Just been thinking about this alot lately. Not really talking about any specific god, just any being whos supposedly perfect and all powerful. The way I see it there's basically two reasons god could have created life. 1 It wants something 2 it needs something.
I don't think it's the second one, since if it was all powerful it would never need anything. But isn't the first one kind of selfish? Even if you give it the benifit of the doubt and say it created life so it could see it prosper. Isn't it kind of selfish to do so knowing all of the pain and suffering involved with survival in this world. All just so god can be happy. Admittedly life has its high notes. But if I were creating something and I knew that 95 percent of it was going to be awful for everyone other than myself and a lucky handfull, then why do it at all?
>>1023372
when you bring hell into the equation God is truly a huge asshole. literally creating souls knowing they will feel intense pain for an infinite amount of time
>>1023372
i personally like the Hindu idea that he is bored and decides to dream. he creates reality to pass the time so to speak. he first lives out any and every amazing fantasy he can imagine. after he becomes bored with that, he started coming up with random things. a human, a tree, the sun, whatever it might be, and lives a life this way, and then starts again. this goes on until he finally wakes up and simply is
>>1023372
God Loves and is Love and wants to share that Love.
All major characters of the Bible suffer. And Jesus, the central figure of the bible and God Incarnate, is often shown nailed to a cross and writhing in agony as he slowly dies.
Ever see a volunteer sharing deep joy with those he's helping even if they are destitute or in pain? That is God working through man.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rY6eTiAU0vg
>>1023382
Only if you view Hell as cosmic burning jail.
Offer a very hungry homeless man a sandwich with pickles, he refuses because he hates pickles, you offer again, he refuses stating he'd rather starve to death than eat pickles, eventually you just let him alone and he starves to death because he refused the sandwich because of the pickles.
That man is in a state of hell, rejection of a good freely offered and being turned over to his own devices. Hell isnt a prison God damns you to, it's him saying, "if you don't want my Love, fine. I'm not going to make you take it" and then being miserable because God, being the source of all Love is denying you love per your own request.
So god created man so he could watch as others ease their suffering? Or he created the entire universe so he could show them all how awesome "love" is. And if god IS love then he created everything so he could show them how awesome he is? Still seems selfish maybe even vain.
>>1023372
Prove a god would have motivations at all.
>>1023424
If you're coming to the conclusion God is Selfish, you need to reevaluate your idea of God.
motivation in the sense you describe is exclusively derived from lack, which would not apply to god. it's a concept that might as easily as not have been created exclusively for us. if things like time exist where it does not? ...it's hard to even make guesses about something that abstract.
>>1023382
>>1023385
retards
>>1023372
Nothing, he just set the universe in motion and let it go from there. He doesn't intervene, just watches His creation grow.
>2016
>not being a Deist
If it didn't have any motivations at all, I would classify it as more of a force than a being. Like gravity or something. For now let's just assume it's a being.
>>1023437
>2016
>believing in something transcendent that can intentionally create and watch
>>1023372
You can't have joy and love without pain and suffering. One without the other would just be one consistent state of existing and, if you always exist in the same state, what's the difference between existence and nonexistence?
>What motivates god?
The imagination of shysters and shitbags.
protip: he only exists in people's heads
Just creating existence just to watch it grow would probably be just as selfish and vain. It's like me cloning a billion horribly deformed sheep just to inflate my own ego.
>>1023435
You think your god doesn't lack self-fulfillment and independence? He's a petty prick who created people for the express purpose of groveling in front of him.
>>1023472
Stop projecting your horrible view of humanity
>>1023472
>It's like me cloning a billion horribly deformed sheep just to inflate my own ego
Pride is God's robe.
>>1023521
>stop properly applying characteristics, only my idealized nonsense characterization of god applies
>>1023396
Why the fuck would god need to work through man. If I built a car, why would I use other cars to work on it. And if I were a god, why would I waste my time creating an imperfect being that needs to be improved upon in the first place?
>>1023521
It's not just humanity. The entire world is drenched in blood 24/7. There is not a single minute that goes by without one creature slaughtering another in order to stay alive. I think we can both agree that being killed and eaten is not exactly desirable.
God isn't all-powerful. He created Adam to be his helper (Adam's job was to till god's garden). Look it up.
>In the day that the Lord[g] God made the earth and the heavens, 5 when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no one to till the ground; 6 but a stream would rise from the earth, and water the whole face of the ground— 7 then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground,[h] and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. 8 And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
>15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it.
It sounds ridiculous but it makes more sense when you realize that god doesn't exist and that he is just the fictional invention of a bunch of nomadic iron-age tribesmen who had no mathematics or written language.
>>1023421
It's not much of a good if he hates pickles. That and no one would rather starve than eating pickles they would just remove the pickles. I do think like mayonnaise but I will eat a sandwich with it if I am hungry enough.
Having gods love has far more detestable conditions than icky foods.
I will accept gods love if I can remove the pickles.
>>1023605
Hah. Learn something new every day.
>>1023605
Oh great, he made us all so we could be slaves and do his grunt work. How nice of him.
>>1023605
>I take the stories of the Old Testament literally
>I'm too stupid to understand symbolism
>>1023617
That's right, boy. Not get back to the field before you get another taste of the whip.
>>1023605
>http://biblehub.com/genesis/2-15.htm
Hahahahahaha. This is even more ridiculous than the iron chariots thing, I really should get around to reading this trite book just for shits and giggles.
>>1023605
>put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it
This simply means that He gave him something to do.
>>1023631
cringe
>>1023625
>i only take the least falsifiable parts literally, making my ideology fall apart
>>1023637
>symbolism triggers me
It shows kiddo.
>>1023639
Symbolism strips your religion of the religious part of it. Your pseudo-intellectual babble is what triggers me.
>>1023632
>see I'm not violating child labor laws by sending my kid to the factory, he just needed something to do. He was getting so bored after school
>>1023653
Are you just pretending to be retarded?
>>1023645
>Symbolism strips your religion of the religious part of it
weak bait
>>1023672
>stories
Paul took Adam and Eve as literal people. he justified women's inferior place by that Eve had been decieved by the serpent. Jesus (of the gospels at least) took Moses, Elijah and Abraham as literal people. how do you draw the line between actually true and "metaphor"?
