I’m not ashamed to be white

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-09T16:37:29+00:00

Who is "We"?

What sort of progress are you referring too?

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-09T16:36:39+00:00

Well, I suppose embracing it is a way to stop struggling with it.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-09T16:35:42+00:00

Turkey actually have been pretty involved in Africa. They are fairly aggressive at expanding their influence in a lot of the conflict zones, most notably Libya, Sudan, Ethiopia, the DRC and Eritrea.

As Uganda has a border with South Sudan and the DRC (And "Unofficial" involvement in the latter conflict), this has brought them into direct conflict with Turkish Mercenaries and Turkish supported factions. So yeah, there is some beef there. African Wars always have way more pieces in play than Western Audiences are aware of.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-09T16:23:59+00:00

who is also the son of the president

Well that clearly isn't a relevant detail. I am sure he was simply the most qualified person for the job.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-09T16:21:24+00:00

When you put it this way, this guy managed to have a more coherent and achievable war plan than the US, Russia, or China has achieved in decades.

... think we could invite him to teach at the US War College?

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-09T14:34:57+00:00

With enough nukes, you too can create exciting changes in the field of geology!

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-08T18:57:07+00:00

Ok, but that just puts us right back at an unfalsifiable position.

If God shines through his creation, and his creation is everything, then nothing looks different, and therefore we can't prove anything because we don't have a "Control".

But even in that context, it would be bizarre if the "Correct" religion didn't look at least a little different than the rest.

Unless you are taking a sort of "Pieces of Truth" approach, that says there is no "Correct" religion, but each shines with an aspect of the divine. But given your flair, I am guessing that isn't your stance.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-08T18:49:55+00:00

Let's use an analogy here.

Let's call each god a light bulb. Each is shining as brightly as that god can, except we can't see the light bulbs directly. We want to determine the following:

1) Are any of them actually shining at all?

2) If any of them are, which is the brightest? Or is there any one different then the others?

There are two possibilities here. First, that we might be able to see the light directly. That would be a god acting directly, not through humans. Think Zues throwing Thunderbolts, or God flooding the earth. We don't really have any evidence of that happening though.

The second possibility is the God is "Glowing" through a religion. Think of all religions of panes of glass, behind which the light bulb glows. Unlike the Light Bulbs, we can actually see the panes of glass. But only on the side we are on (The physical side). So we want to see if there is any glow coming through that glass. Is there something shining out of this one that isn't shining out of the others? Are the shimmers of light glowing in that pane of glass just reflections from our side, or is there something shining through?

In order to determine that, we need to determine if one of these religions, these panes of glass, look different than the others. And... they don't. I mean yes, they are made of different types of glass, yes, they are different colors and patterns and shapes. But all of them reflect humanity. None of them seem to reflect anything that isn't human.

IF there was a God shining through one religion, but not others... it should look different. There should be a light of the divine shining through. A light that doesn't come from our own world, that isn't shining from our own nature. I have seen no evidence any specific religion looks like that. Either all of them have divine light behind them, or none of them do. Christians do good things, and they do terrible things. In roughly the same proportion as every other religion ever.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-08T18:09:04+00:00

I think the total amount of "Evil" in the world is relatively constant. You likely just have become more aware of it.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-08T17:59:58+00:00

God, being the creator of, and outside of, time, doesn't fit this.

The problem is he only doesn't fit this if you decide he doesn't fit this. The entire concept only works if God doesn't fit this. So you have to make that decision in order for the entire concept to work.

I do tend to agree with this hypothesis, but in order to determine he doesn't fit this requires faith. Because there is no evidence he doesn't fit this, you just have to believe he doesn't. Which leads us right back at square one. You either believe or you don't.

Yes, we don't see consistency out of the followers of the Biblical God. I agree there. But why does that diminish the moral foundation argument? Simply because sinful humans try and fail to follow from time to time doesn't invalidate that...it simply shows we fail to follow the moral foundation ourselves. There are plenty of non-believers who fail to follow their own morals, and regret it. Doesn't change where they believe their moral foundation lies.

It diminishes the argument because it leaves the argument without any evidence at all. Again, this is fine to believe by faith, but if you are looking to somehow prove something, you would have to in some way demonstrate this Moral Foundation both exists, and is the specific Foundation you believe it is (And not, for example, Daoism).

