Hey, I'm New

Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Hey, I'm New

Hello there, my name is Jimmy Prescott and I'm a Christian. I found this site while I was writing a paper on my beliefs, and thought it would be interesting to join in on some blogs. I'm eighteen (senior in high school) and don't know TOO much, but believe that doubts should be followed to their logical conclusion, as is said in Timothy Keller's the Reason for God. After all, if my beliefs cannot stand up under pressure, then why would they be worth believing?? My only concern is that the posts that I've read through haven't seemed entirely civil, lol. Honestly, I earnestly believe that everyone is in need of salvation, and my true motivation, aside from learning effective apologetics, is to try and effectively show what I believe to be the truth. I look forward to talking with everyone here, as the members seem to have good reasoning skills and pretty good evidence for their cause.

Thanks - Jimmy


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Welcome what are your doubts

Welcome what are your doubts and may I have them.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Hi Jimmy and welcome

 

Foxhound wrote:

Honestly, I earnestly believe that everyone is in need of salvation.

 

So you are saying that you believe being born human is a crime?

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Well, I'm pretty secure in

Well, I'm pretty secure in what I believe. I more meant that I wasnted to see what arguments were posed on the site, and if I knew enough of what I say I believe in order to face those doubts.


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
well, crime is an intersting

well, crime is an intersting word for it. I believe that man is fallen, yes. we aren't operating the way that we were designed to- that's the problem


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:well, crime

Foxhound wrote:

well, crime is an intersting word for it. I believe that man is fallen, yes. we aren't operating the way that we were designed to- that's the problem

How is man fallen???? Sin ... the Greek harmateia ... missing the mark... crime.... fuel for the fires of hell.... same difference.  I would say that Christology rests upon a mistake and that is there was a fall. Genesis is an ancient myth. Salvation from what....Hell. Because two mythological narrative characters eat from the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. 

 

 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
people have a sense of right

people have a sense of right and wrong, and we don't always do what we know to be right. obviously there's something wrong there in my opinion. There's a fall there, right. Missing the mark, as you said??


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3688
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:Hello there,

Foxhound wrote:
Hello there, my name is Jimmy Prescott and I'm a Christian. I found this site while I was writing a paper on my beliefs, and thought it would be interesting to join in on some blogs. I'm eighteen (senior in high school) and don't know TOO much, but believe that doubts should be followed to their logical conclusion, as is said in Timothy Keller's the Reason for God. After all, if my beliefs cannot stand up under pressure, then why would they be worth believing??

Hello. Welcome to the forum, Jimmy.

Foxhound wrote:
My only concern is that the posts that I've read through haven't seemed entirely civil, lol.

Lol. People here are not....entirely civil. Due to the topic of this forum, we're very lenient regarding insults and rudeness. I expect you'll get a response from redneF pretty soon.

If you're looking for a polite discussion, I recommend that you start a thread in the Kill 'em with Kindness sub-forum.

Foxhound wrote:
Honestly, I earnestly believe that everyone is in need of salvation, and my true motivation, aside from learning effective apologetics, is to try and effectively show what I believe to be the truth. I look forward to talking with everyone here, as the members seem to have good reasoning skills and pretty good evidence for their cause.

Thanks - Jimmy

Thanks for the respectful introduction.

So, do you have any questions to start us off? 

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:people have a

Foxhound wrote:

people have a sense of right and wrong, and we don't always do what we know to be right. obviously there's something wrong there in my opinion. There's a fall there, right. Missing the mark, as you said??

No fall... free will perhaps. We evolved so we have competing interests with different parts of our brain,


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Thanks for the welcome,

Thanks for the welcome, sir Smiling There aren't any specific questions on my mind at the moment actually, I just sorta stumbled onto this site and wasn't really looking for answers to any particular questions. Anything that you might like to ask, though, since we're on the subject?


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I think

 

you might need to read Kohlberg's 5 stages of morality, Jimmy. Humans 'moral duty' to others in their social group says nothing whatever about the possibility of supernatural things being true.

Morality is a label used to describe a set of valuable social behaviours. These values can be demonstrated to be cultural and have the capacity to evolve. For instance, it is not considered immoral to drive a gigantic V8 car spewing carbon into the atmosphere just at present. But if global warming inundates a couple of helpless Pacific nations, it will be.

People look after people in this particular reality. It's not an indication of universal right and wrong - that sort of thinking simply suggests that humans anthropomorphize everything. 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:Foxhound

TGBaker wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

people have a sense of right and wrong, and we don't always do what we know to be right. obviously there's something wrong there in my opinion. There's a fall there, right. Missing the mark, as you said??

No fall... free will perhaps. We evolved so we have competing interests with different parts of our brain,


 

 

 

If this is merely a matter of free will, then why is it that we know that one action would be right, or more noble so to speak, than another, even if the action we perceive to be "wrong" will bring us a more desirable outcome? If it was merely free will and our thought process has evolved then our choice of action would be more instinctual. Insticts should not compete. True, we HAVE insticts, but these are like the keys on a piano. Our sense of morality, the sense of right and wrong that is rooted in us, is like the sheet of music that is being played, as C.S. Lewis puts it.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I'm obviously going to disagree with you.

 

Foxhound wrote:

well, crime is an intersting word for it. I believe that man is fallen, yes. we aren't operating the way that we were designed to- that's the problem

 

Humans are demonstrably acting exactly as they have evolved to. Right and wrong is a balancing act - some people are better at it. Some people have no empathy whatever. I think it's clear that people have the ability to conceptualise universal altruism and morality cults use this improbable benchmark to insist that it's actually possible to behave perfectly to all living beings all the time. This is a blatant untruth. The first time jesus took a bite of a lamb kebab he breached these 'rules'. No one has ever attained universal altrusim. It's impossible.

