To all the christfags on Veeky Forums, what's your apologetic response to theodicy?

to all the christfags on Veeky Forums, what's your apologetic response to theodicy?

Other urls found in this thread:

kingjamesbibleonline.org/begat/
youtu.be/X9Dh43kVL1Q
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

sorry

Christian response:

All suffering (natural and human-caused) is a consequence of human freedom (that is to say, the fall).

God is Almighty, not omnipotent.

I believe that God created the world and humans to have their own integrity and free will, even if to abuse it. He lets it fold into its own rhythms.

However, God allows evil because He wants to bring about the greater good, and we as believers must have faith in that.

without the ability to sin we would not be able to make the choice to love god, thus nullifying the whole fun of existence desu

Atheist here, they probably don't have an answer to that lol.

"Faith" is basically them saying "look guys we know this religion shit is primordial, but society is going to destroy itself if we get rid of it, so PLEAAAASE believe"

I think you meant "primitive", not "primordial"

But what about tsunamis and schizophrenia?

My defense wd be that there once was a time when some writers felt the urge to justify the manner or the way that life is lived whether [we] presume to 'like' it or not, and that there used to be a market for the exploration of such a topic. There are some latterday books with theodical concerns. Karamazov is one, obviously. O'Connor's The Violent Bear it Away and Barth's The End of the Road are two less obvious 20th c. examples.
Classic examples are of course Leibniz's long essay (better than one might suppose if Candide precedes one's reading) and arguably Pope's greatest poem, The Essay on Man.

That's Peterson's take at least and doubtless many of them are petersonites

'schizophrenia' is actually what hobbled Harold Bloom. He has a schizophrenic son.

>existence is fun
>this is what evangleicals actually believe

grow the fuck up

>"Faith" is basically them saying "look guys we know this religion shit is primordial, but society is going to destroy itself if we get rid of it, so PLEAAAASE believe"

Assuming this is true, what is your problem with this?

source?

>Leibniz's long essay

Does it have a name?

>Theodicy
I don't think God cares about us reading Homer

Took a class on it in undergrad, but an extra-literary source as to what 'theodicy' is might be sociologist Peter Berger's The Sacred Canopy (yes, I've read it). There seem to be either of two roads one may take into the topic- the assertion Whatever is is right, and a defense, or the question IS whatever is is right? and an exploration of the alternatives.

Bingo

Oh, and Paradise Lost is a major text.

Read Brothers K, nerd.

The name is The Theodicy!

No I meant a source for Harold Bloom having a schizophrenic son

Human evil exists due to free will.

Natural disasters occur as judgement when God deems it necessary.

Children die because they are human, too. How ridiculous would it be if children were totally immune to all diseases and illness until a certain age? You better believe there would be mass killing of babies to harvest their infallible immune systems.

Free will, universal sin and vicarious atonement

Oh, my bad. Read it in an interview a few years ago. Shouldn't be too terribly difficult to find, but where I read it now escapes me.

Realized my error and posted to your earlier comment before seeing this.

Suffering is not bad, not is it the fault of God. He is the source, He can inflict suffering, but He is not what brought it into existence.

Suffering for the strong is cathartic in several ways. First, one suffering is more likely to indulge in the severest of sins, one who avoids that convenience is a person worthy. Second, suffering is humbling for the strong, in the proper (not humanist 'the eclipse made me feel so small...' sort of way). Third, (arguably a result of the first), suffering is carrying a burden which the weak cannot handle, which is a virtue. A common example is a good parent eating little to feed their children, but not so little that they cannot care for them. Fourth, suffering (the knowledge of 'evil') is requisite to fully appreciate Grace, which can be easily be ignored by those jaded to it. Fifth, suffering is unifying; God's reunification with humanity was His own suffering through Christ.
There are possibly more but I cannot think of any.

Back to r*ddit please.
No, that is not what faith is, you cunt.
Schizophrenia is a made-up condition by the Antichrist and its followers. 'schizophrenics' are actually troubled by alien (as in, foreign and unfamiliar, not ayylmaos) beings causing difficulties and even harm. Delusions of attacks by said beings are still delusions, because they are impotent, but they are not a result of the psychobabblist's reasons.

yo but what about heroin babies

The parent's fault.

what if the heroin baby makes heroin babies

Babies can't get pregnant

I mean someone who was born a heroin baby, grows up with an inborn disposition to go out and do heroin, and then makes more heroin babies

is it still the fault of the heroin baby for being born a heroin baby

To you,
why do you feign concern over human suffering while simultaneously attempting to cause it?

if christfags are going to proliferate suffering through their sanctification of it might as well enjoy some bantz from it

Yes, and their parent's also

You cannot define good without its having a counterpart by which to compare it. The free will of your divine spirt proffers you the choice of acting in one way or another, it is not a fault of God but a manifestation of omnipotence. The capacity to act in all ways is omnipotent, to only be capable of the better half is a limitation of power. This is the "contradictory" duality of being the composite of all opposites, and since men are created in the image of God (as in capacity for creation, transformation, rebirth, destruction, et al) they, again have the ability to act in all capacities.