>>1023637
Is this bait or what? Genesis was transparently symbolism even to the ancient Hebrews. For fuck’s sake, "Adam" literally just means "human" or "humanity". Gee, could it be that this guy named "humanity" symbolizes humanity? I wonder!
>>1023689
I like how you say this, and yet after thousands of years of rationalizations it's not transparently symbolism to a vast majority of people who believe this.
And you're still left with everything your god does being metaphor. Enjoy your book of fiction, but don't then pretend there's some divine truth to it.
>>1023689
>Genesis was transparently symbolism even to the ancient Hebrews
if it was they wouldn't have bothered to to give humanity a whole genealogy from Adam including the number of years each person in the line lived. outrageously long lives can be found in sumerian kings lists. it was a common theme at the time to think that people in the past lived super fucking long. also I'd love to hear how to make the literal giants called the Nephillim and the sons of Anak that Israelites fought at various times into a "metaphor"
>>1023372
It created us so it could see itself, experience itself.
1. If it's all powerful it would be able to see and experience itself without us.
2. It would have to be pretty fucking full of itself.
>>1023723
That's deep, mang. But what if it's nothing, and we literally came from nothing. Woah.
>>1023752
Everything comes from nothing, nothing is perfect, and nothing lasts forever.
>>1023696
>it's not transparently symbolism to a vast majority of people who believe this
The word you're looking for is: proddies
>>1023752
Why is there something instead of nothing?
>>1023723
/thread
>>1023793
Religious apologists have existed since before the 2000's when we started getting youtube debates with them. It's curious why their apologetics never penetrated the common teachings.
>>1023488
>my
I'm just entertaining an idea without subscribing to it. Your evident idea of God, however, is pointless and uncompelling.
>>1023802
Because there can be.
>>1023840
>my
It's not my idea, it's the idea of an overwhelming majority of christfags. I don't know about your idea of god without you defining it first, all I can do is refer to something widely believed.
>>1023653
Better than be a lazy fat ass like his old man. Work builds character.
>>1023680
I hate to be that guy, but... I mean, we're all thinking it.. women pretty much have been established as inferior, am I right?
>>1024016
they are desu
>>1023606
Okay, so say your down a cliff and god throes you a rope. It's like you saying "waah, climbing a rope is hard, float me up the cliff" and god says "if you don't climb the rope, you're gonna fall down the cliff"
So, you can save yourself, gods not gonna do all the work for you.
I guess.
>>1024030
Except god threw you down the cliff first.
>>1023372
It is really retarded to even hope we can answer this question.
If I were to come up with an answer though, just for the sake of it, I would say God does what he does because he is pure love and therefore by his own nature creates us and sustains us.
So, God is all lonely.
>>God makes man
>>God sees man is basically a sheep
>>man decides not to be a sheep and finds reason in the difference between good and evil
>>God wants man, now with reason, to choose to be with him
I so r ta see that.. like, a loving wife is better than a sex doll that has a recorder lodged in its mouth saying "ooh, your a big boy
>>1024030
>>1024066
>>1024066
And then he's pissed that man doesn't love his genocidal, petty and insecure attitude.
>>1023385
So God is just playing a universe-sized game of Dwarf Fortress?
>>1024030
Shitty analogy. God out me on the cliff face to begin with. The rope is also made of razors and highly aggressive fire ants. A quick death might be preferable to that suffering.
My analogy is not perfect but it is better than yours.
>>1023752
We're something.
An artist has the urge to do anything, regardless of its implications, simply to express their emotions. Besides, when you consider the fact that God is beyond existence, and probably has been for an infinite amount of time, you realize how bored one could be.
In my eyes god needed a reason to exist
My reasons for thinking so are thus
We are made in the form of god
We naturally desire meaning
Exestential crisis fucks people up
People usually make meaning for themselves afterwords
Therefore god desired meaning therefore created everything
My idea of god is more human than others. Look how no one else but humans and god have such intense emotions and the like. If we are made in his image then surely we act like him in some way.
>>1024236
What about aliens who look nothing like us.
Your conception of God is lame,but somehow manages to keep the Christian arrogance that a god would choose a form anything like ours
>>1023372
Motivation comes from desire, you're giving human charachteristics to something that is not humanfrom its mere concept.
maybe he doesnt exist?
>>1023372
How can you try to rationalize what a supreme being does ? That makes no sense ? You think that any human can make an understanding of one ? That's like an ant trying to figure out the actions of an aeroplane.
>>1023606
>I do think like mayonnaise
Yes my friend, you surely do.
>>1024490
>You think that any human can make an understanding of one?
Sure, try us.
>>1024490
No it isn't. It's like a sapient being capable of reason trying to figure out the actions of another being. That kind of reasoning is just a theistic cop-out.
>>1023583
Well then thank God you aren't God,
>>1023372
>ITT: prideful humans ordering their thoughts around faulty notions of justified disobedience
I don't know, and I can't know, but I know that it's going to work out someway
>>1024818
Okay, think about explaining sight to a person without eyes. Imagine being blind for a second. You don't see darkness, you see nothing!
So if I can have that much disconnect with a member of my own species on a sensory level, how can I possibly understand what is supposed to be omniscient?
>>1024089
Why, have you been smote recently?
>>1023432
Not an argument.
>>1025087
He gave my girlfriend herpes from sitting on a bus.
>>1025117
That's just what she told you.
>>1025082
>So if I can have that much disconnect with a member of my own species on a sensory level
Through human ingenuity (or barbarity) we CAN figure out exactly what that feels like though. Are you saying it's possible, we just need to figure out how to do it (which we have the capacity to)?
We can sever and reconnect the optic nerve through surgery or accidentally and completely understand what seeing "nothing" means. You're making a really good case for the human mind anon.
>>1024852
Good boy. Now sit.
>>1024852
Nothing could be more arrogant than believing you personally are the point of the entire Multiverse.
What motivates Superman?
>>1025167
He's just trying to impress Lois.
>>1023372
He wants. Simply as that.
