- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: A fact worth remembering: Those who don't believe in God argue against absolutes
Posted on 10/6/20 at 9:16 pm to catinthehat
Posted on 10/6/20 at 9:16 pm to catinthehat
quote:No thanks. I don't want to tempt God.
Go handle snakes.
1
Posted on 10/6/20 at 9:17 pm to Indefatigable
quote:aside from the fact that your statement is false, morality in the christian tradition is not based on religious doctrine.
something that depends ENTIRELY on religious doctrine and on pre-assumed notions of theology cannot be objective
i have no idea where people get these crazy notions from. seriously, where does this come from? is this crap actually taught in classes or are people just getting this from the internet ramblings of random loons?
Posted on 10/6/20 at 9:23 pm to catinthehat
My miss. You must be a hard worker. Don't blame you for the expenditure of you "mockery" time. Wisdom there, as your allotted time is (relatively) very short...and therein...very valuable.
One thing I bet we can agree on...what one believes...determines how one 'feels'. People work very hard to manipulate their 'Feeling'; it's the essence of life...with folk employing stuff, status, countless folly, mind games and all manner of 'belief' to that end. Watched a Doc and those Indian Gurus; they just cut to the chase, skip the games, and go straight to controlling their Feeling. I suspect me and you enjoy the 'game'.
Good luck with your enterprise.
One thing I bet we can agree on...what one believes...determines how one 'feels'. People work very hard to manipulate their 'Feeling'; it's the essence of life...with folk employing stuff, status, countless folly, mind games and all manner of 'belief' to that end. Watched a Doc and those Indian Gurus; they just cut to the chase, skip the games, and go straight to controlling their Feeling. I suspect me and you enjoy the 'game'.
Good luck with your enterprise.
Posted on 10/6/20 at 9:26 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
No thanks. I don't want to tempt God
So an omnipotent infallible creator can be tempted?
Tell me more.
Posted on 10/6/20 at 11:31 pm to catinthehat
quote:In this context (as in the context of Jesus’ words to Satan), it means not to put God to the test regarding His mercy and power. It is actually a sign of faithlessness in His word to put God on trial by tempting His providence with unnecessary acts of recklessness and personal danger to see what God would do.
So an omnipotent infallible creator can be tempted?
Tell me more.
So yeah, I don’t want to test God but presuming on His power and mercy towards me by unnecessarily putting myself in danger.
Posted on 10/6/20 at 11:44 pm to FooManChoo
So you agree that the people handling snakes are faithless heathens?
Posted on 10/6/20 at 11:53 pm to catinthehat
quote:No. I’m in no position to judge anyone’s heart. I believe they are misled and are doing the opposite of what they think they are doing.
So you agree that the people handling snakes are faithless heathens?
Posted on 10/9/20 at 7:36 pm to LSUSaintsHornets
quote:alright champ. let us know when you're on to something. you need to get the word out since almost every human that's ever lived is a theist
I don't know if I have the time for that. I'm going to have to explain concepts to you then show you when and where those concepts apply. Not sure you're ready tiger.
quote:has that happened?
you can't just fricking assume the premise in your argument
quote:but what you are obviously missing is that without said god, there would be no morality at all. there would only be ethical relativism. since we know relativism is self defeating....
If the "Christian God" is the source of an objective morality then it would be a pretty silly argument if your God only exists in your head
when you're ready to join the adult's table, let us know
Posted on 10/9/20 at 7:44 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
I don’t believe in God and have no problem enjoying life. There doesn’t need to be any absolute, objective moral truths or eternal meaning to existence in order to experience subjective happiness. And ultimately, while there is no such this as “good” and “evil” in an absolute sense, there are behaviors that objectively harm and objectively benefit the society in which we have created. If the goal is to maximize human happiness and minimize suffering, then we can say there are actions and behaviors we should encourage and those we should discourage. That is the basis of our legal system.
So if you want what you do to matter 4 billion years from now then sorry, it won’t. But what you do and how you live now does matter, and a lack of eternal purpose doesn’t change that.
So if you want what you do to matter 4 billion years from now then sorry, it won’t. But what you do and how you live now does matter, and a lack of eternal purpose doesn’t change that.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 7:49 pm to bfniii
quote:
aside from the fact that your statement is false, morality in the christian tradition is not based on religious doctrine.
i have no idea where people get these crazy notions from. seriously, where does this come from? is this crap actually taught in classes or are people just getting this from the internet ramblings of random loons?
The only difference between you and I with regards to morality is where we believe it comes from. You attribute to a deity what I attribute to the result of strong selective pressure on the cooperative societies of a social species. The actual actions and behaviors we believe are moral/immoral likely vary very little if at all, especially given I’m politically conservative.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 8:10 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:
They don't believe in right and wrong.
They didn't teach Objectivism at your college?
Posted on 10/9/20 at 8:29 pm to Flats
quote:
Not at all. The earth was round well before that fact could be even remotely verified. It was round regardless of what Oog the caveman thought, and it was round regardless of the fact that nobody could tangibly verify it.
