>Wants slaves >Creates free willed beingsCan anyone explain this?
demiurge needs loosh because his corrupt existence is doomed to entropy
>>18345572The conception of “sin” is incompatible with true free will. If you are sent to hell for literally anything at all, then no you don’t have free will if God is opposed to anything you do.
I have a theory that heaven sucks. You start on Earth, which is a bad place, so that you can better accept heaven when you get there. God is desperately trying to make heaven seem like an upgrade.
>>18345572>wants slavessays who? the fucking atheist? lol
They do it for free.sage
>>18345908No, that's the muslim point of view.
>>18345908why are christcucks so disengenouspaul tells you to be a slave of christ
>>18345572Pic related>>18346037They haven't read the book Anon
>>18345572All gods are mythologiesAll holy books are fictionalPolitics is TreacheryReligion is Brainwashing
>>18346037>>18346068>PaulCan mohammedans come up with original arguments?
>>18345908You'd have no qualms of Trump demanded you pray and worship him?
>>18346838If you are going to ignore Paul you have to throw out more than half of the New Testament
>>18347134The comment is because muslims had to find someone to blame for the fact that Christianity and islam are in opposition.It's inconceivable to them that the mentally ill bedouin (who often claimed to be hallucinating under dark magic) was just lying.
>>18345572>>18346037Being a slave is the first step. God ultimately wants sons.>>18345656You think lack of consequences is what constitutes freedom?
>>18345572I think God just wants to see what happens. He created the world in a certain way and gave humans a set of rules they are to follow. And he just wants to see how will humans act.
>>18348010>You think lack of consequences is what constitutes freedom?Average Christ cucks brain. Are North Koreans free?
>>18348029No, they're oppressed; arbitrary restrictions are placed on their faculties and their human nature. Surely you don't think "thou shalt not kill" is one of those arbitrary made-up rules?
>>18345572You can't make someone do something against their will, unless they actually have a will.
>>18345572He finds mindbreaking hotter than having drones happy with even the worst treatment.
>>18348008Paul is the best source we have for the existence of a historical Jesus at all so if we take the perspective of "he was just lying" we might as well adopt a wholly mythicist perspective>>18348036"Don't get divorced, don't have sex outside of the narrow circumstances I describe, don't covet(actual thought crime)" are all pretty arbitrary
>>18348073>keep the absolute peak biological pair-bonding for peak pair-bonded social situation>don't give up on the bondPlease point out precisely the arbitrary parts.You don't see that having sex and relationships arbitraily is the ... well... arbitrary way?
God gave you free will even though he knew you would use it defy him. That is love.All these atheists, edgy Satan worshippers and people saying God is the "demiurge" secretly wish God had not granted them free will as their lives fell into hedonism and degeneracy and they view their weakness as a curse imposed on them. It is a kind of existential crisis which results in a flowering of copes. Determinism, nihilism, antinatalism, transsexualism, satanism and gnosticism, marxist atheism as well as postmodernism, deconstructivism, critical theory and other such anti-rationalist modes of thought espoused by French philosophers like Sartre and Foucault.More popular today are offshoots like decolonial transfeminism, critical race theory and gender-critical ideology which are taught as fact in colleges across the western world and which I am sure OP and many others here are familiar with. People spend $10000s on tuition fees and some make careers in "human resources", "diversity, equity and inclusion manager" and as "therapists" and the like who filter down their teachings to the general populace who vote for legislation based on these ideas. You even see proto-transsexualism as far back as the medieval Cathars and Bogomilists who did not distinguish between gender, were antinatalist and sometimes mutilated their genitals and breasts.Epstein was of the Synagogue of Satan and the apotheosis of all this and many gathered on his island to listen to his pilpul, among other things. At one point these same people were trying to defend him against "antisemitism" until public outrage flared up. Transsexuals hacking their genitals off, normies willingly paying taxes to pedophiles, shooting up fent and wanting to live in decrepit ghettoes instead of the white picket fence churchgoing communities of the 1950s all seems very deranged to someone who knows God, but it all makes sense if you realize they do not.
pic related, atheist determinists who reject free will
>>18348036What restrictions? If consequences don't influence freedom then they're free as fuck. They can leave their neighborhood (lol) and piss on a portrait of Kim Jong Un. Who cares if they get killed and their entire family harvested for organs? After all, as you said that consequences doesn't constitute freedom.
>>18348090Sex and marriage is bullshit. Everyone cheats on everyone.
>>18348102>you said that consequences doesn't constitute freedomI said lack of consequences doesn't constitute freedom. When all your actions have the same result you're obviously not free in the slightest. This doesn't logically imply all consequences constitute freedom. Which I explicitly pointed out in the very post you're replying to.
>>18348090Restricting arbitrary (sexual)relationships is an arbitrary restriction, yes. Notice you skipped over how thinking bad thoughts is also a sin.
>>18348111No.>>18348113>Restricting arbitrary (sexual)relationships is an arbitrary restriction, yesIf you read it really, really quickly this makes an impression of a coherent thought. So I just want to make sure it gets a little more attention. You're saying that >>> arbitrary relationships ----> not arbitrary>>> restricting the arbitrary ----> more arbitraryIt's a complete contradiction, Anon. The only arbitrary thing is to have the arbitrary things lol.>Notice you skipped over how thinking bad thoughts is also a sin.I did, I couldn't think of a punchy one-liner that would make it really clear that populating your heart with things you would never do is not a wise idea. And I'm now glad I didn't, seeing that even my one-liners got quite an obscure treatment.
>>18348120>>> arbitrary relationships ----> not arbitraryThis is not what I'm saying at all lol. Free will should allow one to make arbitrary decisions. If I decide to have orange juice with my breakfast instead of milk, that is an arbitrary decision. Choosing orange juice not being allowed and incurring a punishment is an arbitrary restriction on my freedom of choice.The only one who brought up arbitrariness was you when you insisted the restrictions God places on humans are not arbitrary.
>>18348133>Free will should allow one to make arbitrary decisions.Why? Is the freedom you're seeking a freedom from sense and meaning?>orange juice not being allowed and incurring a punishment is an arbitrary restriction on my freedom of choice.Yes, because those two drinks are roughly equivalent. Just like marrying one of two good women would be roughly equivalent. The restrictions are not placed on those and as long as you apriori assume that God's restrictions are arbitrary then yes... you will circularily conclude they are abitrary. But you don't actually have good evidence for that.>you insisted the restrictions God places on humans are not arbitraryCorrect. And I tried to make it obvious in >>18348090 how they're actually pretty sensible in the cases where we can tell.
>>18348073He wasn't lying and he's not the best source.
>>18348138>Why?Why wouldn't itI don't care if the restrictions are "sensible". I am sure North Korea considers their restrictions sensible, but you called them oppressed.>>18348173What's a better one
>>18348212If the freedom you seek is from sense then you're just not talking about the same free will that religious people are talking about. You can discuss it with libertarians but as far as religions go, you're conflating different things. Just like you now tried to conflate sensible restrictions with ones that someone "considers" sensible.
