Adultery is not rape. Rape is when the victim does not consent. Adultery is by definition, consenting
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Islam vs western values
- Thread starter Pro Gamer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- feminism liberalism shariah
Adultery is not rape. Rape is when the victim does not consent. Adultery is by definition, consenting
Why not kill this greatest evil ..satan?
I can tell you that .. if G-d had ordained that everybody who opposes "Him" would die, nobody would
have autonomy .. no true independence.
The source of evil is in our having free-will. Remove that, and the whole point of the Creation of man becomes futile.
How can satan be "rehabilitated", when he chooses not to be??
Depends how you define the greatest evil. Personally i believe deliberately killing people to be evil
Also note, those 10 were at gods command
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
I've just explained to you that the evidence doesn't indicate that kleptomaniacs are "born that way." So it doesn't work for your analogy. Others have explained why as well.
Then rape is not the crime. Adultery is. That's what's being called ghoulish. Rape violates humanist moral standards.
That was in response to, "humanist ethics are superior to Christian ethics." I just did. I can give you more. Humanist ethics consider homophobia unkind, irrational, and destructive, whereas Christianity espouses it.
They are free to be good in all the ways that their imposed beneficence allows. Maybe you'd like to think a bit about what freedom is and when it's a liability. Guardrails on a mountain road restrict your freedom, and that's a good thing. Freedom to have malicious thoughts and to execute them isn't good for anybody.
The Bible says all men are sinners. The ones in heaven have been forgiven, but have they had their freedom to be evil stripped from them in the process? If not, there is evil in heaven. If so, they've had the freedom to be evil removed, which you say is not nice, earlier called tyrannical, and coming right up equate with killing.
I'll assume that that first "good" was supposed to be "god." If so, I don't believe that that is why you say that. For starters, much of Genesis is neither reasonable nor truthful.
It's the opposite for me. The errors of fact in the Bible's historical narrative, the moral and intellectual errors of the deity, and the internal contradictions throughout tell me not to trust that book for information or advice.
Removing the desire to harm others is not killing the person. Earlier, you were in favor of killing evil people, but that was when you were defending God's killing. And this is special pleading, because we're talking about a god doing it. Good parents raise their children in the hope of removing those destructive inclinations and their expression. They do everything in their power to "force" them to have no desire to rob banks or take street fentanyl. If we were born programmable with dials, we would program our children have no unhealthy or destructive inclinations. But when we discuss why a tri-omni god gives us the free will to commit evil, the rules change. That would be forcing and killing the person, tyranny even.
This is that special pleading again excusing what believers believe are god's choices. You just saw my response to that. Freedom is not always good for oneself or others. Loving parents understand that and set limits on autonomy and independence.
That's a good illustration of the harm some freedom causes.
Can God not modify Satan's psychology?
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
satan .. the great deceiver .. you have been deceived.
G-d is not a person .. He does not kill .. our souls belong to Him .. they are eternal.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
..but that is not reality!
The reality is, that we have been given free-will .. and we are responsible for our actions.
You want to "change the ballgame" .. change reality .. but that is fultile.
What if, what if .. I won't waste my time talking about "dream worlds"..
Ok, what do you think would be correct punishment for rape?
Bible tells eternal life is for righteous. (Matt. 25:46) I have understood righteousness is wisdom of the just and they don't want to do anything evil, because they understand it is not good and they don't want it. So, they are free and could do also evil, but they don't want that, that is why they get the eternal life.
Sorry, I didn't mean that adultery is the same as rape. If person who is married rapes someone that is not his wife, he commits adultery also. But, the victim obviously is not doing it.
In Biblical point of view the rapist would deserve death in that case. Do you think it would be right judgment for him?
I read the bible. Deception?
Show existence before excusing the biblical killings or giving yourself away
Last edited:
Nope,
Actually i used to consider they needed castrating from the kneck down but ive mellowed a little now i think rapists deserves a long time incarcerated to consider the harm they do
Last edited:
The rapist does not need to be married
Dimi95
Прaвославие!
In the Quran there is claim that EVERYTHING that the Prophet says is NOTHING except inspiration from Allah(Chapter 53:4).
There are also verses in the Quran that were abolished because of side-influence(Satanic).They were abolished by the creator - Allah
Verse 22:52 confirms that
How can we know there is no influence after those verses when there was in the first place?
How can every verse after that be trustworthly?
You want us to belive that the Creator could not protect his Beloved Prophet - "The LAST Messenger"?
Was not Allah the "All Powerfull"?
"Everything happens , happens if Allah allows it" - that is what Muslims belive
So if we use Logic as Muslim preachers suggest then Allah allowed Satan to interfere in the Revelation.
@Pro Gamer
Tell me how should we belive in the cultural values and moral authority of Islam,when it's authencity can't be proven.
I have presented you an example(one of many) , and if you want we can discuss that and many more..
You know what's the main problem with you Muslims ?
You are trying to explain divinity with human standards , and that's how you drown in your own mud.
