The god paradox

174 posts / 0 new
Last post
Cognostic's picture
@ROYISM: OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE

@ROYISM: OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE EQUALLY IGNORANT OF THE QUARAN. If that were the case, then you would have to say God is the sinner and the sin as well. He is the liar and the lie. And that would render the argument that God is good meaningless.

No one is talking about the sin and the sinner. Obviously according to the Quaran, Allah made the sinner. The question is about the nature of god and whether or not he can make a rock so big he can not lift it. Your Response: Allah can not. But obviously the Christian God can. Finally, we are in complete agreement. God is the sinner and the sin and thus we can render him completely meaningless. Or in your view, attribute any bullshit meaning you want to the imaginary made up deity.

ROYISM 's picture
@Cognostic

@Cognostic

You said: "Your Response: Allah can not. But obviously the Christian God can. Finally, we are in complete agreement. "

Read my reply carefully, I said, "God can, but will not."

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ ROYISM

@ ROYISM

How did you find that out? Have a cozy chat over coffee? Did Allah visit you one day? Doesn't your book(s) say don't presume to know the mind of god?

Hmm I see the signs of hubris in you ROYISM...oh as well as all the other stuff we have found out about you....

ROYISM 's picture
@Old man Shouts

@Old man Shouts

You said: How did you find that out? Have a cozy chat over coffee? Did Allah visit you one day? Doesn't your book(s) say don't presume to know the mind of god?

According to the qualities of God as revealed by Allah in the scriptures, He is All-powerful. So he can do anything he wants, like creating that rock. But according to that same scripture, he is also The Wise, and so he will not do stupid things that will compromise his godly attribute, like creating that rock. So, can he? Yes he can. But will he? No he will not.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Royism

@ Royism

Once again more evasion from you.
You said:

Read my reply carefully, I said, "God can, but will not."

I replied: How did you find that out? Have a cozy chat over coffee? Did Allah visit you one day? Doesn't your book(s) say don't presume to know the mind of god?

As usual when cornered, you rat out introducing non sequiturs, evasions and straw men. I never mentioned rocks, scripture being wise; I asked plainly how YOU can evidence you know the mind and will of your god....when your own scriptures tell you that you should not presume to 'know the mind of allah"

Try again.

ROYISM 's picture
@Old Man Shouts

@Old Man Shouts

Here is what you asked me, "Doesn't your book(s) say don't presume to know the mind of god?"

And that's why I showed you what my book says about God. So,, its not my presumption. It's what the book says.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Royism

@ Royism

You said

It's god's will

Yet when asked for evidence, you evade, then produce a fallacious appeal to authority....one can only suppose that like your justification and endorsement of pedophilia you are at a loss for words?

That is the problem when you produce raw opinion out of your arse....

David Killens's picture
I love it when theists make

I love it when theists make all kinds of pronouncements on god's nature. It just displays how much bullshit they can stuff into their mouth. The amusing part is when asked a tough question such as "why do so many children die of cancer?" they mumble "god's will" and look for any exit.

So ROYISM, is it OK for an old man to marry a child?

ROYISM 's picture
@ David Killens

@ David Killens

You said: “I love it when theists make all kinds of pronouncements on god's nature. It just displays how much bullshit they can stuff into their mouth.”

As a Muslim, my understanding of God’s nature is from the Quran and prophetic teachings.

You said: “The amusing part is when asked a tough question such as "why do so many children die of cancer?" they mumble "god's will" and look for any exit.

Is your problem only with children’s cancer? Would it be okay, if this were not there on Earth? Of course not, then you would say, but what about grownups dying of diseases, hunger, war etc? IF those were done away with, then you would say, but still there is such a thing as death, which is bad too. I mean, even the prick of a thorn is a suffering of some kind, and people could have issues with it, right? Therefore, this world should have been created free of any suffering of any kind. Nobody would even catch a cold, no poverty, no pain, nothing.

But imagine, what would be meaning of goodness or morality in this kind of a Utopian world? Because doing good is ultimately about helping someone in suffering. You are good when you feed the hungry, care for the sick, comfort an ailing heart etc. Without suffering, the world would not be a good place, because goodness would be meaningless. The very reason, you are debating about god’s morality is because you have a measure for morality – based on the two binaries of good and bad.

