Do you believe in God?

  • Thread starter Patrik
  • 24,171 comments
  • 1,020,796 views

Do you believe in god?

  • Of course, without him nothing would exist!

    Votes: 617 30.5%
  • Maybe.

    Votes: 368 18.2%
  • No way!

    Votes: 1,041 51.4%

  • Total voters
    2,025
So many things wrong with this. First, I thought it wasn't your business.
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."

Why not give me a follow so that it's easier to track my replies.

"Second, what do you think is the proper response? Forgiveness? Stoning? Elect them president of the US?"

They should seek repentance and when they don't they deserve the punishment. What's your take on this?
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.
Well He created you, your parents, grandparents and great grandparents all the way back to Adam, and He has every right to test His creation to make an argument against them on Judgement Day.
Quoting two Muslim scholars:

1. "Ibn Taymiyyah said : The proof against the servants is based on two things: On the condition of being able to know what God has revealed, and being able to act on it."

2. "Ibn al-Qayyim said : God’s proof was established upon the servant by sending the Messenger, sending down the Book, conveying it to him, and enabling him to learn about it, whether he knew or was ignorant. So whoever was able to know what God commanded and forbade, but fell short of it and did not know it, then it was established against him. And God Almighty does not punish anyone except after the proof has been established against him."
 
Last edited:
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..
Actually I don't see much of that in this thread. I see people discussing why the claims of a god and about a god are nonsensical.
Why do you spend any time at all on something that doesn't exist?
Because of the stupid stuff it seems to drive people to do. From blowing themselves up to condemning pregnant women and homosexuals to die.


"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."

Why not give me a follow so that it's easier to track my replies.

"Second, what do you think is the proper response? Forgiveness? Stoning? Elect them president of the US?"

They should seek repentance and when they don't they deserve the punishment. What's your take on this?

My take is that they need to be removed from society (where they can harm others) regardless of repentance.

Well He created you, your parents, grandparents and great grandparents all the way back to Adam, and He has every right to test His creation to make an argument against them on Judgement Day.
Quoting two Muslim scholars:

1. "Ibn Taymiyyah said : The proof against the servants is based on two things: On the condition of being able to know what God has revealed, and being able to act on it."

2. "Ibn al-Qayyim said : God’s proof was established upon the servant by sending the Messenger, sending down the Book, conveying it to him, and enabling him to learn about it, whether he knew or was ignorant. So whoever was able to know what God commanded and forbade, but fell short of it and did not know it, then it was established against him. And God Almighty does not punish anyone except after the proof has been established against him."

This "he made you he can rape you" isn't just absurd, it's morally repugnant.
 
Last edited:
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.
I'm aware of the story of Lut, but I don't use it to inform my sense of what is or isn't moral. It's just a story.

I mean, if the rules are that we get to use fiction to justify our arguments then we'll just be throwing books and movies at each other forever. Does Brokeback Mountain trump the story of Lut? Is that even a sensible question?

A story is not in and of itself sufficient justification for anything. That you think that a story is sufficient justification for assault, imprisonment and/or execution is disturbing.
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.
I don't know why I never saw this before, but the "other people's suffering is a test" line of reasoning has big "I'm the main character and everyone else is an NPC" vibes. It only makes sense if everyone else isn't actually real, they're just objects put there for your convenience.

The whole God thing makes more sense through the eyes of Main Character Syndrome. There's a Lead Developer in the sky, watching and tweaking the game just for you as He watches you play. Everything else in the world is something that He created just so that you would have the perfect experience that He designed, just for you.

You are special. You are The One. When you get to the end of the game, you will see your scoreboard with all the hard work you put in and you will be rewarded with many gacha rolls.
 
This "he made you he can rape you" isn't just absurd, it's morally repugnant.
Kindly refrain from associating God with the heinous acts of some people. I get that you don't believe in God but vile words won't get us anywhere.

