rebelnerd

Seems to me that the terrorists are doing just fine already without using us as a rationale for killing people. Terrorists can attempt to justify anything they want, they are still terrorists. And what I think is the worst of all is that they are basing their actions on mythology. I feel that people can believe in anything they damn well please as long as this belief does not affect others against their will. When people's beliefs start to affect others against their will it is wrong. That too is a moral judgment.

There are just too many weak minded individuals who do not want to take responsibility for their actions and thoughts. They let mythology guide them. I define weak minded as a lack of character or integrity, not as a lack of intelligence.


Filo

Media-1

Not at all! Moral relativism involves the rejection of moral absolutes. I'm not saying that just because I can't know in advance exactly what God would do in a particular situation, that this means God is morally arbitrary or capricious.

The reason I can't speak on God's behalf in any particular situation is because God makes His moral judgements with perfect knowledge.

Even if we don't know for sure what God would do given a particular situation, we are still guided by the same principal: do what we believe is the right thing to do. In most cases, that is not difficult to discern. If we're unsure of the right thing to do, we should ask God.

Media-1

Autonemesis

I know, and that is what you are doing.

Quote:

I'm not saying that just because I can't know in advance exactly what God would do in a particular situation, that this means God is morally arbitrary or capricious. The reason I can't speak on God's behalf in any particular situation is because God makes His moral judgements with perfect knowledge.

Under these circumstances, how can one tell the difference between between an arbitrary and capricious act, and a deliberate and just act? If perfect knowledge is required for moral judgments, then morality for humans is impossible.

What if God's morality requires that he not answer your plea? I know that human believers like to say that God will always answer a prayer if the heart is open to receive the answer. But those people do not have God's perfect knowledge, so they could easily be mistaken. Furthermore, how can you tell the difference between God's answer and your own wishful thinking? Doesn't it still come down to a personal judgment call?

Media-1

Actually, some of them are saying that they want to destroy us because of our morality (or lack of morality).

My point is that if human survival is highly dependent on humans adopting the "right" moral values, then how should we respond to their logic? Can we prove them wrong in their assessment of our morality vs theirs?

How do we know who's morality is best for human survival? What if their morality is better for human survival? Doesn't human survival seem doomed anyway? Either a giant asteroid will hit us, or eventually the sun will burn out. Does any species last forever? Morality needs to be grounded in something absolute.

Media-1

Media-1

You've made a lot of great points here. I just admit my own imperfect knowledge and understanding and trust that God will guide me. That's what faith is all about.

I could trust in my own wisdom and knowledge, but where has that gotten me? So, even though I don't have all the answers to your questions, I think that trusting in God has blessed me; trusting in something other than God has always led to hardship for me.

Media-1

Autonemesis

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Then why on freakin' Earth do you pick the most controversial, incomprehensible, unpredictable, unapproachable, misunderstood, misapplied idea ever conceived, the slipperiest one of them all namely "God", to ground it in????

rebelnerd

And just what is your reason? How is it more justified than my getting pissed off about it?




Nothing odd about it. Don't you value humans more than ants?


Media-1, would you answer these questions I posted on the first page please?

Filo

Autonemesis

You may find it strange, but I can relate to that very much. The times that have been a hardship or that have brought a painful outcome for me were the ones where I failed to exercise sufficient doubt about my understanding of the adventure I was embarking upon. Wishful thinking has gotten me into more trouble than I care to recount.

Dr Rick

That is a bifurcation fallacy; an omnipotent god would have more than just two alternatives open to him, or else he would not be omnipotent. He could allow free-will and still not allow the little children he so loves to fry in mommie's car. Once again, if he can't do that, than he is limited and not omnipotent.

Rick

Media-1

So nothing "bad" ever happens? Then if you lived in such a perfect world, never having any contact with "bad", how could you know what "good" or "bad" is? Aren't you saying that a "good" god wouldn't allow something "bad" to happen? This is not a valid judgement of God based upon your own criteria. Your judgement of God is actually self refuting.

Media-1