No problem, when kids die of hunger they go to the heaven and live there forever WO hungry…
And the reason God couldn’t have just put conscious souls directly in paradise is because shut up, that’s why
god works in mysterious ways… 🙏🤞
Trying to pull a fast one on Jesus huh? Not on my watch!
This is why the pagan/Roman/greek gods made a lot more sense. They were all arseholes who didn’t care about you.
Hera cared. Hera cared a lot.
Not that was a good thing. she cared because Zeus would come down as an animal and rape hot humans, so she cared an awful lot about people. So she could torture them.
Woah don’t you know god is LOVE that is why he created hell to love his “children”.
Don’t kink shame…
Oh sure, when God sure it it’s great, but when I trap my exes in a basement and spray them with a hose until they say they love me I’m a “freak” and a “monster”
Yea because its a small punishment you can do for uh what a lifetime ? Try torturing them eternally and then get back to me loser then i will obey you like a slave because logic.
Oh man, I forgot all about that Kirk Cameron banana video with “Ray Shine” or whatever his religious propaganda porn name is. Good times.
religious propaganda porn
“Oh yeah baby, repent harder! Condemn those sins of the flesh! He’s second COMING!”
They’re actually fine with children dying because it means they get to go to heaven early, plus the adversity it causes their loved ones is beneficial. I’m serious, they told me this when I asked as a kid.
Then why do they want medical treatment, when their injuries bring them closer to their end goal: heaven?
Yes, why is it that religious people aren’t completely logical?
Something something suicide leads to hell.
Better question is why wouldn’t parents immediately sacrifice their newborns on the Blood Altar? I can only go to hell once but I could sire many children and give them all a guaranteed ticket to heaven. Actually, I could even take a shortcut and blow up a maternity.
… now that I think abkjt it, I guess some fundamentalist lunatics have probably already done it, and now I’m sad.
There are a few religions that refuse forms of medical treatment. I agree with what you’re saying, but it isn’t unheard of
God wouldn’t kill a child unless he was preventing evil
Every child with cancer is someone who would grow up to be worse than Hitler
So Hitler was like the worst a kid can get without getting cancer?
Well unless history has someone worse
Some would argue for Japanese atrocities during ww2 or Mao/Stalin
Vlad the Impaler seemed pretty mean
This is one of the many reasons why I don’t get their arguments against abortion. An abortion is just a baby’s e-ticket to heaven.
No it’s not- scripture says the soul enters at its first breath. Their arguments are nonsensical because they can’t really argue the real reasons.
They’re opposed to abortion because they want people- specifically the poors, and specifically the black poors- to have to have that kid. Unplanned/unwanted kids provide a huge economic strain on the family, and greatly reduce the ability of the other kids to succeed in life.
This means they’re more likely to continue a tradition of low wage blue collar jobs, or even better, get in on the school-to-prison pipe and provide more or less free labor for ages.
(Of course the other reason is the raging misogyny.)
It’s also the same reason why they’re so against social safety nets, universal health care and public education.
The Torah notes a child who does not survive thirty days after birth does not get full funerary rites (a grim implication of infant mortality of the age).
Dan McClellan notes the current positions on the point of ensoulment come from Greek positions: Conception (Platonian?), Quickening (Aristotlean?) and birth (Epicurean? It’s all Greek to me.) For most of Christian history, the quickening was the standard (about 22 weeks). The conception became popular after the 1970s when abortion access was made accessible and the controversy was used as a rallying point to unify Christians to conservatism as a voting bloc.
Where does it say the soul enters at first breath?
Genuine question, I wanna bust that shit out and have a citation ready.
scripture says the soul enters at its first breath.
Do you remember where this is said? I grew up in a church and remember a lot of the rhetoric about how sacred life is and blah blah blah, but I don’t specifically remember that part. I’d say knowing that scripture would help me convince people that their views are incorrect, but let’s be real, these people don’t want their minds changed.
loads of places, more or less. Keep in mind, it’s the human soul (‘made in his image’), that makes us ‘special’, compared to animals. christian doctrine, this distinction is what makes it acceptable to kill animals for food, etc. It’s not murder because they have no soul. So the technicality of when life begins is different than the technicality of ‘when is it murder’.
