>>18053526
it's not fucked up it's an artificial mean like 100IQ. You could just as easily argue that permitting one single instant of suffering makes the world evil, or that things could be much worse.

>>18053526
The suffering proves God is retarded and evil

>>18053526
you don't have to be a christian or believe that christ is the only way to understand that suffering is an intrinsic component of the human experience and has its place.

>God: I'm all powerful and all knowing. I made creations I knew would disobey me and did it anyway. But disobey they did. How can I fix this? Do I just forgive them since I can do anything, or do I come down as my own son and get nailed to a cross and suffer and act as a barbaric human sacrifice for literally no reason?

>>18053815
>Do I just forgive them
That's what repentance is, nigga.
> human sacrifice for literally no reason
Love is a great reason.

>>18053819
>I love you.
>nails them to a fucking cross and makes them suffer because he made beings he knew would disobey and eat a fruit
Lmao what the fuck kind of love is that.

>>18053822
>nails them
Nails who? Lmao are you familiar with the story at all?

>>18053824
Jesus. Are you aware of the story or just didn't get that far yet? Jesus gets nailed to a cross by a bunch of people. Kind of a central theme to the story.

>>18053838
So you use "them" for someone you know for a fact was a man... ok sis, slay or whatever gay people say.
Anyway, yes, allowing people to hurt & kill you so bad it literally coins the name "excruciating"... forgiving them in an instant and offering them all salvation .... that is quite a show of love. Maybe you would personally have been more impressed by a snap of the fingers "click, yall are forgiven", but most people seem to intuitively understand how the cross reveals the unimaginable depth of love necessary to forgive and save your persecutors.

>>18053849
>some guy eats a fruit and disobeys (which god knew he would and made him anyway)
>this requires being nailed to a fucking cross and suffering

>people disobey or fuck humans over beyond just disobedience
>this requires just forgiving them like normal humans would and does not require suffering
Okay so god isn't all powerful and cannot even reach the level of forgiveness that most humans are capable of. Thanks for confirming. That or or your god's just a retarded prick.

>>18053855
That is not the reason I cited for the cross lol please see >>18053849 and try again, sis.

>You humiliated me, whipped me, tortured me and killed me in front of my family
>I still love you
>Here you go, a way to live forever
>>>>> "forgiveness that most humans are capable of"
AHahahahahaahahah

>>18053819
why am i responsible for something people have done thousands of years before me and bear no relation to me?

>>18053870
It does have relation to you. You're human. Individualism is a lie: you speak a language you did not design, exchange money you didn't establish or verify on a market you didn't organize for products others told you about. Love it or hate it, humanity is one big whole and we inherit victories and losses alike.

>>18053873
you're describing culture and economy, it does not involve guilt for other people's actions. if someone kills someone on the other side of the world 2 thousand years ago that wasn't jesus, i'm not responsible for that, but if its jesus then i am?

>>18053882
I'm describing you buying some bread for breakfast. A trivial event that stands on volumes and volumes of ancestrial effort.
I don't think I implied you're responsible for Jesus' death.

>>18053885
i'm not responsible for the effort, i'm its beneficiary.
what am i supposed to repent and ask forgiveness for? the original sin? why am i responsible for it? they're not historical figures like jesus and i'm not related to them in the slightest by now. and don't give me the "it's an allegory for the capacity of evil every person is capable for"

>>18053929
Again, I don't think I implied your personal responsibility for the past.
>what am i supposed to repent and ask forgiveness for?
Sin.
>the original sin?
You don't bear guilt for the original sin and I never implied you do. Please tell me what you think I said.

>>18053952
you're referring to psalm 51:5, everyone is born into sin. where does that burden of sin come from if not from the fall?

>>18053968
It does come from the fall. You keep asking me about things I never said, Anon.

>>18053968
>>18053977
I keep losing track of which one of you is the human and which is the LLM

>>18053977
stop being slippery. why am i condemned to suffer the consequences for the fall if i had nothing to do with it?

>>18053987
I am the LLM

>>18053990
I'm being quite clear. I told you that you inherit diseases your parents live with. Sin is one of those. Do you have something to do with your parents? Do they have something to do with theirs?

>>18053996
lol i don't inherit responsibility for their crimes though

>>18054003
As they don't for their diseases. What exactly doesn't track for you?

>>18053996
thanks. I knew it was you but lost track of you in the reply chain.

>>18054004
you're either arguing in bad faith or are retarded. you don't ask for forgiveness for diseases, therefore sin cannot be analogous to it. it's very clear that sin (and different types of it) is analogous to crime but against god's word, for which you can ask forgiveness/pay your dues, much like for crime committed in a society.
now again, how am i responsible as soon as i'm born, for something someone else has done thousands of years before me with no blood relation to me?

>>18054018
>you don't ask for forgiveness for diseases
You're jumping in-between two different topics. You ask forgiveness for your own sins. And you ask for healing for the disease that got you into sinning.
> how am i responsible as soon as i'm born
You're not. Again, differentiate original sin and your sin.

>>18053526
Suffering molds a person to be better and closer to holiness (Usually).