And conceiving universal altruism does not allow you to exercise the sort of moral inconsistency that lies at the heart of the garden of eden story. There's not a christian I know who would torture or murder another human but they're all so happy for the lord to do so. How does this work, Jimmy? On judgment day when they're pitchforking screaming school kids into the pit, will you intervene?

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2368
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
Welcome to the site

Foxhound wrote:

Thanks for the welcome, sir Smiling There aren't any specific questions on my mind at the moment actually, I just sorta stumbled onto this site and wasn't really looking for answers to any particular questions. Anything that you might like to ask, though, since we're on the subject?

 

 

                  I'd like to ask,  what kind of christian are you?  Liberal  --  YEC  --  easy going.  What is your take on science,  evolution or creation? What part of the country do you live in. Toronto Canada here.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote: you

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

you might need to read Kohlberg's 5 stages of morality, Jimmy. Humans 'moral duty' to others in their social group says nothing whatever about the possibility of supernatural things being true.

Morality is a label used to describe a set of valuable social behaviours. These values can be demonstrated to be cultural and have the capacity to evolve. For instance, it is not considered immoral to drive a gigantic V8 car spewing carbon into the atmosphere just at present. But if global warming inundates a couple of helpless Pacific nations, it will be.

People look after people in this particular reality. It's not an indication of universal right and wrong - that sort of thinking simply suggests that humans anthropomorphize everything. 

 

Saying that the morality of cultures "evolves" is partially true, but I don't believe it is the extent to which you are presenting it. Morailty can seem to change, but only with the people's sense of what justice is. Still, the same set of morals are present. Many would say that the Salem Witch Trials were immoral, but wouldn't any society in the situation defend themselves from who they thought were persecuting them? True, they were ill-informed lol. I lost my train of thought somehwere in trying to word that last sentence, lol. Either way, the fact that we have a standard of what is right expresses that we understand that there is an absolute goodness.

Since we're suggesting literature, you should read Mere Christianity Eye-wink


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:Foxhound

Jeffrick wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

Thanks for the welcome, sir Smiling There aren't any specific questions on my mind at the moment actually, I just sorta stumbled onto this site and wasn't really looking for answers to any particular questions. Anything that you might like to ask, though, since we're on the subject?

 

 

                  I'd like to ask,  what kind of christian are you?  Liberal  --  YEC  --  easy going.  What is your take on science,  evolution or creation? What part of the country do you live in. Toronto Canada here.

 

I live in Florida. My denomination is Christian and Missionary Alliance, which is between Protestant and Baptist. Pretty mush, we take the Bible literally. I believe that Christian doctrine can be proven just as well as anything else; the concept of pure faith has been employed too mush in the U.S. and is not a strong Christian value, in my opinion. But it's still extemely necessary, don't get me wrong. Science is a tool for both sides, but it can't give all the answers in any case.

Hopw that answered your question Eye-wink


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

Foxhound wrote:

well, crime is an intersting word for it. I believe that man is fallen, yes. we aren't operating the way that we were designed to- that's the problem

 

Humans are demonstrably acting exactly as they have evolved to. Right and wrong is a balancing act - some people are better at it. Some people have no empathy whatever. I think it's clear that people have the ability to conceptualise universal altruism and morality cults use this improbable benchmark to insist that it's actually possible to behave perfectly to all living beings all the time. This is a blatant untruth. The first time jesus took a bite of a lamb kebab he breached these 'rules'. No one has ever attained universal altrusim. It's impossible.

And conceiving universal altruism does not allow you to exercise the sort of moral inconsistency that lies at the heart of the garden of eden story. There's not a christian I know who would torture or murder another human but they're all so happy for the lord to do so. How does this work, Jimmy? On judgment day when they're pitchforking screaming school kids into the pit, will you intervene?

 

I'm slightly embarrassed to say that i don't know what "altruism" is, but I don't Jesus eating a lamb chop violates heavenly decree, lol. That school boy example is very vivid by the way 0_0 But everyone is given a chance. And I should also say that what we see as evil can be a tool for something else outside of our perception. We can't see everything that happens to everyone, and we can't see everything that happens in consequence. But I can safely say that, whatever the situation, I can trust the God who I believe in to make a better choice than I could. He IS omnipotent after all Eye-wink I don't think I really tackled the argument there did I?


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Again, I have to disagree

 

What is absolute goodness? What is goodness in and of itself? I agree that as social creatures humans avoid hurting one another for the most part. There are exceptions. Where I live the murder rate is 1 in 100,000 which suggests major crime is not a majority sport. The sorts of 'sins' most people commit on a day to day basis are paltry. Personally, I think the morality of the bible is insupportable and that no right thinking person could accept the fallacy from force that calvary truly represents.

 

Foxhound wrote:

Since we're suggesting literature, you should read Mere Christianity Eye-wink

 

Read it. A mountain of assertions and assumptions based on no genuine knowledge about how human brains operate. I think Lewis was a nice guy but he's no more qualified to pontificate about the existence absolute morality than I am.

 

I suggest you read this:

 

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

 

And ask yourself why god's sad rule set presented in the commandments spends most its time on exhortations to adore and less than half on moral precepts. It's worth wondering, too, why the work of mere mortals 60 years ago is so much better considered than was the finger of god.

