>the devil tells you that you must defeat the BBEG. Wat do?

>>48690074
>Thanks, Uncle Stanton! What a nice guy.

The entire party then looks on dumbfounded at the seemingly literally retarded character they share a party with.

>>48690074
Well it depends.
Prince of Lies or not out goal aligns so he's probably given you something that will really help.
If say Michael came down and demanded I allow the BBEG to do his thing for the greater good then it ultimately boils down to what the party wants.
Either way we're probably gonna listen to Lucy,

>>48690074
I'd much rather have the devil owe me one than vice versa. He's not a bad guy, he was just pragmatic and god wanted none of that shit. Heck, I'd probably do it out of the goodness of my heart depending on what he wants and how nicely he asks. I'm not one to accept bribes, but a nice please and thank you would probably do the trick.

>>48690388
What kind of shitty and miserable life you must have to fall for a simple "thank you"?

If it's the Ned Flanders devil I tell him to shut up and call him stupid and look mad.

>>48690074
Depends on the setting.
Are we talking about a trident-wielding clown-nose-wearing horse-hooved red-jacket fiddle-playing comedy devil, who can be outwitted by a half-decent punster and a youth with a fiery heart?
Or is this more of a Father of Lies, Prince of Darkness, millennia of experience corrupting mortals, grand prosecutor of the world devil trying to get me in as much shit as possible?

I plan for the main baddy in my next Pathfinder game to be Rovagug so Asmodeus saying "Hey these cultists need to be stopped" isn't anything weirdl

>>48690074
we can assume the devil acts to change events into greater evils, regardless of any inverse psychology he might be pointing to, ignoring him and treating his action as if it never happened would practically result in the devil not having acted at all, resulting in not falling into doing greater evils.

>>48690074
Is the BBEG chaotic? Then it would be perfectly in character for the Devil to tell me to do so without any further meaning other than he doesn't like the BBEG.

File: Paladin Backstory.png (678KB, 613x522px) Image search: [Google]

678KB, 613x522px

>>48690074
>the devil wears my face and tries to tell me what to do

File: 476878765.gif (327KB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 240x180px

>>48691402

He's just trying to manipulate me, but my goal was to kill the big bad anyway. I'm going to end up killing the devil on the adventure anyway. Also a third even bigger badder evil that is behind everything. Also my friends are probably going to die. I'm probably not going to survive a final sacrifice at the end either. This is going to be a very bloody and tragic adventure and no one is going to come out of it happy.

>>48690388
>I'd much rather have the devil owe me one than vice versa. He's not a bad guy, he was just pragmatic and god wanted none of that shit.
Lucifer plz go

File: explain this bullshit.jpg (90KB, 324x250px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 324x250px

>>48690074
Congratulations, you just described EVERY FUCKING CAMPAIGN our DM does. He simply cannot have a good guy telling good guys to do good things, he has to have an evil power deliver the orders. I'd be OK with it if it was used more sparingly, but nope, it has to be done every time.

>>48690074
>"the devil is unconditionally evil"
I want this meme to die.
This isn't some sort of Angra Mainyu shit, where he is literally Evil with a big E, not because he wants to, but he was born that way.
Devil isn't some sort of deontologically evil being.
He has a will, and guess what, sometimes, he will do good shit too, if it benefits him.
This isn't some sort of Saturday morning cartoon, where the devil is evil for the sake of being evil.

>>48691845
Psst... devil here... I need you to kill me.


But heads up: if you kill be, you'll become just like me.

>>48691898
>the devil isn't lying
>you will actually literally take Devil's place if you kill him, with all responsibilities and drawbacks it entails

>>48691898
>kill evil
>acquire power

will I have to tell adventurers to kill me and take my place?

>>48691918
Is tempting mankind part of his "duties", or just something he does for fun? Because if it's a latter, a good man might just take his place for the betterment of humanity.

File: piq_336214_400x400.png (2KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 400x400px

>>48691924
If you want to be the Guy...
>>48691930
His duty. He was literally established by God to tempt people and determine who is worthy to go to Heaven.
The devil is basically a middle-manager of Hell, appointed by God.

>>48691883
If you go by the various real-world cults that actually do worship the devil, they believe that there are two paths to godhood: convergence and divergence. Convergence means you do what god tells you and eventually you become a part of god. Divergence means you do literally the opposite of everything god tells you. Through this separation from god, you will become a god of your own power. God tells you to be nice? You have to be a dick to everyone, just to stick it to god. Like how a child's first act of evil is rebellion against their parents to assert their own will, you must take the path you are told not to. There may be room within this for seemingly reasonable behavior: IE: don't attack someone unless they provoke you; but at the core, the idea is to be as demonically evil as possible in the modern world in order to raise the middle finger to your cosmic pappa.

>>48690074
Pray.
>Yo God, this guy legit?
If yes,
>Well shit, we better get to work!
If no,
>Lucy, why do you do this?
If no response,
>Pray harder, asshole!

>>48691883
Oh, hey, guy who thinks the Devil is unconditionally evil here and I *also* want the OP meme to die where the devil is a saturday morning cartoon villain, with all the affable stupidity that entails.

>>48691948

>Middle manager for hell
>Have to constantly grill Belphegor as to why he's always late
>Constant talks with Asmodeus regarding the sexual harrassment problem.
>Trying to solve the problem of how to fit Legion into the conference hall every week.

Truly the devil has his own special level of hell.

>>48692099
>Constant talks with Asmodeus regarding the sexual harrassment problem.
It's hell, he's supposed to make others feel uncomfortable.

>>48692126
Obviously the sexual harassment problem is that there isn't enough of it. Just the other week there were damned souls complaining that the sexual harassment "had started again". What do you mean it stopped!?

File: five star post.jpg (78KB, 351x440px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 351x440px

>>48692162

>>48691690
I'll take the guy who's okay with me being self-aware and intelligent over the guy who would have had me remain an ignorant slave to cosmic whim.

You can leave my complementary fedora in the mailbox.

