>>42139254
No it really doesn't. God exists in perpetual bliss. Prior to his incarnation as Christ, he had literally never suffered. If he had never created us, he could have existed just as himself totally satisfied never suffering a single moment. Tragedy is just a cudgel humans are beaten with. It means absolutely nothing. If your life were just endlessly bountiful, you would not for a second wish for tragedy to befall you. God is callous in his ignorance. Misery is made for us.

>>42139263
Nah I’ve accepted that if we are a great creation of god’s, we are one that he feels duty bound to not interfere with (except he breaks his own rules sometimes like with Jesus - like one often does occasionally with their own child) he loves us but wants us to succeed without much interference even though he theoretically could. I can actually understand and appreciate this view. I’m not saying that it is true. I’m just saying that I can accept a loving god. Yaldy doesn’t have to be the only explanation.

>>42139279
My opinion is that God loves us in a way that is totally alien and unidentifiable as affection by human standards which is why he's comfortable with allowing his apostles, who he apparently 'loved,' to be boiled alive or sawed in half from the balls up. God would not ever hug you. His love for you is remote and transactional. You trust him, he hurts you. You are expected to continue trusting him despite knowing better. Job was lucky God decided to relent and reward him in the end. Most people God does that shit to just die. Or worse.

>>42139254
>>42139286
All cope for being goycattle.

>>42139295
bait

>>42139254
>can be loving and allow bad things to happen
Yes, of course.
It just means that creator cant be all powerful.
>tragedy gives meaning to beauty and love
Why did the creator make it this way?
Why didnt the creator have love and beauty have meaning WITHOUT tragedy?
Your answer is because he CANT.
The creator CANT have meaning in love and beauty without there also being tragedy.
They dont have the power to remove tragedy, or suffering.
So there is no reason to ask them to help with it.

>>42139302
I'm saying he does have the ability to interfere but chooses not to as he feels duty-bound not to interfere, it goes against his ethics if let's say "free-will" is his experiment. Although, he sometimes wants to nudge this experiment in certain ways because he actually cares for life and wants life to succeed - so he occasionally uses avatars to do so. This way I can reconcile god's inaction with a morality that I can at least find peace with and understand from the perspective of a creator. If that makes sense.

>>42139328
>the ability to interfere
I didnt ask about interfere. I asked why he made it so beauty and love have no meaning without tragedy.
Nothing you wrote addresses the fact that this creator deliberately made the world include suffering.
This creator did this because he WANTS suffering for no reason other than suffering.
Or it was done because the creator CANT do it without suffering.

>>42139340
The creator set the variables and the variables created suffering.

>>42139381
Does the creator have the ability to have the same variables and the same end result without the suffering arising?
Or is that something they cant do?

>>42139895
They can but they are ethically bound (self-imposed) to not interfere with the experiment as it takes it’s course. The experiment has not reached its end result yet.

>>42139254
OK, congrats on being a self admitted retard.

>>42139940
>They can
Then they are deliberately adding suffering without reason, that is not benevolent and I judge it evil.

File: knights.png (222 KB, 392x377)

222 KB PNG

>>42139254
Well done
You've cleared the second hurdle of the path towards true faith

>>42139995
Their reason for allowing suffering is because it is a byproduct of free will. Suffering in nature is not immoral imo, and suffering caused my men is a reality caused by freedom. I’m okay with that. What would be evil is if suffering was thrusted upon us purposely rather than circumstance, which I simply don’t believe anymore

>>42139254
There's great reason and justification in it. I'm not telling you why because it doesn't matter what is said.
one day God will be confirmed by le science(math) and then we'll truly be fucked
because we'll read it and nothing will change in us
intellectual ascent is pointless
I will not appeal to the recursive cause and effect deterministic retard brain
let it go to hell. it's the only place for it.
really need an answer? ask Him yourself. no answer? suck it up.

>>42139286
A brother who sees the reality of the state of affairs!

>>42139279
One thing about having a child is that you are confronted with your own flaws when they question, mirror, and frustrate you and you still are fully responsible for their dependency and fair discipline unlike when that happens with adult humans. Although this is the greatest challenge of all, if you embrace the responsibilities you discover yourself anew and grow to be a more mature person along with your child as you guide them.
In an analogous sense, letting us develop without interfering could be his process of learning compassion and separating good from evil, as we make choices and affect each other.
Maybe the point in time at which we succeed is the part of him that sees the value in our suffering and understands our desire to escape it.

>>42139254
People who say this deserve to have the worst things happen to them. Because if it's not happening to you, then you are offloading that pain onto someone else, which is unfair because you affirmed that pain and they didn't.

>>42139299
He's unironically right though, religion is a trap

>>42140104
no more than being anti-religion is. don't pretend you aren't stuck in dualities

>>42140097
It is repulsive and inhuman when people use their happiness to justify others’ unhappiness, and use focus on good to rationalize turning their attention away from those who need their help, but it’s how our current economic system operates so it’s completely naturalized

I have accepted that some people get dick parasites (not me) and that it's... well basically it's a good thing!

>>42139302
The creator is all powerful.
You're touching on the concepts, but you clearly need help articulating them.
Power itself isnt everything.
Even with all power/knowledge/observation there are still things you cannot do, because even omnipotence itself has an upper logical limit.
>Can God make a rock so big he can't lift it and then slift it anyway?
Yes
>can God know what you're going to do and still be surprised to see you do it?
Yes

>>42139263
God fragmented himself into us so that he could know pain, sorrow, strength, endurance, conquest, and thus a far greater bliss than previously known.

>>42141242
It goes deeper than that.
Define not-God.
I'll wait.

