>In 1590, a few boys are living happy sheltered lives in a remote Austrian village called Eseldorf. (Esel means "donkey" in German and can refer to a stupid or ignorant person, and "dorf" means village, so in essence it is a village of stupid people.)
>The story is narrated by one of the boys—Theodor, the village organist's son—in a first-person narrative. One day, a handsome teenage boy named Satan appears in the village. He explains that he is an angel and the nephew of the fallen angel Satan. Young Satan performs several magical feats. He claims to be able to foresee the future and informs the group of unfortunate events that will soon befall those they care about. The boys don't believe Satan's claims until one of his predictions comes true. Satan proceeds to describe further tragedies that will befall their friends. The boys beg Satan to intercede. Satan agrees, but operates under the technical definition of mercy. For instance, instead of a lingering death due to illness, Satan simply causes one of Theodor's friends to die immediately.
>Mayhem ensues — witch trials, burnings, hangings, deaths and mass hysteria. Satan vanishes with a brief explanation:
>>79765596 >"You are not you—you have no body, no blood, no bones, you are but a thought. I myself have no existence; I am but a dream—your dream, a creature of your imagination. In a moment you will have realized this, then you will banish me from your visions and I shall dissolve into the nothingness out of which you made me."
>"In a little while you will be alone in shoreless space, to wander its limitless solitudes without friend or comrade forever—for you will remain a thought, the only existent thought, and by your nature inextinguishable, indestructible. But I, your poor servant, have revealed you to yourself and set you free. Dream other dreams, and better!"
>"Strange! that you should not have suspected years ago—centuries, ages, eons, ago!—for you have existed, companionless, through all the eternities."
>>79765605 >"Strange, indeed, that you should not have suspected that your universe and its contents were only dreams, visions, fiction! Strange, because they are so frankly and hysterically insane—like all dreams: a God who could make good children as easily as bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave his angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice and invented hell—mouths mercy and invented hell—mouths Golden Rules, and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites a poor, abused slave to worship him!"
>"You perceive, now, that these things are all impossible except in a dream. You perceive that they are pure and puerile insanities, the silly creations of an imagination that is not conscious of its freaks—in a word, that they are a dream, and you the maker of it. The dream-marks are all present; you should have recognized them earlier."
>"It is true, that which I have revealed to you; there is no God, no universe, no human race, no earthly life, no heaven, no hell. It is all a dream—a grotesque and foolish dream. Nothing exists but you. And you are but a thought—a vagrant thought, a useless thought, a homeless thought, wandering forlorn among the empty eternities!"
>>79765614 Going further: >I have no special regard for Satan; but I can at least claim that I have no prejudice against him. It may even be that I lean a little his way, on account of his not having a fair show. All religions issue bibles against him, and say the most injurious things about him, but we never hear his side. We have none but evidence for the prosecution and yet we have rendered the verdict. To my mind, this is irregular. It is un-English. It is un-American; it is French. Without this precedent Dreyfus could not have been condemned. As soon as I can get at the facts I will undertake his rehabilitation myself if I can find an unpolitic publisher. It is a thing we ought to be willing to do for anyone who is under a cloud. We may not pay him reverance, for that would be indiscreet, but we can at least respect his talents. A person who has for untold centuries maintained the imposing position of spiritual head of four-fifths of the human race, and political head of the whole of it, must be granted the possession of executive abilites of the loftiest order. In his large presence the other popes and politicians shrink to midgets for the microscope. I would like to see him. I would rather see him and shake him by the tail than any member of the European concert.
>>79765637 >But who prays for Satan? Who in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most, our one fellow and brother who most needed a friend yet had not a single one, the one sinner among us all who had the highest and clearest right to every Christian's daily and nightly prayers, for the plain and unassailable reason that his was the first and greatest need, he being among sinners the supremest?
>Satan must have been pretty simple, even according to the New Testament, or he wouldn't have led Christ up on a high mountain and offered him the world if he would fall down and worship him. That was a manifestly absurd proposition, because Christ, as the Son of God, already owned the world; and besides, what Satan showed him was only a few rocky acres of Palestine. It is just as if some one should try to buy Rockefeller, the owner of all the Standard Oil Company, with a gallon of kerosene.
>>79765637 >>79765645 And now I feel bad for Satan(if he exists). I have found while growing up that it's kinda bad how much Satan gets the very short of the stick, and just how cruel God really is.
