Guest end3 Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 If we assume Love an absolute, the mechanism that will produce that absolute is Grace and Forgiveness. Legislation nor force will work. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 9 On 8/9/2017 at 0:23 PM, bornagainathiest said: Posted 8 hours ago 8 hours ago, bornagainathiest said: End, Your argument (deregulate and what's left is grace) is nothing more than a rehash of Jesus' message of NT grace replacing OT law. Therefore, your argument is another faith-based exercise in circular logic. You believe by faith that grace is better law because the Bible (which you believe by faith) says so. No, I've given rationale regarding population, freedom, and purpose..... faith is not my sole reason. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ My bad then. Sorry, I thought you were making an entirely faith-based argument, End. Since that's not the case, I'll proceed on the assumption that you are making an argument that doesn't rely on faith in anything religious, supernatural or spiritual. That your faith in the thing you call grace is a purely secular thing. That you view this grace to be some aspect of the human mind. So are you arguing that this one, single aspect of human psychology is the foundation of all human morality? @End3: What BAA has asked here ties into my question on what you think about morality, your position on it. BAA is trying to nail down the grace aspect of your position, while I'm trying to work out if you think this is objective or subjective. Can you please answer both our relative posts several ones above? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76336-moral-law/?page=7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 2 hours ago, end3 said: If we assume Love an absolute, the mechanism that will produce that absolute is Grace and Forgiveness. Legislation nor force will work. End of story. When I think of God's love, grace and forgiveness, what naturally comes to mind is Hosea 13:16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted August 16, 2017 Super Moderator Share Posted August 16, 2017 I'm not sure I agree. If something were an absolute, wouldn't it be complete within itself? And, if so, wouldn't it not need a mechanism to produce it? As an absolute, love is capable of producing grace and forgiveness; but I don't see it operating the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 I don't like the word "absolute" but is there an objective morality? Something put into place by natural selection in the human species over living in social groups for thousands of years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LogicalFallacy Posted August 17, 2017 Moderator Share Posted August 17, 2017 20 hours ago, end3 said: If we assume Love an absolute, the mechanism that will produce that absolute is Grace and Forgiveness. Legislation nor force will work. End of story. What if we assume that the first assumption is false, and the rest bald assertion? What grounds do you have to say that anyone's love is absolute? I think most the time love is conditional on a vast number of factors. While it might be nice and romantic to think of 'unconditional' love how many actual examples of unconditional love are there? And what TRP said. @end3 PS: per BAA's re-quote above, the posts we want you to answer are shown below for myself and BAA respectively. Unfortunately keeping track of posts without numbers is a nightmare. @midniteridersaid: "When I think of God's love, grace and forgiveness, what naturally comes to mind is Hosea 13:16." Personally I was thinking of the "Believe in me and love me or burn in hell" attitude as the absolute in love, grace and forgiveness. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 2 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said: What if we assume that the first assumption is false, and the rest bald assertion? What grounds do you have to say that anyone's love is absolute? I think most the time love is conditional on a vast number of factors. While it might be nice and romantic to think of 'unconditional' love how many actual examples of unconditional love are there? And what TRP said. @end3 PS: per BAA's re-quote above, the posts we want you to answer are shown below for myself and BAA respectively. Unfortunately keeping track of posts without numbers is a nightmare. @midniteridersaid: "When I think of God's love, grace and forgiveness, what naturally comes to mind is Hosea 13:16." Personally I was thinking of the "Believe in me and love me or burn in hell" attitude as the absolute in love, grace and forgiveness. Per your point LF, if there are any qualifications on love, as humans often do, then yes, I don't see it as absolute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 14 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: I'm not sure I agree. If something were an absolute, wouldn't it be complete within itself? And, if so, wouldn't it not need a mechanism to produce it? As an absolute, love is capable of producing grace and forgiveness; but I don't see it operating the other way around. Yes, I think humanity diminishes love.....and therefore needs a mechanism. To your last sentence, I think we would have to ask, what is the entity, love, if it's capable of producing grace and forgiveness. Love --> grace and forgiveness humanity practicing grace and forgiveness --> love then humanity practicing grace and forgiveness --> love --> grace and forgiveness Just playing around, thoughts please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 1 hour ago, end3 said: Per your point LF, if there are any qualifications on love, as humans often do, then yes, I don't see it as absolute. End, LogicalFallacy requested that you answer his questions and mine. 