If God sent your child to Hell.

[Polaris]

You must really believe that to be true...because you couldn't possibly have concluded it by means of evidence.  We haven't been down the "survival of the fittest" route in 50k years.....lol. 
-but..by all means, continue to say shitty things about people and cultures you're plainly ignorant of.  Totally legit.

Whine some more...see where it gets you.

The tribal societies of that era and region were very much about survival of the fitest and what you could offer the group. If you were not seen as productive to the group or seen as damaged goods (i.e. raped women, especially raped women with a bastard), then you would be left behind.

[The Grand Nudger]

Okay, if you say so.  

[Faith No More]

Polaris thinks assertions are arguments.

Go, go human lie detector!

[Esquilax]

Obliviousness? I know of that being the Law and it was better than the alternative. That's not saying much with our current societal viewpoint, but it was the best for that era.

Yes: you are oblivious, because I can think of a simple alternative that's miles better than either of the options you're thinking of: have the rapist fund his victim without forcing him to marry her and be in contact with her again. The fact that such an easy solution apparently never occurred to you either means that you're working toward the presupposed conclusion that the bible's solution was the only viable one, or you are oblivious.

It actually wasn't too long ago that a similar viewpoint was common in America...if you knocked up a woman, it was automatically assumed you would marry her regardless of your actual feelings towards her.

And as usual for christians, I have to remind you that two wrongs do not make a right.

[Godscreated]

So let us for a moment imagine God is real, and a theist dies and goes to heaven. Now imagine 30 or so years later, the child of that theist, who ended up being an atheist, dies and gets sent to hell for his non-belief.

From now until the end of time your child, whom you cherished and adored from the moment they were born, whom you would literally give your own life for, will be tortured and tormented in ways that are incomprehensible to the mind. They will never escape, and God will never change his mind, so their suffering will be as eternal as your own afterlife. You will never see your own child again, and you know that every minute of every day, they are in indescribable agony.

My question is...what would theists think of the God who not only let this happen, but specifically planned it as part of his grand scheme for humanity? How would that effect your love for God and your trust in him? I am extremely curious to know.

First off it's the child's decision and through true justice a price has to be payed. I guess you've already seen what some others said when I answered this question before. God will give us an understanding of what truth really is and we will have an understanding, He will also wipe away all the past, why, because there is no need for it in heaven. Read scripture and find the answers, we are not going to see people in heaven as we did here in this life, all is made new.

GC

[henryp]

I do have what we casually think of as sociopathic tendencies.  I don't care about most other people.  I could pretend, I suppose, but I could't make myself care about some random person any more than I could decide to believe in God.  

If tomorrow God came down from the heavens, or wherever he hangs out and said "Just checking in.  I'm real btw.  Try to love eachother,"  I could find value in others through such a being.  

I think the idea of it being good because of some threat from God, rather than his saying people have value is an idea with authority is an important distinction.

As it relates to this topic, though, it's a clear dichotomy in how I behave.  So the idea that "Just be good (according to general sentiment), and it'll all be cool" isn't the greatest situation for people like me.

That's a long-winded way to say, "I'm a selfish prick and only value others if it affects me somehow."

It's honest, though, I'll give you that.

We're all pals here, no reason for lies.  Besides, I'm sure there is some PETA person out there who sees you eating a chicken finger and thinks you're a selfish prick, because they've got even more empathy for things than you.  Of course, they're just overly sensitive weirdos.  It's funny how many people just happen to be living the perfect balance.  That confidence in our own beliefs is a weird thing.  I'm not sure what the purpose of it is.  Not judging, I agree I'm a selfish prick

But the more important moral of my story, is that I wasn't a selfish prick when I was religious.  I had some selfish tendencies, but the illusion of connectedness and intrinsic value of humans a belief in God provided combined with not putting too much thought into it made me a better person.

I desperately wish I could get inside other people's brains to see what they're thinking is.  Do people really care if a bunch of people in Africa starve?  They 'feel' like they do.  But most people aren't exactly taking out a 2nd mortgage to make sure those people get food.  The interesting thing with charity, is you can literally put a number on how much you care.  What do you buy for yourself before people who need the money to live get a cut?  

Every dollar is a choice, really.  That's why rich people don't get into heaven in the story.  Because every dollar you spend could be spent on saving other people's lives.  If you buy 3 mansions first like a Hollywood Philanthropist, that's just saying you care about someone more than a 4th mansion, but less than a 3rd mansion.  But it's not really any different than getting the new Ipad, or eating at a fancy restaurant.

It's like being on the way to the movies, and coming across an overturned bus on fire.  How many of those kids do you have to try and save to be a good person?  Can you save 4 of the 10 and then leave the other 6, go to your movie, and feel good about yourself?  

There's a gap between what people 'feel' and their behavior.  I'm 'honest' in that I view my behavior as the indicator.  And my behavior says I don't give a shit.  

The confusing thing for me was why more people don't wander down this line of reasoning.  But that's where whatever psychological disorder I'm working with comes into play, I think.  The 'feel' portion of my brain does not put up much of a fight, and I that may be where my road diverges.

Sort of like the shades of selfish prick, it's a lot like that with religion.  We both think Religious people are buying into a big pile of made up bullshit.  But I'm PETA, and I think most atheists are still buying into their own made up bullshit.  And I'm sure there is some sociopath murderer who thinks my caring a little about somethings is just a bunch of bullshit as well.

It's interesting stuff.  

[Polaris]

Polaris thinks assertions are arguments.
Go, go human lie detector!

You think your emotions dicate truths. You rely too much on your emotions in discussion.


Some daft guy mentioned that the rapist should fund the women they harmed....with what exactly?

[dyresand]

Polaris thinks assertions are arguments.

Go, go human lie detector!

No no its more like Go, go gadget bullshit detector. 

---

Polaris thinks assertions are arguments.
Go, go human lie detector!

You think your emotions dicate truths. You rely too much on your emotions in discussion.


Some daft guy mentioned that the rapist should fund the women they harmed....with what exactly?

Well it's in your bible..... if a guy back then saw a hot woman he raped her and she had to marry him or else she dies. 
So he is obligated to take care of his wive(s) because back then polygamy was and is still a thing. 

[Polaris]

Polygamy makes sense biologically.

[dyresand]

Polygamy makes sense biologically.

But as it stands now we don't need anymore humans running around on the planet because one day its going to get very uncomfortable for everyone...