Messages

Most young men in greece that are frustrated with their life commit a solitary suicide that nobody will forget but their grieving family. This 'kill as many of your peers before doing yourself' thing has yet to be mimicked from the americans... But we got your macdonalds. We got your inane television. We'll get our own underage school shootings, I'm sure.

I wish a game handled an interpersonal relationship well for once. Can anyone suggest anything or do I have to file under 'games to make myself'?

I suppose I was just disappointed that instead of reasoning with me concerning how forgiving despite a lack of repentance constitutes greater faith, you did what looked to me like a punt. "Well, if you can't see how that's true, then you're just not a good Christian."

But it's very embarassing for me because what I can only tell you - and remember I am a godless heathen that eats feces and marries goats! - to explain that you are not what I understand to be a good christian is.... study the Bible more.

Do you see why I wanted to avoid having to say this? Seeing how the christian faith is not important to me but is important to you, to recieve that sort of patronizing instruction by me would rightly seem infuriating.

I think the message of Christ's death is very clear as far as what forgiveness is and what unconditional love is, and I've written to you about this three times and running now and you seem to dodge it. What can I say? If you don't see how the ultimate sacrifice of Christ means a good christian (a person following Christ's example) should love everybody and forgive everybody... then look at your sources again until you do.


I am ashamed to cause you grief about this because for me it is an academic conversation: I hold no faith and I am moral (probably very similar morality to yours) without the need of gods, but for you it's probably a bigger deal to be told 'read the bible, lol!'.

But... I don't know why you make me do this: The point was that was being made is that the Jesus the bible speaks of is a fictional character only very lightly based on one of the many prophets that came -along with scorpions- from Judea, and that in this case, looking inside the Bible for the acurate historical information regarding the latter is not the wisest thing to do. Nobody said you could learn more about the theological figure, Jesus, anywhere outside the Bible.

How many of you guys can honestly say that your female characters are as alive as your males?

Why is this 'wrong' suddenly? I am not interested in a phone drawn realistically, I am interested in a phone drawn as an artist would through his individual vision and ability. Similarly, I am not interested in a 'realistic' depiction of a female (whatever the hell that is) I am interested in how she would be depicted by the artist, be it a him or her. There's no objective representation of anyone in art, and being a woman when writing a woman is only more efficient in getting shallow facts right. I can guarantee you that if you invest yourself in a character you are writing, be them male or female, if you really risk it and put parts of yourself in there, there'll be people of both sexes that will find the character alive and resonant within themselves, maybe not in an obvious ("oh she's 16 and depressed, so am I!") way, but in a more vital one, maybe.

I am so sick and tired of this bullshit 'write what you know' truism. Write what you feel strongly about and let the pieces fall where they may. If there's honesty, there's room for passion. If there's room for passion, there's room for vision.

Oh, and Harvest Moon is among the greatest game ever made. The greatest game is Beyond and Evil, and I feel no shame in telling you this again.. and again.. and again..   

I feel your adoration is misplaced. Harvest Moon is the game where an emotional relationship is typifed by the act of breaking into a woman's house like a creepy stalker and reading her journal in which there is your NAME, followed by a number of HEARTS signifying how much she LOVES you.

Let's just think about this for a bit.

Let's think about abstraction versus immersion, about the model this game seems to suggest as 'fun'. About 'life as procedure' and the causality of emotion. I buy you flowers, you add another heart in your sole, Helm entry, in your little bedside journal. One step closer to a fulfilled life, you, my cabbages and the town fair that's coming next summer, every summer, forever. Maybe we'll also get a cat eventually. Can you check my pulse to tell me how many HPs I've got left?

Consider the fellow who originally came up with the Little Red Riding Hood story (bad example, I know there are many versions, but take it as an example). A few hundred years later, someone says "No! That can't possibly be true, because AHAAA! If you look at it scientifically, wolves can't look like grandmas, and they cannot possibly talk. THIS MEANS THAT THE STORY DISTORTED! The original antagonist was a cannibal who's name translates to Wolf'!". It's a ridiculuous argument, because (if you are going along with the example), the guy who originally wrote Little Red Riding Hood is probably the best bet on what happened, and it's his story after all.

I think the clue that you're missing from my other post is that Little Red Riding Hood is a ficitional character.


