So you believe god allowed this young lady to be raped, strangled and burned so that you could be reminded of the evils of lust? :bugeye:
The Ineffability of God's Will
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
better than for nothing huh?
do you think that the man who committed the crime is the only one who's guilty? i don't. i think we're all guilty. every day we tolerate a society that perpetuates such atrocities. none of us are innocent, and we all bear a burden. it seems sometimes though that the greater the innocence, the greater the burden. and for all of those motherfuckers who want to argue with me about lust being ok, and pornography is ok, well fuck you, and may you rot in hell where you belong.
my last post described what the bible calls repentance, but it goes further than that. because i can see how wrong we are, i can believe in a right. there can't be a wrong without a right. because i believe in the possibility of a right existence, i demand that from god, and i (and others) are willing to do whatever it takes, and sacrifice anything and everything, to see that it's manifest.
i think we have to believe in something before it can be manifest, and i and others do, like it's our job.
The House at R'lyeh
If DNA ends up becoming a legitimate excuse, we will also know how to cure the problem.
The same cannot be said for God.
The point still holds. God is, by such a theology, an asshole.
Strangely forthright, that.
Thank you for proving a point.
Apparently, if one is God.
I prefer sarcasm of a slightly higher brow. But it is a cute idea.
Look, you have to remember that you are the one describing a sadist. God may be an asshole, but He's your asshole.
That you are so afraid for God that you would undertake such extremity suggests codependence.
I mean, by the textbook.
Well, maybe all those people are trying to be like God.
Don't do us any favors.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.
____________________
Notes:
Goldman, Emma. "Anarchism: What It Really Stands For". 1911. Anarchy Archives. June 23, 2011. http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_archives/goldman/aando/anarchism.html
Lovecraft, H. P. "The Call of Cthulhu". 1928. HPLovecraft.com. June 23, 2011. http://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/fiction/cc.asp
Lightgigantic said:
If DNA ends up becoming a legitimate excuse, we will also know how to cure the problem.
The same cannot be said for God.
The point still holds. God is, by such a theology, an asshole.
Strangely forthright, that.
Religion, the dominion of the human mind; Property, the dominion of human needs; and Government, the dominion of human conduct, represent the stronghold of man's enslavement and all the horrors it entails. Religion! How it dominates man's mind, how it humiliates and degrades his soul. God is everything, man is nothing, says religion. But out of that nothing God has created a kingdom so despotic, so tyrannical, so cruel, so terribly exacting that naught but gloom and tears and blood have ruled the world since gods began.
Thank you for proving a point.
Apparently, if one is God.
I prefer sarcasm of a slightly higher brow. But it is a cute idea.
Look, you have to remember that you are the one describing a sadist. God may be an asshole, but He's your asshole.
• • •
Lori 7 said:
That you are so afraid for God that you would undertake such extremity suggests codependence.
I mean, by the textbook.
Well, maybe all those people are trying to be like God.
Don't do us any favors.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.
____________________
Notes:
Goldman, Emma. "Anarchism: What It Really Stands For". 1911. Anarchy Archives. June 23, 2011. http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_archives/goldman/aando/anarchism.html
Lovecraft, H. P. "The Call of Cthulhu". 1928. HPLovecraft.com. June 23, 2011. http://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/fiction/cc.asp
what extremity? opening my eyes? being accountable? admitting i'm wrong? rejecting the things that hurt myself and others?
i don't do that because i'm afraid. i do that because i give a shit...unlike yourself,
who's just out here having an emotional tirade because he wants to have his cake and eat it too. well boo hoo. congratulations on being another ineffectual moron who wants to bitch about what's wrong with the world but won't admit anything's wrong with themselves. well aren't you just so above it all.
where's your hostility coming from tiassa?
i may or may not be doing you any favors. i don't give a shit which side you're on so here's an idea...if you don't want answers, then stop asking questions.
i don't speak your language.
