I am about to ask a serious but utterly reprehensible question

[The Industrial Atheist]

Rape isn't a sin in the Old Testament in some cases. 

Where?

I know there is a scripture where Moses ordered that everybody but the virgin girls in a Canaanite city be killed. The virgins were to be kept for their "own uses."
If I believed in god I could say Moses didn't have god's backing, but according to OT Law a rapist could just pay a raped woman's daddy and then he has a new sex slave, I
mean wife.

[Astonished]

Where?

I know there is a scripture where Moses ordered that everybody but the virgin girls in a Canaanite city be killed. The virgins were to be kept for their "own uses."
If I believed in god I could say Moses didn't have god's backing, but according to OT Law a rapist could just pay a raped woman's daddy and then he has a new sex slave, I
mean wife.

No, you were right the first time.

[Faith No More]

The whole "Age of Accountability" thing just opens up a new can of worms anyway. I mean, shouldn't Christians be out murdering every innocent child before they reach that age to make sure they don't end up in hell?

They're so against abortion but the aborted fetuses get to go to heaven. Shouldn't they be putting an end to them in the womb in case they grow up to be a filthy heathen?

Besides, all you have to do is tell the J-man that you're really sorry, and it's all good. You get to go, too, dead babies and all!

[Astonished]

The whole "Age of Accountability" thing just opens up a new can of worms anyway.  I mean, shouldn't Christians be out murdering every innocent child before they reach that age to make sure they don't end up in hell?

They're so against abortion but the aborted fetuses get to go to heaven.  Shouldn't they be putting an end to them in the womb in case they grow up to be a filthy heathen?

Besides, all you have to do is tell the J-man that you're really sorry, and it's all good.  You get to go, too, dead babies and all!

Right. When you appeal to faith (irrationality), you can literally justify anything. It's great to be able to throw off your responsibilities (or pretend you are) and not be accountable for your actions. This is why anyone who still claims religion is in any way related to morality, let alone the source or that it's a necessary component, should not be taken seriously about anything.

[robvalue]

How can it not be evil for God to torture someone endlessly without hope of redemption?

Why should I hold God to a lower standard of morality than I would expect from a human?

When judging morality, I take into account knowledge and capability. If someone doesn't know very much and isn't very capable, I don't expect a lot of them. If someone tortures an animal but they genuinely don't understand that the animal is in pain, or aren't capable of caring about that, then I hold them to a lower standard. But God has the greatest knowledge of how bad the suffering really is, apparently loves everyone so should really care about it, and has infinite power to go about things in any other way than this. So fuck him, he is judged to be the most evil thing I can possibly imagine.

If you think hell exists, and you worship its creator, you are worshipping an evil tyrant.

[CWoods]

I get where you're coming from with this. Honestly, the only difference I've ever seen is what their god says they deserve. The only reason they don't believe people deserve to be raped is because their book doesn't say that. If it did, they would jump to that just as easily.

Of course, they always seem to say that it's not them making the judgement; it's their god. They just happen to worship that god anyway. Even if I did believe that a god existed, I wouldn't have anything to do with anyone who made that kind of judgement. It's sick.

But the Bible implies it's OK to rape.  
In Numbers 31 (and other passages) the Israelites were allowed to take female captives from nations they conquered. 
Apologists say that they were not taken to be raped, but why else would they "take" captured females?
We know from our own times, that females in war situations are often raped.

[robvalue]

Do apologists suggest this group of people who murdered whole cities including babies based on voices in their heads would have moral hangups about raping their new acquisitions? What a dishonest load of crap apologetics is.

[Ben Davis]

For those who argue against objective morality, there isn’t really a problem (how is rape wrong under a subjective morality) However; that is a different subject; and I’ll assume objective morality in the answer.

Wrong. There's nothing wrong with rape under an 'objective' morality if the source says that it's moral. For example, in the Old Testament when God 'gives' the women of a conquered tribe to his chosen people, the lack of consent is explicit consequently any sex is rape. However in modern, secular, subjective moralities, expression of the rights to self-determination and bodily autonomy are explicit in describing the immorality of rape because there is no consent. You are completely wrong on this point.

I think that there are a couple of aspects to your question.  The first has to do with why something is wrong.   In the case of rape, I think that this has more to do with the why; rather than the what is occurring.   C.S. Lewis made the distinction of intentions when discussing morality, rather than the outcome.  He stated, that we are angry with the person, who attempts to trip us up, yet fails.  But not angry with the person who trips us by accident; even when the result is injury. There may initially be some emotion from the injury or embarrassment, but I think that for a rational person, this should subside.    Now from the principle in your example, the second case is “far worse” in result, so shouldn’t we be able to compare them?  I think that the answer is no, because the intentions do make a difference.   In the case of rape, the motivations are selfish, and set themselves on something that God has set apart to be Holy.

Bad analogy. Rape is defined by the outcome and attempted rape is also a crime. I'm also keen to understand how you could 'accidentally' rape someone. Please, do tell...

The second aspect, is that I think you are working from a pop culture caricature of hell.  A Greek Orthodox would describe hell and the torment therein; as a result of separation from God.    I do agree with this view, but also think that some can take it too far (making it purely emotional and  self-inflicted), and I believe ignoring some parts of scripture.  While I believe that most of the descriptions of hell in the Bible are symbolic; they still represent that which they are symbolizing.  What the Bible describes is the consequences of sin, and the result of separation from God.  

Well, here's the bible contradicting itself again. Jesus makes it very clear that hell is a physical place where people are tortured with fire. There's no punishment in being separated from something that you were already separated from and that's what hell's all about, isn't it? Divine retribution?

So the answer is no; I wouldn’t agree with what you proposed, or do anything like that.  I don’t think that it is an equivalent comparison, nor accurate of the Biblical description.

Well, it's great that you wouldn't but you have to acknowledge that the bible endorses rape and doesn't classify it as immoral unless it occurs outside of wedlock. Raping your wife, whatever age she is, seems to be a common occurrence in the bible. Whether any christian would? Well, have you seen some of the insults that christians throw at atheists, sometimes actually threatening rape? Yes, I know they're the nutters but they're christians none-the-less.

[SteveII]

Rank Bullshit.   "For all have sinned and fallen short".  A christian might want to tell their children the truth, rather than wishy washy cafeteria christianity.  


Calvin told us that non-elect children are damned.  The catholic church has long maintained that a child could be damned.  "Sin" has nothing to do with an "age of accountability".  

You're confusing your faith based positions with vastly improved secular law, lol.

That was Calvin's opinion. Most denominations (including most Calvinist leaning ones) believe that children are not judged until they are reach a point where God judges they understand. 

Your "For all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God" quote is correct. You are simply describing a state. It is not just any sin that sends you to hell, it is the rejection of God that sends you to hell. The "age of accountability" goes hand in hand with the answer to the question about what if a person never hears about Jesus and his death/resurrection?  God will judge him/her based on their response of what he has made know to them. 

I am not Catholic but would like to know the basis for your "child could be damned" assertion.

---

Why would any Christian tell a child he/she is a terrible sinner and deserving of an eternity of fiery torment? No Christian denomination that I know of believes that that child is accountable for their sins until some "age of accountability" where they can understand such things. Only God could know when a person is to be culpable for their sins. In some cases, a person's mental disabilities might prevent that from happening their whole life. 

This has got to be the biggest lie out of this whole thread. And you know it. According to the abrahamic god, one can't enter into the kingdom of heaven unless he is "born again". Meaning, when you're born the "first" time, you are born with sin. But please, feel free to sugarcoat that bullshit all you like just so you christians have an excuse to feel better about verbally abusing your kids with threats of being sent to hell by an entity that just doesn't exist at all.

Christians are well known for filling their kids with all sorts of glossed over stories about the atrocities committed by their god. They just like to make them sound pretty. See Noah's ark for a perfect example of how christians make genocide, committed by their very own god, appealing to small children. And if you think that there isn't a christian denomination out there that hasn't done this very thing with Noah's ark, then you, good sir, are full of shit.

I can full well remember (back when I still believed in this non-sense) attending a non-denominational church one time and inquiring about a baptism service for my then 8 year old daughter. She was asked a series of questions and had to state that she believes that "the lord jesus christ is my personal savior and died to save me from my sins". Now I ask you - what the actual fuck has an EIGHT YEAR OLD CHILD done that was so damned horrible that she needed a personal savior to save her from?

I'll answer that for you - It's nothing. Nothing at all. Because she was 8 and innocent and good and really, had I woken up sooner, the only thing she would have needed saving from was the non-sense she was being fed from a pastor who got uncomfortable when I started asking some questions of my own.

Christians tell their kids all sorts of things that are bullshit just to indoctrinate them into brainwashed thinking that a magical sky daddy loves them but.... is going to send them to hell unless they give him all of their unconditional love and always put him first. Fuck that. I can't see you - I ain't putting you first. Period. You fail to show up during crucial times in my life where people have told me you'd actually be there, but you fail miserably in that regard. You watch people starve to death when you could easily provide mana from heaven, yet you fail. You watch people dying of disease you could so, in your omni-everything, abolish, yet you fail. You get piled into the "things I don't give two fucks about" section of my life. And I can sleep at night knowing I don't have to worry about some stupid imaginary deity sending me to some imaginary hell because I refuse to drink their kool-aid.

I'm just telling you what most Christians denominations believe. Sorry it does not fit into your narrative of what is wrong with Christianity. 

Your 8 year old baptism example does not make your point. Baptism is an public affirmation of salvation. Of course the question will be does she believe Jesus is her personal savior and died of her sins--you just defined being a Christian. If you didn't think she understood such a thing, she had no business the subject of believer's baptism.

[Drich]

Listen, jackass, you've already proven YOU don't know what the fuck is in your own holy book (big surprise)

Then please show me book chapter and verse where anyone says humanity/the unsaved will burn forever.

I can give you 1/2 a dozen places where Jesus Himself tell us Hell is our second death, it is the place where God destroys souls, we are sent there to be 'consumed' by hell fire.
Not one does Christ tell us we are to burn forever, that is the fate of Satan.

and since it's all down to interpretation anyway, don't act like you've got the fucking truth that no one else does

That's my point sport. a straight reading makes Hell your second death, your Spiritual death. It takes 'interpretation' to change that to forever torment.

(pot calling the silverware black with the self-righteous libel, classic projection of your own faults as expected).

Actually no. My Righteousness comes from the bible. Yours/the OP does not it comes from a community of individuals or rather a community of "self."

Do you understand? there is only the righteousness of God and our own version or SELF Righteousness. Mine is the righteousness of God.

The way people interpret it informs what they do to their children and THAT is the god damn problem, not whether any of it is true or not, so you've missed the point (shocking) entirely and are just making yourself look like a bigger idiot.

For some this is true, but how is this any different than how one of you (the self righteous without God) Warps the minds of your children when you teach them of your morality and the dangers of becoming one of it's boogey men?

The contradictions in the book and lack of clarity and need for subjective interpretation aside,

Holy crap dude can I get a period from you every now and again?
Here's the thing sport, I am beating you over the head with a straight forward off the page reading, of Jesus' own description of Hell.
The only time one need a 'specialty reading' is one is compiling a doctrine from several different points of the bible. I am not teaching you a 'church doctrine' I am simply pointing out what Christ had to directly say about Hell which is indeed in conflict with how most religious people view Hell. Why because like you they do not read their bibles for themselves but read through church doctrine, and the problem that creates is that one does not know for himself which is true.

I promise you, You Can Read Straight through and Get 80% of what is being communicated if you simply take what is off page for face value. The problem is take what you will take away does fly in the face of most religions. So then you have a choice to make... Follow the God of the bible or the gods of religion.

you seem to have had part of your brain removed to miss that it doesn't matter what salvation does, nothing removes that impurity, it's just a mercy extended that we don't deserve, so we're still tainted and have no value, a proposition which makes absolutely no sense (not a logical fallacy, just a typical completely backward iron age myth).

Again book Chapter and verse please.
Jesus Christ Paid a very High Price for our salvation, which denotes or suggests a great value, even if this valuable gift is simply given to us. If I give you a 2017 BMX X5 M5 does it mean what I gave you has no value? IF I give you a 75 or 80K car doesn't that also mean I see your worth equal to or greater than what was given/sacrificed?

Now let's say we are in a fox hole together and in comes a grenade, and I jump on it to protect you. What does that say? It says I value your life, over my own. Christ Himself said that is the Greatest expression of Love one man can show another. (Is to give his life for another) John in Chapter three of his epistle said God so loved all of us, that He gave us His son... Then the Son Love us to Give Himself... Through all of these hands This love is passed, so then how can you say there is no value to the one who receives?

And yes the sin you committed has indeed been completely atoned for. And yes you are still a sinner, but so what? Do you not understand the nature of salvation? It is not a last chance, but a measure God put in place so He can live with those who can not earn a live with Him.

So lay a guilt trip on a kid, paint the image of hell in their minds, and keep them feeling worthless because of it, never fucking mind that there's a loophole, that doesn't mean you're worthy, it means there's an undeserved hand being extended and you'll still spend eternity as a lowly worm being trod upon by self-righteous tyrants who need constant colonic irrigations and like to employ human lips for the task.

I'm sorry but you are describing a pretty stupid kid. Is he like 4? I mean seriously to me this conversation is not something a 4year old need to be completely burdened with, least he be made to implode. I'm thinking this is a conversation a 12 or 13 year old needs to have and understand. Now unless this little fragile snow flake is so self absorbed in his own self worth (which if he is needs this reality check) he should be able to work out what I just told you.

That yes WE Are All Sinners All the time and there is nothing anyone can do about it outside what God did. Which means God knows we are all sinners all the time as well. Then that would mean there is NO FRIGGEN EXPECTATION OF PERFECTION, and if that is the case then this kid shouldn't have a problem be labeled a sinner.
You know unless he is of a single mind.
Example:
unga bunga, me no like being called sinner.

Unga Bunga Sinner Bad.. Dat Mean me bad! Unga Bunga! Unga Bunga OO OO ME NOT BAD!!! ME Good guy! Dis Mean You Only Tell Me good Things dat make ears tickle when you say them!! SAY ONLY GOOD THING!!

Alternatively if the kid is not retarded or self absorbed he should be able to work out:
1) All have sinned and fallen short the glory of God.
2)This does not matter because Jesus offers atonement for all who simply believe.
3)That means being labeled a sinner simply pushes one to accept atonement for sin.
4)once we are 'saved' we are free from the law as a means to define our righteousness.