Jump to content


Photo

There's Probably No God...


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#61 Hippocampus

Hippocampus

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Age: 53
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Camberley, England

Posted 20 November 2008 - 10:21 AM

This just confirms what the Bible says will happen. There will be a huge falling away (people rejecting God). Then a big revival. Then the rapture. These events just show how close we are. What you are now wittnessing, is prophecy being fulfilled. This part of the predicted prophecy has never happened in history.

View Post


Well, a few posters on buses hardly amounts to a "huge falling away", but I agree that it may be taken as a signal that public expressions of non-belief are becoming more acceptable (at least in Europe).

Can't agree about the prophecy aspect though. Surely there have been previous occasions when the level of religious belief fell sharply? I'm almost certain that I've read that it happened after the First World War.

#62 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 20 November 2008 - 09:34 PM

The difference is that to assume that something unproven exists, you need to have faith.

To assume it does not exist, you don't need faith. Only lack of faith.

Hans

View Post


And I only have to assume that evolution does not exist. I can also assume that God exists.

#63 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 20 November 2008 - 09:37 PM

Well, a few posters on buses hardly amounts to a "huge falling away", but I agree that it may be taken as a signal that public expressions of non-belief are becoming more acceptable (at least in Europe).

Can't agree about the prophecy aspect though. Surely there have been previous occasions when the level of religious belief fell sharply? I'm almost certain that I've read that it happened after the First World War.

View Post


Seeing that the huge falling away has only just now truly begun on such a large scale only in this recently past century of high technology. So we are now in the beginning of another high tech century, and you know what, atheism is getting more prevelant.

The first World War, ah yes such a fine time for the beginnings of advanced technology, and the evolutionary mindset take over. Even more so in the 2nd World War.

#64 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 21 November 2008 - 12:09 AM

I hope your not being serious.... 

1) He did not rape an infant.
2) He new what he was doing was wrong.
3) The society is not claiming the act as being moral correct.

View Post


I wasn't referring to the man in the article. I included that so that you wouldn't think I was making this stuff up.

But, to cut you some slack, lets assume that the entire society said they thought it was Ok to rape 2-week old infants.  Would that make it moral?

View Post


Not to me it wouldn't. But then, I come from a society that functions well when all it's participants are working together.

So, to turn the argument around, is God the only reason that you have a frame work of morals? Is God the only thing stopping you from raping infants? If God said tomorrow that raping infants was ok would you do it?

#65 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 21 November 2008 - 12:10 AM

What a group of persons think about an act does not mean that act is not absolutelly wrong.

View Post


The only agents that I can ask about morals are other people.

#66 Guest_92g_*

Guest_92g_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 November 2008 - 11:48 AM

So, to turn the argument around, is God the only reason that you have a frame work of morals?


God is the only reason mankind has a moral framework.

Your claim that society is the origin of morals is based on circular logic, and has no philisophical merrit. There is no explaining the origin of morality from a 100% materialistic viewpoint, morality is not matter or energy....

Is God the only thing stopping you from raping infants?


My Sin Nature doesn't operate in that trend, but obviously some people's do, or at least could.

If God said tomorrow that raping infants was ok would you do it?


God's rigtheousness is absolute, He cannot sin, and we will not condone sin.

When man makes himself out to be god, which what atheists do, you become your own god, then its absolutely the case that mankind will one day do what was seemingly wrong the day before.

Will you ever answer the question about if raping infants is absolutely wrong or not?

Terry

#67 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 23 November 2008 - 05:28 PM

God is the only reason mankind has a moral framework.

Your claim that society is the origin of morals is based on circular logic, and has no philisophical merrit.  There is no explaining the origin of morality from a 100% materialistic viewpoint, morality is not matter or energy....

View Post


My contention is that there is a human component to the moral framework. No circular logic, just men judging men.

My Sin Nature doesn't operate in that trend, but obviously some people's do, or at least could.

View Post


Some peoples could. Yours could. You wouldn't know unless the holy spirit convicted you of that sin. Is the only thing holding you back from rape your god? Is the only thing that convinces you that you have done wrong the holy spirit?

God's rigtheousness is absolute, He cannot sin, and we will not condone sin.

View Post


That is an awfully big claim, and one big statement to live up to.

When man makes himself out to be god, which what atheists do, you become your own god, then its absolutely the case that mankind will one day do what was seemingly wrong the day before.