One thing that has to be understood about Tiassa's bigotry is that it's an insouciant one, coming and going with his mood. He scans the intertubes looking for samples of Janis Joplin's cryofrozen underwear (not today, her genetic return, perhaps, but one day) and stumbles on this story and demands blutgeld. Recompense. A reckoning that shall terrify the masses of religious sheeple, and remind them of their proper place. 'Come ye and comment on that which to my eyes maketh no sense!' And it probably won't to the eyes of theists either: it's an old question of commenting on the morals of an often incomprehensible concept that purports to govern in the world in which we breathe and poop and die. I expect the contrast of Eden was developed for the express purpose of explaining this world of hurts, and then forgotten. Anyway, my personal impression of God is the watchmaker (no, not a micro or macroevolutionary one) that, having wound the universe, lets it run, but holds the door of redemption based on relative moralist choices: each tested according to their measure. And so from that perspective, Tiassa's bigoted battering is pointless, but rings well.
You're an idiot and an asshole on top of being crazy. I'm out of here.
The young girl that was raped and burned did not have a choice. She was involved with the church and attacked by a trusted member of the church. What lesson is this suppose to be teaching?
If god exisits we are all screwed because he is clearly a sociopath.
None, clearly. If an atheist tosses six million people into crematoria, or starves out a steppes population for unfavourable political aspirations, what lesson is this supposed to be teaching us about atheism? None.
God's Work, and Other Notes
Just how are you being accountable?
Just what are you admitting to being wrong about?
What extremity? Well, okay, you're justifying God's abuse of another human being, and for personal gain.
You give enough of a shit to defend a rapemongering God?
Come on, Lori. Just stop and think about what you're saying. All you can do is lash out at humanity in order to defend your own idea of God. For some reason, you need this version of God you've construed in your mind, and rather than accept that it is a brutal and vicious God—perhaps because that would reflect on that god's creator—you instead attempt to indict the entire human species for being as that God made us?
You don't see the extremity in that?
When a church leader learns that one of his flock is exploring dangerous behavior, the appropriate course of action, regardless of what God wants, is not to rape her and set her on fire.
Ordinarily, this is not hard for a person to figure out. The youth leader—the rapist, arsonist, would-be murderer—could not figure it out, though.
So here's the thing:
We don't even need to get into Lightgigantic's silly bit about DNA. Any psychologist will tell you that you are dealing with a deviant state of mind in this rapist. Delusional? Antisocial in extremis? Schizophrenic? It's hard to tell, as his legal representation has done is blame the victim and explain that his "young", "immature" client is really, really sorry, so please don't give him a harsh sentence.
And you're trying to make this about lust in general? How does that even work? You might as well say that Jeffrey Dahmer made an impression on you about the dangers of gourmet cooking. Just as there is a difference between the sinful excess of steak au poivre, a bottle of wine, and a three hundred dollar tab to the one, and cannibalism to the other, there is a difference between the sinful excess of being horny and raping someone and then setting them on fire. Rape and arson as a sexual assertion are exceptionally deviant. That you would connect this manner of rape to mundane lust is something you're going to have to explain.
Well, to put it simply:
That reads like a threat. Against the entire human species. Such as you're arguing—
—we might as well say that in raping and attempting to murder a young woman Mr. Hermogenes is doing God's work.
Oh, it's not a matter of not wanting answers. Rather, your cruelty is breathtaking.
Theologian Jeffrey Burton Russell reminds:
So are you equating atheism to life, or God?
____________________
Notes:
Iaria, Melissa. "Youth church leader in sex, petrol attack". The Sidney Morning Herald. June 20, 2011. News.SMH.com.au. June 23, 2011. http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...ader-in-sex-petrol-attack-20110620-1gb8m.html
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages. New York: Cornell University Press, 1984.
Lori 7 said:
Just how are you being accountable?
"better than for nothing huh?"
Just what are you admitting to being wrong about?
What extremity? Well, okay, you're justifying God's abuse of another human being, and for personal gain.
You give enough of a shit to defend a rapemongering God?
Come on, Lori. Just stop and think about what you're saying. All you can do is lash out at humanity in order to defend your own idea of God. For some reason, you need this version of God you've construed in your mind, and rather than accept that it is a brutal and vicious God—perhaps because that would reflect on that god's creator—you instead attempt to indict the entire human species for being as that God made us?
