Semitic Religions

Why did you fall for this meme?

Other urls found in this thread:

plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Jesus was preaching literally the same thing as Buddha and yogis
Jews and years bastardized it
This is objective truth

Because Jesus is the truth.

Did Buddha preach that he was going to torture people forever if they didn't do what he said?

He literally wasn't. How does it feel to be 14?

>The same book he's in told me so

Europeans forfeited their folk religions for Judaism-lite.

Kek

Organized religion was created to enslave people without them knowing it

RARE

wtf i hate jesus now

You should

The concept of time disappears once you teach enlightenment
So time is out of equation
Hell is suffering on earth
Buddha gave us a method to follow to stop suffering
So basically yeah

>Buddha gave us a method to follow to stop suffering
>So basically yeah

The list of needless horrors is endless. Consider the abundance of poisonous and diseased food and water sources, as well as infertile or inhospitable land. No considerate civil engineer would include such things in any city he was building. Indeed, if he did so, he would have to be a villain with a very perverted sense of humor. And if he did so by some accident or limitation, he would hardly be worthy of the title “God.” Just imagine God telling you, as you walk into heaven asking what the hell was up with all that crap, “Oops! I didn’t think of that! Sorry. Couldn’t be helped. Did my best! No. No way to fix it now. My budget ran out!” What sort of God is that?

I feel what Jesus stood for was altruistic and just. Despite people mocking him, he never killed people like Mohammed or the Old Testament God.

In that way, I honor his memory in the same way I'd honor Lao Tzu or Guatama Buddha.

Suffering is caused be denying and resisting reality
You can literally be tortured and not suffer

Jesus *is* the old testament God

not only should there be less pointless suffering if there is a God, there should be more benefits from such a God as well. Yet there are none. God is supposed to be your bud, your pal. He is a shepherd, a father, a mother, a friend. Yet he does none of the things such people do. You cannot deny that God would act like a friend and a parent if he really were one. After all, it is only “by their fruits that ye may know them.” You cannot say whether someone is good or evil or indifferent if you never see them doing anything, by which their character can be known. And unless God is tied up and stuck in a box somewhere and unable to chew his way out, he would surely make a regular appearance in our lives, well beyond the vague emotional illusions and contradictory revelations people claim to be from God.

They is no pointless suffering, people suffer because they choose to
'god' gave us free will remmember

It is not even the point that God doesn’t do enough. It is that he does nothing whatsoever. Even if God did too little, if he at least did something, we would be justified in believing he existed, leaving us to debate only about his character or limitations or whether we ought to love or worship him. But we don’t even get that. Someone is contemplating suicide. Is God there to counsel them? Someone is drowning. Does God throw them a life-jacket? A gunman is about to walk into a church and kill thirty children. Does God warn the children? Does he try to talk to the gunman and help him work out his problems instead? Or persuade him to put down the gun? Does he turn the bullets into popcorn? It goes even deeper, to the fundamental nature of the universe itself. Why design a planet that has earthquakes in the first place? Why a universe that can produce gunpowder? It simply makes no sense at all. Unless there is no god. Then it makes perfect sense.

According to Christian doctrine, the immorality of the soul is not supported by their religious scriptures. Read Revelation 20:13-14:

13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.

Or Matthew 10:28: Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in Hades.

Note that the term "hell" does not appear in the earliest manuscripts. The closest translation is hades, which is not a place of eternal suffering or torment for sinners. Rather, their souls along, with hades, are permanently terminated, no longer inhabiting a plane of existence.

It would be similar to how people do not remember anything before they were born: because they no longer exist. There is no pain or suffering. Non-Christians just die again because they reject God's place for them in his Kingdom. As non-Christians, why would they want to be part of the Kingdom of Heaven?

The Christian Heaven only appeals to Christians who desire a personal relationship with their God. As someone who is secular, if the Christian religion was proven right, then I honestly would have not a problem with my sentence. I never wanted a personal relationship God or his son, why would I complain if God respects my decision and throws me into oblivion where I earn eternal rest?