By the way, if you want to find GOD, do take good care into looking at the supposed "devil" of the bible. Whom the "god" of the bible says is opposing him, whom jesus said won against.
The bible claims the world is in the hands of the devil and that scripture was changed.
Isn't it obvious where GOD was placed?
Don't believe me? Who is more like jesus and less like the devil? Who is more like the "god" of the bible and less like the alleged satan?
Why would GOD not be prideful, arrogant, lustful, boaster? Sexually "perverted". And those things the "god" of the bible call evil but seem insanely fun?
Why would GOD make a prostate that gives anal pleasure and then say it is not good to put dicks there?
It is obvious that your FATHER whom is loving wants you to enjoy, and anal sex doesn't have why to be bad, because HE made you gay and it IS HIS WILL.
And people always do HIS WILL. Because HE is omnipotent. It's a paradox, you have free will but at the same time you are doing what HE WANTS AND WILLS. Because it is omnipotence, every power conceivable and unconceivable.
>>1025216
Your desires are HIS desires, and no "god" of the alleged "scripture" since it was falsified and even this scripture warns about it should tell you how to behave.
Try disobeying jesus and doing opposite believing you do the will of GOD see how it goes for you. And consider that the guy posted as "satan" is the actual GOD.
The angel who "rebelled" (as you cannot do opposite of what GOD wans even if HE wants) simply ordered his sons to fuck up scripture and GODS commandments are not there to be found.
It is simple: If we live among sons of satan? How come we have to give them our money and belongings when they are poor? Or be kind to them and bless them when they hate us? Why not hate them? Or why not be prideful among them? Or disobedient? Or however the fuck we want? And fuck like lions and with lions?
If God gives freedom, how come the "god" of the bible is so unable to provide it and so unloving and unaccepting of his "alleged" children? Why wouldn't GOD love his homosexual son when HE is the one desiring HIS son to be homosexual and he is doing HIS will by being homosexual?
>>1023385
Hey remember when mom was gang raped to death? Well too bad God was bored and had to pass the time with SOMETHING. Apparently he fantasized about genocide and rape.
>>1023396
Everything about nature screams violence, death, and meaninglessness. This notion that there's a personal creator who embodies love is bat shit insane. This very moment, probably over 95% of sentience is suffering. Go fuck yourself with your God of love you imbecile
>>1025285
Not him but the way you write makes me want to throw up. Stop randomly putting words in all caps, it doesn't impress anyone
The bible is an extremely important part of our culture.
It is a work written during a primordial early civilization period.
It is equivalent to many of the things we think about now, only from a different perspective.
Think of it like the magna carta but longer and covering different areas of life.
It is both general and specific and teaches us a lot about how people can and did percieve reality at a different earlier time.
We can still reinterpret it to fit modern times.
You can question why we should use it but it is relevant exactly because its so old and complex.
Why should we use any old document and think about what is written in it? Because certain documents and books were very influential for many different reasons.
In some ways you can use it to criticisze modern society.
I mean why do we still find Plato's works important? All his ideas area already included within arguments by modern philosophers...
And yet it is still important because their perceptions back then are fundamental ones from wich all other fields grew.
they are the basis on which we reiterate our understanding and find inspiration for further progress.
>>1025291
So you feel like throwing up when somebody honors the TRUTH?
I WILL DO IT MORE.
>>1025291
I've noticed you've looked for an excuse to throw shit at me the moment I've said something that makes lots of sense, as if you wanted to get revenge for it.
Care to refute anything I said?
>>1023372
If man could understand God, he would be God already.
Go find something useful to think about, dude.
>>1024344
>let me tell you about aliens I know nothing about
>>1025216
>Why would GOD make a prostate that gives anal pleasure and then say it is not good to put dicks there?
Stopped reading
>>1025216
>Why would GOD make a prostate that gives anal pleasure and then say it is not good to put dicks there?
That's for making shitting less painful dipshit and the Bible does not forbid anal sex between a man and a woman, faggot.
>>1025319
I barely read what you said. Your writing just disgusts me.
>>1025301
This.
I bet all the morons arguing over nonesense here cant see the big picture.
>>1025373
Rage more, I poop on you kid.
Heh, faggot.
>>1023459
I can have a joyful day and a day without joy and still recognize the difference even if I never experience a day of suffering. As long as the state varies it never has to be negative in order for the positive to be recognizable.
>>1025378
>The bible forbids a lot of things including that one, faggot.
It doesn't.
[verse needed]
>>1025358
You say that now, and it is a defensible position, but for centuries all sodomy including oral and anal sex between a man and woman was ranked up there with homosexuality based on a different interpretation of the bible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States
>>1025401
Well those interpretations of the Bible were wrong because not a single verse forbids anal sex between a man and a woman.
>>1025400
I agree with you that the bible not being against all sodomy is a solid enough position.
For information purposes you should be aware that the verse about Onan has traditionally been used to outlaw all sex that might not result in procreation.
I'm just informing you of that to encourage you not to take too fundamentalist view of bible verses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onan
>>1025418
>I'm just informing you of that to encourage you not to take too fundamentalist view of bible verses.
I'm not a proddy.
>>1025407
>Well those interpretations of the Bible were wrong
Unless you are claiming to be God that is a very strong view of your interpretation of the bible to take.
>>1025423
I don't know what you are but if you happen to be Catholic (and the vast majority of Christians are either some form of 'proddy' or Catholic) then the Roman Catholic church has traditionally taken a much stronger view against non-procreational sex than Protestant churches have.
>>1025430
What are you talking about? Copy and paste a verse from the Bible which clearly forbids anal sex between a man and a woman which is as clear as Leviticus 19:28 about tattoos or Exodus 22:19 about beastiality.
Have you even read it?
>>1025445
>the Roman Catholic church has traditionally taken a much stronger view against non-procreational sex than Protestant churches have
Your point?
>>1025301
There are dozens of ancient books, legends, scriptures and codes of law. Why should we limit ourselves to one written by some violent nomads in the middle east? And even if we accept that the bible as a work of literature has unique value, do we have to pretend its true in order to access that value?
