FSTDT Forums
Community => Religion and Philosophy => Topic started by: Gnostic Christian on August 22, 2021, 04:37:35 pm
-
If you had the power, would you kill the Trinity?
I have killed many animals. Some with intent and others by accident.
The notion of killing a person, I find abhorrent. Sometimes it is necessary and or just.
After reading reports of God/Yahweh and Jesus killing instead of curing, the opposite of the thing Jesus said he came to do, --- one has to reject and condemn those mass murderers.
Given the Trinity god’s genocidal character, I would gladly kill the Trinity.
Would you?
As Trump would say, Trinity very very bad. Really Bad.
Regards
DL
-
Deicide - how metal.
Puting aside the fact that Yahweh and the Trinity don't exist.
The answer is no. Thanks.
Edit: Also killing animals? Are you doing it for food or fun. So weird.
-
"Our gods are dead. Ancient Klingon warriors slew them millennia ago. They were more trouble than they were worth."
-
If you had the power, would you kill the Trinity?
I have killed many animals. Some with intent and others by accident.
The notion of killing a person, I find abhorrent. Sometimes it is necessary and or just.
After reading reports of God/Yahweh and Jesus killing instead of curing, the opposite of the thing Jesus said he came to do, --- one has to reject and condemn those mass murderers.
Given the Trinity god’s genocidal character, I would gladly kill the Trinity.
Would you?
As Trump would say, Trinity very very bad. Really Bad.
Regards
DL
It's a bit of a conundrum trying to kill the trinity since none of it's component parts are technically alive. JC got stabbed and left on a Roman torture/PR pole, the Holy Ghost, is well - a ghost and the "father", the bit that can be traced back to Yahweh in the OT doesn't have an origin, doesn't exist in this world and lacks key criteria for living things including physicality and a lifespan.
I mean you could argue that an omni-everything entity is "alive" in a meta Star Trek sense, i.e. "not as we know it" but posing a question as to how one offs an omni everything thingy with three dead components that maybe sorta aren't dead is one of those how many angels dance on pinheads queries that doesn't really have an answer which isn't to say people can't argue about it. It's the internet, people can shitpost about anything!
-
If you had the power, would you kill the Trinity?
I have killed many animals. Some with intent and others by accident.
The notion of killing a person, I find abhorrent. Sometimes it is necessary and or just.
After reading reports of God/Yahweh and Jesus killing instead of curing, the opposite of the thing Jesus said he came to do, --- one has to reject and condemn those mass murderers.
Given the Trinity god’s genocidal character, I would gladly kill the Trinity.
Would you?
As Trump would say, Trinity very very bad. Really Bad.
Regards
DL
It's a bit of a conundrum trying to kill the trinity since none of it's component parts are technically alive. JC got stabbed and left on a Roman torture/PR pole, the Holy Ghost, is well - a ghost and the "father", the bit that can be traced back to Yahweh in the OT doesn't have an origin, doesn't exist in this world and lacks key criteria for living things including physicality and a lifespan.
I mean you could argue that an omni-everything entity is "alive" in a meta Star Trek sense, i.e. "not as we know it" but posing a question as to how one offs an omni everything thingy with three dead components that maybe sorta aren't dead is one of those how many angels dance on pinheads queries that doesn't really have an answer which isn't to say people can't argue about it. It's the internet, people can shitpost about anything!
You are partially right on the speculative nonsense aspects of the question.
The reality aspects I concede.
The question is a moral judgement call and thus has an end game on that side.
I see it as asking the S.S. if they still love Hitler.
Better still, like asking Christians if they would light the fuse for Armageddon.
When faced with a truth, Christians run for the hills.
Funny if not so sad.
Regards
DL
-
Deicide - how metal.
Puting aside the fact that Yahweh and the Trinity don't exist.
The answer is no. Thanks.
Edit: Also killing animals? Are you doing it for food or fun. So weird.
I did it for both food and fun.
It was the life style where I grew up.
Why is that weird, when you either do the same thing or support it to survive, just as I do?
As to not killing the genocidal and imaginary Yahweh, why not?
Work in the real world, if you like.
Can I take it that, if given the opportunity, you would not have put that bomb under Hitler?
Regards
DL
-
"Our gods are dead. Ancient Klingon warriors slew them millennia ago. They were more trouble than they were worth."
The Gods never lived to die, but that aside.
The harm that the mainstream god religions do is quite apparent and to flippantly ignore it or not fight against it shows an inferior immoral character.
Do unto others.
