If God is omnibenevolent, why can't someone repent after dying? Why is it so important that it happens before you die?

You die and you get judged at judgement day there is no time to repent.

They might be able to, we don't know. If they can, it sure as hell won't be as easy of a contrition to endure though.

So why doesn't God just not reveal himself fully after death to those in a state of sin? Does he lack the ability or will?

Sheol got rekt by Christ, in order to save those stuck in that state.

>"I love you son"
I love you too papa!
>"I'll forgive anything you do wrong if you really mean you're sorry"
Yay!
>"No running in the house"
lol why? no
*BOOM*
[crashing noise]
Oww, help me daddy! I'm sorry! I'm gonna bleed to death!
>Fuck you, you had your chance. Now die you little shitfuck.

>why can't someone repent after dying?
hypothetically you can, only Catholics though

If God is omnipotent why didn't he just create a world without sin while retaining free will?

Omnipotence means you can do ANYTHING

Not logical contradictions. That's like saying make a perfectly round square.

So logic outranks God?

Logic contradictions are about semantics, not reality. It's like saying, "let us define boko as something black. Now make a boko that is not black--haha, you failed, it's not black, therefore not a boko."

God is the one who created logic

If he wants 2 + 2 = 5 then it is

So do semantics outrank God?

That's like saying 4 = 5. It's just semantics

No, because they're just models, not reality. It's like saying, "Let us define "God" as weak. God is not weak, therefore, not God. We've killed God." No, you've just played language games.

This is like asking "Why can't Superman fly faster. The rules of fiction don't make sense.

>Semantics
Did you forget the omnipotent part?

Do you comprehend the implications?

"sin" as defined by God is not the inherent result of freewill

Hush your mouth or I'll post fat people in hats

Freewill means being able to choose sin.

So God has the potential to sin?

God doesn't have a gnomic will.

If God lacks something, he is not complete, and therefore imperfect.

That doesn't make sense

Also sidenote: explain Mary

God is completely God. God also isn't a Ming vase, but that doesn't make him incomplete, since a Ming vase has nothing to do with being completely God.

Why doesn't it make sense?

What about the Theotokos would you like me to explain?

That's not a logical contradiction at all. God inventedthe concept of sin, all he had to do was not invent it.

"Sin" just means (in Hebrew, Greek and Latin) to "miss the mark". In this case, the mark is Theosis.

Sure it is. Reasoning is a thing. Even the people who most fervently say this shit basically know they're fooling themselves. I hope. But suicide bombing makes this harder.

You have to be truly retarded.

Trying to logic a Christ fag. I figured out during high school that this wouldn't work. That was also the last time it was socially acceptable.

Suicide bombing is also a thing with secular ideologies,like with the Viet Cong, I'm not sure of your point is on that.

Reasoning is of absolutely zero value in discerning what ultimately orders reality. We can't even accurately calculate the probability for numerous economic and social concerns, something like this is completely beyond probabilistic calculation.

And Catholic dogs.

no

Unironically not an argument

>Saying God does is not more ludicrous than any other idea.
A humble "I don't know (yet)" is better than jumping to conclusions and assuming the existence of a supernatural being.

If by this you mean pure agnosticism, yes that's more rational. If you mean "implicit atheism," that's not really more rational, since we have no clue to the probabilities. Saying, "There is no evidence of God, so I will assume there isn't one for all intents and purposes," is not any more rational than, "there is no evidence for God, but I will assume there is one for all intents and purposes." The reason why is, as I've said, the absolute and total opaque situation of the probabilities.

>Sure it is. Reasoning is a thing. Even the people who most fervently say this shit basically know they're fooling themselves.

How so?

Thinking that reasoning is anything other than a balancing of ideals and concepts, ideals and concepts that exist outside of the man, is just flat out delusion because you're basically saying that man creates what we know as good, fair, and virtuous. When the fact these are ideals created before man and for man to choose.

Because if God was truly benevolent he'd take pity on sinners after seeing them repent due to the tortures of hell. He's supposed to be forgiving after all. Problem is that this creates a loophole where people would be able to do whatever they wanted in life, thinking "oh well God will forgive me", which kind of runs counter to the point of religion. So the folks who wrote the bible wrote it like that, supposedly to stop people from sinning. But we all know how well that went.

Why even assume there is a God when there's no evidence that suggests it? Going by that train of thought I could assume the existence any kind of magical being with the ability to conceal themselves from humans. I could say, for example, that Greek gods exist, or I could create my own pantheon.

If God is Love then there is no Hell. The reason churches teach the doctrine of hell is so they can fleece the goyim for their shekels, the very concept is self-contradictory.

We're talking about ideas of what determines the pattern known as "reality". The Greeks didn't actually believe the gods did that, they believed fate did.

Sin is going against god. All must obey god and any omnibenevolence is just false human tradition attributed to him. You obey or you will suffer. Toys shouldn't misbehave.

Then a Ming vase can also completely be a Ming vase. In fact, half a Ming vase is the complete half Ming vase. Half Ming vases are therefore perfect.

Not a perfect Ming vase. Maybe a perfect half-Ming vase, if you flawlessly cut into two perfect halves.

Living in ignorance, isn't really what faith is about though.

2 Corinthians 4:18
So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

That's the difference between science and the word of God though. Science is limited and imprisoned by the black void they can't see beyond. That's their limit. That's their boundary.

That same black void is the very thing that terrifies man in general though. It implies "nothing", it implies that there is a general lack due to that "nothing". The fear of lacking is why people generally do all the horrendous things they do. It's out of a fear that they won't find the pleasure anywhere else, so they opt for the extreme responses...all out of fear. It's no coincidence that the void science runs into is the very physical/theoretical representation of the great veil of darkness that has us void of knowing anything further. Science is the art looking backwards, not forwards. It's looking in reverse by diving further into matter that already exists. When everything that exists in the physical dimension is going to be suffer decay and destruction of some sort anyway.

But the only reason why people can be so arrogant nowadays on the topic of a creator is only because of the society they live in. No one knows what it truly feels like to be hungry, to have your neck under the foot of a tyrant for an extended amount of years. I mean by technical standards, as a people, we're not even truly free by definition.

It doesn't need to be two perfect halves. It just as easily could be a perfect 51.3% of a Ming vase along with a perfect 48.7% of a Ming vase.

It's really easy when you can arbitrarily change your definition of what "perfect" means.

This is why the word of the God is far more realistic than science perse. The word of God does not hesitate to demonstrate the reality of the situation we're in. That by having evil and good to choose from, evil will be chosen. And it's efficient in how it works on man. Man can feel satisfaction from oppressing others, makes that man feel good and it fertilizes his ego through pride. The word of God doesn't hesitate to point out that there will be men who will cut you in half....they simply won't care how intelligent or important you think you are.

I don't think Christian theology ever intended "perfect", as a term applied to God, to mean pantheism.

Because it's a mental trick to affect your behavior while you're alive and there isn't any actual afterlife.

"There is no god summer, gotta rip that band-aid off now you'll thank me later.

If a person dies, they go to heaven or hell. The concept of time does not exist in either place.

It's called reincarnation. If you fail in this life, you will try again in the next life.

Hell is a spook invented to sell indulgences.

So when Jesus died, where do you think he went for three days? The break room?

There is a suggestion in the gospel that he preached God's word in hell. It is a minority view however

Why do humans even have a desire to sin? Most people don't have a desire to eat their own shit but they do have a desire to fuck a hot girl out of marriage so why the fuck did God give us that desire to begin with? Because of Eden? Why did he give Adam the desire to be an ambitious asshole who listens to snakes instead of just being a chill, happy guy who is content fucking his 10/10 rib-wife? Sin is dependent on God giving us desires that are bad, not on freewill, since I have freewill to eat or not shit but I don't eat shit because I don't want to.

Actually it is more rational.

Because it's presumably easy to repent when you're burning in a lake of hellfire

Maybe there's a sentence, like a century of hell fire and 10 yrs of being assraped by Satan, then you can chill in the slums of Heaven or something