Is there any religion for me? >believe in only one God. >don't believe Jesus is God

Is there any religion for me?
>believe in only one God
>don't believe Jesus is God
>don't believe the Bible, the Qu'ran or the Talmud is the Word of God
Maybe Deism or Pantheism? Idk much about them.

CRIME Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

  1. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Deist, I reckon.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, probably. I'd like to read more about it one day.

      Baha'i
      Sikhism
      Certain schools of Hinduism
      Universal Sufism
      Zoroastrianism

      >Baha'i
      >Sikhism
      >Zoroastrianism
      Interesting, do those have mythical creatures in their lore? Cause I also generally don't believe in this kind of thing unless we have any evidence.
      >Certain schools of Hinduism
      Monotheistic Hinduism? Never heard of that. Anyway isn't Hinduism one of the religions for which there's no conversion possibility, for being ethnic?
      >Universal Sufism
      Isn't it just an offshoot of Islam anyway?

      >>don't believe the Bible
      If you give https://tektonticker.blogspot.com/2022/05/today-i-have-special-guest-piece-by.html and honest read I think your mind will be changed by that
      Virtually the only monotheists like yourself were, for centuries and centuries, those who worshipped YHWH. And the Temple of YHWH is the place on all of the planet where we have seen the clearest, best-recorded, most obviously direct actions of the divine.

      I'll save it for later. My problem with the Bible is that there's too much imorality, cruelty etc involved. I can't believe it's the Word of God.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >My problem with the Bible is that there's too much imorality, cruelty etc involved. I can't believe it's the Word of God.
        The Bible (and the Quran too) will only make sense if you accept that these scriptures were corrupted. So, basically the opposite of the Orthodox position that the text is the verbatim word of God. If you look into the Bible you will find the word of God within it, like the messianic prophecies, but there is a lot of human corruption as well that radical Christians and Muslims try to explain away as "God's justice". I will be posting examples of these: in the next post.

        Unitarian Universalism

        I like Unitarian Universalism since I believe you accept only the good parts of the Bible, and none of the bad. Also you take the common sense approach, and believe in one God.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          The genocidal "God" of the Bible orders for the killing of women and children, including infants:

          1 Samuel 15:3
          "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."

          The "God" of the Bible orders for women's hands to be chopped off:

          Deuteronomy 25:12
          "If two men are fighting, and the wife of one steps in to rescue her husband from the one striking him, and she reaches out her hand and grabs his genitals, you are to cut off her hand. You must show her no pity."

          The "God" of the BIble orders for people to be stoned to death for breaking one of his rules:

          Like the "crime" of picking up sticks on the sabbath:

          Numbers 15:32-36
          "Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him.

          Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” So, as the Lord commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died."

          1/2

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            God gives life, and He has the right to take it away.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Who said God's taking these lives away? I didn't post any verses about God flooding the earth or sending the angel of death to take the souls of the Egyptian newborns. Or even Sodom and Gomorrah which God destroyed himself. I could maybe understand all of that, it's justified if God alone does it and he sense innocent souls up to heaven while condemning only the wicked souls. Since God is not a man.

            However, these are verses commanding men to kill babies in the name of "God", it's nowhere near the same. You are an all powerful deity commanding men to commit the sin of murdering innocent infants. Would you be able to slaughter babies? If you try to justify this you are evil, and only orthodox dummies try to justify any of this. The modern world has moved on from accepting the Bible as word for word what God commanded. Like I said earlier, you can find God's words, and men's interpolatons. The cruelty usually comes from corruption of scripture.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            *he sends innocent souls up to heaven while condemning only the wicked souls

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            They didn't take it upon themselves to kill them, but it was specifically commanded by God. That makes all the difference. It's normal to feel bad about it but you don't have an argument.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It's normal to feel bad about it
            Why would you feel bad about it if it's "just" according to your twisted scriptures? You just outed yourself. You and I both know grown men brutally slaying babies is evil as all hell.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I feel bad because I am a human and I have an uncontrollable reaction to these sorts of things. After all, 99.9% of all cases of violence were not directly ordained by God.

            >but it was specifically commanded by God
            Also, how do you know? Because your book says so. What makes you think God would care or not about protecting his scriptures? Why wouldn't God use his own scriptures as a test to see who recognizes good (his words) and evil (corruption) within his own holy books. That makes a lot more sense than "text written down thousands of years after these events says it happened this way so it happened this way".

            I don't know, but I'm just pointing out that your objections to God's decisions aren't an argument against the existence of God. It just means that you disagree with God.

            The death of critical thinking, right here.