>>48692162
Obviously the devil in charge of that section was operating on a more advanced level. Doing it sporadically gives them false hope with makes it more painful when it ends. If you never stop they eventually just get used to it

>>48690074
>"No, seriously, fuck that guy up. At least I have standards."

>>48691521
>guy writes plot while shitting himself on drug overdose

>>48692250
It's hell. His boss doesn't understand that and will grill him about the sexual harassment having stopped, even if a different harassment schedule actually helps matters.

And then he'll probably deny a raise to the sexual-harassment devil so that he feels angry and takes it out on his own subordinates.

>>48692220
Your mailbox isn't big enough to fit all the fedoras you need.

>>48692512
To be fair, if you believe the SMT paradigm of God/humans/demons relationship triangle, choosing demons is not that different from choosing God.
The only difference is either existence or absence of clear and transparent hierarchy.

>>48692584
>Comparing videogame-based morality to real world morality
SMT is a pretty hamfisted fusion of buddhism and japanese folk religion with Christianity (and everything else thrown in for good measure). Its morality falls into the golden mean fallacy that states that the middle ground is always the best. (IE. Some Cancer is good, but too much is bad)

>>48692512
So you wouldn't have eaten the fruit of Eden? Honestly?

>>48692743
P.S. Being half-evil isn't better than being good. Being half-wrong isn't better than being right. There is no such thing as being too convinced of the truth, and there isn't such thing as being too devoted to righteous authority. These things only become negative when they are applied where they are not deserved. The issue with many real-world cults is that they tell people that they are equals with literally the creator of the universe and all life. This is objectively wrong.

File: the devil quits.jpg (205KB, 986x403px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 986x403px

>>48691898
>the devil just wants to quit

>>48692834
It is said that it is inevitable for a child to commit evil. Psychologists say that children will inevitably rebel against their parents to discover themselves as sentieny beings.

So evil is a part of nature, and intrinsic to humanity and free will. However, wisdom is knowing that you can rebel, yet learning why you shouldn't.

>>48692902
Answer the fucking question, weasel.

>>48693059
I did. I stated that it is inevitable for all humans to make the same choice, to rebel, as it is an integral part of humanity. But the experience of life consists of gaining the wisdom to truly learn the meaning of right from wrong.

File: Asmodeus3.jpg (136KB, 280x356px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 280x356px

>>48690074
Asmodesus wants Demogorgon dead?
Talk about your status quo, OP. I barely even need to bother with paranoid, check over your shoulder once and a while thou.

>>48693092
Okay. Let me rephrase the question into one that should prompt a simple "yes" or "no" answer.

In the place of Adam or Eve, knowing that God told you not to, and also knowing that it would allow you to think as God does, would you have eaten the fruit of Eden?

I'm not expecting a one-word answer. I honestly don't think you capable of it.

>>48692902
>So evil is a part of nature, and intrinsic to humanity and free will. However, wisdom is knowing that you can rebel, yet learning why you shouldn't.
Good.
Now that you've established that humanity isn't human without the presence of evil, we can conclude that by excluding evil from equation (i.e. giving in to the rule of God), you lose your status as a human.

The human is at least partially defined by his capability of committing evil. If you take that away, what's left isn't human anymore.

Have you ever read a short story called "Blissful" by Stanislaw Lem, and its direct precursor - "Altruisin" by the same author?

The human "saintliness" is defined by his choice of not committing evil, despite being capable of it.
The rule of God strips the humanity of said quality.
It is literally impossible to remain human under the rule of God.

>>48692743
>>48692852
You're implying that there is an absolute good and an absolute evil in all situations, which is objectively false.

>>48693179
I don't understand why you are having difficulty with the topic, considering I even rephrased it for you.

All humans have, and will, eat the apple. That is human nature.

If I were literally in a garden, as a naked man with the maturity of a 2 year old, I would eat the apple too.

Rebellion is how children assert themselves as independent from their parents.

However, when your pappy says "don't touch the stove" there is a damn good reason not to touch the stove!

>>48693223
Considering your definition of "human nature" is implied to have been created by the act of eating from the tree of Eden, you didn't really answer anything, but rather just did your damnedest to dodge the question.

Like a politician. A weasely politician refusing to admit when he is wrong.

>>48693190
>The human "saintliness" is defined by his choice of not committing evil, despite being capable of it.
>The rule of God strips the humanity of said quality.
>It is literally impossible to remain human under the rule of God.
Incorrect. God does not strip your agency from you. You are free to do as you please. But you are correct in the fact that saintliness requires the ability to do evil, yet refraining from it.

>>48693205
Has your statement ever been philosophically proven? How can you claim that this is false?

>>48693255
>you didn't really answer anything, but rather just did your damnedest to dodge the question.
Nigger, he said he'd eat the fucking apple. He literally answered your question.

>>48693255
I have literally no idea what you are going on about. I have answered your question 3 different times. This will be the fourth time:

The apple, whether literal or metaphorical, represents rebellion against god. It represents the desire to learn of good and evil througj experience rather than submission to authority. Truly, life is would be easier to follow the path you are told, but it is human nature to seek strife. So we create strife, and diverge from the path. This in itself is not damning, but what is damning is staying on the path of evil instead of returning to the path of good, once you learn where both lead.

>>48693288
I didn't see a "yes" anywhere in his word salad. I saw "inevitable" and "human nature" and a whole bunch of shit other than just answering the fucking question.

I'd eat the fruit. You would too, most likely, as would our little Trump-in-training over yonder way.

We're all Satanists at heart. Some of us just don't like admitting it.

>>48693330
>I didn't see a "yes" anywhere in his word salad. I saw "inevitable" and "human nature" and a whole bunch of shit other than just answering the fucking question.
I'm sorry to hear that your reading comprehension is absolute shit, anon.
>If I were literally in a garden, as a naked man with the maturity of a 2 year old, I would eat the apple too.

File: tmp_5672-oh jesus-173945527.gif (777KB, 233x173px) Image search: [Google]

777KB, 233x173px

>>48690074
>shit is so fucked even Satan wants this guy stopped
Time to panic.

>>48693344
Good. Now we can be fedora brothers.

