Do Christians have Stockholm syndrome where one loves his abuser?

Gnostic Christian Bishop

Do Christians have Stockholm syndrome where one loves his abuser?

I will not pull my punches on this issue. Christians know that we Gnostic Christians think that their genocidal and infanticidal God is one vile satanic piece of work. Gnostic Christians call evil evil while Christians call evil good. Muslims, who idol worship the same God, do the same thing and suffer from the same condition.

That is why Gnostic Christians call Yahweh a demiurge when discussing our myths. Myths that we do not foolishly read literally the way foolish Christians read theirs.

If these actors were real, they would be showing you how Gnostic Christians think.
https://vimeo.com/7038401

Stockholm syndrome is a condition that causes hostages to develop a psychological alliance with their captors, as a survival strategy during captivity, to the point of loving and protecting their abuser from harm.

Yahweh used genocide on humanity, yet Christians forgive him and even praise him for killing when he could have just cured all. Christians also forgive Yahweh for torturing and murdering innocent babies, with the vilest incident being King David’s baby. Yahweh did the satanic thing instead of the Godly thing.

As a real instead of fictional analogy, I offer that Hitler also used genocidal ways, also tortured children. In his case the world, even some Christians, recognized his satanic ways and condemned him.

The Christian mindset of calling evil good that, Christians are demonstrating, shows that Christians either developed an immoral double moral standard, --- where they praise the genocidal attribute of God, while condemning the same attribute in a man, --- or they collectively have Stockholm syndrome. I do not see a third option.

The analogy shows that Christians adoring Yahweh is like Jews adoring Hitler. Something seems to be wrong with Christian thinking.

Which label do you apply to those who adore a genocidal entity? Good or evil?

Regards
DL

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

I don't do storytime, full stop. You're as bad as them in some respects. But yes, I get the analogy you make and agree with it. They explain the bad away with apologism in order to maintain their precious self-deception. Heaven forbid they boldly face up to reality without cowardice.

There is so much in reality to fill me with wonder and amazement and a sense of profundity, that I do not need and actively discourage treating myths as anything other than myths. I am currently reading a book called Reality Is Not What It Seems: The Journey To Quantum Gravity by Carlo Rovelli, and I would pick that sort of book over any religious fiction, and over Harry Potter and The I Don't Give a Damn.

hachit

If you're going to talk about this, I'm going to need a more specific example of Christians calling evil, good.

Gnostic Christian Bishop

You're as bad as them in some respects — S

Such as?

Regards
DL

Gnostic Christian Bishop

If you're going to talk about this, I'm going to need a more specific example of Christians calling evil, good. — hachit

What can be more specific and evil than mass murder?

Be specific.

Regards
DL

hachit

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

the church is so reliant on context I basically need the storys. But for the time being I think your using murder in place of killings

Gnostic Christian Bishop

Was the seven day torture of King David's baby before finally murdering it just a normal killing to you?
Are the many drowning's of babies and children In Noah's flood just plain od killing and not murder to you?

Regards
DL

hachit

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

yes, here is why. God loves humans, however he cannot be in the present ofor sin. The punishment of sin is death. Murder implys hate. This paradox is probably were your idea came from.

Such as? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Such as all of the religious nonsense. All of it.

CaZaNOx

the church is so reliant on context I basically need the storys. But for the time being I think your using murder in place of killings — hachit

What about Sodom and Gomorrah? God specifies the number 10(why 10). If one can find 10 righteous people(I don't know if this only applies to adults/male adults) in Sodom he will spare the city.
This suggests a very strange principle if we assume there to be 9 righteous people in the city. God would punish\kill them because of association. Similarly he would spare the sinful people due to being associated by living in the city with 10 righteous people.
This seems rather odd. And just to prevent this kind of response the righteous people (Lot and family) (lets leave aside how righteous of an act it is to offer ones daughter to be raped) are saved by the angles not god. However Lot's wife turns in to a pillar of salt due to reassociating by the act of looking back.

Now I think the entire introduced concept of guilt by association is problematic. Other instances of the same principle would be original sin and the connected concepts f.e. limbo(referring to edge of hell for infant deaths)

hachit

↪CaZaNOx

lot was trying to bargan for the cites safety.
In realty he only need to find 6, because he and his family.
Later the number was lowered to 5, so he only need to find one.

As for

However Lot's wife turns in to a pillar of salt due to reassociating by the act of looking back.

As mentioned the punishment for sin is death

Now I think the entire introduced concept of guilt by association is problematic. Other instances of the same principle would be original sin and the connected concepts f.e. limbo(referring to edge of hell for infant deaths)

That is why God sent his son.

I'll say this thought, what is good and evil is different for everyone, there's not sum universal standard of them.

CaZaNOx

↪hachit

As mentioned the punishment for sin is death — hachit

What exactly was the sin she committed in your view? Associating?

I'll say this thought, what is good and evil is different for everyone, there's not sum universal standard of them. — hachit

I agree to the first half but not to the second. Anyhow I would agree with the OP that there are quite a few dubious morals expressed in the bible. I don't think that Christianity can't acknowledge that but I think there's quit a bit of theological overhead to do so.
Anyhow I don't understand how you can claim that there is no universal standard when there seem to be universal categories (Heaven and Hell) that you fall into based on the judgment of your actions by God(in your view?). This is the case even if you assume God to be more forgiving torwards some people since they had it more difficult.

hachit

↪CaZaNOx

what exactly was the sin she committed in your view? Associating?

ok this is something I should make clear. In christian theology sin is defined as to disobey God.

Also when I said

there's not sum universal standard of them.

I was furthing my point that good and evil have no objective meaning.

CaZaNOx

↪hachit

In christian theology sin is defined as to disobey God. — hachit

She disobeyed the angle, not god.

In realty he only need to find 6, because he and his family.
Later the number was lowered to 5, so he only need to find one. — hachit

How is changing it later justified, isn't this basically stating that god said it wrong? Did gods word change? Isn't 10 like a special number in Jewish fate?
The change also seems problematic since it supposes that the family members where actually righteous people. However from the story itself at least for his wive this case seems not well grounded. Especially in regards to the fact that the principle of righteous or guilty by association is introduced. It therefore could very easily be understood that there being saved results from being associated to a righteous person and not being righteous themselves. This however would again lead to god killing righteous people in the city which only committed the mistake of being in the city.
I am myself aware of possible escape routes a christian could take however all of them seem dodgy in nature. Reframing the picture every time but I think this itself is problematic behavior.

I was furthing my point that good and evil have no objective meaning. — hachit

How can god do a final categorizing in to good and evil if those terms have no objective meaning?

hachit

She disobeyed the angle, not god.

The problem here is you don't know your angelology. Angles have no will of there own, that speak nothing except what God wants them to say.

Isn't 10 like a special number in Jewish fate?

Maby but I not Jewish

How is changing it later justified, isn't this basically stating that god said it wrong? Did gods word change? Isn't 10 like a special number in Jewish fate?
The change also seems problematic since it supposes that the family members where actually righteous people. However from the story itself at least for his wive this case seems not well grounded

Well I looked at the story to remind myself. I did make two mistakes the last change is to 10 from 50. He sill only would need to find one it's just that there are more people in this family than I remembered.
And it's not God changing the number, it was Abraham and God simply agrees.
Also yes there is gulit by association but the people he need to find are in absence of that.

How can god [sick] do a final categorizing in to good and evil if those terms have no objective meaning?

It is like this, you have your view of good and evil. Someone somewhere have there view of good and evil. They may not be all the same.
Now (I know all the problems with what I'm about to say) how dose God know what is good and evil? Divine command theory he decides.
By saying that good and evil have no objective meaning I'm really saying, what you call good an evil and what he calls good and evil may not always be the same.

However I should say there is a common ground
Good being it should be done
Evil being it shouldn't be done

I hope I didn't make things to confusing.

James Statter

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

When did Yahweh torture innocent babies in the bible? The Amorites were a wicked people and Yahweh chose the jews because he knew they wouldn't listen to him and kill them outright (Jews/Israelites are known for being soft and weak). The Amorites were well known for sacrificing their children to their gods. As to why Yahweh had the Israelites kill the children of the Amorites too i could not give you a great answer other than when you grow up being raised by the people who killed/murdered your mother and father you might reject the religion of your NEW parents. That being said Yahweh for whatever reason believed the religion of Yahweh was important for eternal happiness. People who grow up in bad homes are known to resent their parents and their parent's beliefs. When these children and babies were killed they went to heaven because they were never given the chance to reject the supposed good religion of Yahweh.

Gnostic Christian Bishop

yes, here is why. God loves humans, however he cannot be in the present ofor sin. The punishment of sin is death. Murder implys hate. This paradox is probably were your idea came from. — hachit

So killing without cause when god can cure as well as kill, is not murder to you. This shows how your beliefs have corrupted your moral sense.

If god loved humans, as you say, he would cure instead of kill or murder. Right?

As to his not being in the presence of sin, did he turn his head when he told Satan to do evil and sins against Job's children and friends?

You might want to read Job 3;2 where god admits to being a sinner himself when he sais that Satan moved him to do harm without a just cause.

If the punishment for sin is death, the god is dead. Right?

Regards
DL

Gnostic Christian Bishop

Such as all of the religious nonsense. All of it. — S

IOW, you are too uneducated to know what you are talking about.

That is why you cannot articulate examples of what you are talking about.

Regards
DL

Gnostic Christian Bishop

Now I think the entire introduced concept of guilt by association is problematic. — CaZaNOx

A good point.

Regards
DL

Gnostic Christian Bishop

The problem here is you don't know your angelology. Angles have no will of there own, that speak nothing except what God wants them to say. — hachit

??

If angels have no free will, how is it that Satan and, they say, a third of the angels rebelled against god?

Regards
DL

Gnostic Christian Bishop

When did Yahweh torture innocent babies in the bible? — James Statter

Read the story of King David's babies death by torture for 7 days before god finally murdered it.

Read of the murders of the first born of Egypt or of the drowning of all the innocent babies and children in Noah's flood.

Tell us after that reading why god kills instead of cures those he believes afflicted with evil.

We are all children of god, according to scriptures and we are to emulate god.

What would you do if you had god's power? Would you kill or would you cure. Remember that Jesus said he came to cure the afflicted and did not come for those who did not need his mentoring.

Regards
DL

RegularGuy

I am a Christian in that I believe Christ was enlightened and was a truly moral person. I do not take the Bible to be the infallible “Word of God”. It’s stories are indeed myths with lessons to be learned. Some are good myths. Some are just asinine.

I believe in a higher consciousness that created the universe, and this is what I call “God”. I cannot fathom how inanimate matter collects itself and organizes itself so that it can become self-aware without some kind of divine guidance. I have yet to hear a convincing argument how this would be possible as an accident of nature. We are all “gods” in that we are all conscious, and I believe consciousness is of a spiritual nature, being so unexplainable and mysterious. It seems to me our consciousness was purposefully created by a higher consciousness. I find this to be an abductive inference for the existence of God’s consciousness. I find it to be a better inference than that matter accidentally collected and organized itself into conscious beings.

James Statter

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

I know the story of David's son dying after 3 or 7 days (i thought it was 3 but that is besides the point). God or Jesus allows suffering and sometimes even inflicts suffering on innocent people to show more corrupt people (David) that sin is serious. David murdered a man which is what caused this. The fact that bad things happen does not make me believe the God of the Bible is not a good God. I could go on and on about why i believe this but i'm not sure it would serve a purpose in this case.

In the case of Egypt those Egyptians were slave drivers and it says it in the story. Sometimes not being given the chance to become our parent's is God's greatest gift to us. The fact that their is evil in the world is due to us having free will. I'm not a calvinist.

Gnostic Christian Bishop

You are not a Calvinist, nor are you a moral person.

That is why you do not think a god who punishes the innocent instead of the guilty, including torturing and murdering them, is evil when he obviously is.

That is also why you did not answer my last question.

Thanks for showing all here how your beliefs have corrupted your morals.

Christians are always spouting off about god giving us free will, and here you are saying that god ignoring our free will, that would not want us to be murdered or tortured, is quite ok.

Regards
DL — James Statter

James Statter

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

i disagree. Don't act like anything i said was going to change your opinion anyway. Its your god against my god. Your a gnostic and i consider myself a christian. We'll just have to see what happens after we die.

Gnostic Christian Bishop

I am a Christian in that I believe Christ was enlightened and was a truly moral person. — Noah Te Stroete

That being the case, would you like to argue for Jesus and his morals against me as I do not see Jesus as very moral at all.

Just not to blind side you, I will tell you that I particularly dislike his no divorce for women and his substitutional punishment policies.

I have more but those will either scare you away, as it does most Christians or, hopefully, you will engage. Can you take the truth?

Regards
DL

Gnostic Christian Bishop

Don't act like anything i said was going to change your opinion anyway. — James Statter

I can be moved by good apologetics but you did not provide any.

Hell, you cannot even answer straight questions.

Regards
DL

James Statter

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

"That being the case, would you like to argue for Jesus and his morals against me as I do not see Jesus as very moral at all.

Just not to blind side you, I will tell you that I particularly dislike his no divorce for women and his substitutional punishment policies.

I have more but those will either scare you away, as it does most Christians or, hopefully, you will engage. Can you take the truth?" -Gnostic Christian Bishop

Please enlighten us because the Bible according to you is complete crap. Do you have a website so that i can learn all about Gnostism?

James Statter

*Gnosticism

James Statter

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

"I can be moved by good apologetics but you did not provide any.

Hell, you cannot even answer straight questions.

Regards
DL " -Gnostic Christian Bishop"

That might be true it might not be true. I've got stuff to do. Get angry Don't get angry i really don't care.

RegularGuy

↪Gnostic Christian Bishop

I am not familiar with those passages. However, one must remember he was a Jewish man living in the first century. “Do unto others as you would have done unto you.” “Love your neighbor as yourself.” “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” “The meek shall inherit the earth.”

This was way more moral than his local contemporaries.

Do Christians have Stockholm syndrome where one loves his abuser?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions