Do you think God is benevolent and do incels have any moral burden?

[SewerPolarKoala]

What is your view on benevolence of God? I think God cursed us and it may be true, but then should we expect heaven in afterlife or should we expect hell.

If everything is predestined then we are destined to play role of bad guys like satan and his demons that are seen as ugly, undesirable and evil by any god-loving man, and we exist only as contrast to people that are desirable in eyes of God.

But if there is no predestination and every person has free will then biological and political choices of our ancestors shaped us so God should reward us as compensation because we were never born free and all evil we make doesn't burden us morally.

Also God doesn't really promise anything, it seems he is malevolent demiurge because look, El, Yahweh is one of many Israelite deities worshipped, like Baal Hadad, Baal Hadad is God of male fertility, he gave people rain, crops, he gave men strength and made sex slaves out of foids, Baal even raped some foids himself. But our God never listens to prayers, he tests people endlessly, promises nothing but hell and damnation, wants people to be poor, wants men to be weak.


How would you morally justify it?

I know most mainstream view is that earthly pleasures are deceiving, but isn't it what actual demiurge would say to keep people miserable their whole life and then trap them in hell anyway? Wouldn't the true God give people what they want and give them heaven anyway? Why is there this moral ambiguity in religion that God who gives people everything must be evil and God that harms people must give them heaven as compensation.

 

[dumbozhina]

there is no god. there is no being that gives you good and bad lives, keeps track of your deeds, and sends you to heaven or hell. there is no reason to assume there is an agent behind this complex life and world, let alone discussing whether this agent is good or bad. there is no heaven or hell in the old testament. the idea that good people go up when they die was rather late, persumably under persian or greek influence. if god can not even achieve justice in this life, why assume there is justice in the afterlife, assuming there is an afterlife.
both theodicy and misotheism are wrong. both mainstream religion and gnosticism are wrong. although gnosticism and misotheism are closer to blackpill. however the real blackpill is materialism, and from that, endless possibilities.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

there is no god. there is no being that gives you good and bad lives, keeps track of your deeds, and sends you to heaven or hell. there is no reason to assume there is an agent behind this complex life and world, let alone discussing whether this agent is good or bad. there is no heaven or hell in the old testament. the idea that good people go up when they die was rather late, persumably under persian or greek influence. if god can not even achieve justice in this life, why assume there is justice in the afterlife, assuming there is an afterlife.
both theodicy and misotheism are wrong. both mainstream religion and gnosticism are wrong. although gnosticism and misotheism are closer to blackpill. however the real blackpill is materialism, and from that, endless possibilities.

There was some primal cause of the world, if we go back in chain of causation, it requires intelligent designer in the very beginning of it

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

there is no god. there is no being that gives you good and bad lives, keeps track of your deeds, and sends you to heaven or hell. there is no reason to assume there is an agent behind this complex life and world, let alone discussing whether this agent is good or bad. there is no heaven or hell in the old testament. the idea that good people go up when they die was rather late, persumably under persian or greek influence. if god can not even achieve justice in this life, why assume there is justice in the afterlife, assuming there is an afterlife.
both theodicy and misotheism are wrong. both mainstream religion and gnosticism are wrong. although gnosticism and misotheism are closer to blackpill. however the real blackpill is materialism, and from that, endless possibilities.

Materialism means relativism and nominalism, which means "we are not right neither them are right" which is most cucked view to hold

 

[dumbozhina]

There was some primal cause of the world, if we go back in chain of causation, it requires intelligent designer in the very beginning of it

typical scholastic theology. it's not as sound as you might think.
first refutation: causation is a human invention. some modern physicists believe this.
second refutation: the idea that there is first cause contradicts the assumption that everything needs a cause. (like, if god created us, who created god?)
third refutation: everything is interdependent. the linear model of "chain of cause and effect" is false.
fourth refutation: the first cause does not mean intelligent designer, as darwinian evolution proves that complex systems can develop through blind evolution.

 

[tired as fuck]

There was some primal cause of the world, if we go back in chain of causation, it requires intelligent designer in the very beginning of it

no. Read about Agrippa's Trilemma. Any regressive causal chain has to end up in either of these three:
1) Creator
2) Infinite Regression
3) Loop

so there is no logical necessity for a creator to exist.

Materialism means relativism and nominalism, which means "we are not right neither them are right" which is most cucked view to hold

Explain how materialism implies relativism and nominalism please.