Regards
DL
-
Well the bomb under Hitler didn't work. They missed. At what point would you be justified killing Hitler? Would you be justified the moment before he killed himself in a bunker? Would that have helped? It would have only taken away the ignominy of his suicide.
How can you expect to advance when your morality is just as flawed as the person you are replacing.
Don't get me wrong I am all for killing animals for food. I think we should do it as humanely as possible and that farming practices should be with the minimum amount of cruelty (ie not battery farming etc) but the way you phrased it sounds like you a got real kick out of it.
Frankly there is a big difference between slaughtering a chicken for your Sunday roast and fucking it to death mate. You kind of gave off the latter vibe.
-
Well the bomb under Hitler didn't work. They missed. At what point would you be justified killing Hitler? Would you be justified the moment before he killed himself in a bunker? Would that have helped? It would have only taken away the ignominy of his suicide.
How can you expect to advance when your morality is just as flawed as the person you are replacing.
Don't get me wrong I am all for killing animals for food. I think we should do it as humanely as possible and that farming practices should be with the minimum amount of cruelty (ie not battery farming etc) but the way you phrased it sounds like you a got real kick out of it.
Frankly there is a big difference between slaughtering a chicken for your Sunday roast and fucking it to death mate. You kind of gave off the latter vibe.
So to you, those who tried to kill Hitler, even the good ones, FMPOV, were just like Hitler.
An interesting moral position.
I disagree.
Was that "you" you used the Royal you?
If not, show where that was shown.
That's a good lad.
I love to chat with Moral Cowards and other Christians about morals.
They generally run away.
Regards
DL
-
If you had the power, would you kill the Trinity?
I have killed many animals. Some with intent and others by accident.
The notion of killing a person, I find abhorrent. Sometimes it is necessary and or just.
After reading reports of God/Yahweh and Jesus killing instead of curing, the opposite of the thing Jesus said he came to do, --- one has to reject and condemn those mass murderers.
Given the Trinity god’s genocidal character, I would gladly kill the Trinity.
Would you?
As Trump would say, Trinity very very bad. Really Bad.
Regards
DL
It's a bit of a conundrum trying to kill the trinity since none of it's component parts are technically alive. JC got stabbed and left on a Roman torture/PR pole, the Holy Ghost, is well - a ghost and the "father", the bit that can be traced back to Yahweh in the OT doesn't have an origin, doesn't exist in this world and lacks key criteria for living things including physicality and a lifespan.
I mean you could argue that an omni-everything entity is "alive" in a meta Star Trek sense, i.e. "not as we know it" but posing a question as to how one offs an omni everything thingy with three dead components that maybe sorta aren't dead is one of those how many angels dance on pinheads queries that doesn't really have an answer which isn't to say people can't argue about it. It's the internet, people can shitpost about anything!
You are partially right on the speculative nonsense aspects of the question.
The reality aspects I concede.
The question is a moral judgement call and thus has an end game on that side.
I see it as asking the S.S. if they still love Hitler.
Better still, like asking Christians if they would light the fuse for Armageddon.
When faced with a truth, Christians run for the hills.
Funny if not so sad.
Regards
DL
As regards Hitler, I can see that as relevant if we're discussing if it's ever morally right to commit murder, even if it's against a tyrant. I'd cautiously argue that yes, it can be but in the case of killing The Trinity I'd need a lot more information, like how much of the OT and the NT is literally true, parable or hearsay.
We all know what Hitler did, there were a lot of witnesses, photographic evidence and physical evidence. When it comes to biblical history, apart from biblical sources, there's not a lot to go on. Aside from the Hebrew people being a minor kingdom who's existence was acknowledged by the Egyptians and forced into provincial status by the Romans. If you wanted to judge the actions of contemporaneous figures from the time of biblical history like Israelite kings, Roman Emperors and Egyptian pharaohs you'd have an easier time of it because it's easier to piece together what their actions were. That has a big bearing on your original question, would you kill the Trinity. You need to have some evidence of what the Trinity actually did before you start talking about justifiable homicide.
More pertinent is whether this person/party of three still exists, if that could be shown to be true then the case for killing them would become a lot stronger if the New Testament is any guide to its plans or motives. If, for example, the Trinity really was planning to enact Revelations with the whole orgy of violence, wine vats filled with bleeding skulls, ruining of the Earth and indefinite imprisonment/torture for most of the world's population then yes, killing would absolutely be justified and you'd have a very strong case for doing so as it's more defensible to kill for self defence than as a punishment for past actions.