You said: So ROYISM, is it OK for an old man to marry a child?

Oh not again. I thought we just finished a long discussion on that in the previous thread!!! You can simply revisit it to know my position on that.

xenoview's picture
@Royism

@Royism
Is it okay for a man to marry a child? Is it okay for a man to have sex with a child?

ROYISM 's picture
@Xenoview

@Xenoview

You said: “Is it okay for a man to marry a child? Is it okay for a man to have sex with a child?”

If you are asking about our times, it’s not okay!

xenoview's picture
@royism

@royism
So it use to be okay for a man to marry a child? So it use to be okay for a man to have sex with a child?

ROYISM 's picture
@Xenoview

@Xenoview

You said: “So it use to be okay for a man to marry a child? So it use to be okay for a man to have sex with a child?”

Okay, let me repeat it for you here. Islam says that the age of marriage for a girl is from the time she hits puberty. That’s the baseline age. Marriage (sexual union) before that is prohibited. But starting from that point, a girl can marry at any age as is deemed appropriate in a given context.

About 1400 years ago, in a society where there was no schooling or universities, where the average lifespan was abysmally low, where there was a need to raise as many children as possible even to maintain the population as deaths due to disease, plague, war, etc were rampant… the most productive thing for a pubescent girl to do is to raise a family.

However, in our times, those situation have changed. There are a lot more things for a girl to do in order to be a productive citizen. And an early marriage would be a stumbling block for the girl to advance on those fronts. Therefore, it is inappropriate in our times.

xenoview's picture
@royism

@royism
So you're saying if a girl reaches puberty at 10 years old, she can get married? So it use to be okay for a man to marry a young girl and have sex with her? So in your opinion what is the age a girl should be married? Do you agree with the child bride some islamic countries allow?

ROYISM 's picture
@Xenoview

@Xenoview

You said: “So you're saying if a girl reaches puberty at 10 years old, she can get married?”

In today’s context, she shouldn’t get married. Because it would impede her prospects in the world today.

You said: “So it use to be okay for a man to marry a young girl and have sex with her?”

Yes, it was okay back then. For reasons I stated in the earlier post.

You said: So in your opinion what is the age a girl should be married? Do you agree with the child bride some islamic countries allow?in our times.”

No. I don’t agree with the child bride custom in some Islamic countries. That is as a general rule. But it really depends on the specifics of each case.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ David Killens

@ David Killens

But it really depends on the specifics of each case.

Just so we are all on the same page: I asked ROYISM these very specific questions on another thread. Several times. With great reluctance he answered the first question. The others he evades and weaves a smokescreen of equivocation instead of answering with a simple affirmative or denial.

1. Do you think that the marriage of a six year old to a 50 year old man is moral?
Answer "YES"
I think this answer says it all about the conflict that ROYISM finds...he agrees that such a practice is moral, never mind any factors such as power imbalance and the inability of a child to comprehend the enormity of the undertaking.

2. Do you think the sexual penetration of a nine year old by a 50plus year old man is moral? 'Married' or not?
3. Do you think a six year old can give informed consent to sexual acts such as "thighing?"?
4. Do you think a nine year old can give informed, free consent to full penetrative sex with a 50 year old man?
5. Are there any circumstances that you can explain where such acts are ethical and moral?

Simple questions asking for a direct and honest answer. Royism's equivocation and inability to give a clear answer to questions 3 and 4 despite overwhelming medical evidence of the harm such events can cause show his shallow capacity for moral judgement and complete lack of empathy for females who, it seems, can still be 'auctioned off' for parental gain.

I am glad he is so religious and, like Jo, 'just following orders' or I would think he was a complete fucking disgrace to humanity.

David Killens's picture
@ROYISM

@ROYISM

"Without suffering, the world would not be a good place, because goodness would be meaningless."

Utter bollocks.

Without suffering the world would be a much better place.

ROYISM 's picture
@David Killens

@David Killens

You said: “Utter bollocks. Without suffering the world would be a much better place.”

