Community

Oct 11, 2012 -- 12:58PM, Barinellos wrote:

Oct 11, 2012 -- 11:36AM, ReaderAt2046 wrote:

while Rakdos often goes mad but does have a grasp of the proper enjoyment and celebration of God's good gifts.

You do understand that the Rakdos are demon worshippers right?

That's where they go mad. They have a grasp of joy that many of the other guilds lack, but they've fallen into the "if life is forbidden, the forbidden is life" trap, and have lost the distinction between the lawful and unlawful pleasures.

Oct 11, 2012 -- 7:14PM, ReaderAt2046 wrote:

Oct 11, 2012 -- 7:12PM, Jivanmukta wrote:

Oct 11, 2012 -- 7:00PM, ReaderAt2046 wrote:

Oct 11, 2012 -- 1:52PM, Shamsiel wrote:

Of course, Yahweh is evil anyways, so it matters little.

That is a contradiction in terms. Evil is any lack of conformity to or transgression of the law of God. God can no more be evil than light can be darkness.


Why is it that everyone on this forum says such ridiculous things that either they are crazy or they are deliberatly talking utter meaninglessness or they are using words to mean completly different things from the way they are used in English?   

You're gonna have to validate that bullshit with something besides "I believe this". Your anecdotal religious nonsense doesn't fly when having an actual philosophical discussion. 

That is the definition of evil. If you wish to use an alternate definition, I cannot stop you, but it will render discussion impossible since we will be using the same word to mean two completely different things. 

Evil:

Oct 11, 2012 -- 7:18PM, ReaderAt2046 wrote:

The definition I used comes from the Westminster Shorter Catechism. I didn't make it up.  

It's still not the definition that the vast majority of people use. If you wish to hold a discussion you need to use common terms, not expect everyone else to cater to your own.

Oct 11, 2012 -- 7:18PM, ReaderAt2046 wrote:

The definition I used comes from the Westminster Shorter Catechism. I didn't make it up.  

Then you're using a definition from one work which is adhered to only by a small portion of a cult, that is itself a smaller portion of a larger schism that occured after an even larger seperation of a larger religion. You've limited yourself to an acceptable defintion that isn't even shared amongst the majority of Chrisitianity, let alone the larger world. Those aren't standards for a debate, those are standards for a lecture.

Oct 11, 2012 -- 5:26PM, Jivanmukta wrote:

Oct 11, 2012 -- 5:23PM, Barinellos wrote:

Oct 11, 2012 -- 3:56PM, Shamsiel wrote:

I think deities, being just overpowered humans, should be held to the same moral standards, and it so happens that Yahweh is morally analogous to Stalin, if a bit more well intentioned.

That's an absolutely flawed perspective to take, one Beast normally takes.
Things that are larger than humanity cannot be held to a human standard.

Hey! Clearly Azathoth should be judged by our mortal code of ethics and nothing else.

Ah, the whole "ants" argument.

The analogy falls apart when Azathoth is basically an animal, while Yahweh supposedly has a human-like mind. Rational minds MUST be held to a common set of standards.

That is a contradiction in terms. Evil is any lack of conformity to or transgression of the law of God. God can no more be evil than light can be darkness.

For your own sake, I hope you're a troll.

Evil is what is morally wrong, not arbitary rules that make no moral sense. The idea that God encompasses goodness is actually no older than the 20th Century.