Islam vs western values

[1213]

What about some of the atrocities I mentioned?

I think "atrocities" that come from God, are a reward for being evil, people deserve them.

 

[1213]

Having selected targets doesn't make killing moral. The targets of the mafia and drug cartels aren't arbitrary, either. A god shouldn't be killing anybody. It shouldn't be necessary.

Essentially killing evil people is the same as ending evil. Do you think evil should continue forever?

Not by humanist standards. There are too many unhappy and suffering people in the world to say that human well-being has been maximized. A good god wouldn't allow humanity to cook its world. A god good wouldn't allow multiple clashing religions and cultures. The world is far from the humanist vision for it.

I think it is interesting that you seem to think, a tyrant would be a good God. Why do you think humanity has cooked its world?

I don't. I'm an unbeliever. But that is mainstream Christian doctrine taught from pulpits for centuries and to children to coerce their obedience and religious compliance. It's what I was taught as a Christian - hell was a real place that sinners go to suffer at the hands of demons and fire forever.

Ok, I think it is sad that the issue has not been taught accurately. But, I believe hell is real and that is what the Bible tells. However, I don't think it can be called a torture chamber, for example because soul and body are destroyed there. It is not a playground for demons.

 

[1213]

How did you determine that God is the good one in the Bible and satan is the evil one?
How did you determine that "God is extremely good, fair, and merciful" .... ?

I have determined it by reading what is told in the Bible. Biblical God is good, because He has given freedom, gives wisdom, shows love, is truthful and just.

The reason why I think satan is evil is for example what is told in the book of Job. If you read the book, you can see that satan tries to prove all knowing God wrong by torturing Job in many evil ways. Now you may ask, but was God evil in allowing it? And my answer is, no, He knew Job can stand it and after it, He would compensate all the evil that was done to Job. The story shows:

1. God knows better than Satan.
2. Satan can't do anything without God allowing it.
3. Satan is willing to torture people for petty reasons.
4. By allowing this, God also showed that He is clever. His opponent made himself look really bad and God didn't have to do anything.
5. And even if person has to suffer in this life without being guilty, God will compensate it in the end.

 

[Valjean]

I think "atrocities" that come from God, are a reward for being evil, people deserve them.

But it's not the evil people that the atrocities are visited on, is it?

 

[Valjean]

I have determined it by reading what is told in the Bible. Biblical God is good, because He has given freedom, gives wisdom, shows love, is truthful and just.

So you believe in Biblical events and morality because the Bible tells you it's true? Why did God bother giving yyou a brain or a capacity for judgement if you're not going to use them? Are you just a record and playback device?
You can't defend these assertions except by referencing the source you got them from, nor can you defend the source. It's all an intellectual circle.

 

[Kenny]

In some circumstances, yes, but you can't change your natural hair color, or your race, or myriad other genetic features.
You can act straight, or sound straight, or even convince yourself you are straight, but brain scans and psychometric tests would indicate otherwise.

So you support the position that I am created to drive fast and I am a kleptomaniac and therefore should not be charged for anything that you might deem as wrong because I am born that way.

 

[Kenny]

Being gay vs being a robber, is - off course - a dishonest and false equivalence.
Those are not the same thing at all.

One is determined by biology you have no control over. Like having blue eyes.
The other is a behavioral decision that you have 100% control over.

Therefor, only one of these has moral implications.

No... a kleptomaniac and being gay are both mental aspects. If one is born that way, we are unchangeable.

 

[Kenny]

Again.....

One is a biological reality.
The other is a behavior decision.

These are not the same thing.

No... either both are biological or both are behavioral. You can't cherry pick

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

if one want to express themselves in whatever lifestyle, they are free to do so.

I don't know what you mean exactly there. Yes, in a secular democracy, people are free to express their sexuality and sexual preferences with other consenting adults. Individuals are not free to contradict their sexual inclinations, and many find it painful or impossible to conform to puritan sexual mores. And finally, in Christianity, you will not be stopped from sinning but you will be punished severely for it. Were you referring to one of those, or maybe something else.

