Tumgik
#dystheist
Text
I just recieved an advertisement for religion and I am... amused (/derogatory).
Ah yes, let's give the demonic alter with religious trauma a message praising the thing that helped form it (/sarcasm).
It isn't any of my business what others do or believe in; I do not care as long as it doesn't hurt my headmates.
But I am... displeased with the irony.
3 notes · View notes
vampiretheology · 2 years
Text
On the Nature of God
TL;DR: People read the made in God's image thing to mean humanity is good. The far more reasonable interpretation is that God isn't.
Gen 1:26 - Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
This differentiation of image and likeness conveys the idea that mankind is made deliberately similar to God, not just in physical body, but in action and function (and yes, the difference exists in the Hebrew as well). Where God claims dominion over the world, mankind claims dominion over all animal life. In so paralleling, scripture informs us that we can get a glimpse of the nature of God simply by looking at ourselves.
Mankind has great capacity for many things, but not all are good. Sure, we may have great capacity for love, but if God were only love we certainly couldn't be called his likeness. We have spectacular capacity for becoming overly controlling, manipulative, jealous, abusive, and deceptive. Many of which are traits we see God openly exhibit in scripture.
I find it odd how little capacity those who claim to follow the Bible have when it comes to accepting that their god might not always be truthful with them. He might not always have their best interest at heart. Even from the first chapter of the first book we see the subtle warning that all the evil man might do, God might just do as well. And one of those evils, in fact arguably the first one man displays, is deception.
My best and only response to a biblical literalist is simply this: "Yes, but he could very well have been lying." Do I know that he was - no, but neither can you be certain he wasn't. If the question itself is God's honesty, no scriptural refutation is possible, only blind faith. I do not doubt that your god exists - I doubt that he is good, that he is truthful, and that he is alone. He could have literally said everything you quote - but who's to say he's being honest? You've experienced his voice, even his miracles - great, I never refuted his existence, I never doubted his ability to grant miracles, but I also have no reason that his motives are noble, or even to believe he is alone in the capacity to grant miracles. The only evidence is that of his own hollow words, and I do not accept them.
You wish to dedicate your life and your soul to him - more power to you, I certainly won't get in the way. Just don't try to force me along for the ride.
10 notes · View notes
ewingstan · 1 year
Text
Finding out that drawing a lot of Rachel Lindt means drawing a lot of dogs in complicated poses. Becoming a dystheist because clearly this is incompatible with the possibility of a loving god, or even an uncaring universe not out to punish me specifically.
130 notes · View notes
puissantveil · 10 months
Text
Re: Tarkat disease
CW: fictional genocide (albeit in an unconventional manner)
At first I thought "oh, that's a clever reference to Mileena's past Tarkatan genetics" and left it at that. But people smarter than me have brought up the possibility that Liu Kang turned the Tarkatan people, with their own culture, their own set of values, their own sexual practices even...and turned them into a literal disease.
What a swell dude.
Bastard didn't even think to spare Mileena.
I really hope this isn't the case, and it's just a coincidence, but if it is they better not play it straight. I hope they approach this from a dystheist (i.e. the supreme being isn't completely good and sure as shit isn't perfect) perspective, or reveal that some things are locked in stone by fate, or that Liu Kang fucked up real big when he made this wonderful decision /s
I hope we see some Tarkatans in MK1, if only to put such a horrible idea to rest.
12 notes · View notes
gxlden-angels · 2 months
Note
I'm forced to go to a Catholic school, and my theology was trying to teach us about how some disciple was asked by Jesus to follow him out of nowhere and he did? She then made us write what we would do?
And I was supposed to give the classic Christian girl answer of "of course I would follow Jesus :3 <3" But I kid you not I wrote "Well, let's see...a random dude asking a teenage girl to follow him? seems sketchy doesn't it..."
No one knows i'm sacrilegious and a dystheist yet
Reminds me of when my youth group was asked how they'd react to a popular celebrity coming in the door then we were asked how we'd react if Jesus walked in and got shamed if our Jesus reaction seemed any less enthusiastic than our reaction to our favorite celebrity
3 notes · View notes
skewbforty · 9 months
Text
Rest in peace, spiritual Rachie.
Long live dystheist Rachie.
2 notes · View notes
viadescioism · 1 year
Text
What is the divine in viadescioism?