We can see this in numerous points of scripture:
Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
This is specifically to the creation of Adam, however, we see this distinction made in other places as well. Job 33:3
The Spirit of God has made me; the breath of the Almighty gives me life.
clear distinction, and also in Job 32:8:
But it is the spirit in man, the breath of the Almighty, that makes him understand
There is also the distinction made in Exodus 21:22-25
When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
The punishment for causing a miscarriage is the more as taking the life of livestock, as seen in Exodus 22:1
If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it or sells it, he shall repay five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.
which is why exodus 21 specifies if there is harm (to the mother), the punishment for murder is death. It also is why it’s specified that if others do it. If the husband, well… that’s an entirely different matter. which, abortions… they even contain a recipe… in numbers 5- but only if the husband wants.
I thought the last one’s gonna be “— Gays? — I dunno they kinda appeared all by themselves”
Did ya see the recent bit about the humpback whales? Apparently the first time humpbacks have been filmed having sex, they were going broke back mountain ….
“god’s plan… god is testing them… god is testing ME!”
Epicurus’ Paradox, beeyotch!
There’s nowhere in the bible that it states God’s purpose is to ensure no children ever die, bad things never happen, and no calamity ever befalls us. I’m atheistic myself but I just think people have this weird idea that “god” is supposed to be this overarching protector who ensures nothing bad can happen. Where does that idea come from? The God of the old testament is a viscious homocidal maniac and kills people all the time, and creates havoc for them also. Why do bad things happen to good people? Because nowhere does it state that God’s job is making sure they don’t.
While you absolutely have a point you have to consider how people — specifically theists — portray God.
God is supposed to be this warm, loving father of everything that will send you to Paradise if you’re nice for a couple of years and worship him (probably a kink of his, idk). If you don’t, yeah, you go to hell or something else happens to you depending on the specific type of Christian that you’re talking to but overall, churches, flyers, songs, people that ring your doorbell at 8am on a Saturday… they all make God look like a good thing.
Trust me I’ve pulled the “but doesn’t the Bible say…”-card many times. They always have some dumb excuse to make God look like a good guy. I think it’s fine to talk about God not only in the way he’s described but also in the way he’s perceived (not actual perception of course) and advertised, which is usually way more positive.
Well that’s true and I’m aware that god is portrayed as a loving kind father of everything (so long as you do as he expects, that is). And it kind of makes sense, if you’re going to worship something, you’d want it be something benevolent with good protector vibes.
But, it’s quite obvious from the war and misery we experience that if god’s job is to keep us happy, he ain’t very good at it. I think, if there is any force out there that can (in the broadest sense) be called a “god,” it is probably far from benevolent and very far removed from what we do on earth day to day. So instead of “in god we trust,” I prefer to think “I trust in other people and myself.” I mean, ultimately it’s on us to create the kind of world we live in no matter what.
God gave humans free will. Millions of Children dying is not the result of lacking ressources. It is the result of shitty humans denying them.
The ultimate cop-out. Anything good? God. Anything bad? Free will. Nevermind, like, children with leukiemia.
Well, they obviously did something bad in the womb, like touching themselves.
We do have treatment for Leukemia and it has a very high success rate. The problem is the lack of people willing to register as donors.
So yes, everything good comes from god. Or rather god gave us the means to do good, that we couldn’t do without him. But it is the free will of good people that turns the ability into reality.
Are you by any chance familiar with Stockholm Syndrome?
Can you elaborate what you mean by this?
How does the concept apply in your eyes? Because you aren’t handed everything on a silver tablet? It is funny and sad, how the underlying entitlement in this assumption goes back to how the bad in the world does come from free will of bad actors. If people, in particular western capitalist people, would be less entitled, maybe they would realise that the ressources of the world are not for them to exploit and waste in a few generations, even more so by brutaly opressing and murdering the people they take them from.
So we get climate change as a just punishment for our greed. And if you ask, how it would be a just punishment, look at the exhaustive information we had on it. There is evidence of climate change being known to science in the 19th century already. There is now more than 50 years of knowledge and warning in the general public. And what do we do? Destroy, destroy and destroy.
But to be specific about Leukemia, particularly in young children. It is directly linked to deliberate pollution, fueled by nothing but greed. The children of Basra are suffering from Leukemia because of the depleted uranium used in American tank shells in the Guld and Iraq war. Why did they put the uranium in the tank shells? Because of their greed, making a cheap and destructive shell, while “getting rid” of the left over uranium from nuclear enrichment. Of course also many veterans and their children are suffering from the use of these weapons.
You are projecting your Stockholm Syndrome, believing the destructive greed at the core of our societies to be in your favor, when in fact it is just harming you. You cannot think entitlement without greed. And the violent rejection of some religions comes from the danger its gratitude poses to a capitalist order, reliant on everyones greed.
You’re on an atheist board, preaching…
Stockholm syndrome describes the psychological condition of a victim who identifies with and empathizes with their captor or abuser and their goals.
I hate the greedy, destructive society we’re in, but I also see how people have leveraged faith as a platform to make things the way they are.
but I also see how people have leveraged faith as a platform to make things the way they are.
So by this logic, would you reject human rights and democracy, as they are regularly abused by western imperialism as a reason to invade countries and steal their ressources, furthering the very order you hate? Or would you consider communism or socialism an alternative, but then run into the problems of how Stalin, Mao and others used them to justify horrible crimes too?
I don’t see how the opposite is not correct: god gave us the means to do evil, that we couldn’t do without him. But it is the free will of evil people that turns the ability into reality
Is Einstein evil, for without his theory of relativity, nuclear weapons were not developed, or is he good, for he furthered physics fundamentally?
Is Antonine van Leeuwenhoek good, for his microscopic research lead to microbiology, which led to modern medicine, or is he evil, for without it, there couldn’t be weaponized anthrax?
The possibility, that something good can be used for evil, does not remove the merit of having the good in the first place. Or to put it in mathematic terms:
Plus times Plus equals Plus
Plus times Minus equals Minus
The first factor, which comes from god, is always positive. But the final outcome is determined by the second factor, which is free will.
You’re not going to convince anyone on an Atheist thread, because we’ve heard the dogma before and have used logic and reason to come to our own conclusion instead of blindly having faith. Ironic that you’re encouraging blind faith while trying to sprinkle logic into your argument.
Both people you mentioned are humans. According to the bible, they are both evil because all humans are born into sin.
You also cannot say all good things are from God for so so many reasons. But the most obvious one is that you don’t know god, and you don’t know their intentions. What we DO know is that either evil came into existence without God, and God isn’t powerful enough to stop it. Or god allowed it to exist. Or god created it themselves. So which one is it? Also, god has free will so why is their free will good but ours is evil?
The first factor, which comes from god, is always positive
I’m sure the babies is Sodom and Gamorah really had it coming.
I’m sure the babies of the Cannanites when Moses and the Israelites were told to genocide them really had it coming.
I’m sure all the babies that died in Noah’s Flood really, really had it coming.
Famines have been around for a lot longer than humans, as have causes of faminine, such as blight and volcanic winter.
And whatever free will we have (whether God-given or otherwise) isn’t enough to overcome our instincts for dominance hierarchy and exclusionism, which figures into the (decades old) bullying crisis, Oaklahoma calling Nex Benedict filth (and their kind, all trans gender persons, I infer). It also keeps billionares from using their ill-gotten gains to actually engage in large public-serving projects without turning them into capitalist enterprises.
As Stephen Fry noted, bone cancer in children is a pretty dick move. Unlike the plot armor (or tone armor) of our stories, children are disproportionately represented in mortality of disasters and epidemics. If God created everything then God is responsible for everything.
