In Christianity, God made creation out of love, especially for the angels and for humanity...

Hell, in Orthodox Christianity, is the same as heaven, experiencing God's love very acutely. His love is often described as a light (as with halos) or a fire (Hebrews 12:29). If your relationship with God is bad, you hate his love (or are so ashamed before him you cannot lift face and the love makes you more ashamed), but that's all hell is.

There is so much cognitive dissonance in this post

>"God loves you so much that he makes you feel unbearably ashamed of yourself"

Here in the human world, we all that an abusive relationship. Usually happens because someone gets too possessive.

God doesn't force you to feel ashamed.

>In Christianity, God made creation out of love, especially for the angels and for humanity, whom he he made in his image.

Ephesians 1:11-12

11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of
him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.

Is this a troll thread or are you just this eager to confirm your bias against brown people?

>Ephesians 1:11-12
And can you tell me what the purpose of Christ's incarnation was? I'll give you a hint, it's the most quoted verse in the Bible.
>Is this a troll thread or are you just this eager to confirm your bias against brown people?
There are plenty of Arabic Orthodox

>first for the original flood myth

>And can you tell me what the purpose of Christ's incarnation was?
To glorify God via soul redemption, that was that poster's point

>To glorify God via soul redemption, that was that poster's point
The motivation for the incarnation is illustrated in John 3:16

Through which we ultimately end up at Ephesians 1:11-12. Now we've come full circle.

Hence, God loves first.

>People who never had the opportunity to learn about Jesus Christ are judged on their deeds and still go to Heaven if they were good people.
The most moral thing we could possibly do then is to eliminate every reference to Christianity possible. That way, people will be judged on their morality rather than their credulity, and the proportion of good people in hell will plummet.

>to commit an "act of love" requires a positive outcome
It's about the intention at the time of commiting the action

Not if you're omniscient. Intent doesn't matter when you are 100% certain of the consequences.

>People who never had the opportunity to learn about Jesus Christ are judged on their deeds and still go to Heaven if they were good people.

Then telling people is basically screwing up a person's easiest way to heaven. It's like "now you know Christ and now you must join us or face condemnation".

Rokos basilisk to use a sillier example.

That sounds oddly pantheistic. Am I wrong in this judgement?

No, but you're close. It's panentheistic to be precise.

Go on eightchan and ask /islam/.
Here is just checkmate! Shitposting to be found.

Not limited to Islam. All Abrahamic faiths put worship first above all else. 51:57 - 60 puts it quite succinctly. God deserves to be worshipped. The human complex of understanding why He deserves worship can be many things (service, love, sustenance, hope) but He quite clearly commands it so it must be done.

>"God created us out of love"
>yet He won't intervene to stop human suffering, famines, earthquakes, drought, disease, cancer, disabilities, natural disasters, and all the misery these things cause

The Christian God sounds like a hypocrite and a tool

At least the Jewish and Muslim God is honest about the whole "tyrant-in-the-sky" thing

Nah they say its satan that controls the material, explaining bodyhorror such as glassbones however is where it gets a bit more difficult I guess.

This life is only temporary, user.

It's a question of why God created the world. Islam appears to state that his sole motivation is wanting worshipers.

He sent his Son to die so these things could end. He could stop them instantaneously, but not without destroying our subjectivity.

Ephesians 6:12

Not really. In Islam it's much more based on forgiveness.

Most of His mentions in the Qur'an are followed by 'most merciful', 'all knowing' and 'caring'.

He's forgiving. Within reason
>Allah forgives what is past: for repetition Allah will exact from him the penalty. For Allah is Exalted, and Lord of Retribution.
Quran 5:95

Worship, yes. His sole motivation? Beyond our comprehension. See 2:30.

51:56 says worship is the only reason.

*Only that they might* is the closest you will find in major tafsirs. Not only as in the sole purpose.

How old are these tafsirs?

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, no hoor for you.

>sinning is "fooling" God

The earliest ones are from Muhammad's lifetime up until the Golden Age and Byzantine era. The contemporary ones are considered to be after, but outside of theological issues like the Imamate for example, they do not contradict each other.

*Theological as in Sunni or Shi'a tafsir, not different schools of thought.

Meant for

>creates humans out of love
>tries to kill them out of hate

kek

It's not unjustified hate though.

And I mean in general.

I'm talking about the ones that back up your exegesis.

Ezekiel 33:11

>no guys you see, the holocaust had a noble cause!

hate is hate

All of them back my exegesis. Google tafsir, search the verse and compare it to the different exegetes. The only difference you will notice is some omit only, some add might, others have maybe, or they have all of the above.

>ya know I don't liiiiiike killing you guys but.....you had it coming

He just had good intentions to kill didn't he?

>All of them
You've read them all?!!

