This is something I even as a child understood better than most religious collars. Its only real flaw is how easy it is to take down, you think it just can't be that simple, it can't children can't checkmate Chess Grandmasters constantly you must be missing something... you aren't though. The answer being simple does not make it stupid.
im not religious and frankly could never be for trauma reasons™ but ive alwaye found the idea that we're all God's OCs and he loves us but tortures us for the plot very funny because thats what i do
personally (as a non-religious person) I think religion is just an artifact of old, before the european enlightenment religion is rooted and maintained in tradition, and i dont think trying to argue against it with reason would be very effective at trying to eliminate it.
honestly i agree, my goal in making content arguing against it is less to remove it than it is to more so convince atheists to be less apathetic about religion or to give religious people a perspective thats critical in a an uncensored way but not cruel or judgemental- tbf thats less the goal of this specific video but more so my overal content. i guess the veiws of "new atheism" people like dawkins or TJ with OUT the agression or judgement? to convince people that religion NEEDS to go away in the first place, not to actually acomplish doing so? if that makes since?
@@godlesssnowshoe thats fair sometimes i wish i was religious because i fear what my conscience would experience after death, and religion provides answers, even if faulty theres some good religion can have, but the bad things need to be addressed- such as in your cult video
Now to clarify, I am not religious, but I think the easiest way to genuinely provide an answer the problem and continue believing in such a god would be to assume that they (as in the god) ultimately always know more and are therefore more qualified to define good and how they can get there (and you already have to have a fair few assumptions to hold religious beliefs in the first place so there's not much out of the ordinary there in my opinion). Religions can only really exist if people consider the ideas they see within them to be true, even if everyone interprets them differently. So basically you aren't gonna get much of a satisfying answer from someone believing in the existance of a being fitting that description because to believe in them is to assume they exist even if seemingly logically impossible.
i agree but i think the problem is that falls into the "i dont want to think about it" catagory. saying god ultimatly knows more than us and knows why things are the way they are is the same thing as "god works in mysterious ways". it dosent mean anything, it dosent attempt to reconcile the problem. im usually all for answers akin to "we dont know" when we genuinly dont know, but in this case its not "i dont know" because the person is being intellectually honest and genuinly does not know, but in a "god is so much more than us in a way we cant fully understand him". which is not intelectually honest as it still asserts god exists when you cant know that. its like "yeah i know this thing" when they dont, but choose to say i dont know when its convienent. basicly its a cop out, theyre against admitting they dont know when it dosent serve them, but when they cant answer a question that condradicts their beliefs "i dont know" is suddenly an acceptable response. to be clear im not disgareeing just, ye ^^;
@@godlesssnowshoe I agree that that line of reasoning really only serves the purpose of stopping oneself from thinking about the logical implications of their beliefs, but I don't think a person is necessarily being dishonest when giving those kinds of answers (though we might just have different understandings of what "intellectually dishonest means) It is certainly a frustrating one though. There is nothing one can say to make people think about it more if they genuinely believe in that kind of argument because they will always see their own ability to reason as less than that of god, which can definitely end up being harmful.
@@goli8699 when i say intellectually dishonest i dont mean theyre lying in the sense that they know it to be untrue and say it anway, but specifically ig the google definition of the word intellectual honesty lol: "intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving characterised by a nonpartisan and honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways: One's personal beliefs or politics do not interfere with the pursuit of truth; Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted, even when such things may contradict one's hypothesis; Facts are presented in an unbiased manner and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another; References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided." i DO think they deliberatly manipulate what standards of evidence are acceptable. not in a intentionally malisious way but often through things taught by the religion being ingrained in them. that faith is a virtue, to believe without evidence is actually good because it shows you trust god. using thought stopping tecniques taught by many churches to push aside critial assesement, etc. essentially, theyre not abiding by the idea of an unbiased perception or presenting facts regardless of how benifical they are to the conlcusion. what is convient is included, what is not is ommited. a christian would likley never take an untested unapproved medication, theres no proven evidence that it works of that its safe, so why would they? but a christian would deticate their life and hold their most fundemental beliefs without any evidence, because that standard has been at best ignored and at worst activly pushed away. its intellectually dishonest in the fact that its a double standard i guess. "i dont know" would be the most honest answer to questions about the orgin of life. if they held them selves universally for all beliefs to the same standard, they would say i dont know. but they assert that they DO know. and then when pressed further on the details of that, "i dont know" is sudenly not betraying god and abandoning faithfullness, but rather humbling yourself in that god is so much more than you that you cant fully understand him.
@@godlesssnowshoe If that's the definition you're going with, then yeah, I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. I do think it's pretty much impossible to be fully intellectually honest by it though. It's a fine ideal to strive for but on every topic some presumptions are going to be challenged and I don't think it's possible for us to remove ourselves from them entirely. This isn't entirely relevant to the discussion about religion in particular because I don't think that's usually what they're trying to do, I just felt like pointing it out.
@@goli8699 yeah i agree haha. were all human and people all have inherent bias especially on topics we care about, and i mean also, not everyone knows every peice of information so sometimes things will be omitted out of ignorance and not deception or convince. its just in this area i think the vast majority of religious folks, at least ones who aren't either scholars or very personally knowledgeable about theology and the like, often dont make any effort to be intellectually honest and instead lean hard into the bias the religion has instilled in them. its not just a flaw of being human its clinging to that bias like its a life raft lol im by no means free from bias either but i make an active effort to read their holy book, listen to christian theologists, watch content made by them, etc in order to understand their beliefs and positions, not just the ignorant ones like kent hovind but more educated people like william lane craig or atheists i disagree with like bart erhman or sam harris. and there ARE christians who do that as well of course, one of my friends who's christian has a whole collection of different versions of so many holy books id never even heard of, and has actually read them all, and hes knowledgeable about his own theology and others, and science. but thats also likely why hes an agnostic theist who isnt one of the people in these comments saying "rape is good actually cus were all sinners who need punishment".😅 we can have really fun conversations about theology cus i not constantly bumping up against god of the gap's arguments or pseudoscientific creationism lol.
This is probably one of the points that made me not understand the concept of god as a kid. I'd already be like "how is he around if people disappear when I close my eyes??" so trying to think of it positively was challenging. And oh god that makes me remember catechesis, I'm so happy my mom removed me from that bullshit.