-
Well the bomb under Hitler didn't work. They missed. At what point would you be justified killing Hitler? Would you be justified the moment before he killed himself in a bunker? Would that have helped? It would have only taken away the ignominy of his suicide.
How can you expect to advance when your morality is just as flawed as the person you are replacing.
Don't get me wrong I am all for killing animals for food. I think we should do it as humanely as possible and that farming practices should be with the minimum amount of cruelty (ie not battery farming etc) but the way you phrased it sounds like you a got real kick out of it.
Frankly there is a big difference between slaughtering a chicken for your Sunday roast and fucking it to death mate. You kind of gave off the latter vibe.
So to you, those who tried to kill Hitler, even the good ones, FMPOV, were just like Hitler.
An interesting moral position.
I disagree.
Was that "you" you used the Royal you?
If not, show where that was shown.
That's a good lad.
I love to chat with Moral Cowards and other Christians about morals.
They generally run away.
Regards
DL
For someone who seems to be quite interested in parsing statements you are quite happy to ignore the bits that don't suit you. My main point was the question needs context, such as when this killing would occur.
That was my main point - as in the question of whether it would be justified in killing Hitler needs to be answered by when. To carry on Tolpuddle's point - is there a justification in killing the Trinity if God's already dead?
Also don't be condescending. It doesn't suit.
-
Interesting factoid, its not clear if Gnostics were trinitarians. From Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#Jewish_Christian_origins).
Alexandria was of central importance for the birth of Gnosticism. The Christian ecclesia (i. e. congregation, church) was of Jewish–Christian origin, but also attracted Greek members, and various strands of thought were available, such as "Judaic apocalypticism, speculation on divine wisdom, Greek philosophy, and Hellenistic mystery religions."[30]
Regarding the angel Christology of some early Christians, Darrell Hannah notes:
[Some] early Christians understood the pre-incarnate Christ, ontologically, as an angel. This "true" angel Christology took many forms and may have appeared as early as the late First Century, if indeed this is the view opposed in the early chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Elchasaites, or at least Christians influenced by them, paired the male Christ with the female Holy Spirit, envisioning both as two gigantic angels. Some Valentinian Gnostics supposed that Christ took on an angelic nature and that he might be the Saviour of angels. The author of the Testament of Solomon held Christ to be a particularly effective "thwarting" angel in the exorcism of demons. The author of De Centesima and Epiphanius' "Ebionites" held Christ to have been the highest and most important of the first created archangels, a view similar in many respects to Hermas' equation of Christ with Michael. Finally, a possible exegetical tradition behind the Ascension of Isaiah and attested by Origen's Hebrew master, may witness to yet another angel Christology, as well as an angel Pneumatology.[31]
The pseudepigraphical Christian text Ascension of Isaiah identifies Jesus with angel Christology:
[The Lord Christ is commissioned by the Father] And I heard the voice of the Most High, the father of my LORD as he said to my LORD Christ who will be called Jesus, 'Go out and descend through all the heavens...[32]
So if the Gnostic Christians believed Christ was an angel that'd mean they didn't think he was literally God which is a central tenet of trinitarianism.
Why have we got a 'gnostic Christian' asking us if we want to kill something which his faith doesn't seem to acknowledge anyway?
-
If you had the power, would you kill the Trinity?
I have killed many animals. Some with intent and others by accident.
The notion of killing a person, I find abhorrent. Sometimes it is necessary and or just.
After reading reports of God/Yahweh and Jesus killing instead of curing, the opposite of the thing Jesus said he came to do, --- one has to reject and condemn those mass murderers.
Given the Trinity god’s genocidal character, I would gladly kill the Trinity.
Would you?
As Trump would say, Trinity very very bad. Really Bad.
Regards
DL
It's a bit of a conundrum trying to kill the trinity since none of it's component parts are technically alive. JC got stabbed and left on a Roman torture/PR pole, the Holy Ghost, is well - a ghost and the "father", the bit that can be traced back to Yahweh in the OT doesn't have an origin, doesn't exist in this world and lacks key criteria for living things including physicality and a lifespan.
I mean you could argue that an omni-everything entity is "alive" in a meta Star Trek sense, i.e. "not as we know it" but posing a question as to how one offs an omni everything thingy with three dead components that maybe sorta aren't dead is one of those how many angels dance on pinheads queries that doesn't really have an answer which isn't to say people can't argue about it. It's the internet, people can shitpost about anything!
You are partially right on the speculative nonsense aspects of the question.
The reality aspects I concede.