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Top ten list please.

Foxhound wrote:

 but believe that doubts should be followed to their logical conclusion, as is said in Timothy Keller's the Reason for God. After all, if my beliefs cannot stand up under pressure, then why would they be worth believing??

Jimmy,

Welcome.

How about giving us your top 10 reasons for belief in God? Also, a definition of the God you believe in would help us understand exactly what you do believe.

 

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3688
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:True, we HAVE

Foxhound wrote:
True, we HAVE insticts, but these are like the keys on a piano. Our sense of morality, the sense of right and wrong that is rooted in us, is like the sheet of music that is being played, as C.S. Lewis puts it.

I don't agree with this analogy. 

Our sense of morality is based partly on our instincts and partly on our environment; morality is not some spiritual thing that is independent of our instincts, whatever that even means.

Ultimately, what we consider 'right' or 'wrong' is just what we like or don't like. So, I see morality as nothing more than an abstraction of our preferences; it's the same as expressing your preferences for ice cream flavors. Except, instead of saying 'I like chocolate more than vanilla,' we say, 'Chocolate is absolutely better than vanilla and whoever likes vanilla more is wrong!' So, in a sense, imo, the entire concept of morality is a really intuitive category error, attaching truth values to subjective feelings.      

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3688
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:Pretty mush,

Foxhound wrote:
Pretty mush, we take the Bible literally.

Well, surely, you don't take the entire Bible literally. Do you mean that your group takes many parts of Genesis literally, that are often claimed to be metaphorical?

Foxhound wrote:
Science is a tool for both sides, but it can't give all the answers in any case.

Hopw that answered your question Eye-wink

What is your position on the evolution v. Creationism "controversy" though? Are you undecided?

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote: And

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

And ask yourself why god's sad rule set presented in the commandments spends most its time on exhortations to adore and less than half on moral precepts. It's worth wondering, too, why the work of mere mortals 60 years ago is so much better considered than was the finger of god.

 

 

 

 

I'll start here, since this seemed to me to be the only argument lol. Well, we are called to have a reltionship with God, and so, in the ten commandments, it is outlined what He expects from us. Obviously we wouldn't want to make the God of the universe angry, since He IS known to "punish the children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generations" as He states in Exodus 20:2 I believe >_< so think of these outlines of "exholtations" (which are actually just reasonable commands from an authority that most people in American society today would not want to submit to) a love letter to God's people on how to get along with Him. Don't really know what you mean by the last part O_o do you mind capitalizing God by the way, so I know we're talking bout the God of the Bible??? Thanks Laughing out loud


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Hi again Jimmy

 

Foxhound wrote:

I'm slightly embarrassed to say that i don't know what "altruism" is, but I don't Jesus eating a lamb chop violates heavenly decree, lol. That school boy example is very vivid by the way 0_0 But everyone is given a chance. And I should also say that what we see as evil can be a tool for something else outside of our perception. We can't see everything that happens to everyone, and we can't see everything that happens in consequence. But I can safely say that, whatever the situation, I can trust the God who I believe in to make a better choice than I could. He IS omnipotent after all Eye-wink I don't think I really tackled the argument there did I?

 

altrusim is the selfless concern for others that's considered ideal behaviour for the perfect christian.

Look, Jesus had certainly caused the suffering of a poor wee lamb when ate tea so he can hardly have been leading a perfect life. He harmed a living organism. In fact all the food he ate should have been given to the starving. In fact, he should have devoted his entire life to saving victims of the myriad diseases of the period. Perhaps he could have founded a maternal hospital and spoken about antibiotics. Why just drone on about treating people properly? None of this would have been news at the time, as earlier Greek and Roman writers, like Cicero, clearly state. Personal integrity is far older than religion.

If real, jesus is definitely selfish. Where is he now? Working in a leper colony or playing golf on some heavenly green? As for the business of everyone being given a chance before they are hurled into the lake of fire - this is still an unethical position for you to take. God is either moral or not. Consistent or not. The god of the bible's morals are utterly inconsistent just as you'd expect a man made god's morals to be.

Finally, do you seriously want to hand all your higher thought processes over to the rejoinder 'He knows so much better than me', Jimmy? If you are prepared to just accept the things you can't adequately prove on this basis, what is the intellectual fulcrum of your faith?

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Sorry, Jimmy

 

Foxhound wrote:

do you mind capitalizing God by the way, so I know we're talking bout the God of the Bible??? Thanks Laughing out loud

 

I'll capitalise a social worker's name but not the name of a fabricated monster. It's a policy of mine not to give respect where I feel it's undue.

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3688
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:Obviously we

Foxhound wrote:
Obviously we wouldn't want to make the God of the universe angry, since He IS known to "punish the children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generations" as He states in Exodus 20:2

Do you think that's fair?

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Foxhound

butterbattle wrote:

Foxhound wrote:
True, we HAVE insticts, but these are like the keys on a piano. Our sense of morality, the sense of right and wrong that is rooted in us, is like the sheet of music that is being played, as C.S. Lewis puts it.

I don't agree with this analogy. 

Our sense of morality is based partly on our instincts and partly on our environment; morality is not some spiritual thing that is independent of our instincts, whatever that even means.

Ultimately, what we consider 'right' or 'wrong' is just what we like or don't like. So, I see morality as nothing more than an abstraction of our preferences; it's the same as expressing your preferences for ice cream flavors. Except, instead of saying 'I like chocolate more than vanilla,' we say, 'Chocolate is absolutely better than vanilla and whoever likes vanilla more is wrong!' So, in a sense, imo, the entire concept of morality is a really intuitive category error, attaching truth values to subjective feelings.      