I think the awnser to this video could be a parable matthew chapter 13;24-30. The english version has mistaken the word servant for slave again or maybe its using a diferent version of english idk why i observe this. But i don't think people understand whats a parable like the parable above tells about not understanding the word of god. The one above is 4 sections the seed on the path explains that people who don't understand the word of god won't khow how to apply it and go wasted. which many who call themselves cristian and catholics do miss this part and the other too. Seeds on rocky ground. This section explains those who use tactics such as R.I.C.E or B.I.T.E when using god's word won't make diciples who survive evil. Seeds among thorns. after hearing the word of god they doubt on god's plan and guidance because of what they observe the world being like. Seed on good soil. Is when a person understands god's plan and guidance workings and dedicates time to his duties. Now the Matthew 13;24-30. Its about why god allows evil the parable of the weeds. its god is the land owner the angels are the servants the farmland is the planet the weath is the people and the weeds is the evil planted by god's enemy and harvest time is justice time the furnace it the process of getting rid of youre personification until theres only a divine spark left. The servant notice that. theres some weed that was fully develop early he told the land owner the land owner said we can't pull the weeds and weath in the early stages since they look indistiguashable so that no wheat is lost. so in harvest day the weeds were use as furnace fuel. well you can imagen the weath that decided to not develop in given time. While this parable only gives a glimpse of the situation in an easy to digest form. I'l try explaining what i khow from my observations but about it not great and make mistakes at explaining stuff or not fully understand it. Firts i want you to consider this very abstract stuff. lets start explaining mechanisem of the reward junky. A researcher want's a AI to navigate game airplane to end. An artificial intelligence being is given a reward for collecting a respanable items along the path. What ended resulting the ai drives the airplane in circles. collecting the reward after reswpaning never completing the end goal. Whith this in mind i want you to look at real world examples whith nature , humans , emotions and phyco mind. Which is what the genesis chapter 2 verse 3 mentions if you read in its hebrew form. Because reproducibility of hebrew language seems bad when translated. Its just a theological translation not an oficial translation. The khowlege of administering reward and punishment. Which could mean as a way to redefine the standards of whats intended. The good for the bad ways of doing things. Evil was contained but now its loose! Adam was in an unfallen image of god with the ruling over creation. Whem the fruit was consume open world which seems to be become the admin of youre own reward/punishment thingy. Which allows the flesh to reinforce paths that do not lead to life but plesure. Becoming the broken image of god the image of self. The adam's throne becomes broken because the image of god is not the thing ruling over it but the flesh. Making everithing materialise into matter. Because god left the position of being the admin of reward and punishment. The universe and creatures wears down in a desctructive way. Lucifer also rebelle when he could not legally get plesure from pride. angels do have freewill in this open world since all intelligent beings get the same laws to obey. The reward junky thing is a type of curse As well as the rock so heavy god won't lift thing. Too the fact that randoness can't exist in a finite world without endlessly reapeating thats why god is infinit to prevent a mathemacthical curse. God makes sure to not fall into any of curses. Which the reason why he has such atributes. So theres true life in him and can self sustain. And help us get out of our curses. The celestial juristriction system aplies to both humans and demons. Theres a law about the blood sacrafice that when you recive the wages of sin. Death you can bail it by using a blood sacrafice. which is why deamons disguises themselves as false gods. So that a folish human do their bailout deeds. Yeah the only priest hood that does sacrafice today is that i khow of is the order of melchizedek the chatolic priest. Since the bread and wine turns to blood and flesh of jesus hearth when invoked. So the law was always the same just reaplied in a hidden way. God never demands worship he only makes it clear to not worship anything that is out side the trinity. Don't belive everything you observe or hear from oneself or someone because humans are foolish. Information about god is rare so lots of people invent stuff to fill gaps. If i were to encounter jesus i would ask him this question? Whats the anwser to all questions? And ask a favor of entering into his mind if he doesen't mind that.
Regarding the parable specifically i dont think it really answers the question? I did a bit of research into it to make sure i was understanding the message correctly, and it seems to come back to the 2nd point of “these things need to happen” but more so in a we have to prove ourselves, are we the weed or the wheat? Similar to the “testing of faith” argument i addressed in the video. And then once we die god will burn the weeds, and harvest the wheat; or damn the sinners/ evil-doers (weeds) or allow the good people (wheat) into the kingdom of heaven. But again this dosent really answer WHY this process is necessary. Why would god allow satan to plant the weeds, if you will? Why would a good god allow the wheats growth to be hindered by the weeds in the first place? This still dosent seem like a good god, it seems like when i play The Sims and make one of my Sims cheat in front of her husband just to see how the husband reacts. Cringy to reference bo burnham but i actually think its fitting here lol: “None of you are going to heaven. You're not my children, you're a bad game of Sims” Sure this parable might answer the question from a purely christian perspective but when you take a step back and look at it to understand god as truely, literally tri-omni, capable of literally anything, absolutely 100% all loving, and knowing LITERALLY anything and everything, it still dosent answer why god would see planting the weeds as an acceptable outcome or the most effective way to accomplish his goal. Theres also still the evidential problem of evil here- in reality, using the weed analogy, the feild was filled with rows and rows of weeds and only two or three stalks of wheat. Again, theres not an equal amount of goof to rival the bad, not even a somewhat comparable amount. Its a grain of sand to a whole beach. Even using this parable it dosent address that aspect. Also going under the assumption angels have free will, this still dosent answer why free will is a good thing? Why allowing horrible events to happen is preferable to free will that functions until you hurt someone else. It also still dosent really address for example, 2 Kings 2:23-25. Its heavily implied here that god killed the children for mocking the man. Is that not impeding on free will? Or if its not, why not kill them before their action instead of after allowing it to occur, since he knew it would? Free will being good is just taken as a given, but its not a given. This all makes since if youre coming from the pre-existing position that the bible is true, but the thing is its not, or at least we have no evidence to suggest as such. So those of us who are aware of that are more comfortable asking if god is really good for doing these things, why he would do these things, or if these things make him worth worshipping. And seeing gods supposed tri-omni nature as truely tri-omni instead of instead trying to rationalize his actions in the bible with that notion. We dont have to take the bible as true, or as the correct way for things to play out. Its just one possible way things couldve happened and there were a lot of better ways a tri-omni god could have done this, but did not.
@@godlesssnowshoe So i migth of made a error about the parable that they don't map to real world beyond the point thy are meant to convey similar to that of sheper dog. The point to me of the parable is that God wants to reduce the number of cualsaties in just way. Leaving me clueles how he will pull that off. So i went to a catholic website of why would God even test us if he all knowing. Because isin't the point of a test to learn what you don't khow. Got an argument about Satan wanting to find if theres evidence that if any human souls belong to him. Satan gets permission. He proves the sin nature of humans but inconclosive about God's grace. I've watch a video about Cathcisem. Teaches that we use grace to defeat Satan. And that God repays us in joy and merits for our suffering and exercise of virtues for selfless acts of love. luke 4;6-8 I come across a video made consider what worship really meant. Because Satan has a desire to be worshipped. Its this very descicion that its unforgigable. Leading him to a punishment of lake of fire with two other. None of the animals want to worship Satan Revelation 5:13. So eventually Satan and God will force us who we will worship. Worship insin't labor its just means realizing that you and God belong together to one another. As the pope gives us a defenition. Looked at stack overflow the verses about a blind at birth If there was an reason for allowing some one to suffer at birth if not guilty. Q: john 9; 1,3,18,20,34 Was jesus contradicted? A: Pharacies viewpoint sicknes/sin connection exo 15;26 psalm 38;3 3 zeph 1;17 Jesus making it clear at jonh 5;14 concluding at john 9;3 that he was blind so that god's works could be shown. I wasn't saftified trying to be youre intellectual sperspective because it goes back to god works in mysterios ways hymm. Even if i khow that gods work's are meant for repentance of all. The bible does not explicitly says free will. But is obserbable. As its often analyzes our will with God's will. And sins natures of flesh makes desire to do sin. I wonder if our will is the result of omnibenevolence and onipotent in conflit. I was getting upset that there was no awnser to this question as most of the search results i got were theories. Found that jesus admits. you will suffer in this world later you rejoice john 16;33. so my conclucion i don't khow how to awnser youre question. As my human sperspective is the limit on the puzeling world im not an expert at Corinthians 13:12. I wonder how would God's justice would handle suffering and evil in a way that would makes us rejoice and that is fair. God only wants true type of repentance thats why he test us so that we khow if we are repented. So that he does not to give us his full wrath with death when his grace ends. If you want scientific evidence of Jesus then look for carlo acutis website of eucharistic miracles. Maybe you could get supervised permission to look it under a microscope and see the fact that it does not decay. Some samples do beat like a hearth as they are hearth tissue. Some been use for getting blood type of AB+. But the scientist seems unable to decode the DNA even the DNA of the mithochondria. They test firts if its red micelion before sending it out to other scientist just to rule it out to not cause acidental controversy. hope youll find it useful. if you want to see the firt time i saw god in my dream i animated it in blender then use ffmpeg to glue the frames on gentoo you can ask me for it. I feelt sorrow for youre sufferings.