This is a straightforward fact about life. Quran chapter 67:
1. Blessed is He in whose hand is dominion, and He is over all things competent -

2. [He] who created death and life to test you [as to] which of you is best in deed - and He is the Exalted in Might, the Forgiving -

Those two verses are just 2 examples of many in the Quran. Here's one verse from chapter 2 talking about the creation of Adam:

30. And [mention, O Muhammad], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority." They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we declare Your praise and sanctify You?" Allah said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know."

@Imari explained life well in his reply to you even though I disagree with some terms he used. You get tested in schools and universities on the information you've studied and it's the same case with this life. For example if I have read in the Quran that I shouldn't consume usury then I'd pass the test when I avoid usury.

I'm aware of the story of Lut, but I don't use it to inform my sense of what is or isn't moral. It's just a story.

I mean, if the rules are that we get to use fiction to justify our arguments then we'll just be throwing books and movies at each other forever. Does Brokeback Mountain trump the story of Lut? Is that even a sensible question?

A story is not in and of itself sufficient justification for anything. That you think that a story is sufficient justification for assault, imprisonment and/or execution is disturbing.
Yeah sorry about that as I was busy at that time and multitasking on the job won't get the main job done. So I had to point you to that story so you can do your own research after having read it.
I'll reply to you tomorrow as it's getting late here and I've got work to do tomorrow so I'm heading to bed. I appreciate your patience.
 
Last edited:
Because despite god not existing, he's still making the world a worse place. Coming from a religious family, I see it every day.

As I said, before, that is a people problem. Bad people will do bad things. They will create justifications for their actions.

A god who does not exist is making the world a worse place?? An entity that does not exist is accomplishing things.

I cannot argue with that.

I am refraining from further comment.

Actually I don't see much of that in this thread. I see people discussing why the claims of a god and about a god are nonsensical.

Because of the stupid stuff it seems to drive people to do. From blowing themselves up to condemning pregnant women and homosexuals to die.
My mistake, I was attempting to make it obvious that I was talking to exorcet, I used the word thread to refer to the discussion he and I were having in public. I thought the subject was "Do you believe in God?" , in the forum "Opinions & Current Events" I have yet to grasp all of the workings of the quoting/reply system in use on this particular forum.
If you would be kind enough to tell me what the correct term for the public conversation between two people given this particular context is, I would appreciate it.

As I have said, bad people are going to do bad things. They will find justifications for doing them. If your argument is with the people using a particular justification, you should take it up with them. Real believers are not going to rush to defend bad actions.

Best Regards.
 
A god who does not exist is making the world a worse place?? An entity that does not exist is accomplishing things.

"A god" is a concept, and concepts can and do have negative effects. The concept that sex with a virgin cures aids is an example.

My mistake, I was attempting to make it obvious that I was talking to exorcet,

I know. I was responding to that because it is a public conversation.

As I have said, bad people are going to do bad things. They will find justifications for doing them. If your argument is with the people using a particular justification, you should take it up with them. Real believers are not going to rush to defend bad actions.

You're here teaching original sin and hell (the combination of which is especially gross). So I am taking it up with them.
 
"A god" is a concept, and concepts can and do have negative effects. The concept that sex with a virgin cures aids is an example.



I know. I was responding to that because it is a public conversation.



You're here teaching original sin and hell (the combination of which is especially gross). So I am taking it up with them.
Yes a god is a concept. That is what exorcet said:
"Because despite god not existing, he's still making the world a worse place."

A "he" is not a concept or an idea.

Merriam-Webster:
he
pronoun
1) that male one who is neither speaker nor hearer
2) used in a generic sense or when the gender of the person is unspecified
noun
3) a male person or animal
4) one that is strongly masculine or has strong masculine appeal
5) symbol for helium
symbol
6) fifth letter of the hebrew alphabet
abbreviation
7) abbreviation for
Her Excellency; His Excellency , high efficiency,high explosive,His Eminence

I am not teaching anything. I was having a discussion about my beliefs.

I find it interesting that you freely change things in your mind (as reflected in your response)
to be that which you want them to be, as opposed to that which they are.

