Do you believe in God?

  • Thread starter Patrik
  • 24,083 comments
  • 1,006,678 views

Do you believe in god?

  • Of course, without him nothing would exist!

    Votes: 616 30.5%
  • Maybe.

    Votes: 368 18.2%
  • No way!

    Votes: 1,035 51.3%

  • Total voters
    2,018
Well, do you have a way to punish wrongdoers?
None of those things that you quoted me as listing are examples of wrongdoing. I don't understand why you highlighted those things to ask me what you have.

Do I have a way to punish those who perpetrate acts to which I referred? No. I abhor vigilantism. I do support a system of governance which respects and protects the rights of individuals and which ventures to punish those who perpetrate rights violations, but does so in a way that doesn't violate the rights of the accused.


I may inflict harm upon another, but I'd do so only in response to an immediate threat of physical violence to myself or one who is in my presence and I'd make every effort to limit any harm I may inflict to that which is necessary to neutralize such a threat.
It's non of my business tbh.
And yet you responded to my earlier post with delusional drivel. Weird.
Christians can hold each other accountable.
But they don't. In fact they frequently go to great lengths to ensure offenders are not held to account, including by moving child rapists out of areas where they've raped children and setting them up in new areas where they may rape more children.

The myth of punishment in the afterlife was created to keep people under the thumb of the religious elite ("Do what we say or you'll burn for all eternity in Hell.") but I have to wonder if the additional benefit that the deluded ignore things like child rape because of this promise of an eternal torment is deliberate, so that they don't seek to address such heinous acts either themselves (which they shouldn't because that's vigilantism) or by referring offenders to outside actors who may bring about justice.

Do Christians actually think child rape is wrong? I confess that I haven't read texts thoroughly, but I've sought this out and haven't seen it addressed substantively. I've seen nothing explicit about child rape but I have seen that a man and a woman to whom the man is not married engaging in consensual sexual intercourse is cause for the offending parties to be stoned to death. Curious that an Earthly punishment is justified, depriving "God" of the opportunity to forgive the "sin." Why is it that adultery by individuals who consent to sexual intercourse with one another is so heinous that it's highlighted specifically and a punishment is suggested but child rape is seemingly glossed over?

Like I said Christians can hold each other accountable by reading their book but they aren't.
"Stop or I'll read."

:lol:

I'm compelled to refer to your having invoked the afterlife delusion as punishment to deflect from an Earthly one.

Also "their book," which would seem to be your book by your invocation of the afterlife delusion, is seemingly selective where accountability is concerned: "Adultery? Throw stones upon them until they die! Child rape? Meh."

The brain is a magnificent organ, it takes information, processes it and chooses whether to store it or throw it away.
Magnificent but flawed. It can take a lack of information and process it into belief.
 
Having just watched F1 on a dodgy stream, I feel compelled to right my wrong by reading part the bible.

"The Holy Bible, New International Version
Copyright (c) 1979, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, formerly International Bible Society
All rights reserved"


Ahh... I feel cleansed by the word or the lord.
 
None of those things that you quoted me as listing are examples of wrongdoing. I don't understand why you highlighted those things to ask me what you have.
How are they not?!
You wouldn't pat a rapist on the back for their act or support a warmonger like the Russian president or cheer on murderers and thieves.
Do I have a way to punish those who perpetrate acts to which I referred? No. I abhor vigilantism. I do support a system of governance which respects and protects the rights of individuals and which ventures to punish those who perpetrate rights violations, but does so in a way that doesn't violate the rights of the accused.