You have the wrong idea about God
We're you a Christian before?
If so, what denomination?
Go clear those basic misconceptions to some dedicated Catholic forum an then come back
No one here time or energy for this basic crap
I say this as someone who is not Christian

Because it's the truth. My FEELZ tell me so.

Luke 13:28
>"There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out."

Doesn't sound like non-existence

infinite planets in infinite universes and you think your experience is not directly caused by your actions with regard to dharma?

Oh how radically the different denominations differ
Christianity as a whole is one disgusting mess, so many conflicting doctrines it makes my head hurt, I would nuke it altogether if it wasn't keeping the western civilization alive

good old objective christian morality

Christianity is the biggest red pill against the Jews. I mean they literally crucified our king an savior. They curse us to this day. Jesus came to save everyone, including you OP, and they killed him. Now you mock our faith? Aren't you ashamed?

...

Lol no. All semitic religions are blue pilled

>william lane craig

he's considered "the smart one"

It was, but the people just rose above the priests.
They took the bait, but snapped the wire.

Yeah, I watched Man From Earth too faggot.

That's not a fuckin argument.

Christians are literally the good goy cuck slaves of the jews. Worship the same god, but not the chosen people. Send millions of dollars to defend Israel because it's where all the jew magic is. Maybe it started out as the blasphemous cult of jesus, but the jews found a way to make it work for them.

And all religions are red pills. In the early days to make you feel better about all the things you didn't understand (lightning, disease, earthquakes) and these days to make you feel better about your inevitable death.

Damn, today I feel like having cancer, or for a war to rage out in my country due to external influences, or that an asteroid hits the earth... or that I accidently get run over.
I sure love this selective suffering thing

i dont consider germanics to be christians

please forget christianity and go back to your paga gods

I did not

Hitler had a less than perfect understanding of Christianity, virtually every historian attests to that.

American Christianity is heresy that has been subverted by Jews, Orthodoxy is the true faith.

They are called Abrahamic religions - Christianity, Judaism and Islam. You can spot them as Abrahamic by the way that they teach that non-followers are inferior and can be tolerated until they misbehave which is when they must be murdered. You can also detect them by he way there is zero spiritual competent to their teachings, and they are simply a set of rules to keep society functioning and enriching the leaders. Also they charge taxes and will slither their way into government and enforce their ideas on any country they get a chance to. In short, Abrahamic "religions" are total garbage that serves only to keep people docile and willing to give money to the leasers. Hindu religions are far superior and offer real fulfillment and freedom.

Do you shills really hate it that much/? It couldn't be more obvious that you're a bunch of Jews.

See

>Hitler had a less than perfect understanding of Christianity
no he didn't
he had a perfect understanding of Christianity
it's a cuck faggot religion for cuck faggot autists

>Worship the same god, but not the chosen people.

Only Evangelicals say that, read pic related

im not a shill you fucking germanic pig
stop insulting christianity, forget about it and follow your pagan gods, odin

>it's a cuck faggot religion for cuck faggot autists
hahahahaha

not it isnt, ahmed

He is. If you discount God's existence there IS no moral objection to the slaughter of children, for any reason.

Argue against it. Insist you don't like that morality. Call it mental gymnastics or whatever else you want. You can't argue it isn't the basis of an objective morality. You can only insist you don't like it.

From there it only boils down to what is true or false. You can't simply get out of the discussion on the grounds of epistomology "Oh we can't know". Metaphysically it's one or the other. Either there is a god, or there isn't. If there isn't, objective morality is nonsense.

If there is, you task is just beginning, but it is only then that all of the reason you might want to object to Craig will have any weight.

ancient jews dont even exist anymore
you are getting christianity wrong

...

As an Israelite that's the funniest thing I've seen in a while. Don't appreciate the image of the beast though. That's not the Messiah

*tips fedora*

It's in THE BIBLE, nerd, if u disagree with THE BIBLE ur a fucking fedora nerd LOL.