I would suggest that if this is actually important to you, start again, at the beginning and
read what is there, not what you wish to be there.

You are free to free associate, twist and distort whatever you want. That does not make it true.

If you do not think that what exorcet wrote is correct, take it up with exorcet.

I am not in the mind reading business, I can only go by what people say.

Best Regards.
 
Replying in reverse order,
Yes a god is a concept. That is what exorcet said:
"Because despite god not existing, he's still making the world a worse place."

A "he" is not a concept or an idea.

Merriam-Webster:
he
pronoun
1) that male one who is neither speaker nor hearer
2) used in a generic sense or when the gender of the person is unspecified
noun
3) a male person or animal
4) one that is strongly masculine or has strong masculine appeal
5) symbol for helium
symbol
6) fifth letter of the hebrew alphabet
abbreviation
7) abbreviation for
Her Excellency; His Excellency , high efficiency,high explosive,His Eminence
You're getting too hung up on words. I already said I don't believe in gods. Saying "despite god not existing, he's still making the world a worse place" is equivalent to "while god does not exist, associated beliefs in god still make the world a worse place."

You said earlier that you've never heard any adult discussing ideas in which they do not believe. Maybe you haven't, but I feel like it's more likely that you don't recall or you're incorrectly dismissing those occasions, because they happen often.

Here's someone who has written two books centered around that very act:


And here is a government agency tracking something that they know isn't real:


Here is one from a historic physicist:


The discussion of something does not imply belief in said thing.
I am not in the mind reading business, I can only go by what people say.
I don't believe in gods
I don't expect you to read minds. I'm making it clear.
As I said, before, that is a people problem. Bad people will do bad things. They will create justifications for their actions.
People are to blame for their actions, but they can't be blamed for being fallible. Someone can be convinced that a lie is true and then act on that lie, thinking that what they're doing is correct. They don't even have to intend to do wrong, in fact it might be the very opposite. In that case I think a good defense is to weed out the bad ideas so that people aren't lead down the wrong path.

It is not wrong to be convinced that homosexuality is a problem when it isn't. That is just a risk of human fallibility. Still, people can act on that incorrect idea and end up harming people. If someone with the belief that homosexuality is wrong has a child that is interest in the same sex, then it becomes likely that such a person will try to "correct" their child or prevent from doing things that are "harmful" while in the process being the one to cause harm. Another example is the idea that unexplained things are acts of god. If people believe this, they may give legitimacy to things that don't deserve it (I heard a voice that told me to not to give money to this person - it must be god) or to simply abandon rigorous study of the event and learn nothing (fires burn only because god so wills them to, because of this I will not investigate what causes fire to burn for the purposes of using fire to my advantage).
A god who does not exist is making the world a worse place?? An entity that does not exist is accomplishing things.
You are familiar with lies right? A lie can accomplish a lot despite the subject of the lie not existing.

People spread lies about deadly comet dust about 100 years ago now and fear of that dust was enough to get people to buy scam products.


Though again you seem to be tripping over language. While god does not exist, the concept of god does in people's minds. If referring to something that does not exist bothers you, "the concept of god" is interchangeable with "god" here. You can make the swap virtually anywhere in my post if that makes it easier for you to understand.
 
You're here teaching original sin and hell (the combination of which is especially gross). So I am taking it up with them.
Thank you for proving my point from an earlier post which was:
"As I have said, bad people are going to do bad things. They will find justifications for doing them."

In addition, you, having been told that you were wrong, and have made no attempt to retract your lies and apologize.

I understand that the standard for behavior of non-believers is not as high as that of believers, but I would think that the standard is not so low as to make libel acceptable.

I have stated someplace on this site, everyone starts off as trustworthy until they prove they are not, You have proved you are not.


Danoff: your status is now untrustworthy based on libel and lies

This is proven below.
Anyone can verify this using the search item in the site menu bar.

Consequence of bad behavior: I will no longer interact with you.

Libel committed by Danoff in a baseless accusation, post #24,067
"You're here teaching original sin and hell (the combination of which is especially gross). So I am taking it up with them."



Times feral and bad has used the words sin or hell as reported by the forum search function.

Of the 6 distinct posts, hell or sin was mentioned by "feral and bad" 4 times.

1 time both words were used in a single post. Both words were included as a result of quoting Danoff.
Here are the search results


Search "sin" posts by "feral and bad"

Sin in 3 posts, 1 of which was included because of a quote by Danoff



Search results for query: sin

111111111111111111111111111111111111
Do you believe in God? discussion thread

Quoting Danoff

feral and bad Post #24,068 Today at 7:05 PM Forum: Opinions & Current Events


22222222222222222222222222222222222222222
Do you believe in God? discussion thread

This is getting hard for me to follow. First you said "God created everything and also knows the future, yet the blame for sin is placed on humans. Adam and Eve (Especially Eve) specifically. The only reason there was a forbidden to tree for them to eat from was because God wished for this...

First you said "God created everything and also knows the future, yet the blame for sin is placed on humans. Adam and Eve (Especially Eve) specifically. The only reason there was a forbidden to tree for them to eat from was because God wished for this happen."

Why would you be concerned about sin? If you don't believe in gods, there is no downside to sin or reason to hope something isn't a sin.

No, according to the Bible man started off without sin, made 2 bad choices, one by Eve, one by Adam. As long as man was sinless, he could live in the Garden of Eden. Becoming sinful led to his eviction. The Garden was, as I understand it, a place without sin. That is why God could go there. If there was sin there, God could not go, because his character does not allow him to be exposed to sin.

feral and bad Post #23,960 Wednesday at 1:26 PM Forum: Opinions & Current Events


33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
Do you believe in God? discussion thread


God cannot do anything outside of His character. An example is that even though He is all powerful, He cannot lie or sin.

feral and bad Post #23,923 Tuesday at 6:45 AM Forum: Opinions & Current Events







Search "hell" posts by "feral and bad"

Hell in 4 posts, 1 of which was included because of a quote by Danoff, 1 by a quote from oreca 1998

Search results for query: hell
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Israel - Palestine discussion thread


Those who do not believe in predestination say that would mean that God condemns
to hell people regardless of their lives or beliefs.

It was narrated from ‘Awf bin Malik that the Messenger of Allah(ﷺ) said:
“The Jews split into seventy-one sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy in Hell. The Christians split into seventy-two sects, seventy-one of which will be in Hell and one in Paradise. I swear by the One Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad, my nation will split into seventy-three sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy-two in Hell.” It was said: “O Messenger of Allah, who are they?” He said: “The main body.”

So, as I understand it, 1 of 72 sects of Christians, who must be pre-Muhammad and did not believe Christ to be a deity are going to paradise and all other Christians are going to hell.

feral and bad Post #2,808 Jan 31, 2024 Forum: Opinions & Current Events


2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
Do you believe in God? discussion thread

quoting Danoff

feral and bad Post #24,068 Today at 7:05 PM Forum: Opinions & Current Events



333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
Do you believe in God? discussion thread.

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).


feral and bad Post #24,059 Today at 3:34 PM Forum: Opinions & Current Events


4444444444444444444444444444444444444444
Israel - Palestine discussion thread

All references to hell are a result of quoting oreca 1998

feral and bad Post #2,782 Jan 25, 2024 Forum: Opinions & Current Events



--------

And just for completeness....

4 times the word original was used and the sentences they were used in:

From my original post:
I do not understand how this answers my original question though
I fear that we have wandered way off of the original question
and once by quoting Danoff.

0 times any form of damn was used
 
Thank you for proving my point from an earlier post which was:
"As I have said, bad people are going to do bad things. They will find justifications for doing them."

In addition, you, having been told that you were wrong, and have made no attempt to retract your lies and apologize.

I understand that the standard for behavior of non-believers is not as high as that of believers, but I would think that the standard is not so low as to make libel acceptable.

