>Yeshua says hes coming back >his followers get ready to

File: METAL GODS.jpg (230KB, 1134x700px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1134x700px

>>2430496

Remember, if you find something in the Bible that "seems" to be false, misleading, idiotic or impossible, "It's a metaphor :^)"

>>2430496
>>Yeshua says hes coming back
When did he ever say this?

>>2430547
According to bible before all his disciples had died.

>>2430577
Verse?

>>2430547

Are you seriously claiming you've never heard of the Second Coming?

It was just a prank, bro

>>2430584
Mark 9:1
So... did you get pulled into a murderous cult?

>>2430588

is the second coming a pauline thing?

>>2430703
No it's that thing that every Christian person on Earth has been waiting for for the past 2000 plus years

>Says he's coming back
>didn't say when so people wouldn't obsess over the end times and live as though the Kingdom was ever present
>militaristic Jews can't accept that their concept of the messiah was greatly distorted from what the prophets told them

It's all here in this book.

http://www.balderexlibris.com/index.php?post/Jones-Eugene-Michael-The-Jewish-Revolutionary-Spirit-and-Its-Impact-on-World-History

>>2430496
U smell like shit. Early christianity was in its purest form, good. It was quickly hijacked by Romans after it was proven you can't stop an idea using brute force. Roman Empire literally transformed into Roman Catholic Church which still survives to this day.

Early christianity if I'm not mistaken taught that all people were equal in the eyes of god regardless of social or wealth status.

>>2431238
>It was quickly hijacked by Romans

No it wasn't.

>>2431242
Are you actually doubting the allegedly large amounts of evidence to support the Roman Empire transformed into the Roman Catholic Religion?

>>2431242

>Pope Boniface VIII proclaimed 1300 a year of Jubilee (the first Holy Year) and granted plenary indulgences (the remission of temporal punishment in Purgatory) to the tens of thousands of pilgrims to Rome. It was at this time that he began to occasionally dress in imperial regalia and exclaim, "I am Caesar, I am the Emperor." He commissioned so many statues of himself that he was accused of encouraging idolatry.

http://www.culturalcatholic.com/PopeBonifaceVIII.htm

>>2431269
>One Pope using Imperial imagery centuries after the collapse of the Western Empire proves anything

>>2431254
He's doubting your assertion that it was quick

it truly is a doomsday cult peter and paul preached about the end of days like it was around the corner. it wasnt till after their death that one of their students writes revelation in order to hide their incorrect doomsday preaching by pushing it to a later date

>>2431254
Except it didn't? They remained two distinct entities and the Empire never exercised much direct control over the Church.

>>2430496
>muh doomsday cult
Still better than your cult of nihilism "humanist".

>>2431238
Early Christianity in purest form was a breakaway Jewish doomsday cult.

>>2431292
those are some really hot aspersions and assumtions there, champ.

>>2431282
>they talked about the end times
>that means they thought it was going to happen soon

So all these astronomers must believe the heat death of the universe is just around the corner.

>>2430703
Wasn't Paul the one who pulled them away from Doomsday hobo religion?

>>2430496
People were literally castrating themselves because Jesus said lust is a worldly emotion and that it doesn't exist after death. So they wanted to get in early and cut their balls off until Constantine banned it.

>>2431293
According to what Ancient Aliens-tier "scholar" on the History Channel?

>>2431300
>People were literally castrating

Where in the Bible did Jesus tell them to do that?

>>2431282
OMFG THIS

At the time it was preached, people thought but all this shit the Jesus was talking about what happened within their lifetimes. Even the Apostle Paul reading his letters to the churches said that he who is a slave to do not seek to become free he who is not married don't seek a wife, the christ is coming back and shit is going down ANY moment,and you don't want to come stumbling out of your room with your dick in your hand when Christ returns His glory.
In fact the only way the New Testament makes sense is if they are speaking of a event that is to happen relatively soon, certainly within their own lifetimes.

>>2431302
According to anybody with eyes who has read the source material.

Did you even study the scriptures?

>>2431309
If you had read the rest of the post you would know

>>2431312 says the same thing basically. If it's easier for you, read his post instead.

>>2431299
see >>2431312

>>2431275
Well das just one example. Look how the church controlled most of europe for hundreds of years

>>2431312
>OMFG THIS

Why are atheists literal retards?

>that he who is a slave to do not seek to become free he who is not married don't seek a wife,

Because everyone should be content with where they are in life and not obsess over getting some new station in life

>and you don't want to come stumbling out of your room with your dick in your hand when Christ returns His glory.

So morality to you only makes sense in the context of apocalyptic teaching?

Wow.

>>2431327
Jesus never told anybody to castrate themselves. Jesus wanted us to celebrate his Kingdom and share his Love with everyone no matter their conditions.

>>2431297
So what are you then, a Jew?

>>2431343
or maybe apocalyptic teaching just helps force people to hold to a morality so contrary to logic

>>2431374
>morality so contrary to logic

How is it contrary to logic?

>>2431343
what are you talking about?
Where did I say I was Atheist?

>Because everyone should be content with where they are in life and not obsess over getting some new station in life

Nice interpretation. Except thats not what the text says.

>so morality to you only makes sense in the context of apocalyptic teaching?

Literally what?

Go back. Read what I wrote. sit there for 5 minutes thinking about it. Then come back and ask questions that make sense and are not based on what you want me to be to fit inside the confines of your narrow worldview.

>>2431360
agnostic.

I have no idea what's going on in this universe and neither do you.

>>2431374
how are the 10 Commandments contrary to logic?
Are you going to say that any of them is wrong?

>>2431389
>Except thats not what the text says.

Yes it is. Unless you'd like to point out where exactly Paul says any oof the things you allege.

no FUCK you!

File: floki.gif (624KB, 245x190px) Image search: [Google]

624KB, 245x190px

>>2431379

>>2431393
intellectual coward. And I say that as someone that was an agnostic until months ago.

Make a leap of faith and accept that God is a self-contained answer to our most problematic questions.

>>2431412
Still waiting for an answer. Unless you want to post more gifs from your faggot viking show.

>>2431414
>you're an intellectual coward
>AGREE WITH ME!

>>2431352
Jesus heavily discouraged lust, marriage, and sex, saying that the end is nigh.

Inspired by these words of wisdom, Christians started cutting their balls off.

>>2431402
>If you work on Sunday will kill you

>>2431429
>no masturbation
>no killing (except for when god tells you to)
>treat others equally (unless they believe differently than you)
>literally leave your family and join small early cohorts of the church (jesus preached this)

should i keep going?

>>2431446
>Jesus heavily discouraged lust, marriage and sex
>"It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery."

Jesus' only words about marriage are related to divorce. Stop talking out of your ass.

>"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

The word used for "lust" here is epithumeo, a consuming desire for something that's not yours to possess. Jesus is clearly condemning a consuming lust in a married man.

>>2431414
>intellectual coward
Just pretending to know something doesn't mean you actually know it.

Being anything other than agnostic is juvenile and shows a real lack of understanding. If you're not mature enough to say you don't know for sure and instead go around spouting your beliefs as if they are very makeup of existence itself then that shows yet still some want of wit to quote The Bard.

>>2431414
God cannot be a lover and a creator. Too much suffering. There is a lover and and hater, and a creator, or a creation. There is no monad.

>>2431282
Jesus was a gnostic and his disciples took the idea and ran with it

>>2431451
>no masturbation
When did God ever condemn masturbation? He cursed Onan because he wasn't fullfilling his duties as a husband and anyway that's Old Testament.

>no killing (except for when God tells you to)
Old Testament; the Jewish people needed to secure their promised land.

>treat others equally (unless they believe differently than you)
When did the New Testament ever say something like this?

>literally leave your family and join small cohorts of the church
Jesus never encouraged EVERYONE to abandon their family. If you felt the need to extend His Word and His Love throughout the World, you could. But people can still stay with their family and communicate His Message while staying in one place.

If you mean the part where the word "hate" is used, that's a mistranslation. The word "to hate" here means "to love less"

>>2431408
I was writing a response but I'm at work and my boss keeps walking by so I'm going to have to get at you later

>>2431300
> Jesus said lust is a worldly emotion

so you cut your balls off?

need to get their heads checked desu

>>2431486
>just pretending to know something doesn't mean you actually know it
but you can approach that knowledge by a honest search

I don't know all the ways of God. But I try to understand them.

>being anything other than agnostic is juvenile
Being agnostic is juvenile. It shows no mental fortitude and intellectual laziness.

>>2431488
>Too much suffering
You mean the suffering that is a product of our own free will? God doesn't want us to kill each other or ordered Hitler to kill so many jews.

>>2431509
some of the contradictions are between the teaching and the actual practice.

10:29 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
10:30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

>>2431451
all of those are literally corruptions from the original message

If you kill in the name of God I got bad news for ya son

>>2430496
The Bible also clearly says that time has no meaning for God and that a day is like a thousand years for him and a thousand years a day.

>It's another atheist thinks he's found something no-one has brought up before and cracked the "Christianity is a myth" case wide open

Mate there have been MILLIONS of people who have spent huge portions of their life dedicated to reading and interpreting scripture. There is literally nothing you can point out that hasn't already been argued over for more than a thousand years.

