this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
1574 points (98.8% liked)

Comic Strips

12397 readers
3501 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Its funny, I did the same thing and it actually destroyed any vestiges of faith I still had. The more I know about Christianity/Catholicism, the less I believed. Too much self contradictory bullshit, and too much preaching without enough action to go with the words.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Christianity/Catholicism? Don't you mean just Roman Catholicism? As you can have Christianity without the Roman Catholicism. When I was researching faith and religion, I was able to rule out Roman Catholicism. I know what you mean about self contradictory BS (things such as purgatory being unbiblical, perpetual virginity of mary despite Matthew's gospel strongly implying that she consummated her marriage and the Bible mentioning Jesus' brothers several times, etc). As with preaching and action - I care more about the faith and my own spirituality than letting myself be defined by what others are doing. Of course, I'll always call people out when they are being heretical and/or abusive or misusing the faith (I remember there was an Indian guy who claimed to have converted to Christianity but I later realised he did it because he hated Muslims so much, and he ended up actually dropping his identity as a "Christian" because I kept telling him that Christians cannot call for a mass extermination of a religious group. Pretty funny but also a sad story), but I wouldn't stop being a Christian just because other Christians are being hypocrites. Why should I let them take what Jesus did for me away from me?

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Christianity/Catholicism? Don’t you mean just Roman Catholicism?

No, christianity as a whole. The sourcebook is a self contradictory slapfight perpetuated by whomever translated the particular copy you're looking at, and is a convenient shield for those who choose not to follow the faith, but want a way to hurt/control others while pretending they do.

There are a lot of good lessons to take out of the sourcebook, but there's more chaff than wheat to be had, and I just have no time for it anymore.

Why should I let them take what Jesus did for me away from me?

No one is saying you should let them take that from you. But you don't have to be a christian to be a good person and to use the positives you gained from your experience. I took the good parts of the religion and moved on with my life. I'm still a good person and have the beliefs my christian family instilled in me, I just don't care to surround myself with religious types for reasons that most religious people feel offended by.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why should I let them take what Jesus did for me away from me?

Why did God have to send his son to die for you? Why can't he just decide not to punish people without requiring a blood offering?

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Because then there's no justice for sin. God is perfectly just, and forgiving people for no reason isn't justice

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

But God is the one doing the justice, right? Why does he have to have a blood offering? Sending his son to die when he could merely decide to forgive without a blood offering feels weird. The one who would punish us if it didn't happen would be god himself. He could simply choose not to carry out that punishment rather than going through the act of having his son literally die an excruciating death.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If he forgave everyone for no reason, then there's no justice and sin goes unpunished.

If someone damages your car and you forgave them for it, would that mean there's no payment? No, you'd pay for it yourself. So God paid for the price of our sin Himself.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If someone damages my car and I want to forgive them I don't have to spill blood to do it. I could simply choose to not call the cops or whatever.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You'd still have to pay for the damage though, which is the cost of your car being damaged. Meanwhile, the cost of our sin is death.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't see how you can believe God is omnipotent while also being utterly incapable of choosing to not punish people without killing his son. All the metaphors you make break down because it's all god in control. God chose what is and is not a sin. God is the one punishing for breaking those rules. But suddenly God is incapable of choosing to not punish people without literally murdering his son? And God sends people to hell for the "sin" of not "accepting" this "forgiveness" when he could've just chosen not to punish us? God subjects people to an infinite amount of suffering for a finite amount of wrongdoing? Possibly even the only wrongdoing of not accepting him if you otherwise followed everything? Even if they literally never even heard of God?

If God is real then he's psychopathic.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

God paid the price Himself. How's this psychopathic? How could a perfect being exist in a perfect realm with people running about committing atrocities?

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

It's awfully dramatic to kill yourself and say that accepting you did it means people get forgiveness from your own wrath instead of simply choosing to not punish people if they accept you. How is it not gas lighting? "The only way for me to forgive you for the wickedness of original sin is for me to kill myself and for you to accept that. No, I can't just choose to not send people to hell if they believe in me, I have to also kill myself." How can that not be viewed as guilt tripping people?

The entire concept of original sin is also horrible because Adam and Eve literally did not know the difference between right and wrong when they sinned. They did not know what they were doing was wrong. They did not know the difference between good and evil until they ate the fruit. So God punishes all of humanity for all eternity just because two people made an honest mistake?

God subjects people to an infinite amount of suffering in hell if they die as a baby because two people did something wrong when they literally didn't didn't even know right from wrong.

The idea of calling any of this justice is beyond me.