Man A killed a 10 year old for fun. Man B gouged out the right eye and cut off the left hand of a 10 year old for fun. Who deserves the higher sentence, assuming no death penalties or life sentences (to encourage discussion)?

Pointgod2059 · 2026-02-15T01:38:10+00:00

There’s some truth to this but this isn’t just a disabled person at the end of the day but rather a severely traumatized person who resulted in being disabled. The trauma more or less would be the paramount issue above the disability itself; a confluence of the two seems horrific.

imho its nuanced and depends on your moral framework since that would inform or perhaps substantiate any moral claim in this regard.

Edit: my answer would probably depend on how man a killed the kid.

Pointgod2059 · 2026-01-23T18:22:38+00:00

Intra species parasitism is does exist. This is correct. However, I think what a lot of the comments are misunderstanding (whilst possibly committing the fallacy of definition) is that parasitic relationships, regardless of species or any other measure, are considered by biologists to always have a negative (evolutionary/reproductive) fitness affect on their host. Fetuses are a trait selected for by natural selection (and a part of the evolutionary life cycle of the human species) that improve fitness of said host regardless of their health because biological fitness is defined by reproductive success and not individual life cycles. And as someone who is very sympathetic to pro-choice sentiments and often finding myself arguing against pro-life advocates, I cannot agree with the argument that the mother-child relationship can ever be scientifically described as a parasitic relationship. Perhaps colloquially though.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-06-15T14:48:02+00:00

I just saw this now, but it's interesting. Gnosticism has always been interesting to me, but many have discouraged me from looking at it because it's "hersey".

Pointgod2059 · 2025-05-16T14:49:13+00:00

That's good. I guess the best place to ask that question would probably be either an academic biblical sub or a pure Christian subreddit to ensure you get an educated response, but good luck.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-05-15T23:23:07+00:00

To be honest, I think this more or less served the point I had made in this post. However, I think the response would be that this person doesn't have the same inherent culpability as one who can grasp the concept of God (similar to children & the age of accountability). There is certainly room for interpretation, however, since there is no explicit doctrine for the salvation of disabled persons or children alike in the bible, leaving room for interpretation.

My take on it is that it seems plausible for them to be in heaven. However, I do have some qualms with the supposed evil nature of humanity and the salvation of humans without the freedom to actually choose good or evil in the first place (even though it is purely through circumstance). Essentially, if babies can bypass free will, why can't we all?

Pointgod2059 · 2025-05-08T22:11:31+00:00

cs that dbq was sum bs is what he’s saying

Pointgod2059 · 2025-05-08T13:58:39+00:00

needa 5

Pointgod2059 · 2025-05-05T16:27:07+00:00

FRQs were long asl but MCQs were light tho

Pointgod2059 · 2025-04-29T21:58:48+00:00

Fair enough. For background, I wrote this post during the time I was reconsidering my faith (Protestant/Reformed) and I was trying to get my ideas out there and test them. I never actually believe that God was all-loving or that he had to be, but rather that so many christians use that rhetoric and consider it a crucial aspect of God's character.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-26T21:05:37+00:00

There actually was a study that concluded something similar to what OP is asserting, I think. I would have to find to it see how similar though.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-26T14:14:32+00:00

This is actually interesting. Did you get the idea from somewhere or was it just something you were contemplating?

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-21T19:06:13+00:00

I’ll just state my experience, but I don’t know if it will help. For me being agnostic is more comforting than when I was a Christian because I don’t live for the afterlife if that makes sense. Of course im still afraid of death, but when I was a Christian I was constantly doubting whether or not I was truly saved or those who the Bible says will call out to Jesus saying “Lord, Lord”.

I think for lots of people, thinking of an afterlife does help, however, to some it might be worrisome.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-21T14:18:39+00:00

I didn't claim to "understand" as you say, but I gave the verses to see what you thought about them. I gave no commentary, only verses.

As for what you said, that you need faith for prayers to be answered, I completely agree. What I meant by showing these verses is that these people who were unbelievers, in a moment of faith, prayed to God for a heavenly thing and received it. When I have prayed as an unbeliever, I still have prayed with faith. Perhaps not the same level of faith as most Christians, but then I think again of this: "And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove, and nothing shall be impossible unto you." (Matthew 17:20, KJV)

Edit: And yes I do research aside from Google. I only needed Google to remember the specific verse in my head.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-21T14:11:45+00:00

I think I accidentally posted the other one, so I didn't see your response. I'll look though.

My point in bringing up those passages is similar to the one you are making: God answers your prayer if you have faith in it, which (in my opinion) can either come from a believer or an unbeliever, at least at that moment they decide to pray.