I may inflict harm upon another, but I'd do so only in response to an immediate threat of physical violence to myself or one who is in my presence and I'd make every effort to limit any harm I may inflict to that which is necessary to neutralize such a threat.
I can agree with you on that.
And yet you responded to my earlier post with delusional drivel. Weird.
Well you asked the question and that's the answer any monotheistic person would give you 🤷🏻‍♂️.
But they don't. In fact they frequently go to great lengths to ensure offenders are not held to account, including by moving child rapists out of areas where they've raped children and setting them up in new areas where they may rape more children.
Well it's mentioned in the Quran that their ancestors corrupted the Bible and made numerous versions of it which was true back then and today. Maybe you can do your own research about this.
The myth of punishment in the afterlife was created to keep people under the thumb of the religious elite ("Do what we say or you'll burn for all eternity in Hell.") but I have to wonder if the additional benefit that the deluded ignore things like child rape because of this promise of an eternal torment is deliberate, so that they don't seek to address such heinous acts either themselves (which they shouldn't because that's vigilantism) or by referring offenders to outside actors who may bring about justice.
Rape is forbidden in all monotheistic religions and those who practise it in the name of God must be punished and will be punished on Judgement Day. You have to take into account that Christianity has sects with different practices.
Do Christians actually think child rape is wrong? I confess that I haven't read texts thoroughly, but I've sought this out and haven't seen it addressed substantively. I've seen nothing explicit about child rape but I have seen that a man and a woman to whom the man is not married engaging in consensual sexual intercourse is cause for the offending parties to be stoned to death. Curious that an Earthly punishment is justified, depriving "God" of the opportunity to forgive the "sin." Why is it that adultery by individuals who consent to sexual intercourse with one another is so heinous that it's highlighted specifically and a punishment is suggested but child rape is seemingly glossed over?
Well the window for repentance is open until Judgement Day comes and that's what all monotheistic religions agree on.
Child rape is unjustified and is a sin and the same applies to adultery.
"Stop or I'll read."

:lol:
I'm compelled to refer to your having invoked the afterlife delusion as punishment to deflect from an Earthly one.
Earthly punishment must be carried out prior to the afterlife punishment. It's a test to the believer's faith.
Also "their book," which would seem to be your book by your invocation of the afterlife delusion, is seemingly selective where accountability is concerned: "Adultery? Throw stones upon them until they die! Child rape? Meh."
I'm not a Christian and if stoning to death is the Bible's way of Earthly punishment they must abide by it.
Magnificent but flawed. It can take a lack of information and process it into belief.
 
Last edited:
How are they not?!
Wrongdoing is that which violates another's rights. Rights violations require action. You quoted me as listing "fantasy," "delusion," and "mental defect." These are not actions. These exist in one's mind alone, even if they may exist in the minds of many, as is the case with organized religion. One may act upon what exists in one's mind and one's actions may violate the rights of another, but thought alone does not. Thought may be incorrect but it cannot be wrong.
You wouldn't pat a rapist on the back for their act or support a warmonger like the Russian president or cheer on murderers and thieves.
Correct. Do you disagree that these things, in their having required specific action which violates the rights of others, are distinct from what may exist in one's mind?
Well you asked the question and that's the answer any monotheistic person would give you 🤷🏻‍♂️.
Well, no. It's the answer you gave me. Not everyone who has a monotheistic belief shares your belief. Belief in a singular deity does not require belief in an afterlife, especially one which bodes eternal punishment. I gather Judiasm is an example where the two don't correlate, and it's a pretty major one.
Well it's mentioned in the Quran that their ancestors corrupted the Bible and made numerous versions of it which was true back then and today.
I mean...okay? A common theme in religious doctrine is placing itself over that of other religions. That doesn't mean it's true. Religious doctrine contains all kinds of falsehoods and fantasies. I kind of laugh it off as competition for who can be the most deluded.
Maybe you can do your own research about this.
That adherents to some religious beliefs place theirs over the beliefs of others has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I'm aware that this is common but I don't particularly care about it, especially to the degree that I'm compelled to research it. I think it's all delusional.
Rape is forbidden in all monotheistic religions and those who practise it in the name of God must be punished and will be punished on Judgement Day.
Can you provide specific text? Is it proscribed specifically or is it more of a vague gesturing in the direction of proscribing it? How is rape defined in such text?
You have to take into account that Christianity has sects with different practices.
Oh, I'm aware.


Well the window for repentance is open until Judgement Day comes and that's what all monotheistic religions agree on.
That doesn't answer my questions. Any of them. And you're speaking in absolutes again, which I'd suggest is...unwise.
Child rape is unjustified and is a sin and the same applies to adultery.
I'd agree that child rape is unjustified.

What justification does adultery require? I can understand one whose trust has been violated may want an explanation from that who violated it, but that isn't to say that it's required. Adultery is mere consensual sexual intercourse between a man and a woman, where the woman is married to a man other than the man with whom she's engaged in adultery. The bible specifies a married woman, but not a married man. Not that I think anyone should be stoned to death for engaging in consensual sexual intercourse, but it's curious that a woman who has been similarly wronged (where her husband has been adulterous, and the woman with whom he's been adulterous is unmarried) is not offered the same kind of relief.