I mean, fuck, when he created Adam and Eve, they were basically kids that knew nothing about anything. I also wonder why the fuck he didn't explain why he didn't want them to eat the forbidden fruit, and why did he even make it for if he didn't want anyone eating them?
And what about that story about him asking some guy to kill his own son? The bible is all kinds of fucked up, especially the old testament.
>>79765860 Reminds me of that time my mom left my dog inside the car with a case of cupcakes unopened. When she came back, the dog had eaten them all. She should of have known better than to have left the cupcakes at such easy reach from the dog.
So I am left thinking that God was hoping they ate the apples or something. Hell, the guy could of have instead explain calmly why he forbade them from eating the fruit more than just "BECAUSE I SAY SO!" kind of manner and kicking them out.
>>79765771 The story of Abraham and Isaac, as I remember it, was to show the piousness of Abraham, as he unquestionably would kill his own son if God only asked him. He got all the way up the the mountaintop to sacrifice him, then bound him, and was about to slay him when God said hey man that's enough, you've proven that you're loyal. Then Abraham and Isaac went on their merry way (though Isaac probably shat his pants and was forevermore a bit nervous when his dad cut the meat at the table). I always interpreted it as just a parable to tell people to unquestionably follow God's orders. That's not all to say that it isn't fucked up, it's just not as bad because God was planning on not letting his follower murder his son.
The peak of divine fuckery has to be the trials of Job, holy fuck.
>>79766020 The Abraham and Isaac thing was also to show Abraham's trust in God as well.
God had told Abraham to sacrifice his son even though God said that the Messiah would be descended from him. So when Abraham was going to sacrifice him, he reckoned that God would still fulfill his promise to him, even if it meant bringing his son back from the dead.
Which God kinda did, after a fashion.
>>79766055 Moses was barred from entering the Promised Land because he didn't put faith in God to help him with the continually bitching Israelites.
Moses did go to heaven though, he showed up at Jesus' transfiguration.
The trials of Job were a test by God.
Satan and God made a bet that even if Satan took away everything Job possessed, Job would still believe in him. Satan proceeded to do so, and made Job's life a living hell.
Most of the book of Job is his asking God why he allowed this to happen, or arguing with his friends.
At the very end, though, God reminds Job of his place in the universe, but then gives Job his life and possessions back for his continued faith in him.
And yet, it is absolutely correct. God permits the murder of dozens of people, all to show that one single human will stubbornly maintain his beliefs in spite of the evidence - and when called on his shit, tells same human "I do whatever I want and there is nothing you can do about it. Because I am powerful and you are not."
>>79765914 The basic moral is God wanted man to be intelligent, and the first thing man felt to be guilt and shame.
In theory this is to teach him to make something of himself, and make himself a better person. Tough love, like enlisting your kid in the USMC on their 18th birthday.
But...given we see what comes nect it fall apart pretty quick.
>>79766113 Yeah, but Job's family is still dead. Sucks pretty hard for them, God just gave them a new family.
Plus there's the whole "Let the Israelites massacre entire civilizations in absolute genocide because they were squatting on land God intended for the Jews, rather than having that land be unoccupied by being shit until the Jews arrived...
I heard an interesting theiry once on the concept of evil and suffering.
So God basically set the limit for what we can suffer in this universe. God is infinite, God could make it worse if he felt like it. Now imagine if the only true suffering was getting a papercut, losing your keys, and getting itchy. We'd be lamenting how a kind god can let us suffer sucj things, unironically because that's to us the most anyone can suffer. Now imagine all the suffering and fates God did not include in this world. For all we know, getting gangraped by your dad and uncles before being skinned alive with shit-covered knives on your birthday may be like getting a paper cut. What if hell is, from God's perspective, just a time-out? Like if it could be FAR worse, but we cannot concieve of how because God would never inflact that bad a punishment on anyone?
Its too flimsy to be an argument, but it still makes me think.
>>79766263 I don't want to pry into your past, but you sound like a former Christian who turned virulently atheist. Especially considering your backlash over my labeling you a fedora.
>God permits the murder of dozens of people, all to show that one single human will stubbornly maintain his beliefs in spite of the evidence - and when called on his shit, tells same human "I do whatever I want and there is nothing you can do about it. Because I am powerful and you are not."
Why do you blame God for having sin in the world when it wasn't in his original plan to do so? And you seem to be condemning God for even allowing there to be a choice for humans to sin or not, without realizing that that's why God values those who believe in him, and allows Satan to test their faith.
Believing in God doesn't entail an easy and comfortable life on a sinful Earth. More like the opposite, in fact. The world as we know it is dominated by Satan's influence, and Satan wants as few people as possible to know the word of God.
The whole point of Job is to reinforce this point. The hardships we have in our lives aren't allowed by God because he hates us. They're to have us turn to God and realize: God does whatever he wants to, and what he wants is for our ultimate SPIRITUAL good. Having a good life on earth has nothing to do with it.
> "I do whatever I want and there is nothing you can do about it. Because I am powerful and you are not." That's why this is a comfort for me as a believer in God, and for that matter why it was one to Job as well. I can't do jack shit about my own sin since there's so much of it. Only God can do anything about it, and he chose not to wipe us all out in favor of trying to save at least some of us.
>Yeah, but Job's family is still dead. Sucks pretty hard for them, God just gave them a new family. Job's family and household was God-fearing as well, so their place in heaven was assured. It's likely Job knew this as well.
>What if hell is, from God's perspective, just a time-out? Like if it could be FAR worse, but we cannot concieve of how because God would never inflact that bad a punishment on anyone? Hell is the complete absence of God. He's not there at all. The magnitude of what this entails is lost on most people.
When people turn away from God, the worst thing he can do is to let them do it. He's acknowledging that they want nothing to do with him so he'll let them go to the one place he's not there. The Canaanites had done this on a national scale, so that's why he let them be destroyed by the Israelites. (Never mind the fact that people native to Canaan still managed to survive as long as the Israelites had.)
>>79766510 >I don't want to pry into your past, but you sound like a former Christian who turned virulently atheist. Especially considering your backlash over my labeling you a fedora.
Yes, I am; and what did you expect in response to an insult?
>Why do you blame God for having sin in the world when it wasn't in his original plan to do so?
How could it NOT be his plan, given that he is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent? And if it was NOT his plan, how could it happen anyway? This is a bullshit argument.
>And you seem to be condemning God for even allowing there to be a choice for humans to sin or not, without realizing that that's why God values those who believe in him, and allows Satan to test their faith.
Why would he test things he by definition already knows? Why would he deliberately put people in danger of Hell, or even 'merely' terrible suffering in the living world? Why would he create someone to tempt people to do evil?
>Believing in God doesn't entail an easy and comfortable life on a sinful Earth. More like the opposite, in fact. The world as we know it is dominated by Satan's influence, and Satan wants as few people as possible to know the word of God.
Why is that the case? Why does God want things to be this way? And if he does not want them to be this way, does that mean he is powerless to fix it?
>>79766517 >Job's family and household was God-fearing as well, so their place in heaven was assured. It's likely Job knew this as well.
Not only is it not stated anywhere that anyone in his household but himself was god-fearing, there is no suggestion in the book - instead, the opposite - of an afterlife in any way, shape or form. The book emphatically ends with Job's death.
You are completely deluded. You INSIST on your god. And you twist even the Bible to support your views.
I shudder to think you are a moral agent in society. I wonder how many others you have infected with this bullshit.
>>79766510 >> "I do whatever I want and there is nothing you can do about it. Because I am powerful and you are not." >That's why this is a comfort for me as a believer in God, and for that matter why it was one to Job as well. I can't do jack shit about my own sin since there's so much of it. Only God can do anything about it, and he chose not to wipe us all out in favor of trying to save at least some of us.
>he chose not to wipe us all out in favor of trying to save at least some of us.
>>79766136 I'm amazed that I sat through that shit as a kid in church and christian school and saw absolutely nothing off.
It sounds "fedora" to say, but looking back, I was really fucking brainwashed, lol.
>>79766517 >it's okay, they're in heaven I'd be more okay with that idea if the writer didn't present the whole "here's a brand new set of kids for free, also some money" thing as setting everything right.
>>79766541 Well, let's see. Lots of questions here.
>what did you expect in response to an insult? For you to shrug it off like any casual banter and name-calling on this website like a mature adult.
>How could it NOT be his plan, given that he is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent? >And if it was NOT his plan, how could it happen anyway? God didn't intend for sin to come into the world (like he didn't intend for Satan to rebel against him), but yet he saw it coming from the beginning. God doesn't force anyone to obey him, which is why he lets the option for evil open so that believers may then reject it.
