I can't see one, and Orwell took as part of his influence for 1984 his time as a kid in a Catholic School. Big Brother is an anti theists view of god.
God is a creator. Big Brother is not. God deserves gratitude. Big Brother does not. God operates His justice based on morality. Big Brother, notably, does not.
C.ommunist nations have historically tried to ban religious services. The concept and devotion to God is anathema to any society that views people as little more than workers. Contrary to what you seem to believe, the very idea of God has freed people stuck under oppressive regimes. History speaks against you, Ian :)
Incidentally, 1984 is a lot like a secularist society gone haywire. (Not democratic, but secularist.) Cheers.
That wasn't my point:
go on youtube and look up 1984 anti clerical masterpeice
The majority of religious establishments in former communist regimes churches were allied to the anciene regime, which is why they were banned. Liberation theology has freed lots of people, because at its core its an atheistic ideology with religious trappings. I believe the same is true of most religious liberatory movements.
disprove a benevolent god in one word: stillborns
"Incidentally, 1984 is a lot like a secularist society gone haywire."
It's a depiction of any kind of government gone wrong, religious or not. That's just silly.
It was a critique of Stalinism saying that Stalinism took on the forms of religion, fascism and the authoritarian right
"disprove a benevolent god in one word: stillborns"
Doesn't disprove a benevolent God given that you have no clue what would've happened if the stillborn lived. Perhaps it would've chosen to become some sort of genocidal maniac and gone to H.ell. More benevolent to kill it. No human can no the consequences.
Lemme watch the YT vid.. one sec....
Ahhhhh 13 min... I hate watching videos. Can't you summarise Ian?
In monotheism and oceania the original sin is thoughtcrime. The unforgivable sin is denying the holy spirit, not murder. L ust is adultury.
Seeking pleasure outside of the faith/party is the sin. Questioning the divine is the sin. The ideal faithful is not the theolgion Sime, but the unthinking devotee Parsons. Duckspeak is what all religions strive for.
"More benevolent to kill it."
More benevolent, still, to guide them and set them on a better path.
And somehow that doesn't explain why God didn't "excercise benevolence" on those who really did become genocidal maniacs.
But yeah, 1984 had the religious idea of thought crime down to a T.
In Abrahamic religions people have freedom and they are given consequences for their choices, which is the highest acknowledgement of freedom.
Thanks. :) I'll respond later...
But only certain fe.tuses are exempt from that policy, or what?
Oceania? Isn't that like New Zealand + Australia or something?
L.ust isn't adultery, that's Christianity which is a bit of an ascetic religion adapted to the masses.
I agree on the thoughtcrime thing.
Questioning the divine is not sin. Seeking pleasure outside the faith -- dunno what that means. If you mean drugs, then yes, drugs are banned in Abrahamic religions for the most part. I dunno who Sime or Parsons are, but theologians have existed in all Abrahamic religions and are really REALLY important in Islam and Xtianity (dunno about Judaism), so again don't know what you're talking about.
You're starting from a secular POV so I don't think this convo is going to go anywhere..
So God is not just. Why's that?
"You're starting from a secular POV so I don't think this convo is going to go anywhere."
Um, what? Yeah, and you're starting from a religious point of view. Do you really think that completely prohibits discussion?
Um God is just. Your sense of justice is wrong.
Well yes, it does in certain people's cases, because they cannot see the internal consistency. Morality is not the same thing in a secular and religious context. Religiously morality IS what God commands, there is no way for God to not be just. It doesn't work. It's totally internally consistent. Secularly morality is defined any number of ways, none of them related to God, so He is not "just" from a anthrocentric perspective. If you're trying to determine whether He is just, you have to realise that morality is not black and white and that it means something different IF you take the premise of God,
Basically, to say "God is not just" (or any variation of that) requires that you temporarily accept the premise that the Abrahamic notion of God exists. But if He exists, then justice is what He says it is. So God is just.
It's like if I said "Secularists doesn't have morals because they don't obey God"; under secularism morals have a totally different meaning and I have to accept that if I am analyzing the consistency of the thing.
As for arguing over what morality ACTUALLY is, I did create a thread for that...
"Your sense of justice is wrong."
Defintion: Justice - The quality of being fair and reasonable.
Sorry, but what you say simply isn't true. I agree that our beliefs are irreconciliable -- the difference is that what I am saying agrees with every definition as well as our actual sense of justice, whereas yours does not by any stretch of the imagination.
"Religiously morality IS what God commands"
Which is why it should be clearly immoral from the perspective of any good, reasonable person.
"But if He exists, then justice is what He says it is. So God is just."
No, even if Yahweh did exist, humans have our definition of justice and it does not match. In any case, this argument does not work for you anyway -- with this you can only argue the "God would be just" as a true statement, and not "God is just."
"Your sense of justice is wrong" "Definition: Justice" etc
You've got to be kidding me. An English dictionary is how you are going to figure out what justice is? Yes it's the quality of being fair, now tell me what being fair is. You'll go around in circles.
I agree that justice is being fair and reasonable, and I also think that that definition has 0 practical value.
"Which is why it should be clearly immoral from the perspective of any good, reasonable person"
*Rolls eyes* Enough of the emotional arguments? Please?
"No, even if YHWH did exist, humans have our defintin of justice and [...] etc"
Our secular anthrocentric definition of justice. Justice is a moral feeling, and it can be conditioned to certain ends.
"with this you can only argue the God would be just, and not God is just"
Hmm. Not sure if I agree. If I understand you correctly (I'm not sure that I do), then you are basically saying "If God exists, then He ought to be just, but He is not as He does not match up to *insert defintiion of justice here*". Except that I am saying that moral commands issue from God in a religious persepctive. The most you would be able to say is "If God exists, His moral commands disagree with my sense of morality", which obviously doesn't make them immoral; it reveals a contradiction between our inner morality (which is no doubt affected by environment) and God's moral commands - reasonable thing to do woudl be to accept the Infinitely Wise Being's commands at this point..
I think I roll my eyes more on this forum than I have done in the past 5 years in real life. It's such an easy sign of contempt.. I gotta stop though.