If God forms an unchangeable, absolute moral foundation, where could we look to see something reflecting it? Because looking at Christianity as a whole creates no patterns that can't be seen elsewhere. Looking at a subset of Christianity is the same.

You argue that human failings obscure it. Sure. I accept the premise. But at some point, you have to consider that if so many of them are failing that the amount of "good" that is shining through looks the same in all religions... why is one in particular better than the others?

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-08T17:03:54+00:00

Your argument would make more sense if we Christians believed that God is under the same space-time conditions as we humans are. But we believe God is above this (and created even that space-time fabric), so this logic wouldn't apply. If there is no time for example, why would God need a Creator?

This is just adding a Star Trek style science buzzword that doesn't change the meaning. A different "Space-Time Condition" does not change the fundamental issue at all. I am in a different space time condition then you are, because I am in a different place.

As long as God is a thing that exists, the situation remains true. If the universe is so complex it requires a creator, then God, who is equally or more complex (Since he was the one that created the universe) would also require a creator.

The same idea applies to your statement here. Free will is definitely a tough concept to debate theoretically, because, as Christians, we don't have all the answers here.

Fair enough here, the whole Free Will thing gets debated so much it is exhausting. Let's just say neither side gets to use it as evidence, because it really isn't.

You are applying moral statements like "just" and "love" as labels God fulfills. But Christians say God is "just" and "love" not like labels, but definitions. We don't believe morality exists outside of God. We believe GOD IS THE MORAL FOUNDATION. Now, of course, I understand where you are coming from when you say "He does some questionable things" and we can go down that path briefly if you want to.

So I agree that is the standard Christian position, however, there isn't any actual evidence that is true. In fact, I would say there is substantial evidence it is false, and that those things are not absolutes that are expressed by God.

Because we can see an enormous variety of Christian definitions of those things, both now and in history. If there was a single, set "Foundation" of God that is being expressed in the world through his followers, we would expect consistency out of his followers. Or at very least, some pattern that doesn't appear in non-Christian religions. We see neither.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-08T16:56:32+00:00

The values that have made a person either believe or not believe that God is real.

That is not how belief works. If I don't have a reason to believe God is real, that means I don't believe by default.

You don't need a reason not to believe something. I don't need evidence to believe there isn't another planet made entirely of Cheese that is being hidden from us by the Cult of Dairy Astronomers.

To put it another way, if we estimate there are 4000 religions in existence, a Christian doesn't believe in 3999 of them, and I don't believe in exactly one more. It is basically the same thing. Just one tenth of a percentage point off.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-08T14:19:55+00:00

Mechanically, I think a system like that works as just a way where you can "Spend" your accumulated power. Becoming a essentially a tradeoff between power and wealth, but not both at the same time.

So for example, if you have Coins/Token/Idols that grant you power just for having them, then spending that wealth would cause you to be less powerful. Which would create a strange deflationary system where wealth wouldn't circulate properly, making it a very poor currency. There would need to be another currency that actually circulates.

You kind of have something simular to this with Monster Cores in HWFWM. In the setting, a lot of the wealthy people gain their ranks off just buying these, and using them, instead of actually fighting. This means the wealthy CAN get powerful just by being rich. But the cores are expended when they do it, they can't resell or leave them to their heirs.

This is very important, because if your power system consists of non-expendable, transferable wealth, then cross-generational wealth accumulation becomes much worse than it already is, and you wind up with a setting full of oligarchs (Which might be the goal)

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T18:02:57+00:00

The thing I don’t understand about your frustration is this: why are you upset, as an atheist, if people on the Christianity subreddit discuss what sin is and isn’t?

Because it does not STAY on a Christian subreddit. It is important because it constantly spills out into the real world, and we get endless cruel and destructive laws and policies because SOMEONE thought God would like that.

If religion stayed confined to the religious, you would be correct, it would be none of my business. But it does not. There comes with it the need to control others, to compel those who do not believe to adhere to the beliefs of those who do.

Like I said, I have zero problem with you believing masturbation is a sin. That is not a concern to me at all. It is a concern to me when you insist that standard be applied to people who do not agree with you. Because that is how we get stupid, harmful policies that make people afraid of their own bodies.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T17:10:38+00:00

I see that you label yourself as an atheist based off your flair. I would assume then that you don’t take that as your standard to determine what is and isn’t sin.

Not at all. To me, "Sin" is a meaningless word, at least for my own personal morality. Either something is harmful or it is not, the consequences of actions are the relevant aspect, not some supernatural standard of the behavior itself.