>Why would he test things he by definition already knows? >Why would he deliberately put people in danger of Hell, or even 'merely' terrible suffering in the living world? >Why would he create someone to tempt people to do evil?
If someone has no choice but to listen to you, how can that prove they love you of their own volition? God is a lot more like us than we're inclined to think. He wants people to come to him in faith as opposed to having mindless servants.
Why is that the case? Because sin exists in the world, and Satan is the bringer of sin. Earth is a completely corrupt place. Why does God want things to be this way? See above. And if he does not want them to be this way, does that mean he is powerless to fix it? No, but he's waiting until the day of judgement to do so.
>And you twist even the Bible to support your views. The Bible is all about God and what God says about himself to us. So why reiterate something we already know God told us before about believers and the afterlife?
>Seriously, what is wrong with you? What, that I appreciate the fact that God wants to save me despite no reason for him to do so? That I only need to believe that he did so and the least I can do is to let other people know about this? Or that I can reconcile the doctrines of the Law and Gospel?
-"Would you condemn me to justify yourself?" Job 40:8b
Well, if your parents present it to you as a matter of fact, of course you accept it. And I wasn't raised in a radical environment - the members of my church were and are lovely people.
It was, in fact, moral issues which made me question for the first time - the wholesale slaughter of entire cities in 'Joshua'. Only later did the science and logic enter the equation, and they were balm on my soul, because I came to realize the stories were simply bullshit.
The believer on this thread seems to be one of those people who thinks that justice is defined as God's will so that mass murder can be good, if God wants it.
>>79766724 Yo if God didn't intend for there to be sin and now there is, then that would imply he is fallible. If he's infallible and planned everything (or at least was aware of what could/would happen, which he was since he is touted as omnipotent) then that would imply he was a shitter who created people to suffer because why not, which means he doesn't care for his creation. Every time you consider a part of the Father it just makes the other parts fall out.
>>79766737 Oh totally, same here. My dad was a really nice pastor, which sped things along. The whole community was great, too. I was the opposite of you, I got the the history/logic of it all first. The etymology of all the names of God is really intriguing, and the history of proto-Judaism is crazy cool. It's interesting looking at how some hillbilly massive-pantheon religion copied from the rich guys in the country over could compress into a monotheistic religion and take over half the planet. I just thought that all the stories seemed really suspiciously like cultural control instead of earnest lessons, and then the moral issues popped up. But by then they were just interesting topics to mull over, like now.
>>79766760 while I believe the bible is a bunch of palooka God never created the Angels (if)when He came into existence the angels came with him. Angels aren't born or made they just kinda are nobody becomes an angel, not by dying on either side in childbirth, not by dying as an innocent, and not by being devout.
>>79766724 >God didn't intend for sin to come into the world (like he didn't intend for Satan to rebel against him), but yet he saw it coming from the beginning. God doesn't force anyone to obey him, which is why he lets the option for evil open so that believers may then reject it.
This is a shit argument, completely circular with no real rebuttal for the previous question. God isnt JUST omniscient, he's also omnipotent, meaning if he did make a mistake by not intending for sin to become a thing (by the way, he's also said to be infallible in the bible, so no he DOESNT make mistakes) he could fart and get rid of the whole problem. He doesnt though, which means logically he just plain doesnt want to, or intended to make sin and evil things in the first place.
Which would make god "evil" as we understand it.
>If someone has no choice but to listen to you, how can that prove they love you of their own volition? God is a lot more like us than we're inclined to think
If thats the case he sounds like a fucking psychopath unworthy of love. He made evil, he made creatures that can be affected by evil, then he turns around and says that if they dont like him for doing it, or give in to the evil he himself made, they dont get to be part of his special club.
You're making a strong case for partying in hell with satan for eternity over god's pissbaby ass.
>>79766724 Why would god put two animals, without understanding of shame or guilt, in front of food and tell them not to eat it then punish them when it happens, now that they understand because the food magically gave them the capacity for understanding why it was wrong?
You may as well dump your dog off in the woods because you told him not to eat a cookie you left on the floor.
More importantly, why did god create a snake to tempt the animals who didn't understand right and wrong? In the bible, the devil is not the tempting snake. God created a creature who's whole purpose there was to egg on the unintelligent beasts into eating forbidden brain food.
>>79766954 They also don't look at people being assholes to each other throughout history as the basis for abandonment of by themselves harmless cultural practices, or state how ludicrous some things are as evidence for a text, and all like it, being 100% wrong.
Hardcore Atheists are just as bad as biblethumpers in the exact same ways. People will act like shit no matter what their position.
>>79766917 I guess? I don't really want to make an assumption on how people of that time and place would feel about death, but you did, so... Could you also suppose that he would be devastated by the loss of his loved ones regardless of compensation? Humans have always been social animals, after all.
>>79767048 Just because you think the other monkeys are faggots for eating ants with a stick doesn't mean all of us are going to abandon antfishing, especially when most clans are based on it as a communal bond.
A lot of entry level questions on the thread. I am tempted to give a catholic explanation - that is much better to be honest than these "everything is literal" aproach - but I will probably spent my time here for hours, when I should be working in my thesis.
>>79767068 Man, imagine being fleshborn and having to go through a series of dangerous, expensive surgeries and transfers to achieve immortality, when all those AI's that are building themselves have it by default.
Could you explain how this logical tangle works? I can explain my faith, yes.
He saw it coming and he didn't want it. So why didn't he stop it? Yes, you’re right. He could have gone, “Fuck it, I’m starting over”. But he didn’t. And what a comfort that is. He saw what the world would become, saw each of us, and decided that we were as a whole worth saving instead of just destroying us all, (like what happened in the short.) He went out of his own way to do so and sacrificed his own godhood through his Son so he could accomplish that.
And why did Satan rebel, anyway? Where did that come from? I’m not Satan so I don’t know. A thought that he could do it better, maybe?
But if Satan's personality was prone to rebellion, how is God innocent of that - since he created Satan himself? Why would God create humans that way? So that God’s created beings can acknowledge who we are as naturally sinful, and then choose to reject that in favor of following him. The path is open to sin, however, so that the choice has meaning.
>>79767210 Because God is insecure? No. God doesn’t depend on us for anything. But he’ll let people make mistakes on earth and suffer the earthly consequences. And if they decide they don’t need him, then he’ll let them be by themselves without him for eternity.
So... that is why Heaven and Hell exist? Hell exists as a place for those who reject God to be without him. This is the worst punishment that can be visited on anyone.
What happened to "If you love somebody, set them free"? Set them free from what? Having to acknowledge their insignificance in the grand scheme of things? Having to acknowledge the fact that deep down, they’re at the core terrible and beyond saving on their own?
You can argue that God has “set us free” by giving us free will to do wrong as well as right. In that case, don’t turn around and blame God for the sinful actions of the people who reject him.
And what if they don't love him? >Then that’s their choice, I guess. I can try to answer you based on my beliefs why I love God, but I know I can’t convince you with my own logic to do so, it’s up to him.
What if people don't love him, because he behaves selfishly, cruelly, loveless and needy? >God doesn’t need anything. Least of all the help of any regular person on the street. He didn’t need to work through humans to accomplish his will at all, but he chooses to out of his great love for us.
>Are people free not to love him, and still live happy? >You seem to believe it is impossible for humans to be happy without God. Why is that the case? Sure, you have the option not to love him. Many people don’t and consider it a point of pride. But I don’t think it’s a coincidence that many today talk about trying to fill what seems to be a void in their lives. Burying it in a manufactured world or identity on Tumblr, trying to have as much sex as possible to drown out the emptiness, or spending your waking hours searching for validation from anyone, even anonymous strangers by posting on the Internet.
Do you even understand what I mean? I can see your viewpoint, yes. I go to a public college so I run into people like you all the time.
Call me a “sheep” if you want to, I at least know my purpose in life. And I’m just as dumb as one, sometimes. There’s a reason Jesus is the Good Shepherd.
Thanks for the mostly civil discussion /co/, I’ve got to go to bed.
>>79767048 I tend to think that religion and art come from the same source: mankind's uncanny ability to read between the lines, and to see patterns where none exist.
Religion is this web of ardent faith and the complex fictions written to support it, and I'm not sure you can (or should) tug on those very basic human qualities. As long as there are people who demand answers in their lives, they'll naturally band together and write their own. You can't remove it from the basal human template without bringing down everything else.