>>1025448
I already agreed that you can take a solid enough position that the bible does not explicitly outlaw sodomy between a man and a woman but also provided citations to show that it has often been outlawed and the verse about Onan to show why it has often been outlawed.
>>1025454
That simply saying "I'm not a proddy" is no point at all.
>>1025466
True? What exactly do you mean?
We dont have to limit ourselves to the bible. You can read any anciant books you want but as a member of western society The Bible and other westenr texts might be more relevant and closer. Many themes will repeat throughout the different books.
>>1025466
The fact they were violent nomads, as you put it does not make the book any less valuble. modern humans have killed millions of people and we are still killing them through our system of society and economy.
Future generations will say we were brutal and violent. It is always a relative measurement.
Our positions are as true and as relevant as their positions were, only the old texts have an advatage since much of what we do now is based on them and is awlays looking back at them. In those old texts we can and always will be able to find inspiration for different reinterpretations of exitence and human meaning.
>>1025493
>it has often been outlawed
By men, not by God Almighty.
>verse about Onan
He did not even commit sodomy; he rebelled against God's command given to him specifically and so has nothing to do with all men.
Read the Bible.
>>1025348
>I don't understand hypothetical questions
>>1025525
Oh c'mon. Every single interpretation of the bible is by men, unless you are claiming to be God your's in no different.
>>1025501
I mean that if our society in general approached the bible as literature rather than documentation of historical fact we would be a lot better off.
>>1025540
My interpretation of what verse or passage?
>>1025546
This was what was meant by history back then. Homer is also a historian by the standards of his time...
We analyze history differentely and in the future history will be looked at differentely as well.
the study of histroy changes all the time as well so lets not make the mistake of thinking the way we think of history represents some "objective infallible way of looking at it.
>>1025517
Violence is less an aspect of every day life for us now than it was then. Any book of morality written now (even one written by a soldier) would not include things like how hard you can beat your slaves or how much a rapist has to pay you to buy your daughter.
>>1025551
It doesn't matter what verse or what passage. If you are claiming that you know what God wants and every other interpretation (other than yours) is not from God and only yours is then you are claiming to be the person that knows the mind of God - and that is a very silly, prideful and blasphemous position to take.
>>1025587
So you mean to say that our laws now mediate violence as it is structured into society in our time and back then violence was mediated as it was structured into their anciant society? So?
>>1025604
>every other interpretation (other than yours)
>yours
My interpretation of what verse or passage?
>>1025562
I don't think we are actually disagreeing in any way. I agree that studying the bible is important for understanding our culture. I only object to it being treated as anything other than a book essentially like any other that we are free critique, modify or ignore as we see fit.
>>1025604
>you are claiming to be the person that knows the mind of God
No, I'm simply telling you that no Biblical passage forbids a woman to suck a cock or to take a cock up her butt.
What don't you understand?
>>1025610
No, I mean only what I said. Violence is less an aspect of our lives now than it was then. We've had 3,000 years to consider moral questions and our thinking has evolved.
>>1025618
Well, I dont completely agree with that position.
God in the bible and faith in a god represents something that is obviously important to people.
Our instrumental scientific view of reality is one view. Within it, atm, some of us find little space for something one could call god but we can interpret the concept of god and what what God represents and find it in our own concepts as well.
Like the idea of an objective truth that science discoveres. It is a populist view but that only makes such notions more influential.
The idea of an objective truth is a paralel to religious belief in objective truth.
Do we not find such assurences in our lives today? Science as the truth, documentaries and news as the truth and other ideas about "truth" as we accept based on modern standards.
There are very compliex understandings of what god is and even the "primitive" ones can help us to perhaps rethink the way we think of existence today.
It can be a critique of modern ills exactly because it is so primordial and exactly in the name of tradition and historical importance.
The fedora ideas about "truth" above all else might not be the appropriate way of looking at life in the far or even near future.
>>1025675
And the bible is obviously not a book like any other...None of the anciant influential books are.
If we critically think about educational structures on which modern society relies but which we not relevant in the past we can see that a "simple" view might be just as "correct" as a more educated view of reality.
>>1025656
>provided citations
You've talked about Onan who has nothing to do with what we were arguing.
>I'm not the one claiming to be God.
Neither am I. Now, will you tell me which ''interpretation of mine'' are you talking about?
>>1025322
You're completely right. What possible use could there be in gaining a little insight into something that supposedly controls all of existence. Maybe we should all quit asking questions and just stop trying to figure things out, like you have.
stop using that fucking definition of god
it's not rite and has nothing to do with rites in fact. unless you count eating, drinking, shitting, fucking, working and dying like a bi-pedal, fur-less, stoned ape is a rite or some shit.
>>1025726
The passage of Onan has consistently been used as a justification of sodomy laws. I pointed that out for information purposes. And that is a fact.
I said I agreed that the bible does not explicitly outlaw oral and anal sex between a man and a woman but provided proof it has often, historically, been interpreted that way, that is a fact.
I didn't say I interpreted the bible that way I just chided people who responded to my factual posts by say.....
>I am GOD and you are WRONG!!!!!!
No you're not God and no one else in this thread is.
>>1025799
>The passage of Onan
Read it.
>it has often, historically, been interpreted that way, that is a fact.
Yes and as you said:
>the bible does not explicitly outlaw oral and anal sex between a man and a woman
>I am GOD and you are WRONG!!!!!!
Who the fuck are you quoting you braindead imbecile?
>>1025878
>This guy
That is me and where the hell have I said anything remotely close to:
>I am GOD and you are WRONG!!!!!!
I was telling you that those laws came from men not and not from God since NOWHERE in the Bible is anal sex between a man and a woman prohibited.
What don't you understand?
>>1025887
>That is me and where the hell have I said anything remotely close to:
If you are claiming to personally know what God thinks...
>By men, not by God Almighty.
>he rebelled against God's command
....then you are claiming to be God or claiming to be a prophet that knows the mind of God.
You should relax and calm down a little bit because you are committing blasphemy and over-reaching in your arguments.
Declaring you are certain God is on your side in any given interpretation of scripture is equivalent to claiming you are Jesus. There are lots of interpretations and you need to learn to make yours based on proper argument rather than....
