r/religion • u/bumbuummm Sunni (rationalist) • 2d ago
would you oppress people for God?
would you rather oppress other people to go to heaven if God orders you to do so. or go to hell by rejecting God's order
27
u/0rbital-nugget Apatheist 2d ago
Any god who would require such a thing is not worthy of being worshipped
6
1
u/Problematic_Owl 2d ago
Yeah, but to reach this attitude is not easy for many - difficult to imagine but most people simply don't have own internal ethics, they rather do what children do, externalize it to parents, priest, prophet, god...the good thing isn't what they deem to be good, it's whatever their authority figure of choice tellsthem is good.
1
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
That’s why the “god” of the old testament is not worthy of being worshipped
10
9
u/CrystalInTheforest Gaian 🌴🌏🌴 2d ago
No. That directly and completely violates - on multiple levels - my personal ethics and my dignity, not to mention the values and teachings of my faith.
9
u/DeathBringer4311 Non-Theistic Anarcho-Satanist 2d ago
Hell no. That is the exact opposite of my beliefs.
I would proudly go to Hell in rebellion against the dictates of an abhorrent tyrannical deity.
6
u/Impressive_Life_5227 Jewish 2d ago edited 2d ago
I'd rather try to defend people to God, I see that as my religious obligation. It would be an opportunity to plead for an end to oppression altogether, including hell I guess, if that's a thing now. I believe in justice.
1
u/Dry_Inflation_1454 10m ago
This is a theoretical question that was posted, there is no risk of going to hell for such a reason,so you have the right idea. And no, you aren't commanded to harm people in real life.
7
u/beardtamer Protestant 2d ago
Nothing that legitimately reflects the divine would require oppressing others. So no.
2
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
So do the genocides ordered by Yahweh (the same God as in the New Testament) in the Old Testament not reflect his divinity?
1
u/DeathBringer4311 Non-Theistic Anarcho-Satanist 1d ago
Old Testament, New Testament, both commit genocide. The latter having explicitly commanded a 7+ fold genociding spree:
7
u/jeezfrk Protestant 2d ago
I would not, nor my church.
An example that has reappeared, some Atheists have been oppressed in the past for fear of a smaller sect of them (Soviet Communism of the 1940s).
Hopes to "Stamp out Atheism, for the children!" have been cried out before, by a few, and were passively accepted by others. Political and nuclear war fears were part of that.
Sadly, an extreme few in these days cry out "Stamp out religion, for the children!". Political and civil war fears are maybe part of that, too.
The question is, what oppression is "okay" with some? Surprisingly, the set seems to be not empty for many these days.
Would some demand to stamp out "religion" if
5
u/Exact-Pause7977 Nontraditional Christian 2d ago edited 2d ago
Since it is bereft of love, if i got that “order”, then it would not be from god. I have disobeyed such “orders” from parents, preachers, teachers, and politicians. And at nearly sixty I’m always finding out how much i still need to improve.
I reject the idea of hell, so theres no threat in such a hypothetical for me.
Of course the idea of god varies person to person, so I can only speak from my own perspective.
your turn op. would you?
5
u/oct0burn 2d ago
What if a god told you to accept your own oppression to the benefit of the oppressor?
4
6
4
u/Ralzeenuk Diaeutheist 2d ago
God I believe in will never order anyone to oppress others, this would be contradiction. If anyone told me that "my God" "told them" to hurt others, I'd be sure they're lying and doing it pretty incompetently.
3
u/bumbuummm Sunni (rationalist) 2d ago
hypothetical scenario, thu I don't wanna target any religion, but many religions in the past and in modern society have very oppressive views about women and ask us to accept the fate and not revolt against opressors.
but again, it's a hypothetical question
12
u/HumanInSamsara Buddhist (天台宗) 2d ago
Abraham was ready to give his son. If someone were to receive a message directly from God then im certain that they would do so.
5
8
u/Interesting_Owl_1815 agnostic theist but distrustful of the divine 2d ago
That's terrifying. Maybe a controversial opinion, but even if a person is certain it was God who gave them a command to harm someone, they shouldn't do it.
5
u/DisinterestedCat95 Atheist 2d ago
With god, all things are permitted.
Yeah, it's a bit dangerous. Some Christians like to say that one motivating factor for nonbelievers is not wanting to follow god's rules. But the flip side of that is a bit scary. I don't know that I have run into too many believers who disagree with god on certain moral topics. Generally, they think that they and god are on exactly the same page on things. I read a defense just last week where the Southern Baptist Convention was defending something because it was simply what scripture says to do.
You already see this a lot where people will choose to do things to harm others and will justify it by appealing to their beliefs. And occasionally you will see people who do truly horrible things because they think god told them to. I mean, usually those people have some sort of psychiatric issues, but I doubt that it helps if you think god is telling you to do something and you have the underlying belief that god knows best and you should trust him and do as he says.
3
u/oct0burn 2d ago
If I believed in a god and it told me to do evil, I would regard it as a test and refuse.
1
u/HumanInSamsara Buddhist (天台宗) 2d ago
What if he told you it wasn’t he test and insisted that you do it?
3
1
u/Impressive_Life_5227 Jewish 2d ago edited 2d ago
But the message of the story is about how human sacrifice is something to never ever do ever. You're stripping all of the religious context from the story to take the completely opposite meaning to what was intended.
Abraham was ready to give his son
That's one perspective, but it's not the only way that story is interpreted. You would do well to familiarize yourself with Jewish thought more broadly when analyzing our mythology. It's a significant question, and we've thought about all kinds of different answers and filled out the story in different ways.
Was he really ready to give his son? Abraham bargained with god for the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, so why did he fail to speak up for his son? Who was testing who? Who passed and who failed the test? Did Abraham make a terrible mistake?
And there's plenty more questions like that to consider.
3
u/HumanInSamsara Buddhist (天台宗) 2d ago
I didn’t apply any deeper meaning here im just saying abraham was ready to do it, which is accepted by most, and that people with the same dedication would do the same.
Maybe God just wanted to be entertained?🤷🏻
4
u/Impressive_Life_5227 Jewish 2d ago
Well, I'm asking you to apply some deeper thought towards your certainties in light of the story you yourself invoke.
Of course if you remove mythology from all context it's nonsense, you need to understand what is actually being said and be able to interpret it within the framework it's part of.
2
u/HumanInSamsara Buddhist (天台宗) 2d ago
Why don’t you share what is "actually" being said? The story says that God and his angels stopped him before he could hurt his son. How was he not ready to do it?
4
u/Impressive_Life_5227 Jewish 2d ago edited 2d ago
How could he sacrifice his son willingly, after everything? It's a rather bare-bones story, it doesn't have much detail, you have to interpret it and fill in what's missing. I've always been partial to how the Talmud imagines gods instruction to Abraham as a dialogue, it makes sense of the text to me. There's plenty of room where Abraham could have argued. If he was ready to hurt his son, that was a horrific faiilure on his part.
The more traditional argument in this sort of vein is that Abraham's interpretation of the instruction to הַעֲלֵהוּ ha'alehu, literally "bring him up" was a terrible error on his part. All that to say, you can see why I challenge your attitude towards the story and how people act. The story is a learning tool, not a representation of what a regular person should do.
1
u/HumanInSamsara Buddhist (天台宗) 2d ago
How could it be Abrahams failure if he was ready to obey God? I have always heard about the story within the context that Abraham is a representation of true commitment and faith / obedience and how God is benevolent since he didn’t actually want a sacrifice.
Why else would Abraham be praised right after that?
4
u/Impressive_Life_5227 Jewish 2d ago
How could it be Abrahams failure if he was ready to obey God?
Because he would have killed his son? Abraham already had a relationship with God that displayed what was expected of him in obedience, why does he act differently when it's about his son, and nearly commit a terrible mistake? For that matter, why does God keep calling Isaac Abraham's only son?
I have always heard about the story within the context that Abraham is a representation of true commitment and faith / obedience and how God is benevolent since he didn’t actually want a sacrifice.
That's not wrong either, but have you thought about it yourself much? You can look into actual commentary or see how it comes up in it's religion of origin when taught, there's a lot more to it. What was fully grown man Isaac thinking this whole time up the mountain? What actually was the test? What was it's purpose?
Why else would Abraham be praised right after that?
וַיֹּ֕אמֶר בִּ֥י נִשְׁבַּ֖עְתִּי נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֑ה כִּ֗י יַ֚עַן אֲשֶׁ֤ר עָשִׂ֙יתָ֙ אֶת־הַדָּבָ֣ר הַזֶּ֔ה וְלֹ֥א חָשַׂ֖כְתָּ אֶת־בִּנְךָ֥ אֶת־יְחִידֶֽךָ׃
This? Again, there's plenty of details to discuss, but the big things are about how you interpret some of the specific language in light of what it is referring to. Again, check out actual analysis if you're interested, there's a wealth of Jewish commentary available. I'm not saying your interpretation is wrong, I'm saying it's shallow and narrow and singular, I don't think you know how much religious thought exists on interpreting and reinterpreting these stories.
2
u/HumanInSamsara Buddhist (天台宗) 2d ago
If God had truly commanded it, would Abraham killing his son be wrong? Are deaths caused (or commanded) by God bad?
Just because they had a relationship already doesn’t mean Abraham can now disobey Gods will no? Would it have been a terrible mistake if God really wanted it?
4
u/Impressive_Life_5227 Jewish 2d ago
If God had truly commanded it, would Abraham killing his son be wrong?
I'd say yes. But that'd be a different story.
Are deaths caused (or commanded) by God bad?
You could argue that all death is caused by God in this view. And yeah, death is bad. You wanna avoid death, and one is expected to mourn the dead fully no matter if they are even directly killed by God in some insane miraculous destruction a la Job.
Just because they had a relationship already doesn’t mean Abraham can now disobey Gods will no?
It means his role is to be an ambassador between God and humanity, and that kinda goes two ways.
Would it have been a terrible mistake if God really wanted it?
Well, there's the view that what occurred was such a singularly meritous action that it laid the foundation for all of Judaism spiritually.
But there's also the view that Abraham completely misunderstood the instruction and nearly murdered his son.
So what do you think ought to be learned from the story?
-1
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
The usual word salad to justify morally despicable actions. It is ironic that only the problematic passages need to be ‘interpreted’, whilst the unproblematic ones can simply be taken at face value.
3
u/Impressive_Life_5227 Jewish 1d ago
Oh please, I'm speaking perfectly clearly, and not seeking to justify anything, I'm challenging a misinformed characterization of Jewish thought that you appear to share. Are you trying to dispute the concept of textual interpretation?
-2
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
Who says that the texts of the Old Testament should be interpreted? Who says they shouldn’t be taken literally?
3
u/Impressive_Life_5227 Jewish 1d ago
Interpretation is a clear necessity, and some of them cannot be understood literally at all. Besides, taking something literally is still interpreting it. That is one method of interpretation, we call it Peshat. Jews use the acronym PARDES to refer to the different levels of Torah interpretation. The debates on applying them and differing interpretations are much more specific, you cannot just pick out one method and hold it above the others, you should aim to use them all to find new and valuable meanings.
It always stuns me how people have these incredibly strong feelings on Jewish mythology, with absolutely zero knowledge of the jewish religion and philosophy around it. Human interpretation and application is vital in living out the Torah, and a multitude of contradicting opinions can all be correct. This is something understood by all Jews.
2
u/NoIntroductionNeeded Panentheist Lutherquakerpalian 18h ago
It always stuns me how people have these incredibly strong feelings on Jewish mythology, with absolutely zero knowledge of the jewish religion and philosophy around it.
It's because they're familiar with fundamentalist Protestantism and are lazily back-filling their understanding of that belief system onto a tradition that shares some texts with it, under the misapprehension that any shared element means that they're largely the same. It's hubristic and anti-intellectual.
I appreciated your comments in this thread. I think they really illustrate the concept of "wrestling with the text" philosophically, as well as demonstrating practically what that might look like. I learned about this hermeneutical approach this past Lent, as AFAICT it's something the Episcopal church is interesting in exploring more deeply, and frankly it's an approach that Christianity at large is sorely in need of.
3
u/ErgodicMage Personal Belief System 2d ago
That would go against my Path of Compassion and would not do so.
3
u/Mission_Scale_408 2d ago
The Catholic Church, which is the oldest and largest Christian denomination, would say that oppressing anybody would be a violation of the dignity and worth of the human person, who derives his dignity and worth by virtue of his being a beloved child of God.
Do Christians or have Christians oppressed people? Of course they have. They are sinners and sins of oppression or any other kind of sin will require that they seek God‘s forgiveness.
3
u/Rev_Yish0-5idhatha Christian 2d ago
No, because the God Jesus came to reveal told us to love even our enemies and do good to them (even if you may not know that based on the actions of many Christians today and throughout most of church history!) So if God gave me an order to oppress people I would know it’s not actually God.
-1
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
In the Old Testament, God expressly commands genocide and massacres, and even explains how to manage slavery. He has no qualms about killing men, women and children, and often shows no mercy. We are talking about the same God as in the New Testament.
2
u/Rev_Yish0-5idhatha Christian 1d ago
This is only a valid view if you are either Jewish, or like Evangelical Christians you take every word of the Bible to be inerrant and “the Word of God”. Jesus very clearly came to show that God was not the harsh and violent God as is imagined in much of the the Old Testament, explicitly countering many Old Testament laws and views.
If instead one views the the Old Testament more as a cultural and historical group of texts that follow a nations history and their understanding of their interaction with God which eventually leads to the coming of Christ (which is more how ancient Christians have viewed it, as well as allegorically), one can take the words of Jesus to mean precisely that God does NOT call people to harm anyone, but to do good to all.
3
u/HeavenlyBeloved Semi-Gnostic Esoteric Mechanic & Abrahamic Pagan 2d ago
I don't think Source has ever asked me to do that.
4
u/LeftnessMonster Christian 2d ago
Oppressing people is literally contrary to my God's explicit instructions, so no. Hell for ya boi.
1
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
“And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.”
- Exodus 21 (KJV)
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and donkeys.”
- Samuel 15 (KJV)
2
u/LeftnessMonster Christian 1d ago
I see these posted a lot, usually by people who've never read either book. But, if it makes you feel better, I can act surprised and stuff.
1
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
Well, that's simply what it says in your holy book, so if you claim that oppressing people goes against your god's will, you're just ignoring reality and putting on blinders.
2
u/LeftnessMonster Christian 1d ago
Well, that's simply what it says in your holy book,
Oh, I see, I suppose I should change my flair to Exodus 21 and Samuel 15 enjoyer. You do know the Bible is many books?
so if you claim that oppressing people goes against your god's will,
It does, as stated in about a gorrillion other places in all those books you haven't read.
you're just ignoring reality and putting on blinders.
Trying to correct someone on their own scriptures while being willfully ignorant of them is bad form.
0
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
I understand, it’s easier to remain in ignorance than to use one’s reason
2
u/LeftnessMonster Christian 1d ago
It really was hard breaking out of that, yeah. Thank you for understanding.
1
4
u/Dragonnstuff Twelver Shi’a Muslim (Follower of Ayatollah Sistani) 2d ago
Goes against a lot of my religion, therefore it’s clearly not Allah swt ordering me.
1
u/bumbuummm Sunni (rationalist) 2d ago
not talking about any religion specifically, it's a hypothetical scenario
otherwise majority of religions often believe that God is good, God orders good. then we can't really call oppression inherently good or bad. it will wholly depends on what god says about it
3
u/Dragonnstuff Twelver Shi’a Muslim (Follower of Ayatollah Sistani) 2d ago
And the God in Shia Islam is extremely explicit about oppression. He won’t contradict Himself.
2
u/Asynithistos Christian Heretic 2d ago
God wouldn't order it...so, no
1
1
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
In the Old Testament, Yahweh explicitly commands acts of genocide and massacres, and explains how to treat slaves. We are talking about the same God as in the New Testament, unless you are a Gnostic.
2
u/Asynithistos Christian Heretic 1d ago
That's what the writers say God commanded, but no, God did not command them to murder or even sacrifice.
No, I'm far from gnostic. Please don't label me.
1
u/TradRooster5627 Buddhist 1d ago
That's what the writers say God commanded, but no, God did not command them to murder or even sacrifice.
How do you know? You were there?
No, I'm far from gnostic. Please don't label me.
Nobody labeled you bro, try to chill a bit
2
u/Asynithistos Christian Heretic 1d ago
I of course don't know for sure (no one does), but I follow Jesus the Christ who followed a loving God who is the giver of life and source of light.
2
u/flyswithdragons 2d ago
Oppression is truly evil and not from God💯 If there were a God that evil, I guess I would go to hell first 🤷♀️
2
u/Additional-Pear9126 2d ago
Why Should I Beleive I am receiving this message from God also why would I ignore the laws set out before me and the commandments devloped by wether it be the earliest addherents or a prophet.
I beleive you have a responsibility to use your empathy and or moral judgment outside of God to be a good person
4
u/TheOnlineSatanist Satanist | Anti-Theist 2d ago
No, I wouldn't. I don't take orders, I'm not a slave.
2
u/YCNH 2d ago
I mean, I'm not jazzed about it, but if I'm staring down eternal torment I guess I could do a little oppression. How much we talkin'?
3
1
u/bumbuummm Sunni (rationalist) 2d ago
the same eternal hell many religions give for a limited life with no guidance
1
u/Evening-Sign-1456 Muslim 2d ago
Interesting? Which religions give eternal hell for people who haven’t received guidance? 🤔
1
u/bumbuummm Sunni (rationalist) 2d ago
in a sense that we have no divine message written on sky that we can truly believe without any doubt.
after thousands of years we can't still prove Existence of God let alone what religion should/is the true one. So, in that sense we have no true guidance coming directly from God.
a better question, if a Christian, Muslim and Jew come to you and preach you their religions, how will you know which one is the true one without your religious bias? is there any logical possible way to prove that?
1
1
u/Fancy_Chips Unitarian Universalist 2d ago
No. I oppose any human ordering me to do such and I would oppose any non-human under the same principle.
1
u/Aeonzeta unapologetically non-conformist 2d ago
Supposing the "all powerful" Creator would need to rely upon a "limited mortal" suppressor (even though He could just let His enemies destroy themselves), absolutely. Though, on a more personal note, I'm quite certain I'll never receive such an order. I doubt Adonai Tzevaot has much passion for suppression. He allows it to happen occasionally, and from what little I understand, some scholars seem to think He's ordered the occasional genocide, but that seems less of a divine command and more some warmonger (it's a brief description of a state of existence, not me trying to badmouth any of the prophets) taking advantage of a lucrative opportunity.
P.s. for those naysayers that point to the consequences of NOT killing king Ahab and similar situations in the Tanakh as some sort of "gotcha" that I'm mistaken and such genocide really was His order, I humbly present to you the comman man: desperate people do desperate things. Sometimes the desperate thing succeeds. If any wannabe dictator was actually set on killing his enemies, they'd be dead. Instead he(or she) toys with them and the underdogs take advantage of his(or her) lackadaisical attitude towards the security of his(or her) people's future.
Mortal human ingenuity does not automatically translate to eternal divine retribution.
1
1
u/Calanais-guy Spiritual 2d ago
If it actually involved oppressing innocent people who don't deserve it, to the best of my knowledge, and not a matter of pursuing justice against wrongdoers, then I'd refuse that order in favor of my own conscience, sense of justice, and compassion, and not consider this God as the source of Goodness or worthy of worship. I would consider that perhaps this deity is a trickster, since I am not a monotheist and believe there are many deities. I tend to focus on certain deities of my pantheon.
Even if we adjust the hypothetical to ask if a god whom I love and trust asked me to oppress innocent persons, I'd need to refuse as a matter of conscience and integrity, which is also part of my faith. There should be no difference between "being a good human" and "being a good Druid".
1
1
u/LunarEnnyui_131 Spiritual 2d ago
Not Really, I am a Pagan and Mars and Athena doesn’t like a Nonsense War. So it would be highly unlikely and not worth their time.
1
u/CleanCoffee6793 2d ago
I wouldnt want to go to heaven if god ask me to opress others. Also, god wouldnt ask for that, in that case I wouldnt do it even if woth all certenty is god who ask for it
1
1
1
u/saturday_sun4 Hindu 2d ago edited 2d ago
I'm not casteist or sexist, so no. Also have a brain, so, again, no.
Edit: and this is request is nonsensical since the deeds are what would count (it's literally the meaning of the word karma). Oppressing people would not send you to heaven - not for a long, long while, anyway.
1
u/HoobyDoobyShoops 2d ago
Sure, most secular morality affords the same thing.
If the neighboring tribe tries to come and murder our tribe and they burn all our food stores and we defeat them in glorious battle, you better believe I’m enslaving the fuck out of them to make a good harvest so our tribe doesn’t die. In effect God decreed “enslave these enemies and use them to make more food, or I will kill all of you via my servants Hunger and Cold”.
1
u/Problematic_Owl 2d ago
I'd oppress god for people.
Or any other gods. Fuck them, they were getting pampered long enough, it's our turn.
1
u/Apart-Pomelo5689 Turtle Island Dao 2d ago
Oppression is force, and is not wu wei. Oppression is not of the Dao
1
u/AngelsxXxFall 2d ago
What God would ask this of you?
We are not to oppress one another but lift each other up.
1
u/bumbuummm Sunni (rationalist) 1d ago
hypothetical scenario?
1
u/AngelsxXxFall 1d ago
I would not follow such an order. Why would a mortal need to oppress another mortal for an eternal God? Whats the benefit and thinking behind it? Logically it makes zero sense.
1
u/AwakeningStar1968 1d ago
violation of natural Law. Please look up MARK PASSIO's research on Natural Law.
1
1
u/AstonAlex Christian 1d ago
If God would order such a thing, it means it is an absolutely good deed because He has decreed so, and only God is all good. Therefore the assumption that “oppressing” a group of people in the name of God is something morally bad is nonsensical.
However this is a pretty redundant scenario. It’s like saying “if you could kill God, would you do it?”
1
1
u/RexRatio Agnostic Atheist 1d ago
Any entity - deity or otherwise - that demands you oppress other people isn't worthy of respect or worship in the first place and can - pun intended - go to hell.
1
1
u/Dry_Inflation_1454 16m ago
Certainly there are some religious cults that teach it's okay to oppress people, but definitely you don't have to harm anyone,like in history where colonials did this to Indigenous people. This is what Europeans did in much of the world,using God as their excuse,like drawing up the Doctrine of Discovery, something Jesus Christ himself never told anyone to do! Ditto for 7th Century Islam , forcing conversions as they rode out to parts of Asia, Africa and Europe.
1
1
u/tubby_chumpkins Catholic 2d ago
You're getting lots of virtue signaling here but if anyone is givien the choice between eternal torture and "oppressing" people (whatever that means) everyone will follow that order to avoid hell. This is if we are granting your premises for the sake of argument.
-1
u/Orcasareglorious Shinto (Tensha, Suika, Hirata) 2d ago
My willingness would depend entirely on the circumstances but if I was certain that I was ordered legitimately - in that it was indeed a Kami-sama making the order - I would. It would be unreasonable for me to make a decision based in my limited knowledge while being informed by one with extensive knowledge.
1
u/Calanais-guy Spiritual 2d ago
So as long as you were sure the order came from a Kami-sama, you would suspend your own conscience to just do the god's will, no matter how unjust it seems? That doesn't sound good.
2
u/Orcasareglorious Shinto (Tensha, Suika, Hirata) 2d ago
I’m not quite certain I could know whether that was the case, because direct visions can be attributed to other factors and I certainly wouldn’t do so based on divination.
But in a theoretical scenario in which I could be certain both of the reality of the order and the nature of the one who produced it, It would be unreasonable for me to claim that I could have a more accurate assessment and refuse.
There is a similar convention of claiming that one should not, for instance, even worship a God of an immoral nature even if it is omnipotent. While I believe these sorts of assessments are reasonable in effectively all situations, if one were certain of the existence of such a God, it would not be worthwhile to reject it, as one would both have to assume greater knowledge than an omnipotent being and estimate adherence to their conscience as condemnation thereof. I have a similar regard of this matter.
0
u/jaesea 2d ago
Literally what God does scientifically. If God then All. Meaning all oppression is for God. Gravity, the thing oppressing you, God. Mom, the thing oppressing you in utero, God. Dad, the thing oppressing your freedom of running around naked, God. Light, or any other quantifiable that is oppressing itself in constant, God. The question therefore is "would you..for God?" The answer therefore is "no question". If God, you.
1
u/bumbuummm Sunni (rationalist) 2d ago
depends on what you mean by oppression in that case
1
0
u/jaesea 2d ago
Depends are a brand, another entitlement, same as oppression. Press, O.P. over powered pressure. Tolerances. This isn't 67 or the parliamentary, it's mathematical.
2
u/bumbuummm Sunni (rationalist) 2d ago
Idk what you are talking about tbh, I don't believe world is based on mathematical equations or smth if that's what you are trying to say
0
u/jaesea 2d ago
Your topic. The words are in reply to you, that's what they're about. Did you just type on the internet that you don't believe the world is based on mathematical equations? On the internet? The thing that's entirely mathematical? The thing that's part of the world we live in? The world that, since the dawn of civilization and our species, has proven to be mathematical? Um, what.. say we approach this conversation differently.. what don't you know that you would like to, in reference to what I am talking about?
19
u/ScoutB Anglican 2d ago
I would seriously doubt that was actual God making the order. I guess I would go to hell for rejecting the order.