He is risen!

[Elok]

AAHZ requires tweezers, a magnifying glass, and three hours of horse porn to jerk off.

Lori: you ask why Christ's crucifixion is a bad thing. From their perspective, it wasn't, but the Jews' role in it was. God simply turned their malevolent actions to a good end.

[Lorizael]

You're ignoring the distinction between the effects of one's actions and one's intentions in doing them there. I mean, I can't speak for the medieval types here, and they ignored the part where the Jews they were killing were the distant relations of the ones who did the killing--but even that's not really inconsistent, at least in the West where they held to the Augustinian conception of Original Sin. If everyone is somehow to blame for one guy eating an apple millennia ago, all Jews bearing the guilt of their ancestors isn't much of a stretch. I guess. Anyway, these people were not consequentialists or utilitarians. The good or evil of an action was dependent on its intentions, not its outcome. And in that very limited sense I agree with them; if I try to shoot up a school, but through rank incompetence bring an unloaded gun and thus cause no harm, that does not make my actions morally neutral.

Well, from here it's a hop, skip, and a jump to theodicy, so I guess that's that.

[Elok]

Well, you get what I'm saying, right? John kills his wife as part of an insurance fraud scheme. Had she lived, she would have become a dictator who killed millions. John has done humanity a great service, it's great that he did it in a sense--but it doesn't make him a hero, or anything other than a simple murderer.

Theodicy questions tend to rely on our assumption that God's conception of what is good is, or should be, the same as ours. Given the gap between God's POV and ours, this is not a valid assumption.

[Lorizael]

Yes, but Christians are supposed to strive to have the same conception of good and evil as God, right? Because his conception is basically definitionally correct?

Anyway, the jump to theodicy is, assuming God is omniscient, then he knew sending his son to Earth would end in murder by Jews/Romans. If the singular act of murder--divorced from the resurrection and all that follows--is still evil, then God is responsible for that evil blah blah blah.

I have no interest in settling theodicy. I'm just making the point that a deontological view of Jews killing Jesus takes us in that direction.

[Uncle Sparky]

Христос воскрес !

[Bereta_Eder]

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ ΑΝΕΣΤΗ!

--------

Why did jews give the nails to crusify little baby jesus? why eh? why????

Since we are on the subect are names like peter george etc jewish names? (were they frequent as names in the time of jesus?)

[Bereta_Eder]

and chios priest wins award for most breathtaking entrance

[Nikolai]

I mean, I get that it's propaganda, but I'm trying to give antisemites the benefit of the doubt by assuming there is some coherence to their hatred. It seems entirely plausible to me that there is a slightly more complex (and consistent) explanation for why the Jews killing Jesus was a bad thing that isn't good sound bite material.

As a Christian there is no good reason for antisemitism, and certainly not for cruzifying Christ. However, I think their reasoning is by cruzifying the Lord, they betrayed God and their position as God's chosen people. Bringing in the heretical view that the Church somehow has replaced the Jewish people(despite Biblical texts saying otherwise). I'd imagine the key Biblical verse for the antisemites to be Matthew 27.25.

[I AM MOBIUS]

"Cruzifying the Lord"

[Sava]

Face punch factor: 10

[I AM MOBIUS]

He's probably a hero of Nikolai's

[Elok]

Yes, but Christians are supposed to strive to have the same conception of good and evil as God, right? Because his conception is basically definitionally correct?

Anyway, the jump to theodicy is, assuming God is omniscient, then he knew sending his son to Earth would end in murder by Jews/Romans. If the singular act of murder--divorced from the resurrection and all that follows--is still evil, then God is responsible for that evil blah blah blah.

I have no interest in settling theodicy. I'm just making the point that a deontological view of Jews killing Jesus takes us in that direction.

If there is a God, an afterlife, and all the rest, then we simply do not have enough information--and likely never will in this life--to determine what is "good" or "evil." Our conception of death as a tremendous evil (though affirmed by my sect of Christianity) is fundamentally misguided in its implementation. We're essentially playing a game by the wrong rules, and scolding the DM for not doing likewise. The interaction between God's actions and plans and our own is tricky and drags free will in after theodicy.

[I AM MOBIUS]

And the above is why God doesn't exist. Thanks for playing

[Lorizael]

If there is a God, an afterlife, and all the rest, then we simply do not have enough information--and likely never will in this life--to determine what is "good" or "evil."

Well, you and I certainly agree there.

Our conception of death as a tremendous evil (though affirmed by my sect of Christianity) is fundamentally misguided in its implementation. We're essentially playing a game by the wrong rules, and scolding the DM for not doing likewise. The interaction between God's actions and plans and our own is tricky and drags free will in after theodicy.

Yeah, God not having to follow the same rules as us is one answer to theodicy, but going down that route makes it even harder to say anything definitive at all about God, which is why I personally don't try.

And the above is why God doesn't exist. Thanks for playing

This is not even wrong (not a compliment).

[Elok]

I'm still not totally sure why I'm religious, though I know that I am. I think the bottom reason is that what most or all major religions have in common is not so much God but the notion that human beings are sick and broken. I find this to be true, so I follow the advice of people who've been thinking about human brokenness for a long, long time. I allow that, being so broken, we may have gotten any number of things wrong. But it still seems better to do the best I can, from my limited perspective, to become less broken. Really I don't have any choice, it seems; true nihilism is not psychologically feasible, and I can't swallow attempts to downplay our bugs or recast them as features. That leaves religion, and I find Orthodoxy the most compelling of faiths.