@@godlesssnowshoe I din't saw my reply so i made a few edits. So i migth of made a error about the parable that they don't map to real world beyond the point thy are meant to convey similar to that of sheper dog. The point to me of the parable is that God wants to reduce the number of cualsaties in just way. Leaving me clueles how he will pull that off. So i went to a catholic website of why would God even test us if he all knowing. Because isin't the point of a test to learn what you don't khow. Got an argument about Satan wanting to find if theres evidence that if any human souls belong to him. Satan gets permission. He proves the sin nature of humans but inconclosive about God's grace. I've watch a video about Cathcisem. Teaches that we use grace to defeat Satan. And that God repays us in joy and merits for our suffering and exercise of virtues for selfless acts of love. luke 4;6-8 I come across a video made consider what worship really meant. Because Satan has a desire to be worshipped. Its this very descicion that its unforgigable. Leading him to a punishment of lake of fire with two other. None of the animals want to worship Satan Revelation 5:13. So eventually Satan and God will force us who we will worship. Worship insin't labor its just means realizing that you and God belong together to one another. As the pope gives us a defenition. Looked at stack overflow the verses about a blind at birth If there was an reason for allowing some one to suffer at birth if not guilty. Q: john 9; 1,3,18,20,34 Was jesus contradicted? A: Pharacies viewpoint sicknes/sin connection exo 15;26 psalm 38;3 3 zeph 1;17 Jesus making it clear at jonh 5;14 concluding at john 9;3 that he was blind so that god's works could be shown. I wasn't saftified trying to be youre intellectual sperspective because it goes back to god works in mysterios ways hymm. Even if i khow that gods work's are meant for repentance of all. The bible does not explicitly says free will. But is obserbable. As its often analyzes our will with God's will. And sins natures of flesh makes desire to do sin. I wonder if our will is the result of omnibenevolence and onipotent in conflit. I was getting upset that there was no awnser to this question as most of the search results i got were theories. Found that jesus admits. you will suffer in this world later you rejoice john 16;33. so my conclucion i don't khow how to awnser youre question. As my human sperspective is the limit on the puzeling world im not an expert at Corinthians 13:12. I wonder how would God's justice would handle suffering and evil in a way that would makes us rejoice and that is fair. God only wants true type of repentance thats why he test us so that we khow if we are repented. So that he does not to give us his full wrath with death when his grace ends. so faith and repentace are on each side of same coin. I'm also insterested on how would you awnser this question. since i don't khow youre perspective. If you want scientific evidence of Jesus then look for carlo acutis collection of eucharistic miracles. Maybe you could get supervised permission to look it under a microscope and see the fact that it does not decay. Some samples do beat like a hearth as they are hearth tissue. Some been use for getting blood type of AB+. But the scientist seems unable to decode the DNA even the DNA of the mithochondria. They test firts if its red micelion before sending it out to other scientist just to rule it out to not cause further acidental controversy. hope youll find it useful. i would like to show you something in private in discord. I feelt sorrow for youre sufferings.
I din't saw my reply so i made a few edits. So i migth of made a error about the parable that they don't map to real world beyond the point thy are meant to convey similar to that of sheper dog. The point to me of the parable is that God wants to reduce the number of cualsaties in just way. Leaving me clueles how he will pull that off. So i went to a catholic website of why would God even test us if he all knowing. Because isin't the point of a test to learn what you don't khow. Got an argument about Satan wanting to find if theres evidence that if any human souls belong to him. Satan gets permission. He proves the sin nature of humans but inconclosive about God's grace. I've watch a video about Cathcisem. Teaches that we use grace to defeat Satan. And that God repays us in joy and merits for our suffering and exercise of virtues for selfless acts of love. luke 4;6-8 I come across a video made consider what worship really meant. Because Satan has a desire to be worshipped. Its this very descicion that its unforgigable. Leading him to a punishment of lake of fire with two other. None of the animals want to worship Satan Revelation 5:13. So eventually Satan and God will force us who we will worship. Worship insin't labor its just means realizing that you and God belong together to one another. As the pope gives us a defenition. Looked at stack overflow the verses about a blind at birth If there was an reason for allowing some one to suffer at birth if not guilty. Q: john 9; 1,3,18,20,34 Was jesus contradicted? A: Pharacies viewpoint sicknes/sin connection exo 15;26 psalm 38;3 3 zeph 1;17 Jesus making it clear at jonh 5;14 concluding at john 9;3 that he was blind so that god's works could be shown. I wasn't saftified trying to be youre intellectual sperspective because it goes back to god works in mysterios ways hymm. Even if i khow that gods work's are meant for repentance of all. The bible does not explicitly says free will. But is obserbable. As its often analyzes our will with God's will. And sins natures of flesh makes desire to do sin. I wonder if our will is the result of omnibenevolence and onipotent in conflit. I was getting upset that there was no awnser to this question as most of the search results i got were theories. Found that jesus admits. you will suffer in this world later you rejoice john 16;33. so my conclucion i don't khow how to awnser youre question. As my human sperspective is the limit on the puzeling world im not an expert at Corinthians 13:12. I wonder how would God's justice would handle suffering and evil in a way that would makes us rejoice and that is fair. God only wants true type of repentance thats why he test us so that we khow if we are repented. So that he does not to give us his full wrath with death when his grace ends. so faith and repentace are on each side of same coin. I'm also insterested on how would you awnser this question. since i don't khow youre perspective. If you want scientific evidence of Jesus then look for carlo acutis collection of eucharistic miracles. Maybe you could get supervised permission to look it under a microscope and see the fact that it does not decay. Some samples do beat like a hearth as they are hearth tissue. Some been use for getting blood type of AB+. But the scientist seems unable to decode the DNA even the DNA of the mithochondria. They test firts if its red micelion before sending it out to other scientist just to rule it out to not cause further acidental controversy. hope youll find it useful. i would like to show you something in private in discord. I feelt sorrow for youre sufferings.
in advance, i am not a christian and i like your content, but theres one issue with some (realistically only one) of the things youre saying for instance, god is eternal and strictly seperate from the unvierse (which brings about a different kind of theological issue but this is not the place), and eternity isnt conceived as no beginning and no end/a beginning with no end, but rather as a thing which always existed and always exists, that is separate from time itself. you can imagine finite things (such as mankind and the universe) as lying on an arrow of time, while god is a dot above said arrow of time and experiences all of time at once. this is, more or less, the explanation as to how god and free will are compatible. ironically the issue with that argument, for me at least, is: if god is infinite and infinituted expects not being limited by anything else, how can god be truly limited by the universe?