            Enlighten me then.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >that your objections to God's decisions aren't an argument against the existence of God. It just means that you disagree with God.
            No, I'm saying this depiction of God ordering for armies of men to kill women, children, and infants is not accurate. If this God existed he would be an evil deity. I am saying that a good God can only exist if he did not order this, and therefore the scriptures were corrupted. I disagree with a characterization of God that bloodthirsty tribal israelites wrote into their scriptures.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            So the Biblical image of God contradicts your image of God. And where are you getting your image from? Is there another scripture?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >muh Bible is all from the same author
            The Bible is obviously from several authors. So when you speak of the Biblical God, which passages are you referring to? Some passages describe an evil deity, other passages describe a wise and benevolent deity. My image of God comes exclusively from Bible verses which I view as being from divine origin. The other more worldly verses I view as interpolations by men.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Interesting view. But how do you know there are several authors? Documentary Hypothesis? Problem is that we don't know how God writes books. We see things that normally a single human author wouldn't do and rightly conclude that if there are human authors it must be several of them, not just one. But the theory has nothing to say about whether or not it was written by God -- only about the number of human authors. And if it is written by God, I would posit that He would not allow His book to become corrupted, at least not to the extent that it would give us the wrong idea about Him, because it is important that we have the right idea so we can carry out God's will.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >But how do you know there are several authors?
            It's a historical fact that that the Torah was written down thousands of years later. There was plenty of time for corruption to take root since it was circulating after Mount Sinai.

            >And if it is written by God, I would posit that He would not allow His book to become corrupted, at least not to the extent that it would give us the wrong idea about Him, because it is important that we have the right idea so we can carry out God's will.

            This is where Orthodox israelites, Christians, and Muslims are brainwashed. Of course God would protect what he chooses to protect, and let the rest be corrupted. That is the entire point of testing you to see if (You) understand the moral law that was written in your heart or not. I already explained that here:

            >but it was specifically commanded by God
            Also, how do you know? Because your book says so. What makes you think God would care or not about protecting his scriptures? Why wouldn't God use his own scriptures as a test to see who recognizes good (his words) and evil (corruption) within his own holy books. That makes a lot more sense than "text written down thousands of years after these events says it happened this way so it happened this way".

            Religious npcs don't even understand that they are being tested even more than atheists who reject all of the scriptures entirely.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It's a historical fact that that the Torah was written down thousands of years later
            That is a scholarly inference based on the assumption that prophecies could only have been made after the fact, and on the lack of early manuscripts (to which I say, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"). The religious claim is that the Torah was given in one piece at Mount Sinai c.1300 BC and transmitted faithfully by the Israelites for thousands of years. You say the book was corrupted, but then there would likely be multiple Torahs circulating around including the original uncorrupted one. Instead all we find is a few minor deviations in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Samaritan Torah. Moreover, there would be multiple oral traditions floating around, including the correct original one that has a very peaceful and loving God that creates life and never ends it. But no such tradition exists and there is no indication that it ever existed. If God is going to test us there has to be a way we can find the truth. If the text is corrupted, fine, but there should at least be an oral tradition that tells us the truth. Do you really think everyone was fundamentally wrong for thousands of years and it took until the 21st century for a guy on the internet to finally realize the truth?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >and transmitted faithfully by the Israelites for thousands of years
            That's where you messed up. There is no possible way anything was "transmitted faithfully" for thousands of years. If israelites wanted to add in their own words in order to make God more vengeful and bloodthirsty, they easily could have. Forget the Bible, just look at the example of the Quran. The Quran was written down only twenty years after their prophet's death, and within only two decades there were several different versions of the oral Quran. Eventually one king decided what version of the oral Quran would be included in the written Quran, and that is the Quran available today. The other versions were abandoned.

            Now imagine the Torah that had been circulating for thousands of years. Obviously there were different versions, and the most bloodthirsty version became the version that ended up being practiced and written down.

            >Do you really think everyone was fundamentally wrong for thousands of years and it took until the 21st century for a guy on the internet to finally realize the truth?

            Yes, and secular scholarship agrees with me. Only religious NPCs still believe in such a thing as "muh book is the verbatim word of God".

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If israelites wanted to add in their own words in order to make God more vengeful and bloodthirsty, they easily could have
            If there isn't a God watching over us, sure. But if there is a God, He would find a way to preserve his true teachings, if not in the text then at least in an oral tradition. We have inherited no such oral tradition, which stands to reason that it never existed.
            >secular scholarship agrees with me
            Secular scholarship first assumes there is no God, so no they don't agree with you. And you talking about how the Quran was corrupted says nothing about the Torah or the Bible.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If there isn't a God watching over us, sure. But if there is a God, He would find a way to preserve his true teachings
            No he, wouldn't.

