Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Haran · 07-07-2006, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DBT

Non sequitur

That is because you seem not to have followed my threads. The explanations you need are there somewhere.

Quote:

...in any case, the foundation of christianity does not rest on an absolute moral code.

This is why I didn't respond to your previous post. I am not arguing this here. I am arguing that atheism/agnosticism is no better.

Quote:

Are you aware of some of the dodgy God given ethics in the OT? And the NT, for that matter.

I understand that there are some that are a matter of debate and some that are very difficult to understand, yes. However, I am merely trying to point out to those who feel morally superior to Christians and Christianity, that thy are being illogical, biggoted, and hypocritical.

DBT · 07-07-2006, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

That is because you seem not to have followed my threads. The explanations you need are there somewhere.

It's a big board, and there is very little time. :huh:
It's not that hard to reiterate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

This is why I didn't respond to your previous post. I am not arguing this here. I am arguing that atheism/agnosticism is no better.

My comment was addressing the reason why atheism/agnosticism is better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

I understand that there are some that are a matter of debate and some that are very difficult to understand, yes.

There are laws in the OT that have no ethical merit whatsoever.

ELECTROGOD · 07-07-2006, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

One might think you have an agenda....LOL... Later...I'm done chasing you from thread to thread now that you have admitted what I was after.

Gee, now that sounds like an agenda!
What 'cha going to do with the little scrap that you think you have? Disparage all atheists as inferior to your belief system?

BadBadBad · 07-07-2006, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

You have zero objective grounds for rejecting God's actions.

Go ahead and try. You see, without a God, you are capable of absolutely anything without consequence.

How can I reject actions that were never done by a God that doesn't exist? There is no God, and you go ahead and try to do absolutely anything. You'll find out soon enough what the consequences are. What nonsense!

Quote:

You certainly view things from a worldly perspective now. That is why you have so much trouble understanding God.

What other perspective is there? I don't have any trouble understanding God. God is just a figment of your imagination. I understand that perfectly.

Quote:

Death is finite, heaven is eternal. We all will die, it is a matter of when and how. Once dead and in heaven, the manner of death will matter little. Of course, this is just one possible explanation of many.

Here's another explanation. When you're dead, you're dead.

Quote:

The only deception is in the rhetoric you apply to what I write. I have been where you are and rejected it for something I find to be better. You have no basis upon which to tell me I am wrong except your own preference.

How can you reject a lack of belief? It's not a matter of whether you're right or wrong. It's a matter of whether you're making a credible case for the supernatural. Nope. Not even close.

Quote:

My intent is not to present a "defense of Christianity" and never was. My intent was to share what I believe and take on those who irrationally claim, as you have, that Christianity is in some way detrimental to society and should be eliminated.

Just a few pages ago, you said the intent was to talk about our beliefs. I shared what I believe. I believe your views on religion are false. What rational defense do you have against the claim that Christianity has not been detrimental to society. Have you ever picked up a news paper or read a history book?

Quote:

On this later point, I don't know if you have the capacity to understand the arguments (some people in this thread have semi-acknowledged some of my points), but you have NO grounds for acting morally superior to Christianity and Christians except for your own personal and arbitrary opinions.

Hmm. Let me see if I understand this argument. You insult Johnny Skeptic as a precursor for trying to slip by an obviously false assertion. It didn't work.

Quote:

In fact, if you wish to be absurd and continue in your misguidedness, you might find it interesting to note that I could just as easily say that without a belief in a God there are no consequences for our "evil" and "unobserved" wrongs, so you are capable of very bad things indeed.

Here's the tactic again. Insult Johnny Skeptic and make absurd false assertions. Again your assertion that without God there are no consequences for bad behavior and now also that bad behavior would go unobserved is ridiculous. Nice try using an ad homenim to slip that one by.

In addition to that, you have nothing on which to base your morals except the mostly God-believing society around you and the mostly God-based morals that have been passed down since ancient times. You cherry pick and choose your own morals with the best of Christians.[/quote]

On the contrary, God doesn't exist. The morality and immorality written down in the Bible only reflects human morality that was around long before this particular concept of God.

Quote:

The accusations you throw out are typical of embittered atheists who perceive that they were wronged in life by Christians or Christianity in some way (or perhaps were wronged by a Christian...an errant human as we all are) and after their "conversion", and throwing out of the baby with the bathwater, wish to take it out in the most militant fashion.