Also you say "sin" like it's supposed to mean something to me. I mean I'm familiar with the notion of "sin," but I'm also aware that it's very subjective. Sometimes "sin" is that which violates another's rights, in which case it needs no additional denotation (as "sin"), and other times "sin" is that which one who adheres to particular religious doctrine believes their sky daddy--or cross daddy, or...whatever--won't like and so it makes the believer cry like a little bitch. That something makes you cry like a little bitch does not make that thing wrong.

Earthly punishment must be carried out prior to the afterlife punishment.
Why? Why didn't you say anything about this when you invoked eternal punishment in the afterlife as the answer to child rape?
It's a test to the believer's faith.
Again, why? If you believe something, why do you need to prove that you believe? And why must you prove that you believe by throwing stones at an individual who perpetrated no rights violation at all, much less one who didn't violate your rights, until the individual expires from your attacks?
I'm not a Christian and if stoning to death is the Bible's way of Earthly punishment they must abide by it.
Yeah, no...they absolutely must not abide by it. Killing someone just because they do something that makes you cry like a little bitch is wrong, and it concerns me that you have to be told as much.

You spoke of the Quran in such a way that makes me think you place doctrine espoused therein above other religious doctrine. Are you Muslim?

How do you feel about women? Are they individuals or are they possessions of men? How does it make you feel when a woman doesn't conform to religious doctrine to which you adhere? What of when women don't wear particular coverings in public?

How do you feel about the gays? What punishment does the Quran say you must mete out when one man has engaged in sexual intercourse with another? If I were to approach you and inform you that I, a man, had engaged in consensual homosexual intercourse--whether I had or not shouldn't matter if I'd confessed to having done so, right?--would you be compelled to mete out particular punishment? Would the likelihood that I'm armed and willing to neutralize an immediate threat of physical violence? What about proving your faith? Are you picking up on what I'm trying to drive home?
 
Wrongdoing is that which violates another's rights. Rights violations require action. You quoted me as listing "fantasy," "delusion," and "mental defect." These are not actions. These exist in one's mind alone, even if they may exist in the minds of many, as is the case with organized religion. One may act upon what exists in one's mind and one's actions may violate the rights of another, but thought alone does not. Thought may be incorrect but it cannot be wrong.
Yes. Bad deeds and wrongdoing are two separate terms and I apologize for the confusion this has caused. English is my second language so forgive my mistakes and ask for clarification if something doesn't sound right.
Correct. Do you disagree that these things, in their having required specific action which violates the rights of others, are distinct from what may exist in one's mind?
Well prior to committing the deed there definitely was intention. When God was all knowing He already knew what a person's thoughts and intentions were and only when said person commits the deed is when he will be punished for it, first on Earth and if he gets away with his deed in this world only God can exact justice in the Hereafter. I hope this answered your query.
Well, no. It's the answer you gave me. Not everyone who has a monotheistic belief shares your belief. Belief in a singular deity does not require belief in an afterlife, especially one which bodes eternal punishment. I gather Judiasm is an example where the two don't correlate, and it's a pretty major one.
Are Muslims, Christians or Jews really monotheists if they don't believe in the afterlife? It's an essential part of faith to believe in the afterlife and those who separate the two don't believe in God as they don't believe in His ability to resurrect the dead for judgement.
The point of the afterlife is to exact justice and differentiate the good from the bad. The good ones being the ones who promoted virtue and prevented vice, performed their prayers and stood up to the weak and poor without prejudice.
I mean...okay? A common theme in religious doctrine is placing itself over that of other religions. That doesn't mean it's true. Religious doctrine contains all kinds of falsehoods and fantasies. I kind of laugh it off as competition for who can be the most deluded.
It never was a competition. Religion is one and it's 'Submission' which translates to 'Islam' in Arabic. All prophets and messengers came with the message of submission ever since Noah's passing, and every single one of those prophets and messengers were mocked and dismissed by the elites and leaders of their people until they suffered God's wrath. Look up: "The people of Lut" , "People of 'Ad" ,and "People of Thamud". It's an interesting historical read.
That adherents to some religious beliefs place theirs over the beliefs of others has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I'm aware that this is common but I don't particularly care about it, especially to the degree that I'm compelled to research it. I think it's all delusional.
Can you provide specific text? Is it proscribed specifically or is it more of a vague gesturing in the direction of proscribing it? How is rape defined in such text?
As a Muslim and from what I have read, it falls under "Adultery" and here's the sentence according to Muslim scholars (translated from Islamweb Arabic):
"If what is meant by rape is an obscene act of adultery with one party coercing the other, then this is a grave crime. God Almighty threatens its perpetrator with punishment in this world and the hereafter. As for in this world, it is a flogging of a hundred lashes if the perpetrator is a virgin. If he was married, then he should be stoned to death if the legal conditions for that are met. The rapist also requires the full dowry, and the woman is obligated to purify herself with three menstrual cycles.".
Despite the above we don't see stoning or flogging performed too often and are substituted with prison sentence or ?execution?
Oh, I'm aware.