 

[dumbozhina]

Materialism means relativism and nominalism, which means "we are not right neither them are right" which is most cucked view to hold

if you still need a god to validate your feelings or ideas, you are cucked. materialism = nothing matters is typical apologetic bs.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

if you still need a god to validate your feelings or ideas, you are cucked. materialism = nothing matters is typical apologetic bs.

Nah, its not cucked to think God exists but wonder about his nature, I'd say it would be cucked to deny God if he doesn't validate my view, if he doesn't its better to hate him than deny his existence

 

[dumbozhina]

Nah, its not cucked to think God exists but wonder about his nature, I'd say it would be cucked to deny God if he doesn't validate my view, if he doesn't its better to hate him than deny his existence

you can believe what you want. but this is useless, contemplating whether god or this world is inherently good or bad. there can be no answer to that question. the question itself assumes the existence of "nature" of god or this world. ofc you will disagree because you are poisoned by greek metaphysics.
personally i dont need a god to justify my hatred of foids and chads. the idea of divine hatred is stupid.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

no. Read about Agrippa's Trilemma. Any regressive causal chain has to end up in either of these three:
1) Creator
2) Infinite Regression
3) Loop

so there is no logical necessity for a creator to exist.

Explain how materialism implies relativism and nominalism please.

I will read thanks

So, materialism implies there is no objective reality basically, because if there is objective unchangeable reality that is always true, we could say it by itself meets definition of God, like, if there is one single truth about universe then we can say the truth alone is unmoved mover and so is God. That's why communism isn't philosophically incompatible with theism, its politically incompatible with religions

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

you can believe what you want. but this is useless, contemplating whether god or this world is inherently good or bad. there can be no answer to that question. the question itself assumes the existence of "nature" of god or this world. ofc you will disagree because you are poisoned by greek metaphysics.
personally i dont need a god to justify my hatred of foids and chads. the idea of divine hatred is stupid.

So is world inherently good or evil or anything or is it as I said relativism

 

[tired as fuck]

materialism implies there is no objective reality basically

exactly the opposite.
The rest is just illogical

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

exactly the opposite.
The rest is just illogical

How come

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

you can believe what you want. but this is useless, contemplating whether god or this world is inherently good or bad. there can be no answer to that question. the question itself assumes the existence of "nature" of god or this world. ofc you will disagree because you are poisoned by greek metaphysics.
personally i dont need a god to justify my hatred of foids and chads. the idea of divine hatred is stupid.

Foids use their goddesses to hate us, chads use Jesus, but there is no God for us, doesn’t it look even a bit interesting to you lol

 

[dumbozhina]

Foids use their goddesses to hate us, chads use Jesus, but there is no God for us, doesn’t it look even a bit interesting to you lol

like i said, if you need a god, whatever that is, to justify anti-foids or anti-chads sentiment, you are cucked. your life is ruined, isn't that enough.
no ruler will adopt a blackpill religion because it's harmful to society. hence all major religions, with the exception of buddhism, are bluepill.

 

[dumbozhina]

materialism implies there is no objective reality basically

you are confusing materialism with skepticism. skepticism is a predecessor to materialism, but they are not the same.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

like i said, if you need a god, whatever that is, to justify anti-foids or anti-chads sentiment, you are cucked. your life is ruined, isn't that enough.
no ruler will adopt a blackpill religion because it's harmful to society. hence all major religions, with the exception of buddhism, are bluepill.

Feminism is also harmful to society but it was adopted as main cult, it means we are evil ontologically, and that is the reason blackpill won’t be adopted, and I said god not sky daddy, theistic being not Christian one necessarily

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

you are confusing materialism with skepticism. skepticism is a predecessor to materialism, but they are not the same.

Alright I guess my mind makes unnecessary bridge that materialism neccesarily has to mean Marxism

 

[tired as fuck]

skepticism is a predecessor to materialism, but they are not the same.

nay, Democritus and Empedocles were materialists and predate skepticism

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

like i said, if you need a god, whatever that is, to justify anti-foids or anti-chads sentiment, you are cucked. your life is ruined, isn't that enough.
no ruler will adopt a blackpill religion because it's harmful to society. hence all major religions, with the exception of buddhism, are bluepill.

How would you justify non-violence and other aspects of Buddhism without determining that it’s moral objectively or at least beneficial socially

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

I also wanted to hear some christcels of muslimcels on that not necessarily only atheists

 

[Dr. Butane]

"Do you think God is bene-" No.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

"Do you think God is bene-" No.

