>>259376 No but it’s true, you could say you hate the notion of whatever god you dislike, or you could say you hate — capitalized and all ‘God’. OP do you have trouble expressing what you mean or did you just want a certain type of traction on your post? Just ask if there’s other ways to obtain spirituality without following Abrahamic religions, or take a good look at yourself and what you actually believe
>I hate G*d I believe this is the third stage of grief. For me, depression came between anger and bargaining, but to each her own. I uhh… I decided to believe my life was a movie and people were watching me be sad. I needed someone to feel sad for me who wasn't me. But then I promised I'd try whatever I could to pick myself up. I live in this weird limbo where I both do believe and don't believe in a higher power.
>>259365 Kierkegaard is a bit overrated, in the same way Don Giovanni was overrated by Kierkegaard (I don't think there was a single line in either/or that I found insightful). The lily and bird book was ok I guess, but I don't get what's so great about the guy. Feel free to explain why he helped you I guess.
God can only be a She if she's real. Spirituality is good soothing practice, it's humanity's favorite cope. They always end up with either a monotheistic God or a pantheon or they replace all that with worldly preoccupations like activism, politics, conspiracy theories, sciences or charity work. There is always something to grasp for straws at, otherwise we'd all go insane from the meaninglessness.
Why not make God your religion? She is eternal, she will never fail you or betray you. Her is love is eternal is all-encompassing and engulfing. You were engulfed by it the second you were conceived. The only law she knows is Karmic Law. The knowledge of which will soothe you, because she is fair, even if you can't see it play out immediately.
>>259356 god is real- motion exists in our universe. motions were caused by prior motions. motion happens over a course of time. you cannot have an infinite regress of motions, because if time extended infinitely into the past, we could not have gotten to today. therefore, a first motion was started by an unmoved mover, what we could call God.
once you establish the existence of god, the historicity for the resurrection of Christ establishes christianity as the true religion.
>>260087 >you cannot have an infinite regress of motions, because if time extended infinitely into the past, we could not have gotten to today. Your ???? phase makes no sense.
>>260090 this is just a pretty simple mathematical concept. if time extended infinitely into the past, you logically could not have reached any given day, because you would have had to wait infinitely to arrive at that day, which is impossible.
>>260097 i'm proving it by stating the logic of it. time has a definite beginning point and does not go infinitely backward, because you cannot form an actual infinity in reality with success addition. if time stretched infinitely into the past, you could not have reached today nor any specific day at all due to this fact, which showcases the absurdity of a true infinity such as that existing in our universe.
>>259356 Read Parable of the Sower by Octavia Butler. Look into Octavia Butler's religion, Earthseed. God is not seen as a sentient being to be worshipped or anything like that. God is just another word for change.
Earthseed's core tenets: >All that you touch You Change. >All that you Change Changes you. >The only lasting truth Is Change. >God Is Change. >God exists To shape >And to be shaped. >The Destiny of human beings is to take root among the stars; to leave Earth would be leaving humanity's 'childhood' and entering 'adulthood' by exploring other planets.
>>260441 fair enough. the end-point of every christian athiest debate. i think personally that science proves that there has to be a God. "eternal mover," and all that, i never really understood how an anti-theist viewpoint could hold up but that's just me
epicureanism might be cool for you. Basically, God is the source of life, but God is also an impersonal unemotional floating ball of atoms, or space dust, or whatever. So it's our source of life but we don't have to "obey" it or whatever.
>>260890 I remember it differently. On the road, she "dates" an old guy (but she is 15?), and eventually their survivor group find some decent land in the mountain.
>>260892 It's really sad that this is all you remember about the book. You missed the entire point. Just goes to show some people are completely blinded by wanting to push a women-are-always-victims-to-men narrative.
You should really read it again, and read the sequel, Parable of the Talents, if the ending to Parable of the Sower was too happy for you
>>260907 >>260890 >all I remember about reading this is that it ends in a deus ex machina wherein all her problems are solved by letting an older man rape her. o_o
>>260907 >>260911 >>260915 >>260916 I've never read this book. I did read an Octavia Butler story named Bloodchild, which had some mild controversy due to the main character's age. I can say pretty definitively that it was necessary to that story to make the male pregnancy carried by a 13 year old boy. In Bloodchild, Gan's young age and the fact that he is nowhere near through with puberty before being expected to carry the brood of a being older than his own mother is thematically paramount. There is no way to effectively write the story in any other way with characters of any other age. Bloodchild could not work as a story if Gan was an adult man, or if the brood-queen to whom he was betrothed from the moment of his birth were of merely human lifespan. I have to assume that it was similarly necessary in The Parable of the Sower to make its protagonist a mid-teenager who grows into an adult, and also necessary to make her eventual love interest someone older than a parent. In Bloodchild, Butler's taking us to that place of unbearable discomfort and asking us to understand how difficult these uncomfortable choices really are if and when you can't just dismiss the broodmother as an ebil ayyylmo. So: what's she really doing in The Parable of the Sower? She's earned enough trust as an author that I am sure she's doing something meaningful, but you've not really explained it.
>>260448 That sound similar to the philosophy of Heraclitus >No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man. There is nothing permanent except change.
I remember when I was so mad and wanted to disprove the fact that we're more than flesh and I kept analyzing the reality until I found the proof of "god" (i'm not religious and dont believe in one god entity I just dont know how else to call it). It was weird and I don't even remember my exact thought process