As a transmed I wonder if you are also a sysmed and your thoughts on DID being appropriated (not DID but have experience with fakers.) Also can you make a video about ‘radqueers’
i think the term sysmed is really stupid tbh, so while i think people would consider me "sysmed" i domt personally say i am because i think the term is stupid lol- while i understand the need for the term transmed, as transness as an identity is not a medical diagnosis, DID has no other component than being a medical diagnosis. i have an irl friend with dx DID whos been in intensive therapy for years, is on disability, and its not my place to share their trauma but had probably the worst childhood i think i couldve imagined. its enraging to see people use that as an identity or roleplay. especially in tandem with the whole RAMCOA thing, which is entirely created by online DID communities and if you try and look into it further it leads to absolutely NO psychiatric associations or abuse prevention organizations but just more tumblr and tiktok, its like bringing back the satanic panic to win the fake trauma olympics. its just a really disgusting consequence of online self diagnosis culture. also, i dont rlly take video requests but ill put it on my video idea list :)
God permits suffering because people suck & he's perfectly just. It's pretty simple. To say "why can't God use positive means to sanctify people" is malarky because suffering IS a positive means because #1 it works & #2 people suck anyways so it's just to punish. You wouldn't let someone get off scot-free from doing something evil. God's like that & he's smart & patient
what evil thing did a baby with an illness that caused it to only live an hour of pure agony before dying do? how its that just? what evil thing did a rape victim do to deserve that? what evil thing did a person killed and tortured in a genocide do to deserve that? if your god thinks ANYONE is deserving of those actions he is not just he is sadistic. even just in regards to hell, there is no universe in which infinite punishment for a finite crime is just. a god who says people deserve genocide, rape, abuse, starvation, etc is a god who is sick and cruel, not just.
@godlesssnowshoe A lot of your arguments boil down to "why doesn't God just use 'positive means' to achieve things instead of using suffering if he's omnipotent?" But you have to understand that when working with humans, all of the "better options" do not work simply because of the way we behave. We are so dead to sin that it literally does take our own suffering to change us because we are hardened to any better means to bring about a greater good. If this were not the case then God would totally use "positive means" to repair our broken relationship with him. God is infinitely powerful but that doesn't mean we are infinitely responsive if that makes sense. There's only so much I can put in a single comment. Anyways, I like hearing your input. Keeping you in my prayers. I love you & have a good day :3
@@randnew1 I'm sure people would be more responsive if he came down from the sky and said "I am God." and did some impossible shit to prove he is god. But that won't ever happen. Christians will just keep telling people to "find God" where there is no place to actually find him. He's just as likely to exist as any other deity from any other religion. Which is to say, it's unlikely. I find this idea that many Christians have about how all people are inherently "sinful" for just existing to not only be morally bankrupt, but to be misguided. There are many things in the Bible that are touted as being a "sin" that actually aren't bad or even morally gray at all. As in, these actions do not harmfully affect the lives or wellbeing of anyone. Things like having a divorce, having lustful thoughts, being homosexual, wearing clothing cut from multiple fabrics, dressing "unmodestly" as a woman, are all things that this appearent God thinks are sinful. I'm sure some of the things I've listed change depending on what version of the Bible is being used, but you can find many ridiculous things in any version of the Bible. And even if someone does do something bad, that doesn't mean that they're just a bad person. Good people can do bad things. If you can justify pain and suffering with "Ah well this person lied to somebody once some years ago so that actually means it's okay for them to get brutually beaten! That's what they get!" Then something is very wrong with your judgement. One last thing. No, it does not work. I mean, why would it? Punishment can work to change human behavior, but said human has to understand that they're even being punished, and what they're being punished for. If some person decides to attack somebody else for no good reason, there is no lesson to be learnt by the person being attacked. They weren't attacked because they stole candy from the store as a kid, or because they cheated on their partner, they're just being victimized by a stranger. Bad things happen to people no matter if they are good or bad. Therefore, how are people supposed to know that they're being punished for very specific behaviors that are unrelated to said punishment??
i agree with absolutely everything dollette said but i also wanna add on that punishment for sin by being the victim of others evil actions is not biblical at all. theres some instances where god himself directly punishes people for sin or with the attempt to test them (again Job, 2 Kings 2:23-24, genesis 19:26, Exodus 20:5 etc) and ofc there are laws in the old testament of direct earthly punishment for breaking religious rules, but these are direct in the way a kid gets into a fight, you tell them the fight is the reason theyre being punished, and then they get detention. its a rules that's punishment is known before the action is taken and WHY the punishment is occurring is clear. but thats not what youre describing. the idea that were all just deserving of rape, abuse, assault, injury, trauma, disability etc etc because of some inherent sinfulness, even if its a child who hasnt even been alive long enough to hurt anyone, a person whos only ever been on the receiving end of pain and never the cause of it, a person whos dedicated their life to charity and aid work, that they're deserving of that for some vague badness by virtue of existing? (mind you i dont think ANYONE is deserving of these things regardless of how virtuous we see them, but for sake of argument) again your god is a cruel person. and a belief system that instills this idea that everyone is just inherently bad, and that were all deserving of abuse, pain, and suffering, is one that is so horribly damaging it shoukd be abolished. i will never understand how we as a species allowed this type of depravity to become an acceptable way to think. its one of the saddest things i think weve ever allowed to happen.
This whole video is built on the assumption that “a loving God wouldn’t want evil to exist” but that’s not true because “evil existing” doesn’t effect God (or the angels who only do good). In the end, only evil people are effected by evil. How is that not fair? I saw someone say in this comment section “this is an easy religious flaw to refute” but honestly it’s the other way around becuase you can just refute the refutation by saying “we deserve it.” Why would an all loving God allow evil to exist? Because God loves Justice.
"only evil people are affected by evil" do you belive an infant with childhood lukimia to be evil? do you belive children shipped off in carts to auschwitz to be evil? do you belive a woman being beaten and raped by her husband to be evil? do you belive a child sexually assualted by a preist to be evil? do you believe a native child whos family was killed and was taken to be raped by a white man to be evil? do you belive a family sold to a white slave owner from africa during the atlantic slave trade to be evil? do you believe a baby born with a debilitating genetic illness to be evil? this whole argument is frankly disgusting. innocent people are affected by evil actions and immesurable suffering every day. none of these people did anything to deserve these actions, and frankly i think theres very very few people to have ever lived in human history at all that would ever be worthy of these fates. this is exactly why religion is harmful. you look at children, abused women, sick people. poor people, and assert they must have done something to deserve their abuse. no one is deserving of abuse. and frankly as someone who seems much more biblically literate than you, i think the jesus you pray to would be appauled at you making such a statement
you are a prime example of why religion is so detremintal. this is truely a morally bankrup way of thinking, and i hope your religion fades into obscurity, as it should
@@godlesssnowshoe doesn’t matter how much a sinner denies religion, confusion is part of the punishment. In the end God will get the glory when you show up on judgement day and he explains every sin you did and why you deserve Hell.
i am not confused. im clearly a lot more knowledgeable about whats actually in your book. im sorry youre at a point in your life where you believe such abhorrent things but thankfully some people see through the bullshit and neglect this type of barbaric nonsense. there is no judgement day. when i die i will be a decaying pile or carbon in the soil and nothing more or less, and i am perfectly happy to understand that. your world view is truly miserable and pathetic. its a tragedy this type of thinking has ever been presented as normal. edit: biblically hell is nothing more than eternal separation from god. if by some absurd fluke your god were real, id be more than happy to spend my time in a place away from such a narcissistic villain.
We are just Gods oc's and he like us love to see us hurt and get over that hurt.
Sometimes I create fictional fictional worlds.
me @ my warrior cats OC. i am her god and i make her suffer LMAO
This is something I even as a child understood better than most religious collars. Its only real flaw is how easy it is to take down, you think it just can't be that simple, it can't children can't checkmate Chess Grandmasters constantly you must be missing something... you aren't though. The answer being simple does not make it stupid.
The best response I've heard to this is that god is bounded by logic.
im not religious and frankly could never be for trauma reasons™
but ive alwaye found the idea that we're all God's OCs and he loves us but tortures us for the plot very funny because thats what i do
personally (as a non-religious person) I think religion is just an artifact of old, before the european enlightenment
religion is rooted and maintained in tradition, and i dont think trying to argue against it with reason would be very effective at trying to eliminate it.
honestly i agree, my goal in making content arguing against it is less to remove it than it is to more so convince atheists to be less apathetic about religion or to give religious people a perspective thats critical in a an uncensored way but not cruel or judgemental- tbf thats less the goal of this specific video but more so my overal content. i guess the veiws of "new atheism" people like dawkins or TJ with OUT the agression or judgement? to convince people that religion NEEDS to go away in the first place, not to actually acomplish doing so? if that makes since?
