Can't reply on Reddit - StrayLelouch

Can't reply on Reddit - StrayLelouch Jan 8, 2023 16:25:46 GMT

Quote

Post by factsorfeelings1234 on Jan 8, 2023 16:25:46 GMT

This is a reply to StrayLelouch in a comments section in the Reddit thread they shouldn't eat or touch the apple, here. Direct link here.

The original post was deleted by moderators. I am guessing my reply also exceeded the character limit.

I know what the belief is. I used to be a christian.

I can't speak for others, but I don't reject "god". If "god" was supposed to be known - after having allegedly created us - then we would know this instinctively, like Babies know to suck on Mum for food, and Animals know to do their own survival things respective to each Species. Since the fact is that no-one has any possible, obvious nor quantifiable instinct towards "knowing god", all of this "faith" nonsense is clearly just manipulation tactics that the "leaders" use in order to gain money from fools, via control through fear and preying upon vulnerability and ignorance.

Instructions were written centuries ago; and conmen (known as "priests", etc.) regurgitate it frequently. With me not "rejecting god", I am merely being me. I don't need to be created by something, and then that something saying I have to change from what I am. That is what an abuser would be like - and that is what "relationship with god" is - an abuser abusing its victim; and the victims (creationists) making love to Stockholm Syndrome.

Rejection of God is to surrender oneself to his own sinful nature and to alternative idols - such as wealth, reputation, career, etc.

My first thought goes immediately to "priests", bishops, etc. My second thought goes immediately to "god". These does the 3 examples you gave.

Mankind was not made to be ruled. Mankind exists to improve themselves, to become better, and to improve things external to themselves. If "god" needs things to rule, then it should create dogs to worship it instead.

"Serving" oneself does not mean "being sinful"; and "the only" alternative is not "serving righteousness". All "sin" is is making jesus cry. I don't care about jesus's upsets and emotional problems. It needs to make itself proud so as to feel better, instead of being an abuser.

To follow God is to pursue love, fulfilment, goodness, and right relationship with Him, others, and the world.

"Do as I say, or you will be sent to burn forever." Yeah. That's love. That's fulfilling. That's good. That's a right relationship with "him". Creationists need to wake up and free themselves from the Stockholm Syndrome that they love to enjoy with the abuser known as "god", and instead be proud and increase their self-worth and self-esteem.

It's almost a parental relationship

Then go - take your Child/ren and "sacrifice" them. That's what "parents" do - "abraham" was on the way to doing it; "god, the father" did it. If anyone takes "parenting advice" from christianity, then they need serious help - if they are not beyond help.

except the parent is a maximally great creator God.

If it is maximally-great and can create, then it can create things that work and make sense. Before you say "god's ways are above our ways" - then it should be able to make things in our way, so that we can understand. If it makes us on this level, then gives us information that is above our level, then that's stupid. "god" makes us, and makes us be stupid, then blames us for not understanding, and blames us for having and using free will that it supposedly gave us. Just make things be understandable. Instead of 1+1=2, it's more like

0.9+0.09+0.009 +

3.2 -

0.199 /

2 =

when it can simply be 1+1=2. "god's way" is nonsense; keep things on our level of understanding so that we can understand easily, instead of messing around complicating things unnecessarily.

If you personally consider loving and being obedient to your parents 'slavery,' then I guess there's nothing for it.

Of course there's nothing for the slaves; they're slaves. I neither love, nor am I obedient to, my parents' slavery; my parents are not slaves, and if they were, I would not love them being slaves and I would not be obedient to them being slaves.

The idea of Hell is left relatively undefined and varies between traditions - not all them view it as torture per se, but it is suffering by comparison to the greatness of Heaven.

"Hell" actually comes from Hel, which is from the Ancient Greek, meaning Helios and it relates to being illuminated/enlightened.
Also from the Greek, Helios is a Sun God.
Helios can refer to Sol, the name of our star, the sun.
We also have Helloween, which, of course, was changed into Hallowe'en.
Hel was the Phoenician name of the Sun God.
Hell, indeed, is not a bad place; likewise, 666 is not evil. In fact, it is in our Biology. We are made-up of Carbon, that being Carbon-12 specifically, and in Carbon-12, 666 is very-much present within it - 6 protons, 6 neutrons, 6 electrons. If 666 is Satan's number, does that also mean that Satan is slandered and libeled against?

I'd prefer Hel any day, instead of heaven. "In heaven, all are happy", so we get told. So... we ignore or forget about our "tortured" friends and family in "hell"? How? Why? We cannot forget about them; they are our loved ones - unless we get turned into robots with our memories wiped in heaven. No, thanks. I prefer to be me. "God Hates Gays! Gays Go to Hell!" Well... someone who is Gay going to heaven would actually be torturous for them, no?! (I'm not gay, by the way. I'm using it to indicate the nonsense and illogic of these "arguments".)

Hel is where the cool kids hang out. In real life, though, Hel is the place where Souls reside, awaiting reincarnation. The thievery and perversion by abrahamism of "heaven" and "hell" also is such that "heaven" refers to the Crown Chakra (at the top of the head), and "hell" refers to the Base Chakra (at the bottom of the spine). Some say "we are living in hell already" or "it is hell on Earth" - in a sense, that is true; we have been 'damned' into living lowly and in accordance with the Base Chakra - keeping us down, not being able to rise, advance and improve - and creationists agree with this - e.g. saying that Man should be ruled and saying that we should be slaves to "god", etc.

Additionally, the idea that mankind's punishment is eternal is also debated.

Instead of debate, confusion, conjecture, messing around, etc., "god" should come down and say precisely what's what clearly, so that it can be understood easily. The fact that this doesn't happen says a lot - one example of what it says is being creationists - and I refer to christians specifically from both me having used to being one and from my experience with christians - having to try to convince and persuade non-christians. As like conmen, it is a confidence and trickery and exaggeration system, to gain money and hoard it away from those who actually need it, to keep us low and damned.

Scripture seems to prescribe eternity to evil demons and spirits, but not necessarily man.

Daemons are not evil. The word "Daemon" also comes from the Ancient Greek - "Daimon" and it means "Guardian, Teacher, Guide, an Intermediary Being, Wise One". As always, this, too, was stolen and perverted, in this case into "guardian angels". Spirits may or may not be evil; a Spirit is a Soul, and a person may be good or evil; one cannot be alive - they cannot exist - without their Soul; so yes, "hell", being the place of "weeping and gnashing of teeth" is very much necessarily for Man, if Man does not be a loser slave to the abuser known as "god", as according to abrahamic scripture.

So the idea of Hell as "torture forever" is pretty narrow in light of existing discussions.

Besides "faith", discussions are as much "proof" as creationists can try to gather. There is no demonstration (see - demon-stration.) Blatantly obviously, there is no actual proof. Faith is not proof. Proof is proof, and "do not test the lord your god" - whereas in Nature, we test things so that we understand them - we don't "have faith"; we test and observe and understand and demonstrate. All creationists can, and do, do is try to convince and persuade (sometimes as discussions, other times as shouting and not letting the others speak back), and have "faith", not to mention getting upset when the creationist thinks they are being attacked because they cannot rebut what has been argued against them. This makes sense - different biblical scriptures say to "start Children off on the way they should go, and when they are older they will not turn from it" and to have "Childlike faith" - we are not supposed to be mature Adults; we're supposed to be immature Children with faerie tale fantasy story imaginary character abusive "friends" who we have to accept and fear at our own expense.

So again I ask - who would be on that side? Anyone with an ounce of self-respect certainly would not, nor would they brainwash their Children into it either if they supposedly love and respect them.