IF there was no suffering, there would be no such as good. And you will have no point of reference for morality. In such a world, goodness or for that matter evil, will have no meaning. That was my argument.

David Killens's picture
And I say that is bullshit.

And I say that is bullshit. You do not need suffering to get to a better place. You can go directly there.

As far as terms of reference, what is zero? It is an abstract construct, yet is the reference point for counting and numbers.

Only in a sick world created by a sick god do you need massive suffering to achieve massive happiness.

ROYISM 's picture
@David Killens

@David Killens

You said: You do not need suffering to get to a better place. You can go directly there.

Without suffering you will not even know what that ‘better place’ is? Today, if you are talking about god’s morality, it’s because you have this moral standard based on the binaries of good and bad… aka suffering.

David Killens's picture
@ROYISM

@ROYISM

"Without suffering you will not even know what that ‘better place’ is"

And I am telling you that this is a failed strategy. Did your father lovingly explain this to you as he beat you mercilessly? This is one of the oldest lines for stupidity.

Why do you beat your head against the wall?

Because it feels real good when I stop.

ROYISM, that archaic method does not work, and your god should know that. it is a failed method that can be worked around by just explaining. But you don't give people much credit, since the religious position is that people should be treated like stupid little children.

ROYISM 's picture
@David Killens

@David Killens
You said: Why do you beat your head against the wall? Because it feels real good when I stop.

You are begging the question. Even to spell out this example, you have to know that beating the head against the wall is ‘BAD’ and stopping it makes you feel “GOOD”. This dichotomy between good and bad is what makes you get a grasp of morality, and lecture about it now. So, if ‘bad’ were not there, there would be no morality.

Tin-Man's picture
@David K. Re: "So ROYISM, is

@David K. Re: "So ROYISM, is it OK for an old man to marry a child?"

Please allow me to save you from the typical evasive reply that is almost certain to follow from our faithful Muslim. Here is what I learned about his particular stance regarding that subject.

1. He is TOTALLY okay and onboard with the rule that allows such practices.

2. He believes it is perfectly fine for a parent to send his/her young child into such an arrangement.

3. He would NOT be okay/comfortable sending his OWN 9 year old daughter into such a situation.

4. He is not comfortable at all with the thought of his own 9 year old daughter having sex with an adult man.

5. However, despite his personal feelings, he claims the only reason he would not be okay with wedding his child off to an old man is because her education is more important.

6. And regardless of ANY of his personal feelings/reservations, if his god commanded him to send his 9 year old daughter to marry a 50+ year old man, he would obey without hesitation.

Hope that helps clear things up a bit.

ROYISM 's picture
@TIn Man

@TIn Man

Please allow me to save you from the typical evasive reply that is almost certain to follow from our faithful Muslim. Here is what I learned about his particular stance regarding that subject.

Absolutely dishonest

xenoview's picture
@royism

@royism
So you're okay with a young girl being married to a man? Would you marry your on daughter to man?

Tin-Man's picture
@ROYISM Re: "Absolutely

@ROYISM Re: "Absolutely dishonest"

Well, dang... *scratching head*... Now I'm confused. So, are you now saying you ARE NOT okay with the Islam rule in the Koran allowing a 9 year old girl to be married and have sex with a 50+ year old man?... Or are you now saying that you ARE okay with the idea of sending your 9 year old daughter into such a situation and comfortable with her having sex with a 50+ year old man? Or is it both?

Oh, and despite what you may have told somebody else, that Koran of yours (just like the Christian bible) is a set of instructions meant to be followed by Man today, yesterday, yester-year, yester-century, tomorrow, and on into the future until the Lord or Allah or whatever fairytale entity decides to return and lay waste to the world as we know it and collect all of the souls of its precious faithful pets to take back to paradise with it.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ TM

@ TM

Absolutely. Correct, as we have all (including all the lurkers) have discovered Royism seems to be incapable of giving clear answers to cogent and confronting questions.

I am going to repost this here to give ROYISM yet another chance to answer unequivocally to the following questions. He is very adroit at ignoring them, and then claiming he has answered...he only clearly answered one...the first one and that in the affirmative.