More insults, and then another absolutely absurd comment. What baby? What bath water? We're just flushing the toilet. We're willing to wait until you find something good in there, but I'm going to stand outside. All you're doing is getting yourself dirty.

Johnny Skeptic · 07-07-2006, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

Thank you, Johnny, for finally (after what seemed like pulling teeth), although indirectly, admitting in one of your dozen or so threads that your morality is subjective. You have NO grounds except your own, subjective opinions upon which to condemn Christianity. Your belief system is irrational and full of logical holes that you refuse to see, yet you pound and pound away at Christianity. One might think you have an agenda....LOL... Later...I'm done chasing you from thread to thread now that you have admitted what I was after.

And what right do you have to condemn homosexuality except for your misinformed opinions about same sex marriage?

I have plenty of grounds to condemn Christianity. In another thread I told you that the number of priority of a loving God would be to do everything that he could do to keep people out of hell. You replied:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

What you want, Johnny, is for God to come down and properly reveal himself to everyone. Bye, bye free will...

I replied:

[quote=JohnnySkeptic] Your argument is ridiculous. Consider the following Scriptures:

John 2:23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.

John 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

John 6:2 And a great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased.

John 10:37-38 Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father. (NIV)

Even AFTER the Holy Spirit came to the church, Acts 14:3 says “So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders.” (NIV)

Following is one of my early arguments in this thread that you have never replied to because you did not want to embarrass yourself, and yet you have to audacity to tell me that I do not reply to some of your arguments. You are a tyrant. You try to control which arguments get discussed, and you always avoid reply to arguments that you know are difficult for you to deal with. I never intentionally run away from any of your arguments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

Many Christians claim that there is a lot of evidence other than faith that reasonably proves that the Bible should be trusted, but they would surely reject THE VERY SAME EVIDENCE if the evidence said that everyone would go to hell. In other words, the number of eyewitnesses, the number of gospels, or the number of copies of ancient manuscripts would not matter at all, in fact, even if the evidence was TWICE AS GOOD as the evidence that is found in the Bible.

Regardless of the evidence, self-interest ALWAYS presumes that whenever a person is confronted by evidence that claims that he will go to hell, it is best to argue against the evidence, or if a person is uncertain to hope that the evidence was wrong. There would be no possible advantage in doing otherwise.

If a powerful being came from outer space, claimed be a God other than the God of the Bible, demonstrated FIRSTHAND in front of everyone in the world, not hearsay evidence like in the Bible, that he could destroy a mountain in one second, said that he was going to destroy the earth in six months, and left the earth, most Christians would hope that the supposed God would somehow not be able to carry out his threat. On the other hand, if a being from outer space came to earth, claimed that he was Jesus, and demonstrated THE EXACT SAME POWERS, Christians would hope, in fact assume, that the being was actually Jesus. It is interesting to note that even if that being was an imposter, as long as he provided Christians with a comfortable eternal life, that would be fine with them. Eternal comfort is the prize completely regardless of who provides it.

Hypothetical arguments are often excellent means of revealing inconsistent arguments. Christians frequently use them whenever they believe that it suits their purposes to do so. A good example is C. S. Lewis’ ‘Lord, Liar, or Lunatic.’ Evidence that cannot be consistently applied is not evidence at all.

You speak harshly about atheists (I am an agnostic), but the vast majority of people in the world are religious people. In addition, many non-Christians are much more moral than the typical Christian is. Further, the largest colonial empire in history by far under a single religion was conquered by Christian nations by means of persecution, murder, and theft of property, actions that were completely contrary to the teachings in the New Testament. At any rate, the Bible does not teach that a person can go to heaven on good conduct alone. I submit that God does not have good conduct. For instance, Exodus 4:11 says "And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord?" How utterly detestible. Why do you justify such awful behavior? Possibly because you are afraid to contest one single thing that God does lest you go to hell?

Do you believe that might makes right? What evidence do you have that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfect? Are you an inerrantist? If so, where is your evidence? If not, how do you pick which Scriptures are inerrant?

What’s the matter, are you bashful?

Ellis · 07-07-2006, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Haran
What does it benefit you? Why would you even think of someone else (aside from the fact that you currently live in a society that looks favorably upon such a thing)? After all, it decreases the amount of personal gain for you.

I find happiness in sources other than my own wealth and convenience. Who are you to say what my "personal gain" is? Helping people makes me happy.

Quote:

Are you beginning to see the "evil" and "immoral" potential in atheism/agnosticism? It is there...