>>2431527
I don't understand your point? He was promising a reward to the people that left their earthly possessions in a time where his Message wasn't as widespread as it's currently. These people were abandoning their families because they couldn't stay with them and be honest with the message Jesus was trying to spread.

>>2431312
>In fact the only way the New Testament makes sense is if they are speaking of a event that is to happen relatively soon, certainly within their own lifetimes.

So Jesus came down, preached the word told everyone how to live their lives and for his apostles to spread out over the Earth and spread his message, but j/k it doesn't matter because the end of the world will be coming in 30 years anyway?
>Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

"Oh yeah, and better get your asses in gear because the 'end of the age' is going to be in a few years anyway"

>>2431551
corruptions propagated by the church which is the word of god on earth

Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
matthew 18:18

>>2431585
"Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death." 10:21

yes necessity in this exists for his message but you seem to want to gloss over the leave your families part, in which the apocalyptic message plays a large roll

>>2431601
The Church corrupted by human interests and desires.

No good Christian has ever accepted everything that the Church says as truth.

>>2431624
the Apocalyptic message played a large role in the early Church. Without it it wouldn't have become a cohesive organization and it would've ended up dispersed. It fullfilled its purpose; but Jesus never promised to come back in few years.

>>2431627
>good
nice use of a arbitrary descriptor to differentiate people who agree with you and those who dont

also pretty sure the christians of the middle ages till the renaissance (and after depending where) would burn you at the stake for saying that
or do they not fit your structure of "good"

>>2431634
never said he did he was intentionally vague
You also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him." (Luke 12:40)
i said paul and peter said that e was coming inside of a generation or so

>>2431523
Too much suffering period. It wasn't the Jews fault that Hitler tortured them. Stop diminishing suffering you despicable meme.

>>2431642
>also pretty sure the christians of the middle ages till the renaissance (and after depending where) would burn you at the stake for saying that

How is any of that relevant?

>>2431654
>he was intentionally vague
in order to people to keep building His Kingdom in Earth, not to be scared out of their asses.

>>2431655
>It wasn't the Jews fault that Hitler tortured them
And I never said that suffering was the fault of the victim. It is the fault of humanity as a whole.

>>2431661
the point is that they saw themselves as "good" christians too
nice attempt to control the language of the argument though
>not to be scared out of their asses
my point is he used this fear to "build his kingdom of heaven on earth"

>>2431666
And a god with infinite love would never create that.

>>2431683
>And a God with infinite love would never create that
God loves us so much that he gave us free will.
He loves even the most despicable people, no matter how hard to believe you can find that.
>>2431678
>the point is that they saw themselves as "good" christians too
Yeah, it was through an imperfect understanding of the Bible and manipulations by power figures that they saw themselves as good Christians. The truly good Christians didn't celebrate the persecution of other people; they prayed for their salvation.

>My point is He used this fear to "build His Kingdom of Heaven on Earth"
And what is exactly your problem with that? People back then were extremely uneducated and worked out of their asses just to stay alive day through day. He used parables too.

>>2431697
Free will won't save you from a universe where you can be smashed like a bug in various ways and tortured I'm various ways and not have any way in it.

>>2431705
And? Are you so arrogant to think that you should have any say in the way God should treat you or anyone else?

>>2431697
>The truly good Christians didn't celebrate the persecution of other people; they prayed for their salvation.
again your own definition of "good" is much different from the good christians of the past. But of course im sure you're right and not using an arbitrary word to differentiate yourself based on your own thoughts and not facts

>And what is exactly your problem with that?
look at how good a job it did to build based on coercive fear. we all live in a kingdom of heaven right now right?
it doesnt seem cheap at all to you that someone who is supposedly the son of god (and god himself) has to resort to basic fear mongering? oh wait its ok cause god is good even when he spreads fear

>>2431705
It is the will of allah the omnipotent. We surely belong to Allah and to him we shall return

>>2431697
Cancer and aids and herpes and all the other diseases are not love.

>>2431697
>God loves us so much that he gave us free will.

No, he didn't. How do I know that? Because I've heard of your God. if he wanted us to have free will, why would he seek to reveal himself to us? Isn't that coercion?

>>2431697
Free will is unbiblical bullshit.

>>2431724
read this https://www.firstthings.com/article/1995/12/aquinas-and-the-heretics

>>2431738
>Cancer
Propagated by our life-styles
>AIDS
Propagated by our life-styles and easily prevented
>Herpes
see before

>>2431746
>No, he didn't. How do I know that? Because I've heard of your God. if he wanted us to have free will, why would he seek to reveal himself to us? Isn't that coercion?
Is it ironical that you're talking like Satan would do?
>>2431752
>Free will is unblibical bullshit
>All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power.
> If only you would pay attention to my commandments!
Then your peace would become just like a river
And your righteousness like the waves of the sea.

>>2431794
>Is it ironical that you're talking like Satan would do?

Satan has never tried to convince anyone to worship him. Satan isn't jealous, and proud of it. Satan didn't genocide whole nations for the "crime" of living in the wrong place.

>>2431794
Troll harder next time....

File: IMG_0037.jpg (195KB, 1536x1536px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1536x1536px

>>2430496

>>2431788
>runs out of ideas points me to an article
maybe refute my claims or answer my questions
oh wait you're a deist so you point me to more rhetoric that backs up your point.
im over it, enjoy your apocalyptic cult some 1900 years after it claimed the world would end and your precious sky god would come back to save you

>>2431794
>Then your peace would become just like a river
>And your righteousness like the waves of the sea.
Blessed be the LORD my strength, who teaches my hands to war, and my fingers to fight. psalm 144

What is up with the christianity hate going on today?

>>2431803
>Satan has never tried to convince anyone to worship him
No, he has tried to steer people away from God so they're damned.
And he has unfortunately been sucessful so many times
>>2431809
>Troll harder next time
>If you're not an atheist that believes in scientism and believe in God through your poor understanding you're a troll

>>2431828
is a Psalm of David (a king that needed to make war to provide security for his subdits) supposed to contradict what it has been said already about the free will? Specially in Ecclesiastes?

>>2431834
Triggered atheists can't stand the light of truth

honestly the biggest problem for me in regards to religion is trying to understand the fall in the context of evolution

how the fuck can people rationalize this? i can understand most of the other stuff but it can generally (perhaps unfairly) get handwaved with stuff like
>its because of your free will!

but trying to understand what the fuck was going on during the fall in the context of a world where humanity evolved from an ancestor species is confusing as shit

>>2430496
>time from Abraham to Jesus
2,500 years
>time from Jesus to now
less than 2,000

DUDE WHY DOESN'T GOD WORK WITHIN OUR EXTREMELY SHORT EXPECTATIONS OF TIME LMAO

>>2431839
>No, he has tried to steer people away from God so they're damned.

No he hasn't. He's been imprisoned in Hell since the start of time, or haven't you read your bible?

Or are you claiming that Satan can just ignore the judgement of God?

>>2430496
Rome was the kingdom of Zion itself my man

File: IMG_0039.jpg (193KB, 1536x1536px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1536x1536px

>>2431834
You mean like today specifically or since the day it smarted. Christianity has always been pigger trash

>>2431870

Started

>>2431850
>If only you would pay attention to my commandments!
>though shalt not kill
>hands to war
>fingers to fight
no contradictions there at all

SUBDITS!

>>2431794
>Propagated by our life-styles

Still happens regardless of how healthy you are due to errors in cell division. Our lifestyles increase the risk of it, but the risk is always present.

>>2431860
The fall is the development of sapience. The point where you're not ruled by purely base natural urges to eat, fuck, fight, flee and sleep. Where you can overpower inbuilt natural reactions with willpower and think "I'm not going to beat Og over the head with a club and take his mate because that is the wrong thing to do". The fall is becoming apart from the system of nature, rising above it and being able to acknowledge conceptual things like morality, love, fear and hatred and control them via the intellect.

>>2431870
Today

>>2431834
Probably just a response to the relentless shitposting.

>>2431883
Because Christianity today is white and everyone hates whites today

>>2431867
>He's been imprisoned in Hell since the start of time, or haven't you read your bible?
So you've never read the book of Job. Ok.
>>2431875
so you're saying that a king shouldn't protect his subdits? That he should let them be killed through inaction? Not even the most relentless pacifist would accept inaction as a position. Don't be so hypocritical.

>>2431839
You fucking imbecile. Cancers have varieties of causes. Children are born with cancers. Aids was created by starving Africans who needed food. It spread unknowingly and it can be caught be people who follow the Bible's laws. Herpes can too. I'm so fucking mad right now it's not even funny you fucking idiot.

>>2431898
I really enjoy how Satan walks up to God with all the other angels and God is like "Satan? Where'd you come from? What the fuck have you been doing?"

>>2431899
>Aids was created by starving Africans who needed food. It spread unknowingly and it can be caught be people who follow the Bible's laws.
And it spreads thanks to the sins of people. Or are you going to argue that it was spread because of innocent people having sex with each other?
>Children are born with cancers
And it's not our duty to question God and why those kids are born with those terrible diseases. Maybe it's a life lesson for them. Maybe it's to teach us the frailty of our existence here. I won't claim I know why innocent children suffer but there's a reason.