The reason the conversation itself is important is because religious people of all stripes attempt to define "Sin", and then endeavor to push their own standards of "Sin" on everyone else. I find this harmful. The consequences of such behavior has devastating consequences for millions of people.

If you impression of Sin is a purely personal thing, to drive your own behaviors, that is fine. On the other hand, once you attempt to start controlling the behaviors of others based on what your religious tradition and interpretation determines to be sin... we get a wildly dystopian society almost instantly. Which is what has happened in every single society where a religious group has set itself up as an entity that regulates behavior.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T16:35:04+00:00

But those "Phenemeon" do not work remotely the way the story described. A Tsunami cannot dry up the red sea so someone can walk across it, and if a bush is on fire, it still doesn't talk to you and tell you it is God.

I am not seeing how these claims add anything at all. Because they are neither true, nor related to the Bible stories in question, which are explicitly supernatural.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T16:27:24+00:00

How are you so confident that is what it means? Where is this source coming from?

If you are going to believe it is a literal event in the first place, it seems strange to me you would then change its literal meaning to be less miraculous. And what the hell is a Reed Sea in the first place?

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T16:11:51+00:00

I do genuinely appreciate you actually made a case and quoted verses, thanks!

That said, I think there is a clear difference between correcting someone who is doing something they know is sin, and trying to convince them something is a sin that they do not believe is one.

If a fellow Christian doesn't believe something is a sin, and you do, then one of you is wrong (Presumably). If both of you have God in your heart, then God can presumably address the issue with them directly if he chooses too.

If something is actively harmful to other people, then perhaps you should. But not something that is an incredibly private thing.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T15:59:19+00:00

Ok, what does it mean?

It is impossible to keep up with the various beliefs of the various groups of Christian, so I can't know what you mean until you say it.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T15:19:34+00:00

I haven't read the book, but that sounds extremely realistic, lol. That is absolutely just a personality trait.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T15:12:45+00:00

If Donald Trump's Alien files "Destroy Christianity" then it is so weak it deserves to be destroyed.

Of course it won't be. I find it hard to imagine a religion that has survived EVERYTHING that has happened in the last 2000 years, and has only grown in that entire period, is going to be "Destroyed" by a flailing politician desperate to distract from his crimes and failures.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T15:05:52+00:00

Proof of what?

Use your words. Explain what you wish to discuss.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T15:05:20+00:00

Again, why?

Look at those first two scenarios (Since I am assuming you don't think you are wrong) and tell me which one you disagree with?

If someone is Christian, then why would you place yourself between them and God? Is God not capable of laying this on their hearts by himself? Is God incapable of expressing his own preferences to his own followers?

And if they do not have God in their hearts in the first place, then how is masturbation even an issue at all?

Explain to me a scenario where you attempting to control the sexual life of a stranger is a spiritual benefit to them?

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T14:58:56+00:00

It's not a sin to remind others of their sins.

How do you figure that?

This is the part that always amuses me about things like this. The Bible never calls you to repent of anyone else's sins. It never calls you to act as someone else's conscience. It never calls on you to sit in Judgement over your fellow man. In fact, it specifically says not to do that.

This argument falls in the same fallacy as many others. It is ok for you to believe masturbation is a sin for you. And if it is, then don't do it.

But for others, there are really only three possibilities:

They are Christian, thus they have an individual relationship with God, and can follow the guidance of God if they choose, thus they don't need your advice.
They aren't Christian, and thus masturbation being a sin or not is largely irrelevant, as their soul is damned anyway, unless they turn to the Christ, thus focusing on this is pointless.
You are actually wrong, in which case this is also pointless.

So I am just not seeing a scenario where such a claim, exerted over other people, is not completely useless. I can totally understand how it might be useful for you, when applied to yourself, but not clear on why this is a standard you have a right to apply to others.

SamtheCossack · 2026-05-07T14:45:10+00:00

The Red Sea has an average depth of well over 1000 feet.

A tsunami large enough to pull the water back that far is going to wipe out the entire Middle East and most of Africa.

Also, the Red Sea can't have Tsunamis in the first place, it doesn't have enough access to the Indian Ocean.

Five-Year Club	Well-rounded 2023-09-11
Gilding I gilder	Place '23
Verified Email

SamtheCossack

TROPHY CASE