            >And you talking about how the Quran was corrupted says nothing about the Torah or the Bible.
            Yes, it does you fricking idiot.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >No he, wouldn't.
            What makes you so sure of that? I don't even have to make a counterargument because you just made a claim with no supporting argument. I'll humour you anyway: It doesn't make sense to give a book if its true teachings are going to be lost for thousands of years. You say it's a test, but a test has to be achievable in order for it to be fair and just. Because God is omnipotent, He must be fair and just -- the lack of fairness is a weakness.
            >Yes, it does you fricking idiot.
            It only does if the Quran was written by God, but I don't believe that and neither should you. Just because a text can become corrupted doesn't mean all texts have been corrupted.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I already answered this here, learn to read.

            [...]
            I already made my point repeatedly. I already stated that some of the Bible is preserved by God, other parts were corrupted. The Bible is not 100% the word of God, and it's up to (You) to distinguish what is truth and what is deception in the Bible.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Your answer is just to restate your position? Where is the argument?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's up to you to distinguish truth (good) from falsehood (evil) in the Bible, Quran, and any other religious text. If you take it all as the verbatim word of God you are an NPC brain, and you did not pass God's test. Yes, the words of men can be added to the words of God.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            The bible was most definitely influenced by:
            >Vespasian/Josephus
            >Julia Domna
            >Constantine

            I don't think we can trust it much at all,desu. It's been a political tool for way too long, and we don't have any originals. Only a 'vibe' has survived; more the "Message" than the "Word".

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Then hope for the return of Jesus, or the king messiah, or whoever is sent by God next to be "the living word". I think living your entire life by a book is NPC behavior in general. God is alive, and exists within our souls.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Then hope for the return of Jesus, or the king messiah, or whoever is sent by God next to be "the living word".
            That makes Christianity completely meaningless then.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Anon, I can do the same thing.

            It's not up to you to distinguish truth from falsehood in the Bible. It is the literal word of God, and if you believe otherwise you aren't thinking straight. God preserves the integrity of His word for eternity.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Can translators speak in God's name? Can the Gospels? Can all the scribes of the early church days?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It is the literal word of God
            No, it's not. God is not an evil deity who commands for genocide:

            The genocidal "God" of the Bible orders for the killing of women and children, including infants:

            1 Samuel 15:3
            "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."

            The "God" of the Bible orders for women's hands to be chopped off:

            Deuteronomy 25:12
            "If two men are fighting, and the wife of one steps in to rescue her husband from the one striking him, and she reaches out her hand and grabs his genitals, you are to cut off her hand. You must show her no pity."

            The "God" of the BIble orders for people to be stoned to death for breaking one of his rules:

            Like the "crime" of picking up sticks on the sabbath:

            Numbers 15:32-36
            "Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him.

            Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” So, as the Lord commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died."

            1/2

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Evil is when someone does something that is not within their right. God, as creator and sustainer of the universe, was acting within His right.

            Can translators speak in God's name? Can the Gospels? Can all the scribes of the early church days?

            Sure they can. Divine inspiration.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            > Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Evil is when someone does something that is not within their right.
            That's not the definition of evil.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            No? I guess evil is anything you don't like.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's not the definition of evil either.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If there isn't a God watching over us, sure. But if there is a God, He would find a way to preserve his true teachings
            No he, wouldn't.

            >And you talking about how the Quran was corrupted says nothing about the Torah or the Bible.
            Yes, it does you fricking idiot.

            I already made my point repeatedly. I already stated that some of the Bible is preserved by God, other parts were corrupted. The Bible is not 100% the word of God, and it's up to (You) to distinguish what is truth and what is deception in the Bible.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >But how do you know there are several authors?
            average prottie moment

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >but it was specifically commanded by God
            Also, how do you know? Because your book says so. What makes you think God would care or not about protecting his scriptures? Why wouldn't God use his own scriptures as a test to see who recognizes good (his words) and evil (corruption) within his own holy books. That makes a lot more sense than "text written down thousands of years after these events says it happened this way so it happened this way".

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            The death of critical thinking, right here.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Have you read one OT book called Jonah? Notice how God grant something as defiled as Niniveh pity? Even the ox and cattles? There must be something important to consider here before claiming things as is.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          The genocidal "God" of the Bible orders for the killing of women and children, including infants:

          1 Samuel 15:3
          "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."

          The "God" of the Bible orders for women's hands to be chopped off:

          Deuteronomy 25:12
          "If two men are fighting, and the wife of one steps in to rescue her husband from the one striking him, and she reaches out her hand and grabs his genitals, you are to cut off her hand. You must show her no pity."

          The "God" of the BIble orders for people to be stoned to death for breaking one of his rules:

          Like the "crime" of picking up sticks on the sabbath:

          Numbers 15:32-36
          "Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him.

          Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” So, as the Lord commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died."

          1/2

          Even Jesus, according to the gospels, supports the death penalty for disobedient children:

          Mark 7:10
          For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.' 'For instance, Moses gave you this law from God: 'Honor your father and mother,' and 'Anyone who speaks disrespectfully of father or mother must be put to death.'

          The "God" of the Quran orders for his enemies to have their hands and feet chopped off:

          Surah Al Mai'dah 33

          "Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment."

          The "God" of the Quran orders for men to beat their wives:

          Surah An-Nisa - 34

          "Men are caretakers of women, since Allah has made some of them excel the others, and because of the wealth they have spent. So, the righteous women are obedient, (and) guard (the property and honor of their husbands) in (their) absence with the protection given by Allah. As for women of whom you fear rebellion, convince them, and leave them apart in beds, and beat them. Then, if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. Surely, Allah is the Highest, the Greatest."

          Where is the God of mercy? You need to find him yourself in your heart and soul

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Unitarian Universalism
          They feel like larpers to me. People who want the religious experience, but don't actually believe in anything.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >My problem with the Bible is that there's too much imorality, cruelty etc involved
        What example would you say bothers you the most?

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          I remember 1 Samuel 15 now. Also just the concept of hell is cruel.

          Do you like videogames?
          Look into Electromagnetism and how nothing exists without it.

          What if we live in a Open World Game controlled via electromagnetism.

          Interesting, but would it be a religion? Seems more like a philosophical hypothesis. And so God would be the player?

          >believe in only one God
          >don't believe Jesus is God
          >don't believe the Bible, the Qu'ran or the Talmud is the Word of God
          Any faith or philosophy that espouses monism will do you right. Look into Vishishtadvaita or Advaita Vedanta if you need ritual and deity names. Look into Spinoza if all you care about is the philosophical position. Alternatively, as some others have mentioned, Zoroastrianism (in its present-day form), and Baha'i might be up your alley, but the latter kind of requires adherents to at least recognize divine inspiration in the OT, NT, and Qur'an. Sikhism is actually a great option too, but without a decent understanding of Sikh history it is going to seem utterly absurd to you for a while. There is also Mandaeism, which is a storied gnostic faith, and that might click with you too.

          >Vishishtadvaita or Advaita Vedanta
          I thought they were polytheistic for being offshoots of Hinduism
          >Spinoza's God
          Yeah I like the concept

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I remember 1 Samuel 15 now
            The Amalekites were an extraordinarily evil raider culture. Essentially like Mongols or Vikings: they would roll up to your town and take as much as they could: almost always prizing most highly women to use for slavery and sex, including (often especially) teens.
            If God had had the Mongols wiped out in 1000 B.C., knowing what you know now they would become in the future, would you say it was wrong?

            >Also just the concept of hell is cruel.
            Indeed, that's why God came personally and endured a cross to keep you out of it.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            There are lots of other solutions for an omnipotent being other than genocide. And not everyone is going to heaven, according to the Bible.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            That guy you're replying to is a drooling moron who can't comprehend higher thought, God can't possibly be greater than what's written in the Bible for him. Every Christian will open with "the love and mercy of Jesus", and end up justifying genocide because it's in their israelite book.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >There are lots of other solutions for an omnipotent being other than genocide.
            An omnipotent being, interestingly, faces obstacles to its goals precisely from its lack of limitations. An omnipotent being seeking to maximize a value that has no maximum (such as "happiness of my children") would need a standard for using his power that doesn't run into a paradox with infinities. "I will use my power to increase the happiness of my children as much as I can" wouldn't work since that would be infinitely many people with infinite happiness.

            Instead the most he could do is make sure it's always approaching infinity. This would manifest as ensuring the value grows moment to moment by the bare minimum, but anything beyond that would be up to us.

            So in this case, since the threat could be solved by simply ordering Israel to solve it, that's what was done. And they ALL did have to die; look what horrors Tamerlane was able to bring to the world when he started with just a small band.

            >And not everyone is going to heaven, according to the Bible.
            I think you're assuming Hell will be considerably worse than it actually will be. Daniel 12 describes it as a state of shame after the resurrection.
            And Hell really is an artifact of the resurrection process. Resurrection is God re-creating you, and all that you are and have been. But God won't create evil, so God won't create the parts of you that are infected with evil. With those missing, there's "less of you", in a sense. You're more deadlike than someone who gets those parts repaired by accepting Jesus' offer.
            I'm sure they'll be sad about it, but they still get to be in the resurrected world: a world without death or disease or hunger or (any additional) damage, so they'll probably be happier than they are right now.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >And they ALL did have to die
            Why do babies need to die?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Tamerlane was only a distant descendent of Genghis Khan, but became the second most bloody human being in recorded history after him.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            That didn't answer my question. Are you saying evil is inherited like that religious NPC from the other thread who believes a baby can be inherintly evil?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Sometimes descendants follow in their ancestor's footsteps. Not always, but an omniscient being knows when this will be the case.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >an omniscient being knows when this will be the case
            >"God" said it's okay to kill babies so it's okay to kill babies!