"all have sinned" - which includes straight people

OK, but what's the relevance to this discussion? They're not considered sinning when they express their natural inclinations as long as they do so only in marriage. The point is that homophobic Abrahamic morality, which is based in unfalsifiable religious beliefs and is thus irrational, is destructive to a class of law-abiding people. This is an affront to humanist ethics, which is based in reason and an egalitarian society that offers each the skills and opportunity to pursue happiness as they understand it.

And the attitude is spreading throughout the West, as much to the chagrin of our Muslim friend here as to the Christian church. Public perception of Christian doctrine and the relevance of religion in Western lives is on the decline.

I have simply seen many humanists who are irrational, intolerant and bigoted.

I don't trust your judgment there. I don't believe you have encountered any humanist that can be characterized as irrational, intolerant, or bigoted. Reason and empathy are the enemy of that kind of thinking.

Regarding your judgment, perhaps you consider me an anti-Christian (or anti-God or anti-religion or anti-faith) bigot and my antitheism irrational. That would be expected, but I would disagree if you do. One can't be bigoted against ideas, just classes of people. One can be biased against or in favor of ideas, but whereas bigotry against people is always irrational and destructive, bias against an idea can be rational and constructive, such as a bias against drunk driving.

I assume that you see godless people like me as morally and intellectually defective, and our opinions mean-spirited, unjustified, and destructive, and so you say that you've seen people that I don't think exist by my standards for those judgments.

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." That is my definition and there is no greater love than that.

This is what I mean about the Christian definition of love not being mine or humanistic. I don't consider dying an act of love or the measure of love much less of ultimate love. Love is the protection and facilitation of others. Occasionally, a mother, for example, may lose her life defending a child she loves. That doesn't make her love greater than the other mothers who were not asked to give their lives and continued to express love for their children throughout their natural lives.

Love your neighbor as yourself is about the here an now and not the hereafter.

The problem is the Christian model for love and what passes as love in Christian culture. Abrahamic homophobia is not love in humanism, but Christians have no trouble embracing such doctrine and still claiming that they love others as themselves. If you really want to show gay people love, stop persecuting them. I doubt that they can use you laying down your life for them, which is not love.

Christianity teaches this idea for obvious reasons. The central act of Christianity is the crucifixion and resurrection, and so being crucified is depicted as a supreme act that allows souls that sinned in life to reach heaven washed in the blood of the lamb. To an unbeliever, Jesus died for his crimes against the state to the benefit of nobody. Ending up there was an ignoble end to a life based in religious zealotry later glorified by a religion that sprung up based in the claim that a demigod had died for mankind.

If your definition were so true, we wouldn't have help for those in prison and those coming out of prison, homes for those coming out of addiction, helps for those who are in poverty, disaster relief, medical helps, grief counseling, marriage counseling, home building, youth services, baby helps, homeless shelters, educational helps, job preparation helps, home repair helps, building housing for widows, helping orphans and adoption agencies et al.

What does any of that have to do with Christianity? Secular (humanist values and agenda) agencies do all of that and do it better. Those are examples of people helping people, which is basic human nature. Many people are programmed to serve others at least on a small scale.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

yeah for work not for a better life

Do they remain in their host country or return to Muslim countries as soon as possible? I'm sure that there are some of both, but I suspect that most Muslim migrants in the West are there for good and have citizenship or permanent visas. It's common in Mexico for young men to go to the States illegally, live for next to nothing in cramped quarters, send money back home for a while, and then return to Mexico within a year or two. They're there for the money and generally don't like life there for obvious reasons. I've worked with a few dozen Muslim doctors in the States. They're all permanent residents there for a better life doing the same work they could do at home.

I think "atrocities" that come from God, are a reward for being evil, people deserve them.

This comment is the result of Divine Command moral theory, which say that if God said or did it, it is by definition moral, and disobeying it is immoral. The problem is that if the god is guilty of swathe of moral crimes, you've accepted them as moral. A tri-omni god doesn't create evil people, and if he did, rehabilitates them, not punishes them.

Essentially killing evil people is the same as ending evil.

Yikes. Why is there evil? Why is killing the only remedy for it?