>God agrees with me!!!!!!!
... that is a sinful and prideful and wrong position to take.
>>1025934
>If you are claiming to personally know what God thinks...
I am telling you that nowhere in the Bible is anal sex between a man and a woman prohibited.
What don't you understand?
>he rebelled against God's command
>....then you are claiming to be God or claiming to be a prophet that knows the mind of God.
Are you just pretending to be retarded?
>Then Judah said to Onan, “Sleep with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother. What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death also.
Genesis 38:8-10
AS I SAID, HE REBELLED AGAINST GOD'S COMMAND AND MY STATEMENT IS SUPPORTED BY THE HOLY BIBLE
WHAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?
>God agrees with me!!!!!!!
Who the fuck are you quoting and how am I disagreeing with God by agreeing with the Bible?
>>1025934
>I am retarded!!!!!!1111 hurrr durrr!!!11!! xD
>>1025947
That Onan has been consistently interpreted for centuries as outlawing sodomy and that unless you are God making an argument that "I know God better than all those men" and nothing else is blasphemy.
I'm not sure why this is so opaque to you and why you are getting into spasms of rage at your computer.
Please stop blaspheming. I want to be with you in Heaven. Stop declaring you are the one person that knows how to interpret scripture. You're not God.
>>1025976
>spasms of rage
I'm writing as clearly as possible to help your tiny brain understand.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND OR SHOULD I REPHRASE IT FOR YOU? ARE THOSE LETTERS BIG ENOUGH FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND? SHOULD. I. WRITE. LIKE. THIS. TO. GIVE. YOUR. BRAIN. A. LITTLE. MORE. TIME. TO. PROCESS. THIS INFORMATION. ?
>I want to be with you in Heaven
Are you even Christian?
>>1023372
>supposedly perfect and all powerful
this is one of the biggest issues with the religions popular today, that they claim that their gods are perfect and all powerful which causes all sorts of problems. In this way other dead mythologies like norse, roman and greek make more sense just because the gods are fallable and that can explain inconsistensies.
>>1025994
Of course I am a Christian.
I'm off to bed now, anon. Please learn to not blaspheme by claiming to be one true person that can interpret scripture and screaming in caps that people for centuries were a bit dumber than you are because you are God and know everything.
I apologise for causing you so much distress and pain for having an honest and factual discussion about the history of sodomy laws and biblical interpretation.
>>1025675
As an atheist (though hopefully not the fedora tipping kind) I find a lot of what you're saying here baffling.
>Our instrumental scientific view of reality is one view. Within it, atm, some of us find little space for something one could call god
I agree but I consider that a good thing. As far as I can tell "god" in this context has only ever been the explanation people put where they have a question they can't answer.
>but we can interpret the concept of god and what what God represents and find it in our own concepts as well.
Either God exists and interacts with peoples lives or he doesn't. The "concept of God", and "what God represents", and "our own concepts" all sound like different ways of saying "personal values". which are certainly a difficult things that take a lifetime to explore but claiming that they come from on high by the creator of the universe doesn't help the discussion. We can have conversations about abortion, the death penalty, and gay marriage without declaring our positions mandated from heaven.
>>1026019
>because you are God and know everything
Not gonna take that bait.
>>1026052
>though hopefully not the fedora tipping kind
It's funny how some people feel the need to practically apologize for not believing in God.
>>1025685
I did not say "a book like any other". I said:
>a book essentially like any other that we are free critique, modify or ignore as we see fit.
I mean only that I am free to engage with its concepts and agree or disagree with them as I see fit. As opposed to seeing it as completely beyond mortal reproach.
>>1026075
Not all all, I am if anything an anti-theist. I think that belief in god and the tendency to those beliefs are bad for us. I just try not to be rude when expressing that on an individual level.
>>1026052
But they are mandated by something. The modern heaven. Whether it be science, statistics the contemporary regime and social structure where you live and its ideals..
You can consider it good but that can in itself be considered a conservative view.
If you want to interpret god as a personal being you can but there are other interpretations of the biblical god. Ones more suited and compatible with modernity, even with how powerful materialism is right now.
And even the simplistic interpretations of what god is can in my opinion be useful and should not be considered out of the question entirely(I dont share those).
Perhaps it is intro level philosophy but I see god as lonely. Nothing may understand him and we exist and think and evolve to grow and one day be able to stand with him as equals. Mere creation is not enough we must grow into what we are to become.
>all this arrogance
we can't even hope to understand god, let alone his reason for doing anything.
>>1023372
Judaism
>nothing really, he's god the greatest to be and the creator of everything and has arbitrarily decided israel would be his bitch, which is an honor
Christianity
>god just wants to love his creations and be loved back
Islam
>god wants his creations to praise him for how great he is
>>1026199
Makes god sound like an asshole
>>1026180
So god is an empty word, like "satfsfgwe". whats the point of using it?
>>1023372
God created the world of God with words. God's world is our minds words. Humans use words. Humans motivate God.
If you are really trying to "get into the head of God" or "see where it's coming from" I have to say you won't find and answer. You might think you have one, but then another will come along. Things like God...you just get with em or you don't. Understanding is out of the question.
>>1026324
empty?
>>1026372
If you cant understand "god" then obviously you have no idea what you mean when you use this word..It becomes a meaningless word, and empty one, like "sdfgdsfgdfg"...I suppose its not even a word since it is not a sign for anything.
>>1026401
Its just a pointless combination of sounds.
>>1026297
Saying God is "nice" or "an asshole" doesn't make sense. By definition, God is above any of that. Even, according to Christian Orthodoxy, God can be Hell for some people.
>>1026407
Nah just sounds like an asshole. Nothing is above being an asshole. God takes the cake.
>>1026407
David took the blue pass. "Of course. First John, chapter four, verse eight. 'God is
love.'
She looked at him for a long time. "Is he, David? Is he love?"
"Oh, yes," David said. He folded the pass along its crease. "I guess he's sort of...everything."
>>1023372
Humans are driven by motivations, feelings and desires. God is above that, He simply is and He accomplishes his Nature. In a way, you can reduce him to a deterministic entity because He is reduced to his characteristics. However, these characteristics are purely positive, otherwise He wouldn't be perfect.