Shitposting isn't 'bantz'. You're like an autistic child thinking the kids making fun of him are his friends.

>christianity: heroin babies stop being heroin babies

eppur si muove

"Christfags"

Do you hear yourself? Life is hard enough, why do you feel the urge to make it harder?

How am I trying to cause suffering? By hurting your feefees? You're the people who want to believe in an eternal suffering for a vast vast majority of humanity. At least take it seriously you blithe solipsist.

No, it's:
>heroin babies: stop the cycle
Because they're tools of the Antichrist. They're like heroin babies except steroids, laced with heroin.

We don't want to believe in it, it is the actuality and fate of those who reject Christ and instead choose to actively pursue sin, and worse treat it as a virtue.

the problem with christians is that they believe in this magical property innate in humans called agency, then go onto believe heroin babies have it

go meet some hardcore opiate addicts, then tell me they still have agency

they don't need your lip about responsibility, they need their brain to be rewired

And more importantly the billions and billions who never even had a chance to hear the gospel.

>it is the actuality and fate of those who reject Christ

no one "rejects Christ", we've never met the dude, we reject annoying christfags who are so out of touch with reality that they make the world worse

subtle

They do.
>magical property
Like 'muh reason'? Fuck off.
Purgatory exists despite what proddies claim.
You have, you just deny that. That's why you're damned.
Reality doesn't exist, stop projecting your ideology onto existence.

What are you trying to prove?

>athiests think preaching the Word makes 'the world worse'
hoch jej

How stiff his fedora of reason is and how sharp and masterfully-folded his katana of science is.

>the Bible is good, or even literature

kingjamesbibleonline.org/begat/

Nw man, I'll try and find the interview

I'm trying to reprove, not prove old sport.

Clearly not, you seem unsettled over this entire topic.

It is factually literature and functionally good. Get over yourself before I *teleports behind u*

Congratulations, user. This board has gone to so much shit that even a post like yours can get attention. Shitposting has won.

sort yourself out

youtu.be/X9Dh43kVL1Q

Bach was an atheist

source?

(He has none)

He was black first of all and black people are overwhelmingly the original pagan

That's a very Jewish thing to say.

dead kike on a stick etc

best post on this thread tbqh

I meant it unironically. The whole "God as an omnipotent prime mover" in Catholicism is more a result of Aristotle metaphysics than the rabbinic tradition.

>"Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding." (Job 38:4)

That he has a schizophrenic son is pretty well documented, but the particular interview i read had him answering in terms of 'a God that allows such a thing,' etc. I do not think it's relevant to his religious views now, however. He's been too obsessed with religion throughout his career not to be religious. His latest book, in fact, is as mystical as I ever recollect his having been. It's pretty good, too. A watered down return to the type of stuff he was putting out in the 70's and early 80's.

Divine good is infinitely different from human good and Being is better than non-being, even in suffering, are my two standard responses.

This, plus the fact that everything is an act of love, even suffering and hell.

I drink from the source, not downstream :^)

I was just reading that part earlier today. So fucking good.

I like Augustine's answer: if the good were never rewarded and the bad never punished, then nobody would believe that actions were good or bad. If the good were always rewarded and the bad always punished, then people would only do good things for the reward and avoid bad things out of fear of punishment. Therefore, the world is somewhere in between.

There is, too, a very great difference in the purpose served both by those events which we call adverse and those called prosperous. For thegoodman is neither uplifted with thegoodthings oftime, nor broken by its ills; but thewickedman, because he is corrupted by this world'shappiness, feels himself punished by its unhappiness.Yet often, even in the present distribution of temporal things, doesGodplainly evince His own interference. For if everysinwere now visited with manifest punishment, nothing would seem to be reserved for the finaljudgment; on the other hand, if nosinreceived now a plainly divine punishment, it would be concluded that there is nodivine providenceat all. And so of thegoodthings of this life: ifGoddid not by a very visible liberality confer these on some of thosepersonswho ask for them, we should say that thesegoodthings were not at His disposal; and if He gave them to all who sought them, we should suppose that such were the only rewards of His service; and such a service would make us not godly, but greedy rather, andcovetous. Wherefore, thoughgoodand badmensuffer alike, we must not suppose that there is no difference between thementhemselves, because there is nodifference in what they both suffer. For even in the likeness of the sufferings, there remains an unlikeness in the sufferers; and though exposed to the same anguish,virtueandviceare not the same thing. For as the same firecausesgold to glow brightly, and chaff to smoke; and under the sameflail the straw is beaten small, while the grain is cleansed; and as the lees are not mixed with the oil, though squeezed out of the vat by the same pressure, so the sameviolenceof affliction proves, purges,clarifiesthegood, butdamns, ruins,exterminatesthewicked. And thus it is that in the same affliction thewickeddetestGodandblaspheme, while thegoodprayand praise. So material a difference does it make, not what ills are suffered, but what kind of man suffers them. For, stirred up with the same movement, mud exhales a horrible stench, and ointment emits a fragrant odor.

the second idea is fallacious

>I made all this stuff
>so you have no right to be confused

lol, you can't make up this stuff.

Though I would hope you can

Purgatory was made up to sell indulgences and you know it

Even if purgatory is a thing, according to catholic cannon its only for devoted catholcs to pay off their venial sins. Its not universal salvation.

Everyone who died before Christ's birth went to hell, except for a few really faithful Jews

Wasn't that Sheol? Which isn't the same thing as Hell, is it? Hence the existence of "Abraham's Bosom" for the righteous to seek comfort, like in the story of Lazarus and Dives. Not that I really have much understanding of the issue.

Yeah, that's the ticket. As long as your saved screw everyone else.

>can't even into Harrowing of Hell

Is Abraham going to hell? Is Moses? Is Noah?

Honestly Moses deserves it

Why didn't these prophets of God tell the people about Jesus being the savior and son of God if knowing about Jesus is so important?

It is a problem, Christian. When people say things like "reality doesn't exist", when they say life is suffering, when they say that everyone who isn't embracing their god is a sinner, we have a problem. Every person has to believe in an axiom to survive, you have to believe in it with all your heart. But if we pretend that it's an actually true thing, and that thing (that should be for us a source of joy and love) becomes a reason of hate, there is a problem. When tolerance decays and only hate moves the mind of the Christian, hoping to shit on the corpses of his so called "enemies" just to be nearer to his God, it becomes necessary for the non-theist to remind to the Christian that he is not privileged, he can not hate, because his faith, so precious like everyone else's, is ultimately nothing.

Reality doesn't exist, it's a projecting of 'law' upon existence. Life is suffering, and that is good. Everybody is a sinner, you are a proud sinner. It is not a problem, except with you guilt-ridden pagans.
>muh tolerance
Fuck off with your humanist memes, my love extends to all of creation.
>it becomes necessary for the non-theist to remind to the Christian that he is not privileged, he can not hate, because his faith, so precious like everyone else's, is ultimately nothing.
Stop shitposting. I am right, you are wrong. This world is mine, the sun rises for me.

c*tholics are also wrong.
Purgatory in the sense I use it is what the word actually suggests, it is a place of purging for those who were not purged in corporeal life. Whether than is by suffering, or a long time waiting and thinking, is the person's decision.

Ok, this is obviously bait, but I'll take it because it looks fun
> Fuck off with your humanist memes, my love extends to all of creation.
This is, right here, a contradictio in terminist.
> This world is mine, the sun rises for me.
Feeling kinda poetic, I would reply "Yet I do live, and I do see the sun of the living, and I do not need an afterlife to justify my life wasting"

al·might·y
adjective
having complete power; omnipotent.

>anything i dislike is le bait!!!
Humanism hates creation, and humanity. Creationism adores all of creation and the Oikos.

Do people have free will in Heaven?

This discussion is turning dull. Now, could you explain why tolerance is bad? Don't talk about humanism (we'll see it later), just tolerance.

Tolerance is bad because it is lifeless fence-sitting. I will not tolerate you, I will love you or hate you.

I like their greek yoghurt desu

The Oikos is the home, one's oecology is one's relation to their home and their understanding of their relation to their home. But the Oikos is not merely a 'home.'

okay but Oikos greek yoghurt aint bad either

That's my Rocky!