>>48693344
>>48693330
>>48693319
>>48693390
Sorry to jump into your autistic argument, but why do you automatically define rebellion as "evil"? And why do you say it is human nature to rebel when you use evidence from AFTER we ate the fruit from the Tree? Do you know what human nature was like beforehand? Because according to the story itself, God cursed up, changed us, afterwards. And you're also neglecting the hand the serpent had in all this.

>>48693390
No, fuck off. I don't need a shitty hat to be an atheist.

>>48690074
How do we know it's really the devil?

>>48691883
"If it benefits him" usually means working towards the corruption of mankind, because what the fuck else would he do? He IS evil for the sake of being evil, or on others interpretations it's his JOB to drive humanity to evil and decadence, so effectively the same thing.

>>48693402
If you look at the story as allegorical, it represents the child rejecting the benevolence of their elder. Rejecting wisdom and benevolence is basically the most naive manifestation of evil. It represents setting out on our own path. That path may not be good, but it was the path we have chosen.

I don't believe God ever changed the nature of humanity after they were created, though when they chose their own path, he sent them out, into the world. Like father casting out a disobedient son.

The snake is, as always, the voice of poor judgement. It is the thing that leads us to seek our own answers instead of the wisdom of elders.

But the point to the story is that the path has been chosen, not just by Adam, but by our very nature. Wr are Adam. We are never content to do as we are told, but in order to become good, we must discover for outselves what it means to be good.

>>48693402
Eating the fruit was the first sin to be commited by men - the first act of, indirectly, scorn against God's will and thus evil

>>48693446
The devil's story:

>angel created by God
>got pissy
>God threw him from the heavens
>he gets dominion over the Earth and Hell
>starts to fight God

All we know is that his ultimate agenda is revenge against God. That doesn't make him automatically evil unless you're a paladin.

>>48693491
>Rejecting wisdom and benevolence
Adam and Eve never recieved "wisdom", and you'll need something to back up the idea that rejecting wisdom and benevolence is evil. Also, define benevolence for me. One could percieve God's creation as a cage for his playthings - humans.

>I don't believe God ever changed the nature of humanity after they were created

"The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil." Genesis 3:23

You can interpret that how you like, but becoming like God seems like a change in nature to me. If not, we merely have differeing interpretations.

>The snake is, as always, the voice of poor judgement
Again, I think we have different interpretations. You're thinking of it as an allegory, and I take it as a literal story (in a RPG mythos)

>scorn against God's will and thus evil
why is that evil?

File: disgusted sigh.jpg (59KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 500x375px

>>48693593
>and you'll need something to back up the idea that rejecting wisdom and benevolence is evil.

>>48693330
>We're all Satanists at heart. Some of us just don't like admitting it.
The path of Satan is, essentially, remaining on that path of rebellion forever. Never changing, never admitting you were wrong. It means to be the spiritual equivalent of a toddler for your entire life.

What use is there for someone who never learns from his mistakes? What use is there for one that hurts themselves and others willingly? What use is there for one that only seeks the easiest path and never masters themselves?

They have learnt nothing in all their life that is why they are cast out.

>>48690074
Be cautious but don't change your plans. Just because your goals and an Evil person's align doesn't mean they're on your side but neither does it mean they're against you.

>>48693593
What part of actively going against the plans of the omnibenevolent creating deity by leading his servants and children into rebellion and eventually perpetual misery and fall from divinity ISN'T evil to you?

>>48693640
You and I disagree on what the path of Satan means, then.

>>48693720
And you know what pal? I have to go with him on this. I'm sorry, but your worldview hasn't changed since you were 13 (assuming that you are in fact older than 13).

>>48693678
>omnibenevolent creating deity by leading his servants and children into rebellion and eventually perpetual misery and fall from divinity ISN'T evil to you?
The claim of the "omnibenevolent creating deity". Some powerful dude building your house doesn't mean shit about him being in good interests. "Good" being defined by the traditional RPG defintion "Good characters and creatures protect innocent life"

>>48693720
Think about this: Cain's greatest sin isn't considered to be the murder of Abel, it's NOT ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS when god questioned him. His descendants made the first civilizations as we know them - a sign of man's increasing attachment to the material world and estrangement from the divine

>>48693593
If you have ever created anything in your life, you will know what love a creator has for their creations. A builder creates the place where he will raise his family, a father raises their children to be like them, an artist spends hours perfecting their work to truly reflect their esel-xpression. So God, a being of infinite wealth and wisdom, has created mankind. Just to be mean? That doesn't seem likely. Especially when you consider His teachings, the benevolent direction of the messages and the quality of the shared wisdom. It doesn't seem like He's suddenly going to pull a "haha, I tricked you! Black is white and up is down! I was toying with you all along!" It's a rather absurd thought.

>Genesis 3:23
Widely debated. My personal interpretation is that the apple was simply an apple. A test. The test was "do you really want to know good from evil?" As soon as Adam failed the test, he was ashamed of himself. So God essentially told him, you want to know evil? Well you have committed it first hand!

>>48693751
I see you're not at all interested in christian cosmology then

>>48693789
P.S. I hate typing on a touch-screen

>>48693789
>Widely debated. My personal interpretation is that the apple was simply an apple. A test. The test was "do you really want to know good from evil?" As soon as Adam failed the test, he was ashamed of himself. So God essentially told him, you want to know evil? Well you have committed it first hand!
So what would've happened if he had just asked Yahweh about good and evil instead of eating the apple?

>>48693789
t. person who's never read Lovecraft. Gods don't have to be benevolent simply because they created the universe.

>Widely debated
I'm aware. That's why I think that most of us in this thread just have differing interpretations

>>48692220
Lucifer just wanted YHWH to pick up the pace. And decided armed rebellion was in order when the boss said "we stick to the schedule."

>>48693789
>So God, a being of infinite wealth and wisdom, has created mankind. Just to be mean? That doesn't seem likely.
The problem is God's reasons for creating mankind are unfathomable, so "He's actually evil" is as good an explanation as any, even if it's the edgy position. Our understanding is limited, that's why we can't make sense of His motives and decide for ourselves if they're good. All we can do is trust him, or stand in pointless defiance.