I have stated someplace on this site, everyone starts off as trustworthy until they prove they are not, You have proved you are not.


Danoff: your status is now untrustworthy based on libel and lies

This is proven below.
Anyone can verify this using the search item in the site menu bar.

Consequence of bad behavior: I will no longer interact with you.

Libel committed by Danoff in a baseless accusation, post #24,067
"You're here teaching original sin and hell (the combination of which is especially gross). So I am taking it up with them."



Times feral and bad has used the words sin or hell as reported by the forum search function.

Of the 6 distinct posts, hell or sin was mentioned by "feral and bad" 4 times.

1 time both words were used in a single post. Both words were included as a result of quoting Danoff.
Here are the search results


Search "sin" posts by "feral and bad"

Sin in 3 posts, 1 of which was included because of a quote by Danoff



Search results for query: sin

111111111111111111111111111111111111
Do you believe in God? discussion thread

Quoting Danoff

feral and bad Post #24,068 Today at 7:05 PM Forum: Opinions & Current Events


22222222222222222222222222222222222222222
Do you believe in God? discussion thread

This is getting hard for me to follow. First you said "God created everything and also knows the future, yet the blame for sin is placed on humans. Adam and Eve (Especially Eve) specifically. The only reason there was a forbidden to tree for them to eat from was because God wished for this...

First you said "God created everything and also knows the future, yet the blame for sin is placed on humans. Adam and Eve (Especially Eve) specifically. The only reason there was a forbidden to tree for them to eat from was because God wished for this happen."

Why would you be concerned about sin? If you don't believe in gods, there is no downside to sin or reason to hope something isn't a sin.

No, according to the Bible man started off without sin, made 2 bad choices, one by Eve, one by Adam. As long as man was sinless, he could live in the Garden of Eden. Becoming sinful led to his eviction. The Garden was, as I understand it, a place without sin. That is why God could go there. If there was sin there, God could not go, because his character does not allow him to be exposed to sin.

feral and bad Post #23,960 Wednesday at 1:26 PM Forum: Opinions & Current Events


33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
Do you believe in God? discussion thread


God cannot do anything outside of His character. An example is that even though He is all powerful, He cannot lie or sin.

feral and bad Post #23,923 Tuesday at 6:45 AM Forum: Opinions & Current Events







Search "hell" posts by "feral and bad"

Hell in 4 posts, 1 of which was included because of a quote by Danoff, 1 by a quote from oreca 1998

Search results for query: hell
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Israel - Palestine discussion thread


Those who do not believe in predestination say that would mean that God condemns
to hell people regardless of their lives or beliefs.

It was narrated from ‘Awf bin Malik that the Messenger of Allah(ﷺ) said:
“The Jews split into seventy-one sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy in Hell. The Christians split into seventy-two sects, seventy-one of which will be in Hell and one in Paradise. I swear by the One Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad, my nation will split into seventy-three sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy-two in Hell.” It was said: “O Messenger of Allah, who are they?” He said: “The main body.”

So, as I understand it, 1 of 72 sects of Christians, who must be pre-Muhammad and did not believe Christ to be a deity are going to paradise and all other Christians are going to hell.

feral and bad Post #2,808 Jan 31, 2024 Forum: Opinions & Current Events


2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
Do you believe in God? discussion thread

quoting Danoff

feral and bad Post #24,068 Today at 7:05 PM Forum: Opinions & Current Events



333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
Do you believe in God? discussion thread.

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).


feral and bad Post #24,059 Today at 3:34 PM Forum: Opinions & Current Events


4444444444444444444444444444444444444444
Israel - Palestine discussion thread

All references to hell are a result of quoting oreca 1998

feral and bad Post #2,782 Jan 25, 2024 Forum: Opinions & Current Events



--------

And just for completeness....

4 times the word original was used and the sentences they were used in:

From my original post:
I do not understand how this answers my original question though
I fear that we have wandered way off of the original question
and once by quoting Danoff.

0 times any form of damn was used
I'm going to guess that English isn't your first language, as your accusation towards @Danoff is both inaccurate and unfounded. He's not claiming you literally said "original sin and hell", as he would have almost certainly put them in quotation marks, as I have just done.

Danoff is clearly saying that you have, in the totality of your posts on the subject, been using the concepts of original sin and hell, which is not inaccurate at all (nor would you even need to use the words 'sin', 'original', or 'hell' to do so). Now you are quite within your rights to no longer engage with Danoff, but I would caution that doesn't mean he is barred from interacting with you, and should he still wish to reply to any post you make, he's free to do so.
 
Last edited:
Libel committed by Danoff in a baseless accusation, post #24,067
"You're here teaching original sin and hell (the combination of which is especially gross). So I am taking it up with them."

:lol:

I spend time and energy on this discussion because I am trying to keep people out of hell

The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was put there for Adam and Eve to choose to glorify God by obeying him. God is sovereign and all powerful, not a puppeteer.

Q.E.D.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to guess that English isn't your first language, as your accusation towards @Danoff is both inaccurate and unfounded. He's not claiming you literally said "original sin and hell", as he would have almost certainly put them in quotation marks, as I have just done.

Danoff is clearly saying that you have, in the totality of your posts on the subject, been using the concepts of original sin and hell, which is not inaccurate at all (nor would you even need to use the words 'sin', 'original', or 'hell' to do so). Now you are quite within your rights to no longer engage with Danoff, but I would caution that doesn't mean he is barred from interacting with you, and should he still wish to reply to any post you make, he's free to do so.
You have the right to say that my accusation is inaccurate and unfounded. You are wrong in saying it though.
In the totality of my posts, I have never written on the concept of original sin or man being born with sin. As I previously stated, I have not "taught" anything, I have discussed my beliefs. Please take the time to review my posts and show me the error of my ways. The closest that I can find is a discussion about man being less than perfect. Man being created less than perfect is not the same thing as being born with sin. There are about 30-40 posts by me in this forum. I can certainly repost all of my posts to show you that I didn't have anything at all to say about original sin, but that wouldn't save you any time. If I am proven wrong, I will gladly apologize. I do find it interesting that in a medium that consists solely of the written word, that some people are regularly taken to task for the way they used the words, and other people get to redefine what was said whenever they or someone they agree with are called out for what they have written. Until proven otherwise, you are both wrong. Per Merriam Webster one definition of libel is "a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression". I believe that this includes writing that someone did something that they did not do. Do you wish to redefine that as well?
Best Regards
 
I have never written on the concept of original sin or man being born with sin

Adam and Eve / Tree of Knowledge = story about original sin.

If you have some kind of super interesting and very unknown to me interpretation of this story where Adam and Eve were cast from the garden of Eden for eating from the tree of knowledge and somehow they DON'T end up propagating original sin... that's a new one for me.
 
You have the right to say that my accusation is inaccurate and unfounded. You are wrong in saying it though.
In the totality of my posts, I have never written on the concept of original sin or man being born with sin. As I previously stated, I have not "taught" anything, I have discussed my beliefs. Please take the time to review my posts and show me the error of my ways. The closest that I can find is a discussion about man being less than perfect. Man being created less than perfect is not the same thing as being born with sin. There are about 30-40 posts by me in this forum. I can certainly repost all of my posts to show you that I didn't have anything at all to say about original sin, but that wouldn't save you any time. If I am proven wrong, I will gladly apologize. I do find it interesting that in a medium that consists solely of the written word, that some people are regularly taken to task for the way they used the words, and other people get to redefine what was said whenever they or someone they agree with are called out for what they have written. Until proven otherwise, you are both wrong. Per Merriam Webster one definition of libel is "a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression". I believe that this includes writing that someone did something that they did not do. Do you wish to redefine that as well?
Best Regards
You've written about the garden of Eden, and Adam and Eve, the temptation of them, and their failure.