>>2431898
but good christians shouldn't kill right
it is tough to protect ones subdits

>>2431913
>And it's not our duty to question God and why those kids are born with those terrible diseases. Maybe it's a life lesson for them. Maybe it's to teach us the frailty of our existence here. I won't claim I know why innocent children suffer but there's a reason.

Because God's a monstrous, idiotic dickhead if he exists.

But more likely, because we exist in a meaningless universe without a God.

>>2431913
>And it's not our duty to question God
>HURR GOD NEVER DOES UNIMAGINABLY EVIL THINGS FOR NO REASON!
>DURR WELL OKAY HE DOES BUT THATS JUST HIS MYSTERIOUS WAYS :^)

ITT: Weebs who can't handle the truth of Mohammad

File: ElmoDiesForOurSins.jpg (431KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 500x667px

>>2431879
How the shit were we created in God's image during any of this?

Especially when niggas like Homo Erectus and Homo Neanderthalensis were walking around and interacting with (in the case of the neanderthals, fucking,) humans?

we werent even the first sapient species on earth

>>2431936
>Because God's a monstrous, idiotic dickhead if he exists.
Why? Do you think your existence on Earth is the be all, end all? That's an atheistic perspective, your existence on Earth is only a blink of an eye, and everyone faces different trials. In heaven God balances the scales and if you kept faith the righteous are rewarded while the wicked are punished. The idea that earthly suffering is the worst thing that can ever happen is the perspective of someone who does not believe in God, and therefore is a pointless argument since if God exists having cancer is literally nothing compared to the eternity of ecstasy that awaits after

>>2431945
it's not because of His misterious ways. He's so bigger, so much more knowledgeable and powerful than us. He is the ultimate reason of our existence and the Natural Law personified. You don't question why the cheetah eats the gazelle, so why do you question the reason people are born with horrifying diseases?

>>2431936
>because God's a monstrous idiotic dickhead
I will legit pray for you. Don't be like that. You can't apply our notions of morality to God because God is that morality. If God wanted to he could give cancer to everyone on this world and kill us at this very moment. But he's not evil.

>But more likely, because we exist in a meaningless universe without a God.
Read The Brothers Karamazov
Seriously do it.

>>2431955
>How the shit were we created in God's image during any of this?
God is a spirit, He has no body. How can your body be created 'in the image' of a being with no physical form? Your soul is what is in Gods image, not your body.

>>2431912
God knew exactly what Satan had been doing, he just wanted to hear what Satan has to say.

That's why God asks questions at all. He already knows everything, he just wants to make people/entities face up to their own actions. He wants to see if/how they'll lie, or if they'll be truthful.

>>2431958
>Why? Do you think your existence on Earth is the be all, end all?

Because I'm not delusional.

>rest of your post

None of that shit happens because it isn't real, and you're a shitposting cretin who makes this place worse. I honestly hate you.

>>2431955
it is your immortal conciousness/soul the one that's made in image of God. Not our bodies. As for the Homo Erectus/Homo Neanderthalensis, I don't know. Maybe they had souls/conciousness, maybe not. I haven't interacted with any of them to know.

>>2431967
I hate this asspull argument.

>Adam and Eve hid from God
>God spends the day walking around paradise and asking where they are
>HURR HE WAS JUST PRETENDING TO BE RETARDED

According to the Bible, God clearly isn't omniscient.

>>2431967
>He wants to see if/how they'll lie, or if they'll be truthful.

But he already knows. Who is he trying to impress?

>>2431971
So your argument is that IF God exists then hes a dick because he makes you suffer and doesn't really exist. Nice argument bud.

>>2431964
I understand that it isn't about the physical form. How do we have the imago dei but not neanderthals, who we know practice burial rituals and had tools and more likely than not had art as well? What makes us any different from them, besides the fact that we survived and they didn't?

>>2431975
So God allowed multiple species with his image to evolve..?

>>2431971
>because I'm not delusional
how did you make the jump to the "fact" that there's nothing after death? Isn't that a jump of faith by itself? If you want to be really coherent, there's a 50/50 chance that there's something after death. If you were living 500 years ago and were said that there's small microbes that make you contract diseases and they're in the air, the water and the dirt, you would discredit the one that told you as a crazy idiot.

>None of that shit happens because it isn't real, and you're a shitposting cretin who makes this place worse. I honestly hate you.

And I honestly wish for the well-being of your soul. You're just misguided and I wait you find your path back to God. You're near that spot but find the acceptance of suffering in the universe unacceptable. Read the Brothers Karamazov for a good argument for the suffering that exists and why it exists.

>>2431980
>because he makes you suffer

It's not about me. My suffering is very little to me. It's about the countless other people he makes suffer, because I have basic human empathy, something you demonstrably lack. In your time here you do nothing but try to scare people into worshiping your garbage baron, and delight in the idea of people that disagree with you being tortured for all of eternity.

Even when you're nice to someone, it's always tainted with the knowledge that you delight in the fact they'll be tortured for all of eternity for disagreeing with you.

And don't you fucking dare try to deny that you delight in it, because we all know your posting style.

>>2431995
>So God allowed multiple species with his image to evolve.
I don't see why allowing that is wrong or anything like that. It's like asking why God would allow humans to be so different from each other. Why are there black people, asian people, mixed people?

>>2432002
So then multiple different species fell, too?

ASSFUCK ME YEAH ASSFUCK ME POPE GAYLORD II

File: 1475283439110.png (630KB, 602x560px) Image search: [Google]

630KB, 602x560px

>>2432011
its time to stop posting anon

>>2431996
>If you want to be really coherent, there's a 50/50 chance that there's something after death.

No, in a complete absence of evidence, the negative claim is the default.

>If you were living 500 years ago and were said that there's small microbes that make you contract diseases and they're in the air, the water and the dirt, you would discredit the one that told you as a crazy idiot.

Without evidence, that's the logical conclusion.

>And I honestly wish for the well-being of your soul.

Fuck you. Fuck you and your fucking self-righteous garbage. I hate you.

>You're near that spot but find the acceptance of suffering in the universe unacceptable.

The suffering in the universe is perfectly acceptable you goddamn idiot. Suffering is part of the experience of life as a human being. What isn't acceptable is that a hypothetical all-powerful piece of cosmic garbage created a universe for people to suffer in on the promise of eternal paradise if you just submit to his inane demands and the threat of eternal torture for not accepting his ridiculous story at face value.

>Read the Brothers Karamazov for a good argument for the suffering that exists and why it exists.

Dostoevsky is overrated garbage.

>>2431998
>because I have basic human empathy, something you demonstrably lack

Are you seriously saying that I can't suffer because of the people that are experiment pain and are hurt everyday? That the fact that I believe in God doesn't mean I care for my neighbor?

Why would I translate that love and compassion into hate for an entity I don't think exists (in reference to you)? Why would I not translate that love and compassion for my fellow human beings into action.

>Even when you're nice to someone, it's always tainted with the knowledge that you delight in the fact they'll be tortured for all of eternity for disagreeing with you.

Who in the world is even doing this? At least on this thread? The people that do that are wicked people and not any better than an atheist. Faith without action is wicked.

>>2432007
maybe. I didn't claim to exactly know the process throughout these species were made in the image of God or not. Just that the question is extremely irrelevant for any morality purposes.

>>2432018
>No, in a complete absence of evidence, the negative claim is the default.
>Without evidence, that's the logical conclusion.
So you're admitting that you could be wrong. That's all I need and thank you. You're on the good path. Not saying that I find the blasphemies any comforting, but your anger is righteous. Just sadly misdirected.

>>2432018
>What isn't acceptable is that a hypothetical all-powerful piece of cosmic garbage created a universe for people to suffer in on the promise of eternal paradise if you just submit to his inane demands and the threat of eternal torture for not accepting his ridiculous story at face value.

I never claimed that you would face eternal torture for not accepting everything I tell you at face value. Just that the righteous will find themselves in Heaven and the wicked in Hell, but at the end, all souls reunite with God. There's no eternity in Hell.

I don't see how any of his demands are inane. He's Supreme, so asking to be worshipped is not irrational. And the rest of his Commandments are reasonable morality guidelines. A pious atheist/agnostic has a bigger chance to get in Heaven earlier than a sinful believer.

>>2431523
>Being agnostic is juvenile. It shows no mental fortitude and intellectual laziness

How was it lazy to admit that you don't know something? It doesn't mean you stop searching for answers, it just means that you admit you don't know.

So instead of this you would rather come up with some Theory based on your limited understanding of limited information about what may be an infinite occurrence existence itself and Proclaim that you have all the answers?

That's immature, self-aggrandizing, and the height of hubris. Qualities that teenagers and young adults seem prone to

>>2431666
>666

Get behind me Satan. You are a stumbling block to me because you think not God's thoughts, but those men.

>>2431862
>>2431862
>time from jesus to now less than 2000

Check your calendar bruv, I think you're about 17 years behind at least.