            I don't buy it, go shill your israelite kool aid elsewhere.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Do you oppose all bombing campaigns in World War II, and think they were all immoral?
            If not, are you aware of how many children were killed in those?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Do you oppose all bombing campaigns in World War II, and think they were all immoral?
            Yes, and collateral damage from bombing campaigns is not the same as deliberately targeting and killing babies in order to intentionally genocide them so false equivalency.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes
            I see. That's very radical pacifism. Do you oppose all acts of war and think they are all always immoral?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Do you oppose all acts of war and think they are all always immoral?
            War has been necessary in certain situations. The end goal of mankind is to break free from war, and embrace world peace. Even religion agrees with me on that. I don't know how this started with you trying to justify genocide and deviated into a discussion about war in general.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >War has been necessary in certain situations.
            Like which?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            The civil war

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Did children die as a result of the civil war?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Did Abraham Lincoln command the union army to kill the infants of confederate soldiers?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Do you think, despite the deaths of children that it brought, that the world is better because the civil war was fought?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Answer the question:

            >Did Abraham Lincoln command the union army to kill the infants of confederate soldiers?

            The civil war was not a genocide of children, so once again false equivalence.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yes actually (or did so through proxies), Union forces sieged and shelled Confederate cities during the war, resulting in the deaths of children. It's impossible to do those things and to wage such a war without increasing the mortality of children. And everybody is well aware of this.
            But he and you believe that these deaths of children were necessary for a greater good, and so you consider them regrettable but required.

            So you don't disagree that the death of children can in unfortunate circumstances be necessary to make the world a better place

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes actually (or did so through proxies), Union forces sieged and shelled Confederate cities during the war, resulting in the deaths of children.

            Then the answer is not "Yes". My question was:

            >Did Abraham Lincoln command the union army to kill the infants of confederate soldiers?

            The answer is no, he did not give a direct order to the union army to directly kill the infants of confederate soldiers. I already stated that collateral damage is different, and is not intentional genocide.

            >Do you oppose all bombing campaigns in World War II, and think they were all immoral?
            Yes, and collateral damage from bombing campaigns is not the same as deliberately targeting and killing babies in order to intentionally genocide them so false equivalency.

            Intentional genocide is directly ordering for the children to be killed, like Hitler sending israeli kids to the death camps.

            The evil deity in the OT directly orders for children and infants to be killed.

            The genocidal "God" of the Bible orders for the killing of women and children, including infants:

            1 Samuel 15:3
            "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."

            The "God" of the Bible orders for women's hands to be chopped off:

            Deuteronomy 25:12
            "If two men are fighting, and the wife of one steps in to rescue her husband from the one striking him, and she reaches out her hand and grabs his genitals, you are to cut off her hand. You must show her no pity."

            The "God" of the BIble orders for people to be stoned to death for breaking one of his rules:

            Like the "crime" of picking up sticks on the sabbath:

            Numbers 15:32-36
            "Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him.

            Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” So, as the Lord commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died."

            1/2

            There is no "higher good" in genocide, and the intentional murder of of innocent babies. The key word is intentional.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The answer is no, he did not give a direct order
            Meaningless cope to try and assuage the conscience. If you give orders that involve the shelling and sieging of cities, there will be children who die as a result of those orders who otherwise wouldn't have. It's completely unavoidable. And everyone knows this; you can't aim artillery or resource deprivation at only the adults.

            God isn't play game like that with his orders, where it's "ohhhh no looks like I just HAPPENED to kill who could have foreseen-". He's not sugarcoating it, he's being upfront about the horrible brutality that war is. Maybe if we were just as honest about it instead of taking your approach where we have a fantasy of age-limited artillery shells we would be more hesitant to get children killed if we weren't trying to pretend they wouldn't be as a necessary consequence of what we are doing.

            >There is no "higher good" in genocide, and the intentional murder of of innocent babies.
            What would those children and their descendants have done as adults? How would history be different if they had lived?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            For what purpose would God pre-create the world and then create a situation where he himself is forced to order the murder of infants to attain his goal?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Did you just outsmart israeli writers? God did that, because he's just did okay! You have no right to doubt muh bible stories exactly the way they were written!