 

One thing that is wrong with what you're saying is that personal preference does not prevail in morals. We are actually most conscious of morals when we're acting based on a preference that we know to be wrong. For example, if there is a man drowning in a river, would you not admit that you would have an urge to jump in to save him, although you preference, based on you instict of self preservation, is to stay on shore so you don't drown as well. This is not a matter of preference, but an act of rooted morality that is contrary to animal instict.

 

As for you evolution v. creationism question, I'm a creationist. Evolution is a theory that is pitted against a law - the law of entropy. To believe evolution you must assume that the law of entropy does not apply, and it is therefore not scientific in my opinion.


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

Foxhound wrote:

do you mind capitalizing God by the way, so I know we're talking bout the God of the Bible??? Thanks Laughing out loud

 

I'll capitalise a social worker's name but not the name of a fabricated monster. It's a policy of mine not to give respect where I feel it's undue.

 

 

well, I tried >_< I'm sorry you feel that way. And that's not a sarcastic remark by the way.


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Foxhound

butterbattle wrote:

Foxhound wrote:
Hello there, my name is Jimmy Prescott and I'm a Christian. I found this site while I was writing a paper on my beliefs, and thought it would be interesting to join in on some blogs. I'm eighteen (senior in high school) and don't know TOO much, but believe that doubts should be followed to their logical conclusion, as is said in Timothy Keller's the Reason for God. After all, if my beliefs cannot stand up under pressure, then why would they be worth believing??

Hello. Welcome to the forum, Jimmy.

Foxhound wrote:
My only concern is that the posts that I've read through haven't seemed entirely civil, lol.

Lol. People here are not....entirely civil. Due to the topic of this forum, we're very lenient regarding insults and rudeness. I expect you'll get a response from redneF pretty soon.

If you're looking for a polite discussion, I recommend that you start a thread in the Kill 'em with Kindness sub-forum.


Thanks for the respectful introduction.

So, do you have any questions to start us off? 

 

Civil. I think that there is a bias toward Christians as to what is civil. And I understand foxhound been there done that.... What he needs to understand is to address someone and say hey you're in need of salvation because there is something wrong with you is not very civil.  But then neither is religion.


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
MEP

Foxhound wrote:

As for you evolution v. creationism question, I'm a creationist. Evolution is a theory that is pitted against a law - the law of entropy. To believe evolution you must assume that the law of entropy does not apply, and it is therefore not scientific in my opinion.

 

The major revolution in physics in the last decade is the recognition of the law of maximum entropy production and an expanded view of thermodynamics showing the spontaneous production of order from disorder to be the consequence of all basic laws.

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Foxhound

butterbattle wrote:

Foxhound wrote:
Obviously we wouldn't want to make the God of the universe angry, since He IS known to "punish the children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generations" as He states in Exodus 20:2

Do you think that's fair?

 

 

Well, the verse ends with "...of those who hate me." maybe i should have included that lol. The next verse says that He blesses the children of the fathers who love and obey Him to the thousandth generation, so He's not just smiting everyone >_< I believe that He is just in what He does. I can't claim to know the context, which would be necessary to say if think it's fair or not.


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:TGBaker

Foxhound wrote:

TGBaker wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

people have a sense of right and wrong, and we don't always do what we know to be right. obviously there's something wrong there in my opinion. There's a fall there, right. Missing the mark, as you said??

No fall... free will perhaps. We evolved so we have competing interests with different parts of our brain,


 

 

 

If this is merely a matter of free will, then why is it that we know that one action would be right, or more noble so to speak, than another, even if the action we perceive to be "wrong" will bring us a more desirable outcome? If it was merely free will and our thought process has evolved then our choice of action would be more instinctual. Insticts should not compete. True, we HAVE insticts, but these are like the keys on a piano. Our sense of morality, the sense of right and wrong that is rooted in us, is like the sheet of music that is being played, as C.S. Lewis puts it.

Right and wrong... the conscience is built up of genetic and social constructs. A lot of what is supposed to be right or wrong is neither.  Some guilt is simply imposed by antiquated religious indoctrination.  Lewis was hardly a theologian.


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Dude

 

Foxhound wrote:

 well, I tried >_< I'm sorry you feel that way. And that's not a sarcastic remark by the way.

 

I'm sorry about the way you feel, too. Because even though you understand god acts violently and in a manner that is morally inconsistent, you turn your morals off when you think about him. Did he scare you into this?

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:butterbattle

TGBaker wrote:

butterbattle wrote:

Foxhound wrote:
Hello there, my name is Jimmy Prescott and I'm a Christian. I found this site while I was writing a paper on my beliefs, and thought it would be interesting to join in on some blogs. I'm eighteen (senior in high school) and don't know TOO much, but believe that doubts should be followed to their logical conclusion, as is said in Timothy Keller's the Reason for God. After all, if my beliefs cannot stand up under pressure, then why would they be worth believing??

Hello. Welcome to the forum, Jimmy.

Foxhound wrote:
My only concern is that the posts that I've read through haven't seemed entirely civil, lol.

Lol. People here are not....entirely civil. Due to the topic of this forum, we're very lenient regarding insults and rudeness. I expect you'll get a response from redneF pretty soon.

If you're looking for a polite discussion, I recommend that you start a thread in the Kill 'em with Kindness sub-forum.