Erenan: I don't know what you think you're caught between (I and SSH? Now here's a shit orgy!), and feel free to not reply to me, since this is a conversation that can end at any time, but I don't think there's any reason for you to get upset by what I'm saying. I respect you bowing out before you became unreasonably upset anyway.

I don't think there is any mention of Jesus anywhere outside of religious texts. While what is written in the religious texts may be very, very unlikely, it is the only source of any of the events that could possibly have happened to Jesus.

That is such an awesome argument you present to us here. Because there's no mention of Jesus anywhere else than on the texts that later consisted of the Bible... they are... the best account of what... possibly... must... have... happened... to him.

The historical truth about the person to whom the acts and teachings of Jesus are attributed to does not interest me very much, since I am discussing theology, morality and philosophy, and not history here, for one. If there's anyone that must bear the burden of the 'You christ didn't exist, lol!' that is the christians of this forum. I am content to discuss the Christ paradigm even though I don't think such a person existed and did the miracles attributed to him.

Because I don't know who this god thing is at all.


but I agree with you nacho on that the ressurection weakens the sacrifice, and that in the end if there wasn't a ressurection Christ would by just another martyr for a cause, just like oh, millions before and since, who would not be of much use as the figurehead of a religion. I mean, he'd do, but probably not for 2,000 years. The moral ramifications of this 'empty sacrifice' are... interesting, but besides the point that Christianity should be/is about full-on love and forgiveness to all.

Yes I agree that by putting his money where his mouth was, he actualy forgave WHEN he died, although I'd say it would take huge balls just to say 'it's ok' to someone that is nailing you to the cross, but to the general point I think you are correct. Jesus was one awesome motherfucker.

He taught this in parable (Matt. 15) and he taught this in plain words (Luke 17). I don't know where you've gotten this notion that God forgives sins with or without repentance. And I don't know if you're interested even the least in reading the Bible at this point, but since we're talking about it, I figured it was logical to refer to it.

How about when he forgave everyone before dying for their sins? Does that footnote hold any weight?

Forgiveness makes no sense

Makes no... sense? Are you approaching christianity with pragmatism in mind? It seems to me you desire to be an atheist much more than it originally was clear. THERE IS NO PRACTICAL USE in forgiving someone that doesn't want to be forgiven, but it makes all the difference for their immortal souls and yours (I am playing devil's advocate, but what can I do?). Christian doctorine makes no sense inherently. It says 'love your enemy' and 'forgive those that do not wish to be forgiven'. It makes me wonder on what sort of christianity you were brought up on. It must have been something different. Were we reading the same book, at least? I was brought up in a Christian Orthodox environment. Perhaps you are a protestant or strange catholic of some sort? We kiss pictures, you kiss statues! Let's have an orgy!

I'm going by what the Bible and Jesus himself appear to me to have taught. I'm also fairly certain that we don't understand the same thing by the word "faith."

How about when he forgave everyone before dying for their sins? Does that footnote hold any weight? It's in the bible somewhere. I think.

Yes, his standard is difficult. But in my opinion this is not Christ's standard that you're suggesting.

Okay. I understand that. I think your idea of christ's teachings is a very besides-the-point one, probably one that makes more sense to apply (forgive when it's needed, help when help is wanted) but one that severily disgraces the concept of christianity as I understand it. Love everybody, forgive everybody! Turn the other cheek and SMILE.

Because underlining the differences between ourselves and others makes us feel like distinct people, outside of the herd and such?

Isn't this just an illusion, since striving to be 'outside of the herd' as you put it often involves falling into just another category?

Dunno. I just hate black people.

Because underlining the differences between ourselves and others makes us feel like distinct people, outside of the herd and such?

This is why I don't care if God exists after me being a colossal unrepentant atheist for all my life: he wouldn't mind, he wouldn't judge me, I'd go straight to heaven, along with everybody else. If god exists, he loves us all, and that's great. It's a win/win situation for me.

nope.
only those who accept Him as their God and has faith in Him will go to heaven.
in other words, if God exists, atheists are not in a win/win situation at all.

Okay.

Yes, thinking or descriptive text outside the screen, be it from a narrator figure or just utilitarian 'this object has been picked up' is better for serious games, I think.