That doesn't answer my questions. Any of them. And you're speaking in absolutes again, which I'd suggest is...unwise.
I'd agree that child rape is unjustified.

What justification does adultery require? I can understand one whose trust has been violated may want an explanation from that who violated it, but that isn't to say that it's required. Adultery is mere consensual sexual intercourse between a man and a woman, where the woman is married to a man other than the man with whom she's engaged in adultery. The bible specifies a married woman, but not a married man. Not that I think anyone should be stoned to death for engaging in consensual sexual intercourse, but it's curious that a woman who has been similarly wronged (where her husband has been adulterous, and the woman with whom he's been adulterous is unmarried) is not offered the same kind of relief.
Adultery is forbidden because it eventually leads to lost lineages, grudges and murder. It simply leads to the downfall of societies regardless of consent and safe sex.
Also you say "sin" like it's supposed to mean something to me. I mean I'm familiar with the notion of "sin," but I'm also aware that it's very subjective. Sometimes "sin" is that which violates another's rights, in which case it needs no additional denotation (as "sin"), and other times "sin" is that which one who adheres to particular religious doctrine believes their sky daddy--or cross daddy, or...whatever--won't like and so it makes the believer cry like a little bitch. That something makes you cry like a little bitch does not make that thing wrong.
Any action which violates others' rights and crosses the red lines set by God are called sins. Examples of sins are:

Polytheism
Adultery
Witchcraft
Killing a soul which God has forbidden except by right.
Usury
Consuming an orphan's wealth
Why? Why didn't you say anything about this when you invoked eternal punishment in the afterlife as the answer to child rape?

Again, why? If you believe something, why do you need to prove that you believe? And why must you prove that you believe by throwing stones at an individual who perpetrated no rights violation at all, much less one who didn't violate your rights, until the individual expires from your attacks?

Yeah, no...they absolutely must not abide by it. Killing someone just because they do something that makes you cry like a little bitch is wrong, and it concerns me that you have to be told as much.
I hope those questions were sufficiently answered above. If not I'm happy to respond to further queries.
You spoke of the Quran in such a way that makes me think you place doctrine espoused therein above other religious doctrine. Are you Muslim?
Yes. I didn't place the Quran on top of any other holy book. I can't and won't force Islam on people of the book as they already have a book and submit to God. If they're interested in knowing more about Islam then and only then I'm open for queries.
How do you feel about women? Are they individuals or are they possessions of men? How does it make you feel when a woman doesn't conform to religious doctrine to which you adhere? What of when women don't wear particular coverings in public?
1. They're human beings like men with equal rights in education and occupation.
2. No they're not the possessions of men and if she wasn't happy with her spouse she can seek divorce and take legal action if she was abused.
3 and 4. Lower the gaze and pray for their guidance. Why pray for their guidance? Because selfishness is disgusting and Hell isn't a fun place to be thrown in. Love for your brother what you love for yourself.
How do you feel about the gays? What punishment does the Quran say you must mete out when one man has engaged in sexual intercourse with another? If I were to approach you and inform you that I, a man, had engaged in consensual homosexual intercourse--whether I had or not shouldn't matter if I'd confessed to having done so, right?--would you be compelled to mete out particular punishment? Would the likelihood that I'm armed and willing to neutralize an immediate threat of physical violence? What about proving your faith? Are you picking up on what I'm trying to drive home?
1. Homosexuality is forbidden in Islam, Christianity and Judaism, and the story of the people of Lut is a textbook example of homosexuals who refused to repent and thus were wiped off of the face of the Earth.
2. If you were proven guilty of homosexuality then its sentence is death.
3. Why would anyone confess something which they haven't done? If you weren't proven guilty and had had sexual intercourse with a man then God's punishment is far greater than a death sentence.
4. If that's not violence and hostility then what is it? I didn't get the question.
5. You prove your faith by abiding by what's written in your holy book. Those books weren't written by men but were written by God long before His creation of the universe.
Life is nothing but a test of a person's faith and resilience. Proof lies in the Quran in: 5:48, 6:165, 11:7 and 67:2.