File: you talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded.jpg (82KB, 362x263px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 362x263px

>>48693841
>t. person who's never read Lovecraft.
>bringing Lovecraft into a discussion about the Old Testament

>>48690074
I tip my fedora and bask in sudden euphoria, if he starts to take offense I'll remind him that it's nothing personal.

>>48691883
>He has a will,
He thinks he has a will. This is where the pride starts to come in.

>>48693826
Then they would understand good and evil, but not KNOW evil as they later did via experimenting human mortality and suffering due to their disobedience. In their unsoiled state that was fully in tune with God's will and therefore everything that was good and the good only, they would have most likely never even entertained the thought, anyways

>>48690511
It's not a matter of intelligence, it's that I'd rather help someone who's polite and treats me with respect over someone who acts like a self-entitled child. I'd much rather help a smiling devil than a dogmatic god.

>>48694043
The part where you're screwed is that a lot of self-entitled people are good at faking respect for a short while. Especially if they've been doing it since the creation of mankind.

>>48692220
So you don't understand what "knowledge of good and evil" was supposed to mean, right?

>>48694075
Better than the god that goes "YOU SHALL SERVE ME"

not >>48694043 BTW
I'd still want something in return.

>>48694043
The devil wants your fucking RUIN as he does with all of humanity. Yes, he can be charming and kind on moments, but his endgame is human suffering and spiritual decay. His whole motivation is that his war against dad didn't work so now he spends the rest of eternity fucking shit up out of spite

>>48694094
The god is at least honest with his intentions and therefore trustworthy, fuckface.

>>48694133
>The god is at least honest with his intentions
Where did you learn how to read God's mind?

File: 1448379210491.png (127KB, 326x368px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 326x368px

>>48694043
>charmed into giving up your immortal soul
Did you learn nothing from the fall of Eden?

>>48694173
Why would god ever lie when it would be easier to turn a falsehood into the truth?

>>48693657
>taking the middle road
Booo. You need to work inside the dilemma.

>>48694214
Why would a god wish for mortals to serve them?

When did you learn what God's interests were?

>>48694242
Answer my question, retard.

>>48694258
I don't know, becuase I am not God.

Answer my questions.

>>48694242
Servitude to god is essentially an attempt to repair the connection that was severed during the Fall of Man and bring humanity back to its former glory and holiness

>>48694241
But Anon the dilemma is that there are no dilemmas except the ones we put ourselves in

>>48694290
That doesn't answer the question. That explains why humans who have knoweldge of the Fall of Man would serve God, not why he would want them to.

>>48694286
>Why would a god wish for mortals to serve them?
The same reason a parent wishes for obedience from their children.

>When did you learn what God's interests were?
He laid them out pretty fucking clearly.

>>48694335
>The same reason a parent wishes for obedience from their children.
Sense of property? That's a shitty fucking reason.

>>48694325
Because something emphasized very often on christianity is god's love for mankind.

>>48694335
>The same reason a parent wishes for obedience from their children.
Explanation, please. Also, not all parents give a shit about their children.

>He laid them out pretty fucking clearly.
Where? In the Bible? Because the Bible is written by prophets, not God. Falliable human beings.

>>48694360
It's better than Satan's "I'm going to make humanity miserable and damned because fuck Yahweh".

File: captainMetaphysicsSkeptic1.png (714KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

714KB, 1000x1500px

>this whole thread

>>48691958
>take the path you are told not to
What is this, an RPG? Is the secret treasure waiting just a few screens off the beaten path?
>>48694360
You don't want good things to happen to your property?

>>48694364
>christianity
We're talking about the Bible here

>>48694388
Specific Bible passage?

>>48694377
>Explanation, please.
Did you not have parents? Or guardians of any sort? Did you grow up in the woods, eating berries and luckily not eating any poisonous ones?

File: captainMetaphysicsSkeptic2.png (614KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

614KB, 1000x1500px

>>48694420
That would explain some things, actually.
>>48694411

>>48694420
Explain how God wishing for humans to serve him is akin to parents asking obedience from their child. Is your argument to difficult for you to understand?

>>48694377
The scripture is considered to be divinely inspired, though. Literal wars have been fought over it and even today people don't fuck around with translation and interpretations of the bible

>>48694441
>even today people don't fuck around with translation and interpretations of the bible
wut

>>48694438
We're his creations, and he wishes to see us do well. What's so hard to understand about that?

>>48694415
Are you implying that is NOT on the Bible?

>>48694441
> even today people don't fuck around with translation and interpretations of the bible
toppest of keks

>>48694441
Fundamentalists are a small portion of any religion, dude. They're just really loud and violent.

>>48694464
I'm asking where it is in the Bible.

>>48694463
"doing well" = serving him?

>>48694441
>even today people don't fuck around with translation and interpretations of the bible
>what are protestants

>>48694455
>>48694466
There are people within the US and most likely elsewhere who will get downright violent if you advocate for anything but the King James Bible, for instance. There's a EXTREMELY exhaustive process to get a bible published with approval from the catholic church.

>>48694513
Adults know better than children, omniscient being knows better than humans.

>>48694515
>what are the sects of prtestantism
>what are the sects of catholicism
>what are the different sects of THOSE sects

>>48694529
point? That serving God will allow us to "do good" because he'll be telling us how to do it?

>>48690074
Defeat the Devil.

>>48694535
Yep, because he knows better than us. It's pretty cut and dry.

>>48694515
A lot of Protestants often fit in the "will get downright violent if you advocate for anything but the King James Bible" bit and many, many others will at the very least object to catholic bibles let alone INTERPRETATIONS of its content

>>48694555
Forget this post I'm kind of drunk

>>48694570
Now I shall remember that post until the end of my days.

>>48694545
Sounds like slavery to me. A "good" character protects innocent lives. If that means purely survival, then perhaps God is "good" for humanity.

But if so, then I'd rather not be good.

>>48694584
>A child listening to their parent is slavery.
You know, you seem to have a lot of vitriol for something that doesn't even exist.

