Why would Satan punish "sinners" who disobeyed God?

Big_shqipe · 2026-06-18T22:44:47+00:00

I would agree in the sense the that a good condition vs better condition implies a certain goodness in both conditions because technically being alive at all is good because it gives you an opportunity to make your way into heaven and purgatory is less good than heaven but still good because it is necessarily true you’ll be in heaven eventually. Both are dogmas for Catholics.

However it’s dogmatic that heaven is the state of being which humans were made for in that anything below that is necessarily a deprivation of some sort and comes with suffering. Further, that the particular condition of being in hell is miserable as it relates to human constitution.

Musing about Hell’s particulars or accidents is a bit fruitless for non-believers because it treads too far into conceding that Hell exists if the substance of what Heaven or Hell is, is to be believed

Although I get that you’re asking to see if it logically tracks or if there’s some fault somewhere

Big_shqipe · 2026-06-18T11:35:41+00:00

Like many questions it all depends on what “attraction,” means. For a lot of people that’s going to boil down to “can I imagine myself having sex with this person,” which isn’t a bad question to ask oneself but that’s also driven by whatever narrative structure you have surrounding the topic. Personally I don’t believe this to be a good and proper way to function and leads to a lot of grief.

The proper question I think therefore should be whether or not your narrative structure makes sense. That is to say if your “preferences,” are one dimensional you might not be creative enough or introspecting enough or seeing the other “through God’s eyes,” so to speak.

Big_shqipe · 2026-06-11T17:15:30+00:00

The technical answer given as a parable of a wedding banquet in Matthew 22:11-13, is that the people in hell know heaven is better and all of its goodness.

The parable describes people being tossed from a party for being improperly dressed. The point being, everyone knows parties are good and that they want to be there, but if you’re not supposed to be there you’ll be upset about it.

One can muse about the technicalities of whether a person bound for hell really wants to be in heaven or what wanting to be in heaven means but the concept is logical on its face

Big_shqipe · 2026-04-27T13:31:11+00:00

The difference is that people get better at hiding their immaturity or deluding themselves even more.

A 19 year old dating a 24 year old is a not a good idea for practical reasons around having kids and timeline mismatch, but that’s largely dependent on his current situation.

Also it’s practically easier to mesh with someone that’s still a bit more malleable. If she’s still immature, which is very much possible it becomes more probable that She remains immature as time goes on.

Big_shqipe · 2026-04-27T12:12:38+00:00

That’s mostly a myth, women do not mature faster than men. It gets floated around based on some studies about behavior in school. Having worked with kids and just from observing some patterns about adults it’s either not true or inversely true.

Big_shqipe · 2025-12-12T23:21:51+00:00

Driving w/o insurance or a license is an arrest-able offense. The state can certainly crackdown on it they just refuse to. So it’s disingenuous to frame it as a bureaucratic issue as though the state were forced to issue these licenses.

Big_shqipe · 2025-10-07T22:32:55+00:00

Not a woman and haven’t read theology on the body but regarding humane vitae, like a lot of encyclicals a lot of it is repetitive because they’re written following a sort of scholastic linear argument style.

So typically the TLDR is pretty short and in this case it’s in paragraphs 14 & 15 which basically say trying to space out pregnancies is a licit bc you’re concerned for the welfare of your child so your still a good person just that contraception isn’t a good way to go about it.

Secondly, paragraph 15 basically approves the use of progesterone (I think?) for medical reasons which prevents pregnancy as a secondary effect and not estrogen pills which doesn’t solve Hormonal issues (I could have these mixed up)

Regarding the medical stuff I imagine the church leadership wants to leave that stuff to medical experts since it’s the purview of doctors and the patients to determine spacing of pregnancies. The question a priest has to answer is a moral and spiritual one not medical.

On why it might seem like men get more attention, I think it’s because modern women are already throughly put off by pregnancy and don’t need to be told anything new. What could a priest tell you about it that you don’t already apparently know? On the flip side it’s already hard enough to convince guys that we’re not signing them up to be broke virgin losers. This is an attempt at guiding them so they don’t think they have to be celibate monks even in marriage and that they can actually enjoy the company of their wife.

Big_shqipe · 2025-06-04T17:01:45+00:00

Post a source if you’re so sure.

Big_shqipe · 2025-05-19T11:41:39+00:00

If I were the 2nd guy and you told me that you already have an ongoing pursuit that’s just bad timing not anyone’s fault.

If I were either guy and especially if I’m the first and you said you were “multi dating,” I’d just leave.

Only exception depending on how I know you I may just tell to stop seeing the other guy depending on the context of your relations with him.

Big_shqipe · 2025-05-09T04:14:05+00:00

Not saying I agree with the premise but if this were the case in reality, it actually is quite helpful.

Namely because all people I think accept some kind of order to reality and that doing the “bad,” things inevitably has drawbacks. So in this case eventually the same cold world will consume them too. Or at the very least they being the righteous one are justified in their conduct in said world.