Thank you for taking the time to read this long reply.
 
Last edited:
5. You prove your faith by abiding by what's written in your holy book. Those books weren't written by men but were written by God long before His creation of the universe.
Having just watched F1 on a dodgy stream, I feel compelled to right my wrong by reading part the bible.

"The Holy Bible, New International Version
Copyright (c) 1979, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, formerly International Bible Society
All rights reserved"


Ahh... I feel cleansed by the word or the lord.
Gave me a good chuckle.
 
3. Why would anyone confess something which they haven't done? If you weren't proven guilty and had had sexual intercourse with a man then God's punishment is far greater than a death sentence.

I won’t speak for @TexRex but I’ll take “if it’s not violating anyones rights it’s not a crime” & “if it’s not a crime there’s nothing to confess too”.

I don’t understand why so many religions feel it necessary to outlaw something that doesn’t violate rights or actually hurt anybody. If engaging in same-sex relations makes the participants happy; I don’t see the reasoning behind lashings, stonings or any form of shame.
 
"This" being someone posting hymns instead of having original thoughts?
My point was (and is) that all of this is questioning the truths that we believe in.

Is what we believe absolute truth?

Maybe, maybe not.

I will admit that some of the things that I have believed in my life have been proven wrong. However, some haven't.

And, yes, we shall see. I don't know specifically how that will turn out, but it will. In whatever way it does.
@Oreca 1998 Do you believe in a purgatory, or is it a "one shot chance" in this lifetime?
I believe that there will be eternal punishment. In that one of God's names is eternal. So, it will be HIS punishment. How long or how much depends on what is decided by Him.

But I also believe in eternal progression. So there is always a chance to get where God hopes for us to be. I just don't know precisely how that will happen. When you have forever to change (however slowly that may happen), you CAN change.

We shall see.
 
I won’t speak for @TexRex but I’ll take “if it’s not violating anyones rights it’s not a crime” & “if it’s not a crime there’s nothing to confess too”.

I don’t understand why so many religions feel it necessary to outlaw something that doesn’t violate rights or actually hurt anybody. If engaging in same-sex relations makes the participants happy; I don’t see the reasoning behind lashings, stonings or any form of shame.
Sodomy is forbidden because it contravenes innate sexual behaviour, leads to STDs and, as I mentioned regarding adultery, the downfall of a society.
Quoting my earlier reply: "Despite the above we don't see stoning or flogging performed too often and are substituted with prison sentence or execution". Whether sodomy is punishable or not depends on the society's laws. For example in absolute Muslim and Muslim majority countries some laws are derived from the Quran and some aren't.
 
Sodomy is forbidden because it contravenes innate sexual behaviour, leads to STDs and, as I mentioned regarding adultery, the downfall of a society.
Quoting my earlier reply: "Despite the above we don't see stoning or flogging performed too often and are substituted with prison sentence or execution". Whether sodomy is punishable or not depends on the society's laws. For example in absolute Muslim and Muslim majority countries some laws are derived from the Quran and some aren't.
Do you not have a problem with that....?

Seems a bit....harsh, no?

I believe that there will be eternal punishment. In that one of God's names is eternal. So, it will be HIS punishment. How long or how much depends on what is decided by Him.

But I also believe in eternal progression. So there is always a chance to get where God hopes for us to be. I just don't know precisely how that will happen. When you have forever to change (however slowly that may happen), you CAN change.

We shall see.
And where does hell come into it?
 
Last edited:
Sodomy is forbidden because it contravenes innate sexual behaviour, leads to STDs and, as I mentioned regarding adultery, the downfall of a society.
All that applies to heterosexuality:

It is commonly held that more primitive humans used to have sex primarily from behind like most mammals do. So having "normal" missionary sex contravenes innate sexual behaviour.

Heterosexuals spread more STDs and commit more adultery than homosexuals do. The fact that you point out homosexuals spread STDs and commit adultery without recognising that heterosexuals do the exact same thing is a blatant, hypocritical double standard.

There is nothing uniquely sinful about homosexuality other than "I don't want to do it so nobody else is allowed to".
 
Do you not have a problem with that....?

Seems a bit....harsh, no?
If they get away with the deed then it's up to God to punish them. I've read stories of Muslims committing sodomy due to ignorance and asked Sheikhs if they can repent and undo this sin and all of them were told repentance will be accepted so long as they don't go back to committing it. God is the most merciful but if there's no repentance there's no mercy.
 