>>48694612
No, a god commanding his creation is slavery.

>>48694630
Anon, has your father never told you that he brought you into this world and he can take you out and make another one just like you? Because it's still a parent-child relationship.

>>48694612
>A child listening to their parent is slavery.
Isn't it, though?
A child listens to their parents (not solely, but) mostly because the parents provide for him.
Again, a child is basically parents' property.
Sure, you CAN technically disobey your parents, but it can go on only for so long before the parents disown you and you end up on the street without any means to survival and die shortly.
It's basically slavery, with the punisment for disobeying being ceasing providing for the child in question.

>>48694655
>he brought you into this world and he can take you out and make another one just like you?
>Because it's still a parent-child relationship.
Has your father ever locked you in the basement and forced you to have sex with paying men? Because that's still a parent-child relationshp. It's also slavery.

And it has nothing to do with what we're talking about. A god-creator and his creation, how they relate, and how the god's opposition plays into it.

>>48694705
>Has your father ever locked you in the basement and forced you to have sex with paying men? Because that's still a parent-child relationshp. It's also slavery.
I'm sorry to hear your daddy never loved you, anon. But that's not what Yahweh is supposedly like.

>And it has nothing to do with what we're talking about. A god-creator and his creation, how they relate, and how the god's opposition plays into it.
We're talking about a piece of fiction that makes clear in no uncertain terms that Yahweh wants you to go to heaven, that Satan wants you to burn in hell and they're both giving you instructions to achieve their respective goals.

>>48694817
>I'm sorry to hear your daddy never loved you, anon
Just an example of parent-child slavery

>But that's not what Yahweh is supposedly like
my point exactly. God-humans does not resemble parent-child

>Yahweh wants you to go to heaven, that Satan wants you to burn in hell
Bible passages, please? Because I find stuff like http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Satan/, and it seems more like I should be listening to the devil when he asks about the BBEG

>>48694902
>Bible passages, please?
How the fuck should I know? I'm not a Christian, let alone a nutjob who actually reads that schlock everyday.

>>48694927
>How the fuck should I know?
Then how do you know that

>Yahweh wants you to go to heaven, that Satan wants you to burn in hell

File: 1442342734613.jpg (137KB, 800x712px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 800x712px

>>48693223
>human
>nature

>>48694902
>God-humans does not resemble parent-child.
It's more than a resemblance alright.

>>48694959
Then perhaps God does enslave his creation

>>48694937
Pop culture, and I got dragged to church as a kid.

>>48694982
>pop culture
>church

>these accurately portray the Bible

I bet you don't even read character sheets and instead just go by stereotypes based on race, class, and alignment

File: I came here to laugh at you.png (138KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 375x375px

>>48695021
>church
>not accurately portraying the bible

>>48695039
>he actually thinks it does
not to mention the thousands of churches that preach different interpretations of the Bible

>>48694515
I think you mean:

>what is Catholicism

Protestants have fucked around with the Bible the least amount.

>>48690074
fuck you devil i join the BBEG

>>48695074
>what is Catholicism
Right.

what IS Catholicism?

>>48695173
The unbroken tradition of using religious authority for political gain stretching back over 2000 years.

File: laughing crocs.jpg (82KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 500x500px

>>48695067
>what the churches preach isn't anything like the bible!
>even when they quote it directly!
>really!
Okay, believe whatever you want fedoralord. I'll just sit here, smug in my knowledge that it's all fiction anyways and you're effectively a 13 year old girl arguing that Draco Malfoy is in fact the good guy.

>>48695212
would you listen to the devil when he says to fight the BBEG?

>>48695250
I'm an atheist.

>>48695266
And the 13 year old girl knows that Harry Potter is fiction too. You're both immature, stupid, and saying that the author is wrong. What's your point?

File: Capture.png (189KB, 478x405px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 478x405px

>>48695173

>>48695289
That you shouldn't immediately discount the devil's proposal to kill the BBEG when playing a fictional RPG simply because he is the devil.

File: into the trash it goes.png (182KB, 404x266px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 404x266px

>>48695319
A devil's propsal you shouldn't immediately discount. THE Devil's proposal, on the other hand? Pic related.

>>48695353
you did read OP right?

>>48695396
>the devil
>THE devil
Did you?

>>48690074
>BBEG wants to become the new devil
>devil doesn't want to lose his job

Pretty good plot hook to be honest.

>>48690074
>the devil wants me to defeat a Hexxus-like wyrm-spirit of pollution
>tfw broing it up with said wyrm-spirit and defeating the devil with the power of a snazzy duet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hr4knvNNgtU

>>48695413
I'm very confused by what you mean here.

>>48690074
I mean if even satan is scared this guy must be a pretty bad dude.

>>48695441
It's the difference between listening to an imp and listening to, say, a great old one. An imp has its own plan that may align with yours temporarily. The great old one does too, but his plan, in the end, results in your and everything you have ever known being brought to destruction, ruin, and generally hell.

Helping the imp might be beneficial in the long run for you. Helping the great old one makes you a pawn in its plan, and part of its machinations, and pretty much sends you down the road to ruin whether you can see it or not.

To be honest, if I come across a near omniscient being in character, I'll just flip a coin to see all my decisions relating to doing them favors or whatnot. Otherwise I'd just be a tool of the being, even if they appear to be friendly. Consider that the devil in this scenario might be expecting you to say "well anyone you hate ought to be my friend." A being like that has been playing the game for way, way too long to be trusted.

>>48695884
But what are you saying?
>the devil
>THE devil

"the" as a generic term generally occurs when the listner already knows what you're talking about. EX:
>See that dwarf?
"Yeah"
>He likes money
"The dwarf is greedy, huh?"

But "the" out of nowhere refers to something so obvious everyone knows what it is. EX:
saying
>the devil tells you that you must defeat the BBEG.
when you have not stated anything else about a devil

>>48695946
Don't be daft anon. It's the difference between "a big apple" and "the big apple"; one is a fruit that is above average in size for its species, and the other is New York City.