You don't see the extremity in that?
When a church leader learns that one of his flock is exploring dangerous behavior, the appropriate course of action, regardless of what God wants, is not to rape her and set her on fire.
Ordinarily, this is not hard for a person to figure out. The youth leader—the rapist, arsonist, would-be murderer—could not figure it out, though.
So here's the thing:
"hearing that story makes an impression on me, about how dangerous lust is."
We don't even need to get into Lightgigantic's silly bit about DNA. Any psychologist will tell you that you are dealing with a deviant state of mind in this rapist. Delusional? Antisocial in extremis? Schizophrenic? It's hard to tell, as his legal representation has done is blame the victim and explain that his "young", "immature" client is really, really sorry, so please don't give him a harsh sentence.
And you're trying to make this about lust in general? How does that even work? You might as well say that Jeffrey Dahmer made an impression on you about the dangers of gourmet cooking. Just as there is a difference between the sinful excess of steak au poivre, a bottle of wine, and a three hundred dollar tab to the one, and cannibalism to the other, there is a difference between the sinful excess of being horny and raping someone and then setting them on fire. Rape and arson as a sexual assertion are exceptionally deviant. That you would connect this manner of rape to mundane lust is something you're going to have to explain.
Well, to put it simply:
"because i believe in the possibility of a right existence, i demand that from god, and i (and others) are willing to do whatever it takes, and sacrifice anything and everything, to see that it's manifest.
i think we have to believe in something before it can be manifest, and i and others do, like it's our job."
i think we have to believe in something before it can be manifest, and i and others do, like it's our job."
That reads like a threat. Against the entire human species. Such as you're arguing—
"hearing that story makes an impression on me, about how dangerous lust is."
—we might as well say that in raping and attempting to murder a young woman Mr. Hermogenes is doing God's work.
Oh, it's not a matter of not wanting answers. Rather, your cruelty is breathtaking.
• • •
GeoffP said:
Theologian Jeffrey Burton Russell reminds:
The doctrine of double effect cannot relieve God from responsibility .... It seems impossible that an omniscient God does not intend what he knows absolutely will result. God knows, surely and clearly, that in creating the cosmos he creates a cosmos in which children are tortured. (21)
So are you equating atheism to life, or God?
____________________
Notes:
Iaria, Melissa. "Youth church leader in sex, petrol attack". The Sidney Morning Herald. June 20, 2011. News.SMH.com.au. June 23, 2011. http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...ader-in-sex-petrol-attack-20110620-1gb8m.html
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages. New York: Cornell University Press, 1984.
Which undercuts the denominator of my supposition - each according to their merits - how?
I'm confused here: as a necessary step in your question, are you then first equating atheism to totalitarian outrages? Because I wasn't.
god didn't rape and burn the girl, the "pastor" did.
the reason there are victims such as this is because we, obviously, live a communal existence. communion being one of the major tenets of christianity. hence the concepts of heaven and hell. bottom line, we're either all in, or all out. iow, you will never have a victimless society unless everyone is on the same page, and that page is the correct one.
again, god didn't rape that girl. and you'll be the first one to complain about the concept of hell or the apocalypse.
how am i accountable? i don't look at porn. i don't lust after people that's how. i don't support or entertain the evil that almost took that girl's life. and i wouldn't trust my daughter alone with a youth pastor either. i don't support organized religion. I KNOW BETTER.
what's wrong? exactly what the bible says is wrong, we're sinners. now go and argue with me about that. "porn's fine. lust is fine. there's nothing wrong with me." well i'm sorry, but you can't have it both ways, and i'm not blind.
tiassa you're trippin. he didn't have to rape the girl, and was not in any way encouraged to do so by the holy spirit. do i believe in demons? yes i do. do i believe you have a choice as to whether you entertain them or not? yes i do.
