- 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: Christians Praying over Trump in Oval office
Posted on 7/12/17 at 4:29 pm to MButterfly
Posted on 7/12/17 at 4:29 pm to MButterfly
Uh, have you frickers completely lost all rational thinking? Most of the heads of state worldwide have already stepped over dead bodies, robbed the poor, fricked their neighbors wife, and stuffed their pockets to the max. Trump, Putin, Dutuerte, Kim, Xi, Maduro, the Castros, Assad, Sisi, Netanyahu, etc. Pray for someone who needs it, not these assholes, who are the antithesis of spiritual beings. And yes I include past US Potus Obama, Bush I & II, Clinton, RR, LBJ, JFK, Ike, FDR, Nixon and on and on.
This post was edited on 7/12/17 at 4:33 pm
1
Posted on 7/12/17 at 4:34 pm to Big12fan
quote:
Pray for someone who needs it
Everyone needs it.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 4:34 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
It doesn't have to, but then again if it's not, you have no basis for judging anyone else as right or wrong or their actions as good or bad. They are just different from you and their moral code is just different from yours.
Personally, no, I don't and I'd never make that claim as religion likes to do. Ultimately, religion has no more of a claim to morality than any other view.
quote:
Christianity, for instance, adheres to a belief that the only true moral standard originates from an eternal and holy God which transcends His creation. With that belief, the moral standard that He imparts on humanity would be an objective standard since God would dictate ultimate right and wrong and humans would be held accountable to that standard. The Christian faith is either correct or it isn't, but if it is, then the Christian's moral standard would be objective due to its origin, and because the origin of that standard doesn't change (and doesn't change the standard), the standard, itself, doesn't change.
Only as far as you believe that the Bible is the literal word of God. That alone removes objectivity from your larger view of morality. It requires a subjective belief in the subjective words of other men. That cannot be a basis for anything without your faith. After all, I just don't believe what you believe.
If your views are true, sure, you'd have objective morality. I guess my question would be...so what? You're exactly where you started.
If your views are true...
quote:
The atheist has no claim at all to objective morality because in that worldview, all moral standards originate in the minds of men. If men were wiped out, there would be no moral code because the source of morality was gone. Because of that, each person may create their own moral code to live by and it isn't any better or worse (objectively speaking) than any other. Because of this, the moral standards of humans who don't appeal to an objective standard will constantly be changing and evolving over time, and not necessarily for the "better".
Without faith in something completely subjective, you're exactly where they are. Without faith in God, your moral standards originate in the minds of men as well.
Regardless of where our morality comes from, it's the same source. That leaves us exactly where it typically leaves anyone in these conversations. You believe something that I don't, and your argument isn't all that compelling to me on that point.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 4:49 pm to rbWarEagle
quote:Evidence is found in nature (natural revelation), history (fulfillment of Biblical prophecy), archaeology (support for Biblical narrative), philosophy (arguments for the existence of God), and the Bible itself. Christians have the internal witness of the Holy Spirit, as well.
What are the evidences?
Posted on 7/12/17 at 4:58 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Evidence is found in nature (natural revelation)
Go on...
quote:
history (fulfillment of Biblical prophecy)
This one, too...
The rest... you're right, I don't find those to be acceptable forms of evidence.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:14 pm to Argonaut
quote:If you honestly don't believe your moral standard has any concrete basis, then you'd be one of the few who have thought through the issue and have conceded as much. Kudos. However, I would ask if you're consistent about it. Do you judge others for their behavior that goes against your personal view?
Personally, no, I don't and I'd never make that claim as religion likes to do.
quote:I agree, but I am not speaking for religion holistically as there are a multitude of religions with various and differing moral codes so by the law of non-contradiction, they call can't be right. Therefore "religion" can't have an objective moral standard.
Ultimately, religion has no more of a claim to morality than any other view.
I adhere to the Christian religion, and if what my faith teaches is true, then the moral standard it promotes is objective. If Christianity is false, then you would be right that it is as subjective as the next man-made standard.
quote:If my views are true... that is very impactful to humanity. An objective moral standard means there is one right way to act towards others and all other ways can be legitimately judged as wrong and legitimately rejected. It also means that there is a judge that will hold all humans accountable for how they live up to that standard.
Only as far as you believe that the Bible is the literal word of God. That alone removes objectivity from your larger view of morality. It requires a subjective belief in the subjective words of other men. That cannot be a basis for anything without your faith. After all, I just don't believe what you believe.
If your views are true, sure, you'd have objective morality. I guess my question would be...so what? You're exactly where you started.