Viadescioism is theistic, monotheistic, polytheistic, autotheistic, and pantheistic within its understanding of the divine. The divine is the sacred preternatural greatest highest supreme point of being, and we refer to this as Oxakna meaning ascended enlightened being. There has to be a top aspect of existence in which encompasses everything else even, if it is not what we described there is an aspect of existence that is the greatest, and this is known to us as Oxakna. We are theistic, and are not atheistic, antitheistic, non-theistic, or agnostic as Oxakna is the main emanation of divinity in the world, and we believe in it, and we believe we can know about it. Oxakna is an impersonal divine, and it is more akin to the absolute, or the all, and because of this is not personal. It is not eutheistic, dystheistic, or maltheistic as Oxakna is neutral, and indifferent towards all things and exist much more as a state of nature rather than a benevolent or malevolent force. Oxakna is the main divinity because of that viadescioism is a monotheistic religion, but viadescioism also believes in emanationism, and the emanations of Oxakna are also divinities making it a polytheistic religion as well. Because of this it is both monotheistic and polytheistic at the same time having one god that is many gods. The polytheism is a Soft polytheism within its esoteric understandings as the Divines are aspect of existence reinterpreted by various cultures and traditions, but it is hard polytheistic within its exoteric understandings as the divines are seen as separate entities of various cultures and traditions. Allowing for the Divine aspects of existence to be honored through our interpretation and understanding of what we find Divine, and how we choose to name that divine.  We are Apeirotheistic as the amount of emanations are infinite split off from the main source. meaning that there are an infinite number of aspects of Oxakna which are all Divine and unique within their own right. We are monistic and hondualistic as there is only one substance or essence of existence and this is kna which is the essence of oxakna, and the ultimate reality not divided into separate parts, and there is no separation or duality between the self and the universe, or between the individual and the ultimate reality. It is not henotheistic, kathenotheistic, or monolatristic as we do not force the worship of any divine over the divines of others at any specific time or place, or depending upon worthiness. Which is what makes viadescioism religiously pluralistic and omnistic as the other religions should be respected as they are forms of interpretations of the perennialist religious world from the viewpoint of the culture or tradition and are all valid interpretations, but may not always be true, or false. We are theopanistic and pantheistic as the Divine is the existence and cannot be separated from that existence as it is it. It is not transtheistic, or panentheistic as Oxakna needs to be imminent and in the world, and cannot exist outside of existence because there is nothing outside of existence, or can transcend existence, because being outside of existence means you do not exist which is an impossible state to be within. We are also autotheistic as Oxakna is the main divine emanation of existence, and every other aspect of existence is part of that divinity, and is in some way divine. It is not classical deism, pandeism, or polydeism as we do not believe the universe was created by the divine and do not believe that is a prerequisite to be divine. We do not believe in any form of creation of existence as we believe existence has always been going. It is omnipresent, because it is existence and it exists everywhere within existence. It is omniscient, because it is all of existence, and the existence knows all about itself. It is not omnipotent as it could not create a rock that it could not move, much like it could not create a round Square or a married Bachelor. There are some aspects of being that are impossible to bring about and because of this they do not exist and are outside of being and because of that are outside of the power of oxakna. It is not omnibenevolent as it is neutral, and indifferent much like every other aspect of nature. It is infinite in its depth, number, and possible worlds, much like how a number line can go on forever and there is an infinite number of possibilities of being, and possible worlds. It is eternal because it has always existed, and there will never be a beginning, or end to existence. Because nothing can not create something from nothing, and nothing can not create something outside of being, therefore something in existence must have existed in order for existence to have existed, and because existence exists it must have been existing already. It is unchangeable in the sense that the monadic nature does not change, but simply expresses itself differently within the existence which accounts for the change we see even though the existence itself stays the same.
4 notes · View notes
Text
Pinned, I guess? What goes here? Hrmmm
Talk to me, I love making new friends and I care about you
IDENTITY:
29, white, dystheist, west coast best coast, queer, recently tossing around the idea of non-binary. Avatar from a picrew here
POSTS:
Random junk I guess. Pretty strong anti-theism theme at times. I just want to post stuff that might help someone through the day. Maybe that means funny stuff, or wholesome stuff, or obstinate stuff. Also my inane ramblings and whatever whacky shenanigans crosses my dash.
INTERESTS:
Nature, science, cute stuff, gaming, anime, stories, you (yes, you) (yes, it is a little creepy)
3 notes · View notes
flameandindifference · 5 months
Note
What's Lucius' take on dystheists?
For those who have no idea wtf that is: Dystheism (from Greek δυσ- dys-, "bad" and θεός theos, "god") is the belief that a god is not wholly good and can even be considered evil. Definitions of the term somewhat vary, with one author defining it as "where God decides to become malevolent".
Tumblr media
He is silent a moment as several war-esque flashbacks of the Old Testament run through his head.
".... Makes more sense than the current view. My father's a shithead but at least he didn't give a damn who you were fucking."
1 note · View note
Is there a term for simply believing gods unworthy of worship instead of non-existing? Or does that fall under the umbrella of agnosticism?
Agnosticism concerns knowledge. Atheism concerns belief.