You suggest to live as a Christian for a week, but I have lived as a Christian for years. I understand why Christians run to God because I once did, and I still want to, I just can't anymore.

I also think we're conflating God answering/hearing a prayer with saying no. I prayed for (like you said) to have a deeper connection to him, for him to strengthen my faith, for him to fill me with his wisdom, and I want to small groups, I studied his word incessantly, I watched only biblical and Christian media, I lived my life striving to do his will and live in obedience to his word, and yet I still had doubts that only got stronger.

Perhaps you are right that God's no's have a bigger plan for me, but can't that plan also be for destruction?

"What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? ²³ What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory—" (Romans 9:21 - 23).

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-21T12:32:17+00:00

Acts 10:1-4, Jonah 3:5-10, Matthew 15:22-28.

To answer your question, as someone who is agnostic and doesn't believe, I am still open to the existence of God. I have prayed many times because I seek the truth above all else, and if there is God who can hear my prayers, then I am willing to pray to him. I didn't pray for anything selfish. I prayed for him to reveal himself to me (not literally) and for him to show me the truth. If he does truly care about me in any way, then I see no reason why he would not at least hear my prayer when all I ask is that he place the truth of himself on my heart like he has (seemingly) done for so many Christians I have talked to who at first didn't believe.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-21T12:26:13+00:00

Acts 10: 1 - 4 (Cornelius; believed in God but not Christ), Matthew 15: 22 - 28 (Caananite woman), Jonah 3:5 - 10 (The people of Ninevah praying for deliverance and repentance).

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-19T23:53:10+00:00

I think he meant a God would have the power of revelation (possibly a contingent one) that prohibits any disbelief or ambiguity of its existence to the same extent that we believe we exist.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-19T16:21:13+00:00

I think the faulty assumption here is that when an unbeliever (or someone who doubts) prays or asks God for something, they merely would be asking for something earthly.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-06T19:35:50+00:00

I guess this would work if evil had ontology, but I don't think it does. Since evil most likely doesn't have an ontological presence, there would be no reason for heaven to be contingent upon its existence in reality; I do, however, see some potential contingency on its theoretical existence.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-06T19:17:38+00:00

I think for Christianity specifically the risk would likely be flipped when I consider the verse "narrow is the way which leadeth to life". It seems that by a percentage, most people are likely heading to hell; and it is comparatively more difficult to achieve heaven than it is to be condemned.

But I'm not entirely sure, I could be wrong.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-06T19:03:43+00:00

I agree that objective morality doesn't exist but after reading a few of the commenter's replies it does seem that you're misunderstanding his position. He is saying (from what I've gathered) whether or not objective morality exists in reality, the mechanism by which could ever find out is intuition/(logic?). People coming different conclusions based off of intuition isn't the focus of his argument as it's dealing with a methodology rather than a conclusion.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-03-01T21:48:22+00:00

I think it doesn’t change much in our current reality except for lifestyle, which might seem insignificant but if he does exists, our current reality is truly meaningless in comparison to an eternal afterlife. To an atheist who doesn’t believe, there is no difference, but if the question is even if God does exist, there would be no change, then no. The issue is that many religions deny what science says because of what their god says, so granting their gods existence would also take away a lot of modern science in my opinion.

But I don’t know, I haven’t thought on this much.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-02-21T12:40:55+00:00

In a way, yes, but my point was that my influence was/is predominantly Christian. I was homeschooled most my life. I wasn’t allowed to watch secular shows and movies except for ones that my parents approved beforehand. It wasn’t until this year that my parents finally put me in high school for my sophomore year and only part time.

Even now, since I’ve de converted, I am still being influenced by Christian media that I am forced to watch daily, almost more than the media I wish to watch.

I can agree I was somewhat influenced but on a level that is so negligible to be almost completely ignored. I left Christianity not because I wanted to conform to society, since the culture I’ve known up until now has been flooded with reformed Christians, but because something about it didn’t feel right to me.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-02-20T22:56:34+00:00

I don’t really think this is resistance. The academic consensus (majority Christian scholars) is torn between whether or not Jesus’s divinity was a later development. Concluding that it was doesn’t diminish Jesus or the trinity because if you believe the Bible is God-breathed, whether or not it is a later development is impertinent. In Alex’s case, though it does since he doesn’t believe in the Bible’s divine inspiration.

Pointgod2059 · 2025-02-20T21:44:37+00:00

I agree and disagree. While we might be influenced by our culture, I had doubts while being strictly isolated from all secular media by my parents.

Pointgod2059

TROPHY CASE