>>2431868
>zion
>not jewish

Rome was the second Babylon

all religion is a sham, get used to it

>>2431879
Self-awareness in itself does not come with a moral code. If he didn't want to hit Og over the head and take his mate so recently after gaining self-awareness, it would more likely be out of the aversion to pugilism rather than that some newly-discovered sense of propriety.

>>2432082
Oh goddamnit. I didn't even realize the digits. But even if Satan said that through me, he would be right.

>>2432054
>how was it lazy to admit you don't know something
That's not the lazy part. The lazy part is the commodity that comes afterwards where you stay in that position for God knows how many time.

>So instead of this you would rather come up with some Theory based on your limited understanding of limited information about what may be an infinite occurrence existence itself and Proclaim that you have all the answers?

I never proclaimed I have all the answers. Just that I try to approach them. Something that scientists also do.

>A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion
Francis Bacon

>>2431976
That was written at a time when the people who were to become the Hebrews were a polytheistic people and the boundary between men and gods was very very blurry.

>>2431998
>Even when you're nice to someone, it's always tainted with the knowledge that you delight in the fact they'll be tortured for all of eternity for disagreeing with you.
I don't even believe in a Hell where people are tortured for eternity. The biblical hell seems to be using fire as a metaphor for the soul being destroyed. So no, you're not tortured, your soul is destroyed and you get to go back to non-existence just like you want.

Nice try at projecting shit onto me and arguing against that though.

>>2432017

GAYLORD THE GREAT

File: IMG_0288.jpg (380KB, 1280x1920px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1280x1920px

New International Version
He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

>>2431979
It's not for God's benefit, it's for the benefit of the ones he questions.

Jesus does this too.

>Who do people say the Son of Man is?

>>2431995
The line between species is blurry and arbitrary. Remember that evolution is a continuum of very small changes over a vast amount of time and there is no actual moment when one species suddenly becomes another species. You're imprinting your arbitrary knowledge of species on Gods design, which is more fluid and doesn't fit into neat boxes.

>>2431523
>You mean the suffering that is a product of our own free will?
>Malaria, Epilepsy, and Dementia are things humans choose.

>>2431860
The message of the Gospel is not meant to be a factual account of world history. It's a parable to guide you in living your own life. None of it is meant to be read as a factual accounting.

>>2432294
>Malaria, Epilepsy, and Dementia are things humans choose.

I already said that genetic diseases can't be used as arguments for a maltheistic approach. God is infinitely bigger and more knowledgeable than you. And, as the other anon said before, the suffering on Earth is infinitely small compared to the rewards in Heaven.

>>2431898
>so you're saying that a king shouldn't protect his subdits? That he should let them be killed through inaction? Not even the most relentless pacifist would accept inaction as a position.
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.
41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
That's literally Jesus' whole deal. It doesn't matter if if your fanatical pacifism gets you killed, because YOUR BODY DOESN'T MATTER, ALL THAT MATTERS IS MAINTAINING YOUR RELATION TO GOD UNTIL SOMETHING KILLS YOU.

>>2432321
I found your song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWSoYCetG6A

>all these people who took the protestant trolls bait
Every.Single.Time.
I need to stop coming here for theological discussions and maybe stick to /lit/. That being said, suffering, to the Christian happens and comes for a multitude of reasons but I think a very simplified and quick answer would be 1. Humans are allowed to exert their free will.
2. Suffering is allowed to test the faithful and how conditional human beings are. The whole mentality of "I only love it if it pleases me and makes me feel good! If it hurts and ceases to please me then clearly its evil" Is frowned upon in most religions not just Christianity.
3. Suffering willingly for the sake of others has tremendous benefits but that's dwelling deep into Christian mysticism and probably not appropriate for this thread.

>>2432334
Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you out without purse or bag or sandals, did you lack anything?” “Nothing,” they answered. 36“Now, however, He told them, “the one with a purse should take it, and likewise a bag; and the one without a sword should sell his cloak and buy one.

For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but bad. Do you want to be unafraid of the one in authority? Then do what is right, and you will have his approval. 4For he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not carry the sword in vain. He is God’s servant, an agent of retribution to the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to authority, not only to avoid punishment, but also as a matter of conscience.…

>>2432329
We don't have enough evidence to conclude that God's Malice is the source of suffering, but we have definitive evidence that suffering isn't rooted in human free will. People die of diseases and floods and being struck by lightning, with no knowledge of what's going on.
So either God has nothing to do with that, and suffering is just in the World somehow, or God is doing it on purpose for what he claims is the greater good.

>>2432340
Can someone help me out here? I can't figure out if this is a compliment or not.

>>2432366
>God is doing it on purpose for what he claims is the greater good.

You only need the first part. God allows suffering "without reason" and His reason is not ours to entirely comprehend. It may be a test, it may be a lesson. But decrying suffering as inherently evil is irrational.

>>2432348
>If it hurts and ceases to please me then clearly its evil" Is frowned upon in most religions not just Christianity.
So Satan is about, doing good in the world, and it is only our foolish perspective that makes him seem evil?

>>2432379
Satan wants you to be good, settle down, raise a family and not take too much from his world.

>>2432379
even Satan has a purpose in the plan of God.

>>2432352
>the one without a sword should sell his cloak and buy one.
A sword that, when he uses it, Jesus rebukes him for it. I'm not sure what the point of the sword was.
>Coming at me with that Romans shit
There's no reason to believe that Jesus would have approved of a single word of Saul of Tarsus, other than Saul's own assertion.

>>2432379
Satan wants you to focus on worldly things and ignore or deny God.

>Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!”
>Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

>>2432377
God has infinite power and knowledge. If He truly desired it, he could arrange events to teach any lesson without causing any pain at all. That he chooses not to do so suggests that he desires us to suffer.

>>2432399
>A sword that, when he uses it, Jesus rebukes him for it. I'm not sure what the point of the sword was.

Because the man was acting recklessly. There's a difference between killing in self-defense when you're being assaulted or in defense of a partner, and striking when you're not in immediate danger. Even policemen are taught to not be reckless.

>Coming at me with Romans shit
So you can use passages of the Old Testament (David's Psalms) but I can't counter with the New Testament in equal grounds? That's extremely hipocrytical of you

>>2432413
>God has infinite power and knowledge. If He truly desired it, he could arrange events to teach any lesson without causing any pain at all. That he chooses not to do so suggests that he desires us to suffer.

And in what way is what you said contradicting anything of what I said? If he wishes us to suffer on this Earth, so be it. If he wishes us to keep suffering on Heaven so be it. It's not ours the duty to question Him.

>>2432366
>or God is doing it on purpose for what he claims is the greater good.
And omnipotent and omniscient being can only commit the greater good because every action they could possibly perform is a perfect one because they ARE perfection. If we took the wheel to perhaps change the conclusion of that man being struck by lighting who knows what would result of his survival? We're entirely limited in our perspective.
>REEEE but that's mean!
>>2432379
Satan does absolutely no good. If you're implying hedonism is good then I want you to look at how miserable and depressed materialism has made people.

>>2432421
>You just don't know dude, it's all part of the plan!
>Maybe everyone would have suffered if that guy lived!
Then why did God allow him to be born in the first place?

>well he did it so something else would happen before the guy croaked
He's all powerful. He could've easily created a scenario where everything goes according to his plan and nobody dies a pointless death.

>>2432414
>There's a difference between killing in self-defense when you're being assaulted
Jesus was pretty specific about what to do if you're assaulted: Turn the other cheek and just keep taking it.
>So you can use passages of the Old Testament (David's Psalms)
So first off I'm confused because I haven't quoted any of the OT. But second off we have Jesus' opinion of the OT, he gives it to us in the Gospels, tells us what parts he agrees with and what parts he disagrees with. We have no reason to believe that the direct contradiction of his entire message is something he would have approved of.

>>2432413
And how do you know that this isn't the optimal way for us to learn the lessons he wants us to learn?

>>2432420
The "god makes us suffer to teach us something" part. God just wants you to suffer. He doesn't want anything to come of it, he doesn't have some greater goal. God wants you to suffer for no other reason that to see your suffering.

>>2432448
Pain is the price you pay satan for pleasure.

>>2432421
>And omnipotent and omniscient being can only commit the greater good because every action they could possibly perform is a perfect one because they ARE perfection.
WRONG. God's capacity to always serve the greater good is called omnibenevolence. Omnipotent just means "can do whatever he wants" and Omniscient means "knows everything".
> Satan does absolutely no good
But didn't you know anon? Satan works in "mysterious ways" and it's not possible to say whether what he's doing isn't part of the greater good, because human's can't understand the greater good.

>>2432442
Optimality is an irrelevant concern to god. Optimal is a word meaning "requires least effort for most result" but god has infinite effort.

>>2432433
>I haven't quoted any of the OT
so you enter a conversation without even announcing you're a new person?

>Blessed be the LORD my strength, who teaches my hands to war, and my fingers to fight. psalm 144

>Jesus was pretty specific about what do if you're assaulted
Then why did he ask his disciples to buy swords? Oh, yeah, you can't admit the easier explanation: that self-defense or the defense of your partners is justified.