@@godlesssnowshoe thats fair
sometimes i wish i was religious because i fear what my conscience would experience after death, and religion provides answers, even if faulty
theres some good religion can have, but the bad things need to be addressed- such as in your cult video
Now to clarify, I am not religious, but I think the easiest way to genuinely provide an answer the problem and continue believing in such a god would be to assume that they (as in the god) ultimately always know more and are therefore more qualified to define good and how they can get there (and you already have to have a fair few assumptions to hold religious beliefs in the first place so there's not much out of the ordinary there in my opinion).
Religions can only really exist if people consider the ideas they see within them to be true, even if everyone interprets them differently. So basically you aren't gonna get much of a satisfying answer from someone believing in the existance of a being fitting that description because to believe in them is to assume they exist even if seemingly logically impossible.
i agree but i think the problem is that falls into the "i dont want to think about it" catagory. saying god ultimatly knows more than us and knows why things are the way they are is the same thing as "god works in mysterious ways".
it dosent mean anything, it dosent attempt to reconcile the problem. im usually all for answers akin to "we dont know" when we genuinly dont know, but in this case its not "i dont know" because the person is being intellectually honest and genuinly does not know, but in a "god is so much more than us in a way we cant fully understand him". which is not intelectually honest as it still asserts god exists when you cant know that. its like "yeah i know this thing" when they dont, but choose to say i dont know when its convienent.
basicly its a cop out, theyre against admitting they dont know when it dosent serve them, but when they cant answer a question that condradicts their beliefs "i dont know" is suddenly an acceptable response.
to be clear im not disgareeing just, ye ^^;
@@godlesssnowshoe I agree that that line of reasoning really only serves the purpose of stopping oneself from thinking about the logical implications of their beliefs, but I don't think a person is necessarily being dishonest when giving those kinds of answers (though we might just have different understandings of what "intellectually dishonest means)
It is certainly a frustrating one though. There is nothing one can say to make people think about it more if they genuinely believe in that kind of argument because they will always see their own ability to reason as less than that of god, which can definitely end up being harmful.
@@goli8699 when i say intellectually dishonest i dont mean theyre lying in the sense that they know it to be untrue and say it anway, but specifically ig the google definition of the word intellectual honesty lol:
"intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving characterised by a nonpartisan and honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways:
One's personal beliefs or politics do not interfere with the pursuit of truth;
Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted, even when such things may contradict one's hypothesis;
Facts are presented in an unbiased manner and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another;
References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided."
i DO think they deliberatly manipulate what standards of evidence are acceptable. not in a intentionally malisious way but often through things taught by the religion being ingrained in them. that faith is a virtue, to believe without evidence is actually good because it shows you trust god. using thought stopping tecniques taught by many churches to push aside critial assesement, etc.
essentially, theyre not abiding by the idea of an unbiased perception or presenting facts regardless of how benifical they are to the conlcusion. what is convient is included, what is not is ommited.
a christian would likley never take an untested unapproved medication, theres no proven evidence that it works of that its safe, so why would they?
but a christian would deticate their life and hold their most fundemental beliefs without any evidence, because that standard has been at best ignored and at worst activly pushed away.
its intellectually dishonest in the fact that its a double standard i guess. "i dont know" would be the most honest answer to questions about the orgin of life. if they held them selves universally for all beliefs to the same standard, they would say i dont know.
but they assert that they DO know. and then when pressed further on the details of that, "i dont know" is sudenly not betraying god and abandoning faithfullness, but rather humbling yourself in that god is so much more than you that you cant fully understand him.
@@godlesssnowshoe If that's the definition you're going with, then yeah, I agree with pretty much everything you've said here.
I do think it's pretty much impossible to be fully intellectually honest by it though. It's a fine ideal to strive for but on every topic some presumptions are going to be challenged and I don't think it's possible for us to remove ourselves from them entirely. This isn't entirely relevant to the discussion about religion in particular because I don't think that's usually what they're trying to do, I just felt like pointing it out.
@@goli8699 yeah i agree haha. were all human and people all have inherent bias especially on topics we care about, and i mean also, not everyone knows every peice of information so sometimes things will be omitted out of ignorance and not deception or convince.
its just in this area i think the vast majority of religious folks, at least ones who aren't either scholars or very personally knowledgeable about theology and the like, often dont make any effort to be intellectually honest and instead lean hard into the bias the religion has instilled in them. its not just a flaw of being human its clinging to that bias like its a life raft lol
im by no means free from bias either but i make an active effort to read their holy book, listen to christian theologists, watch content made by them, etc in order to understand their beliefs and positions, not just the ignorant ones like kent hovind but more educated people like william lane craig or atheists i disagree with like bart erhman or sam harris.
and there ARE christians who do that as well of course, one of my friends who's christian has a whole collection of different versions of so many holy books id never even heard of, and has actually read them all, and hes knowledgeable about his own theology and others, and science. but thats also likely why hes an agnostic theist who isnt one of the people in these comments saying "rape is good actually cus were all sinners who need punishment".😅 we can have really fun conversations about theology cus i not constantly bumping up against god of the gap's arguments or pseudoscientific creationism lol.
This is probably one of the points that made me not understand the concept of god as a kid. I'd already be like "how is he around if people disappear when I close my eyes??" so trying to think of it positively was challenging. And oh god that makes me remember catechesis, I'm so happy my mom removed me from that bullshit.
Can’t even defeat some Iron Chariots, all mighty my ass!
You would know all about evil
disagreeing with u is evil good to know LMAO
I didn't say I disagree with you
I think the awnser to this video could be a parable matthew chapter 13;24-30.
The english version has mistaken the word servant for slave again or maybe
its using a diferent version of english idk why i observe this.
But i don't think people understand whats a parable like the parable
above tells about not understanding the word of god.
The one above is 4 sections the seed on the path
explains that people who don't understand the word of god
won't khow how to apply it and go wasted. which many who
call themselves cristian and catholics do miss this part and the other too.
Seeds on rocky ground. This section explains those
who use tactics such as R.I.C.E or B.I.T.E when using god's word won't
make diciples who survive evil.
Seeds among thorns. after hearing the word of god they doubt on god's plan
and guidance because of what they observe the world being like.
Seed on good soil. Is when a person understands god's plan and guidance workings
and dedicates time to his duties.
Now the Matthew 13;24-30.
Its about why god allows evil the parable of the weeds.
its god is the land owner the angels are the servants
the farmland is the planet the weath is the people and the weeds
is the evil planted by god's enemy and harvest time is justice time
the furnace it the process of getting rid of youre personification
until theres only a divine spark left.
The servant notice that.
theres some weed that was fully develop early he told the land owner
the land owner said we can't pull the weeds and weath in the early
stages since they look indistiguashable so that no wheat is lost.
so in harvest day the weeds were use as furnace fuel.
well you can imagen the weath that decided to not develop in given time.
While this parable only gives a glimpse of the situation in an easy
to digest form. I'l try explaining what i khow
from my observations but about it not great and
make mistakes at explaining stuff or not fully understand it.
Firts i want you to consider this very abstract stuff.
lets start explaining mechanisem of the reward junky.
A researcher want's a AI to navigate game airplane to end.
An artificial intelligence being is given a reward for
collecting a respanable items along the path.