 

Thanks for the respectful introduction.

So, do you have any questions to start us off? 

 

Civil. I think that there is a bias toward Christians as to what is civil. And I understand foxhound been there done that.... What he needs to understand is to address someone and say hey you're in need of salvation because there is something wrong with you is not very civil.  But then neither is religion.


 

 

 

Wait, I've been where and done what?? And I'm not making a claim against any one person. It's as though I'm saying every living person in the world has a brain. Of course, some people may say otherwise lol


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2368
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
Follow up

Foxhound wrote:

Jeffrick wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

Thanks for the welcome, sir Smiling There aren't any specific questions on my mind at the moment actually, I just sorta stumbled onto this site and wasn't really looking for answers to any particular questions. Anything that you might like to ask, though, since we're on the subject?

 

 

                  I'd like to ask,  what kind of christian are you?  Liberal  --  YEC  --  easy going.  What is your take on science,  evolution or creation? What part of the country do you live in. Toronto Canada here.

 

I live in Florida. My denomination is Christian and Missionary Alliance, which is between Protestant and Baptist. Pretty mush, we take the Bible literally. I believe that Christian doctrine can be proven just as well as anything else; the concept of pure faith has been employed too mush in the U.S. and is not a strong Christian value, in my opinion. But it's still extemely necessary, don't get me wrong. Science is a tool for both sides, but it can't give all the answers in any case.

Hopw that answered your question Eye-wink

 

 

                       I checked the C & M allience web site,  they  claimed to be pentecostal in nature.  Christian doctrine is not something that has to be proven; by definition if you follow the doctrine then you are a christian, it is not a case of proof v. disproof; it is a case of belief v. disbelief.

 

 

                       Science is not a tool for both sides;  what sides?   Theology and science are two very different courses of study.  Theists trying to use science to justify their tenets just look rediculous  [YEC's  etc].  If humans believed the biblical science that Pi =3, then the wheel would not exist and humans would still be living in caves ;  since nothing else could be buildt without the wheel.

 

 

                       btw  Jesus Chritos is NOT a name it is a title;  it means  "gods annointed savior"  ;  there was NO real person by that name. The charactor Jesu christos is a composite from meny sources some real most imaginary;  mostly of Lord Mithras of the Zoarastrian religion.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

Foxhound wrote:

 well, I tried >_< I'm sorry you feel that way. And that's not a sarcastic remark by the way.

 

I'm sorry about the way you feel, too. Because even though you understand god acts violently and in a manner that is morally inconsistent, you turn your morals off when you think about him. Did he scare you into this?

 

what you see as morally inconsistent is more than likely otherwise if we look at the big picture. Which neither of us can do. Now both of us are making claims on faith. I say God's actions are not inconsistent, based on a view of everything, you say they are, based on teh narrow view that each of us can see.


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3688
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:One thing

Foxhound wrote:
One thing that is wrong with what you're saying is that personal preference does not prevail in morals.

Okay, and how do you know that?

Foxhound wrote:
We are actually most conscious of morals when we're acting based on a preference that we know to be wrong. For example, if there is a man drowning in a river, would you not admit that you would have an urge to jump in to save him, although you preference, based on you instict of self preservation, is to stay on shore so you don't drown as well. This is not a matter of preference, but an act of rooted morality that is contrary to animal instict.

Okay, so how do you know any of this is more than just a preference?

I want to stay alive, but I also want to help others. Whether or not I would ultimately jump into the river is based on a compromise between these and other preferences. I hold that they are all subjective preferences whether they be based on instinct or environment. 

Foxhound wrote:
As for you evolution v. creationism question, I'm a creationist. Evolution is a theory that is pitted against a law - the law of entropy. To believe evolution you must assume that the law of entropy does not apply, and it is therefore not scientific in my opinion.

I will paste my response from the other thread.

The second law of thermodynamics states that entropy always increases in an isolated system. Differences in temperature etc. will become equal.

So, can you explain, in more detail, how this contradicts evolution and the Big Bang?

 

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3688
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:Well, the

Foxhound wrote:
Well, the verse ends with "...of those who hate me." maybe i should have included that lol. The next verse says that He blesses the children of the fathers who love and obey Him to the thousandth generation, so He's not just smiting everyone >_< I believe that He is just in what He does. I can't claim to know the context, which would be necessary to say if

think it's fair or not.

Okay then, for the sake of the discussion, let's assume that it literally means he will punish the children of the people who hate him, to the third or fourth generation, for the reason that those people hated him, even if those children worship him. Do you think that's fair?

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:Foxhound

Jeffrick wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

Jeffrick wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

Thanks for the welcome, sir Smiling There aren't any specific questions on my mind at the moment actually, I just sorta stumbled onto this site and wasn't really looking for answers to any particular questions. Anything that you might like to ask, though, since we're on the subject?

 

 

                  I'd like to ask,  what kind of christian are you?  Liberal  --  YEC  --  easy going.  What is your take on science,  evolution or creation? What part of the country do you live in. Toronto Canada here.

 

I live in Florida. My denomination is Christian and Missionary Alliance, which is between Protestant and Baptist. Pretty mush, we take the Bible literally. I believe that Christian doctrine can be proven just as well as anything else; the concept of pure faith has been employed too mush in the U.S. and is not a strong Christian value, in my opinion. But it's still extemely necessary, don't get me wrong. Science is a tool for both sides, but it can't give all the answers in any case.