If your views are true...
If my views are not true, then I'm in the same boat as you and everyone else who has ever lived. My moral code would be subjective and without real meaning. Morality, itself, would not be a universal truth but only a societal construct that lives and dies with the human race. People would have no absolute right to judge or condemn anyone else for what they do and "might makes right" would decide which particular standard is enforced. The concept of "human rights" goes away (or is rendered meaningless, since it can change from society to society and from generation to generation) and even human life loses all of its value.
quote:Just as I said, except I suspect you meant to say "without faith in something completely objective".
Without faith in something completely subjective, you're exactly where they are. Without faith in God, your moral standards originate in the minds of men as well.
quote:I agree with your conclusion but I disagree that our morality comes from the same source, at least not if my views are true.
Regardless of where our morality comes from, it's the same source. That leaves us exactly where it typically leaves anyone in these conversations. You believe something that I don't, and your argument isn't all that compelling to me on that point.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:17 pm to rbWarEagle
quote:As already articulated by FMC, the clearest evidences for the unregenerate man is found in nature itself. It points towards a creator. But be clear, God never attempts to "prove" his existence. The most basic premise is found in Genesis 1:1;
rbWarEagle
In the beginning, God...
The intent is that man already acknowledges the existence of a supreme power. The challenge is to see the evidences presented and turn to God the Father and accept the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ. That is the gist of the whole argument.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:20 pm to rbWarEagle
quote:That's exactly my point. Just because you reject it doesn't mean it's not evidence. It's just not evidence that carries enough weight to you to convince you of the truth claim the evidence is meant to prove.
The rest... you're right, I don't find those to be acceptable forms of evidence.
With that, I'm not inclined to provide specifics for evidence in nature and history as a quick google search for those topics can get you what you need. I'm more concerned with the philosophical aspect to this discussion.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:39 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
If you honestly don't believe your moral standard has any concrete basis, then you'd be one of the few who have thought through the issue and have conceded as much. Kudos. However, I would ask if you're consistent about it. Do you judge others for their behavior that goes against your personal view?
I don't think they do. I have a basis for my morals, but I certainly wouldn't say I could claim that to be objective any more than anyone else.
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at with your question. I try not to judge anyone. It happens. I'm certainly not perfect. No one is, and I try to keep that in mind when I'm dealing with anyone, including those I disagree with.
quote:
I agree, but I am not speaking for religion holistically as there are a multitude of religions with various and differing moral codes so by the law of non-contradiction, they call can't be right. Therefore "religion" can't have an objective moral standard.
I adhere to the Christian religion, and if what my faith teaches is true, then the moral standard it promotes is objective. If Christianity is false, then you would be right that it is as subjective as the next man-made standard.
To be sure, and this is a point atheists often bring up. I don't know that I've seen a good reply to it.
You're as much of an "atheist" as I am when we're discussing every religion that isn't Christianity.
quote:
If my views are true... that is very impactful to humanity. An objective moral standard means there is one right way to act towards others and all other ways can be legitimately judged as wrong and legitimately rejected. It also means that there is a judge that will hold all humans accountable for how they live up to that standard.
If my views are not true, then I'm in the same boat as you and everyone else who has ever lived. My moral code would be subjective and without real meaning. Morality, itself, would not be a universal truth but only a societal construct that lives and dies with the human race. People would have no absolute right to judge or condemn anyone else for what they do and "might makes right" would decide which particular standard is enforced. The concept of "human rights" goes away (or is rendered meaningless, since it can change from society to society and from generation to generation) and even human life loses all of its value.
No, not really. You're in the same boat as me regardless of what is true. The truth of your views has no impact on our world. The faith in those views does. If it were true and zero people believed it were true, would it be any less true? Certainly not. The opposite is also true. If it isn't true, but everyone on the planet believed it was, it wouldn't be any more true.
Again, we're back where we always are. You believe something that I don't believe.
quote:
I agree with your conclusion but I disagree that our morality comes from the same source, at least not if my views are true.
If your views are true, we still have the same source. I've simply been wrong in my views.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:40 pm to FooManChoo
This actually morphed into a pretty good thread. Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to write a thoughtful response. We need more civility on this board.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:41 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
As already articulated by FMC, the clearest evidences for the unregenerate man is found in nature itself. It points towards a creator.
Sure, but this "creator" doesn't need to be God any more than it needs to be a turkey sandwich on the moon.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:42 pm to Argonaut
From a Christian world view, the creator is God so...
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:45 pm to Wolfhound45
I love Trumps Holy Spirit!
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:46 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
From a Christian world view, the creator is God so...
Yes, but not everyone has a Christian worldview. That evidence may be compelling to Christians. Others? Not so much.
I can't say it enough. We're back to what you believe versus what I don't believe. I'm completely OK with that as the baseline. I suspect you are as well from what I've read of your posts.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:50 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
That's exactly my point. Just because you reject it doesn't mean it's not evidence.
I suppose we need to agree what constitutes good evidence, first. Good evidence is scientific evidence. The evidence you speak of is not scientific. That's why I don't accept it.
quote:
With that, I'm not inclined to provide specifics for evidence in nature and history as a quick google search for those topics can get you what you need.
I don't think so, but that's your prerogative.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:52 pm to Argonaut
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:57 pm to Tactical1
quote:
That's weird.
How?
I get that you apparently are not a believer but I have been to many churches of many denominations and every single one of them have done this so maybe your post says more about you than it does others who partake in laying on of hands...This post was edited on 7/12/17 at 5:58 pm
Posted on 7/12/17 at 5:59 pm to MButterfly
It looks like poking a dead squirrel with a stick.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 6:16 pm to Argonaut
quote:That is precisely what I would expect from a person with the beliefs you have espoused. The problem is that most people who espouse the same beliefs do not accept the logical conclusions that must come from them. I'm glad you are consistent in that area.
I don't think they do. I have a basis for my morals, but I certainly wouldn't say I could claim that to be objective any more than anyone else.
quote:What I'm getting as is the lack of consistency that most people have with their worldviews. An atheist has no objective basis to judge anyone since according to his worldview, there is no objective moral truth, yet, they judge people all the time. They condemn Christians as being wrong about their faith; they condemn Muslims for their barbaric actions; and they make moral judgement about people of all faiths and creeds all the time where their actions don't conform to the personal standard of the atheist. Someone who is consistent with their lack of objectivity would not be able to legitimately condemn anyone or any action as immoral or "evil" since each person would get to decide for themselves what that means. The best they could do is say "you aren't conforming to the standard that this society has adopted, at this time in history".
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at with your question. I try not to judge anyone. It happens. I'm certainly not perfect. No one is, and I try to keep that in mind when I'm dealing with anyone, including those I disagree with.
quote:I agree with you. Christians were called "atheists" in Rome in the early days of the church because they denied the Roman gods.
To be sure, and this is a point atheists often bring up. I don't know that I've seen a good reply to it.
You're as much of an "atheist" as I am when we're discussing every religion that isn't Christianity
I've heard it said that Christians deny all gods but one, and that atheists just deny one more than Christians do. I am not a religionist, but a Christian, so I will argue for my specific faith and condemn all others. I'll stand beside you to condemn Islam but will oppose those who condemn Christianity.
quote:We are only in the same boat as it relates to how people act, but not the basis for what they believe. A Christian and an atheist can commit murder. Their worldviews and beliefs are meaningless as far as the impact of that actions towards others. What the Christian understands is that their actions will be judged by God because God has set in place an objective moral standard for all people--regardless of their beliefs--to abide by and be judged by.
No, not really. You're in the same boat as me regardless of what is true. The truth of your views has no impact on our world. The faith in those views does. If it were true and zero people believed it were true, would it be any less true? Certainly not. The opposite is also true. If it isn't true, but everyone on the planet believed it was, it wouldn't be any more true.
Again, we're back where we always are. You believe something that I don't believe.
The consistent atheist shouldn't judge anyone. The consistent Christian should judge righteous judgement according to God's word. The atheist should resemble the hippie that is cool with everyone and everything regardless of what they say, do, or think. The Christian should condemn words, actions, and ideologies that do not conform to the moral imperatives of God. The atheist has no basis to judge anyone, though they might do so anyway, because his worldview doesn't accept a universal morality that applies to everyone. The Christian has a basis to judge the atheist, because he believes in a universal morality that applies to everyone.
While the atheist and Christian are capable of acting the exact same way, the truth of the moral standard gives justification to one or the other.
I do agree that belief in something doesn't make that thing true and disbelief doesn't make something untrue. Truth is true regardless of public opinion.
quote:The source I'm referring to is God, who created the moral standard after His own character. The source (I believe) you are referring to is the human mind.
If your views are true, we still have the same source. I've simply been wrong in my views.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 6:17 pm to Argonaut
quote:
but even the most devout of you has to admit this is a bit creepy.
I dont think yall quite understand...we believe God exists. Im not sure whats so hard to understand about that
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News