See above. This potential exists only for sociopaths, people who don't care about the well-being of others. The only way religion makes things different for such people is that they are afraid they will go to Hell if they don't follow the rules. In this case a religion like Buddhism, which clearly states that kindness is a virtue and cruelty is a sin, would be more helpful in frightening them into shape.

Quote:

if you ever visit Africa and see tears streaming down a malnourished child's face, I think you will know unhappy when you see it.

This image is meant to instill pity in me, correct? I don't like feeling pity (or ignoring it, which makes me feel guilty.) So I help people, and the pity is replaced with a sense of having done good, which makes me happy.

I want other people to be happy because it makes me happy. I think the reason religious people have a hard time understanding this is because they have always had the mindset of needing a reason to help people: it will get them into Heaven, they will reincarnate to a better form and reach Nirvana, etc. But I don't need a reason. I help people because want people to be happy, which I suppose makes me an evil, selfish atheist.

Quote:

" Just because a system is complicated doesn't mean it's totally invalid."
I don't intend insult, but I wonder if you see the irony in this statement from a Christian or theist point of view? If not, I'll let you in on the secret.

No. Please explain.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ellis
This is the hard part. However, religious morality does not solve the question.

Ah...but I didn't say it did. See, my postings may not really apply to you. Please do read all of my posts, though, if you haven't. I am mainly directing my attentions toward those atheists/agnostics who believe they somehow have the higher moral ground. They would be wrong.

I apologize if I've misinterpreted you. However, I do think aspiring towards human happiness is a goal more worthy of my efforts than trying to obey the nonsense in Israeli tribal myths (or any other superstition posing as morality).

Quote:

This still does not take into account the fact that this [making rules for one's children] impinges on their happiness

But it also contributes to their happiness later. Happiness is tricky business.

Quote:

Then I would call you an agnostic and not an atheist, for the very name atheist means a (no) theos (God). You are denying the existence of God(s) with the very label that you brand yourself.

You misunderstand. I allow for the possibility that there is a God in the way that I allow for the possibilty that the sun will not rise tomorrow morning. It's theoretically possible, but so unlikely that it doesn't really affect my decisions.

Quote:

What people around them? If they were all suffering and a burden to you, you have the potential to do away with them all so that only happy, "good" people will live and multiply.

I don't want to kill them, for a number of reasons: I don't like killing, I think killing is immoral (it destroys what little happiness they have and hurts those who love them), just because they are unhappy now doesn't mean they will never be happy, their life is their own responsibilty and not mine, it is very hard to know from objective criteria whether a person is or could be happy.

Quote:

It is physically possible for life to exist outside of our planet

Quite a strange statement for an agnostic. atheist

Why? Life, in terms of physical requirements, is simply molecules arranged in such a way that the molecules, and the arrangement thereof, reproduces itself. It is perfectly conceivible that such arrangements exist on other planets.

Quote:

It is physically impossible for a person's brain to function after it no longer exists.

See how depressing agnosticism atheism is as well? You die and that's it.

"There is no such thing as AIDS. The idea is too depressing." This is basically your argument. I don't care if the idea of death is depressing. I will die one day, and denying that fact won't make it any less true.

Quote:

There is no thought, no memory of loved ones...everything you ever enjoyed in life is forgotten and nothing you did will matter because you will be gone...

Are you trying to make me so depressed that I agree with you? Besides, I don't find it depressing. I didn't exist before I was concieved; do you believe in life before birth?

I would find eternal life incredibly boring. But with the realization that I will die one day comes an incentive to enjoy life as it is now, rather than wasting my time trying to procure the less painful of two eternal boredoms.

Quote:

The good news, at least to me, is that you don't have to live with that emptiness

I am not empty. I love life. Don't project onto me the way you think you would feel if you were an atheist.

Quote:

and that flawed world-view.

My world view is not flawed. It is true, and it makes me happy. Yours may make you happy, but it is untrue. You are in denial.

Quote:

There are alternatives that make more sense

"God gave birth to himself so that he could be sacrificed to himself in order to prevent himself from punishing people for breaking the laws he made." Right.

Quote:

and provide purpose

My life has purpose. I want to be happy. I would rather be happy than serve an entity which I'm not convinced exists.

Quote:

and objective truth

Right, so I can have an objective reason to do the things I currently do for subjective reasons. I don't think objective is superior to subjective, by the way.

Quote:

(if you should decide to have faith

"Faith" means choosing to believe an objective statement ("God exists") for a subjective reason ("I don't want to feel alone"). I do think the two should be kept separate. (My philosophy is that I should use the subjective to determine what I want and the objective to determine how to get it.)