I do find that I talk to myself alarmingly often, but I fear it is a sign of an unstable psychology more than anything else. Therefore: adventure game main characters are predominantly schizophrenics.

I like how it's breaking the fourth wall to be talking about how it's a game, in the game, but nobody seems to mind that a person is talking out-loud to nobody in particular about random items his gaze is travelling over and debating the relative merits of using bricks on them.

[UNCONDITIONAL NEVER-ENDING LOVE]

First of all, I don't see how forgiving someone who does not repent constitutes greater faith. And second, doing so directly contradicts the biblical model of forgiveness. There are many, many passages that clearly state to forgive anyone who repents of their sin. It does not say, "Yes, that guy murdered your wife and kids, and no, he doesn't care one bit, nor does he feel any remorse or guilt. But what the heck! Forgive him anyway!" In the Christian faith, that is not how God forgives mankind, and that is not how God endorses forgiveness, as you put it.

It is very clear to me you don't believe in the Christianity I am familiar with. The bible says a lot of things. You tell me with some authority that 'that's not the type of forgiveness God endorses, sorry!' but you have your extraconceptual sources and I just point out what happened in the bible: Christ/God forgave everyone without the smallest bit of repentance by them. He uh.. died for their sins. Gladly. That is the crux (haha, small pun!) of Christian doctorine. What a petty god he would be if he only forgave those that aknowledged him and asked for forgiveness directly. This is why I don't care if God exists after me being a colossal unrepentant atheist for all my life: he wouldn't mind, he wouldn't judge me, I'd go straight to heaven, along with everybody else. If god exists, he loves us all, and that's great. It's a win/win situation for me.

Of course for the social institution that is the Church what I am describing is BAD BUSINESS, and of course they need hell, they need earthly messengers and forgivers and they need to be them themselves. That shouldn't define the premise of the Christian faith, which is to the best of my knowledge UNCONDITIONAL NEVER-ENDING LOVE.

That having been said, I suppose I should mention that I'm not even entirely sure I want to be a Christian any longer,

What you seem to be is not very christianic for me, you seem to grasp theology, or at least have devoted a lot of your time to it, but for you to tell me with a straight face that you don't see how real faith is about forgiving the sinner without them asking to be forgiven, I'd say you're not the good sort of christian, in my opinion.

It was Creator who asked if you were teasing him, so if you really want his forgiveness, then maybe ask him again?

Which was the point: I don't want his forgiveness at all. I shit on his forgiveness. But he better forgive me, turn the other cheek, so on, if he wants to be a Christian. FAITH IS DIFFICULT. Christ's standard is a very high one. Get to it.

Also, I don't care if you spit on any cross. And if you should find Christ's body and spit on that, then I'd certainly not be a Christian.

Is there some sort of freudian I/you error in that sentence, as it makes no sense now.

Note: This post was written without anger.

I didn't detect any anger

By the way, how does someone "yell" at people through a text-based medium? If dictionary.com isn't lying to me, yelling requires an increase in volume.

What you're doing in this thread is the equivalent of bad stand-up comedy. Why bad? Because you're not funny, I don't know if people tell you this a lot or not, could be just me. So you seem very excited and loud for no particular reason, and no punch-line is forthcoming.

I sincerily don't know why you write in that tone, whatever you have to say can be said with about 99% less overenthusiasm and lame jokes. You don't get points of being funny on a thread like this, but you do get negative points for trying and failing. Just say what you have to say without mocking anyone and maybe you'll be treated better by your peers, with whom you're supposed to be discussing on an even level about an subject you find interesting.

For instance, I agree with your post: I don't think this is an issue that's interesting or to be debated, as I stated. However I completely disagree with your bullshit attitude and I get this reactionary impulse to attack your position just because you're behaving thusly. You're hurting your (/our) point of view. How? By being an asshole on the internet, in the WRONG PLACE and doing it BADLY. Sorry, DG, that's how I see it.

Now quote my post all over and make fun of me.

You'd have to apologize first.

Is that the limit of your god-endorsed forgiveness? Did christ when he was once upon the cross say to the lord  'forgive them for they do not know what they are doing' or did he say 'dad, they're being a bit assholeish but forgive them 'cause they apologized'.

Come on, put some faith in your faith. Let me spit on your cross and the forgive me wholeheartedly, you can do it.

You'd do well to forgive me then.