Based but elaborate

 

[Dr. Butane]

elab

Just look at your situation man.

 

[Moth]

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.’

Doesn’t sound like something a benevolent God would command.

 

[GrAYnigger]

malevolent if anything

 

[ONION BURPS]

Good looking people are desirable to other people.

They are not inherently attractive. A baboon wouldn't care about a giga blonde Stacy human, he likes female baboon ass.

This is all a mental construct. We are all living in our minds. We cannot see reality for what it actually is. We have all gone insane.

We are slaves to the brain and it's chemicals and instincts. None of this is of our own volition. We don't actually desire any of this. The real you doesn't want anything.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

Just look at your situation man.

Indeed you have exceptional gift of convincing speech lil bro

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

Good looking people are desirable to other people.

They are not inherently attractive. A baboon wouldn't care about a giga blonde Stacy human, he likes female baboon ass.

This is all a mental construct. We are all living in our minds. We cannot see reality for what it actually is. We have all gone insane.

We are slaves to the brain and it's chemicals and instincts. None of this is of our own volition. We don't actually desire any of this. The real you doesn't want anything.

Yes the question is why this way and not other way around and why core fundaments of universe say we are born to be doomed

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

malevolent if anything

That’s valid opinion, unironically

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

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.’

Doesn’t sound like something a benevolent God would command.

Sounds like something I would endorse (in GTA V) if I was beneficial from it

 

[Dr. Butane]

Indeed you have exceptional gift of convincing speech lil bro

ok Christcuck

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

ok Christcuck

I am not, eww, it was just what I’d call my failed attempt at joke

 

[Solid State]

I am not religious, but if a supreme creator did exist, I think it is more than likely that it would be largely neutral. Uncaring more than malicious because why would he even notice or bother to micromanage the events that happen on one tiny planet in the universe out of a near infinite amount of planets...some of which probably have their own lifeforms.

I guess "God" would be more like an impersonal cosmic force who takes neither joy nor spite in the personal lives of some hairless apes on a random ball of rock and just lets events play out as they will.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

I am not religious, but if a supreme creator did exist, I think it is more than likely that it would be largely neutral. Uncaring more than malicious because why would he even notice or bother to micromanage the events that happen on one tiny planet in the universe out of a near infinite amount of planets...some of which probably have their own lifeforms.

I guess "God" would be more like an impersonal cosmic force who takes neither joy nor spite in the personal lives of some hairless apes on a random ball of rock and just lets events play out as they will.

Yes, question is whether world the force created is objectively morally good for humans or not, even if God is impartial and he probably is totally neutral indeed, do the rules he made ultimately favor anyone or not, looking at the world answer is obviously yes, some are favored and some are cursed, even if ultimately God is not personally affected by joy or suffering of humans

 

[Solid State]

Yes, question is whether world the force created is objectively morally good for humans or not, even if God is impartial and he probably is totally neutral indeed, do the rules he made ultimately favor anyone or not, looking at the world answer is obviously yes, some are favored and some are cursed, even if ultimately God is not personally affected by joy or suffering of humans

Well, the vast majority of the universe seems to be uninhabitable, so life arising on a planet is probably akin to a rare accident in the first place so the idea of a creator making everything just for life to arise seems to have made a lot of wasted space and empty planets for nothing then. Plus, looking at how often mass extinctions have happened in Earth's prehistory with creatures who presumably have done nothing "wrong" it does not seem like a hypothetical god is overly concerned about the well-being of life in general.

 

[feuerwehr]

I love God.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

Well, the vast majority of the universe seems to be uninhabitable, so life arising on a planet is probably akin to a rare accident in the first place so the idea of a creator making everything just for life to arise seems to have made a lot of wasted space and empty planets for nothing then. Plus, looking at how often mass extinctions have happened in Earth's prehistory with creatures who presumably have done nothing "wrong" it does not seem like a hypothetical god is overly concerned about the well-being of life in general.

Yeah but you assume physical world is good while gnostic view may be more true that the physical is evil

 

[Violet loner]

What is your view on benevolence of God? I think God cursed us and it may be true, but then should we expect heaven in afterlife or should we expect hell.

If everything is predestined then we are destined to play role of bad guys like satan and his demons that are seen as ugly, undesirable and evil by any god-loving man, and we exist only as contrast to people that are desirable in eyes of God.

