- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Correlation: Prayer out of schools to increase in mass shootings
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:43 pm to AUveritas
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:43 pm to AUveritas
quote:
So you agree that when atheists say they don't need God to be "good", it's essentially gibberish.
No, I don't agree with that at all. Did you read the main body of my post?
I'm saying that humans have evolved a general moral framework. That exists outside any framework from a higher power, and doesn't necessitate such. That's the point.
0
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:44 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
The Bible (and thus Christians as a whole) doesn't teach that the point of Jesus' sacrifice was to remove human suffering here on earth
So Christians don't suggest that if people followed Jesus' teachings the worlds sufferings would greatly diminish?
Interesting...
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:48 pm to Azkiger
quote:We do teach that, but that is a tertiary benefit to obeying the law, not the primary goal of it. Jesus' death was to save sinners, not to eliminate physical suffering on earth. If everyone sought obey Jesus, physical suffering would be reduced on earth but not completely eliminated.
So Christians don't suggest that if people followed Jesus' teachings the worlds sufferings would greatly diminish?
Interesting...
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:52 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
We do teach that, but that is a tertiary benefit to obeying the law, not the primary goal of it.
Irrelevant with regards to the Hitchen's quote as Hitchens never himself said that the primary goal of the intervention was to relieve suffering.
At the end of the day, Jesus did a lot more than just die on the cross. He said and did a lot, and that's what the Hitchen's quote was aimed at.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:52 pm to Azkiger
quote:
So Christians don't suggest that if people followed Jesus' teachings the worlds sufferings would greatly diminish?
Interesting...
Control is the entire point of Christianity, along with nearly every other religion.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:54 pm to Strophie
quote:
but the vast majority of humanity is innately aware of it and generally adheres to it.
You mean like the Kim Jung Un's of the world. When you are your own god, this is what happens to society. What retrains him?
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:55 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
The orthodox Christian view is that what God commands is good because it comes from the ultimate source of good, which is God. We believe that God's character is such that He cannot perform evil and therefore what He does is good. Since the law of God (morality) is a reflection of the perfectly pure character of God, the law must therefore be "good".
What God does and what God commands is good because God is morally good.
So, in effect, the answer is merely tautology? Moreover, it does raise questions about whether or not God is even "good". There's certainly a discussion to be had about whether someone is good if they're incapable of being bad.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:56 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Control is the entire point of Christianity, along with nearly every other religion.
Go ahead and explain your vast knowledge of the Christian faith. I'm more free now than I ever was as a non-believer.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:57 pm to Azkiger
quote:The Hitchen's quote that I addressed on the previous page said that God put up with 98,000 years of suffering until finally He relented and sent Jesus. The obvious implication is that the point of Jesus being sent to die was in response to the physical death and destruction that was occurring on earth for so long.
Irrelevant with regards to the Hitchen's quote as Hitchens never himself said that the primary goal of the intervention was to relieve suffering.
quote:I didn't think that was the case at all but if it was, it was bad theology on the part of Hitchens, which is ultimately my point in responding to his quote in the first place; he misunderstood Christianity and fought tirelessly against that misunderstanding.
At the end of the day, Jesus did a lot more than just die on the cross. He said and did a lot, and that's what the Hitchen's quote was aimed at.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 12:59 pm to Lg
quote:
Go ahead and explain your vast knowledge of the Christian faith.
You need me to explain Christianity to you? Pass. Hit up your preacher man.
If you have specific questions, ask them.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:00 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
he obvious implication is that the point of Jesus being sent to die was in response to the physical death and destruction that was occurring on earth for so long.
The Principle of Charity
I just proposed a more robust interpretation of Hitchen's quote. If you'd rather grab at the low hanging fruit go right ahead. I'd rather tackle the strongest argument rather than the weakest.
This post was edited on 2/27/18 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:02 pm to Azkiger
quote:Essentially, yes. God's very being is the universal standard for goodness in the universe and His moral law comes from His own being, making the law good because of its source.
So, in effect, the answer is merely tautology?
quote:I'm fine with having that discussion, as futile as it seems. After all, if God does exist as the Bible states, then who are we to judge God? It's always a fun discussion, regardless.
Moreover, it does raise questions about whether or not God is even "good". There's certainly a discussion to be had about whether someone is good if they're incapable of being bad.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:02 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
You need me to explain Christianity to you?
Not at all. I knew you wouldn't have the guts to answer it? You spout off generalities but care not to answer when someone ask for specifics. I knew exactly where this was going with you. You are more than predictable. It's really amusing.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:02 pm to Lg
quote:
You mean like the Kim Jung Un's of the world.
No, as Kim Jung Un is an example of the small minority who don't. Hence me calling out, specifically, sociopaths and others who don't have or adhere to that morality.
quote:
When you are your own god, this is what happens to society. What retrains him?
Obviously not the God of the Christian bible, right? I don't see much restraining going on, given that he's breaking God's imposed moral law.
I know that the rebuttal, of course, is that he will be judged after death and sent to hell for eternity. Which is all well and good conceptually. But there's no tangible proof of that. And, frankly, given that Kim Jung Un obviously isn't Christian and no doubt thinks the concept of hell is hogwash, it's not doing much to dissuade him, is it?
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:02 pm to AUveritas
quote:
"Because I think so and everyone agrees with me unless they're an idiot" isn't an answer. Popular opinion isn't an objective source of morality.
I’ve given you examples that objective moral goods lead to better civilization and less suffering. The moral nations tend to last longer than the immoral ones throughout history and their citizens. Western values specifically superior to most other morals, and everyone who has embraced them has thrived.
Socialism and communism is theft and is doomed to fail. Totalitarians though treat the individuals and minorities/women like dirt, which envitably leads also to its destruction. Western ideals where you make something of yourself and treat your neighbors with kindness are objectively superior, and it’s been proven time and time again. It’s an objective fact and therefore moral.
This post was edited on 2/27/18 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:07 pm to Azkiger
quote:I understand the principle very well but I will not apply it to someone like Hitchens when Christianity and the Bible are in question. He had a history of being a fervent enemy of God and Christianity and did his very best to refute the entire belief system while he lived. It's impossible for me to be charitable (according to that principle) to his comments about God, the Bible, or Christianity as a whole within that context.
The Principle of Charity
I just proposed a more robust interpretation of Hitchen's quote. If you'd rather grab at the low hanging fruit go right ahead. I'd rather tackle the strongest argument rather than the weakest.
Regardless, a lot of people (not just Hitchens) misunderstand Jesus and what the Bible actually teaches about Him so I attempt to offer clarification when given an opportunity to do so.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:08 pm to Strophie
quote:
isn't Christian and no doubt thinks the concept of hell is hogwash, it's not doing much to dissuade him, is it?
But that's the point of the whole thread. You just proved it. Your side says that everyone is inherently "good" because it's not right to harm another and there isn't a need for a Supreme Lawgiver. I say, without ONE, whom I believe is God Almighty, that this is the very thing that can happen. He doesn't believe in God or the eternal consequences do why should he care about his people at all. And for that matter, any other human being.
Thanks.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:09 pm to bayoumuscle21
(oops wrong thread)
This post was edited on 2/27/18 at 1:10 pm
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:17 pm to Lg
quote:
But that's the point of the whole thread. You just proved it. Your side says that everyone is inherently "good" because it's not right to harm another and there isn't a need for a Supreme Lawgiver. I say, without ONE, whom I believe is God Almighty, that this is the very thing that can happen. He doesn't believe in God or the eternal consequences do why should he care about his people at all. And for that matter, any other human being.
Thanks.
And you have shown that you completely miss the rationale/argument.
Kim Jong Un is, in the eyes and judgement of humanity, evil. He's not inherently good. He's the opposite. We can argue whether that was of his own volition, or a result of nature/nurture, or a whole gamut of other things. But that's beside the point; he's evil. 999 out of 1,000 people will agree (and here, again, is that finicky small tiny minority that doesn't have or adhere to the innate human morality).
Him being judged as such is contingent on an innate human sense of morality. That morality, in turn, doesn't require a higher power to explain.
quote:
He doesn't believe in God or the eternal consequences do why should he care about his people at all. And for that matter, any other human being.
It's not his lack of belief in God that somehow frees him to be a sadistic tyrant. He's a sociopath.
I also notice that you do nothing to address my rebuttal that the moral laws you claim as being objective and universal and enacted by God have, as of yet, done nothing to hold Kim Jong Un in check or do anything to prevent him from being the murderer and tyrant that he is. Nor does your perceived threat of hell.
Posted on 2/27/18 at 1:23 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Essentially, yes. God's very being is the universal standard for goodness in the universe and His moral law comes from His own being, making the law good because of its source.
How convienet as tautologies are neither verifiable or disprovable. I'd be upset if this wasn't par for the course with religious apologists.
quote:
I'm fine with having that discussion, as futile as it seems. After all, if God does exist as the Bible states, then who are we to judge God? It's always a fun discussion, regardless.
The Bible states that God is good, so if that weren't the case then your qualifier "as the Bible states" can be thrown out because you'd be admitting Bible error (what other characteristic that the Bible asserts God has is incorrect)?
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News