Sodomy is forbidden because it contravenes innate sexual behaviour,
Nope, over 1,500 species of animals, including human engage in it.
leads to STDs
As does heterosexuality, so I assume the same punishment holds.
and, as I mentioned regarding adultery, the downfall of a society.
Nope, it's existed as long as humans have and has never once been the downfall of a society.
 
All that applies to heterosexuality:

It is commonly held that more primitive humans used to have sex primarily from behind like most mammals do. So having "normal" missionary sex contravenes innate sexual behaviour.
Commonly held to the ones who claimed it. Vaginal intercourse is the main mean of reproduction and pleasure and is the natural and normal sex behavior. Anal sex is forbidden in Islam but I'll leave it to you figure to out why that is.
Heterosexuals spread more STDs and commit more adultery than homosexuals do. The fact that you point out homosexuals spread STDs and commit adultery without recognising that heterosexuals do the exact same thing is a blatant, hypocritical double standard.
The subject of our current discussion is 'Homosexuality'. I have already touched on Adultery in my reply to @TexRex but no one's willing to invest time reading long replies.
STDs are an epidemic affecting everyone everywhere so the last thing human beings want to do is spread it further. Besides, the medication used to treat STDs aren't accessible to everyone worldwide so the best solution is to avoid multiple sex partners and use protection.
In Islam any form of sex outside marriage is adultery and the perpetrator is subject to the Earthly and the Hereafter punishment unless he repents.
There is nothing uniquely sinful about homosexuality other than "I don't want to do it so nobody else is allowed to".
 
Then there's the deja vu problem, which I haven't heard a reasonable explanation for yet.
Well, I'm going to assume that just like last time you haven't bothered to look for any explanations yourself, so you're on your own on that one.
This is why there's something called 'Judgement Day'. Rapists, warmongers, criminals, etc, will eventually meet their fate in Hell.
Why not just send them to meet their fate now and avoid a whole lot of unpleasantness for everyone else who is just trying to get through the day? Why let them do all these awful things, and THEN give them the business?
It's non of my business tbh. Christians can hold each other accountable. After all they have a book to abide by.
Are you saying that if you saw Christians raping a child, you'd leave them to it to deal with amongst themselves according to their book because it's none of your business?

That's a take, I suppose.
Sodomy is forbidden because it contravenes innate sexual behaviour, leads to STDs and, as I mentioned regarding adultery, the downfall of a society.
None of those things are facts, they're just opinion. It doesn't hold any more water than saying sodomy is forbidden because it's icky.
 
Well, I'm going to assume that just like last time you haven't bothered to look for any explanations yourself, so you're on your own on that one.
I've read about the neurological based theories....but they don't explain the phenomena as I've personally experienced it.

More interesting are the thoughts on different universes, but I'm not sure we're at the stage of understanding that.

EDIT: Am I morphing into Dotini as I'm getting older....
 
Last edited:
Why not just send them to meet their fate now and avoid a whole lot of unpleasantness for everyone else who is just trying to get through the day? Why let them do all these awful things, and THEN give them the business?
Where are the leaders who can exact justice? Do you see any? We're watching Palestinians die everyday and not a single leader is batting an eye. This is why Jews, Muslims and Christians are awaiting Jesus return because he will exact justice on this Earth after it has been filled with heinous acts. Does anyone know when Jesus is returning? No. But how do we endure all this filth? We obviously won't sit there and watch but we raise our voices against tyrants and pray. As for when judgement day will happen, there are signs that warn about its nearing. Muslim scholars divided them into lesser and greater signs. We're nearing the end of the lesser ones and once the greater ones happen they'll follow one another like the pebbles of a torn necklace until Judgement Day happens.
Are you saying that if you saw Christians raping a child, you'd leave them to it to deal with amongst themselves according to their book because it's none of your business?

That's a take, I suppose.
If a child was being raped in front of me I wouldn't walk away even if the rapist was a man of religion but as I haven't seen any of this it's the duty of those who see such heinous act to punish the perpetrator. If Christians aren't doing anything to stop this crime they'll be punished by Jesus first and by God in the Hereafter.
None of those things are facts, they're just opinion. It doesn't hold any more water than saying sodomy is forbidden because it's icky.
I'm not going to discuss homosexuality any further as I've already made it clear that Islam, Christianity and Judaism consider it a sin. If you want to know why look up the story of the people of Lut.

Thank you for your time.
 