>>48695946
I think it's assumed that OP is talking about the biblical devil, the original big bad, Lucifer himself.

Though it's never expressly stated. In the case that you're dealing with an imp and not big Lou himself, then doing as he asks is probably okay.

>>48696002
And that's why you pray you morons! If THE ACTUAL DEVIL, OLD SCRATCH has shown up and asked you to do something, you check to see if this shit is legit. If this is something Big G confirms as legit, then well shit, get to work, adventurers.

>>48693747
Go with him on whatever you like. My worldview has changed considerably over the past fifteen years. When I was thirteen, I would have thought Clinton would be a good president.

Way I see it, anyone who tells you to do what they tell you to do without question does not respect you, and treats you as a slave. Why would I worship something like that?

>>48694043
Shit, I should have just read before posting. This guy gets it.

>>48693871
Have you ever read any actual Lovecraft and not the dreck that Derleth and memes turned it into? The horror of Lovecraft's original works and the reason his characters so often went mad is because they realized the truth of the universe: that not only was the universe not created /for/ mankind, it didn't give a fuck about him. The universe wasn't out to kill humans; it was simply that humans were completely beneath the universe's notice. The whole point was "the god who created the universe isn't particularly aware of humans and wouldn't care if you told him"

>>48695212
The Catholic Church as a political institution is a great deal younger than that. The Orthodox Church is older than the Catholic Church, and Jesus wasn't born more than 2000 years ago faggot.

fundamentally, the exercise of free will is a sin, obeying god is not free will, but subservience to and exercise of God's will. God made us for the express purpose of sinning. Why?

angels were created to serve, and if they choose not to, they are cast out of heaven and damned.
humans were not created to serve, but suffer the same penalties for not serving. god created us to suffer.

if god created us to love us, then he is doing a kinda crappy job (just look around).
if god created us to love him, then he did kinda a crappy job (just look around).

>>48697387
His point was most likely that it had no bearing on the discussion

>>48698263
Read Paradise Lost. It adresses this topic very well

>>48698263
You forgot to cite an important piece of evidence: God cursing all of humanity because two humans disobeyed him.

>>48694429
>The only way to tell the true nature of something is by going off your own senses, which can be easily manipulated and are wrong a lot of the time.
Think Pyrrho kinda won that one.

>>48698968
How can you be sure that's what he was actually saying?

>>48698720
It's not a "curse", they brought it upon themselves by eating the fruit AFTER being told it would doom them to death. It's also not just "two humans", they're essentially the ideal form of humanity and the predecessors of all mankind. It's no more a curse than dying after leaping off a building is a curse.

>>48698720
doesn't change the fact god made them that way, and punished them for his choice.

>>48695946
Since the other guy is focusing on emphasizing the wrong parts allow me to simplify this for you dude. You got "The devil" and then you've got "The Devil"; Note the capitalization in the second one that marks is as an official title. Basically any powerful infernal being can be considered a devil, but only Lucifer himself is referred to as "The Devil". It's a title, kind of like how you can have a god, and then you've got God.

>>48699490
So immortality, perfect health, an earthly paradise and lordship over all living things is not enough, he should have also made mankind infallible so they wouldn't disobey him at the slightest temptation?

>>48699359
They were not told what would happen, nor did they have the knowledge neccessary to understand it

>>48699590
I know. My point is that OP means "THE devil"

>>48699640
>temptation

They had no concept of Good or of Evil. How long exactly were they to go without eating from that tree without having any morality besides "I want"?

Also,
>immortality

The Tree of Life isn't mentioned until after they've already eaten of the Tree of Knowledge. Were they immortal before that? Doesn't say.

>>48699710
They literally were. It was part of the warning
>But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

>>48699752
>for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
but they didn't die. And as God also said,
"And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” Genesis 3:22, meaning they weren't immortal, i.e. they were going to die someday already.

>>48699038
I honestly don't see any other interpretation of it. Do you?

>>48699749
>>48699814
You are misunderstanding what "knowledge of good and evil" means. It's not that they had no understanding of morality, evil specifically was opposite to their nature because they were made to be essentially perfect. Knowing evil just meant their eyes were opened to the bad side of the world as well, their spiritual corruption. Whatever they did before, except for downright disobedience to God, couldn't have been evil as they had no way to sin with that being the only of God's limitations to their existence. And they were literally told by God not to eat from the tree at moral peril

>>48690074
The devil doesnt care where the blood flows, he probably knows that the fight againts the BBEG will be more bloodier and more sins againts god will be commited than if we just joined peacefully

>>48699857
>Knowing evil

It's the Tree of Knowledge of Good *and* Evil, senpai. You're taking the position that they knew Good before that. Please cite.

>>48699857
>It's not that they had no understanding of morality
>good and evil

mo·ral·i·ty
/məˈralədē/
noun
noun: morality

principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

Pretty sure I understand correctly.

>And they were literally told by God not to eat from the tree at moral peril
But they did not recieve any knowledge of what the peril was. So >>48699359 is incorrect, and God made a hostile action against all of humanity because two humans disobyed him. Thus, God should not be served by humanity or considered "good", and we should consider the devil's offer from a neutral standpoint.


Unless you're a paladin, you should talk with the devil to consider your options. Even if your LG, but not a paladin, you still should. He could have a great offer up his sleeves.

>>48699640
well, being created with free will, entails the purpose of using it. if god didn't want humans to be disobedient (at any level of temptation), it's capacity would not be present, (unless god made a mistake). also, if god is omniscient, he already knew the outcome, so is he just being a dick?

someone offered earlier the example of the hot stove. all parents tell their kids not to touch the stove, it is hot and you will get burned/hurt. and all kids touch the stove anyway. they don't posses the knowledge and experience required to make a correct decision. only a bad parent would punish their child for disobeying in that type of situation.