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            (*distant relative, in case someone wants to nitpick about whether they were truly directly in a descendant line)

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I can't get over how brave Jesus really was. Frick. Imagine the balls required to stand up to an entire empire and endure so much pain; literally taking the entire world on your shoulders. He knew he was going to die, but he still did it. It's like standing on a bridge and jumping off into the abyss.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Jesus was only brave if he was not God. if he was God then it was nothing for him to "die". If he was not God, then the new testament is a story about a man sent by God submitting to a will greater than his own, and trusting his life in the hands of a higher power.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Jesus is a Son of God. Not God itself. For some reason, God gave us a gift from the Heavens and saw us worthy of his Message.

            We should be thankful, and putting faith in a higher power is literally what civilization us. We were reminded about the Word the Sumerian originals received, and it was improved upon.

            The Next Coming will take us a step further. I personally think it will be in the form of an AI system.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Jesus is a Son of God. Not God itself.
            Correct, now tell that to the trinitarian idolaters. There is only one God.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Jesus is a Son of God. Not God itself.
            This is what Muslims and some israelites believe bro
            You can't believe it and be Christian
            Btw claiming Jesus is God is blasphemy ccording to Judaism and since Jesus was a israelite he would have killed every Christian since blasphemy is basically the only unforgivable sin

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Only because Constantine told you so.

            It was ok until this point. And I trust pre-Costantine Christianity over post-Constantine Imperial ideology.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Jesus wasn't even creating a new religion
            It was Saul of Tarsus that corrupted his message not Constantine
            The so-called Revelation of a con-man who made up a stpry about Jesus descending from Heaven and talking to him so he could avoid punishment for killing so many people and raping young boys

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >This is what Muslims and some israelites believe bro
            Dead wrong. God has no son. Jesus (pbuh) was neither God nor His son.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's brave because he still got tortured to death, and he walked into it with eyes wide open.

            Everyone who rejects Christ burns in hell and it is okay to kill them.
            Pagans and atheists are not human.

            >it is okay to kill them.
            That goes against the redemptive message of Christ.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I thought they were polytheistic for being offshoots of Hinduism
            Many schools of Hinduism recognise only one God, and the other "gods" are all emanations of that one God. Some are essentially pantheistic. Most of the "philosophical" schools like Advaita and Dvaita Vedanta are like these.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Now thinking about it I don't think it's Deism, because I think God does intervene in the universe after creating it

  2. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Baha'i
    Sikhism
    Certain schools of Hinduism
    Universal Sufism
    Zoroastrianism

  3. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >>don't believe the Bible
    If you give https://tektonticker.blogspot.com/2022/05/today-i-have-special-guest-piece-by.html and honest read I think your mind will be changed by that
    Virtually the only monotheists like yourself were, for centuries and centuries, those who worshipped YHWH. And the Temple of YHWH is the place on all of the planet where we have seen the clearest, best-recorded, most obviously direct actions of the divine.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      I agree with Bart Ehrman's take that if you accept this standard of proof for the examples in the articles, then there's a huge amount of other examples of improbable events in history and other religions which pass this bar

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        You clearly didn't even read it. I would be utterly shocked if you could find any sort of comparable example in the entirety of human history. Nothing else even vaguely comes close and believe me: I've looked.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      i do

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        I'm sorry but I don't quite understand your reply

  4. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Unitarian Universalism

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      globohomosexual corruption

  5. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Hinduism.

    The Idea of Hinduism is tied to the quantum wave nature of particle meaning we are all one.

    It will show you the path to spirituality rather than blind worship entities.

    Also Hinduism is not a religion. The west like to classify things hence the classification.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Hinduism is not a religion
      You could say it's really a bunch of religions, but I think what you're trying to say is it doesn't have a clear set of essentials that define someone as orthodox, heterodox or heretical - we don't really hear about heterodox or heretical Hindus because that idea doesn't really exist.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Isn't it impossible to convert to Hinduism? Also it's polytheistic.

  6. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >don't believe the Bible, the Qu'ran or the Talmud is the Word of God
    Have you read any of them, OP?

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Read the Bible like 10 times. Considering the Quran says stuff like the sun set in mud and the moon split in half I think I can safely say its full of the same nonsense, possibly even worse. Also the Talmud as I understand it is more like the Hadiths in Islam anyway.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Considering the Quran says stuff like the sun set in mud and the moon split in half I think I can safely say its full of the same nonsense, possibly even worse. Also the Talmud as I understand it is more like the Hadiths in Islam anyway
        So you haven't actually read them.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why would I read the fricking Talmud? You have to be autistic to read all that shit (pic related)
          >nooooooo! It was le metaphor. The moon didn't really split in half!
          This is sounding like the usual coping, Abdul

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Not entirely, just parts of the Bible, but as I said, I don't like the imorality and cruelty there.