Tumblr media
I regard myself as an agnostic atheist. I don’t claim to know that no gods exist (although I will say the god of the bible cannot exist), but I necessarily conclude from everything presented to me so far that none exist (see also: Null hypothesis). This isn’t a claim of knowledge - I find the gods “Not Guilty” of existing, rather than “Innocent” of existing. If someone can reliably, verifiable prove one or more of the various gods exist, then I will believe. Until then, I remain skeptical.
I’m not quite sure I understand what you mean by “believing gods unworthy of worship instead of non-existing.” If “instead of” applies to the person, rather than the terminology, this seems to suggest someone who believes they do exist, but don’t think very much of it/them to worship it/them. This would make them a theist, as that term refers to holding belief.
If this is true, they might be described as a misotheist (”hatred of god”), or a dystheist (belief that god is not wholly good, and possibly evil). Although that might depend on why they found the god(s) unworthy, while still believing it/they do exist.
If it was more a case of the “instead of” applying to the terminology rather than the person, then they’re likely just an atheist. I don’t believe any gods exist, but there are very few gods I’ve ever heard anyone describe that weren’t petty, arbitrary and rather loathsome. Just like how I find Jar Jar Binks to be a particularly odious character. (Although, the villain theory makes him much more interesting.)
“Anything that wants to be worshipped is not worthy of even respect, much less worship.” - Jonathan Harper
I don’t aspire to have anyone or anything worship me. A higher form of life should have better self-esteem, be more self-possessed than a random imperfect human such as myself. Otherwise, it would be as pathetic as me getting my self-esteem and validation by demanding a nest of ants worship me. Anything that needed worship would be, by definition, imperfect - so, why would you worship it at all? Any existent god that was perfect would have no need of worship. Therefore, either way, god or no god, worship would be utterly pointless and unnecessary.
But this is ultimately trumped by my lack of belief anyway. Can’t hate or decline to worship a god that I find no reason to think exists in the first place. It’s more of a theoretical, a mental exercise to evaluate the position of those who do believe.
So, terminology for that might just be a skeptic. Or perhaps a book critic.
56 notes · View notes
kalystastakakastaka · 4 years
Photo
Tumblr media
last night i had a dream where i met a pantheon of college aged gods and they all looked like some different version of this
23 notes · View notes
hell-propaganda · 2 years
Note
the dystheist urge to bite God's hand like a rabid animal
!!YES!!
31 notes · View notes
resignedseraph · 2 years
Text
(James speaking)
Tumblr media
[ID: a comment from @chaotixxguud reading: “hi james! looking forward to your inputs and thoughts here~ (if that’s what you plan on doing anyway).” /End ID]
Hey hey! It is, yeah. I wanted to keep the system stuff and religious stuff separate, as well as just having somewhere to dump my more dystheist ramblings, so that’ll probably be part of what I end up posting here
2 notes · View notes
debelltio-a · 3 years
Text
Tumblr media
†: Did they come from a religious family/culture?
More & More! Headcanons / @auroradicit​ , @shuuhuu​
Tumblr media
Lexrul , located right along a popular trading route , ferries many travellers from near and far. Trade and religion are passed into its history — and these can be seen in its people. Orson’s homeplanet is a melting pot of religion however on a personal level , the level of faith in his family varies. He remembered little of his father before the man’s passing but most of the time , he was concerned with practical matters rather than placing their faith onto a divine power. His older brother is , however , religious. Orson does not share this.
I should note here that Orson has a disdain towards religion. He’s a Misotheist / Dystheist. He believes in a higher being , but he hates it and believes it to be malevolent in nature.
The Gods were never kind to him , why should he pay lip service ?
Tumblr media
1 note · View note
soldier-poet-king · 3 years
Text
i know the pillars of eternity pantheon could be described using a dystheist view at best, and not to once again project onto a fictional thing instead of dealing with my problems head on, but the fact that aloth’s key-breaker sceptre has a special function called ‘misotheist’???? oh im vibing
3 notes · View notes
gascon-en-exil · 4 years
Note
I can't help but wonder if Dimitri's weakness in "reason" is because of his mental health. Studying in that field may not be engaging enough for him and his ghosts and self loathing can more easily take a grasp. I know from personal experience trying to work on something I do not like or find unpleasant has caused me to dwell on my anxiety and depression.
That could be. Strengths and weaknesses in reason seem to represent a variety of things, and Dimitri does have his struggles with mental illness to consider. I also consider it significant that he, Felix, and Gilbert all have the same black magic spell list, as if they’re pulling from some common Faerghus royalty-related point which would be especially painful for Dimitri if true.
Could also be a structural thing, as the house leaders follow a consistent pattern when it comes to skill proficiencies. For this it’s that each is weak in one magic type, and while it’s faith for Edelgard (atheist/dystheist) and Claude (spiritual but not a follower of the faith of Seiros) it’s reason for Dimitri.
15 notes · View notes