Pic related: This subhuman trash rejects the teachings of Jesus Christ our Lord And Savour. Do you want to look like that?

Thought not.

>can't prove a sunset is beautiful
>can't prove killing children is bad
>therefore God has to exist

Top kek

I still don't see any justification on your part for infanticide being immoral.

...

There is feeling you got inside that tells you it's wrong
That's where morals come from in the first place, they are based on feelings we attained through evolution

It's subjective, just like beauty.

Fuck, i guess I'm with her now.

Uncommon flag; close to rare.

>There is feeling you got inside that tells you it's wrong
Some people get a strange feeling inside when they strangle the life out of another human being that tells them it is good.

Evolution is chance. If the chance dictates that the slaughter of whites is what is necessary for the human species to survive and continue to advance, then white go out the door, but that isn't based on reason or evidence. Only does it make any sense in hindsight. Neodarwinian evolution explicitly concludes the process is UNGUIDED, meaning we can't even make any decisions in the process else we interfere with the process and... well I don't know what it would be, but by definition it wouldn't be neodarwinian evolution.

So hey, defer to evolution, but that only works in justifying what has happened. Not in what wil happen. You're in the same position as the following. Because it happened: it was right. Whether god actually exists and commanded it, or someone was just talking crap, there was nothing morally wrong with the slaughter of infants according to your worldview.

Then you have no objection. and you need no justification. You can not condemn the act, and assuming God, the command to slaughter infants has no moral quality, good or bad, the same as if the command was given with any respect to you. It would just be subjective,

...

The Narrow Way does not at all depict a picture of eternal suffering. In fact, it just supports the Last Judgement of humanity written in Revelation: One section of humanity rejoices their union with their Triune God, while the other part mourns they will not gain entry to the New Jerusalem when they are lined and judged. Jesus talks about how many will not be saved on Last Judgment, and states many will weep because God's judgement finds them unworthy of Heaven.

There's too many biblical verses that indicate that the Second Death means the death of the human soul. Romans 6:23: The wages of sin are Death. John 3:16: those who do not believe Jesus, perish.

Finally, then death and the grave were thrown into the lake of fire. This lake of fire is the second death. Revelation 20:14 Both the Hebrew 'Sheol' and the Greek 'Hades' refer to the grave or to the final completion of this physical life which death represents.

>You can not condemn the act

Yes I can, just as I can say the Mona Lisa is beautiful.

Keep trying kid

>plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/

No theist philosopher has ever shown that theism is logically necessary for moral realism.

>unless sky daddy tells me not to kill children i must kill children
>better pay my tithe to the heavenly father's representation on Earth
>lol i'm a bad guy but i am saved by god's grace
Hmm...

Buddha specifically did not want to be worshipped as a god.

Neither did Jesus

If there is no immortality, the Liberal believes, one can still lead a civilized life; "if there is no immortality"-is the far profounder logic of Ivan Karamazov in Dostoyevsky's novel-"all things are lawful." Humanist stoicism is possible for certain individuals for a certain time: until, that is, the full implications of the denial of immortality strike home. The Liberal lives in a fool's paradise which must collapse before the truth of things. If death is, as the Liberal and Nihilist both believe, the extinction of the individual, then this world and everything in it-love, goodness, sanctity, everything-are as nothing, nothing man may do is of any ultimate consequence and the full horror of life is hidden from man only by the strength of their will to deceive themselves; and "all things are lawful," no otherworldly hope or fear restrains men from monstrous experiments and suicidal dreams. Nietzsche's words are the truth-and prophecy-of the new world that results from this view:

Of all that which was formerly held to be true, not one word is to be credited. Everything which was formerly disdained as unholy, forbidden, contemptible, and fatal--all these flowers now bloom on the most charming paths of truth. [4]

The blindness of the Liberal is a direct antecedent of Nihilist, and more specifically of Bolshevist, morality; for the latter is only a consistent and systematic application of Liberal unbelief It is the supreme irony of the Liberal view that it is precisely when its deepest intent shall have been realized in the world, and all men shall have been "liberated" from the yoke of transcendent standards, when even the pretense of belief in the other world shall have vanished--it is precisely then that life as the Liberal knows or desires it shall have become impossible; for the "new man" that disbelief produces can only see in Liberalism itself the last of the "illusions" which Liberalism wished to dispel.

Literally not an argument

"nothing man may do is of any ultimate consequence" if that is true, then morality is meaningless. The argument for the necessity of God's existence is obvious.

Yeah it's based on chance, get over it
There is some sense of direction to it tho, only what works in the current environment gets selected
I never said you should disregard that feeling inside you, I advocate the opposite
We have created this system that makes people who want to strangle children rethink thier position because we are the majority
but that doesn't mean the system reflects some kind of objective morality, maybe situation changes and strangling children will be the path to survive and therefore that will be 'moral'
Should you adopt that morality then? No

Phonefag here, what country is this?

John 20:28-29
>Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”. Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

read the thread dipshit.

Meant for Fuck posting from phone

>the universe is big so God doesn't exist

That doesn't mean he wants to be seen as god. He is proving that god exists through his existence.

By "ultimate" I assume you mean eternal.
You argument is simply not valid, unless you add a hidden premise "Things must have eternal consequences in order to have moral value", which is a premise that I see no reason to accept.

than an ant hill or, more to the point, a desktop computer, which we know even today can model the entire process, and from a simple set of rules can spontaneously produce organisms just as surprising and complex as humans, especially given the same ridiculous lengths of time nature has clearly needed to get so far. Any dumb process can exhibit a blind teleology, winnowing behaviors or outcomes away, leaving only those few that satisfy the particular criteria of survival.

In contrast, even a cold-hearted superintelligence would not be so stupid as to take billions of years of meandering and disastrously catastrophic trial and error to figure out how to make a human. It would just make humans. But the evidence does not pan out that way—that is not what happened. Instead, a moronic teleological process did the work, sloppy and slow. That is incredible if God exists. But it makes perfect sense if he doesn’t.

Oops, deleted the first half of that response accidentally. Should start with:

there is no high teleology anywhere in the organization of the universe. By that I mean the sort of intention or goal one can only expect from a conscious being like us, as opposed to the sort of goals exhibited by, say, a flat worm or a computer game or an ant colony. The most teleological force we observe in nature, apart from the goals and intentions of animals—whose cause we already understand to be evolution by natural selection—is that of natural selection itself, which shows no more intelligence than an ant hill...

Sure, you can say it, but beyond yourself it is meaningless. Unless you have no objections to forcing your will on those who would do what else you object to you're just blustering. Your morality would amount to nothing more than might makes right and subject to the whim of the most powerful. That is not morality, it is merely autocracy.

Interestingly, IF God, the situation may not be so far removed. In which case I wonder what your objection to the moral question in particlar is actually.

>but that doesn't mean the system reflects some kind of objective morality, maybe situation changes and strangling children will be the path to survive and therefore that will be 'moral'
Should you adopt that morality then? No
hold on here for a second. let me straighten something out here before we have a misunderstanding.

Are you saying that under no circumstances should I ever strangle a child?

He didn't go trial and error he created them through creating the universe
Time is irrelevant when you're eternal being that created time itself

>But it makes perfect sense if he doesn’t.

This is the kind of ilk you atheists mix with. Never thinking outside of the box; everything is so cut and dry; you make me sick.

No

>Your morality would amount to nothing more than might makes right and subject to the whim of the most powerful

Well, laws *are* just opinions with guns. Sorry that fact upsets you. Better talk to your imaginary friend

Saying time is irrelevant is like saying space is irrelevant. There goes all of existence. I guess God made a bunch of pointless stuff!

Alright.

So you have no objection to the strangling of children, if it happens to be an evolutionary advantage in the long run.

Doesn't upset me. My worldview assumes the highest law is backed by the most powerful authority. The question is why you have an objection with that authority when/if is advocates the slaughter of children.

You do think the slaughter of infants is wrong, don't you?

I'm ok with God being evil.
But it's sad he's so dumb too. Hurr believe in me while I hide, also there're gorillion of different religions you better pick the right one motherfuckers.

never forget

As an explanation of the world, materialism has a sort of insane simplicity. It has just the quality of the madman’s argument; we have at once the sense of it covering everything and the sense of it leaving everything out. Contemplate some able and sincere materialist, . . . and you will have exactly this unique sensation. He understands everything, and everything does not seem worth understanding. His cosmos may be complete in every rivet and cog-wheel, but still his cosmos is smaller than our world. Somehow his scheme, like the lucid scheme of the madman, seems unconscious of the alien energies and the large indifference of the earth; it is not thinking of the real things of the earth, of fighting peoples or proud mothers, or first love or fear upon the sea. The earth is so very large, and the cosmos is so very small. The cosmos is about the smallest hole that a man can hide his head in.

>powerful guy says X is wrong
>therefore it is wrong

Textbook fallacy of authority

Fpbp and
This.
I know this doesn't make much sense, but you can't understand your spirit (or true reality) with your conscious mind. Trying to put everything into dichotomous paradigms is also no good. God is 1. God is the 1 thing. Call him love, truth, or Jesus. It means the same. No, I don't believe all religions will get you to God. Stick with the teachings of Christ, try to ignore the serpents who have infiltrated and corrupted aspects of the religion (but never lose sight of them.), and stop trying so hard to figure it all out.

And yet that is the basis for YOUR appeal to morality. All I was asserting is that the situation doesn't change in your case IF God. You're just looking at a greatest might making right.

Unless you want to change your position.

???
Good created the existence
Wat are you even doing here arguing you stupid nigger
The presumption is that the big bang, the point where time and space began was created by God who is beyond space and time

>Non-Christians just die again because they reject God's place for them in his Kingdom.
This is wrong. Everybody is judged according to their own beliefs and the tenants of their religion. So if they lived well by the standards of their religion they will achieve their eternal reward. However, if they did not they will perish. The problem with all other religions is that it is almost impossible to fulfill the goals that they have set forth. No Jew has been successful at following their religion, no Buddhist has achieved their freedom from Samsara. That is why God gave up his life, to give people a way to achieve this without undue effort.

More verses:

Psalm 92:7
The wicked spring up like grass and all evildoers flourish, they will be destroyed forever.
Psalm 104:35
But may sinners vanish from the earth and the wicked be no more.
Psalm 145:20
The LORD watches over all who love him, but all the wicked he will destroy.
2 Thessalonians 1:9
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.
Hebrews 2:14-15
14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

Does this sound like eternal suffering to you?

When I say a sunset is beautiful I'm making a statement about myself, not the sunset. I'm not claiming authority, or ability for objective ethics.

Nice obfuscation though

No I said you shouldn't disregard that feeling
Mine's telling me it's wrong and I will stand behind it as long as I feel that way

Bunch of logical imbecilities

Really, "immortality" is part of a weltanschauung and moral-spiritual state you achieve by getting away from sin. You don't necessarily have a soul. Behaving like an animal makes you a soulless subhuman animal.

>"Things must have eternal consequences in order to have moral value", which is a premise that I see no reason to accept.

That is basically the entire idea behind what is referred to as "good" as it relates to evil. You are speaking of another morality, the one where I'm good to others because it might benefit me in some way on this earth, in this life. I am speaking of the morality where I am good to others for the sake of being good, when nobody is watching. The kind of good I don't tell anybody about. I try to be a good person because I am a Christian and I believe in the immortal soul. Why would an atheist have any reason to have these morals? Nobody ever said you have to be a theist to be altruistic. We are speaking of a higher morality here.

Then you reinforce my point: you have nothing to say.

Your macro is also irrelevant. Christianity does not assert that it makes people good. It only asserts God is good - Mark 10:18

then your morality is nothing more than a whim. Your moral character would be akin to indigestion. Under such a view why should YOU listen to your impulses, nevermind anyone else?