For us naturalists, on one hand we’re captains of our own destiny: only we can reach for the stars and cure famine and warfare. On the other hand you can endeavor to teach a dog calculus and run head first into upper limits, and so it might be with us naked apes. As much as we want to imagine ourselves as galactic civilization material, we may just be simple hunter gatherers trying to bat out of our league.
And when we perish from pollution, disaster and ultimately famine, our gods die with us along with our mathematics and symphonies.
isn’t enough to overcome our instincts for dominance hierarchy and exclusionism,
Think again. Why do you think this? Why do you assume these to be given? Because we are living in a society that has bastardized what it means to be human and has elevated the worst of human traits to be cherished as something to strive for. And in such the reasons for perishment you mention lie in nothing but the results of that horrible barbaric culture we have inflicted on ourselves. American “Christians” are a prime exmaple of that. While Jesus was very clear about greed, ill gotten wealth and the duty to use your wealth for the betterment of society, it was bastardized in the delusion that rich people deserve to be rich and poor deserve to be poor.
It is such a blatantly corrupted version of what the scripture tells, that only those who themselves are deeply corrupted can say this and make themselves believe this.
But we see so many examples throughout human history, where people did not fall victims to what you believe to be impossible to overcome instincts. Humans are a product of their society just a smuch as their society is a product of them. The scriptures give us guidance how to create a society where we do not succumb to the worst of our traits, but aspire to the best of them.
I totally agree with this and I don’t even believe in a god. Because if a god did exist, he’s still the root of all evil in us since we were made in his image. Wouldn’t be human suffering if humans didn’t exist.
Think again.
I’ve thought about it plenty, thanks.
Why do you think this? Why do you assume these to be given?
Because the same problems reoccur time and again, and we don’t try anything new. You might be able to point to an outlying incident, but that doesn’t change the trend.
There might be a solution in sociology. The same science that shows us voters will vote to harm rivals sooner than they’ll vote to help themselves out. The same science that shows how and why people spend their rent money on microtransactions and bad bets. The same science that shows how a nation go from detaining degenerates to mass execution in a matter of a couple of years.
We might work out a trick to get our school administrators to rethink funding massive contact sports programs rather than school lunches, but for the time being, we don’t have that, and we’re not figuring it out, and then there’s people like you turning to scripture like homeopathy. You might say one person sinning is a choice, but when hundreds of millions behave contrary to their best interests, that’s a flaw in the system.
And that’s before we look at the specific history of how Christianity was repurposed into the pro-America, pro-capitalist, pro-property ideology that has elected officials disparaging dead high-school students.
But feel free to expect miracles in the future, if that’s what you need to do. I’ll base my expectations on the common behavioral trends, not the outlying data points. It’d be nice if I’m pleasantly surprised, but I don’t expect it.
I suppose we could always just pray harder.
I’m sure that’ll work… despite having done nothing to rectify anything in the past.
Where do you get this idea from?
In the scriptures god demands people to fight injustice and opression.
Your god also demanded genocide on more than a few occasions. What has that got to praying cancer away until the cancer kills you?
As for the efficacy of prayer… are you really going to sit here and tell me that praying about issues has ever done a lick of good, compared to working to resolve the issue?
If prayer was effective at anything, don’t you think we’d have solved world peace by now? World hunger? Miracles would be dime a dozen. It’d be the cure for cancer.
Or are you going to suggest we’re just not praying hard enough? (Well I’m not. Even if mythical sky daddy existed, I wouldn’t worship a being that gaslights the fuck out of people like that.)
The scripture doesnt tell people to just pray and sit by idly. It tells them to take action. So of course you dont pray cancer away, you go to a doctor and take proper medical treatment.
You wrote four paragraphs projecting your assumption, when i already said the opposite of that in the comment you replied to.
So do you thank God when the doctor fixes you, or do you thank the human who actually relied on science, and other existing, real philosophies, and sciences, to you know… Actually fix you?
Prayer and God have no place in society. Have trust and faith in your fellow humans, and we may all actually stop hating each other one day.