The question is a moral judgement call and thus has an end game on that side.
I see it as asking the S.S. if they still love Hitler.
Better still, like asking Christians if they would light the fuse for Armageddon.
When faced with a truth, Christians run for the hills.
Funny if not so sad.
Regards
DL
As regards Hitler, I can see that as relevant if we're discussing if it's ever morally right to commit murder, even if it's against a tyrant. I'd cautiously argue that yes, it can be but in the case of killing The Trinity I'd need a lot more information, like how much of the OT and the NT is literally true, parable or hearsay.
We all know what Hitler did, there were a lot of witnesses, photographic evidence and physical evidence. When it comes to biblical history, apart from biblical sources, there's not a lot to go on. Aside from the Hebrew people being a minor kingdom who's existence was acknowledged by the Egyptians and forced into provincial status by the Romans. If you wanted to judge the actions of contemporaneous figures from the time of biblical history like Israelite kings, Roman Emperors and Egyptian pharaohs you'd have an easier time of it because it's easier to piece together what their actions were. That has a big bearing on your original question, would you kill the Trinity. You need to have some evidence of what the Trinity actually did before you start talking about justifiable homicide.
More pertinent is whether this person/party of three still exists, if that could be shown to be true then the case for killing them would become a lot stronger if the New Testament is any guide to its plans or motives. If, for example, the Trinity really was planning to enact Revelations with the whole orgy of violence, wine vats filled with bleeding skulls, ruining of the Earth and indefinite imprisonment/torture for most of the world's population then yes, killing would absolutely be justified and you'd have a very strong case for doing so as it's more defensible to kill for self defence than as a punishment for past actions.
We can only go by what the bible says of the Trinity.
It shows a genocidal Yahweh with Noah's flood and promises Jesus' Armageddon and yet another genocide.
Regards
DL
-
Interesting factoid, its not clear if Gnostics were trinitarians. From Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#Jewish_Christian_origins).
Alexandria was of central importance for the birth of Gnosticism. The Christian ecclesia (i. e. congregation, church) was of Jewish–Christian origin, but also attracted Greek members, and various strands of thought were available, such as "Judaic apocalypticism, speculation on divine wisdom, Greek philosophy, and Hellenistic mystery religions."[30]
Regarding the angel Christology of some early Christians, Darrell Hannah notes:
[Some] early Christians understood the pre-incarnate Christ, ontologically, as an angel. This "true" angel Christology took many forms and may have appeared as early as the late First Century, if indeed this is the view opposed in the early chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Elchasaites, or at least Christians influenced by them, paired the male Christ with the female Holy Spirit, envisioning both as two gigantic angels. Some Valentinian Gnostics supposed that Christ took on an angelic nature and that he might be the Saviour of angels. The author of the Testament of Solomon held Christ to be a particularly effective "thwarting" angel in the exorcism of demons. The author of De Centesima and Epiphanius' "Ebionites" held Christ to have been the highest and most important of the first created archangels, a view similar in many respects to Hermas' equation of Christ with Michael. Finally, a possible exegetical tradition behind the Ascension of Isaiah and attested by Origen's Hebrew master, may witness to yet another angel Christology, as well as an angel Pneumatology.[31]
The pseudepigraphical Christian text Ascension of Isaiah identifies Jesus with angel Christology:
[The Lord Christ is commissioned by the Father] And I heard the voice of the Most High, the father of my LORD as he said to my LORD Christ who will be called Jesus, 'Go out and descend through all the heavens...[32]
So if the Gnostic Christians believed Christ was an angel that'd mean they didn't think he was literally God which is a central tenet of trinitarianism.
Why have we got a 'gnostic Christian' asking us if we want to kill something which his faith doesn't seem to acknowledge anyway?
That is not what we believe.
Start with knowing that we are naturalists, like Christianity used to be, and are not stupid enough to believe in anything supernatural.
Remember that most of what was written, was written from the hands of those who feared the inquisitors.
Study the Cathars if you wish to see what a modern Gnostic Christian is. Their highest possible epitome of a god was a Parfait. A perfected man.
Much like what Chrestianity was before the stupid literal reading of myths screwed up all religions.
The following shows our thinking and why we cherry pick the universalist Gnostic Jesus out of the archetype Jesus' in scriptures.
I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental efforts that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.
https://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2
Further.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html
Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."
Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.
"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."
Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02ciandvg&feature=BFa&list=PLCBF574D
Regards
DL
-
Interesting factoid,
Jesus was never anointed Christ.
