- 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 10/9/20 at 9:32 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
Posted on 10/9/20 at 9:32 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
This needs to be posted.
1
Posted on 10/9/20 at 9:41 pm to NimbleCat
Posted on 10/9/20 at 9:54 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
Hope they are selling coke and popcorn on Judgment Day.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 10:00 pm to Goforit
As long as there’s beer in Hell
Posted on 10/9/20 at 10:06 pm to Roger Klarvin
Posted on 10/9/20 at 10:21 pm to LukeSidewalker
Habermas is no different than Craig and other haughty academic apologists. He’s very articulate and is able to dress up simplistic and thoroughly refuted arguments in fancy sounding theological verbiage but it’s little more than that.
Habermas builds his entire case on the following grounds:
- the gospels are historical fact
- the report of an empty tomb and the alleged witnesses of a resurrected Christ prove the resurrection occurred
- the conversion of Paul is a meaningful truth in any account
- the rapid success of Christianity and its success today proves its validity and the divinity of Jesus
He has built a 40 year career on these completely spurious claims and preposterous logic. The facts, when viewed objectively, reveal how thin and fragile this entire argument is at each juncture.
The simplest explanation I can give is this: Every single argument he uses, every one, can be altered slightly and utilized for Islam. In the case of Islam, the presentation would come with far more historical data given how much more recent and well documented the origins of that faith are compared to Christianity.
Habermas builds his entire case on the following grounds:
- the gospels are historical fact
- the report of an empty tomb and the alleged witnesses of a resurrected Christ prove the resurrection occurred
- the conversion of Paul is a meaningful truth in any account
- the rapid success of Christianity and its success today proves its validity and the divinity of Jesus
He has built a 40 year career on these completely spurious claims and preposterous logic. The facts, when viewed objectively, reveal how thin and fragile this entire argument is at each juncture.
The simplest explanation I can give is this: Every single argument he uses, every one, can be altered slightly and utilized for Islam. In the case of Islam, the presentation would come with far more historical data given how much more recent and well documented the origins of that faith are compared to Christianity.
This post was edited on 10/9/20 at 10:24 pm
Posted on 10/9/20 at 10:40 pm to Roger Klarvin
Not trying to sound rude but would anything help you to believe?
I went 32 years not believing and thought I was a happy camper compared to most and wam, had a moment that led me to believe in Jesus and everything in that bible that said would happen to a believer happened to me. I’m here to tell you Jesus lives, he loves you, and there is a part of you that will never be complete without him.
205-412-9633. Would love to chat with you if you’re ever down.
I’ll chat with anybody on here about what Jesus did for me.
I went 32 years not believing and thought I was a happy camper compared to most and wam, had a moment that led me to believe in Jesus and everything in that bible that said would happen to a believer happened to me. I’m here to tell you Jesus lives, he loves you, and there is a part of you that will never be complete without him.
205-412-9633. Would love to chat with you if you’re ever down.
I’ll chat with anybody on here about what Jesus did for me.
This post was edited on 10/9/20 at 10:44 pm
Posted on 10/9/20 at 10:45 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
For those of us that do believe in God we know from the Bible that things will eventually get very bad for Christians. I don’t know if we’re there yet but you can definitely begin to see the writing on the wall.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 10:47 pm to Diamondawg
quote:this is hilarious. these threads always go the same. some blockhead makes some dumb statement. i respond with questions about their statement. questions never get answered. then blockheads criticize me.
You talk to yourself a lot
Posted on 10/9/20 at 10:48 pm to bass
quote:
For those of us that do believe in God we know from the Bible that things will eventually get very bad for Christians
But then they will get VERY good. Fret not my brother.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 10:49 pm to LSUSaintsHornets
quote:
Ehrman on historicity
i'll give you credit for actually trying. ehrman is a fraud. he's been repeatedly called out for being duplicitous. but you know why right? quote:what about it?
Caroll on physics
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:04 pm to LSUSaintsHornets
quote:i already have multiple times. ethics is more the anthropic study of morals. the social and cultural systemization of moral principles. morality encompasses the actual mores themselves. a more would be "do not murder." ethics would be more about implementing that into a behavior and society. ethics can vary from culture to culture. mores do not.
Mind giving your definitions for both then?
either it is wrong to murder or it is not. however you answer is an attempt at an objective truth - true for all people in all places. morality cannot be subjective and relativism is self defeating. a person is not justified in saying "morality is determined by the individual." that is epistemic nonsense. as i have pointed out, that statement can be parsed at a meta level, i.e. is that statement itself true for everyone? iow, can one person believe that morality is objective and another believe morality is subjective? no, those two beliefs are mutually exclusive. one is wrong and it's obvious which one it is.
ethics operates more at an phenomenal level. morality operates at a metaphysical level. we would have no inkling of right and wrong without a moral law giver. if there were no such anchor, humanity would simply behave on instinct and no person would even think to criticize another because there would be no concept of moral authority. behavior would simply be whatever is expedient or pragmatic or utilitarian, etc.
again, when someone is stating a moral premise, they are making the understood qualifier "based on x." the x makes all the difference.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:14 pm to LukeSidewalker
quote:
would anything help you to believe?