I'm just asking to quote the earliest one that readily backs up your statement and to give me a dating

He's talking about all death here, which is a product of the fall; this includes death from old age. See the next verse.

In fact, read all the way to 33:15

This is about a reverse from the fall, the "surely die" is directly about the fruit of knowledge. Christ is the fruit of life.

Start with the Quran. In 51:56 there is no Arabic word for only. In al-Miqbas' tafsir, the oldest one known to most scholars, he transliterates the verse; meaning he does not further explain it. In ibn Kathir's tafsir, one of the most popular exegetes in the Muslim world, he writes that "except to worship me" means to worship God, willing or unwillingly. To add to this verse, 51:57 to 60 are explained. God states to worship Him not because He requires it but because humans require Him. There is no mention of God's sole purpose of creation is worship. If you don't want these two tafsir, look at any other major Sunni tafsir. The words "maybe" or "might" have been added when the corresponding verses are explained as God stating we need to worship Him because He is the creator. Other tafsirs, will omit only and add "maybe" because of the understanding of a human's willingness to worship God (i.e. "so that they [might] worship me" - implying its consensual).

None of the tafsir contradict the meaning of this verse or its corresponding verses.

>There is no mention of God's sole purpose of creation is worship
But you just said "except". NO purpose *except*

"No purpose except" is not a translation of this verse. It's "I did not create them [except]...". Creation ≠ sole purpose.

Right, it's not a translation, it's an exegesis.

Which no exegete posits nor explicitly states. This is why people rely on tafsir and not go about interpreting the semantics of the Quran itself without an understanding of context. Although it's a very reasonable claim. Most Muslims believe it because it's simple and deserving. But to assume God's word exclusively would be difficult, if not heretical.

>Which no exegete posits nor explicitly states.
You just quoted one
>he writes that "except to worship me"

Don't they go to Limbo which is like poor man's heaven?

The "anonymous Christian" theology was approved by Vatican II.

Except learning about Jesus makes you more likely to become a better person, dumbasses.

>but not without destroying our subjectivity.
please elaborate

so its legit then?

>He sent his Son to die
but he is his son, and he resurrected himself and went to heaven

doesn't sound like he did anything or sacrificed anything to me.

That's the consequence of God giving us free will, bad things can happen

He's apparently forcing me into a position that he knows will cause me to react with painful shame.

How is an earthquake part of free will?

Voltaire pls.

That's the consequence of God giving us independence. Earthquakes aren't bad in themselves.

Every single angel order praise God - because they are thankful for boundless existence in joy - and they directly witness the works of God, then God always gives more and more gifts.

Seraphims delve in the radiance of God's love.

Since you are a girl, and you said from time to time that you want to become a monk - it's safe to assume that you're not a nun, and not in any way member of Clergy.

With whom blessing are you posting here, and dare to talk about orthodoxy?

Canon 64
A layman must not publicly make a speech or teach, thus investing himself with the dignity of a teacher, but, instead, must submit to the ordinance handed down by the Lord, and to open his ear wide to them who have received the grace of teaching ability, and to be taught by them the divine facts thoroughly.

Stop already - if you are interested feel free to read as many books with approval of Church as possible - but if you want to preach do it with a priest approval and at least a member of Clergy checking your messages before you send them.

Seraphim; the im makes it plural. One of them is a seraph.

There are four creatures that are placed before the throne of God, having four faces each; eagle, ox, man, and lion. They also have six wings and eyes all about.

It is these creatures that cry out "Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, Who was and is and is to come!”

It is these four creatures, aka seraphim, who announce the release of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse.

When satan was an angel, he was in charge of these creatures, and indeed in charge of the assembly of the angels, and of the worship of the living God.

Adam's free will caused him to sin, and the earth to be broken.

The cursing and breaking of the earth leads to earthquakes.

Your theology is not Christian.

Jesus would not tell us to spread the gospel if ignorance of the Law, and of the gospel, and of His sacrifice, provided salvation.

We all deserve to go to hell. Stop making up your own doctrine to relieve God of what you think is God's shortcomings.

Your demonology is impressive.

It doesn't provide salvation you dumb fuck, you still have to be good.

There are none good, no, not one.

Only God is good.

You are demanding that God put you on trial to see if you are "Good", when "Good" means "as perfect as the Father in heaven".

You will fail that test, utterly, merely by your post. And then you will be cast into a lake of fire.

Your "good deeds" are as filthy rags to a holy God.

>which Jesus never actually said.

Can't tell if ignorant of if lying from the pit of hell.

Matthew 25
Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Yes, you have abused God.

It's time you stopped.

Nice crazy heretic rant, Martin. Hope you're enjoying the pits of hell.

Yes and? Where does it say anything about afterlife?

Eternal life is something else.

Despite being a tripfag and a Christian at least I respected that you had extensive knowledge of the topics you talked about and did so in an adult manner..but this...