Hopw that answered your question Eye-wink

 

 

                       I checked the C & M allience web site,  they  claimed to be pentecostal in nature.  Christian doctrine is not something that has to be proven; by definition if you follow the doctrine then you are a christian, it is not a case of proof v. disproof; it is a case of belief v. disbelief.

 

 

                       Science is not a tool for both sides;  what sides?   Theology and science are two very different courses of study.  Theists trying to use science to justify their tenets just look rediculous  [YEC's  etc].  If humans believed the biblical science that Pi =3, then the wheel would not exist and humans would still be living in caves ;  since nothing else could be buildt without the wheel.

 

 

                       btw  Jesus Chritos is NOT a name it is a title;  it means  "gods annointed savior"  ;  there was NO real person by that name. The charactor Jesu christos is a composite from meny sources some real most imaginary;  mostly of Lord Mithras of the Zoarastrian religion.

 

People stop too quickly at the faith answer when things can be elaborated, that's what i'm saying. Also, I think you're assuming that Christianity is not based on facts? That's not true. And I don't really understand your point with the C&MA thing lol.

Anywho, you follow any belief to its root and it ends in faith that cannot be proven. Even your belief that there is no God. Science cannot fully prove either side, even that saide that you've labeled as Science. And since neither of us were there, we are both, making faith claims on Jesus Christ. New historical discoveries are made every day. Tomorrow you'll have another person from the past that Jesus was "probably inspred by." This course of opinioated historical argument won't bring truth to either of us.


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound

Foxhound wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

you might need to read Kohlberg's 5 stages of morality, Jimmy. Humans 'moral duty' to others in their social group says nothing whatever about the possibility of supernatural things being true.

Morality is a label used to describe a set of valuable social behaviours. These values can be demonstrated to be cultural and have the capacity to evolve. For instance, it is not considered immoral to drive a gigantic V8 car spewing carbon into the atmosphere just at present. But if global warming inundates a couple of helpless Pacific nations, it will be.

People look after people in this particular reality. It's not an indication of universal right and wrong - that sort of thinking simply suggests that humans anthropomorphize everything. 

 

Saying that the morality of cultures "evolves" is partially true, but I don't believe it is the extent to which you are presenting it. Morailty can seem to change, but only with the people's sense of what justice is. Still, the same set of morals are present. Many would say that the Salem Witch Trials were immoral, but wouldn't any society in the situation defend themselves from who they thought were persecuting them? True, they were ill-informed lol. I lost my train of thought somehwere in trying to word that last sentence, lol. Either way, the fact that we have a standard of what is right expresses that we understand that there is an absolute goodness.

Since we're suggesting literature, you should read Mere Christianity Eye-wink

Mere Christianity hardly gets there. You should read Sam Harris's The Moral Landscape. Morality completely evolved from mammalian brain structure to primates to linguitically based refinements.  No absolute morals in the sky by and by. Sounds like you wanna present the TAG argument for absolutes....


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:TGBaker

Foxhound wrote:

TGBaker wrote:

butterbattle wrote:

Foxhound wrote:
Hello there, my name is Jimmy Prescott and I'm a Christian. I found this site while I was writing a paper on my beliefs, and thought it would be interesting to join in on some blogs. I'm eighteen (senior in high school) and don't know TOO much, but believe that doubts should be followed to their logical conclusion, as is said in Timothy Keller's the Reason for God. After all, if my beliefs cannot stand up under pressure, then why would they be worth believing??

Hello. Welcome to the forum, Jimmy.

Foxhound wrote:
My only concern is that the posts that I've read through haven't seemed entirely civil, lol.

Lol. People here are not....entirely civil. Due to the topic of this forum, we're very lenient regarding insults and rudeness. I expect you'll get a response from redneF pretty soon.

If you're looking for a polite discussion, I recommend that you start a thread in the Kill 'em with Kindness sub-forum.


 

Thanks for the respectful introduction.

So, do you have any questions to start us off? 

 

Civil. I think that there is a bias toward Christians as to what is civil. And I understand foxhound been there done that.... What he needs to understand is to address someone and say hey you're in need of salvation because there is something wrong with you is not very civil.  But then neither is religion.


 

 

If you say that the whole species has fallen then you are making claims about everyone including each and everyone of us here. Well prove to me I'm fallen. Where's this original sin apart from some mythic creation story???

 

Wait, I've been where and done what?? And I'm not making a claim against any one person. It's as though I'm saying every living person in the world has a brain. Of course, some people may say otherwise lol

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Foxhound

butterbattle wrote:

Foxhound wrote:
Well, the verse ends with "...of those who hate me." maybe i should have included that lol. The next verse says that He blesses the children of the fathers who love and obey Him to the thousandth generation, so He's not just smiting everyone >_< I believe that He is just in what He does. I can't claim to know the context, which would be necessary to say if

think it's fair or not.

Okay then, for the sake of the discussion, let's assume that it literally means he will punish the children of the people who hate him, to the third or fourth generation, for the reason that those people hated him, even if those children worship him. Do you think that's fair?

 

 

Not trying to avoid the question, but I don't think it matters either way. If the later generations believe in Him and have accepted the salvation He provides, then they're set. They may have hardship based on they're lineage, just like my generation is going to have to pay off the money the U.S. goverment is throwing out of they're butts (sidehanded remark there Eye-wink) but they will still have an eternity after this life. I assume the punishment is just a deterrant from heresy.