>>2432432
>and nobody dies a pointless death
why do you place so much value in the temporal suffering of our flawed world? WHY. Every "argument" you make hinges on the fact that you think that the fact that God makes us suffer on this Earth means that he's evil. WHY?

>>2432455
There's a disease where children are born without a top to their heads. Their brains are malformed, and if they aren't put in a coma they die screaming. What "pleasure" did they pay for with three days of uninterrupted pain followed by death?

>>2432448
It's always funny to me to see atheists claim they have the same clarity in their logic as an omnipotent being that created the sum total of their reality. It really shows off their supreme arrogance every time.

>Well my logic dictates x and clearly my logic is every bit as good as Gods and there is surely no element that I cannot see because my perspective is that of a speck, but I'm sure I'm right

Why don't you just give up and admit that you literally cannot comprehend God or his motives instead of trying desperately to show you can outsmart God.

>>2432467
He's clearly referring to "optimal" as for US. He even says so.

>>2432448
How do you even know or can claim that? Didn't you say that you didn't believe in God? How can you make such outrageous claims without believing in Him?

>>2432481
You would have to ask them.

>>2432472
>so you enter a conversation without even announcing you're a new person?
wheredoyouthinkyouare.gif
>Then why did he ask his disciples to buy swords? Oh, yeah, you can't admit the easier explanation: that self-defense or the defense of your partners is justified.
I'm sorry, I didn't think you were going to take the position that the Commandments of Christ Himself could be wrong and immoral.

>>2432481
This was already answered. And I even proposed that you read Brothers Karamazov.

>>2432467
How do you know this reality doesn't give God the best possible result? How do you know that suffering is not the means to an infinitely greater end? How do you know that the elimination of suffering would necessarily lead to a better result for Gods purposes? Your entire argument is predicated on the idea that you have an understanding of everything that is equal to Gods, you don't even understand the basics of the basics of the universe, little bit presumptuous to quarrel with the entity that created it ex nihilo about ways you think it would be better, no?

>>2432492
Nowhere. NOWHERE. NOWHERE. Does Jesus condemn a soldier for his work. He even healed the servant of a centurion and was amazed at his faith. Nowhere did he ever condemn the man because of his work as you claim that he did. But leave it to atheists to spin and ignore the Gospel of God.

>>2432497
People go to hell for three days all the time.

>>2432480
If you had to explain why assault was wrong, without quoting Mark, you'd probably fall back on "hurting people is bad, and hitting people hurts people."

>>2432508
and why would our morality apply to God Himself? Why do you keep thinking that you have a higher understanding of God's Ways? Why are you so arrogant?

>>2432485
God could have created a world where everything happened exactly the same except nobody suffered during it. The fact that he didn't suggests he wants suffering.

>>2432517
Then there would be no pleasure, no pain, no creation, decay or destruction. That's satans deal and you don't want it.

File: king-solomon-jikatu1.jpg (691KB, 683x1024px) Image search: [Google]

691KB, 683x1024px

Matthew 24:35-36

35Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Be Ready at Any Hour
(Genesis 6:1-7; Mark 13:32-37; Luke 12:35-48)

36But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

>>2432489
>He's clearly referring to "optimal" as for US. He even says so.
God made us, could have made us however he wanted, he created us so that suffering would be an optimal way for us to learn. God made our environment. He COULD and this is my point HE COULD have created a world that taught the exact same lessons without suffering, and it might have taken more effort, but he's fucking god: He has infinite effort.
>How do you even know or can claim that?
If god can make this happen however he wants, then whatever happens happens because god puts certain people in certain situations, already knowing what they are going to do. The only reason for your response to be [Suffering]+[Thing God 'actually' wants] instead of just [Thing God 'actually' wants] is if the suffering was something god intrinsically valued.

>>2432494
Hold on.
>>2432294
Is my very first post. Nothing said before that is part of this comment chain. Also, there's approximately two other atheists on here arguing with you at the same time. How many christfags am I talking to right now?

>>2432517
But how do you know such a world would have created a greater good than our current one? How do you know that suffering down the line does not create an even greater good that is worth the price and that a world without suffering would ultimately end up being less good?

>>2432551
That's what's happening and the snake is riding on our coattails, he will eat dust.

>>2432497
>How do you know that the elimination of suffering would necessarily lead to a better result for Gods purposes?
You seem to misunderstand me. I don't think that the elimination of suffering would be something God would like, because there IS suffering. So either god isn't smart enough or strong enough to make a world that does all the same things but without suffering in it, or God wants you to suffer. I don't know WHY God wants you to suffer, but I do know that he could have kept you from suffering and had you turn out the exact same person in the exact same situation, but he didn't.

>>2432551
>But how do you know such a world would have created a greater good than our current one?
What part of "all powerful" is unclear? If god has the power to make A N Y T H I N G possible, then he could create a perfect world with none of the issues you've mentioned. Do you doubt your deity's abilities?

>>2432544
I'm just one guy. That doesn't mean I should try to counter different views. That's picking up from a previous argument and waiting I treat you differently without a cue.

>>2432540
>If god can make this happen however he wants, then whatever happens happens because god puts certain people in certain situations, already knowing what they are going to do. The only reason for your response to be [Suffering]+[Thing God 'actually' wants] instead of just [Thing God 'actually' wants] is if the suffering was something god intrinsically valued.

You just reworded what others already said. My point is; how do you claim to know that God only wants us to suffer without any reason? And building from your previous argumentation, how do you claim that God is evil when the judgment you make is from your flawed human understanding?

>>2432562
There is also suffering for mistakes, and the whole world is too full of cowards willing to make any, including the the one that keeps tricking us into making them.

>>2432562
So you're just going to keep circling around the same argument ad nauseum or are you going to claim any proof as for why is this inherently evil without recurring to the fact that you find your flawed reasoning as good as the reasoning of an Infinitely Bigger and Knowledgeable being that created the reality you're currently living in?

>>2432562
>I don't know WHY God wants you to suffer
Because this reality in which there is suffering is the reality that creates the most possible good. To prove otherwise would necessitate a perspective equal to Gods, and arguments against it rely on you having better logic and knowledge of what the nature of good is better than God himself. The dog thinks you are being unspeakably cruel and making it unnecessarily suffer when you take it to the vet, you know better that you're actually caring for it in a way it cannot understand. If your dog accused you of being cruel, callous and terrible would you watch it die of cancer instead of taking it to the vet and getting it the surgery that makes it 'suffer'?

The point is that God has an infinitely greater perspective than you. You think you have it all figured out, God KNOWS why this is best for you, you do not and in your ignorance accuse Him of malice, but it's only because of your own limitations that you don't realize why this world having suffering is in your own best interests.

>>2432501
Jesus also doesn't condemn a prostitute for her work. Are we taking this as evidence that Jesus thought prostitution wasn't immoral?
>ignore the Gospel of God.
Matthew 19:21
Matthew 5:39
As you stand here defending violence on a computing device you presumably own.

>>2432511
Why would God's morality apply to us?

>>2432526
So your saying that creating a world with pleasure, creation, decay, and destruction, but no suffering or pain, is something God isn't smart enough or powerful enough to do?

>>2432583
>Jesus also doesn't condemn a prostitute for her work
The only thing Jesus says to a sinful woman in the Gospels is this

>When the accusers heard this, they slipped away one by one, beginning with the oldest, until only Jesus was left in the middle of the crowd with the woman. 10 Then Jesus stood up again and said to the woman, “Where are your accusers? Didn’t even one of them condemn you?”

>11 “No, Lord,” she said.

>And Jesus said, “Neither do I. Go and sin no more.”

>And sin no more. That was clearly implying that what the woman did was wrong. Nowhere did he ever say something of the sort to the centurion.

>>2432565
>then he could create a perfect world with none of the issues you've mentioned
But that ignores the fact that I just mentioned its entirely possible for suffering to result in an ultimate greater good than a world without suffering. If suffering results in greater good then a world without suffering is by definition less good. You understand?

>>2432598
God has the ability to do anything.
God does not need to use suffering as a tool, because he is all powerful. You understand?

>>2432591
pleasure is only defined as the lack of pain. If you haven't experienced pain, there's no way to know what pleasure is. Creation wouldn't be possible without destruction.

Existence as it is wouldn't be possible if God were to create a world like that. And why should He? Why are you so arrogant? I can only imagine your smug face as you were typing this, thinking that you were oh, so smart.

>>2432531
Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.
"will not taste" γεύομαι to experience
"death" θάνατος death, the act of dying.

>>2432587
It already applies, it's the natural law and conciousness that tells us what's wrong and what's bad. Whether you like it or not.

>>2432605
why do you keep thinking you have better understanding of the universe and how it should work than God, an infinitely bigger being?

>>2432605
Without suffering there would be no need to help, comfort, and support one another.
Think about this.

>>2432591
You're misunderstanding what omnipotence is. Here's what Aquinas said

>It is commonly said that God is almighty. Yet it seems difficult to understand the reason for this, on account of the doubt about what is meant when it is said that ‘God can do everything’… If it is said that God is omnipotent because he can do everything possible to his power, the understanding of omnipotence is circular, doing nothing more than saying that God is omnipotent because he can do everything that he can do… To sin is to fall short of a perfect action. Hence to be able to sin is to be able to be deficient in relation to an action, which cannot be reconciled with omnipotence. It is because God is omnipotent that he cannot sin… Anything that implies a contradiction does not relate to the omnipotence of God.”