>>1026450
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ux7eaHUe6G8
>>1026370
In my entire life I have never come across anything thats absolutely uncomprehendable.
What makes god any different. At one time the universe was uncomprehendable to us, but little by little we chip away at the problem until we finally arrive at something we can understand.
Even if it is completely futile, we can still learn from trying. At the bare minimum I think it's an entertaining subject.
>>1026454
I can kind of understand that, but why worship him then? If he always is and was or whatever and he was going to do this all regardless of anything, then why should we worship him? Seems like he was born on third and thinks he hit a triple.
>>1026436
Why? It is not my fault the one i was responding to said god is behind understanding..I simply pointed out the obvious conclusion of what he said.
>>1026777
We worship Him because life is potentially joyful and spiritually beautiful.
>>1026469
Its called a linguistic structure and its change has to do with our interactions and actions.
Our languages are at the end of a long chain, starting with noises and grunts on which we have built upon and which we are conditioned or even programmed to be able to produce and understand.
Of course words are always in flux as well as the nature of our actions and interactions in the world but when you say "god" means nothing to you, both in terms of a definition and disambiguation then you are simply saying that "god" is not a word and it does not describe anything.
It becomes an empty string of sounds.
Of course when you say "god" is unexplainable(i.e just a complex grunt) you in your head still rely on some conception of god through biblical imagery, verses and other religious words that is part of the the family of words which "god" is part of.
But again, by saying god is not "describable" or "understandable" (remember this means "god" not a "he" or an it" according to you, its simply a combination of letters or sounds) you pull it out of its family of adjacent words thus pulling it out of language.
I am just saying the same thing in different ways but its simply to make it clearer..
>>1026199
>Islam
Muhammad (may God have mercy on his soul) was visited by a false angel of light (and NOT Gabriel), it was a demon, a fallen angel of deception. Satan and his workers are great mimickers and Muhammad, deceived, established a demonic cult of Allah (false-God) called Islam (meaning submission to this false-God, i.e. Satan) which was spread like wild fire by the sword due to the delusion that it is the last revelation of God Almighty.
Islam is none other than Satan's magnum opus, which now has 1.6 billion adherents (23% of the world population) and which will probably be followed by half of the world population by 2050.
>For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
2 Corinthians 11:13-15
>>1026199
>>1026836
Muhammad was Satan's pawn, merely a man, he was easily deceived.
Jesus is the Christ prophesied in scripture, born of God, undeceivable.
>Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort; Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God. For as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, so our consolation also aboundeth by Christ.
2 Corinthians 1:3-5
>>1026777
Then you are not a vanguard.
Of course it's entertaining, and that should not be the bare minimum. Truth is a function of time. It evolves as time continues. That does not imply that there is some final understanding or comprehension of the cosmos. What that means is that our understandings and how we understand change within ratio to each other. The more we chop away at the truth with our intellect, the less understandable the problem becomes.
So like I said, either groove with it or stand rigid against it...or lead a nondualistic life
>>1023372
orthodox christianity:
we don't know why god created the universe. it's a mistery.
that said he created the whole life to serve men and man to watch over the whole life and spread god's grace to every plant, animal and being in every corner of the universe.
everything is destined to become more godlike, and man was created to help bring it to this point.
unfortunately man left garden of eden too soon, so he has to wage a long, tedious battle with himself before he grows up to do his purpose.
>>1026827
I understand what symbolism is, but you use symbols for every word so for you to say one of them is meaningless (another symbol) is to contradict what you are saying. For you to pick and choose what has meaning and what doesn't is a logical mishap.
>>1026889
>god
>g
>>1026899
Well I did not say "god" has no meaning, the person who i replied to did.
If you say God cannot be understood or thought of then you cannot address God as some person, like a her or a she. By saying god is explainable unimaginable etc you are saying the word "god" has no meaning(if you are still the one i was replying to).
>>1026787
Well then what's the meaning of the word life?
>>1023372
God desires relationships; God desires increasing His glory; God desires increasing His name.
>>1026324
God is a title. The title belongs to the being Who created the universe.
>>1026889
I would be surprised if this were the Orthodox view.
>>1026932
Understanding something does not give it meaning. Meaning is in the realm of quality. Quality is mu. Not knowing. Outside the subjective/objective relationship. I'm not quite sure who I'm talking to anymore.
>>1026951
so Lord Xenu could be God?
>>1026966
Whoever you think created you, and the universe, is your god.
If you say it is Xenu, you have a false god. But it's still your god.
>>1026970
But from my perspective you have the false god. how can we tell between these claims which is right or if either are right? perhaps reason?
>>1026958
why?
If we were all "vangaurds" like you we'd have stopped asking the questions that got us where we are and "grooved with it" while we were stuck thinking the world was flat.
>>1026960
I am not familiar with buddhist jargon.
Meaning can be semantic or it can be a question of relevance, capacity to change, significance.
Meaning is not a pie in the sky. You can ask the meaning of a word and I can explain by showing you something similar to the concept the word signifies.
This would be semantic content.
You can also say your life has no meaning.
This can be a matter purpose or significance.
You serve no purpose, you feel insignificant..
If you say "god" is unexplainable, unthinkable then you are first, clearly talking about semantics.
You are saying the word has no semantic meaning. Thus it is equivalent to a random assemblage of letters.
Surely you agree that words and language creates a system of signification that relates to the world through the concepts we create in our minds based on our perception. Right?
words signify concepts in our mind that have formed as a result of our perception. and of course you can argue about the degree to which perception and language effect each other.
In any case according to the person who said god is explainable, the word god is not an actual word with syntactic meaning. It does not relate to any other word nor to any concept in your mind. Thus it is stating that "god" is simply gibberish.
>>1027064
unexplainable*
>>1027041
Vanguard is someone who takes on the unknown and makes new discoveries. The way you use your knowledge is empirical and selfish. I thought we were addressing God not science, thats why I said you have to get with it or pick away at it until your dead. Science is where the metaphorical knife of intellect can chop away at the physical world and provide us with countless advances and disadvantages. As far as God goes, you can try to understand but it's a fools errand.
