@ AJ777

Since you seem incapable of answering any of our questions after we have already thoroughly answered your question in your OP: How can religion be evil? Here is my answer to my question: Is it objectively immoral to terrorize and torture children into believing the Bible?

Religion is evil because of the fear religion puts, or attempts to, put into people especially children. That is the pogrom of religion. Get children while they are between the ages of 4 to 14, when they are especially at their most vulnerable and most susceptible to cultural, traditional, and abhorrent dogmatic conditioning. Religion knows this; thus, the reason they come at children with a smiley-face and ingratiating manner, yet utilize mental rape, emotional molestation, and psychological terrorism to instill that fear into children hoping to brainwash them. In my most honest opinion, this is child abuse in any moral landscape. Basically, beginning at childhood, you are trained to react to ideas, and to reject them no matter what they are told, presented, and/or taught. Children are militantly trained to preserve the FAITH of religion regardless. They are taught to never question their beliefs which is the worst form of dishonesty. They are trained that their faith is NEVER wrong. They are conditioned to never question why they need to defend their belief at all. And the masters do this with apologetics, beguiling dialectical semantics, perverted and distorted data, emotional whiny-ass pleas, and sometimes divinely-inspired violence.

There is the answer to my question: Is it objectively immoral to terrorize and torture children into believing the Bible?

rmfr

@ AJ777

“Understanding more clearly the concept of God in the Christian worldview at least helps here.”

Yes, it does. I have a thorough understanding of the worldview of many, many religions. I spent 30 years studying other religions by traveling to other countries to get first hand experience of those religions. Not just by what I read. My main focus was into the two greatest lynchpins of the father of all Abrahamic religions: the Noahacian Flood Myth and The Exodus That Went Nowhere. Both of which NEVER happened. And there is only one concept anyone who utilizes critical thinking, logical and deductive reasoning, and rational and analytical thought: Any god dreamed up by humans has the morality of a childish, spoiled brat. That is to say, none.

“Since God is unchanging, perfect in all ways, necessarily good and just, otherwise He would not be God, His moral laws are unchanging and perfect.”

"God is unchanging..." LMAOWF. Almost fell out of my chair on that one. One way a comedian once described the "god" of the Bible is so damned true: The God of the Old Testament can be seen as the drunken abusive father, where the God of the New Testament can be seen as the pot smoking hippy. First God is the creator of all things. Then God muders all but eight of his "children." Then God chooses his people. Then God enslaves them in Egypt. Then God commands his people to commit wholesale genocidal ethnic cleansings. Then God enslaves them in Babylon. Then God brings them back to commit more wholesale genocidal ethnic cleansings. And on and on until God makes himself human to sacrifice itself to itself in order to appease its anger.

Bullshit! Your Sky Faerie is just that, a faerie. And I shall never believe it even has an inkling chance of existing until I see OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. And do not give us your bullshit about your Sky Faerie existing "outside of time and space." Do you even realize what this means? Without space, it cannot exist. Without time, it cannot exist. Even if your Sky Faerie exists outside this realm, its actions within this realm would leave evidence. Where is that evidence?

“So in the Christian view they are objective.”

No. They are still subjective. Even if your Sky Faerie is supposedly responsible for instilling a moral code, it is still SUBJECTIVE to your Sky Faerie's whims and actually becomes tyrannical totalitarian dictated edicts. NOT OBJECTIVE.

“Isn’t your argument like science of the gaps. You have faith that science will prove what you currently believe without evidence.”

Nope. No gaps. What I believe can be substantiated by OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Nothing you believe can be substantiated. NOTHING. And if it is something I do not possess any knowledge of, my answer is, "I do not know." Why are you theists so damned adamant about admitting you do not know? Religious Absolutists barely read one book and think they know everything. I have read over 10,000 books and still feel I know nothing. That is the major difference between theists and atheists, especially scientist atheists.

Here is something I believe. We have OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that the Yellowstone Caldera has exploded in a cycle of approximately once every 650Ka to 800Ka. Currently, it has been about 680Ka since the last major eruption (explosion). Thus, we are within the time range of another major eruption. This eruption could occur next week. Then again, it may not happen for another 100Ka. All we can do is to collect and analyze data of its current behavior pattern. We cannot predict when the next eruption may happen. We can only guess if it seems to be heading towards the next major eruption. That is my belief. As said, it is substantiated with OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.

Which of your beliefs can you substantiate?

rmfr