You're relying on the 'omnipotence paradox' which is false. God cannot create a contradiction. If the reality with the most good needs suffering by definition God cannot create a world that is perfectly good without suffering because that is a contradiction.

http://www.ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/FP/FP025.html#FPQ25A3THEP1

>>2432551
The most frustrating thing about this is that YOU'RE FUCKING AGREEING WITH ME I DON'T think the world would be less good to God without suffering in it I THINK GOD FINDS SUFFERING TO BE INTRINSICALLY GOOD a world with less suffering in it WOULD be less good, BECAUSE there's less suffering in it.
Think about it like this: God is all good. Not "mostly good" or "turns out for good". "ALL good". That means that when something happens by his will, not just the ending, but the beginning and the middle are all also all good. So if there is suffering AT ANY POINT in the enactment of God's will, that suffering is good. Not "leading to good consequence" just "good".

>>2432612
So what you're saying is that god is incapable of creating compassionate beings, and needs to rely on a serious of unfortunate events to get his creations to act the way he wants them to?
How is he all powerful if that's the case?

>>2432609
>why do you keep thinking you have better understanding of the universe and how it should work than God, an infinitely bigger being?
I don't. I think god is imaginary and I'm pointing out the flaws in your argument. The fact that you have to fall back on the "mysterious ways" argument every time should bother you.

>>2432613
>Aquinas
>some dude who showed up centuries after the bible was written
Why do Christians frequently pretend that the opinion of a revisionist scholar is relevant?

>>2432621
>How is he all powerful if that's the case
You didn't even read the reasoning by Aquinas, did you?

>>2432621
Why would compassion exist in a world where everyone is provided for and drowning in their pleasures? You would never need to show compassion because there would never be a moment in which its possible to do so.
There's no pain, no stress, etc ,etc.

>>2432621
>I think god is imaginary and I'm pointing out the flaws in your argument
There aren't any flaws. Your argument is meaningless. It's like saying God can create a triangle without three sides. Can you create a 'triangle' without the properties which by definition create a triangle? Your entire argument hinges on the idea that omnipotence defies any and all logic, at which point you might as well just use the old "Can God create a boulder so big even He can't lift it?" argument. It's the exact same thing, literally the only thing your argument is based off is the fact that you personally cannot comprehend omnipotence

>>2432569
>My point is; how do you claim to know that God only wants us to suffer without any reason?
God doesn't have to do anything he doesn't want to. Everything that God does is in accord with his Will, at every step and in every moment. So if it is happening, God wants it to happen. If there is suffering, God wants there to be suffering. To believe otherwise is to believe that God would do differently, if he only was more powerful. There is no "if you want B, first you have to A" for God. He just says "let there be B"

>>2432569
>>2432575
Hold on there mate, I never said that suffering was Evil, or that intrinsically taking joy in watching humans suffer made God evil. That claim came from inside yourself.

>>2432621
>believes himself to have better argument than Aquinas without even attempting to counter them
>believes himself to have superior reasoning to God because he thinks that God "is imaginary" without even fully accepting the premises of the "imaginary" God that's being implied

Not only you're an intellectual coward, you're an arrogant fuck. The other agnostic on this thread based his agnosticism on humility. You base your agnosticism on the false notion that you're superior to everyone else; atheists and believers, God and His Creation. Your belief is only self-gratifying trite.

>>2432635
God made a plan that man can get around to whenever they're ready.

>>2432643
if something doesn't exist something that does would necessarily have superior reasoning

>>2432642
then what's your objective? Why do you keep repeating the same circular reasoning?

>I think x is bad
>If God was all powerful he would have erased x

Your argument hinges entirely on WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT.

>>2432606
Nah mate, I feel a whole host of sensations that are neither pleasure nor pain and "pleasure" isn't one homogeneous sensation. A good book, a good bed, and a good woman are three entirely different feelings.

>>2432627
>Why would compassion exist in a world where everyone is provided for and drowning in their pleasures?
The all powerful creator of the universe uses his powers to make it so.
Problem solved.

>>2432634
>creating a world where people do not suffer is the same as the boulder paradox
That's a new one. Your own creation myth claims that god created humans. If this is the case, then he is ultimately the master of human nature. God has the ability to modify the human mind as he sees fit. It is well within his abilities to make humans care and love without suffering to push people together.

>>2432643
>I can't believe you think you're better than Odin! You arrogant shit!
Okay.

>Aquinas
Like I said, he's a revisionist. There's a million just like him. He showed up centuries after the texts were written and decided that just about everyone who came before him was incapable of gleaning the "true meaning" from the various biblical texts.

>>2432613
>If the reality with the most good needs suffering by definition God cannot create a world that is perfectly good without suffering because that is a contradiction.
Now it is you who is claiming that you understand the universe better than God. God could make a universe that was EXACTLY, IN EVERY WAY like this one, except it had no suffering in it. If the presence of suffering, WHEN EVERY OTHER THING IS THE SAME makes more good, then suffering is good. Not because suffering causes good consequences, but because it is in some way edifying to the Lord when you suffer. Ergo, God wants you to suffer.

>>2432653
>Nah mate, I feel a whole host of sensations that are neither pleasure nor pain and "pleasure" isn't one homogeneous sensation. A good book, a good bed, and a good woman are three entirely different feelings.

And how does that contradict anything of what I said? Are you going to entirely rely on linguistic trappings? Seriously?

>>2432651
Then why engage on this discussion at all? Don't worry, I already have the answer; to satisfy your ego. I have no business engaging someone so intellectually dishonest the only reason he has to engage in discussion is to feel better with himself. You're not even attempting to spread "knowledge".

>>2432656
>It is well within his abilities to make humans care and love without suffering to push people together
He did that then man fucked up. Man is the cause of his own fall and suffering, not God.

>>2432668
And god (the all powerful and all knowing creator) created a flawed creature and knew he would fail before doing so.

Lets end this.

1, God wants to create a world that produces the most possible good

2. A world with suffering creates even greater good than a world without suffering because suffering allows humans to display the virtues of charity, compassion and humility

3. Therefore the world that produces the most possible good has suffering in it

4. Therefore God created a world withsuffering

>Huuuur but God could just create a world that produces more good without suffering if he's all mighty
Incorrect. God can do all things that are possible to do. Can God sin? No because God by definition is sinless, if God has sin he ceases to be God. Can God create a triangle without three sides? No, because a polygon without three sides is by definition not a triangle. Therefore there are things that God even in his omnipotence cannot do, which are logical paradoxes or contradictions.

Therefore a world with suffering is a logical necessity to have a world with the most possible Good.

Q.E.D

>>2432664
no you see I know better than God, I'm sure that if I was all powerful as God I could create a world without suffering. Nevermind that doing that would end up being a contradiction and if the humans could be able to sort it out that would end up creating suffering.

>>2432667
i was only remarking on the logic of your statement im not the guy you wrote it to
i actually agree that agnosticism is cowardice but thats a bad argument
kek couldn't what you said be applied to yourself just as easily

>>2432670
You are asserting that it's impossible to have a world without suffering, but you have no basis for this argument whatsoever.

>>2432652
I DON'T THINK X IS BAD YOU THICK SKULLED TWAT! YOU MADE A CLAIM ABOUT GOD NOT DESIRING SUFFERING THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY WRONG, SO I TOLD YOU YOUR CLAIM WAS WRONG, AND YOU'VE BEEN RUNNING AROUND IN CIRCLES TRYING TO PROVE THAT GOD ISN'T STRONG ENOUGH TO PREVENT SUFFERING!
Yes I'm mad, you god damned heretic.

>>2432672
I'm engaging on this discussion for the betterment of myself and others; not to satisfy my ego. I have learned so many things from the other kind anons posting on this thread. I know that this entire discussion wasn't a power trip for me.

>>2432675
>God isn't strong enough to prevent suffering
read
>>2432670
>heretic
says the fundamentalist. I bet you're not even Catholic.

>>2432667
>Pleasure is only defined by pain
>No it isn't
>How does that contradict what I said?
Are you even fucking reading anymore?

>>2432673
>You are asserting that it's impossible to have a world without suffering
No, I'm asserting that a world with suffering is necessarily more good than a world without suffering because suffering logically creates a greater good than no suffering. Therefore it follow if a creator wants to create a world that is the most good that world must include suffering. To create a world that is both the most good and without suffering would create a logical paradox, which is beyond the scope of omnipotence.

>>2432683
>because suffering logically creates a greater good than no suffering
What are you basing this on?

>>2432676
isn't believing that your taking part in this discussion betters people exactly a egotistical satisfaction

good job ignoring everything else i said also

>>2432656
Do you even know the definition of compassion?
>sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others.
Compassion can literally not exist in a world without suffering. The world you describe and want is a world where literally everything is given to you, nobody dies, and everyone is filled to the brim with joy. What you want is heaven. You are literally just describing heaven. Only hedonistic heaven since everything would still be physical and you'd probably spend %99 your time doing nothing but fucking (because nobody can reject you and you don't have to worry about aids), sleeping (because nobody has to work), and eating (because no negative could result in over eating because obesity and "unhealthy" does not exist).

