Atheists face death in 13 Muslim countries

[Aldon]

The only thing breaking down is your sanity.

I start to love your posts. Osama bin Laden is on your side.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

Um.. I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here, but I don't think it's unfair to point out that this kind of atrocity is not unique to Islam. Extremist factions within any group can misuse that affiliation as an excuse for a lack of empathy towards persons outside their group.
Case in point : this thread

That's how humans got to be the apex predator.

 

[Vic]

That's how humans got to be the apex predator.

Sorry? You came across earlier as someone who wouldn't subscribe to evolution. And the bible says something a little different in Genesis 1:26.

 

[Moonbeam]

Although human are thought to be rational being, without a lot of evidence at times, admittedly, if we were created by God, then I would assume he meant for us to use it for something. And if reasoning in a scientific manner, assuming it's the best kind of reasoning we can do, leads some to doubt in the existence of God because there is no scientific way to prove he exists, where does that leave people of faith? Wish as they might for reasons to believe in a God that seems even remotely ethical, as a reasonable mind may likely conceive it, what way out of this can there be? Either God isn't ethical or a rational mind doesn't know what ethics are, or folk are wrong about who God is, that the one they believe in is just a projection of religious people's hate. but if a rational mind can only conclude that the God of religion is a monster, then why did God give us the capacity to reach such a conclusion? The obvious answer to me then that God might rationally exist is the proof offered by some of the religious that rationally, the god they believe in can't reasonably exist.

 

[Moonbeam]

That's how humans got to be the apex predator.

It's also the reason the victory will be temporary.

 

[spittledip]

I'm bringing Muslims into this because that's what the damn thread is about. Follow along.

What you and I were discussing had nothing to do with Muslims. As we both know, threads tend to gravitate to one subject or another that does not completely encompass the ideas presented in the OP. The discussion you and I are involved in is an example of that.

In order for me to worship ANY god, I would have to be presented with evidence that the supernatural exists and that the god some retard is babbling about after knocking on my front door is the "one true god."
We aren't even to that part of the conversation yet.

Not the question I was asking, as you are well aware. I was asking if you knew that the God of the Koran was the one true God with all the "crimes" He has committed, would you follow Him? As I have stated in other threads, you tend to purposefully ignore the questions asked of you and to also ignore the content of what is being presented. If you are unable to answer the question or are unwilling to, just say so.

Nope, it's not crooked at all. In fact, both religions demand death for apostasy and death for non believers. I've even quoted the verses in this very thread but all you Christians do is ignore it or make some dumbass comment like "well god commanded it, so it must be a righteous act!"

Read the verses I quoted. Your own holy book illustrates your god as an evil entity.

I have already addressed those verses, as you well know. You may not like the answer, but you have not attempted to dispute the logic. As I have mentioned in other threads with you, you tend to use insults or divisive language rather than address the point at hand. Quote above is another case in point. Also you also tend to misrepresent arguments. Case in point above again as you have made the argument more simplistic than it actually is. If you wish to address the statement I made originally, feel free to do so.

The new point you bring up about both religions demanding death for non-believers- can you provide a verse in the Bible where God says that all non-believers must be killed? You will need verses from the Old Testament and then verses from the New Testament. Unless you wish to make your assertion more clear and say that God demanded death in certain geographical areas (Old Testament) rather than a blanket destruction of all non-believers.

God did demand death to apostates in the Theocracy, I do not dispute that point. However, I already explained to you about the Theocracy in my original post in this thread. Here are some verses regarding that: Deuteronomy 20:16–18, Leviticus 20:20-26, Deuteronomy 26 16-19, Deuteronomy 7:1-6

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Meh.. The Christian Right would do the same thing to atheists right here in the US if they could.

I think it far more likely that the enlightened like Thinclient would kill them first.

 

[spittledip]

Most human artists don't create intelligent, self-aware art that is capable of actively objecting to its own destruction.

The purpose of an analogy is not to create a perfect comparison. I am not sure if there is such thing as a perfect analogy... At any rate, the state of the created has nothing to do with ownership of the creator. We aren't talking about humans owning humans here.