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:Jeffrick

Foxhound wrote:

Jeffrick wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

Thanks for the welcome, sir Smiling There aren't any specific questions on my mind at the moment actually, I just sorta stumbled onto this site and wasn't really looking for answers to any particular questions. Anything that you might like to ask, though, since we're on the subject?

 

 

                  I'd like to ask,  what kind of christian are you?  Liberal  --  YEC  --  easy going.  What is your take on science,  evolution or creation? What part of the country do you live in. Toronto Canada here.

 

I live in Florida. My denomination is Christian and Missionary Alliance, which is between Protestant and Baptist. Pretty mush, we take the Bible literally. I believe that Christian doctrine can be proven just as well as anything else; the concept of pure faith has been employed too mush in the U.S. and is not a strong Christian value, in my opinion. But it's still extemely necessary, don't get me wrong. Science is a tool for both sides, but it can't give all the answers in any case.

Hopw that answered your question Eye-wink

Only science can give the answers.


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound

Foxhound wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

Foxhound wrote:

well, crime is an intersting word for it. I believe that man is fallen, yes. we aren't operating the way that we were designed to- that's the problem

 

Humans are demonstrably acting exactly as they have evolved to. Right and wrong is a balancing act - some people are better at it. Some people have no empathy whatever. I think it's clear that people have the ability to conceptualise universal altruism and morality cults use this improbable benchmark to insist that it's actually possible to behave perfectly to all living beings all the time. This is a blatant untruth. The first time jesus took a bite of a lamb kebab he breached these 'rules'. No one has ever attained universal altrusim. It's impossible.

And conceiving universal altruism does not allow you to exercise the sort of moral inconsistency that lies at the heart of the garden of eden story. There's not a christian I know who would torture or murder another human but they're all so happy for the lord to do so. How does this work, Jimmy? On judgment day when they're pitchforking screaming school kids into the pit, will you intervene?

 

I'm slightly embarrassed to say that i don't know what "altruism" is, but I don't Jesus eating a lamb chop violates heavenly decree, lol. That school boy example is very vivid by the way 0_0 But everyone is given a chance. And I should also say that what we see as evil can be a tool for something else outside of our perception. We can't see everything that happens to everyone, and we can't see everything that happens in consequence. But I can safely say that, whatever the situation, I can trust the God who I believe in to make a better choice than I could. He IS omnipotent after all Eye-wink I don't think I really tackled the argument there did I?

If he is omnipotent and good guy why do babies get tortured in burned in his creation?


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:  If you say

TGBaker wrote:

 

 

If you say that the whole species has fallen then you are making claims about everyone including each and everyone of us here. Well prove to me I'm fallen. Where's this original sin apart from some mythic creation story???

 

 

Christianity only begins to speak once the recipient accepts that they are in need of repentence. That's an issue you'll have to deal with yourself, no amount of arguing can convince you unless that part of you is open :/


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Foxhound

butterbattle wrote:

Foxhound wrote:
True, we HAVE insticts, but these are like the keys on a piano. Our sense of morality, the sense of right and wrong that is rooted in us, is like the sheet of music that is being played, as C.S. Lewis puts it.

I don't agree with this analogy. 

Our sense of morality is based partly on our instincts and partly on our environment; morality is not some spiritual thing that is independent of our instincts, whatever that even means.

Ultimately, what we consider 'right' or 'wrong' is just what we like or don't like. So, I see morality as nothing more than an abstraction of our preferences; it's the same as expressing your preferences for ice cream flavors. Except, instead of saying 'I like chocolate more than vanilla,' we say, 'Chocolate is absolutely better than vanilla and whoever likes vanilla more is wrong!' So, in a sense, imo, the entire concept of morality is a really intuitive category error, attaching truth values to subjective feelings.      

You're wrong vanilla bean beats chocolate every time.. .. It is a moral absolute. Well I do sin with dark chocolate.


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:Foxhound

TGBaker wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

Jeffrick wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

Thanks for the welcome, sir Smiling There aren't any specific questions on my mind at the moment actually, I just sorta stumbled onto this site and wasn't really looking for answers to any particular questions. Anything that you might like to ask, though, since we're on the subject?

 

 

                  I'd like to ask,  what kind of christian are you?  Liberal  --  YEC  --  easy going.  What is your take on science,  evolution or creation? What part of the country do you live in. Toronto Canada here.

 

I live in Florida. My denomination is Christian and Missionary Alliance, which is between Protestant and Baptist. Pretty mush, we take the Bible literally. I believe that Christian doctrine can be proven just as well as anything else; the concept of pure faith has been employed too mush in the U.S. and is not a strong Christian value, in my opinion. But it's still extemely necessary, don't get me wrong. Science is a tool for both sides, but it can't give all the answers in any case.

Hopw that answered your question Eye-wink

Only science can give the answers.


 

 

 

Then I assume you wouldn't admit that science can't prove how matter was first created? or how life BEGAN? And please don't say that the first bacterium piggy-backed on quarts... O_o


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:butterbattle

TGBaker wrote:

butterbattle wrote:

Foxhound wrote:
True, we HAVE insticts, but these are like the keys on a piano. Our sense of morality, the sense of right and wrong that is rooted in us, is like the sheet of music that is being played, as C.S. Lewis puts it.

I don't agree with this analogy. 

Our sense of morality is based partly on our instincts and partly on our environment; morality is not some spiritual thing that is independent of our instincts, whatever that even means.