Quote:

in a God).

Fine. Hail Eris. (You didn't say which god.)

A few questions for you. You don't have to tell me the answer if you don't want, or think you have a true answer when you aren't sure.

1. If there are so many reasons to believe in God, why don't I? If the Devil has blinded me, and has such a strong hold on me that I don't realize it, why doesn't God intervene and free me? Is the Devil more powerful than God, or does God really not love me at all? Or is there some other reason? I know you probably will say, "I don't understand you," but try. We are both human, we do not think that differently. Our difference in belief is due to circumstance; try to understand my circumstances.

2. Why do you believe in God, and all the accompanying beliefs on the nature of God and morality and the truth of the Bible? Look at the reasons. Are they reasons you would use to support other beliefs (e.g. "the sun will rise tomorrow" "The world is round" "Other human beings exist on this planet.") You don't have to tell me if you don't want to, but it's something to think about. If your belief is true, it should withstand scrutiny, and be strengthened because you know the reason.

I look forward to your response!

BadBadBad · 07-07-2006, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

I am arguing that atheism/agnosticism is no better.

I understand that there are some that are a matter of debate and some that are very difficult to understand, yes. However, I am merely trying to point out to those who feel morally superior to Christians and Christianity, that thy are being illogical, biggoted, and hypocritical.

Umm, atheism and agnosticism offer no moral standards, except perhaps my personal opinon that behavior associated with religion is immoral. If enough atheists agree, we could call that a moral standard. We as atheists obviously don't have that kind of social pull in the world. I can't see that atheism or agnosticism make any attempt to offer moral standards.

Mankind does have standards for morality, and since God doesn't exist, we have some across the board standards and then a lot of relative and differing standards from group to group and individual to individual. Christians are in the same boat.

Only I believe I can claim moral superiority for my personal moral standards. I adjust mine to avoid hypocrisy. I don't hold other people up to moral standards I can't define, and I don't hold them up to standards I refuse to follow myself. I don't denigrate others and I don't discriminate against others because they violate standards I can't follow myself.

Johnny Skeptic · 07-07-2006, 11:41 PM

Message to Haran: I am sure that readers would be very interested in knowing where you get your arguments from regarding Christian morality. Will you please post where you get your arguments from? If from the Bible, which particular Scriptures? Please be sure to include evidence that Christian behavior backs up what they claim they believe in in spite of the fact that a much smaller percentage of atheists end up in prisons than Christians do.

Superheavy · 07-08-2006, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haran

Kirillov, a character in one of Dostoyevsky's novels saw the point and killed himself...doesn't really matter if it took some thought...that was his ultimate decision.

Again, Kirilov was a nihilist. Atheism or agnosticism is not the same as nihilism.

Huon · 07-08-2006, 02:14 AM

Haran, did you ever hear of the Valladolid debate, in 1550-1551 between fray Bartolomé de Las Casas and Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda ? The question was : Are the American Indians really humans ? Do they have a soul ? Is it right, from a religious point of view, that they should be treated as slaves, like other animals ? Of course, in the debate, the American Indians were not asked their own opinion. Both debaters were Catholics, and Spaniards.

This debate shows that two genuine Christians can have diametrically opposed moral opinions.

By the way, the conclusion was : yes, the American Indians have a soul. Worse than that : they do not accept being slaves ! So, let us import slaves… from Africa.

07-07-2006, 11:41 PM	#108
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Atheist Dog-Pile Message to Haran: I am sure that readers would be very interested in knowing where you get your arguments from regarding Christian morality. Will you please post where you get your arguments from? If from the Bible, which particular Scriptures? Please be sure to include evidence that Christian behavior backs up what they claim they believe in in spite of the fact that a much smaller percentage of atheists end up in prisons than Christians do.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-08-2006, 02:14 AM	#110
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	Haran, did you ever hear of the Valladolid debate, in 1550-1551 between fray Bartolomé de Las Casas and Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda ? The question was : Are the American Indians really humans ? Do they have a soul ? Is it right, from a religious point of view, that they should be treated as slaves, like other animals ? Of course, in the debate, the American Indians were not asked their own opinion. Both debaters were Catholics, and Spaniards. This debate shows that two genuine Christians can have diametrically opposed moral opinions. By the way, the conclusion was : yes, the American Indians have a soul. Worse than that : they do not accept being slaves ! So, let us import slaves… from Africa.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.