You are Prosecutor , Judge and Jury at the same time.
You only want to talk and you don't listen.
There are also verses in the Quran that were abolished because of side-influence(Satanic).They were abolished by the creator - Allah
Verse 22:52 confirms that
How can we know there is no influence after those verses when there was in the first place?
How can every verse after that be trustworthly?
You want us to belive that the Creator could not protect his Beloved Prophet - "The LAST Messenger"?
Was not Allah the "All Powerfull"?
"Everything happens , happens if Allah allows it" - that is what Muslims belive
So if we use Logic as Muslim preachers suggest then Allah allowed Satan to interfere in the Revelation.
@Pro Gamer
Tell me how should we belive in the cultural values and moral authority of Islam,when it's authencity can't be proven.
I have presented you an example(one of many) , and if you want we can discuss that and many more..
You know what's the main problem with you Muslims ?
You are trying to explain divinity with human standards , and that's how you drown in your own mud.
You are Prosecutor , Judge and Jury at the same time.
You only want to talk and you don't listen.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
She's been "deceived" into believing that "deliberately killing people" is evil? Huh?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Cool story, bro.
It hasn't been studied. I'm sure... but the principles are the same... so I don't agree.
I would hold to the position that we are all born flawed and manifests in different areas. But my point is that just because we have desires, doesn't mean we should yield to it so my example remains.
Plus, there really isn't any real evidence that people are born that way:
Massive Study Finds No Single Genetic Cause of Same-Sex Sexual Behavior
Analysis of half a million people suggests genetics may have a limited contribution to sexual orientation
Any "limited" involvement can be controlled. We also know that there are sexual additions and there are chemicals such as: dopamine, norepinephrine, oxytocin, vasopressin that can go out of control if we yield to it - no matter what flavor one decides to follow
So we are back to the reality that it is simply what people consider acceptable which fluctuates from
Last edited:
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
No, the principles are not the same. That's the point.
I've told you that the average age of onset for kleptomania is around 17-years-of-age which would indicate that it's not something one is "born with." You've ignored this twice now. Could you try responding to it?
No kidding. There isn't any one gene for heterosexuality either. And yet people are born heterosexual. What point were you trying to make in posting this?I would hold to the position that we are all born flawed and manifests in different areas. But my point is that just because we have desires, doesn't mean we should yield to it so my example remains.
Plus, there really isn't any real evidence that people are born that way:
Massive Study Finds No Single Genetic Cause of Same-Sex Sexual Behavior
Analysis of half a million people suggests genetics may have a limited contribution to sexual orientationwww.scientificamerican.com
These are behaviours you are discussing and trying to equate with sexual orientation, which is not a behaviour. Same goes for kleptomania.
I don't know what the second half of your sentence is trying to say.
I think you forgot to finish your thought.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Islam has only existed since 600 CE.
I don't think we can really know what religions will stand the test of time and which won't. But certainly those who will survive will be those that evolve to accept new discoveries. I think religions that buck up against science are going to fade away.
"Average, means some more and some less. There are many supposed conditions that don't appear at the beginning.
Average age for gender dysphoria is 26. I'm sure you have a point.
There are desires, there are drives, there are instincts. Our anatomy, including neural architecture, evolves through natural selection. Our psychology and social behavior evolves through natural selection. Our physiology, including gating, activation pathways, specialty regions, hormones and neurotransmitters; evolves through natural selection.
Physical and behavioral diversity is selective. It enables adaptation to changing conditions. Specialization is hazardous, and leads to extinction with changing environmental conditions.
Homosexuality has been shown to increase reproductive success in the human population, by anthropologists. Homosexuality is a common variation in both mammals, birds and fish. It is not unnatural, it's functional.
But there is; a greatdeal of hard evidence, both in clinical and in neural imaging studies. It is not a rebellion, and rarely a social choice. It is a natural, functional, variation.
You did not choose to be heterosexual. It came upon you, at puberty or even before. The focus of attraction, the degree of attraction -- not your choice.
Social attitudes toward it in Abrahamic religions do not reflect reality; they reflect Abrahamic theology. They are not fact based.
Anthropology, psychology and medicine are fact based, and they disagree with religious teaching, which is designed to maintain an ideal, social, status quo. The religious narrative, again, is not fact based.
Exactly!Massive Study Finds No Single Genetic Cause of Same-Sex Sexual Behavior
Analysis of half a million people suggests genetics may have a limited contribution to sexual orientation
As I've said, sex drive is complex and multi-factoral. Unlike eye color or handedness, it involves several brain areas and neural pathways. It is complex and deeply embedded, which is why it's so difficult to alter, therapeutically.
Social and behavioral norms exist, but they can't change biology. They may repress behaviors, and produce an image of homogeneity and normal behavior, but they can't rewire complex neurological wiring.
Gender and sexual orientation aren't either-or, nor are they choices. Fact-based, biological studies support this. Religion does not -- but religion is not fact based, nor is it a research modality.