That's original sin, now I am aware that Islam doesn't follow the doctrine of Original Sin, but rather than explain that you chose to start accusing another member of libel (which has utterly no relevance here at all - nor does it meet that standard) and threaten to stop talking to them!

You might want to calm down a little and ask what people mean rather than assuming it as you have done.
 
Last edited:
now I am aware that Islam doesn't follow the doctrine of Original Sin

Thanks for that. I did a little reading. I'm super confused about the steps needed to pull this one off, because the interpretation of original sin seems pretty clear based on the text, but I guess some of the story gets accepted and some of it doesn't based on... reasons.
 
Last edited:
As I recall, the Qu'ran doesn't actually name Eve (like... at all), and while it has a hell it's not entirely like-for-like and isn't called that either. Although I don't actually remember what it's called.
I believe that this includes writing that someone did something that they did not do. Do you wish to redefine that as well?
It doesn't meet the test for defamation - not even close, in fact - and I've not seen anyone pull the "libel" card in an internet forum discussion in at least a decade, if not two.

Wind it in.
 
As I recall, the Qu'ran doesn't actually name Eve (like... at all), and while it has a hell it's not entirely like-for-like and isn't called that either. Although I don't actually remember what it's called.

It doesn't meet the test for defamation - not even close, in fact - and I've not seen anyone pull the "libel" card in an internet forum discussion in at least a decade, if not two.

Wind it in.
I understand. I will not post further on this subject per your request.
I would like to ask something in order not to run afoul of your wishes.
Could you please tell me what a person should do when said person feels they are wrongly accused or disparaged?
Thank you and sorry for the trouble.
 
And where does hell come into it?
Hell is is more a state of mind. If you realize that what is going on, and you realize that your role was not the best, it becomes a powerful source of guilt.

That becomes your own personal problem.

Thus, it is a hell.

This can happen in this life or the next.

God merely allows it to happen sometimes.
Actually I don't see much of that in this thread. I see people discussing why the claims of a god and about a god are nonsensical.
The funny part about this is that in order to say that ANY god is nonsensical is simply saying how much you don't believe in God. Circular argument.
 
Came across this today: Omni Magazine Interview with Dr. Ian Stevenson:

Did not change my view, but found it interesting for the thread.
OK, so this is quoting a 2012 post....but....someone sent me this:



Now, I'd recommend reading the wiki on Dr Ian Stevenson before declaring reincarnation is a thing, but it's food for thought.
 
God merely allows it to happen sometimes.
Like "He" "allows" the rape of children to occur, including, clearly, by Christians and those who spread "His" "word."

One wonders if "He" is even less obligated to intervene when one who believes in "Him," and especially one as godly as a priest or pastor, perpetrates an act so heinous. From "His" perspective, is the act less heinous because one is so godly? Does "He" think to "Himself," "Well, that would be bad [or worse, case dictating] if they didn't believe in Me"?

I understand that the purpose of Christianity is to control people, and that those so controlled needn't be believers, but from the perspective of a Christian, what is the purpose of Christianity if it doesn't consistently stop Christians raping children? Is it not supposed to? From the perspective of a Christian, not "God"--because the "God" delusion actually just takes the place of individuals' personal views--is a Christian raping a child somehow less heinous, if it's heinous at all, when it's a Christian doing it?

Do Christians also understand that the purpose of Christianity is to control and do they simply lie about a belief which is sincerely held in order to maintain that control?
 
God merely allows it to happen sometimes.
"Allow" is not the right word for someone you think put and set in motion literally everything that happens. "Cause" is more appropriate for your belief.
The funny part about this is that in order to say that ANY god is nonsensical is simply saying how much you don't believe in God. Circular argument.
There is something circular going on, you're getting really really close to the answer without realizing it.
 
It's different from my own NDE. Given the number of people who've experienced them (Wikipedia suggests around 17%) you'd think there'd be a lot more people coming back to tell us about the light of wisdom. 🤔
 
Last edited:
Back