      Isn't this what Masons kind of believed, but unironically? That there was a "divine creator" of some kind?

      Maybe, but I don't like Freemasonry. Too much secrecy and creepy stuff. Also they claim not to be a religion but have very religious traits.

      Neoplatonism

      What is the most basic stuff of it to read? I just don't know if I like the reincarnation stuff anyway.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Enneads

  7. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't this what Masons kind of believed, but unironically? That there was a "divine creator" of some kind?

  8. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Neoplatonism

  9. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Bump. I also don't quite like mythology in religion.

  10. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Do you like videogames?
    Look into Electromagnetism and how nothing exists without it.

    What if we live in a Open World Game controlled via electromagnetism.

  11. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >believe in only one God
    >don't believe Jesus is God
    >don't believe the Bible, the Qu'ran or the Talmud is the Word of God
    Any faith or philosophy that espouses monism will do you right. Look into Vishishtadvaita or Advaita Vedanta if you need ritual and deity names. Look into Spinoza if all you care about is the philosophical position. Alternatively, as some others have mentioned, Zoroastrianism (in its present-day form), and Baha'i might be up your alley, but the latter kind of requires adherents to at least recognize divine inspiration in the OT, NT, and Qur'an. Sikhism is actually a great option too, but without a decent understanding of Sikh history it is going to seem utterly absurd to you for a while. There is also Mandaeism, which is a storied gnostic faith, and that might click with you too.

  12. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    in only one God
    What is that God exactly?

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      The creator of the universe. I don't know if it's personal or not, but for some reason I think it does intervene in the universe after creation

      Pantheism is the only provable theology. Everything else is storytime.

      Where can I read more about it?

      Baha'i, Sikh, Hindu, Deist, Pantheist, Hermetic/Occultist
      Depends what you mean by "God".
      Most pagan religions see all Gods and Goddesses as part of one greater Godhead.

      >Depends what you mean by "God".
      The creator of the universe. I don't know if it's personal or not, but for some reason I think it does intervene in the universe after creation
      >Most pagan religions see all Gods and Goddesses as part of one greater Godhead.
      Maybe I can dig that, but that "freeing from the cycle of rebirth" (moksha) thing in Hindu, Sikh etc seems strange. And Hermeticism/Occultism has too much mythology involved, I'd rather just consider parts of them as some kind of science than take them completely as true, for example. But Pantheist seems interesting.

      It's a shame you can't believe in Christ. Sikhs are pretty cool, check them out.

      Maybe one day I'll change my mind, but the Incarnation seems really strange to me. And I don't quite like the moksha thing in Sikhism.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Most pagan religions see all Gods and Goddesses as part of one greater Godhead.

        You mean like the Roman mystery religion that worships father, son, and holy spirit as three persons in a triune godhead.

        >Maybe one day I'll change my mind, but the Incarnation seems really strange to me.

        Biblical unitarianism is the original Christianity.

  13. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Pantheism is the only provable theology. Everything else is storytime.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      everything is storytime anon, you'll realize this one day

  14. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Read the Quran.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      The quran sucks, its a bunch of rambling speeches devoid of any context

  15. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Baha'i, Sikh, Hindu, Deist, Pantheist, Hermetic/Occultist
    Depends what you mean by "God".
    Most pagan religions see all Gods and Goddesses as part of one greater Godhead.

  16. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's a shame you can't believe in Christ. Sikhs are pretty cool, check them out.

  17. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    The kolbrin teaches that Jesus is a man and not god and also that he went to England. Read the kolbrin, OLB, and havamal.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Or just read the new testament that states that Jesus was a man sent by God, but not God himself.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Sure. Whatever pleases op he should do.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
        John 1:1
        >The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
        John 1:14

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          The word is not Jesus. The word is God's message. God's wisdom, his message, and some of his knowledge (not all of his knowledge) becoming flesh by being imparted on Jesus at birth.

          You are an idolater.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why does it say the Word "made 'his' dwelling among us," then? It uses person language and not thing language.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            The word can be personified, the same as the holy spirit. That does not make the word or the holy spirit an actual person. Learn Biblical language you pagan.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Imagine assigning a verb other than 'to be' to an omni* deity, kek.

            How the frick can you personify a deity? It's a literal oxymoron. Imagine simplifying something which spans infinite times, dimensions and forms, and infinitely more we cannot comprehend into a human. Absolute main character syndrome kex.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us" makes it seem pretty clearly that the Word became a being of flesh and was not something gifted to a person. It says it became flesh, not that it inhabits it.

  18. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Pantheism is the only things which makes sense in religion. Everything else is larpshit.

    If you ever mention pantheism in an argument here, religiious morons always stfu and leave the thread. They have no answer.

  19. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    I can't wait for you to pagans to go to Hell at the end of days. It makes me so fricking giddy.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >I can't wait for you to pagans to go to Hell at the end of days. It makes me so fricking giddy.
      And that makes you a psychopath.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        We need to go back to the good old days when we flayed skinned and tortured pagans like you. I'm so giddy knowing Trump will be President and we will finally return to tradition.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Do all those who don't believe in Christ go to hell?

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Everyone who rejects Christ burns in hell and it is okay to kill them.
        Pagans and atheists are not human.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why should I believe the Old Testament if every character and writer is in hell?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            God made them write it. Everyone born before Christ was a sacrifice to allpw Us to enter heaven. They burn in hell so we may be saved.

  20. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Look into Christian Deism. Specifically: Jefferson Bible, and the writings of Leo Tolstoy. Perhaps also the writings of liberal Christians during the late 19th to early 20th century.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Don't they consider the Bible the word of God? Why?

  21. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    The Bible is not the Word of God. It was written by men.
    The Quran and the Vedas are the Word of God.
    Jesus lived in a way that he attained unity with God by the end of his journey.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      The Quran can be just as cruel as the Bible.

      [...]
      Even Jesus, according to the gospels, supports the death penalty for disobedient children:

      Mark 7:10
      For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.' 'For instance, Moses gave you this law from God: 'Honor your father and mother,' and 'Anyone who speaks disrespectfully of father or mother must be put to death.'

      The "God" of the Quran orders for his enemies to have their hands and feet chopped off:

      Surah Al Mai'dah 33

      "Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment."

      The "God" of the Quran orders for men to beat their wives:

      Surah An-Nisa - 34

      "Men are caretakers of women, since Allah has made some of them excel the others, and because of the wealth they have spent. So, the righteous women are obedient, (and) guard (the property and honor of their husbands) in (their) absence with the protection given by Allah. As for women of whom you fear rebellion, convince them, and leave them apart in beds, and beat them. Then, if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. Surely, Allah is the Highest, the Greatest."

      Where is the God of mercy? You need to find him yourself in your heart and soul

  22. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    "The Egg" spiritual concept is the best version I've come across so far. It seems elegantly compatible with the golden rules of theistic and atheistic belief systems.

    http://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_mod.html

    Animated video version:

    ?si=1kG-OtzzEnTqqnRN

  23. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Monotheists still silent on pantheism.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      if god is everywhere and everything then he is nowhere and nothing. simple as

  24. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Begome taoist anon. (then later on read christ the eternal tao and begome christian. that's the path i took)

  25. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    You fricking room temperature shelf stable vegetable, why the frick you need a label for that? Can't you just exist without it? Philosophy is the only true theism you need, and philosophy is nothing more than a moron buzzword for thinking.

  26. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Baconian

  27. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Reminder that if you use any verbs other than state verbs to refer to God, you don't believe in his "Omni*" properties.

    An "action" implies unrealised potential, which if had existed, would negate the all-powerful nature of said God.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >if you use any verbs other than state verbs to refer to God
      I don't get what you're saying. Can you give examples?

  28. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Believe in Aten and his final messemger, Akhenaten. After all, all those other prophets didn't name themselves after their gods. Just some pussy last name shit, like wtf.

    Now imagine a guy who literally calls himself to 'Goddy-Godderick'. That's real faith

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Believe in Aten and his final messemger, Akhenaten. After all, all those other prophets didn't name themselves after their gods. Just some pussy last name shit, like wtf.
      >Now imagine a guy who literally calls himself to 'Goddy-Godderick'. That's real faith
      Real faith? Or evidence of the obvious fact that Akhenaten himself made up a new singularly supreme god that only he could directly communicate with.
      This achieved the goal of decreasing the power of the established priesthood and increasing his own personal power as Pharaoh.
      Atenism only existed for 17 years under one ruler. It was nothing more than statism.

  29. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Don't believe the Talmud is the word of god.

    Ever heard of Karaites? Also israelites don't believe that the Talmud is the word of god the Torah is.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Ever heard of Karaites?
      Lol, dude there are only 50,000 Karaite israelites in the world out of 20,000,000 israelites.
      That's 0.25% of the israeli population.
      >Also israelites don't believe that the Talmud is the word of god the Torah is.
      No, that's a lie.
      Karaite israelites( 0.25% of all israelites) believe that only the Torah is the word of God.
      The other 99.75% of israelites believe that the Talmud is the word of God because it is merely the Torah in expanded form.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *