CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
I LOVE your debating style.. We either AGREE with you, or we're DINGLE BERRY'S.. But, I don't expect civil decorum from right wingers.. They just spew.
It's not right wingers dressed as vaginas, wearing hijabs, and giving the Islamic call to prayer. The left used to be similar to the current right wing. We moved left. You moved into the abyss where logic and common sense are shouted down, punched in the face, and kicked in the balls all in the name of a belief that believes.... well nothing actually.
If God is the most powerful and omnipotent being, then to oppose Him is? Not very intelligent.
If you are hungry, and there is a chance at getting an all you can eat buffet, then to not take the chance at the buffet is? Not very intelligent.
If God is all powerful and you oppose Him, that is? Not very intelligent
However:
If Satan is the most powerful being, then siding with God is not very intelligent. Given Satan is meaner than God.
If you are hungry, and there is no chance of an all you can eat buffet, holding out for one is not very intelligent.
If there is no afterlife, then structuring the sum of your existence around nothing, isn't a very intelligent existence.
All that being said, your logic tells me that I should side with Satan (just in case), eat actual food rather than potential food (thus starving), and structure the sum of my existence around life rather than an afterlife.
If Satan is meaner than God and atheists side with him, Christians have the moral highground.
If atheists claim Satan is "the most powerful being" they aren't atheists and ARE Satanists(which many "atheists" are according to themselves).
Seeing that God created Satan and is his master, to side with Satan is illogical, and whether there is a god or not, for you to reject the higher prize and willing go for the stool sample by default is... illogical.
God is omnipotent and omniscient benevolence. But he didn't create Satan. Satan is simply omnipotent and omniscient malevolence. They have always co-existed, by definition. You will not find God creating Satan in the bible. What you will find is God talking to Satan when he says "let us create man in our image". This agreement between the two gave us free will, the simultaneous capacity for good and evil. But with God being benevolent, it is more hazardous to oppose Satan. The best bet is to side with Satan until you are on your death bed. Then you should repent. God is forgiving, Satan is not.
Hey, I've got no problem at all with you having faith. Good for you! People can believe whatever they want to believe in. Your faith is YOURS.
My problem is when that person then turns to another with a different view and says since they in turn have a different set of beliefs then they're evil dirty sinners who will burn in hell forever. And my problem is when the faithful kick science out of school and shove religion into it. And my problem is when the faithful want to be heard on a debate website but they routinely ban anyone from talking who doesn't share their faith.
Having faith CAN be smart. But being a d!ck about having faith is dumb.
I understand. I actually went to school with a brontoraptor. He had socks over both hands and clipped onto his sleaves to stop him from touching his junk.
All you Progressives can do is claim all that oppose you are trolls but there are no Progressive trolls LMMFAO ! Change those diapers and drive that car that burns fossil fuel and continue to show what a hypocrite you are LMAO!
The fusion of content from my recent separate debates combined with your single style reveals you are many different avatars on this site. As I suspected anyway.
Yet I remain simply Grenache. Because that's all I need to tie up your hydra of personalities. If that makes me a troll then Brontoraptor should be scared he'll lose his crown.
Yet buffet or starvation really aren't the only choices if you're hungry, so the metaphor fails. If I go along with it, prove those are the only options.
If you simply want to die, then atheism makes sense. If you are truely atheist and actually "want to die" , then the fact you are alive refutes your original claim and makes you... a liar per your own definition.
Atheism equals no belief in god (you like the dictionary so much, where did you get life or death from?)
Theism equals life.
Really? So you don't even have to believe in a particular god? A belief in any god will suffice? That's a new one. So if I believe in Jeff, the god of biscuits I'll have life?
If you simply want to die, then atheism makes sense.
I don't want to die, this is the only life I get.
If you are truely atheist and actually "want to die" , then the fact you are alive refutes your original claim and makes you... a liar per your own definition.
Well it's a good thing I'm an atheist that wants to live.
So list us out our choices of gods, then I'll show you a list of gods who seem to have vanished from history. Nearly the entire human race believes in the God of Abraham.
Yes, any version of theism will provide your psychological hierarchy of needs better than atheism, because doesn't actually provide for any of those needs.
So list us out our choices of gods, then I'll show you a list of gods who seem to have vanished from history.
There are millions of gods worshiped in the present day.
Nearly the entire human race believes in the God of Abraham.
Most recent polls suggest 61.1% believe in the God of Abraham, however nearly half that are Muslims. I'll grant you the majority believe in that god, but that's not nearly the entire human race. Besides, what difference does it make how popular something is? Is that a method of measuring truth?
Yes, any version of theism will provide your psychological hierarchy of needs better than atheism, because doesn't actually provide for any of those needs.
I have no reason to think eternal life exists. There are many things I'd like to be able to do, like telekinesis, but I also don't spend time trying to figure that out either.
Well... eating a mild level of food and dying eternally isn't any more beneficial than starving. You've only delayed the torture, misery and ultimately death.
Well... eating a mild level of food and dying eternally isn't any more beneficial than starving.
Yes, death is an eternal thing. People don't rise from the dead, and eating a "mild level" of food is better than starving. Is this what you do every time you're hungry? You go to a buffet?
You've only delayed the torture, misery and ultimately death.
Dying does not always involve torture or misery. Many people simply die in their sleep, but yes continuing to eat (and live) does delay our ultimate death. No one is disputing we are all going to eventually die, you're simply claiming there is something else afterwards that of course you can't demonstrate to be true.
Not really. I see no reason to believe that the eternity which the religious want is even possible. The Bible screams of being too biased to be true (read - the story of creation).
If I were to play the wager, I'd more probably do it on Hinduism.
Your only option is to die, though. You can either do it by yourself or wait for nature to bring you to the inevitable. There's nothing to eat or starve.
Easy enough. Go on my profile and click on "The Beast is Strong with this one". That satisfies one of your requests.
The second request is met by understanding infinite sets. Within an infinite set, all things that can exist do exist within said set. In our particular set, the most powerful being can exist, thus must exist by default within an infinite set.
The second request is met by understanding infinite sets. Within an infinite set, all things that can exist do exist within said set. In our particular set, the most powerful being can exist, thus must exist by default within an infinite set
Sets don't work like that, and I've already destroyed the ontological argument (you even responded to the debate).
Within an infinite set, all things that can exist do exist within said set. In our particular set, the most powerful being can exist, thus must exist by default within an infinite set.
Prove that it can exist. How do you determine if something can exist? Just because you can keep adding a 1 to any number of any length doesn't mean that applies to everything.
Sure it does. Math does apply to everything. Our reality is of super symmetry, and that is very telling. Our entire reality is described in bits of 1s and 0s.
Math may apply to everything in some way, but that doesn't mean every mathematical rule applies to everything. You still haven't answered my question, how do you prove if something can exist? The ontological argument is garbage so I'm not sure where you're headed with this. You're argument should be able to apply to anything. What about a cows? According to your rule a maximally sized cow can exist on this earth, therefore it does. Where is this cow? Is it as big as Australia? No, it must be bigger. Then where is it?
No one is giving "their own thoughts". Every good debater in human history is familiar with the terminology that supports their claim, and there is little that is "original" about anyone, Atheist or Theist's arguments. They learned the argument somewhere. I made the site because it is easier to go through for you than trying to read a 50,000 word thesis that I copy and paste to this site. If you avoid the site, can I assume you are waving the white flag?
Whether or not it's an original idea is irrelevant. Any good debater will present their argument themselves; they don't rely on someone else to say it for them. You don't need 50,000 words to make a point. If you can't explain it in a more concise manner, you don't understand it well enough.
Not really. Hundreds of fulfilled Bible prophecies takes thousands whether you understand it or not. That's why I created the site. If you are scared to look....
Nope, just can't be bothered. Too many prophecies in the Bible were not fulfilled, many written after the fact, or some were just vague enough to be believed as actual prophecy.
You're referring to the end of the world prophecies? They're incredibly vague and considering there has never been a time in human history in which there has been no war, it's quite believable there would be war at the end times. The problem is it was also stated the end would come during the apostles lifetime, and clearly that didn't happen either.
A baseless claim of when things were written would be pointless nevertheless.
It's not baseless. Take the destruction of the Temple for example. The temple was destroyed in 70AD. Most scholars agree Mark was either written the same year or some time after (up to 15 years after the fact). That's hardly prophecy. How about I make a prediction? I predict Trump will order 59 tomahawk missiles to be fired in response to the gas attacks. Am I a prophet now?
Then it should be easy. Show us any single group in human history that matches the full description.
There is no such group that matches all of it, but it's easy to take current events that have been occurring for a long time and guess what the future might hold.
I noticed you left off "global Christianity with an immediate great apostacy from the faith.
My mistake. First define "global Christianity". Only about 30% of the world claims to be Christian and is declining. The prophecy is that after Christianity is no longer believed that's when the end times will come? So once no one cares what the prophecy says it'll occur? How convenient and laughable.
It said you'd say something like that too. (2 Peter 3:3)
There is a group that matches my entire description, and I didn't list even the half of it. And it's statistically impossible to match every single trait.
Nope it's not bogus. It's all right there in the Bible. I've studied it for decades.
You'll have to look on my page if you want to see who. I'll give you a hint. The children of Ishmael. They are taking over just like the Bible declared, and you will have to submit to them or lose your life. I probably won't be around to guide you once the really bad stuff starts happening. So I provided you a link to my site so that you will know what is happening.
Nope it's not bogus. It's all right there in the Bible.
It's bogus because it's not hard to guess any of it. A child could do the same.
You'll have to look on my page if you want to see who.
Nope, if you want me to care, you'll have to put it here.
I'll give you a hint. The children of Ishmael.
So, no one? It's been refuted that Arabs are descendants, so it can't be them and no one else has made the claim.
They are taking over just like the Bible declared, and you will have to submit to them or lose your life.
The Muslims? They're the group that's been quickly increasing in numbers. but again, there's no reason to believe Mohammed was a descendant of Ishmael.
If it were easy to guess, people wouldn't be claiming the world had lost its mind. They would just calmly assume that our world's current condition is normal. Actually the odds of guessing everything on my site is impossible and actually illogical. To guess that the gospel would go worldwide then suddenly drop off at a time when Damascus is reduced to rubble isn't an easy call in any way. There's almost no logical way to come to that as your prediction.
Many of us do say the world's current condition is normal. The liberals that seem to be losing their minds don't speak for the entire world; they don't even speak for the entire US.
Actually the odds of guessing everything on my site is impossible and actually illogical.
I sure hope whatever crap you have on your site is better than what you presented here then, because like I've said, what you chose to use as an argument was garbage that could have been guessed by a child.
Why would a child guess that Damascus would be leveled after the great apostacy from the faith? Why would anyone? To say that the religion would go global, then do a quick 180, isn't something a child nor an adult would guess. If a religion was gaining steam like a freight train, it wouldn't be logical to guess it would then suddenly fall from power suddenly, and how would that benefit your religion? You would guess what Muhammed did - That your religion would take over the world. And if the Bible is correct, Islam will take over the entire world, making the Bible and Muhammad both correct. And Islam is looking for the Mahdi (the one world Islamic messiah) to have a showdown with "the king of kings". Sound familiar only in reverse?
He(Muhammad) says he was in the Quran, Muslims say he was, they provide the family tree, and he is from the part of the Middle East that Ishmael settled in.
But that doesn't make it true. I can claim to be a descendant of George Washington, provide a family tree and be from the same place he was from, but that doesn't make it true either.
If you match 99 of 100 traits of someone, you don't need to show Ishmael on tape birthing kids birthing kids birthing kids. That is the only detail that cannot be demonstrably proven in regards to the beast system. And Islam claims the 100th detail to be true, so they fulfill it with no help from us but from their own accord. That's what's interesting about Bible prophecy. It's usually our opposition who must fulfill them on their own.
What traits are you referring to? Nowadays you either need DNA or a verifiable family tree. Clearly we have no DNA for Muhammad or Ishmael, and Muhammad's family tree doesn't exist all the way back to Ishmael.
Islam demonstrably matches every single trait of the beast system.
If I described 100 traits of something and you could verify that 99 of them belonged to something, getting ocd about the 1 you cannot 100% prove but looks to be true isn't neccessary. You know it's the thing being described.
Islam demonstrably matches every single trait of the beast system.
So this "system" you seem to claim is your own creation is what you're referring to? I can make my own arbitrary list of traits and make sure all of them match whatever claim I want to make.
It is describing an anti Christ religious system in the end times. Islam is antichrist per Biblical definition. The Quran denies Jesus is the "Son of God" numerous times in the Quran.
Revelation gives us clues as to what to look for.
-The Beast of the Earth that marks foreheads(a term in the Bible). Muslims look for the Beast of the Earth to mark their foreheads.
-Bows to an image
-Beheads Christians
-Genocides Christians
-Opposes the Son of God
-"The Antichrist" (The Islamic Mahdi matches tit for tat. Muslims literally claim that Revelation predicted them in Revelation because it matches so well. Only they think of it as a good thing.
-"666" the number of its name"
666 is a number in Greek and a name creed in Arabic meaning "Allah".
Frankly I don't care what it is. You cherry picked certain prophecies from the Bible and made your own system out of it. Anyone can do that. You're nothing special.
Not actually. Islam literally claims to be the beast system of Revelation, only they see it as a positive thing rather than worship of the devil. I've debated many Muslims on this very topic and know their claims.
Not according to the Bible(Per covenant with Abraham concerning Isaac and Ishmael--God rejected Ishmael and his desendents--and the New Testament's definition of "antichrist"), and the beast system emmulates God in Revelation. That's why Christ and the Antichrist are both depicted as riders on a white horse.
It never calls them by name because they didn't exist yet
That shouldn't stop a true prophecy.
But it described them before they existed.
No, it doesn't. It refers to descendants of Ishmael, which again can't be proven that Muhammad is from the same line. The can claim whatever they want, but that doesn't make it true.
It describes them so well that they themselves are sure it is them.
You don't know if Muhammad came from Ishmael or not. What you do know is they lived in the same area, and Ishmael fathered all of the tribes in that given area. You also know the testimony of Islam that he is their father. They would know better than us, and that is their claim.
It describes them so well that they themselves are sure it is them.
You could also argue the religion was designed around the prophecy which was already written down. If I write something down and have someone else make it happen, does that make me a prophet?
Nope. Muhammad was illiterate and he had no access to Christian doctrine. And even if you were correct, it would still fulfill prophecy. It wouldn't be God's fault if Islam copied in order to become the beast religion. It would simply show his power to know and affect the future.
It's pretty simple logic to me. Islam didn't have to manifest and match the prophecies. The gospel could have easily been snuffed out early as a persecuted and hated minority. But... it happened in real life. Islam does exist and does match. And the gospel did survive the martyrdom period and then flourished. Wanna get saved?
That's not how it works, but building faith has to start somewhere. A good starting place is prayer and honesty. He'll help you. You can pray for faith. You can pray for direction. You can pray for anything you need or whatever you think might help. You don't start out as Billy Graham. You start wherever you are at and go from there.
Had the faith once, and realized after 30 years it was all a sham. No reason to ever go back and the god of the Bible is nothing worthy of worship (he's a dick).
Uh huh. I thought you'd "read the entire Bible". If that were true, you'd know God's wrath was brought on those commiting sickening acts. Example? The Canaanites and Baal worshipers were destroyed by God. They also were cutting and mutilating their children and themselves and sacrificing babies to the devil by slowly cooking them alive. I know. It doesn't make it to the Atheist apologetics sites. I've seen every one of them imaginable. They use quote mines, actual false information, and leave out context. I've witnessed it a million times. Example: They'll say "God condones rape" and put Deuteronomy as the source. Nope. They leave out: "But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die." (Deuteronomy 22:25) and "Do nothing to the woman; she has committed no sin deserving death." (Deuteronomy 22:26) , and if you call them out for it in debates, they just snicker, and scurry off, knowing they can't penetrate or move you because they serve their father and do as their father commands.
The point? You drank the koolaid... and the roots were plucked up by the evil one.
If that were true, you'd know God's wrath was brought on those commiting sickening acts.
No, from reading it I realized how bogus the entire thing is and should have started with, "Once upon a time..."
They'll say "God condones rape" and put Deuteronomy as the source. Nope. They leave out: "But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die."
Doesn't change the fact that he condones rape of women who are not betrothed (don't just stop reading after verse 26 because it gets uncomfortable).
I think it's a safe bet that I've read the entire Bible more than once, seeing that I've been debating religion for 20 years as is demonstrated on my site that has my old debates. I don't debate Muslims and Jews because I'm not fully versed in Christian, Jewish, and Islamic eschatology. I debate them because I am.
To say Arabs "aren't descendents" is illogical. Everyone descended from someone else. Ishmael was the father of the 12 tribes of Ishmaelites in the Bible.
3)It doesn't matter because my site covers end times prophecy. Semantical prophecies of ancient events are meaningless. I Cover things predicted in the end of the world and they are all happening in front of our eyes.
1)There are major and minor prophecies. They have different roles, so you are mixing oil and water frustrated that it doesn't mix how you want. And you are using it as an ad hominem tactic to avoid having to attack my argument.
2)You're still making blind, unprovable claims. No one knows its write date, thus you are splattering hoping something will stick and doing it on your blind faith. And you are contradicting non Christian sources as well. Even if your claim was correct (and it isn't) the apostle claimed the propecy was made nearly 40 years previous by mouth.
3)English versions of the Bible are not "the perfect word of God". They are translations and we don't read Hebrew or Greek.
4)It's meaningless because you are making guesses as the atheist apologetics sites told you to do and hope it sticks. I've read about every Atheist site imaginable. They quote mine and make up concepts. They're easy to debunk.
5)It is convenient. It tells you a plethera of things that will happen suddenly at a point in history. It told us Damascus would be destroyed once the gospel went to every nation and the apostacy began to manifest. And then many other things that I have listed all happen at the same point in history. It even told us what atheists would say, how they would act, and what their claims would be, all of which you have fulfilled in this one single debate in your dialogue with me.
1)There are major and minor prophecies. They have different roles, so you are mixing oil and water frustrated that it doesn't mix how you want.
So if your god couldn't even get the minor ones right, why would anyone believe he'd get the major ones correct?
2)You're still making blind, unprovable claims. No one knows its write date, thus you are splattering hoping something will stick and doing it on your blind faith.
Not unprovable. People who have dedicated their lives to studying the original manuscripts have shown this to be true. Just because you don't understand it doesn't make them wrong.
3)English versions of the Bible are not "the perfect word of God". They are translations and we don't read Hebrew or Greek.
I've never made a claim specifically about the English versions. Don't accuse me of something because your argument doesn't hold up.
4)It's meaningless because you are making guesses as the atheist apologetics sites told you to do and hope it sticks.
I actually don't frequent such sites, but even if I am saying the same things, how am I wrong?
They quote mine
BS
5)It is convenient. It tells you a plethera of things that will happen suddenly at a point in history.
Which is also BS. If they don't occur in your lifetime, well then I guess it'll happen in someone else's. The same can be said of any future prophecy. I can make the claim aliens will come from a planet 10,000 light years from here someday. Who's to prove otherwise? Sure the claim might be precise, but since the details about when it will actually occur are vague, no one can really refute it.
The temple prophecy is irrelevant. I don't need it. The prophecy you are talking about was made by Jesus in 30-33 AD. The temple was destroyed in 70 AD by the Romans.
Whether you need it or not is irrelevant; it's in the Bible, was written after the fact in turn making it just a story. The story is that Jesus said it sometime between 30-33 AD, however it wasn't actually written until 70 or later. Here's another prophecy. In 1903, Tom, a butcher from Brooklyn, said an atomic bomb would be dropped in Hiroshima in 1945.
It doesn't matter because I don't use or need that prophecy, and you are blindly taking a shot in the dark. No one knows the exact date that it was written on paper.
No one knows the exact date, but it is largely agreed it was not written prior to the year 70, and again, I don't care if you don't need the prophecy; fact is it is claimed to be a prophecy made by the son of God and written in the perfect word of God. If that were the case, it shouldn't have been written after the fact.
I don't cover vague prophecies on the site, and I put no focus on"wars and rumors of wars" on the site. I pick the ones that are demonstrably provably true.
It's video of James Gates(ex Science adviser to the President) telling Neil DeGrasse Tyson that there are computer codes writ into the fabric of the cosmos. It's a particular code called Hammin's code, or duel block self error correcting code. The Big Bang did not randomly spew out computer code. Someone put it there.
Sure we don't understand it but it still exists and is right there in reality. We don't fully understand gravity, but its effects are still there just like the effects of the codes.
And the only honest answer can be, "we don't know". There was once a time we attributed lightning to a god because we didn't understand it, but now we do. Lack of understanding is not evidence for anything.
Maybe, just maybe it's better to 'hedge your bets' and not completely rule out the possibility of an all powerful superior intelligence while you pursue your personal dogma.
The dedicated disciples of religious faith are taught to accept a humble and subservient role in life and this limiting faith leaves the way open for the ambitious and unscrupulous to be the rulers of the world.
Ahh yes, let's waste hours, days, weeks, months and years of our precious time on the slim chance that you might be right.
Why not start digging your nuclear bomb shelter while you're at it since there's a chance that nuclear war might happen in your lifetime and it's better to take the chance than to be unprepared.
Re-read your argument and you might be able to come to the same realization as myself; That it makes absolutely no logical sense.
Still wondering if you're a troll or just an idiot.
As has been said by many other debaters already, this tired argument has been dealt with countless times already, so I will make only two points. Firstly, a truly omnipotent God would know the different between those who genuinely believed in him and those who only had faith to fulfill an intellectual wager, and would tend to look rather negatively on the latter. Secondly, there exist a plethora of different religions, which believe in different gods and whose truth claims are, for the most part, mutually exclusive, meaning that the "wager" in question would necessarily not be, as some people think, simply between believing in God or not believing in him, but would rather be between believing, or not believing, in one or more of thousands of different gods, with the wrong choice potentially carrying the risk of eternal punishment. This all, of course, makes the "wager" in question far more complex as its proponents present it.
Not really. Humans are inherently illogical animals (with the capacity to learn it, admittedly), so you can force yourself to believe something, using techniques like repetition, without being too convinced by it.
That's somewhat similar to how lifelong religious people (or ex-atheists, if such a thing is) acquire their faith.
This much I can give you, but logic does not necessarily relate to belief or being convinced of anything.
so you can force yourself to believe something, using techniques like repetition, without being too convinced by it.
That's somewhat similar to how lifelong religious people (or ex-atheists, if such a thing is) acquire their faith.
Here's where I disagree. Most lifelong religious people were indoctrinated into their religion and children of course are highly susceptible to believing anything without proof (faith like a child). Ex-atheists (yes, they do exist) will have likely become convinced by something, even if it's illogical to do so. If you're not convinced of a position, how can you truly believe it? Even if you profess your belief, if you're truly not convinced and a god really does exist, do you really think this god would be fooled? Until I became an atheist, I was fully convinced the Bible was the true word of God. Since I no longer am, how could I believe it to be true?
Atheists can "indoctrinate" their children and do. And if there is a creator(which is possible), that would actually make the Atheist child the brainwashed child.
Google arguments against Pascal's wager. You aren't original. I cam bring the arguments to you if you would ever admit that you understood anything I have told you.
But what if Islam is right? There's an all powerful diety there that you are opposing, and you can apply the exact same argument to yourself. So that's different because...
Interesting. There's a difference between members of ISIS and followers of Islam, right? Most supporters of Islam are not also supporters of ISIS.
But am I pro-ISIS militant? I don't know. They're still people, and most of them are in truly awful circumstances. That obviously doesn't justify their despicable actions, but, it's possible to understand. And I don't think we should dismiss anyone as irredeemable or undeserving of humanity.
Not really. ISIS is doing exactly what Muhammad commanded them to do in the Quran. They didn't just make up burning people alive, drowning them, beheading them
and torturing them. And all Muslims adhere to Muhammad as being infallable... and he was a psychopath.
Not really. ISIS is doing exactly what Muhammad commanded them to do in the Quran. They didn't just make up burning people alive, drowning them, beheading them
and torturing them.
Well, if that's the case, a majority of Muslims aren't 'real Muslims' then and aren't deserving of your generalizations.
And all Muslims adhere to Muhammad as being infallable... and he was a psychopath.
Have you ever talked with a Muslim about this? Because... no.
.
Also, what do you think of Jews? The Torah commands lots of stoning, murder, execution, etc, and they don't do it. Do you shame all Jews?
They are real Muslims. The first step of jihad is literally to bring in the trojan horse of seemingly "peaceful" Muslims. Then they step up the heat according to? The plethera of ex-Muslims trying to warn the West right now.
The Jews were given new commands the closer they got to the New Testament. Muslims have the same commands. Muhammad was a psychopath because he did psychopathic things in the Quran like burning children alive and taking a 6 year old wife named Aisha.
Nowhere in Judaism does it validate beating your wife, torturing people, or being a pedophile. Islam does.
The Jews were given new commands the closer they got to the New Testament.
I'm sorry, what? God is timeless. Why would he need to even correct himself at all? Are you saying that the God of the bible and torah didn't say that we should execute gay people?
Nowhere in Judaism does it validate beating your wife, torturing people, or being a pedophile. Islam does.
I don't know the Qaran that well. Care to throw in a quote or something?
----Are you saying that the God of the bible and torah didn't say that we should execute gay people?-----
These particular gay people were sacrificing humans to the devil by burning them alive and were involved in group rapes... I guess a good god just... lets it happen. Of course then Atheists would go after him for that. That's probably why He couldn't care less what militant atheists say.
These particular gay people were sacrificing humans to the devil by burning them alive and were involved in group rapes...
First of all, evidence?
Secondly, that's not a reason to say execute people for being gay. If that's wrong, then god should say "don't sacrifice humans to the devil or burn them alive or gang rape them." It has nothing to do with being gay.
I guess a good god just... lets it happen.
He does. The God of your bible does nothing about it.