What ended resulting the ai drives the airplane in circles.
collecting the reward after reswpaning never completing the end goal.
Whith this in mind i want you to look at real world examples whith
nature , humans , emotions and phyco mind.
Which is what the genesis chapter 2 verse 3 mentions if you read in its hebrew form.
Because reproducibility of hebrew language seems bad when translated.
Its just a theological translation not an oficial translation.
The khowlege of administering reward and punishment.
Which could mean as a way to redefine the standards of whats intended. The good
for the bad ways of doing things. Evil was contained but now its loose!
Adam was in an unfallen image of god with the ruling over creation.
Whem the fruit was consume open world which seems to be become the admin of youre
own reward/punishment thingy. Which allows the flesh to reinforce
paths that do not lead to life but plesure. Becoming the broken image of
god the image of self. The adam's throne becomes broken because the image
of god is not the thing ruling over it but the flesh. Making everithing
materialise into matter. Because god left the position of being the admin of
reward and punishment. The universe and creatures wears down in a desctructive way.
Lucifer also rebelle when he could not legally get plesure from pride.
angels do have freewill in this open world since all intelligent beings
get the same laws to obey.
The reward junky thing is a type of curse
As well as the rock so heavy god won't lift thing.
Too the fact that randoness can't exist in a finite world
without endlessly reapeating thats why god is infinit
to prevent a mathemacthical curse. God makes sure to not
fall into any of curses. Which the reason why he has such
atributes. So theres true life in him and can self sustain.
And help us get out of our curses.
The celestial juristriction system aplies to both humans and demons.
Theres a law about the blood sacrafice that when you recive the
wages of sin. Death you can bail it by using a blood sacrafice.
which is why deamons disguises themselves as false gods. So that a folish human
do their bailout deeds. Yeah the only priest hood that does sacrafice today is
that i khow of is the order of melchizedek the chatolic priest. Since the bread
and wine turns to blood and flesh of jesus hearth when invoked. So the law
was always the same just reaplied in a hidden way.
God never demands worship he only makes it clear to not worship anything that
is out side the trinity.
Don't belive everything you observe or hear from oneself or someone because
humans are foolish.
Information about god is rare so lots of people invent stuff to fill gaps.
If i were to encounter jesus i would ask him this question?
Whats the anwser to all questions?
And ask a favor of entering into his mind if he doesen't mind that.
Regarding the parable specifically i dont think it really answers the question? I did a bit of research into it to make sure i was understanding the message correctly, and it seems to come back to the 2nd point of “these things need to happen” but more so in a we have to prove ourselves, are we the weed or the wheat? Similar to the “testing of faith” argument i addressed in the video. And then once we die god will burn the weeds, and harvest the wheat; or damn the sinners/ evil-doers (weeds) or allow the good people (wheat) into the kingdom of heaven.
But again this dosent really answer WHY this process is necessary. Why would god allow satan to plant the weeds, if you will? Why would a good god allow the wheats growth to be hindered by the weeds in the first place?
This still dosent seem like a good god, it seems like when i play The Sims and make one of my Sims cheat in front of her husband just to see how the husband reacts. Cringy to reference bo burnham but i actually think its fitting here lol: “None of you are going to heaven. You're not my children, you're a bad game of Sims”
Sure this parable might answer the question from a purely christian perspective but when you take a step back and look at it to understand god as truely, literally tri-omni, capable of literally anything, absolutely 100% all loving, and knowing LITERALLY anything and everything, it still dosent answer why god would see planting the weeds as an acceptable outcome or the most effective way to accomplish his goal.
Theres also still the evidential problem of evil here- in reality, using the weed analogy, the feild was filled with rows and rows of weeds and only two or three stalks of wheat. Again, theres not an equal amount of goof to rival the bad, not even a somewhat comparable amount. Its a grain of sand to a whole beach. Even using this parable it dosent address that aspect.
Also going under the assumption angels have free will, this still dosent answer why free will is a good thing? Why allowing horrible events to happen is preferable to free will that functions until you hurt someone else. It also still dosent really address for example, 2 Kings 2:23-25. Its heavily implied here that god killed the children for mocking the man. Is that not impeding on free will? Or if its not, why not kill them before their action instead of after allowing it to occur, since he knew it would? Free will being good is just taken as a given, but its not a given.
This all makes since if youre coming from the pre-existing position that the bible is true, but the thing is its not, or at least we have no evidence to suggest as such. So those of us who are aware of that are more comfortable asking if god is really good for doing these things, why he would do these things, or if these things make him worth worshipping. And seeing gods supposed tri-omni nature as truely tri-omni instead of instead trying to rationalize his actions in the bible with that notion. We dont have to take the bible as true, or as the correct way for things to play out. Its just one possible way things couldve happened and there were a lot of better ways a tri-omni god could have done this, but did not.
@@godlesssnowshoe So i migth of made a error about the parable that they don't map to
real world beyond the point thy are meant to convey similar to that of sheper dog.
The point to me of the parable is that God wants to reduce the number of
cualsaties in just way. Leaving me clueles how he will pull that off.
So i went to a catholic website of why would God even test us if he all knowing.
Because isin't the point of a test to learn what you don't khow.
Got an argument about Satan wanting to find if theres evidence that if any human
souls belong to him.
Satan gets permission. He proves the sin nature of humans but
inconclosive about God's grace.
I've watch a video about Cathcisem. Teaches that
we use grace to defeat Satan. And that God repays us in joy and merits for our
suffering and exercise of virtues for selfless acts of love.
luke 4;6-8 I come across a video made consider what worship really meant.
Because Satan has a desire to be worshipped. Its this very descicion
that its unforgigable. Leading him to a punishment of lake of fire with two other.
None of the animals want to worship Satan Revelation 5:13.
So eventually Satan and God will force us who we will worship.
Worship insin't labor its just means realizing that you and God
belong together to one another. As the pope gives us a defenition.
Looked at stack overflow the verses about a blind at birth
If there was an reason for allowing some one to suffer at birth if not guilty.
Q: john 9; 1,3,18,20,34 Was jesus contradicted?
A: Pharacies viewpoint sicknes/sin connection
exo 15;26 psalm 38;3 3 zeph 1;17 Jesus making it clear at jonh 5;14
concluding at john 9;3 that he was blind so that god's works could be shown.
I wasn't saftified trying to be youre intellectual sperspective because it
goes back to god works in mysterios ways hymm.
Even if i khow that gods work's are meant for repentance of all.
The bible does not explicitly says free will. But is obserbable.
As its often analyzes our will with God's will. And sins natures of flesh makes desire
to do sin. I wonder if our will is the result of omnibenevolence and onipotent in
conflit.
I was getting upset that there was no awnser to this question as most of
the search results i got were theories. Found that jesus admits.
you will suffer in this world later you rejoice john 16;33. so my conclucion
i don't khow how to awnser youre question. As my human sperspective
is the limit on the puzeling world im not an expert at Corinthians 13:12.
I wonder how would God's justice would handle suffering and evil in a
way that would makes us rejoice and that is fair. God only wants true type of repentance
thats why he test us so that we khow if we are repented. So that he does not to give us his full wrath with death when his grace ends.
If you want scientific evidence of Jesus then look for carlo
acutis website of eucharistic miracles. Maybe you could get supervised permission to
look it under a microscope and see the fact that it does not decay. Some
samples do beat like a hearth as they are hearth tissue.
Some been use for getting blood type of AB+. But the scientist
seems unable to decode the DNA even the DNA of the mithochondria.