"Just so we are all on the same page: I asked ROYISM these very specific questions on another thread. Several times. With great reluctance he answered the first question. The others he evades and weaves a smokescreen of equivocation instead of answering with a simple affirmative or denial.

1. Do you think that the marriage of a six year old to a 50 year old man is moral?
Answer "YES"
I think this answer says it all about the conflict that ROYISM finds...he agrees that such a practice is moral, never mind any factors such as power imbalance and the inability of a child to comprehend the enormity of the undertaking.

2. Do you think the sexual penetration of a nine year old by a 50plus year old man is moral? 'Married' or not?
3. Do you think a six year old can give informed consent to sexual acts such as "thighing?"?
4. Do you think a nine year old can give informed, free consent to full penetrative sex with a 50 year old man?
5. Are there any circumstances that you can explain where such acts are ethical and moral?

Simple questions asking for a direct and honest answer. Royism's equivocation and inability to give a clear answer to questions 3 and 4 despite overwhelming medical evidence of the harm such events can cause show his shallow capacity for moral judgement and complete lack of empathy for females who, it seems, can still be 'auctioned off' for parental gain.

I am glad he is so religious and, like Jo, 'just following orders' or I would think he was a complete fucking disgrace to humanity."

ROYISM 's picture
1. Do you think that the

1. Do you think that the marriage of a six year old to a 50 year old man is moral?
Answer "YES”

In that thread, you guys were framing the question as ‘rape’ initially and I unequivocally said that would be immoral (no matter what the context). And then you rephrased it as ‘marriage’ and then I said it would be moral, because marriage means consent, not just of the bride but her family as well. However, I had clearly explained further that depending on the context, this arrangement could be considered right or wrong. And what the contexts are I have explained in this thread too. I don’t think it needs repetition.

You said: “… he agrees that such a practice is moral, never mind any factors such as power imbalance and the inability of a child to comprehend the enormity of the undertaking.”

Which is why any sexual union has to be through marriage, meaning the concerned families will also be involved, and that would ensure that the interests of the bride are protected.

2. Do you think the sexual penetration of a nine year old by a 50plus year old man is moral? 'Married' or not?

Not if it is outside of wedlock. But through marriage, the above answer suffices it.

3. Do you think a six year old can give informed consent to sexual acts such as "thighing?"?

For heavens sake, there is absolutely no proof for this in the Islamic tradition. A six year old is not pubescent and hence is not of marriageable age. Outside of marriage, there is no question of any sexual relationship, whether thighing or otherwise. So, yes, it’s NOT moral.

4. Do you think a nine year old can give informed, free consent to full penetrative sex with a 50 year old man?

If it is through a marriage, where the bride’s consent is helped by the wisdom and discretion of her family and parents… then it’s acceptable.

5. Are there any circumstances that you can explain where such acts are ethical and moral?

As explained a 100 times earlier… a situation like in the medieval age when a pubescent girl has nothing better to do than raise a family… there is nothing unethical in it.

Now, that you have been asking me so many questions, let me ask you a few.

What according to you is the appropriate age of consent?

Let’s say for example, that a 13 year old school girl has sex with her 17 year old boyfriend? Is it morally right or wrong?

Is there any limit on the age difference between the bride and the groom in a marriage? Say for example, would you say an age difference greater than 30 years would not be okay, or something like that?

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Royism

@ Royism

And you waste our time. You were asked straightforward questions.

You evade, procrastinate and avoid the answer.

That shows the level of amorality you espouse.

Simple questions I asked that do not touch on historical or religious history. Simple moral and ethical questions.

Simple questions of morality that your evasions and non sequiturs do not address.

Your religious pants are below your knees. Your amoral outlook is obvious.

You are a slave to your religion, you would sell your daughter for influence, wealth and patronage.

Not one answer directly addressed the questions.

What a sad fucking sack of shit you are.

For the record here are my answers: I hope you let your daughter read our answers and compare them to yours when she has an education....

1. Do you think that the marriage of a six year old to a 50 year old man is moral?
No.
Your answer "Yes" plus some meaningless equivocation.

2. Do you think the sexual penetration of a nine year old by a 50plus year old man is moral? 'Married' or not?
My answer: FUCK NO Your answer: "YES" this is what you wrote:

Not if it is outside of wedlock. But through marriage, the above answer suffices it.

How fucking sick are you? She is NINE YEARS OLD!! Can a nine year old understand marriage? Can a nine year old give full and informed consent to sexual penetration? You obviously think so! !
How do you think she understands the responsibilities of marriage?

3. Do you think a six year old can give informed consent to sexual acts such as "thighing?"?
MY answer : are you fucking kidding> Hell NO!
Your answer: Equivocation and some bull about historical proof of such acts. The question was not historical, it was plain and simple, it was about sexual abuse of a six year old. You fail as a human

4. Do you think a nine year old can give informed, free consent to full penetrative sex with a 50 year old man?
My answer: No.Not ever..
Your answer was YES:

"If it is through a marriage, where the bride’s consent is helped by the wisdom and discretion of her family and parents… then it’s acceptable."

Meaning when her father decides to sell her for power and influence or food because she has no fucking rights. That's a fucking 'yes' you sub human piece of shite. Look up the meaning of "Informed consent" sometime.

5. Are there any circumstances that you can explain where such acts are ethical and moral?
My answer: No. Not ever. They may be forced, bt that is child stealing and rape.

Your answer?

a situation like in the medieval age when a pubescent girl has nothing better to do than raise a family… there is nothing unethical in it.

Nobody said a fucking word about Medieval times except you....so your answer is ..No, you have no fucking excuse for your abhorrent and primitive views...NONE

I will answer your questions to me on another thread, I want this one left so that every member of the forums can see what you have said.

Rest assured if you lived in my jurisdiction you would be reported, and probably lose custody of your children. I would be surprised that your answers were not reported to the authorities to where this forum is hosted. I believe Canada is somewhat intolerant of pedaophiles and their facilitators.

(Edit tags)

ROYISM 's picture
@Old Man Shouts

@Old Man Shouts
You said: “Your answer "Yes" plus some meaningless equivocation.”
That’s because you are expecting a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer for a question that can’t be answered in that fashion. Or you must say that there is one universal moral standard that is applicable for all times.

You said: “How fucking sick are you? She is NINE YEARS OLD!! Can a nine year old understand marriage? Can a nine year old give full and informed consent to sexual penetration? You obviously think so!”

The word ‘informed’ was understood in very different ways in different cultures across the world in different times. There were cultures where the brides learnt about sex from their spouses after marriage, irrespective of age. Secondly, how informed is informed? Is it just the basic understanding of sex, that penetration leads to pregnancy, or is it deeper knowledge including the biology, sociology and psychology of sex?

What I am driving at is that you just can’ have a one-size fit all standard for consent across all times and cultures. You are just speaking from the stand point of our current situation, and you are back-projecting your ideas on to societies far removed from our reality. That’s an extremely reductionist view point.

You said: “The question was not historical, it was plain and simple, it was about sexual abuse of a six year old. You fail as a human”

I had clearly stated that is not acceptable, and established that it’s not backed by any tradition in Islam. I am still waiting for your proof about thighging, in fact I have been waiting for this since our discussion in the previous thread.

You said: “Meaning when her father decides to sell her for power and influence or food because she has no fucking rights.”

Well if you are talking of power, then in a repressive society, a girl, irrespective of her age, can still be persecuted. Abuse of wives is still rampant in many societies, not because the brides are young, but because of the socio-cultural settings. So to mix it up in this discussion related to the age of brides is irrelevant.

You said: “Look up the meaning of "Informed consent" sometime.”

Waiting to hear your universal definition of ‘informed consent’ applicable across all times and spaces.

You said: “Nobody said a fucking word about Medieval times except you”

The very reason you are asking me this question is because ‘Mohammed (PBUH) married Aisha at that age? Are you going to pretend otherwise? And if your question is based on an event that happened in medieval times or perhaps even earlier, then why shouldn’t I put that in perspective.

You said: “I will answer your questions to me on another thread,”

Waiting to hear you.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.