View Post


Atheists do not believe they are gods. Atheists don't believe there are gods.

I'd like to discuss this with you further, but I don't think this is the argument to do it in.

Will you ever answer the question about if raping infants is absolutely wrong or not?

View Post


No. I won't. Because I don't believe the rights and wrongs of morality are absolute the way you do.

#68 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 23 November 2008 - 08:22 PM

My contention is that there is a human component to the moral framework.  No circular logic, just men judging men.
Some peoples could.  Yours could.  You wouldn't know unless the holy spirit convicted you of that sin.  Is the only thing holding you back from rape your god?  Is the only thing that convinces you that you have done wrong the holy spirit?
That is an awfully big claim, and one big statement to live up to.
Atheists do not believe they are gods.  Atheists don't believe there are gods.

I'd like to discuss this with you further, but I don't think this is the argument to do it in.
No.  I won't.  Because I don't believe the rights and wrongs of morality are absolute the way you do.

View Post


You are an atheist, you are not chained by absolutes. Since this is the case, you could go out and shoot people one day just for inconvenience sake, and the next day wake up and think, hmm yesterday it wasn't wrong, so today I'm going to control myself and not shoot anyone because I'm atheist, and I make the rules.

Until some other atheist shoots you for inconvenience sake, or just so that he can get to wal-mart quicker.

#69 deadlock

deadlock

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,196 posts
  • Age: 43
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Rio de Janeiro

Posted 24 November 2008 - 01:52 AM

No.  I won't.  Because I don't believe the rights and wrongs of morality are absolute the way you do.

View Post


Is the assertion: "Morality is not absolute", an absolute truth ?

#70 Hippocampus

Hippocampus

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Age: 53
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Camberley, England

Posted 24 November 2008 - 06:09 AM

Seeing that the huge falling away has only just now truly begun on such a large scale only in this recently past century of high technology.  So we are now in the beginning of another high tech century, and you know what, atheism is getting more prevelant.

The first World War, ah yes such a fine time for the beginnings of advanced technology, and the evolutionary mindset take over. Even more so in the 2nd World War.

View Post


Not sure what you're getting at here.

#71 Guest_92g_*

Guest_92g_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 November 2008 - 07:02 PM

No.  I won't.  Because I don't believe the rights and wrongs of morality are absolute the way you do.


Then you believe there must be some situation that raping infants is justifiable moral thing to do....

Why can't you just admit it?????

Terry

#72 Guest_92g_*

Guest_92g_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 November 2008 - 07:29 PM

Some peoples could.  Yours could.  You wouldn't know unless the holy spirit convicted you of that sin.  Is the only thing holding you back from rape your god?  Is the only thing that convinces you that you have done wrong the holy spirit?


Well, me personally, I don't think I would ever commit rape, its kind of pointless, and my wife and I are very happy.. :rolleyes:

What God's word teaches us is that God has written his moral law into our conscience, described here in Romans 2:14-15 as our heart

ROM 2:14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,
ROM 2:15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them

The purpose of law is to restrain the human race, the Law God have given us in our hearts, and the Law's we effect as society.

Mankind does not need God's Holy Spirit to convice them of what they are doing is wrong, he gave them that at birth. The Holy Spirit's purpose in this age is to convict unbelievers of Sin. Consider Christ's testimony:

JOH 16:7 "But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper shall not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.
JOH 16:8 "And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin, and righteousness, and judgment;
JOH 16:9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me;

The reason mankind rejects the idea of God's morality is because they will have to face their sin problem with God. The crazy thing about that is that God has already taken care of it for you, all you have to do is believe...

That is an awfully big claim, and one big statement to live up to.


No, its not.... everyone knows God's glory through creation. Consider God's word in Romans:

ROM 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

Yet, you reject what is known about God, and make up lies(through stories about evolution, abiogenesis, etc,,,) about him and his creation, as it is written:

PSA 14:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God."

Please don't take the "lie" accusation as a gross indictment of you as an individual, its true of mankind in general.

Terry

#73 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 24 November 2008 - 10:34 PM

You are an atheist, you are not chained by absolutes.  Since this is the case, you could go out and shoot people one day just for inconvenience sake, and the next day wake up and think, hmm yesterday it wasn't wrong, so today I'm going to control myself and not shoot anyone because I'm atheist, and I make the rules.