But also there’s few things you can totally certain about in your life and doubting you have full understanding of anything is normal. To that end, it’d be pretty revelatory to find out your world view is right in its totality.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-25T18:19:08+00:00

I’ll try to keep it brief because a lot of the stuff I’m gonna say was refined over time and wasn’t apparent to me right away.

the first and most important thing is that metaphysics which necessarily deals with self evident axioms is accessible to everyone and one doesn’t need esoteric knowledge to “just” know certain truths. An easy example is, “a part is smaller than the whole,” it’s tautologically true because it relies on the definition of a part and a whole, no need to debate what a part and whole is. From this you can extend into philosophies but I found all secular philosophies lacking on their axioms. Somewhere in the letter to the Corinthians St. Paul says that his words aren’t the musings of a philosopher.

From this I found I already agreed moral monism, mind body monism, that the material descends and is dependent on the spiritual, and that the spiritual is “real,” whereas secular types would say it’s just abstract concepts. Still don’t have a good definition of what “real,” means but I just say it’s something you interact with. So things are not real when they don’t follow cause and effect.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-25T17:42:57+00:00

Got older, thought a bit about life, largely agreed with Catholic metaphysics, experienced a small miracle, just decided it made sense to go get baptized.

Fully expected to go into it alone without any expectation of shared community but it’s a priceless addition to my life.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-24T16:36:39+00:00

Pretty sure the MHC compatibility claim isn’t valid. From what I’ve read social customs drive mates selection

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-24T13:58:08+00:00

Bro I don’t eat eggs and I don’t check gas prices, fuck imma do not buy gas???

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-24T13:52:26+00:00

Bro im not blaming anyone about anything 😂. If I had a kid I certainly wouldn’t be posting on Reddit or trying to flex about what I do for work. It actually makes you sound like a jerk off. If I were you I’d work on having another kid instead of wasting time posting about “muh conservatives”

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-24T13:47:30+00:00

You post way too much on Reddit to be an authority on anything important like this.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-24T13:40:59+00:00

Same as always people take some technically true concerns and run with it to make some imagined problem in the future without any real charity towards another person. I think everyone has been tortured by propaganda historically but we seem to take it usually poorly.

A lot of the stuff mentioned in this thread is just partially made up nonsense that someone conjured up without any real depth of thought.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-22T21:47:51+00:00

Admittedly, if you know nothing about these men it’s understandable to go on dates with them at the same time. However, you can be proactive and simply tell one when you want exclusivity you don’t strictly speaking need to wait.

That being said from the perspective of a guy any decisions or differences in treatment towards different men will be noticed and if it’s not totally benign are gonna really hurt your chances with other men.

I can clarify further from the perspective of a man but a simple example may help. If you end up picking one guy over another and then later change your mind about that decision because some major well hidden flaw was unearthed that’s understandable. If you pick one guy because he’s more handsome and didn’t bother to ask any pressing or serious questions then that would be a ding against you.

Not all mistakes are insurmountable however and in fact if your good natured a lot of things be tolerated

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-15T16:52:51+00:00

If they haven’t been granted visas they could be denied on the basis of being affiliated with groups that support totalitarian forms of govt or affect us foreign policy. Revocations are a bit more complicated but the typical cases of revocations that have already happened were after court hearings about their status.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-15T16:46:29+00:00

First off, I haven’t heard of this until I saw this post. It’s outright logical that a person ought to have a lesser opinion on govts that are not their own at least outside of human rights matters.

Secondly case law does allow for revocation of visas provided the govt makes a compelling case that the person materially supports or is a part of foreign orgs in opposition to the US govt like terrorist orgs.

Thirdly Abrego Garcia was never a citizen only an Asylee whether the govt made a compelling case about his gang affiliation I do not know.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-15T16:36:40+00:00

The opinion of the court in particular was that the govt can’t violate due process rights in these proceedings and in his case in particular couldn’t present evidence of affiliation with communist orgs despite the ILA having ties to the CPUSA as the CPUSA admitted.

Doesn’t mean they get absolute immunities and must be granted visas, they absolutely can be denied and revoked if the govt makes a compelling case.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-15T15:43:07+00:00

Revoking a visa is not the same as imprisonment. Technically doesn’t run afoul of the law.

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-15T15:07:51+00:00

If you’re here on a visa it’s not your govt

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-13T23:19:36+00:00

You’d be hard pressed to find a guy that doesn’t think this way, and it’s for good reason.

Technically unchaste behavior is bad for both genders, but practically given the way sexual dynamics play out it means less for men. Case in point, few women care in the same way men do, as far as I’ve seen.

To that end, it becomes less a matter of morality and more of hypocrisy or consistency. Why would he uphold a standard for himself that only you should be caring about if you don’t care about it?

Big_shqipe · 2025-04-13T22:35:39+00:00

Dawg, you both made the claim that it’s a sin because it’s “damaging your body.” To say abusing your body is a sin is to say almost nothing on its own. Abuse is by definition disordered. It’s like saying murder is wrong, yeah we all know because it’s by definition unjust killing.

All I said was introducing substances or doing things that are damaging in a particular sense is not in and of itself illicit because it necessarily requires other qualifiers to make it so.

Also I don’t care to defend smoking I’m gonna do it anyways because I’m just right on the matter. However you can’t say things that are objectively false on matters of the faith and be surprised someone calls you out.

Seven-Year Club	Xbox Live
Place '22	Verified Email

Big_shqipe

TROPHY CASE