>>2432682
If you didn't know pain would you know what pleasure is? Wouldn't all sensations be a varying degree of the same sensation? By taking away suffering you take away fear, hate, arrogance, pride and you only let the good stay. There would be no need for the concept "pleasure" on that world as everything we know would be good.

File: epicur god.jpg (90KB, 1595x895px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1595x895px

>>2432680

>>2432685
God is Good. God wants to create a good world. Suffering is in the world. Therefore suffering is necessary for a good world.

>>2432670
>A world with suffering creates even greater good than a world without suffering because suffering allows humans to display the virtues of charity, compassion and humility
Why do you believe that Charity, Compassion, and Humility are good things?

>>2432697
They're virtues God wants you to display and God is the source of all goodness

>>2432680
>I bet you're not even Catholic.
You bet wrong you Vatican two soft-ass.

>>2432694
I wanted you to make more arguments but it seems you're stuck on atheist's baby first paradox. It's kind of funny how this entire thread multiple times attempted for you to get away from that poor "argument". But your understanding of Christian theology is laughable.

>>2432690
>Compassion can literally not exist in a world without suffering...You are literally just describing heaven.
So there is no compassion in heaven? Does that make Heaven worse than Earth?

>>2432695
>>2432683
God isn't dependent on logic.

Either you believe that he is omnipotent, then he can create a world where people can be compassionate without suffering.
Or you believe that he is confined by logic and thereby not omnipotent, in which case he wouldn't be able to create boulders that not even he can carry, hot hotdogs that even he can't touch, et cetera.
Or you believe that he is not good and wants people to suffer.

In all the cases, he wouldn't be the god you think he is, or not even a god at all.

>>2432723
... he specified that you were describing a hedonistic heaven, a version of heaven worse than Earth.

>>2432723
No because Heaven is the perfection of the soul that has been tempered by the suffering and trials it endured on Earth.

>>2432692
The super-category Pleasure would not be a way that we grouped all the elements inside the set, but it wouldn't remove any of the elements inside the set. Learning a new skill is pleasure, taking a nap is please. But in the absence of child-rape I don't lose the ability to distinguish between the two.

>>2432727
Still relying on baby's first atheistic paradox? Seriously? This was already countered but you're like a broken record.

>>2432695
God is good. God wants to put good things in the world. God put suffering in the world. Therefore suffering is good.

>>2432703
Is there a particular biblical quote from which you draw this belief?

>>2432738
By appealing to god being confined to logic, which would just be a proof of him not being omnipotent to me.

>>2432727
>God isn't dependent on logic.
Aquinas says otherwise so I'll take his argument over yours unless you want to post a pic of your theology degree

>>2432741
so you're claiming that God literally puts the knife in the hands of the killer and is the one murdering the boy.

You're idiotic and your "reasoning" is only the rambling of a meatblob. You don't have arguments, you just rely on nonsense spouted by other people with far more knowledge than you will ever have.

>>2432727
>Or you believe that he is not good and wants people to suffer.
You could believe that God is good and wants people to suffer, because wanting people to suffer is good. It's probably in fact more in line with how earlier Christians would have explained Wrath as a sin.

>>2432731
So there is suffering in heaven? Or is there no compassion in heaven?

>>2432745
Jesus entire ministry. Was there ever a point where he didn't teach people to have compassion, mercy and humility?

>>2432732
So heaven is more good than Earth, despite not having any compassion, charity, or humility in it?

>>2432751
Instead of developing different arguments you keep repeating the same ad nauseum

>God allows suffering because suffering allows for a better world
>But that would mean God is not omnipotent :^)
>You don't know everything God does and to think you do so is arrogant
>But that would mean God is not omnipotent :^)
>God is Almighty in the sense that he can do everything that's possible to do. Paradoxes don't account for his Almightyness.
>But that would mean God is not omnipotent :^)

So many different arguments and counter-arguments yet you keep repeating the same drivel. That's outright sad.

>>2432716
lol i was a member of the church for 20 years,spent 13 years in catholic school, have read the bible cover to cover have a brother in the church with a masters in theology and church history with whom i constantly talk about these kind of things
im surprised you haven't resorted to the first mover argument or other such nonsense
>not agreeing with you means i'm ignorant
>just cause the paradox is old doesn't make it bad

>>2432751
Then how do you answer the classic boulder paradox? If your definition of omnipotence relies on the idea that omnipotent beings can create logical paradoxes how do you resolve them? Or do you just handwave it away because it suits your argument to create an absurdist strawman God you can make simplistic 3rd grade paradox arguments about?

>>2432753
So wait, is the Will of the Lord something I can understand, or not? Because if God is beyond human comprehension, there's no reason to think Aquinas learned anything worthwhile in school, and he never claimed divine revelation.

>>2432766
There is no suffering in heaven but there is a concept of compassion seeing how saints are allowed to pray for intervention on behalf of poor sinners and all that.
That being said, heaven is not an all you can eat buffet, or "physical, in any aspect. It's perfect unity with God but not exactly a losing of the self like Buddhists would describe their union with eternity. What heaven is like is dwelling into mysticism and beyond the arguments in this thread because at that point we will be relying on the writings of saints visions and what not which can be rejected even by the faithful.

>>2432775
>I'm surprised you haven't resorted to the first mover argument
You know what's funny? That you seem to think that every Christian is ignorant. You would be surprised at how many Christians are far more knowledgeable than you.

Nobody is criticizing that the paradox is old. What we're criticizing is your endless repetition of the same paradox as if it means anything. I could keep repeating "Can God create a God more powerful than him" and that wouldn't have any logical bearing into any argument because it's a paradox.

It was already explained to you that God is Almighty because he can do everything that's possible. Trying to counter that with paradoxes is nonsense. And while you brandish Epicurean paradoxes you say that the reasoning of Aquinas is invalid. Why? Only because of your arrogance.

>>2432755
Who says the killer stabbing the boy isn't good? You can't even say that God thinks so with a straight face, you've already admitted that you don't know what he wants or how he thinks.

>>2432767
You swapped mercy with charity. And I guess that depends. When Jesus is assaulting bank tellers, tearing up families, destroying buildings and raising the dead, is he not saying that somethings are more important than compassion?

>>2432774
>>2432738
Why are people so inept at tech? Alternatively, why do we still allow phoneposters to post?

Then again, even mobile versions of 4chan X show unique IDs nowadays. There is no excuse o be this retarded.

>>2432802
>Who says the killer stabbing the boy isn't good? You can't even say that God thinks so with a straight face, you've already admitted that you don't know what he wants or how he thinks.

The natural law. inb4 you say "but what if le kid is Hitler? XDDD". That would be adding nonsense to suit your arguments as you understood what I said. Or would you deny that killing the kid is evil?

I find it surprising anyway. You moved away from the paradox argumentation, even if it was only to divert from the original argument.

>>2432794
the true mark of someone whose lost an argument is when they resort to personal attacks
that being said paradoxes do have logical bearing on arguments (see reductio ad absurdum in symbolic logic) or is logic arrogant too

>>2432774
It's because your counter-arguments don't actually address the point. You're saying again and again that suffering is a bad thing that causes good things, as if God was capable of ever doing a bad thing. So you have two. EXACTLY TWO possible choices:
Suffering is intrinsically bad, but can be used for good ends: In which case god does some evil, and God is evil sometimes.
Suffering is intrinsically good, and God sometimes combo-wombos two good things on top of one another. In which case God is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent, by you have to admit that suffering is inherently good, and not only can't you bring yourself to do that, you'd rather impinge the power of god than admit you're wrong about suffering.

>>2432815
>the true mark of someone whose lost an argument is when they resort to personal attacks

Let's ignore the countless attacks inflicted on my person by multiple posters on this thread. Yeah, let's only apply logic to my side while you engage in dishonest discourse and argumentum ad nauseum.

>>2432779
God can lift the boulder he can't lift. God is absurd, logic doesn't apply to his actions at all, read Kierkegaard.

>>2432829
are you a new poster?

>>2432790
You contradict yourself. To feel compassion is to suffer. So the saints suffer.

>>2432829
I disagree. God is not absurd. God is pure logic and forms the foundation of our reality. God is pure, God is simple, God is beautiful, I can't think of anything that embodies that idea more than the mathematical formulae that describe our reality. God is in them. And when you reduce God down to this purely conceptual thing that makes no sense in any way and couldn't exist in reality it does a great disservice to him.

>>2432838
>Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the old heaven and the old earth had disappeared.

He's talking about the New Heaven. The New Heaven is only possible when the entirety of humanity enters Heaven and the suffering of those in Hell ends.

>>2432828
lol resorting to sympathy grubbing is another good rhetorical weapon
>people that don't accept my argument and pose their own are doing so dishonestly

>>2432814
Two things
1. What natural law are you referring to?
2. You're confused because at least 5 people think that they are all having a one on one conversation with one other person. That's why the line of argument seems so erratic, everybody is trying to respond to everybody else as if it were one long thesis instead of 9 separate discussions.