>>79767180 People believe harmful and ugly things, because people are part of nature, and the natural world is a harmful and ugly place. We're bred to dominate, compete, consume, predate, and multiply, and when mutually advantageous, cooperate; it's the legacy that lets us be here now.
We're limited creatures -- ill-equipped from birth with the tools to understand how vast everything is, and how fleeting we are -- but we're still aware of it, even if we don't understand it. There's a cognitive dissonance. So we invent ways to cope, and to feel eternally loved by a universe that has no need or concept of it.
>>79765914 >>79765860 You know the metaphor of tree that the Jews were going for when writing Genesis was that sometimes you just got to accept what you've got. I mean look at Exodus and all the shitters who had shit happen because they reached too far.
>>79766370 The Whole book is the writers attempt to answer the question of innocent suffering. Back when it was written the Jews could not believe that an innocent person could suffer terribly, note how his friends accuse him the whole book. although by the end the writer doesn't really give a good answer which is why he switches to writing God instead of people when he's done proving Job is a good man. Basically though it means don't believe in Karma at least not in the temporal plane or it can lead you to victim blaming.
>>79765771 Because the old testament is full of myths of a people trying to describe the world and why it is.
The world is cruel, so God seems cruel in the explanations. The New Testament is more of a philosophical work, positing that God is not cruel because there is a way to make the world kinder.
This is just from a Christian perspective though, Jewish scholars have done stuff with the Torah that really deserves its own separate consideration. Even if you don't believe in it, the amount of work they put into the expanded commentaries and debates about the Torah and morality are worth looking at.
>>79766690 Its argued that the new family was a later edition to soften the story a bit.
Ultimately its a metaphor about why bad things happen to good people. From a Christian perspective, there's a happy ending because we believe in a relatively positive afterlife (the details vary wildly between Christian sects, of course). Jewish views on the afterlife are more complicated than that (if I recall correctly some believe in a sort of 'waiting room', some don't believe in one at all), which can change the story drastically.
>>79766859 I think a big thing people forget in Abrahamic religions is that in a lot of them, discussing these moral issues is a HUGE part of the religion.
Judiasm especially considers it a DUTY of a jew in good standing to question the Torah and discuss the complexities of morality. That's why they have pages and pages and pages and tomes and tomes of commentary because they wrote down all these arguments their rabbis had long into the night so that they'd their culture and morality in a portable container for when the next place they're staying at decided "lets kill the jews!" and they had to bail.
Catholicism had, lost, and regained a strong sense of debating the nature of the Bible and subsequent morality. Traditions of scholarship going back hundreds of years, y'know? How the lessons of the New Testament applied to a practical reality that Jesus the man couldn't have seen happening.
>>79767042 See I never got that from this short. I saw it portraying Satan as a sad, deluded being who doesn't get what God put into His creations. He imitates them, and destroys them because he doesn't get the creative impulse, and blames us because we're when everything fucked up for him.
>>79767574 >Children's entertainment from 1985 featured prominent erect nipples, drinking and blunts, plus genocide and satan and horror >Modern children's entertainment has people freaking the fuck out if a girl shakes her ass
>>79766113 actually Job is a pretty cool story, everybody just misunderstands it.
>bad shit happens >"well, it's ok, god gave it, now he takes it away" >even worse shit happens.
Then at the end he is really fucking angry at god, shouts to the heavens, the big man himself appears before him and returns everything ten-fold. If anything the message is that sometimes you shouldnt blindly accept everything, sometimes you should question the things that go on. Remember, nothing in the story would have happened if Job hadn't been God's greatest worshipper, that was the only reason the devil targeted him in the first place.
>>79770519 you unironically think being an atheist is somehow hard? I'm one myself but don't act like we have it hard or anything, you'll get more shit for wanting gay marriage to be illegal than going on national television saying you don't believe in God.
>>79772536 To be fair there are parts of the US that are really shitty to atheists, like, say, the bible belt. But then the bible belt is shitty to literally everybody, including white protestant christian dudes, who end up getting so crazy repressed that they go out and start fucking tranny black homo atheists and break off to become awful self-hating fuckbois with incredible issues like David Willis.
What I'm trying to say is when are we going to launch the nukes against Tennessee?
>>79767485 Why do you specifically believe in the bible? I mean sure the idea that we're not ultimately facing oblivion is comforting but what about it makes you think this is correct, this is the nature of the universe?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.