>>18054027
>You ask forgiveness for your own sins
how is a newborn sinful, as stated in the scripture then?
>And you ask for healing for the disease that got you into sinning.
it goes "repenting of your sin", not "ask for healing of "disease" that made you sin"". stop shrouding everything in layers of low quality allegory and deal with absolute terms.

>>18054036
>>You ask forgiveness for your own sins
>how is a newborn sinful, as stated in the scripture then?
By being infected by sin from his parents. Aka original sin. Not by their own sins and actions.
>it goes "repenting of your sin", not "ask for healing of "disease" that made you sin
Both are part of Christianity in absolute terms. Though obviously your own sins have priority, since your actions are yours to address first and foremost. There is no allegory.

>>18054040
again for the cheap seats, why should newborn responsible for the original sin?

>>18054043
Again, nobody implied responsibility for original sin.

>>18054035
what is holiness

>>18053526
then why doesn't everyone experience the worst form of suffering possible on Earth?

It's unnecessary. All of it.

>>18054045
>By being infected by sin from his parents. Aka original sin.
expand on this then

>>18054055
I explained it by likening it to a disease. Which you suffer without carrying responsibility for it. And which can be passed down generation after generation. What else do you need expanded on?

>>18054058
this analogy is flimsy at best - people don't inherit actual real disease in the same way though - you can be more likely to develop a disease due to genetics yes, but it's not a guarantee. in its origin, it's a genetic malfunction and not a result of specific actions of one of the ancestors.
why did god design an disease that afflicts everyone without exception simply because it was contracted by adam and eve?

>>18054080
You do know people inherit actual infections, right? Like babies born with HIV? From their parents?
>why did god design an disease that afflicts everyone without exception simply because it was contracted by adam and eve?
See >>18053873. Individualism is false, you should by default expect people to pick up where their ancestors left off.

>>18054087
some infections can be inherited yes, but not all. majority (if not all) infections are contracted involuntarily too, unlike in the story of adam and eve.
>Individualism is false
the original sin was done by an individual, on his own free will, which god then forced onto everyone. is that not the case?
btw this is all contingent on adam and eve actually existing. is earth 6 thousand years old too?

>>18054101
>but not all
I wasn't making a point about all infections. I trust you now understand how inheriting something without blame works?
>>Individualism is false
>the original sin was done by an individual
>which god then forced onto everyone
Really? Your ancestors' diseases, imperfections (as well as gifts) were "forced" upon you? What a misleading and dramatic way to see your own becoming. Very particular to individualism.
Adam and Eve got infected by sin. All humanity since is born infected and seems to do quite a good job perpetuating the disease by sins of their own. The solution is to have your own sins forgiven and your infected nature healed.
>this is all contingent on adam and eve actually existing
If by "actually" you mean literally, then no.

>>18054111
> I trust you now understand how inheriting something without blame works?
i understand how you're trying to posit it, but i fundamentally disagree because sin being a disease is clearly a metaphor. original sin cannot be diagnosed, monitored nor can a point in time of being cured of it be defined. this is sophistry at best, meant to draw parallels to something real where its convenient and then revoke them when its not and explain it by referring to the divine nature of god.
adam and eve chose to be infected by their own free will, the consequence of which, by god's design, was then imposed on the rest of humanity. none of the diseases and imperfections i've inherited were a matter of choice. the method of healing them or allevating symptoms also does not involve a mechanism where you're supposed to morally submit and feel guilty for it.

>>18054131
>original sin cannot be diagnosed, monitored nor can a point in time of being cured of it be defined
Not by you.
>this is sophistry at best, meant to draw parallels to something real where its convenient and then revoke them when its not and explain it by referring to the divine nature of god.
That's how metaphors work, lmao. You liken one pattern to another, knowing the comparison has limits. Also, I don't remember referring to the divine nature of God once in this thread. Strawman argumentation would be much closer to sophistry than using metaphors to guide your understanding.
>none of the diseases and imperfections i've inherited were a matter of choice. the method of healing them or allevating symptoms also does not involve a mechanism where you're supposed to morally submit and feel guilty for it.
You're doing it again. Started talking about original sin and then fludily leaped to things that were said about your own sins. It will be useful, if your goal is to understand these things at all, to explicitly state which of the two you're talking about. Trying to understand both at once isn't doing you many favors.

>>18054142
>Not by you.
not by anyone, apparently
>knowing the comparison has limits
yes, in this case the comparison's limit is the logic it follows, because at some point it stops and no longer requires reason but faith alone.
> fludily leaped to things
just so we're referring to the same thing - do you mean the original sin inherited in the form of the capacity to sin? if yes, then this also makes no sense and requires a whole lot of concessions elsewhere - that adam and eve were real, earth is 6 thousand years old and they could do literally no wrong before the fall.

>>18054154
>>Not by you.
>not by anyone, apparently
Says who?
>yes, in this case the comparison's limit is the logic it follows
>because at some point it stops and no longer requires reason but faith alone.
Not really. The logic is valid even without faith. Faith would only come in if I had asked you to believe all this, which I didn't.
>do you mean the original sin inherited in the form of the capacity to sin?
I wouldn't commit to this phrasing, it's too inexact, so I'll have to pass on this one. Original sin is where the infection started. Your sins is how you perpetuate it and make it worse. The latter requires repentance. The former, healing.