But if there is no predestination and every person has free will then biological and political choices of our ancestors shaped us so God should reward us as compensation because we were never born free and all evil we make doesn't burden us morally.

Also God doesn't really promise anything, it seems he is malevolent demiurge because look, El, Yahweh is one of many Israelite deities worshipped, like Baal Hadad, Baal Hadad is God of male fertility, he gave people rain, crops, he gave men strength and made sex slaves out of foids, Baal even raped some foids himself. But our God never listens to prayers, he tests people endlessly, promises nothing but hell and damnation, wants people to be poor, wants men to be weak.


How would you morally justify it?

I know most mainstream view is that earthly pleasures are deceiving, but isn't it what actual demiurge would say to keep people miserable their whole life and then trap them in hell anyway? Wouldn't the true God give people what they want and give them heaven anyway? Why is there this moral ambiguity in religion that God who gives people everything must be evil and God that harms people must give them heaven as compensation.

God gave us freedom, but that freedom damned the humanity. After death He would forgive us if we trust repent and accept Him

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

God gave us freedom, but that freedom damned the humanity. After death He would forgive us if we trust repent and accept Him

I have no freedom because I was born like I was born and I made mistakes before reaching consciousness and I have no decision in what I become in my life anymore, so I have no moral burden at all

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

What is your view on benevolence of God? I think God cursed us and it may be true, but then should we expect heaven in afterlife or should we expect hell.

You're asking from a theistic view

 

[mrlunatic]

God is evil and indifferent. He loves to cause chaos and feeds off the misery, guilt and regret of people .

 

[dumbozhina]

Feminism is also harmful to society but it was adopted as main cult, it means we are evil ontologically, and that is the reason blackpill won’t be adopted, and I said god not sky daddy, theistic being not Christian one necessarily

you must let go of the idea of a fixed "human nature". arguing whether this nature is good or bad is pointless.
there is no human nature. it is historically, socially and biologically conditioned.

How would you justify non-violence and other aspects of Buddhism without determining that it’s moral objectively or at least beneficial socially

easy, from a purely pragmatic and self-interested point of view, violence etc obstructs my (and others) nirvana. e.g. stealing feeds my greed, which is not good.
or karma. but it works even if u do not accept karma and rebirth.

 

[itsover1020]

View: https://youtube.com/shorts/XPlIKCu4xic?is=jsvSPTO7Rj8MBG1c


I dont think God hates i just think we dont worship him enough

 

[yeetbender_]

God, if real, is a callous, narcissistic dictator.

 

[Misogynist Vegeta]

If there is a god I doubt he has much control over our lives.

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

Hyou must let go of the idea of a fixed "human nature". arguing whether this nature is good or bad is pointless.
there is no human nature. it is historically, socially and biologically conditioned.

easy, from a purely pragmatic and self-interested point of view, violence etc obstructs my (and others) nirvana. e.g. stealing feeds my greed, which is not good.
or karma. but it works even if u do not accept karma and rebirth.

I disagree that human nature is a construct, I believe nature of human is distinct by some particular traits that never change, that’s why we can debate whether foid has full humanity, assuming rational thought is criteria of humanity, if we assume human nature develops we can’t say what is or isn’t human.

“
easy, from a purely pragmatic and self-interested point of view, violence etc obstructs my (and others) nirvana. e.g. stealing feeds my greed, which is not good.
or karma. but it works even if u do not accept karma and rebirth.” it’s huge Buddhist bias to be honest

 

[dumbozhina]

it’s huge Buddhist bias to be honest

this is not buddhist in any sense. many other philosophies maintains that a moral life is beneficial, because leads to happiness. simple truth: controlling u desire benefits your life.

I disagree that human nature is a construct, I believe nature of human is distinct by some particular traits that never change, that’s why we can debate whether foid has full humanity, assuming rational thought is criteria of humanity, if we assume human nature develops we can’t say what is or isn’t human.

man and foids do have a different mode of behavior or thinking. i will not deny that.

 

[DjentlemanDuke]

ok Christcuck

I would have been a Chad with big penis from birth if God had been benevolent enough

 

[SewerPolarKoala]

this is not buddhist in any sense. many other philosophies maintains that a moral life is beneficial, because leads to happiness. simple truth: controlling u desire benefits your life.

man and foids do have a different mode of behavior or thinking. i will not deny that.

Why would controlling one’s desires be moral, why would benefiting one’s life be moral