It's an odd definition of benevolence: The entity gave you life, promises you love and eternal life after your time on Earth, but is standing quietly in the corner with a stare locked onto you, holding a shotgun. "Don't worry, this isn't for you, unless you do something terrible."
I can't say I'd be at ease.

And yet we are all very much at ease, those of us who believe. Some are at ease b/c they take it for granted, and then others are at ease b/c they are familiar with God's mercy.
Also, saying that He has every right to kill us is not the same as saying that He will kill us if we make one wrong move.
God is not random, and there is nothing in the Bible that says He is random in His actions. I cannot think of any passage where God killed or had someone killed without an explanation.
An interesting passage is Genesis 15:15-16 where God speaks of Israel coming to the promised land in 4 generations when the sin of the Amorites will have reached its "full measure." This seems to suggest that God has patience and mercy for only so long... and then, judgment.

Though the scripture says that he will still do it anyway if his infinite powers fail to find a better solution than "Kill everything and start over."

That is a very interesting passage- Moses got God to change His mind, or at least that is the way it appears. Anyway, He was not controlling the Israelites, so the failure was on their part. I am not sure if you expect God to make everyone "do the right thing". That is the suggestion you seem to be making in referencing His "infinite power" b/c there is not alot you can do with infinite power if you want people to choose the right thing. I suppose He could have put on some type of light show for them.

If he's truly ready and able to kill everything and everyone for some poorly-defined reasons, then he's not benevolent.
If "kill everything" is genuinely not something he'd do, under any circumstance, then why the need for fear of a vengeful god? That shouldn't even need to be a concept that anyone's aware of. I'm sure he'd have the power to turn Earth into a delicious blueberry pie, but it's not something people usually worry about or fear. It's not a concept that is in the common knowledge.

I was saying that even if we were perfect He has every right to destroy us b/c we are beings that He created. I did not make any other statements in reference to the bit you highlighted.

I never said that He wouldn't ever destroy everything for trespasses committed. Take the flood for example.

Saying that the reasons for punishment are poorly defined is a conclusion that we currently can say is wrong- the reasons are fairly well defined in the Bible. For those before the canonizing of scripture, there is this verse: Romans 1:18-25 and Romans 2:12-15.

But the idea that people are intended to fear this god does not strike me as something to expect from a genuinely benevolent being.

If this were the only aspect in our relationship with God, then I would agree with you. Also, God is alot is more that just "benevolent". One can be benevolent and also be just. If you fear justice from God, then you are at a good starting point.

 

[WelshBloke]

Let me ask you an honest question: If there is no evidence either way, how is your view "reason" and theirs, not?

If there is no evidence either way, then the only reasonable position is "I don't know".

If the only reasonable position is "I don't know" then there is no reason for any religious based laws or beliefs. Or indeed any religion.

 

[Thebobo]

Jesus = parody poster

Dont take him for real.

 

[Vic]

I think it far more likely that the enlightened like Thinclient would kill them first.

Well. . Strong atheism is a faith too

 

[Agent11]

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."

Thomas Jefferson


Sums it up the best in my opinion.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Well. . Strong atheism is a faith too

And I have faith that each morning when I wake up that the law of gravity will still be working. It's not the same thing.

And what is a "strong atheist"? Seems to me you're either an atheist or you're not.

 

[Agent11]

That quote from Jefferson is from a letter of advice he sent to his nephew, Peter Carr. I recommend looking it up, it contains timeless wisdom.

 

[Moonbeam]

And I have faith that each morning when I wake up that the law of gravity will still be working. It's not the same thing.

And what is a "strong atheist"? Seems to me you're either an atheist or you're not.

An atheist believes there is no evidence for the existence of God and does not believe there is any justification for believing in God. A strong atheist is one of these who forgets his position and slips into certainty that because there is no evidence there is no God, a faith because there is no evidence that God does not exist.

An atheist is not persuaded and a strong atheist is persuaded by the lack of persuasion.

The atheist is indifferent and the strong atheist has formed emotional attachment. He harbors unconscious prejudice against people who believe without evidence. He has ego involved and that means he has a need to feel superior and express it and manifest it by dominating and humiliating others. It's sort of like what the Spanish Inquisition can do the liberal mine, the opposite phenomenon of what can happen to a group treated as food for lions.

 

[Moonbeam]

I think it far more likely that the enlightened like Thinclient would kill them first.

He is a bit over the top, but I think Atheist Russia has shown more progress in accepting the religious than Saudi Arabia has in accepting atheists. Non believers seem to me to be more able to handle differences that Believers are. Seems to me it's a bit more difficult to develop unconscious motivations for not believing in anything that it is when you're told that you belief will determine whether you burn in hell forever. The believers kind of cheat, I think, by scaring the shit out of children.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

We aren't talking about humans owning humans here.

Yes, but you're still talking about owning humans. What difference does it make who wants to own them? Are you a relativist? It's not okay for people to own other people, but it's ok for God to do it? That's moral relativism.

And yet we are all very much at ease, those of us who believe.

Well, yes, because you're not a very bright bunch.

Also, saying that He has every right to kill us is not the same as saying that He will kill us if we make one wrong move.

It's also not the same as saying he won't "kill us if we make one wrong move." In fact, it moves the probability from zero to greater than zero.

God is not random, and there is nothing in the Bible that says He is random in His actions.

Then please tell us how you predict his actions.

I cannot think of any passage where God killed or had someone killed without an explanation.

What was the explanation for slaying the infant Amalekites? Chapter and verse, please.

An interesting passage is Genesis 15:15-16 where God speaks of Israel coming to the promised land in 4 generations when the sin of the Amorites will have reached its "full measure." This seems to suggest that God has patience and mercy for only so long... and then, judgment.

As a society we take careful measures to restrain people from appointing themselves to judgeship. We are generally highly suspicious of anyone who appoints himself judge. Why do you make an exception for your god? The things he has allegedly done should call the quality of his judgement in to serious question -- particularly given the unlimited supernatural powers he is alleged to possess.

That is a very interesting passage- Moses got God to change His mind, or at least that is the way it appears. Anyway, He was not controlling the Israelites, so the failure was on their part. I am not sure if you expect God to make everyone "do the right thing". That is the suggestion you seem to be making in referencing His "infinite power" b/c there is not alot you can do with infinite power if you want people to choose the right thing. I suppose He could have put on some type of light show for them.

Why not make the "wrong thing" impossible for people to choose? I can't choose to breathe tap water. I can't choose to digest a diamond. I can't choose to see infrared light. Why could he not have decided that the "wrong things" were among this class of actions?

I was saying that even if we were perfect He has every right to destroy us b/c we are beings that He created.

And yet you cannot demonstrate how the former follows from the latter. You just keep declaring as though it were self-evident. Here's a newsflash: it isn't. I reject your postulate.

{snip}

 

[Pray To Jesus]

If the only reasonable position is "I don't know" then there is no reason for any religious based laws or beliefs. Or indeed any religion.

Ifthere is no evidence either way, then the only reasonable position is "I don't know".

If there is no evidence either way, then the only reasonable position is "I don't know

If there is no evidence either way

If there is

If

 

[Pray To Jesus]

{snip}

I think of CT as a little yapping chihuahua. Stupid and annoying.

 

[JEDIYoda]

What was the explanation for slaying the infant Amalekites? Chapter and verse, please.

I think you do not know much about the Amalekites! It`s real obvious that you have thatched onto what you consider to be totally unexplainable, yet if you were to read and search for yourself you would find the answers...albeit you would totally disagree, so why bother discussing this issue with you?

The Amalekites are mentioned several times in the old testament and as well know things in the old testament are quite a bit different than in the new testament which ushered in the dispensation of Grace from the dispensation of the Law!

Why would God order the destruction of men, women, and children?