I think it is interesting that you seem to think, a tyrant would be a good God.

I don't know why you think that. A good god would be one embracing humanistic values - reason and empathy, freedom and democracy, individual autonomy.

Why do you think humanity has cooked its world?

I'm referring to global warming. Man wasn't wise enough to heed the warnings from the scientific community, and now much life on the planet will suffer. If I had the power of a tri-omni god, that would not have happened. How about you? Would you let so much suffering ensue if you could prevent it? This is why so many reject the claims about this god rather than believe it would do that if it existed.

I believe hell is real and that is what the Bible tells. However, I don't think it can be called a torture chamber, for example because soul and body are destroyed there.

That's not mainstream hell theology. Soul is not destroyed. It is kept conscious for the purpose of it suffering for eternity. God doesn't end evil. He segregates and punishes it to the benefit of nobody. Rational, empathetic people reject this as well. You must have a little more of one of those than the average adherent to be freethinking about hell and rejecting what you consider too cruel for a god. That's a good start.

It is not a playground for demons.

Kenny says hell was built for Satan, and implied that throwing man in there was an afterthought. His thinking is more mainstream than yours. And I believe he said that he's a church pastor. If so, that's what he teaches.

Biblical God is good, because He has given freedom, gives wisdom, shows love, is truthful and just.

This is more Divine Command thinking. Whatever this god shows us must be wisdom, love, truth, and justice, right Take of that confirmation bias and you'll see the opposite. This god is none of those things.

 

[Left Coast]

No... a kleptomaniac and being gay are both mental aspects. If one is born that way, we are unchangeable.

We've been over this, Ken. Gayness isn't theft. There are good reasons to be against theft. There aren't good reasons to be against gay romance. That's why the two aren't analogous. That's why it's cruel and ignorant to ask gay people to live in denial of an aspect of themselves that harms no one.

 

[Father Heathen]

I think "atrocities" that come from God, are a reward for being evil, people deserve them.

Like forcing rape victims to marry their attacker?

 

[Muffled]

This is quite nonsensical, and your believing it doesn't make it true. You don't get to decide what other peoples' religion is.

I believe as God I can judge things to be what they are.

 

[Valjean]

I think "atrocities" that come from God, are a reward for being evil, people deserve them.

They come from people. God wills it was just a facile excuse.

 

[Muffled]

Bigotry, subjugation, and willful ignorance are not of the light.

I believe a person who lives in darkness has no idea what light is like.

 

[Valjean]

Essentially killing evil people is the same as ending evil. Do you think evil should continue forever?

So two wrongs make a right, and killing evil people will create a good and crime-free society.

I think it is interesting that you seem to think, a tyrant would be a good God. Why do you think humanity has cooked its world?

OK, I'm missing your points, here. Explain, SVP?

Ok, I think it is sad that the issue has not been taught accurately. But, I believe hell is real and that is what the Bible tells. However, I don't think it can be called a torture chamber, for example because soul and body are destroyed there. It is not a playground for demons.

So the world is a cruel tyranny and we can do nothing to change it.

 

[Muffled]

shariah

I believe that can vary depending on whether hadiths are accepted or not.

 

[Muffled]

So two wrongs make a right, and killing evil people will create a good and crime-free society.

OK, I'm missing your points, here. Explain, SVP?
So the world is a cruel tyranny and we can do nothing to change it.

I believe you could receive Jesus as Lord and Savior. The part of the world you are in will change for the better.

 

[Valjean]

So you support the position that I am created to drive fast and I am a kleptomaniac and therefore should not be charged for anything that you might deem as wrong because I am born that way.

Huh?

 

[Valjean]

I believe you could receive Jesus as Lord and Savior. The part of the world you are in will change for the better.

Don't most religions make this claim?
How would the world change for the better if I were Christian?

I haven't noticed that Christian societies were any less cruel, violent, greedy or dishonest than non-Christian ones. They were more so than many. Aren't crime rates higher in Bible-belt states than in "heathen" New England or Pacific Northwestern states. Aren't the lowest corruption and crime rates found in non-believing regions like Scandinavia?