I call it, god, the Tyrant.
this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
321 points (93.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43755 readers
1240 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Misothiest is the term I heard.
Yet the first words there say
Misotheism is the "hatred of God"
so that's a different thing.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Isn't the god supposed to define what good and evil even is, and wouldn't therefore any monotheistic god be "good" by definition?!
That's only one (narrow) definition of a god.
To take a well known example, is Loki "good"?
It's the definition monotheism employs though, and Loki is from a polytheistic pantheon.
All good, The comment I replied to has been edited to specify monotheism after I wrote my reply.
Yea sorry for that, I had the same thought as you right after I posted my comment.
That's what people say, but in practice people have their own ideas and just project them on to god.
There is no reason to believe that a higher power cares about the concepts of good and evil to begin with. Taking a walk through the woods seems like a morally neutral activity, but all of the insects you crush along the way might view you as evil for what you do to them.
Somewhat off-topic, but there's this line of thought, which multiple Christian thinkers have come up with throughout the centuries, called the Ontological Argument. It basically tries to prove the existence of the Christian God with only pure logic, no axioms involved.
Proofs without axioms don't exist elsewhere, so take the following with a massive grain of salt, but basically it goes:
God is a maximally good being. Existence of a maximally good being is itself good. Therefore, God must exist.
Aside from this being circular reasoning, it also involves a massive axiom: The existence and definition of good vs. bad.
But with your point, we can advance the argument even further:
Defining what's good is good.
That way, we get twice the circular reasoning, but no axioms anymore. ๐
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
A toddler who fries ants with a lens isn't evil, though.
At least not more evil than most toddlers.
A toddler
A toddler with the motor skills to use a and the ability understand how to focus light with a lens is basically a god. It's not happening. The expected intelligence milestone for a 4 year old is three word sentences.
load more comments
(2 replies)
My limited experience with going to Church of God places indicated to me that they hold this belief, but I do jot know the term for it. They didn't pray to god, they prayed to Jesus, specifically. And cried for him. And thanked him. And apologized to him. And so on. All to Jesus, not god, who are apparently different.
The idea of the Trinity is not the same across all "Christian" religions, see Arianism for example of an early split.
I'd never heard of them, but I looked them up, and I don't see anything in their declaration of beliefs to suggest that they think that God is bad or evil. They just seem to have an emphasis on praying to Jesus, but they seem to have pretty standard Christian belief that God and Jesus and the Holy Ghost are all parts of the same being.
I am not sure how aligned all of the different Church of God denominations are in their beliefs, but the main website for them seems to be pretty standard Christian stuff.
You're right, I just mentioned them as an example of splits about exactly what has gone on with the differing beliefs about trinity interpretation. I don't recall that they believed in an evil god. I do recall that some interpretations have other feelings and operate as such.
The Arians and the Church of God are probably not really connected to what op is getting at. I'm definitely not a theologist haha! Maybe I should stay oiy of this...
They certainly didn't start out this way, but the terms gnosticism and manichaeism are now both used loosely for this depending on the context.
Adaptus Ministorum