They test firts if its red micelion before sending it out to other scientist
just to rule it out to not cause acidental controversy.
hope youll find it useful.
if you want to see the firt time i saw god in my dream i animated it in blender
then use ffmpeg to glue the frames on gentoo you can ask me for it.
I feelt sorrow for youre sufferings.
@@godlesssnowshoe I din't saw my reply so i made a few edits.
So i migth of made a error about the parable that they don't map to
real world beyond the point thy are meant to convey similar to that of sheper dog.
The point to me of the parable is that God wants to reduce the number of
cualsaties in just way. Leaving me clueles how he will pull that off.
So i went to a catholic website of why would God even test us if he all knowing.
Because isin't the point of a test to learn what you don't khow.
Got an argument about Satan wanting to find if theres evidence that if any human
souls belong to him.
Satan gets permission. He proves the sin nature of humans but
inconclosive about God's grace.
I've watch a video about Cathcisem. Teaches that
we use grace to defeat Satan. And that God repays us in joy and merits for our
suffering and exercise of virtues for selfless acts of love.
luke 4;6-8 I come across a video made consider what worship really meant.
Because Satan has a desire to be worshipped. Its this very descicion
that its unforgigable. Leading him to a punishment of lake of fire with two other.
None of the animals want to worship Satan Revelation 5:13.
So eventually Satan and God will force us who we will worship.
Worship insin't labor its just means realizing that you and God
belong together to one another. As the pope gives us a defenition.
Looked at stack overflow the verses about a blind at birth
If there was an reason for allowing some one to suffer at birth if not guilty.
Q: john 9; 1,3,18,20,34 Was jesus contradicted?
A: Pharacies viewpoint sicknes/sin connection
exo 15;26 psalm 38;3 3 zeph 1;17 Jesus making it clear at jonh 5;14
concluding at john 9;3 that he was blind so that god's works could be shown.
I wasn't saftified trying to be youre intellectual sperspective because it
goes back to god works in mysterios ways hymm.
Even if i khow that gods work's are meant for repentance of all.
The bible does not explicitly says free will. But is obserbable.
As its often analyzes our will with God's will. And sins natures of flesh makes desire
to do sin. I wonder if our will is the result of omnibenevolence and onipotent in
conflit.
I was getting upset that there was no awnser to this question as most of
the search results i got were theories. Found that jesus admits.
you will suffer in this world later you rejoice john 16;33. so my conclucion
i don't khow how to awnser youre question. As my human sperspective
is the limit on the puzeling world im not an expert at Corinthians 13:12.
I wonder how would God's justice would handle suffering and evil in a
way that would makes us rejoice and that is fair. God only wants true type of repentance
thats why he test us so that we khow if we are repented. So that he does not to give us his full wrath with death when his grace ends. so faith and repentace are on each side of
same coin.
I'm also insterested on how would you awnser this question. since
i don't khow youre perspective.
If you want scientific evidence of Jesus then look for carlo
acutis collection of eucharistic miracles. Maybe you could get supervised permission to
look it under a microscope and see the fact that it does not decay. Some
samples do beat like a hearth as they are hearth tissue.
Some been use for getting blood type of AB+. But the scientist
seems unable to decode the DNA even the DNA of the mithochondria.
They test firts if its red micelion before sending it out to other scientist
just to rule it out to not cause further acidental controversy.
hope youll find it useful.
i would like to show you something in private in discord.
I feelt sorrow for youre sufferings.
I din't saw my reply so i made a few edits.
So i migth of made a error about the parable that they don't map to
real world beyond the point thy are meant to convey similar to that of sheper dog.
The point to me of the parable is that God wants to reduce the number of
cualsaties in just way. Leaving me clueles how he will pull that off.
So i went to a catholic website of why would God even test us if he all knowing.
Because isin't the point of a test to learn what you don't khow.
Got an argument about Satan wanting to find if theres evidence that if any human
souls belong to him.
Satan gets permission. He proves the sin nature of humans but
inconclosive about God's grace.
I've watch a video about Cathcisem. Teaches that
we use grace to defeat Satan. And that God repays us in joy and merits for our
suffering and exercise of virtues for selfless acts of love.
luke 4;6-8 I come across a video made consider what worship really meant.
Because Satan has a desire to be worshipped. Its this very descicion
that its unforgigable. Leading him to a punishment of lake of fire with two other.
None of the animals want to worship Satan Revelation 5:13.
So eventually Satan and God will force us who we will worship.
Worship insin't labor its just means realizing that you and God
belong together to one another. As the pope gives us a defenition.
Looked at stack overflow the verses about a blind at birth
If there was an reason for allowing some one to suffer at birth if not guilty.
Q: john 9; 1,3,18,20,34 Was jesus contradicted?
A: Pharacies viewpoint sicknes/sin connection
exo 15;26 psalm 38;3 3 zeph 1;17 Jesus making it clear at jonh 5;14
concluding at john 9;3 that he was blind so that god's works could be shown.
I wasn't saftified trying to be youre intellectual sperspective because it
goes back to god works in mysterios ways hymm.
Even if i khow that gods work's are meant for repentance of all.
The bible does not explicitly says free will. But is obserbable.
As its often analyzes our will with God's will. And sins natures of flesh makes desire
to do sin. I wonder if our will is the result of omnibenevolence and onipotent in
conflit.
I was getting upset that there was no awnser to this question as most of
the search results i got were theories. Found that jesus admits.
you will suffer in this world later you rejoice john 16;33. so my conclucion
i don't khow how to awnser youre question. As my human sperspective
is the limit on the puzeling world im not an expert at Corinthians 13:12.
I wonder how would God's justice would handle suffering and evil in a
way that would makes us rejoice and that is fair. God only wants true type of repentance
thats why he test us so that we khow if we are repented. So that he does not to give us his full wrath with death when his grace ends. so faith and repentace are on each side of
same coin.
I'm also insterested on how would you awnser this question. since
i don't khow youre perspective.
If you want scientific evidence of Jesus then look for carlo
acutis collection of eucharistic miracles. Maybe you could get supervised permission to
look it under a microscope and see the fact that it does not decay. Some
samples do beat like a hearth as they are hearth tissue.
Some been use for getting blood type of AB+. But the scientist
seems unable to decode the DNA even the DNA of the mithochondria.
They test firts if its red micelion before sending it out to other scientist
just to rule it out to not cause further acidental controversy.
hope youll find it useful.
i would like to show you something in private in discord.
I feelt sorrow for youre sufferings.
in advance, i am not a christian and i like your content, but theres one issue with some (realistically only one) of the things youre saying
for instance, god is eternal and strictly seperate from the unvierse (which brings about a different kind of theological issue but this is not the place), and eternity isnt conceived as no beginning and no end/a beginning with no end, but rather as a thing which always existed and always exists, that is separate from time itself. you can imagine finite things (such as mankind and the universe) as lying on an arrow of time, while god is a dot above said arrow of time and experiences all of time at once. this is, more or less, the explanation as to how god and free will are compatible.
ironically the issue with that argument, for me at least, is: if god is infinite and infinituted expects not being limited by anything else, how can god be truly limited by the universe?
After 6 hours, there are 15 comments, including this one.
As a transmed I wonder if you are also a sysmed and your thoughts on DID being appropriated (not DID but have experience with fakers.)
Also can you make a video about ‘radqueers’
i think the term sysmed is really stupid tbh, so while i think people would consider me "sysmed" i domt personally say i am because i think the term is stupid lol- while i understand the need for the term transmed, as transness as an identity is not a medical diagnosis, DID has no other component than being a medical diagnosis.
i have an irl friend with dx DID whos been in intensive therapy for years, is on disability, and its not my place to share their trauma but had probably the worst childhood i think i couldve imagined.
its enraging to see people use that as an identity or roleplay. especially in tandem with the whole RAMCOA thing, which is entirely created by online DID communities and if you try and look into it further it leads to absolutely NO psychiatric associations or abuse prevention organizations but just more tumblr and tiktok, its like bringing back the satanic panic to win the fake trauma olympics. its just a really disgusting consequence of online self diagnosis culture.
also, i dont rlly take video requests but ill put it on my video idea list :)
2nd comment after 2 hours
My comment is 45 mins old and the video is 3 hours old.
okay lol? im a small channel what is ur point lol /nm
@godlesssnowshoe RUclips only shows the age of a video with only 1 unit of time.
Reply 1 is 2 hours old, 2 is 49 and 3 is 4.
@@furnaceheadgames9001 okay ik im just confused why u commented this LOL
Great video, still gonna be Catholic tho
God permits suffering because people suck & he's perfectly just. It's pretty simple. To say "why can't God use positive means to sanctify people" is malarky because suffering IS a positive means because #1 it works & #2 people suck anyways so it's just to punish. You wouldn't let someone get off scot-free from doing something evil. God's like that & he's smart & patient
what evil thing did a baby with an illness that caused it to only live an hour of pure agony before dying do? how its that just? what evil thing did a rape victim do to deserve that? what evil thing did a person killed and tortured in a genocide do to deserve that?
if your god thinks ANYONE is deserving of those actions he is not just he is sadistic. even just in regards to hell, there is no universe in which infinite punishment for a finite crime is just.
a god who says people deserve genocide, rape, abuse, starvation, etc is a god who is sick and cruel, not just.
@godlesssnowshoe A lot of your arguments boil down to "why doesn't God just use 'positive means' to achieve things instead of using suffering if he's omnipotent?" But you have to understand that when working with humans, all of the "better options" do not work simply because of the way we behave. We are so dead to sin that it literally does take our own suffering to change us because we are hardened to any better means to bring about a greater good. If this were not the case then God would totally use "positive means" to repair our broken relationship with him. God is infinitely powerful but that doesn't mean we are infinitely responsive if that makes sense.
There's only so much I can put in a single comment. Anyways, I like hearing your input. Keeping you in my prayers. I love you & have a good day :3
@@randnew1 I'm sure people would be more responsive if he came down from the sky and said "I am God." and did some impossible shit to prove he is god. But that won't ever happen. Christians will just keep telling people to "find God" where there is no place to actually find him. He's just as likely to exist as any other deity from any other religion. Which is to say, it's unlikely.
I find this idea that many Christians have about how all people are inherently "sinful" for just existing to not only be morally bankrupt, but to be misguided. There are many things in the Bible that are touted as being a "sin" that actually aren't bad or even morally gray at all. As in, these actions do not harmfully affect the lives or wellbeing of anyone. Things like having a divorce, having lustful thoughts, being homosexual, wearing clothing cut from multiple fabrics, dressing "unmodestly" as a woman, are all things that this appearent God thinks are sinful. I'm sure some of the things I've listed change depending on what version of the Bible is being used, but you can find many ridiculous things in any version of the Bible.
And even if someone does do something bad, that doesn't mean that they're just a bad person. Good people can do bad things. If you can justify pain and suffering with "Ah well this person lied to somebody once some years ago so that actually means it's okay for them to get brutually beaten! That's what they get!" Then something is very wrong with your judgement.
One last thing. No, it does not work. I mean, why would it? Punishment can work to change human behavior, but said human has to understand that they're even being punished, and what they're being punished for. If some person decides to attack somebody else for no good reason, there is no lesson to be learnt by the person being attacked. They weren't attacked because they stole candy from the store as a kid, or because they cheated on their partner, they're just being victimized by a stranger. Bad things happen to people no matter if they are good or bad. Therefore, how are people supposed to know that they're being punished for very specific behaviors that are unrelated to said punishment??
i agree with absolutely everything dollette said but i also wanna add on that punishment for sin by being the victim of others evil actions is not biblical at all. theres some instances where god himself directly punishes people for sin or with the attempt to test them (again Job, 2 Kings 2:23-24, genesis 19:26, Exodus 20:5 etc)
and ofc there are laws in the old testament of direct earthly punishment for breaking religious rules, but these are direct in the way a kid gets into a fight, you tell them the fight is the reason theyre being punished, and then they get detention. its a rules that's punishment is known before the action is taken and WHY the punishment is occurring is clear.
but thats not what youre describing. the idea that were all just deserving of rape, abuse, assault, injury, trauma, disability etc etc because of some inherent sinfulness, even if its a child who hasnt even been alive long enough to hurt anyone, a person whos only ever been on the receiving end of pain and never the cause of it, a person whos dedicated their life to charity and aid work, that they're deserving of that for some vague badness by virtue of existing? (mind you i dont think ANYONE is deserving of these things regardless of how virtuous we see them, but for sake of argument)
again your god is a cruel person. and a belief system that instills this idea that everyone is just inherently bad, and that were all deserving of abuse, pain, and suffering, is one that is so horribly damaging it shoukd be abolished. i will never understand how we as a species allowed this type of depravity to become an acceptable way to think. its one of the saddest things i think weve ever allowed to happen.
@@godlesssnowshoe I never said we're punished for others' actions
This whole video is built on the assumption that “a loving God wouldn’t want evil to exist” but that’s not true because “evil existing” doesn’t effect God (or the angels who only do good). In the end, only evil people are effected by evil. How is that not fair? I saw someone say in this comment section “this is an easy religious flaw to refute” but honestly it’s the other way around becuase you can just refute the refutation by saying “we deserve it.” Why would an all loving God allow evil to exist? Because God loves Justice.
"only evil people are affected by evil" do you belive an infant with childhood lukimia to be evil? do you belive children shipped off in carts to auschwitz to be evil? do you belive a woman being beaten and raped by her husband to be evil? do you belive a child sexually assualted by a preist to be evil? do you believe a native child whos family was killed and was taken to be raped by a white man to be evil? do you belive a family sold to a white slave owner from africa during the atlantic slave trade to be evil? do you believe a baby born with a debilitating genetic illness to be evil?
this whole argument is frankly disgusting. innocent people are affected by evil actions and immesurable suffering every day. none of these people did anything to deserve these actions, and frankly i think theres very very few people to have ever lived in human history at all that would ever be worthy of these fates.
this is exactly why religion is harmful. you look at children, abused women, sick people. poor people, and assert they must have done something to deserve their abuse. no one is deserving of abuse. and frankly as someone who seems much more biblically literate than you, i think the jesus you pray to would be appauled at you making such a statement
@@godlesssnowshoe yea, I believe if we’re on this Earth we are evil. We deserve the bad things we experience on this Earth.
you are a prime example of why religion is so detremintal. this is truely a morally bankrup way of thinking, and i hope your religion fades into obscurity, as it should
@@godlesssnowshoe doesn’t matter how much a sinner denies religion, confusion is part of the punishment. In the end God will get the glory when you show up on judgement day and he explains every sin you did and why you deserve Hell.
i am not confused. im clearly a lot more knowledgeable about whats actually in your book. im sorry youre at a point in your life where you believe such abhorrent things but thankfully some people see through the bullshit and neglect this type of barbaric nonsense. there is no judgement day. when i die i will be a decaying pile or carbon in the soil and nothing more or less, and i am perfectly happy to understand that. your world view is truly miserable and pathetic. its a tragedy this type of thinking has ever been presented as normal.
edit: biblically hell is nothing more than eternal separation from god. if by some absurd fluke your god were real, id be more than happy to spend my time in a place away from such a narcissistic villain.