oh yes, here we go. if it's such an "exception to the rule" then would you care to explain why it happens so often? right, everybody's gotta mental illness. everybody's a schizophrenic. stop making excuses! evil causes suffering, period. just because you arbitrarily decide that certain sufferings are worse than others, doesn't mean it's so. you'd be surprised at what we've all gotten used to.
he's not doing god's work. for all i can tell, it's not "working" on the majority at all because they're apparently blind, deaf, and dumb. oh no, they don't get off that easy, they're evil. they just don't give a fuck. maybe if it were to happen to their own daughter they might think twice about picking up another porn mag, but that's a big maybe isn't it?
so take it as a threat, and think i'm cruel, cause you can bet your sweet ass that i'm praying every day for the annihilation of this evil fucked up society, and the restoration and redemption of those who desire salvation. because i'm done suffering, and i'm done watching other people suffer too. and if there's anybody who isn't, and who thinks this is all ok, or that it can be fixed with another stupid fucking politician, or stupid fucking religion, or stupid fucking pharmaceutical, or by throwing some more fucking money at it, well then fuck them straight to hell.
it's where their dumb asses belong.
Last edited:
Actually, I answered the wrong question above, but this is fine also. To answer your question in this post: it would be as responsible for the evils of Its will as the goods of Its will. (No one ever worries about those, though, I note.)
Anyway, the proper answer to the question you actually asked is a simple rhetorical device: a man who closes both eyes to an outcome is not blind. Hell, we already have a Triune supposition so the above isn't exactly a stretch.
But going back to the OP: why are the believers called upon to answer for it? This is the impression that I get.
Haw! I should have taken a bet with someone as to whether you'd slip that little shot in there. Anyway.
It makes quite a bit of sense, Tiassa. I suggested that genocide by totalitarian atheists had little to tell us about atheism. I will recap:
***
***
GeoffP said:
Tiassa said:
***
The answer is clearly neither. Atheism occupies neither position in the parallel that I gave: it is, rather, a philosophy that is not correctly experienced or interpreted by the moral failings of its adherents, unless those adherents are in fact moving in step with its philosophies when they commit acts that we describe as moral failings. There certainly are such philosophies - I think I could be excused for describing the doings of the Thuggees as one such; the exposing of imperfect Spartan infants is another - but atheism is not one of them. As such, it is as irrational for me to blame atheism for Josef Stalin as it is to blame theism or God for a religious psycho with a jug of kerosine and a lighter. The former in each case are philosophies that have been misconstrued in the service of hatred, or violence, or evil. The latter are those who misconstrue them. Again, it is possible for the correlation of responsibility between them to be significant - even unity - but it does not appear reasonable given my experiences of either.
Fascinating, but ...
Actually, the topic post lectures.
I also made clear that, "I'm actually trying ... to figure out the theological implications." Such as the proposition that, "Theologically ... such outcomes do God a great service of some sort. I'm trying to figure out what it is." Thus, one might wonder how believers are called upon to answer for it. It turns out their insight might be useful, because, "It is only by selective and inconsistent theology that the demons operate outside God's will."
And that insight is quite striking, Geoff.
Right, but if you were paying attention, I was looking more at what the theology told us about God.
The question makes no sense because it juxtaposes atheism and God. The two concepts are not analogous.
I included life because the discussion with Lori—which you are obviously following, since you see fit to offer a critique—seems to deal more with what the theology tells us about life.
I don't disagree that genocide by totalitarian atheists has little to tell us about atheism itself, but neither do I see the utility of your bizarre seeming comparison of atheism to God.
I don't think I disagree, though I'm a bit puzzled, still, by the proposition of what you think this has to do with what theology implies about God.
It's a fascinating discussion, but I really do think it's an entirely separate one, as well.
GeoffP said:
Actually, the topic post lectures.
I also made clear that, "I'm actually trying ... to figure out the theological implications." Such as the proposition that, "Theologically ... such outcomes do God a great service of some sort. I'm trying to figure out what it is." Thus, one might wonder how believers are called upon to answer for it. It turns out their insight might be useful, because, "It is only by selective and inconsistent theology that the demons operate outside God's will."