Friday November 28, 2008

by Matt Slick


"Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way while he was coming up from Egypt. 3 ‘Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey,” (1 Samuel 15:2-3).

The Amalekites, who were descendents of Esau, had been longtime enemies of Israel. They fought against Israel at Rephidim (Exodus 17:8). Apparently, they "entertained a deep-seated grudge against them, especially as the rapid prosperity and marvelous experience of Israel showed that the blessing contained in the birthright [Jacob and Esau] was taking effect."1 They were a constant threat to Israel. Therefore, God said to Moses in Exodus 17:14 “Write this in a book as a memorial, and recite it to Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.”

God lawfully has the right to execute judgment upon anyone. The Bible says that all people have sinned against God and are under his righteous judgment. Therefore, their execution is not an arbitrary killing nor is it murder. Murder is the unlawful taking of life. Killing is the lawful taking of life. For example, we can lawfully take a life in defense of our selves, our families, our nations, etc.

When God authorizes the nation of Israel to wipe out a people, it is a lawful execution due to their rebellion and sin against God. Furthermore, such an extermination can be seen to be merciful by delivering the young into the hands of the Lord and possibly saving their souls by not giving them time to become "utterly sinful".2 Additionally, further generations that would have arisen from the perverse culture, are likewise prevented from coming into existence and spreading their sin.

Finally, one of the reasons that the Lord is so strong in the Old Testament and orders the killing of people is to ensure that the future messianic line would remain intact. The enemy, Satan, began his attempt to destroy God's people in the Garden of Eden, by also trying to corrupt the world (which led to Noah's Flood), by trying to destroy Israel with attacking armies, and by encouraging Israel to fall into idolatry by exposure to other cultures as well as intermarrying women from those cultures. The result of both the idolatry and the interbreeding would have been the failure of the prophecies that foretold of the coming Messiah which specified which family line the Messiah would come through. The Messiah, Jesus, would be the one who would die for the sins of the world and without that death there would be no atonement. Without the atonement, all people would be lost. So, God was ensuring the arrival of the Messiah via the destruction of the ungodly.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I think you do not know much about the Amalekites! It`s real obvious that you have thatched onto what you consider to be totally unexplainable, yet if you were to read and search for yourself you would find the answers...albeit you would totally disagree, so why bother discussing this issue with you?

The Amalekites are mentioned several times in the old testament and as well know things in the old testament are quite a bit different than in the new testament which ushered in the dispensation of Grace from the dispensation of the Law!

{snip}

Look, anyone who has been here a while realizes you're just a little, shall we say, "touched," so I don't expect a discussion with you to be fruitful. Alas, I shall simply offer this response to the non-answer you cited, lest anyone think I lacked one.

Nothing in that article provides a chapter and verse explanation for the slaying of the Amalekites infants, which is what I requested in support of the claim I was challenging. Saying "he did it because he has a right to" is not an explanation. Saying "we all sin" is not an explanation. It's question begging.

Spittledip claimed that the Bible gave an explanation for every killing described in the Bible, and I want a citation of that explanation for the killing of the Amalekite infants as a demonstration of that claim's validity.

And please, citing Matt Slick of all people is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, and take that from someone who has met him in person on several occasions, and appeared on his internet radio show (albeit, many years ago).

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

If there is no evidence either way, then the only reasonable position is "I don't know

If there is no evidence either way

If there is

If

You are cordially invited to supply any evidence which you believe is persuasive. Lacking that, you're just blathering.

 

[ThinClient]

If there is no evidence either way, then the only reasonable position is "I don't know

If there is no evidence either way

If there is

If

Please post your evidence that your god exists and that Christ was divine.

I'll wait.

 

[ThinClient]

I think of CT as a little yapping chihuahua. Stupid and annoying.

You project a lot of your own misgivings onto other people. Pretty typical religiotard.

 

[soulcougher73]

If there is no evidence either way, then the only reasonable position is "I don't know

If there is no evidence either way

If there is

If

Could be a Santa Clause, Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy as well. May want to hope on board the IF train and believe in them as well.