>>42139254
>as if you had a choice
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Af-k9sTAYEQ&pp=0gcJCcUKAYcqIYzv

>>42139254
>child rape gives meaning to love and beauty
Your weak mind has been shattered to pieces and you've accepted evil as a consequence.

>>42140021
>it is a byproduct of free will.
Do they have the ability of giving free will without suffering??
Or are they INCAPABLE of this?
> if suffering was thrusted upon us purposely rather than circumstance
The creator - unless they CANT have the same without suffering - added suffering for no reason.
They set up- the rules for the variables.,
They COULD have everything exactly the same, just with no suffering.
They CHOOSE not to.
That is why its evil.

>>42141235
>there are still things you cannot do
Okay.
Your answer is that the creator is not all powerful, and they CANT do it.
That's fine.

>>42141385
It’s hard to explain but basically what I think is that our creator had full control of the experiment but does not know outcomes until they happen, then grasps with it fully. He is bound by a code of ethics to not interfere even if he wants to. Suffering was not intentional, nor even free will, but now that it has occurred he feels it is his duty to not interfere. Although, sometimes he uses his influence in the form of avatars to nudge his experiment to a desired outcome, as one would do to their offspring. I do believe it is within his power to not do so, but perhaps he is not all knowing when it comes to the nature of causality. Thus when suffering arises he was naturally taken aback but felt it was outside of his role to interfere. Eventually this got to being far too much so he sent an avatar, let’s say Jesus, to offer an alternative to suffering.

Alternatively he is all knowing but his intelligence is unknown or ununderstandable to us and reality is his way of uncovering himself/knowledge.

I’m not even saying I believe this, essentially I’m saying I’ve recently accepted that a good, all powerful deity “could” exist.

>>42141516
>our creator had full control of the experiment
You aren't listening to what I am asking.
Creator had full control.
Okay.
So can the creator give the EXACT SAME VARIABLES and get the EXACT SAME RESULTS without including suffering?
Yes or no?

>>42141516
>a good, all powerful deity “could” exist.
They COULD.
The creator, if all powerful, COULD have made this exact same world with all the same variables with all the same free will - just without suffering.
The fact that there is suffering means they DIDNT.
So either they COULDNT - which you aren't accepting.
Or it was a choice, and that choice is evil.

File: 1737922378525141.gif (67 KB, 400x400)

67 KB GIF

why you are talking about? there is not a "Sky daddy" with a white beard and a nice throne there are just the archons and the soul matrix

>>42143924
I don’t think suffering in nature is evil I guess. It just is. The suffering inflicted by man onto man is, but that is a result of free will which is something I can live with.

>>42144008
>I don’t think suffering in nature is evil
You can have your judgement.
It doesn't change anything.
Suffering is there, and either God chose that for no outside reason, or God can't do away with suffering.

>>42144008
>. It just is.
No. Nothing was before God created it.
Unless you are saying suffering exists independent of God, and is outside his influence.
>suffering inflicted by man onto man is, but that is a result of free will
Either God CHOSE to make suffering included in free will for no reason other than he wants us to suffer, or God CANT give free will without suffering.
If he CANT, fine.
If he COULD, and didn't, I judge that evil.

>>42139263
How anybody with any logical thought can take jdawg serious is preposterous. In fact all Abrahamic religions are hogwash but carry on.

How do you measure the weight of a soul if it's not by inducing suffrage and then seeing how it reacts? A god could love you and hold you accountable all at the same time. Forcing suffrage wouldn't even be a sign of hate, indifference would be. See YOU don't understand what love is so how can you point a finger at a higher being? You lack understanding of the simplest shit let alone big boy concepts. Your entire thought process is naive and closeted.

>>42144087
Free will isn’t free if you can’t inflict suffering on others

>>42144131
So you are saying god CANT do it.
I honestly dont get why this is such a problem for people.

>>42139254
>he cant appreciate beauty without something really horrible being next to it for his feeble mind
What a retard

>>42144275
Neither can you, neither can any human that has ever lived. The alternative is not within our purview.

>>42144281
NTA
It doesnt take polarity, it takes comparison.
You dont ever need negative numbers to understand 5 is greater than 3, or that 7 is greater still. And you can continue that comparison going greater and greater and thus always understand the increase without ever needing to go into negative.
The reason it takes polarity in this place is because this place is limited.
But with an unlimited god in an unlimited realm, you could have every moment be better than the last.
You could always understand that you are happier and more joyful at every moment without ever needing to feel bad.

>>42144317
But I don’t want to be happy all the time. I just don’t. Similarly, if one feels the most content in melancholia what is his numerical value then? Experience is not some quantifiable thing. I’m starting to think that emotion and feeling are beyond our ability to describe nor comprehend, truly.

>>42144328
>But I don’t want to be happy all the time.
I dont believe you. You are imagining some events or process that leads to happy, not the happy itself.
>if one feels the most content
and then, whatever that state is, it gets bettter the next moment. And then better the next moment.
At no point does the person ever need to feel worse to feel better again.

>>42139254
if God exist and allow bad things to happen then he is a bigger fag than you
>dude, i give kids cancer and brain tumors because reasons trust the plan lmao

>>42139254
>Cake tastes better after being kicked in the balls

>>42140021
By allowing evil people free will the free will of good people is getting violated. "Free will" is a sick joke. Literal children are being raped to death and eaten in tunnels because of the "free will" of evil people. Many good people are forced to engage in modern day slavery against their will because of the "free will" of evil people.

Evil being given free will fundamentally violates free will. Stop using this "free will" concept as justification for evil. It is intellectually lazy.

>>42139254
why are you wasting your time worrying about a creator instead of working on transforming yourself internally? even the historical full buddha didn't bother addressing the retarded question. it's a waste of time