Have you considered the possibility that god doesn't exist and barely literate jewish cavemen from the middle east were ignorant apes making shit up on the spot?
>>1023428
I don't know why this didn't end the thread.
If God with a capitol G, as in not a god or titan, an actual omnipotent, omniscient, being without beginning or end, did exist, why would he need motivation, why would he desire anything? I'm agnostic, and I think a lot of atheists can't understand the concept of God because they throw these incredibly human traits on Him. God is allegedly above time, so in the loop of true eternity, everything is inevitable at some point (there's a similar theory in theoretical physics). The only things that won't happen are the things God actively doesn't want to happen, such as his own demise, which means the only way a Universe like this wouldn't form is if God actively said "I don't want a universe."
There is no motivation. There is no desire. If there is a God, this universe, while being everything to us, could very possibly be nothing to God.
>>1027064
How about this...
God is a concept that can only be understood abstractly. Explainable to an extent, but not understood in the way language can be verified.
Maybe some of that Jargon would help you out.
Mu
and
Yugen
>>1027115
>I think a lot of atheists can't understand the concept of God because they throw these incredibly human traits on Him
despite what theologians say the God of the Bible is incredibly human and rarely fully rational. He doesn't fit this abstract metaphysical construct. since most theists you'll meet in the first world are christians (and certainly never deists) this is the God that gets discussed
can we just start talking about ethics again please society
>>1027125
why must we beat around the bush like this
>>1027141
What you're referring to is the God who made a covenant with his chosen people, opening a relationship with humanity, showing them favor, offering them prosperity for faith. 'Why' he did this, is unknown. But he did, which special because of its divine aspect, but is also just as human. It that sense, it's feasible to see God develop human-like, emphasis on the like, traits in order for us, to better understand Him.
In the same way that you have to train a dog with a collar, treats and firm "No"'s. Why? Because Dog's don't speak, and barely understands. Is that how humans talk to each other? No (usually). It's below us, but we do what we must to have a relationship with the dog.
In the same way that God develops human-like traits of "ten commandments", "plagues and disasters", and "hell", do get us to do what he wants, in order for us to have a relationship.
>>1023521
how is that projecting
>>1025493
Onan's story was about selfishness, anon, not wasting semen.
>>1023435
>retards
I guess the level of discourse expected from children is what we can expect from christcucks.
> people arguing about fictional being motivations
Isn't there is a /lit/ for that kind of discussions?
>>1024490
Trying to rationalize the motivations of god is just trying to rationalize the motivations of the people who made him up, or the motivations they could come up with to justify their own motivations.
>>1025162
You act as though God is somehow a created being equal to you.
Should all man's creations call man arrogant for wanting a microwave to heat properly or a flat screen TV to be in color?
>>1030692
>You act as though God is somehow a created being equal to you.
Not him, but I act like I should: God is a created being lesser than me, because it's a fictional character while I actually exist.
>>1030821
>hur dur I'm so edgy and smart smart
Not him, but drink bleach.
>>1030821
Tony Stark/Iron Man is created fictional being, but in the context of who he is, he is greater than me.
Quit edgelording.
>>1030846
I'm an Atheist out of apathy to religion, I just hate edgy 14 year olds.
>>1030849
And yet he doesn't exist. Or are you telling me you let Iron Man's existence affect your life in any real way other than buying its stuff as a product?
>>1030856
>it's edgy to say that god is fictional
>it's edgy to say that existing human beings are greater than fictional characters
>I'm atheist out of apathy for relgion
Sure thing, Christcuck.
>>1030864
You don't have to believe any of that about a fictional character to still believe they are greater than you. Atticus fucking Finch is greater than you and he's just a plain old southern Lawyer in the context of To Kill a Mockingbird. But in that story he's presented as a role model for standing for justice and defending a guy who he knows will probably get his case thrown out anyway because white people in the 1930's US south just love lynching niggers.
A fictional character, even one you identify as fictional and know is fictional that absolutely no one believes is real can leave an impact on ones life. Especially since many of them still have done more than you ever will despite being regular vanilla humans in their own works. Jean Valjean will always be better than you because he fucking accomplished shit in Les Miserables. The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants will always be better than you because they actually did something with their lives though journaling about shit they did with mutually shared trousers. The boys in Stand By Me did more in a few fictional days than you probably did all this week.
The only reason you hate God so much is your own pride over "REEEEEE I DONT WANT TO ANSWER TO ANYONE IM BETTER THAN EVERYONE REEEEEEE!" You are the reason Christcucks make films that depict us all as former Christians who just hate God and are bitter about shit. No one ever does a story about the athiest who simply doesn't care. We exist too, and we are far less cringey.
>>1030908
I like your ideas but I don't agree with them. The fictional characters you mention are only as great as the ideas they represent, and their not great in an of themselves. Characters in well written stories are created to serve themes, and it's those themes and ideas that are important for as humans, not the invented characters.
So the debate changes to "can ideas be greater than individuals?" or "can ideas be greater than yourself"?, forgetting about fictional characters altogether. By the way, the answer to those questions are completely dependent on the individual that answers them.
>The only reason you hate God so much
Where does this come from? Do I also hate Iron Man for saying that he's also lesser than me?
>"REEEEEE I DONT WANT TO ANSWER TO ANYONE IM BETTER THAN EVERYONE REEEEEEE!"
Are you projecting? Are you just pretending to be an atheist? I in fact only care about religion as far as how it affects the lives of people I interact with (and the ideas they spouse), and I usually take the perspective of religion when discussing with other people because it's easier to make them agree with me that way (as they'll ignore everything I say the moment I say I'm an atheist).
Right now, I'm retaliating against the low level of discourse put forward by christian posters on this board. They spout their dogma as if they're obvious facts (>>1030692), and namecall everyone who disagrees with them (>>1023435) instead of attempting to debate the topic at hand. This has been going on for far too long and is the reason I have animosity towards them on this board.
>>1031010
>for as humans
us*
>>1031010
I consider anyone who uses "Christcucks" unironically is a bitter edgy "I HATE GOD AND AM AN ANARCHIST INDONT ANSWER TO ANY IMAGINIATH SKY FAIRY REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!" cunt no better than a Prautistant shitposter going off about not Protestants as all being pagans or some "eat God be God" shit. I only used it in my post because you used it and looking back, I forgot to include quotations.
All that fosters is resentment. Why do you think Christians try connecting with Jews and Muslims by baking on the whole "God of Abraham" thing? It connects from a base of positivity. If Joe told Amir "Mohammed was a devil worshiping heathen," that's not going to make him side with Joe's position. If anything Amir will want to punch Joe in the face.
And >>1030692 looks more like he's saying "the Christian God isn't an Altmer who thinks all of Tamriel's other races can suck it when he's barely that different in composition." I get what Christians think of God, hence why I hate dismissive terms like "invisible sky fairy," I just don't care much myself to join a religion.
Besides, the nature of God only really matters if you already believe in God and you're arguing about that to someone in the same camp. You should probably argue more on their God/Scripture-informed doctines on stuff and not dismiss anything because the opponent can't argue for crap. I'd say a Maronite Christian arguing against gay marriage will have better arguments than a Jehovahs Witness on why blood transfusions are prohibited by Leviticus' ban on vampirism. And certainly better than a Sola Scripturist on anything. I feel sorry for any Christian arguing against those idiots.
>>1024112
>The rope is also made of razors and highly aggressive fire ants
???
Being a Christian isn't that bad.
>>1033182
Christcuck is the same as Christfag, cuck is just replacing faggot in most contexts because faggot is not insulting anymore. Not to mention it fits better, as Christians in this site all rave about European-ness while being cucked (in the 4chan sense) into worshiping a middle eastern god. I'm not really sorry that it hurts your sensitibities.
>Why do you think Christians try connecting with Jews and Muslims by baking on the whole "God of Abraham" thing?
No, they fucking don't. There may be some progressive christians (mostly outside the US) who try this, but christcucks on 4chan are mostly the
>"Mohammed was a devil worshiping heathen"
type. (>>1026836 >>1026839)
>You should probably argue more on their God/Scripture-informed doctines on stuff
That's what I do when I meet Christians actually capable of thinking. Proddies (mostly) on this board basically resort to "laa laa laa I can't hear you have a dozen links I haven't read and aren't even related to the topic at hand stop talking to me until you read every single one of them laa laa laa" replies when you press them too hard.
In the end, I don't give a damn about what they think. They're anonymous random posters just like me, so I'll just say what's on my mind about their stupid dogma instead of trying to convince them (because let's face it, the moment they throw dogma around as arguments there's no convincing them).
>>1024050
whoa...jesus that was deep.
Maybe G-d just wanted some peeps to chill with, but good peeps.
In the first go around G-d made some angel peeps to chill with but they didn't really share his nature and a bunch of them rebelled. So He made some new peeps in His image and put them in a place where they could live without seeing G-d, cause He figured that if a few peeps could learn to trust Him even when they don't see Him then He would be able to trust them with soo much more once they did see Him. And they would be tight for the rest of eternity.
>>1023385
I like this idea.
>>1023372
>>1023382
>>1023385
>>1023432
>>1023488
>>1023472
>>1023605
Your question -- and subsequent answers -- are framed by misunderstanding. The severed connection to God, the road to the underworld, the path to enlightenment: they're all inside you.
When you see where God really hides, then understand why you have asked what 'motivates' it.
>>1023372
Define god, then we'll talk.
>>1033605
That's not deep, that's shallow christfag philosophy. God created men sick, and commanded them to be well. At pain of eternal torment.
>>1023752
there is no such thing as nothing saying that this idea of nothing exists is as bad as saying god created the Universe. give me an example of nothing, you cant because the universe is the sum total of all things and nothing is not a thing and therefore does not exist.
>>1033413
>all rave about European-ness
?
>a middle eastern god
God is Universal. He is not from the Middle East though He has made His existence known to a Middle Eastern people in Antiquity.
>progressive christians (mostly outside the US) who try this, but christcucks on 4chan are mostly the "Mohammed was a devil worshiping heathen" type.
There is no such thing as a ''progressive christian'', I am not from the US (those two posts are mine) and I am not a proddy.
>>1035229
They will be well in the next life, of course.
Everyone who rants about how 'evil' this world is forgets that God has promised the next world will be better. Then when it's brought up they claim Christians are life-hating.
>>1036325
>?
Are you telling me you haven't seen the posters who claim that Christianity is quintessentially European, and that people can't be "truly European" if they aren't also Christians?
>God is Universal.
Wrong. The concept people have of God is completely dependent on the culture that surrounds them. Kind of like if it were a made up concept, funny that.
The God of Christianity is a European interpretation of a Greek interpretation of a Hebrew concept with influences from other Middle Eastern (particularly Persian) cultures.
>There is no such thing as a ''progressive christian''
Yes, there is. And for both meanings of the word "progressive" at that (i.e., people open to new ideas and retard SJW regressives). I obviously meant the first one, because I was talking about Christians that just don't see Muslims as heretic satanists that will burn in hell (but maybe misguided people or whatever other stuff they're taught).
>I am not from the US (those two posts are mine) and I am not a proddy.
Which two posts? The ones I quoted between parentheses? If so, then you're a retard regardless of what denomination you adhere to, and not different at all from the average Muslim.
>>1036329
There is no God, stop being delusional.
>a metaphysics thread on a board for history
Good job guys.
>>1037554
>The concept people have of God is completely dependent on the culture that surrounds them
I am not talking about man-made pagan Gods. I am talking about the One God who sent His only begotten Son. Don't play dumb.
>The God of Christianity is a European interpretation of a Greek interpretation of a Hebrew concept with influences from other Middle Eastern (particularly Persian) cultures.
You're trying too hard and only fooling yourself.
>you're a retard
Islam is Satan's magnum opus. What don't you understand? It is evil at its core and the enemy of Christianity.
>>1038603
You wish.
Remember that rejecting Him won't change the fact that He's still watching you.
>>1040573
>no arguments
As expected from a christcuck.