>>2432839
Reducing God down to a being confined by something as mundane as the reality he created sounds like more of a disservice to him, IMHO.

>>2432836
What do you mean?

>>2432839
I'd like to hear your thoughts on big K's arguments for the absurdity of the leap of faith.

>>2432814
Murderers unfortunately have just as much of a right to kill as do charitable people have the right of handing out money to those in need. Because it's hard to avoid in this case I'll drop some mysticism. God makes a distinction that there is suffering and death he himself allows and performs but there is also that which he permits but despises as it is an offense against himself and creation. Humanity should not desire God's justice because God's justice is terrifying. There's a reason a lot of saints ask for mercy upon the world as opposed to justice. This is going into mysticism though so you can ignore it.
>>2432838
You would think so but the beatific vision just doesn't permit it.
>>2432843
What the hell? No I'm not?

>>2432866
>God makes a distinction that there is suffering and death he himself allows and performs but there is also that which he permits but despises as it is an offense against himself and creation
Which, by the way, is what theologians said to explain why Wrath was a sin. Inflicting suffering was God's special privilege that you were usurping, not a thing God was trying to minimize.

>>2432851
Not confined by the reality, but the reality contains aspects of him. You leave your mark on anything you work on, you can tell literary styles from different authors, or tell the artist of a painting just by their style, so too can you discern the nature of God by studying his creation. I like the idea that because we see logic in our universe it points to God having a logic to him as well, since all creation emanates from Him. I find the idea that He's just a chaotic infinite blob with no logic repulsive. God created order out of chaos, he cannot be chaos himself, which is exactly what a being that doesn't adhere logic is.

>>2430496
Why did God wait thousands of years, sending untold millions to hell, before revealing the correct way to live to a small group in the middle east?

>>2432892
why would god care that you find it repulsive?

>he cannot...
he's described as all powerful, therefore you are explicitly wrong. hard stop.

>>2432880
lol the end sounds like basis for the libertines
god is a criminal and saves criminality for himself

>>2432892
>God created order out of chaos, he cannot be chaos himself,
Why do you assume that something that creates order out of chaos cannot be chaotic?

>>2432880
So he's a jealous, power-hungry sadist.

>>2432892
I don't think the logic you see in the universe is in the universe, I think it's in your eyes. You couldn't think about something without imputing some kind of logic on it, even if the logic didn't make sense.That's why quantum mechanics is so weird: The rules of logic we've made up don't account for it, so we're trying to stretch to fit.

>>2432902
Do you believe the police are kidnappers for arresting people?

>>2432909
He says himself that he's jealous, our current debate is about whether or not he's a sadist (and if there's anything wrong with that), but I don't think you can call God power hungry and omnipotent at the same time.

>>2432915
nope not making an argument just saying something i noticed

>>2431474
Luke 20:34-36
>Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage; but those who are considered worthy of a place in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. Indeed they cannot die anymore, because they are like angels and are children of God, being children of the resurrection.”

>>2432945
I'm wondering in what way does what you posted contradict what he posted. This post talks about Heaven and how there will be no marriage there.

>>2432959
He's saying only those who don't marry are worthy of a place in the world to come.

>>2431996
In don't think you understand how statistics work there being only two options doesn't mean the chance is the same. In the same way I wouldn't say there is 50/50 chance of living forever as I can only be alive or dead.

>>2432962
>He's saying only those who don't marry are worthy of a place in the world to come.

Nice interpretation out of your ass. I know the passage this comes from. The Sadducees wanted to question Jesus and asked him who would marry a widow of seven brothers between them in the resurrection.

But keep taking passages out of context and posting nonsense.

>>2432969
>but those who are considered worthy of a place in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage
What then did he mean by this? I don't see how it goes against the context.

>>2430496
The funniest thing about Christianity and Islam is that we have records of people at the time mocking the crazies (Islam even mentions them in the Koran) and yet nowadays they think it's weird that people wouldn't believe their stories or that they deserve any sort of respect for believing irrational stuff.

>>2432945
I take it to mean that in the life to come, nothing supersedes the union of man to God.

>>2433031
>irrational
*supernatural, not irrational. The supernatural is totally rational, if you've experienced it.

God is Omnimalevolent as suffering cannot exist without pleasure it was therefore necessary necessary for God to create a world with some pleasure. Now I know that some of you might be thinking that with all the pleasure and joy in the world God is not powerful enough to deliver on this . The answer is that this world and its current balance aloes for the maximum suffering overall even if we can't understand it fully with our imperfect minds.

How arrogant would you be to claim that you have a better understanding than God. Without pleasure our suffering would have no meaning and if parents weren't allowed to see the smile and love of a child where would the suffering be in its early demise ?

>>2433086
I know you're trying to be clever by flipping the argument around on it's side but regardless of what you feel it's established in Catholic theology that the definition of "evil" within its context is the complete absence of God and in regards to an action "goodness" .
We also established in this exact same that a world completely absent of suffering would render compassion, charity, virtues in general nonexistent since there would be no way to exercise or develop them. Humanity wouldn't have to depend on one another and we could just engage in endless material pleasure.

>>2433233
>I know you're trying to be clever by flipping the argument around on it's side but regardless of what you feel it's established in Catholic theology that the definition of "evil" within its context is the complete absence of God and in regards to an action "goodness" .

My point is to to draw this underlying reason out - it being Catholic or some of Dogma rather than something as simple as reason or logic.

>We also established in this exact same that a world completely absent of suffering would render compassion, charity, virtues in general nonexistent since there would be no way to exercise or develop them. Humanity wouldn't have to depend on one another and we could just engage in endless material pleasure.

We also established in this exact same that a world completely absent of pleasure would render indifference, theft and virtues in general nonexistent since there would be no way to exercise or develop them. Humanity wouldn't have to depend on one another and we could just engage in endless material suffering.

>>2431523
>You mean the suffering that is a product of our own free will? God doesn't want us to kill each other or ordered Hitler to kill so many jews.

How about natural disasters?
Cancer?
All the nasty diseases?
Animal attacks?

>said he was coming back
>did

what's the problem here

>>2433590
Where is he?

>>2433586

>le problem of evil

wow it's almost as if this has been debunked in the theist canon since the book of job

>>2433593
Right here my man. That's right, you heard it here first, Jesus is back and he uses 4chan.

Its roman bullshit that gets disproved by reading it.
True movement was gnosticism.

>>2433447
>Humanity wouldn't have to depend on one another and we could just engage in endless material suffering.
What point are you trying to make here?That being said, we would literally drive ourselves into extinction if we were still mortal and nothing positive would come out of it. You literally just created another scenario in which the world is absolutely shit just like the hedonistic example and proved why the world as it is, for all its faults, is pretty good under a Christian context because we can engage in virtues, actual companionship, strive to go beyond, and hell even progress as a species.

>>2433768
>What point are you trying to make here?
I literally said my point above that paragraph the bellow is just showing the continuation of that.

It demonstrates how silly the omnibenevolant arguments and just world ideas are if you try and act as if they have a leg to stand on without dogmatic adherence to Christian (specifically the Catholic ones in your case) teachings and institutions

The argument for good being a lack of evil is just as sound as evil being a lack of good.

>That being said, we would literally drive ourselves into extinction if we were still mortal and nothing positive would come out of it.

Well thats why the omimalevolent God allows some pleasure as extinction would be a net loss of suffering.

>You literally just created another scenario in which the world is absolutely shit just like the hedonistic example and proved why the world as it is, for all its faults, is pretty good under a Christian context because we can engage in virtues, actual companionship, strive to go beyond, and hell even progress as a species.

All those terms like progress (a term at the core of leftist atheism), positive and absolute shit are contingent on those dogmas I was talking about before.

Everyone from Classical liberals, Marxists to Salafis have a system that has at its core " virtues, actual companionship, strive to go beyond, and hell even progress as a species."

>>2433805
>It demonstrates how silly
No more silly than the idea of an omnimalevolent God.
>if they have a leg to stand on without dogmatic adherence to Christian (specifically the Catholic ones in your case) teachings and institutions
Um yeah. It's almost like we're in a thread about Christianity or something so all of the arguments will be within that context and according to theology and dogma which declare God as omnibenevolent. Outside of this I completely understand your argumentation and what you're getting at (even if I don't really agree with it).
>>2433805
>Everyone from Classical liberals, Marxists to Salafis have a system that has at its core
What was the point of bringing that up? I didn't state morality was exclusive to Christians.

>>2433835
>No more silly than the idea of an omnimalevolent God.

Thats the whole point.

>Um yeah. It's almost like we're in a thread about Christianity or something so all of the arguments will be within that context and according to theology and dogma which declare God as omnibenevolent. Outside of this I completely understand your argumentation and what you're getting at (even if I don't really agree with it).

The issue is other posters not simply being open or clear about this - would have saved the thread from being derailed.

>What was the point of bringing that up? I didn't state morality was exclusive to Christians.

I thought you were implying it, my mistake