And that insight is quite striking, Geoff.
Right, but if you were paying attention, I was looking more at what the theology told us about God.
The question makes no sense because it juxtaposes atheism and God. The two concepts are not analogous.
I included life because the discussion with Lori—which you are obviously following, since you see fit to offer a critique—seems to deal more with what the theology tells us about life.
I don't disagree that genocide by totalitarian atheists has little to tell us about atheism itself, but neither do I see the utility of your bizarre seeming comparison of atheism to God.
I don't think I disagree, though I'm a bit puzzled, still, by the proposition of what you think this has to do with what theology implies about God.
It's a fascinating discussion, but I really do think it's an entirely separate one, as well.
Lori ! I just can't believe how you think like me . I understand the burden of responsibility falls on all . Me included ! I do my part to fuck things up .
I try to learn from my fuck ups and move forward . Yeah one day the dream will manifest . As far as prostitution goes , we need to clarify degradation more for sexuality is people consent in my book and not just a blanket law.
So to me porn can be what the doctor orders in the right circumstance. Now don't go jumping Me bones Lori . Degradation of people been going on sense the fall and is not just in the things you claim . It is more state of mind . You know think bad be bad kind of thing and then if the lust overwhelms bad deed occur . O.K. consider this . Some guys with there little peckers an lack of social skills might only be able to get there sexual satisfaction from a picture . Now consider I prostituted my self for 40 years by being a carpenter, am I any better than the girl that sold her nakedness so a guy that will probably never feel the warmth and wetness of a tight pussy so he can have a good organism. Prostitutes follow Jesus Lori . Not by excepting him as there savior but by deed. They bring joy to the rejected .
O.K. porn addicts that is best argument for you little peckered guys that get no nooky
Are you one of those Atheists that are mad at God ? Paradox
This and That
I don't know, you tell me:
Your theology is all over the place, Lori. Arbitrary, in fact. Specific encouragement from the Holy Spirit to Mr. Hermogenes' soul has not been part of this discussion so far; you're tilting a windmill on that one.
Just how often do church youth leaders rape teenagers and then set the girls on fire?
Out of seven billion people on Earth, just how many of them rape? Certes, it's a discouraging raw number, but even among rapists, what proportion of them set their victims on fire?
Or, rather, what do you mean by "so often"?
And what is evil?
I need not be arbitrary to say with absolute confidence that of all the things I might complain about in my life, I have never experienced suffering that even begins to compare with the effects of being raped and set on fire.
Indeed, I have to admit that until I read your post, it never occurred to me that I would ever write such a sentence as precedes this one. Some things, instead of being arbitrary, are simply obvious.
Okay. Well, like I said, such as you've been arguing.
I suppose there's a maybe about it.
And do you feel better for having said that?
No, I accept the practical proposition that God is irrelevant.
Lori 7 said:
I don't know, you tell me:
"what extremity? opening my eyes? being accountable? admitting i'm wrong? rejecting the things that hurt myself and others?"
(#25; boldface accent added)
(#25; boldface accent added)
Your theology is all over the place, Lori. Arbitrary, in fact. Specific encouragement from the Holy Spirit to Mr. Hermogenes' soul has not been part of this discussion so far; you're tilting a windmill on that one.
Just how often do church youth leaders rape teenagers and then set the girls on fire?
Out of seven billion people on Earth, just how many of them rape? Certes, it's a discouraging raw number, but even among rapists, what proportion of them set their victims on fire?
Or, rather, what do you mean by "so often"?
And what is evil?
I need not be arbitrary to say with absolute confidence that of all the things I might complain about in my life, I have never experienced suffering that even begins to compare with the effects of being raped and set on fire.
Indeed, I have to admit that until I read your post, it never occurred to me that I would ever write such a sentence as precedes this one. Some things, instead of being arbitrary, are simply obvious.
Okay. Well, like I said, such as you've been arguing.
I suppose there's a maybe about it.
And do you feel better for having said that?
• • •
Me-Ki-Gal said:
No, I accept the practical proposition that God is irrelevant.