What annoys me (or ig I have questions about) is that everyone thinks god is a man. I don’t think he’s a man! I think it’s an entity that poses both masculine and feminine traits aka NONBINARY god. There’s so much evidence of it in indigenous cultures. It’s even written in Aztec & Greek mythology. IDK someone explain to me.
i don’t know how to explain how the fear and praise work together. i understand it but i don’t know how to put it into words. and as for hell, i really believe that the burning is the best way for people to understand the concept of it, but it’s not literal. God is all things good, and if you don’t believe in Him, then there’s no reason to want to be around Him, but lack of God is lack of all good, which is hell. (i’m a liberal catholic). in no way am i trying to force anyone to believe any of +
FYI Halloween literally has Christian origins. Not 100% but it literally does have some history connected to it. There r just some ppl who like to ruin shit n I don’t think those ppl should be associated w religion as a whole. There’s always subgroups of everyone religion that takes shit way too far but I think that applies to everything
Ugh!! It’s so annoying how easily Christian values can be bent whichever way to suit ppl’s opinions. I grew up catholic and have had a lot of education on the religion. It’s always interesting to meet someone who preaches Catholicism or Christianity but knows nothing abt it. Like friendly reminder judging ur friend is a sin equally as weighted as a divorce or being gay. My college roommate thought Santa used to actually exist but st Nicholas was quite literally a real person
also going to hell is actively interpreted as a choice based on your nature. like if you’re a good person and do good things then you’re not going to hell because you’re “embracing God” (aka love and goodness etc) by being a good person. people who weaponize God to hate are the ones going to hell
The issue with that line of thinking: what is the threshold for what God is supposed to prevent before he’s worthy of worship? If we were unable to feel pain, or catch disease, or hate each other, what would make us human? Why would we exist at all if not to live and occasionally suffer? I’ve always thought, the fact that we FEEL bad about children suffering is only a testament to our humanity. It says nothing of the objective rightness or wrongness of the matter.
Whether a child is too young to walk and receiving chemo is just as amoral as if that child lives 70 years and then gets cancer. All this to say, your belief or non-belief in God cannot reasonably have anything to do with how much people suffer in this world. To some, the children being able to receive chemotherapy is a blessing worth more than gold. To those people, it is God’s blessing that children can receive chemotherapy.
My personal beliefs are closest to #4’s, except that I don’t think God exists as a unified form. I think that is a useful representation, though. I just haven’t been able to fully believe it. God is effectively just cause and effect. There are behaviors that have heavenly effects and behaviors that have hellish ones. Holy books try to outline what those behaviors are and enforce them through visceral fear - an effective tactic.
I believe that human beings are drawn to religion and other “implicitly true” sources of meaning. In a sense, those who believe they have no religion are worse than those who know what they believe. For some, it’s the belief that the earth is holy and her nature and beauty must be preserved, even at the cost of human life. That is one of the oldest religions there is. For others, it’s hedonic sexual expression, and the holiness of that sort of freedom. Another religion that predates history.
God seems to be a representation of causes and effects that underlie all we know and what we don’t know we know. Obviously God cannot be contained by words, thoughts, or even physics. How then can God “exist”? If God is not even constrained by existence itself, is He not simply what we make him to be? Is He not the inexplicable phenomena we observe, and the empirical data we have gathered over millennia?
Over time, we found that living in certain ways creates lives that are indistinguishable from heaven, and living in other ways takes us to hell. Sins - lying, stealing, sexual immodesty, backbiting - all bring hefty social consequence. Is social consequence not hell for such gregarious animals as we? Insofar as we apprehend our psyches as multifarious, is social consequence meaningfully distinguishable from psychological consequence?
The ideal state for a say, Christian for example, is not living in fear of sin; it’s living a life such that you align yourself with what pleases God. The fear comes as a natural consequence - we all fear doing wrong, and we have to. Does a progressive fear becoming an alt-right Nazi or do they simply align with progressive values. If a half-baked progressive was born to extreme progressive parents, would the parents not treat Nazi-ism as fearful sin?….
….Would our half-baked progressive not feel fear if they found themselves even considering any ideas approaching Nazi-ism. This fear is what is latent in all ideologies of good and evil. It is taken for granted by supporters of any ideology that the facets of their ideology bring only good consequences to their supporters. The ideal belief in a “good” ideology is not a constant fear of straying from that ideology, but unquestioning alignment with the doctrine.