Last edited:
This is why Jews, Muslims and Christians are awaiting Jesus return because he will exact justice on this Earth after it has been filled with heinous acts. Does anyone know when Jesus is returning? No...


As for when judgement day will happen, there are signs that warn about its nearing. Muslim scholars divided them into lesser and greater signs. We're nearing the end of the lesser ones and once the greater ones happen they'll follow one another like the pebbles of a torn necklace until Judgement Day happens.
Do we or do we not know? It sounds like people want both, which is consistent with history.


Whatever the case, waiting around isn't doing anything for people here now and if it isn't going to happen at all, then what good is prayer?
If a child was being raped in front of me I wouldn't walk away even if the rapist was a man of religion but as I haven't seen any of this it's the duty of those who see such heinous act to punish the perpetrator. If Christians aren't doing anything to stop this crime they'll be punished by Jesus first and by God in the Hereafter.
God would be in front of every act of rape, yet wouldn't act.
I'm not going to discuss homosexuality any further as I've already made it clear that Islam, Christianity and Judaism consider it a sin. If you want to know why look up the story of the people of Lut.

Thank you for your time.
That story doesn't even provide reasoning for labeling homosexuality as sin, and also quietly condones arranged marriage as apparently it was fine for Lut to offer his daughters into marriage (with not a word of consent from them) to the people to keep them from engaging in harmless sex. The story is nonsensical and promotes bad behavior.
 
Do we or do we not know? It sounds like people want both, which is consistent with history.


Whatever the case, waiting around isn't doing anything for people here now and if it isn't going to happen at all, then what good is prayer?
"won't sit there and watch but we raise our voices against tyrants"
God would be in front of every act of rape, yet wouldn't act.
God's punishment is inevitable but such acts are a test to the people to see how will they respond to the perpetrators and whether will they punish them or not. Had you read my reply to @TexRex you wouldn't have echoed the same statement.
That story doesn't even provide reasoning for labeling homosexuality as sin, and also quietly condones arranged marriage as apparently it was fine for Lut to offer his daughters into marriage (with not a word of consent from them) to the people to keep them from engaging in harmless sex. The story is nonsensical and promotes bad behavior.
 
God's punishment is inevitable but such acts are a test to the people to see how will they respond to the perpetrators and whether will they punish them or not.
So many things wrong with this. First, I thought it wasn't your business. Second, what do you think is the proper response? Forgiveness? Stoning? Elect them president of the US? Third, how gross is it to use one person's life and suffering as a "test" to see how someone else will respond to the act. If a god is doing this, the god is responsible for the act (as a test), which means the god is to be judged in the same way as the rapist.

If the test is "will you condemn a rapist" the test is also "will you condemn the god that created this rape as a test in the first place". It doesn't suddenly become ok because a god wanted the rape for a non-sexual purpose (assuming the god is not getting off to the test I guess).
 
Last edited:
"won't sit there and watch but we raise our voices against tyrants"
Yes but what about God taking his time. He is essentially sitting around and letting people get away with any number of terrible things.

Then there is the second part of my comment which is that if this judgement never comes because there is no god, or because we don't understand god's will (both being realistic possibilities seeing as there are so many religious denominations) what is prayer but a waste of time? Sometimes we're limited in what we can do. It's impractical to fly to another continent to stop a crime, so I'm not trying to imply that people should go out and looking for trouble that they can stop. Prayer would be at the bottom of the list of helpful things though. The time given to prayer could be better served doing something useful, anything from donating resources to victims, to studying on the reasons behind crime and using that information to shape future decisions like electing someone to office.
God's punishment is inevitable but such acts are a test to the people to see how will they respond to the perpetrators and whether will they punish them or not. Had you read my reply to @TexRex you wouldn't have echoed the same statement.
The test is worthless is god is all knowing. He doesn't need to see the outcome. For the perpetrator and victim, the test has no value and is just needless suffering.

I've read through the recent posts in the thread, there is no justification for this entire sin system that I see. If these acts are sinful, god is guilty of sin by allowing them when applying the same standards that we do to people.
 
Then let's step back a bit. I don't believe in gods, but other people do. I was explaining some of the problems with commonly held beliefs, specifically the belief in an omnipotent and benevolent god. Such a god stands in direct contradiction to the world we live in

Sorry for the delay, sometimes things in life happen.

You acknowledge man's ability to make choices.
This reality exists whether there is a God or not. So, in a non-believers world
it does not matter where the ability to choose came from, it simply exists.