It’s not a matter of belief, especially given that belief isn’t a conscious choice. It’s a matter of what can be shown to be true. I cannot believe something that cannot be shown to be true. Even if I had a Damascus road experience, I would be forced to acknowledge that it was more likely I was hallucinating than that I had actually encountered God because I couldn’t demonstrate the truth of my experience.
I was a Christian for decades before realizing I just simply had no reason to believe in such a thing. Objectively, I have no more reason to believe in the claims of Christianity than I do the claims of Islam, Hinduism or any other religion. Reality can be shown to be real, and no arguments for any deity I have ever encountered can be shown to be true.
In order to accept the extraordinary claims of any religion, I would need to see evidence that conclusively pointed to a claim while also making that claim more likely than all other potential explanations. This means not just a prayer followed by X outcome, you have to show evidence of God’s intercession not explained by chance or other factors.
This post was edited on 10/9/20 at 11:18 pm
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:22 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
I am not a believer. Yet, I have a very firm grasp on right and wrong and care about others.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:26 pm to bfniii
quote:
either it is wrong to murder or it is not.
Murder is by definition the unlawful taking of human life, and thus it is always legally wrong. It is a legal term and has no practical use when discussing morality.
Your real claim here is that there are instances in which killing someone is always an objective moral evil, a claim for which there is no evidence for and in fact much social, biological and historical evidence against. Philosophically such a claim is preposterous, as an exception to every example you can give is conceivable. I can give you a scenario for ANY type of killing in which you would be forced to admit that the action was not morally wrong by your own standards.
This post was edited on 10/9/20 at 11:27 pm
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:31 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Roger Klarvin
Conservative
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:31 pm to Roger Klarvin
When you repent of the sin you are living in and put your faith in Jesus and know you’re going to live for him, this will happen.
26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.
And you will have ALL the evidence you will ever need.
But you have got to truly come to God through faith in Jesus. I’m sorry you never came to Christ while going to church. I too grew up in church as a young one. But I never truly believed and laid my life down so I could gain my life til 32.
I understand there’s nothing I can say to you, still would love to chat, but I’ll be praying for you my man.
26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.
And you will have ALL the evidence you will ever need.
But you have got to truly come to God through faith in Jesus. I’m sorry you never came to Christ while going to church. I too grew up in church as a young one. But I never truly believed and laid my life down so I could gain my life til 32.
I understand there’s nothing I can say to you, still would love to chat, but I’ll be praying for you my man.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:33 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
I am not a believer. Yet, I have a very firm grasp on right and wrong and care about others.
Of course you do, you are the product of millions of years of social selective pressure in environments where cooperation and compassion between individuals is conducive to survival.
We see rudimentary moral behavior throughout the mammalian class, and with closer evolutionary lineage to us as well as higher cognitive function these behaviors increase. The social structures of the great apes and dolphins are shockingly similar to ours when correcting for intelligence and functionality. But we all see basic morals exhibited by dogs on a regular basis.
These behaviors are not unique to us and are clearly a product of natural selection.
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:35 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Conservative
There are millions of non-believing conservatives/republicans in this country. My lack of belief in god has no impact on my beliefs about fiscal policy, the judiciary, the authority of the federal government, etc.
Only cognitive midgets can’t separate the topics.
This post was edited on 10/9/20 at 11:36 pm
Posted on 10/9/20 at 11:36 pm to RCDfan1950
quote:not ALL "spiritual" things are subjective. for example, decrees from god are most certainly objective. they are true for everyone, everywhere.
Spiritual things are ultimately Subjective
quote:this is somewhat akin to philosophical foundationalism. however, some truths are not chosen. they are just true a priori and as such, they are merely discovered by people. one aspect of that a priori truth is being discussed itt - morality. now, there is debate as to whether any such truths can be discerned by people or how they are discerned. that is the endeavor of epistemology
Once one chooses a First Principle
quote:i'm not exactly sure what you're referring to but, any uncertainty in the quantum realm does not negate that there are objective, universal absolute laws that the universe operates from. iow, the aleatory nature of quanta does not mean the universe is subjective or chaotic. us not perceiving a quantum outcome until it occurs is a meta-law itself. since we don't know if we will ever resolve quantum uncertainty, that doesn't mean we won't and that the universe is "subjective."
Quantum Theory alludes to the ultimate Subjectivity of an Entity's Perceptive Paradigm
Page 21 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News