>>48699991
>created with free will
[citation needed]

>>48699920
Did they "know" good in that they could make a contrast to evil? No. Good was just their default state. The tree made it POSSIBLE for them to sin with the loss of their inoccence and divine stature
>>48699933
I'd take being literally told by the almighty creator of reality that you shouldn't eat a fucking fruit because it'll cause your death as knowledge of their peril. And no, he did not take a hostile action against humanity, humanity fucked up *by itself*. That he knew how things were going to pan out does not remove his initial intent. "God can do anything" doesn't mean "God does everything"

File: 1470532720560.jpg (59KB, 453x439px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 453x439px

>People advocating heresy
Disgusting

>>48700020
>it'll cause your death as knowledge of their peril
But it didn't

>he did not take a hostile action against humanity, humanity fucked up *by itself*
How do you figure? Even if God was telling the truth, Eve only thought her OWN life was at stake, not humanity.

>>48700052
I already quoted a bible verse, what else do you want me to do to convince you that they knew what was going to happen? Do you want me to summon Adan and Eve and let them tell you their side of the story on 4chan?
>Even if God was telling the truth
Literally WHY would you ever think it was a lie when within the framework of christianity we're suffering the consequences of that act and have been for thousands of years?

>>48699991
>all parents tell their kids not to touch the stove, it is hot and you will get burned/hurt.

This is not quite the same thing, though. Touching the stove burns you and you get hurt, that's the immediate consequence of touching the stove, no action needed from the parent. But eating the fruit had no immediate negative consequence, it took divine intervention to bring a downside to gaining knowledge of Good and Evil. If the fruit had been poisonous enough to make Adam and Eve sick for a while, they could have learned a lesson about obedience without being condemned to death. And this is an omnibenevolent God?

>>48700006
then by contrast: they were given, or developed this capacity spontaneously without god's hand at work. (god made a mistake) or some other power exists with the capacity to alter the fundamental nature of god's creations (and god allows it).

>>48700052
>Eve only thought her OWN life was at stake, not humanity.
She ate the fruit and gave more to her husband. Boom, literally the whole of humanity at that point in time, and possibly forever as much as Eve knew

>>48700096
>I already quoted a bible verse
I'm sorry, but I din't see it and I haven't found it. Which post?

>Literally WHY would you ever think it was a lie when within the framework of christianity we're suffering the consequences of that act and have been for thousands of years?
It's not the act, its the warning that God told them

>>48700119
>then by contrast: they were given, or developed this capacity spontaneously without god's hand at work.
Evidence?

>>48700136
>Boom, literally the whole of humanity at that point in time, and possibly forever as much as Eve knew
Yeah. Eve had been warned she would die after she ate the fruit, and that Adam would after doing the same.

Thing was, the fruit was irrelevant to their deaths, and God cursed them with many other aflictions besides death, tl;dr they were not warned.

>>48700118
>But eating the fruit had no immediate negative consequence
There's a description of them feeling shame for the first time in their lives after eating it. That was a literal impossibility before. There were no upsides.
>it took divine intervention to bring a downside to gaining knowledge of Good and Evil
No, knowing good and evil was the downside ON ITSELF, the divine intervention was punishment for disobeying

File: heresy.jpg (62KB, 599x599px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 599x599px

>God created humans with free will so he obviously set them up to sin
>God is commiting slavery by asking humanity on their own freewill to follow him
>The snake who caused the whole mess is just a misunderstood fella and even if he is the definition of evil and wants the destruction of man, you should trust him 100%

>>48690388
>implying the devil is going to do you a solid because you think he "owes you one"

>>48700192
>slavery doesn't exist because all slaves have free will to just disobey their master

>>48699752
On the warning itself. Eating the fruit didn't immediately kill them, but there was no indication whatsoever that God intended for mankind to die before. They only begin suffering from their labor after the Fall

>>48700181
>gaining knowledge is a downside in and of itself

Okay Lovecraft.

>>48700192
>on their own freewill

>Hey everyone, do what I say or burn in Hell for eternity. No pressure.

I'm hard pressed to find a better example of Ad Baculum.

>>48700238
Meant for >>48700174

>>48700230
what is asking on their own freewill to follow him

>>48700118
but the point is they lack knowledge and experience to make a correct choice. not whether there are natural consequences.

they were told don't do x or else. serpent says do x anyway. they now have a choice that didn't exist previously. and they posses no capacity to make this choice correctly at the time it is presented to them.

>>48699857
if they were essentially perfect how did they fail?

>>48700238
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Genesis 2:17

>they only begin suffering from their labor after the Fall
and they were not warned

>>48700255
>follow me!
>or you'll go to Hell!

"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

Revelations 21:8

>>48700278
>they now have a choice that didn't exist previously. and they posses no capacity to make this choice correctly at the time it is presented to them

I'm not following you. I think what you're saying is, they didn't know they could choose the eat the fruit anyway until the Snake pointed it out. And then once they knew that was an option they "posses[sed] no capacity make this choice correctly"?

So they didn't know it was a choice until the Snake told them, but once they did they couldn't *not* eat the fruit? Are you saying they had no choice but to eat it right then, or that they'd end up eating it eventually?

>>48700278
They fell by having free will, which was the only way for them to even POTENTIALLY sin, whereas fallen humanity can't possibly be sinless
>>48700292
>thou shalt surely die
I seriously don't understand what is unclear here

>>48700292
“He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’

29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

>>48700381
>They fell by having free will
how do you figure they have free will?

>I seriously don't understand what is unclear here
He didn't make clear the other afflictions

>>48700395
your point?

>>48697387
I've read a fair bit of Lovecraft and you're absolutely full of shit.

The majority of Lovecraft's stories had nothing to do with any sort of existential dread. The reoccurring theme of Lovecraft's work is that science is a crock of shit and people who seek knowledge get fucked because of it (inquisitive protagonists, a number of which are scientists).

Most of Lovecraft's shit is more or less street level too you faggot. He doesn't delve into much canon regarding old gods or any shit like that and the shit he based the cosmic horror angle (R.W Chambers) also didn't condone the bullshit you are spouting.

Yes, the gods in Lovecraft don't give a shit about humans most of the time, but there is very little to suggest anything of a creation story in any of Lovecraft's work.

>>48690074
So how did this thread changed from trusting the devil into the /tg/ crusades?