The truth is what the facts are. The earth being a sphere was always a fact, but that did not become truth until someone could prove it by demonstrating the facts. Saying the Earth was a sphere before anyone could possibly have demonstrated as much would have been a baseless claim, regardless of its truth.
Until someone can present objectively verifiable facts for the existence of god, that is not a truth claim and to claim otherwise is a lie by definition. God or gods could exist but as of this moment we have no reason whatsoever to believe that. It’s a baseless claim without supporting facts, and that’s true regardless of whether or not they actually exist.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 8:31 pm to Supernova Community
quote:You are assuming that he has any education beyond that of Jethro Bodine.quote:They didn't teach Objectivism at your college?
They don't believe in right and wrong.
Not a valid assumption, IMHO.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 8:37 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Do you deny that this happens?
I don't understand why it can't be both. Where Christian dogma fails is creating this dichotomy -- you either believe in God, or believe in chemistry -- obviously, God created the chemical laws as well and has overseen the evolution of life from the very beginning.
Chemistry and evolution are verifiable via the scientific method. Their reality can be demonstrated. The same cannot be said for any deity ever proposed.
Moreover, evolution by natural selection appears decidedly undirected. Life is needlessly complex, wildly inefficient and exhibits innumerable deleterious consequences of random genetic mutation.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 8:44 pm to auburn32
quote:
250 years ago, many heartfelt God fearing Christians owned slaves. They didn't consider themselves morally wrong owning salves. Now, I'd argue that all Christians probably say owning slaves is morally wrong.
So, if morality isn't a social construct and comes from God, why are these two takes so different? Were God's teachings about morality different back then?
The Bible, the Old and New Testaments, offer implicit or explicit support for many things nearly unanimously agreed to be immoral in modern western society. Any American living by the strict moral standards and laws of the Bible would be guilty of numerous misdemeanor and felony offenses under our legal system and thrown in jail.
So the moral standards within the Bible are clearly not objective or universal truth.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 8:52 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:
Straight from the explanations of CS Lewis right there. CS Lewis, who was an Oxford atheists brought to belief in God by JRR Tolkien, when challenged to explain the wonderment of existence.
Appeals to authority are generally worthless, particularly on topics without demonstrable realities. Moreover, many men far smarter with far more information at their disposal than Lewis did not/do not believe in God. So even if we default to appeals to authority, I have better authorities.
Every apologetics argument presented by Lewis has be thoroughly refuted over the last half century. There are entire books on this topic. And the very need for apologists is in and of itself evidence against the existence of a deity, as such a being should not need lesser beings to defend his existence and honor.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 9:00 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
The irony is that you are saying that killing children is evil without providing a rational basis for doing so.
I believe that humans murdering children is evil because I have an objective moral standard to say as much and have it be more than mere opinion. I believe my worldview is preferable to yours because I can provide a rational basis for saying that murdering children is wrong and immoral. You can't. All you can do is emote and provide your opinion, to which I say, "so what?"
You also didn't answer my question. You posted a picture of a child.
The mass murder of children is objectively detrimental to the future of a species under the biological parameters of life here, especially with respect to a social one attempting to develop cooperative societies for the betterment of that species. If we define “wrong” as something that negatively impacts our survival as a species or leads to unnecessary pain and suffering, then we can say murdering children is objectively wrong.
But no, there is not some base universal truth that killing children is wrong. There could be societies in our universe which killing is not wrong by these standards. And there is no ultimate, eternal punishment for those who murder children where it is considered wrong.
So with respect to our species and our society, yes I can say murdering children is wrong. That statement is conditional however and I cannot say that murdering children would always be wrong in every conceivable society.
If that upsets you well, I’m sorry. But the fact is a claim being too horrifying to accept has no baring on the truth of the claim.
This post was edited on 10/9/20 at 9:02 pm
Posted on 10/9/20 at 9:14 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
The Biblical God is the only that provides the necessary preconditions for intelligibility for moral reasoning, yes.
You really need to start listening to people besides Frank Turek, Ravi Zaccarias and Ray Comfort
Posted on 10/9/20 at 9:18 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
Get the maximum hedonistic pleasure you can while you are alive.
That’s everyone.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 9:29 pm to bfniii
quote:
yes. the old "blame god for the foibles of people." that's a good one.
just because people are not perfect does not mean that the idea of theistic morality is flawed. but you knew that right?
I find little use for the problem of evil, it’s just not an argument that holds much weight IMO and is easily refuted. Moreover, the nature of a deity (good or bad) has no baring on whether or not that deity exists.
I much prefer the problem of divine hiddeness, Russell’s teapot and with respect to individual religions the objectively false physical/historical claims made within the respective holy texts.
In other words, it’s far more worthwhile pointing out that we have no objective reason to believe in the existence of a god and even if we did, we know many of the claims by the various religions CANNOT be true. So I can’t say I know with certainty god didn’t exist, but I can say the god specifically described in the Bible or Koran cannot exist because those books make truth claims necessary for his existence that are verifiably false.
Page 20 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News