Until some other atheist shoots you for inconvenience sake, or just so that he can get to wal-mart quicker.

View Post


I could do, but there are a number of things preventing me.

In no particular order:
1. I don't like hurting people. I have an empathy with my fellow human beings that means I wouldn't want them shot.
2. I like the society I live in and I would not like to spend the remainder of my natural life in prison.
3. The society I live in has banned the use of firearms.
4. If I really wanted to shoot people, I could join the army. Then I could shoot as many inconvenient people as I wanted.

#74 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 24 November 2008 - 10:35 PM

Is the assertion:  "Morality is not absolute", an absolute truth ?

View Post


Is this a trick question? It's an assertion, right?

#75 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 24 November 2008 - 10:39 PM

Then you believe there must be some situation that raping infants is justifiable moral thing to do....

Why can't you just admit it?????

Terry

View Post


I can't imagine a situation where I would rape an infant. I can imagine a situation where someone else might think that it is moral thing to do.

I'm not the one arguing from the position that morality is a set of rules laid down by God for everyone. I'm arguing that morals are dictated by the society an individual lives in and then acted upon by that individual as the situation warrants.

#76 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 24 November 2008 - 10:48 PM

Please don't take the "lie" accusation as a gross indictment of you as an individual, its true of mankind in general.

View Post


How can I take it any other way? You've just called empirical observation lies.

#77 Guest_92g_*

Guest_92g_*
  • Guests

Posted 25 November 2008 - 02:21 PM

How can I take it any other way?  You've just called empirical observation lies.

View Post


We all have the same observations...... The problem with your argument is that you think your interpretations are emperical, and they are not.

Terry

#78 Guest_92g_*

Guest_92g_*
  • Guests

Posted 25 November 2008 - 02:26 PM

I can't imagine a situation where I would rape an infant.  I can imagine a situation where someone else might think that it is moral thing to do.

I'm not the one arguing from the position that morality is a set of rules laid down by God for everyone.  I'm arguing that morals are dictated by the society an individual lives in and then acted upon by that individual as the situation warrants.

View Post


Honestly, if you can imagine a sitation where raping an infant is a moral thing to do, and that's the outcome of your overall position:

1) Someone might think its the right thing to do
2) What's moral is decided based on what people think is the right thing to do

, then I have no idea why you think anyone should listen to anything you have to say.....

The whole point to this, is that you have no idea where morality comes from. You claim that it just comes from human thinkink, but you don't even know what thinking is. You probably think all thinking can be reduced down to a chemical reaction, but if that's the case, then who can say one chemical reaction is really preferable over another one?

The existance of a moral law, and it does exist, requires a law giver, and that's all there is to that.

Terry

#79 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 26 November 2008 - 12:27 PM

1) Someone might think its the right thing to do
2) What's moral is decided based on what people think is the right thing to do


Well, yes.

Someone might.

Which is why we as a society have elected representatives to pass laws to make such actions as your baby raping scenario a criminal offence. The majority of societies would deal with such behaviour swiftly and harshly.

, then I have no idea why you think anyone should listen to anything you have to say.....

View Post


Because I make a good point ;) And we're having a good discussion.

The whole point to this, is that you have no idea where morality comes from.  You claim that it just comes from human thinkink, but you don't even know what thinking is.  You probably think all thinking can be reduced down to a chemical reaction, but if that's the case, then who can say one chemical reaction is really preferable over another one?

View Post


I do think I have an idea of where morality comes from. I think it comes from society and the individuals that make up that society.

You're right. I don't know exactly how the thinking process works on a physical level. I'm not sure if it even is just chemical reactions. I do know that those chemical reactions can go wrong sometimes.

The existance of a moral law, and it does exist, requires a law giver, and that's all there is to that.

View Post


Does moral law have to be absolutely wrong or absolutely right?

#80 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 05 December 2008 - 11:33 AM

And I only have to assume that evolution does not exist.  I can also assume that God exists.

View Post


Evolution happens, you can observe it. The question scientists are trying to answer is how the effect happens.

That's what the argument is over. The way scientists explain the diversity of species is the gradual divergence of an existing replicating life form. The way creationists explain it is that their God makes all the different creatures we find.

The argument is about which one of these explanations makes the best predictions and which best explains the effects we see.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users