>>48700414
>how do you figure they have free will?
The whole point of catholic interpretations of genesis hinges upon them having free will, which is assumed as they were created on God's image. A few protestant sects argue that not only they did not have free will but that we still don't

>>48700174
>Evidence?

are you stupid, intentionally obtuse, or just incapable of following the thread?
humans exercised free will, they chose to disobey god. either god gave them the ability when he created them, or they gained it afterwards. If neither case is true, then humans have no free will, and can not choose, therefore all "choices" are in fact god's will.

>>48700468
people saying you shouldn't trust him just cuz he's the devil

>>48700476
and do you have Biblical evidence? Because we aren't discussing Catholocism.

>>48700498
"are you stupid, intentionally obtuse, or just incapable of following the thread?
humans exercised free will, they chose to disobey god. either god gave them the ability when he created them, or they gained it afterwards. If neither case is true, then humans have no free will, and can not choose, therefore all "choices" are in fact god's will."

[citation needed]

>>48700468
One guy literally playing devil's advocate early on the thread eventually turned into a full blown theology shitstorm

>>48700414
God doesnt want humanity to fall into Lucifer hands so he sent prophets, is on their on the freewill of men to decide what to believe, and on another note I want to say that I believe that any person can go to heaven regardless of their belief as long as the are good and repent for their sins in life

>>48700505
I am arguing from a catholic standpoint. It can be argued that ALL sects of ALL major religions with a holy text make interpretations which are not fully agreed upon by everyone else, which is how different sects are born in the first place. If you see it as mythology it's pretty straightforward and cut-and-dry even if it's flawed to modern sensibilities, as is a lot of other mythology like the greek gods being petty fucks who can't stand mortals being even a bit better than them at anything ever

>>48700532
So, slavery doesn't exist because a slaver warned their slaves that they would be enslaved should they not "choose" to, say, murder their family?

>I want to say that I believe that any person can go to heaven regardless of their belief as long as the are good and repent for their sins in life
Revelations 21:8

File: allnightmare.png (245KB, 375x467px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 375x467px

>>48700505
I mean he´s been descrived as pure evil and wants to corrupt mankind and send them to hell but yea you should just trust him

>>48700505
>[citation needed]

Do you or do you not believe humans possess Free Will? If you do, do you believe they were created with it, or gained it after creation?

>>48700629
>he´s been descrived as pure evil
poor guy. sad that everybody's ripping on him like that

>and wants to corrupt mankind and send them to hell
man, God and his propoganda

>>48700598
Except that at the end of the line you go to a peaceful land where not bad things happens instead of the hell hole that is ruled by the guy who is not totally evil, also , So whats the other option then? stage a rebellion againts the guy that promises you a paradise

>>48700664
>Do you or do you not believe humans possess Free Will? If you do, do you believe they were created with it, or gained it after creation?
I do, and also that God uses force to have innocent creatures serve him.

>>48700244
You misunderstand what hell is. Hell isnt fire and brimstone and eternal torture, hell is simply the absence of God. The people who go to hell have shown through their actions that they reject God and do not want to be in his presence so God merely gives them what they want.

>>48700671
he didnt du nuffin

>>48700684
At the threat of of a living nightmare, and having to serve him

>>48700696
dindu*

>>48700705
How bad is to serve him?

>>48700737
depends on the setting

>>48700686
> Hell isnt fire and brimstone and eternal torture

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

>>48700760
This is the true answer of the question OP was asking

>>48700772
you're actually fucking right

and i got shit to do so >>48700737 >>48700684 >>48700594 suck my dick and peace out

File: 1470450786412.gif (3MB, 800x352px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 800x352px

>>48700808
Peace out to you anon and may you find the lord :˄)

>>48700764
First, Catholicism doesn't interpret Revelations literally. Second nowhere in that passage does it imply that the lake of fire is the same as hell. If that were true then why were Death and Hades thrown into hell AFTER they gave up all their dead? Only the things that weren't written in the book of life were thrown into the lake and it says that the dead were judged by their deeds as written in the book of life. So if the lake is hell then none of the dead are sent there.

File: image.jpg (29KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 259x194px

>>48700764
Catholics don't interpret Revelations literally, the book is an allegory for the end times based off of Early Christianity's experience with Roman persecution.

Let me lose it to you logically. Catholics believe many things, but the most important two are:

-God created everything and is in everything

and

-hell is total, eternal separation from God

These are both clearly stated in the Cathecism, the exact places I don't remember (google it, Sue me). So logically, how could hell contain fire and brimstone if those things- the very concept of those things- ultimately came from God?

This same logic defeats sin entirely, as the allure of sin is personal gain and there is no personal gain in nothing. Satan is the ultimate paradox, still something yet all nothing.

>>48699853
No, but how can you trust what you see?

>>48700229
When exactly has lucifer gone back on his word? The only time was to oppose the tyranny of El Eloah. Every other shitty thing done by an enemy figure was someone else entirely, so I'm not sure why you'd think he'd renege on the solid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gEQexEcRps

I give him a wink and tell him I'll make sure it happens.

>>48700764
Revelation was (as alleged) written by John to discuss emperor Nero Caesar, not to foresee the end of days. It was a commentary about modern events in Apocryphal style.

My DM, frustrated and sleep deprived, once sent the party to hell due to a player backtalking. We killed a few dudes and a big dragon who was there for some reason and realised we had mo way of leaving, so our party wizard suggested we ally with a minor evil to overthrow a major evil and in exchange we get let out. As the party paladin I slapped her and started praying, and sure enough my god showed up and let us out.

The point of the story is that wizards have no sense of right and wrong.

>>48694902
>Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

>Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

The first passages on the page you linked are talking about how the Devil is an opportunistic murderer who will never speak the truth in order to make you do the wrong thing, yet you say this encourages you to deal with him.

I'm sorry Anon, but you may just be so euphoric you've permanently damaged your brain.

>>48690074
The devil's task it to test the faith of humanity, it's little surprise that fighting the biggest evil around will do that.

Doesn't mean it it's not a good thing to accomplish

>>48692834
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQj8xOknzKc