Christians run from that fact.
A good thing for Jesus, because literalist would have an androgynous Yahweh and that would make Jesus female.
-
Righto, not for me to define your religion for you. Might have overstepped there.
This is a really weird conversation to be having on this mostly abandoned forum. Thanks for the extra info on gnostics anyway, interesting stuff.
-
I'm not sure you know what androgynous means? I think you will find that if literalists imagined an androgynous Yahweh they wouldn't have a preconception of whether Jesus was male or female or in-between. I think you mean that the literalists imagine a masculine Yahweh.
But if Yahweh is masculine what about 'Elohim'.
I also don't see why a modern gnostic would confine themselves to the authorised versions of scripture and not consider the jewish scriptures, talmud, koran or apocrypha but then again I think about modern gnostics in the same way as I view modern pagans.
-
I'm not sure you know what androgynous means? I think you will find that if literalists imagined an androgynous Yahweh they wouldn't have a preconception of whether Jesus was male or female or in-between. I think you mean that the literalists imagine a masculine Yahweh.
But if Yahweh is masculine what about 'Elohim'.
I also don't see why a modern gnostic would confine themselves to the authorised versions of scripture and not consider the jewish scriptures, talmud, koran or apocrypha but then again I think about modern gnostics in the same way as I view modern pagans.
I am aware and use Jewish thinking when appropriate. We are quite close, given that they are not believers in the supernatural.
Like with Eden, I use their Original Virtue view to oppose the original Sin that Christians label it, then stupidly praise Adam's sin and say it was necessary.
Sounds like Original Virtue more than Original Sin. Right?
I use Christianity because of my Christian heritage.
I owe them a lot and correcting their vile ways is how I try to pay back.
The bible says that that is the loving thing to do.
Call god whatever you like, but Eve came from an androgynous Adam as far as Christianity is concerned.
Regards
DL
-
Exactly what do you think Androgynous means? Also you were talking about Yahweh and not Adam. But now let me guess you are going to say that as 'Yahweh made Adam in his image' if Adam is androgynous so is Yahweh but frankly you were talking about a different topic.
Also the fact that a woman was crafted out of Adam's rib does not make Adam androgynous, nor parthenogenic, because it was not Adam giving birth but God crafting a being, as he crafted Adam out of the dust. In fact really wasn't it just more dust?
Anyway the more you talk the more I suspect you are cooked.
-
Exactly what do you think Androgynous means?
The usual definition of a two natured, male and female god.
Also you were talking about Yahweh and not Adam. But now let me guess you are going to say that as 'Yahweh made Adam in his image' if Adam is androgynous so is Yahweh
Not bad, but don't try to talk for me.
I would have talked more of where the womb came from.
but frankly you were talking about a different topic.
You might have a tracking problem.
Also the fact that a woman was crafted out of Adam's rib does not make Adam androgynous,
Correct.
To think a God would need a man's rib to create is also rather stupid. Right?
That is why literalists have such a hard time doing apologetics.
nor parthenogenic, because it was not Adam giving birth but God crafting a being, as he crafted Adam out of the dust. In fact really wasn't it just more dust?
Don't know, don't care as that is not relavant.
Anyway the more you talk the more I suspect you are cooked.
Ok.
Go away and don't bother coming back.
Regards
DL
-
...........for real bro?
-
It's not my fault if you can't maintain a coherent train of thought you cooked cracker.
My recommendation would be to stop hitting the glass barbeque and fucking animals before you kill them and stick to getting your meat from the supermarket.
-
I'm kinda curious how you make the jump from trinitarian gnosticism to Andro Adam, and what sort of chemical breakfast was involved. Please, continue.
-
" trinitarian gnosticism "
What is that?
Regards
DL
-
Well a "Gnostic" asking us heathens whay we'd do with this Trinity thing would be some kind of Trinitarian. Your question wasn't "would you kill the imaginary thing I don't believe in?"
-
Sorry Tol, I think trying to reason with it is pointless. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense because it's cooked. Whether it's cooked because of crack (which is what I suspect) or cooked because that's just its neurological condition - it is cooked.
Just a spouting machine of oxymoron's, internal contradictions, non-sequiturs and gibberish.
An all you can eat word salad buffet, combined with a deepseated yet undeserved feeling of self importance and an arrogance that can only be born from powerful ignorance.
-
I'm not trying to get actual sense out of it. That's not what I was going for with the Catholic incel, the butthurt reservist or the Gamergate comissar either.
Just seeing what drops out and also if it's shiny!