Ultimately, what we consider 'right' or 'wrong' is just what we like or don't like. So, I see morality as nothing more than an abstraction of our preferences; it's the same as expressing your preferences for ice cream flavors. Except, instead of saying 'I like chocolate more than vanilla,' we say, 'Chocolate is absolutely better than vanilla and whoever likes vanilla more is wrong!' So, in a sense, imo, the entire concept of morality is a really intuitive category error, attaching truth values to subjective feelings.      

You're wrong vanilla bean beats chocolate every time.. .. It is a moral absolute. Well I do sin with dark chocolate.


 

 

 

Hahaha nice Eye-wink


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3688
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound wrote:Not trying to

Foxhound wrote:


Not trying to avoid the question, but I don't think it matters either way. If the later generations believe in Him and have accepted the salvation He provides, then they're set. They may have hardship based on they're lineage, just like my generation is going to have to pay off the money the U.S. goverment is throwing out of they're butts (sidehanded remark there Eye-wink) but they will still have an eternity after this life. I assume the punishment is just a deterrant from heresy.

Okay, but is it just? In general, do you think it is morally sound to punish people for their parent's mistakes?

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Foxhound

Foxhound wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

And ask yourself why god's sad rule set presented in the commandments spends most its time on exhortations to adore and less than half on moral precepts. It's worth wondering, too, why the work of mere mortals 60 years ago is so much better considered than was the finger of god.

 

 

 

 

I'll start here, since this seemed to me to be the only argument lol. Well, we are called to have a reltionship with God, and so, in the ten commandments, it is outlined what He expects from us. Obviously we wouldn't want to make the God of the universe angry, since He IS known to "punish the children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generations" as He states in Exodus 20:2 I believe >_< so think of these outlines of "exholtations" (which are actually just reasonable commands from an authority that most people in American society today would not want to submit to) a love letter to God's people on how to get along with Him. Don't really know what you mean by the last part O_o do you mind capitalizing God by the way, so I know we're talking bout the God of the Bible??? Thanks Laughing out loud

Pretty screwed up person to torture children and grandchildren for what the daddy did. Glad I have a better morality than that. The ten commandments are pretty primitive and there are much better moral codes than those offered to nomads. god is the god of the Bible.


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Look

Foxhound wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

Foxhound wrote:

 well, I tried >_< I'm sorry you feel that way. And that's not a sarcastic remark by the way.

 

I'm sorry about the way you feel, too. Because even though you understand god acts violently and in a manner that is morally inconsistent, you turn your morals off when you think about him. Did he scare you into this?

 

what you see as morally inconsistent is more than likely otherwise if we look at the big picture. Which neither of us can do. Now both of us are making claims on faith. I say God's actions are not inconsistent, based on a view of everything, you say they are, based on teh narrow view that each of us can see.

 

Causing suffering is considered immoral - by me at any rate - and by the ten commandments. So a god who deliberately causes such suffering is, in my opinion, immoral.  Is murdering those who don't agree with you wrong? Is torture wrong? Is coercion wrong? Are threats wrong? You are seriously fine with god dabbling in all these? How is that? Do you claim to be a moral person?

What can you see of god, Jimmy, that I cannot? You have all the same sense data inputs I have and no more. What is this picture of everything you claim to see? Do you mean a picture tinted by blindly accepting religious dogma on face value? I'm the child of an evangelical preacher and a missionary. I know exactly what it feels like to be a christian. But that feeling is not the knowable truth.

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Foxhound
Theist
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-10
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:Foxhound

TGBaker wrote:

Foxhound wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

Foxhound wrote:

well, crime is an intersting word for it. I believe that man is fallen, yes. we aren't operating the way that we were designed to- that's the problem

 

Humans are demonstrably acting exactly as they have evolved to. Right and wrong is a balancing act - some people are better at it. Some people have no empathy whatever. I think it's clear that people have the ability to conceptualise universal altruism and morality cults use this improbable benchmark to insist that it's actually possible to behave perfectly to all living beings all the time. This is a blatant untruth. The first time jesus took a bite of a lamb kebab he breached these 'rules'. No one has ever attained universal altrusim. It's impossible.

And conceiving universal altruism does not allow you to exercise the sort of moral inconsistency that lies at the heart of the garden of eden story. There's not a christian I know who would torture or murder another human but they're all so happy for the lord to do so. How does this work, Jimmy? On judgment day when they're pitchforking screaming school kids into the pit, will you intervene?

 

I'm slightly embarrassed to say that i don't know what "altruism" is, but I don't Jesus eating a lamb chop violates heavenly decree, lol. That school boy example is very vivid by the way 0_0 But everyone is given a chance. And I should also say that what we see as evil can be a tool for something else outside of our perception. We can't see everything that happens to everyone, and we can't see everything that happens in consequence. But I can safely say that, whatever the situation, I can trust the God who I believe in to make a better choice than I could. He IS omnipotent after all Eye-wink I don't think I really tackled the argument there did I?

If he is omnipotent and good guy why do babies get tortured in burned in his creation?


 

 

 

The whole world is groaning with sin. This means that all of creation is paying the price because we aren't living the way that we are MADE to. So you just admitted that torturing babies is wrong. There is truth in that, correct? so consider this truth, along with all of the others that you can think of, and let's call it a moral law Eye-wink This moral law is like programming in a computer. Well, just like a computer, if the programming is not being followed for some reason or another, which it is not, because people are sinning every day, then everything starts going haywire. That's waht's happened to the world.

Now, about God's omnipotence, it should be understood that He provides for the greater good in the end. The "greater good defense" if you will. This means that, although things as we see it are a mess, God's plan is greater. Everything will find justice.