It would appear, at least in this thread, that you have spent a
significant amount of time, if not energy, proclaiming that there is no God..

If God doesn't exist, then there are no attributes, motive or behavior of His to discuss.
In my entire life, I have spent exactly zero time with any adult discussing the existence of,
or the attributes and behavior of any entity that I do not believe exists.

If you were to be correct, that there is no God, then anything about Him wouldn't matter.

I do not see people believing in a non-existent entity who preaches love and hope
being a bad thing. While it is true that this could be (and has been) used by bad people to do bad
things, it is my experience that if someone wants to do something bad and feels that they
need a justification, they will keep searching until they find a justification, no matter
how flimsy it would appear to others.

I can't see the world being worse off because some people believe in a non-existent
entity that they believe teaches love, equality and compassion.

I spend time and energy on this discussion because I am trying to keep people out of hell (whether I am correct about
everything required for this belief is another subject entirely).

So my question is:
Why do you spend any time at all on something that doesn't exist?
 
Sorry for the delay, sometimes things in life happen.
That is fine.
You acknowledge man's ability to make choices.
This reality exists whether there is a God or not. So, in a non-believers world
it does not matter where the ability to choose came from, it simply exists.
Well you can debate where reality or choice comes from, and whether it even exists, without any religious context.
It would appear, at least in this thread, that you have spent a
significant amount of time, if not energy, proclaiming that there is no God..
Some additional clarification here. You can only disprove ideas that are falsifiable. God in the most general sense is non falsifiable, so it can't be disproven. Though on the other hand that means it can serve as an explanation for anything. Only some religious beliefs are demonstrably false. The gods tied to those ideas can be argued against. For the others, all that can be done is to show that they don't provide valid explanations and can't be supported by evidence.

I won't try to disprove a god unless it is a god that is well defined enough to discuss. If a god isn't well defined, it may exist, though there won't be any reason to think that it does. This also isn't limited to religion. While it appears to me that the year is 2024, it might actually be 2424 and I might be a historian in an elaborate VR chamber that blocks out all information of the real world from my mind in order to allow me to study the experience of people from the early 2000's. I can't disprove this beyond all doubt, but at the same time there is zero evidence that it's an accurate description of reality.
If God doesn't exist, then there are no attributes, motive or behavior of His to discuss.
In my entire life, I have spent exactly zero time with any adult discussing the existence of,
or the attributes and behavior of any entity that I do not believe exists.
Hypothetical concepts appear a lot in physics and engineering. Especially in the age of computer aid design, there is a lot of study of things that don't exist or which may or may not exist. I entertain ideas like this as part of my job.

Discussing how something might work, even if its existence can't be confirmed, sounds perfectly normal to me.
If you were to be correct, that there is no God, then anything about Him wouldn't matter.
Well the people that still believe would ideally have reasons for believing. I could show them that their reasoning is flawed. Or I could learn of flaws in my own reasoning.
I do not see people believing in a non-existent entity who preaches love and hope
being a bad thing.
If only religion was limited to that. Hatred is embedded in a lot of popular religious beliefs. My last post was addressing religious based disapproval of homosexuality and the approval of arranged marriage.

Love and hope also don't require any religious beliefs. They are better promoted with secular methods because they don't drag along harmful baggage that comes with religion.
While it is true that this could be (and has been) used by bad people to do bad
things, it is my experience that if someone wants to do something bad and feels that they
need a justification, they will keep searching until they find a justification, no matter
how flimsy it would appear to others.
Possibly, although people are also influence by culture and information. I was raised with the idea that homosexuality is wrong. In my mind it was wrong until many years down the line I stopped to think about it and saw how ridiculous it was to condemn. Not everyone reaches that state. Some people only have bad information reinforced for many reasons.
I can't see the world being worse off because some people believe in a non-existent
entity that they believe teaches love, equality and compassion.
And will also send people to hell if they don't live correctly. People will either tend to become angry with the people who are living "wrongly" or pester them forever in order to "save" them. It's unacceptable.
I spend time and energy on this discussion because I am trying to keep people out of hell (whether I am correct about
everything required for this belief is another subject entirely).
Yes, what I just mentioned above. You may mean well, but that doesn't mean that you can't hurt people unintentionally.
So my question is:
Why do you spend any time at all on something that doesn't exist?
Because despite god not existing, he's still making the world a worse place. Coming from a religious family, I see it every day.
 
Last edited:
Back