The four creatures in the revelations have nothing to do with seraphim.

There are nine orders of the angels that are divided into three hierarchies, each of which is divided into three orders: the highest, the intermediate, the lower.

The first hierarchy, the highest and closest to the Most Holy Trinity, consists of the SERAPHIM, CHERUBIM, and THRONES.

The God-loving six-winged SERAPHIM stand closer than all before their Creator, as the prophet Isaiah saw, saying: "And the seraphim stood around Him, each having six wings" (Isaiah 6:2).

I'll never be there. I hope you change your mind about going there too.

Psalm 14:1
The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, They have done abominable works, There is none who does good.

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Isaiah 64:6
But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags; We all fade as a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, Have taken us away.

Matthew 19:17
So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

The true lord is absolutely Impassable you Jesus worshipping polytheist Kaffir! God doesn't love. Go wash a black man's feet.

That is the afterlife, numb nuts. Eternal life or eternal torment.

Daniel 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting life, Some to shame and everlasting contempt.

John 5
For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will.

The four creatures also have six wings, and are also seraphim.

Stick to the bible.

Put down Enoch.

?? what did you mean by that.

Read 4:6 - they have multiple eyes so at least you would think they were CHERUBIM.

They are unique creations of God - they have both the features of SERAPHIM and CHERUBIM and they also have a unique position and mission in heaven.

>I had sex to have children so that I could love them
>My children experience hardship in their lives (we are certain)
>thus I did not have them for the sake of loving them

You're entire argument totally falls apart m8.

>denominations

Men are fallible God is not, men make mistakes, God does not.
as long as we are right before God then we are right before God
But you might claim that these conflicting assertions undermine our certainty in a correct way.
Well, as long we are right by God, leave the delusional to themselves, they should not impede upon rational scholarly thought.

>net negative
I don't think you can determine this just yet.

It was deemed that all men were to live in peace but had freedom.

It would not be love if God did not give them freedom

"they made their war with God, and they got their reward"

>God loves you so much that he makes you feel unbearably ashamed of yourself
Even biology know that habitual safety and well being are not advantageous for a creature.

Hardship and struggle makes for much stronger and more interesting characters.
There is no cognitive dissonance, you're just assuming that objectively everyone thinks as you do and holds the same values in the same way.
According to you.
But if such is the case, were you not better for it when your parents pushed you to be social, or to get a vaccine?

This is about people teaching their own ideas as if they were wise men in public speeches, this isn't saying, "Don't talk about Christ except in the presence or with the approval of the clergy," that's ridiculous. If someone asks, "Is Christ Our Lord?" Are you going to tell me I have to call up my priest before answering, "Yes"? My priest said we should witness.

The words cherubim and seraphim are used interchangeably.

Hahah no it's not for you to interpret the dogma in a favorable way - it applies to all you do.

Please stop - the punishment is excommunication of the Church finds out what you do.

If you think you are very smart and holy - write a book get it approved and tell people to read it.

Are you an old calendarist? Oriental orthodox? You always seem to believe you are always right and you have all the knowledge in theology.

So you're back to being a girl.

You are one fucked up individual.

They are used in context of scripture revelation for two different creations.

Not becoming heretic - is not the same with preaching dogmas and theology in public.

If someone points out a knife at my neck and forces to to insult Christ and I refuse, confessing that Christ is God and rose from the dead - at worst I just recite the content of Nicaea creed - I do not preach.

If you wanted to preach you should do it in the church context, not preach what Church teaches you to heretics and pagans.

This is what Christi is telling you - stop ignoring God.

Matthew 7:6
Do not give what is holy to the dogs and do not throw your pearls before pigs, for fear that they might trample them under their feet, and then turn [against you] and tear you to pieces.

>interpret dogma in a favorable way
Interpretation of dogma is part of dogma

I see here you are, arguing canons with me. Do you have a priest approving your posts?

I never said I was a woman, in fact I've my best to prevent that impression in order to ensure my posting content was examined rather than obsessing over me as a person.

If someone asks you, "What is the difference between Orthodox and Latin Christianity," would you have an answer, or would you say, "I don't know," or, "I can't answer that without my priest present"?

Compared to you I did not teach anymore anything about orthodoxy here.

Canons must be followed - that's a fact not an argument or interpretation.

You tell him to go ask a priest or read catechism.

But you are so full of pride, even tho there's catechism written in English - you had to write your own and put it on pastebin..

You must always stay inside Church and have clergy approval - regardless of how you interpret it, people that thought they could preach alone eventually created sects.

It's your soul - feel free to do w/e you want, but If I was your priest - and found out what you done - I would excommunicate you for 40 days, so that you learn your lesson - if you kept repeating and the lesser evil would be to kick you out of Church then that would obviously happen.