6 ms·

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by "as bitter as this"? Reading the story with no context, it seems almost reverential to Christianity: We're in the

by ud_0 5y ago

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by "as bitter as this"? Reading the story with no context, it seems almost reverential to Christianity: We're in the far future and space-faring humans still worship the old religion(s). A supernova that occurred roughly during the time of a key event in the religion's history turned out to have killed off another distant civilization. There is an observation that bad things can happen to good civilizations and how that doesn't square with a benevolent creator deity. Do you perceive one of these as harsh criticism or was there some other issue in the text that I missed?

nine_k 5y ago
Here he basically accuses God of destroying a beautiful and desperate world to produce the light show at the Christ's birth time on Earth. I don't see much reverence in this, just a recognition of power, like that a powerful villain might have.
- pantalaimon 5y ago
  How can he accuse one who does not exist? The story merely describes a cosmic catastrophe, that some people in a primitive tribe that had not discovered science yet would interpret as a sign of god, much like lightning. And the irony that this event that became so central to this religion was in fact a stellar cataclysm that had nothing to do with earth.
- knolan 5y ago
  He’s not accusing god of anything, he’s pointing out that what one primitive civilisation saw as a sign from some supernatural being was a cosmic event with local consequences for another civilisation. He also shows how those beliefs, which in part survive from that early civilisation, are dissonant with our understanding of the universe. It’s like a child’s belief that heaven sits on the clouds flying in a aeroplane for the first time.
- boxed 5y ago
  Have you read the Bible? It's full of stuff like this. The story of the children who teased a priest so God sent a bear to kill them is a good example.
  - arunix 5y ago
    I had to look that one up. To be fair, the text says that the two bears attacked 42 boys after Elisha cursed the boys, and doesn't mention if the attack was fatal. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=1531400 https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=... (2 Kings 2, 24)
    - johnhenry 5y ago
      Not sure if this is a joke, or if you are defending God's actions?
      - b112 5y ago
        All I see is someone trying to ensure accuracy. Are you conflating accuracy with defending? Do you believe a wrong, should result in an alteration of truth, to make it look worse?
        johnhenry 5y ago
        Straightforward answers to your questions: No. No. But, I believe you have missed the point. It's problematic to send a bear to attack someone -- particularly if you are the all-powerful, all-knowing creator of the universe with other methods at your disposal. Whether or not the victim dies is besides the point.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - krapp 5y ago
    Also God letting Satan ruin Job's life (a canonically righteous man) over a bet on whether God was as awesome as He claimed. When God shows up in the last act to rebuke Job's friends for complaining about His - again, canonically unjust treatment of Job, His reply is an extended monologue about how awesome He is. ... although to be fair, Job 38 is one of the most epic parts of the Bible, hands down. When YHWH goes in, He goes in. Also God hardening Pharoah's heart when he already wanted to let the Israelites go, in order to complete the plagues and flex on Egypt and its gods. Said plagues ended, remember, with the first Passover event and the murder of every firstborn child and animal in Egypt. And Sodom and Gomorrah, particularly the part where God and Abraham haggle over the lower bound of righteous people it takes to avoid genocide. This is apparently at least ten. ... speaking of which, that time God commands Ezekiel to lie on his side and eat bread baked over human shit for over a year. Ezekiel objects, because the latter would be against God's own law (while the former is just sadistic torture,) and God says fine, he can use cow shit instead, just get on with it. And the Tower of Babel. God sees that humanity united and speaking a single language is capable of anything as they try to build a tower that reaches the heavens, so He curses humanity with multiple languages to confuse them and impede human progress. This was a particular dick move on God's part, and we're probably lucky Heaven was moved somewhere less easily accessible before we learned how to build skyscrapers or go into space. And Jesus cursing a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season. Not as much death and suffering as in the other cases but still petty AF for a guy who can literally create food from nothing.
deknos 5y ago
well, as i understand it, it is the star of betlehem which showed humanity that its saviour is born, the saviour which saves mankind and with that god destroyed another sentient species which is very similar to us. how would you feel about that, if your believesystem said a genocide of another race of sentient, potentially benevolent people by god had to happen, so that you get the message your saviour came around?
- boxed 5y ago
  The same god who also required a human sacrifice (which was also sort of himself) to back away from his own cruelty? Seems totally congruent.
  - Sharlin 5y ago
    This is something I've never understood.Are there any reasonable theological arguments for why he had to resort to what amounts to an elaborate ploy, in order to work around his own arbitrary rules of who gets saved?
    - jbeninger 5y ago
      A character asks that question in Hyperion, by another sci-fi author (Dan Simmons). The answer he arrived at was that God was not testing Abraham. He was allowing Abraham to test God. When God stayed his hand at the last moment, he knew that he'd met a god worth following. (I'm not religious myself, but I did find this to be an interesting-enough interpretation to parrot it back to you on a web forum)
      - Sharlin 5y ago
        No, I was talking about Jesus (I believe the GP was as well). The Jesus situation is an interesting inversion of the Abraham dilemma though. This time God is prepared to sacrifice his own son – but we sort of failed the test by design, executing the sacrifice as planned even though we could have just let Jesus live. Not sure what it says about us or God.

by ud_0 5y ago

nine_k 5y ago

Here he basically accuses God of destroying a beautiful and desperate world to produce the light show at the Christ's birth time on Earth. I don't see much reverence in this, just a recognition of power, like that a powerful villain might have.

pantalaimon 5y ago
How can he accuse one who does not exist? The story merely describes a cosmic catastrophe, that some people in a primitive tribe that had not discovered science yet would interpret as a sign of god, much like lightning. And the irony that this event that became so central to this religion was in fact a stellar cataclysm that had nothing to do with earth.
knolan 5y ago
He’s not accusing god of anything, he’s pointing out that what one primitive civilisation saw as a sign from some supernatural being was a cosmic event with local consequences for another civilisation. He also shows how those beliefs, which in part survive from that early civilisation, are dissonant with our understanding of the universe. It’s like a child’s belief that heaven sits on the clouds flying in a aeroplane for the first time.
boxed 5y ago
Have you read the Bible? It's full of stuff like this. The story of the children who teased a priest so God sent a bear to kill them is a good example.
- arunix 5y ago
  I had to look that one up. To be fair, the text says that the two bears attacked 42 boys after Elisha cursed the boys, and doesn't mention if the attack was fatal. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=1531400 https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=... (2 Kings 2, 24)
  - johnhenry 5y ago
    Not sure if this is a joke, or if you are defending God's actions?
    - b112 5y ago
      All I see is someone trying to ensure accuracy. Are you conflating accuracy with defending? Do you believe a wrong, should result in an alteration of truth, to make it look worse?
      - johnhenry 5y ago
        Straightforward answers to your questions: No. No. But, I believe you have missed the point. It's problematic to send a bear to attack someone -- particularly if you are the all-powerful, all-knowing creator of the universe with other methods at your disposal. Whether or not the victim dies is besides the point.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- krapp 5y ago
  Also God letting Satan ruin Job's life (a canonically righteous man) over a bet on whether God was as awesome as He claimed. When God shows up in the last act to rebuke Job's friends for complaining about His - again, canonically unjust treatment of Job, His reply is an extended monologue about how awesome He is. ... although to be fair, Job 38 is one of the most epic parts of the Bible, hands down. When YHWH goes in, He goes in. Also God hardening Pharoah's heart when he already wanted to let the Israelites go, in order to complete the plagues and flex on Egypt and its gods. Said plagues ended, remember, with the first Passover event and the murder of every firstborn child and animal in Egypt. And Sodom and Gomorrah, particularly the part where God and Abraham haggle over the lower bound of righteous people it takes to avoid genocide. This is apparently at least ten. ... speaking of which, that time God commands Ezekiel to lie on his side and eat bread baked over human shit for over a year. Ezekiel objects, because the latter would be against God's own law (while the former is just sadistic torture,) and God says fine, he can use cow shit instead, just get on with it. And the Tower of Babel. God sees that humanity united and speaking a single language is capable of anything as they try to build a tower that reaches the heavens, so He curses humanity with multiple languages to confuse them and impede human progress. This was a particular dick move on God's part, and we're probably lucky Heaven was moved somewhere less easily accessible before we learned how to build skyscrapers or go into space. And Jesus cursing a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season. Not as much death and suffering as in the other cases but still petty AF for a guy who can literally create food from nothing.

deknos 5y ago

well, as i understand it, it is the star of betlehem which showed humanity that its saviour is born, the saviour which saves mankind and with that god destroyed another sentient species which is very similar to us. how would you feel about that, if your believesystem said a genocide of another race of sentient, potentially benevolent people by god had to happen, so that you get the message your saviour came around?

boxed 5y ago
The same god who also required a human sacrifice (which was also sort of himself) to back away from his own cruelty? Seems totally congruent.
- Sharlin 5y ago
  This is something I've never understood.Are there any reasonable theological arguments for why he had to resort to what amounts to an elaborate ploy, in order to work around his own arbitrary rules of who gets saved?
  - jbeninger 5y ago
    A character asks that question in Hyperion, by another sci-fi author (Dan Simmons). The answer he arrived at was that God was not testing Abraham. He was allowing Abraham to test God. When God stayed his hand at the last moment, he knew that he'd met a god worth following. (I'm not religious myself, but I did find this to be an interesting-enough interpretation to parrot it back to you on a web forum)
    - Sharlin 5y ago
      No, I was talking about Jesus (I believe the GP was as well). The Jesus situation is an interesting inversion of the Abraham dilemma though. This time God is prepared to sacrifice his own son – but we sort of failed the test by design, executing the sacrifice as planned even though we could have just let Jesus live. Not sure what it says about us or God.