'Per your point LF...' is a response only to him. Therefore, here is a copy of my posting from that other thread, with the question I'd like you to answer please. It's the last sentence. Thank you. Posted 8 hours ago 8 hours ago, bornagainathiest said: End, Your argument (deregulate and what's left is grace) is nothing more than a rehash of Jesus' message of NT grace replacing OT law. Therefore, your argument is another faith-based exercise in circular logic. You believe by faith that grace is better law because the Bible (which you believe by faith) says so. No, I've given rationale regarding population, freedom, and purpose..... faith is not my sole reason. My bad then. Sorry, I thought you were making an entirely faith-based argument, End. Since that's not the case, I'll proceed on the assumption that you are making an argument that doesn't rely on faith in anything religious, supernatural or spiritual. That your faith in the thing you call grace is a purely secular thing. That you view this grace to be some aspect of the human mind. So are you arguing that this one, single aspect of human psychology is the foundation of all human morality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 2 hours ago, end3 said: Per your point LF, if there are any qualifications on love, as humans often do, then yes, I don't see it as absolute. "Believe in me or burn in hell" Is that a human qualification? God qualification? Or do you not really believe in that idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounin Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 "humanity practicing grace and forgiveness --> love --> grace and forgiveness" This is formatted like propositional logic, but it's too vague to be logic. It's mostly phrases strung together. This whole notion that God is automatically the best possible basis for an objective morality is also without basis in fact. God is one basis that one might propose. A basis which leads to a morality in which it's good to burn people in furnaces and kill them in droves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LogicalFallacy Posted August 18, 2017 Moderator Share Posted August 18, 2017 @end3 @bornagainathiest it should be noted that ends response was to my minor point in this thread. I haven't yet seen a response to the larger questions from myself and BAA in the thread posts that i linked in my post above. Imo this thread is a distraction from the important issues being discussed in the other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 18 hours ago, Rounin said: "humanity practicing grace and forgiveness --> love --> grace and forgiveness" This is formatted like propositional logic, but it's too vague to be logic. It's mostly phrases strung together. This whole notion that God is automatically the best possible basis for an objective morality is also without basis in fact. God is one basis that one might propose. A basis which leads to a morality in which it's good to burn people in furnaces and kill them in droves. Was just following the thoughts presented....love driving grace and forgiveness and grace and forgiveness producing love, so ??? And yes, to the latter, this would be the point of the discussion, A discussion, to weigh these thoughts. The aforementioned practical evidence appears to be a checkmark in the box for Christianity. To add, considering God were immediately residing with humanity and that an absolute morality were objectively real, then it kind of makes sense humanity failing to make the mark a given....and accordingly, the Law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 22 hours ago, midniterider said: "Believe in me or burn in hell" Is that a human qualification? God qualification? Or do you not really believe in that idea? I don't know why many here don't consider this a warning, a disclosure. If we are subjects of the universe how are we to escape our subjectivity? My mare bucks when she wants to escape....I'm seeing humanity doing the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted August 19, 2017 Super Moderator Share Posted August 19, 2017 10 hours ago, end3 said: I don't know why many here don't consider this a warning, a disclosure. If we are subjects of the universe how are we to escape our subjectivity? My mare bucks when she wants to escape....I'm seeing humanity doing the same. It is not the natural state of your mare to be bridled and harnessed. Who could blame her from bucking against being manipulated into a condition that is not her natural state. Now imagine your mare represents humanity and the bridle and harness represent the christian ideology of sin, hellfire, and "redemption". Again, you will see that it is not the natural state of humanity to be bridled and harnessed. We're not angry at god; we just don't feel like his people have any right telling us how to live or what is, and is not, natural. Especially not when we get lectured on absolutes and objective morality by people who are anything but objectively moral. jesus might be an okay guy; but his bride is a complete cunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 Matthew 7 : 15 - 20. 15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them. Two related questions. What are the spiritual fruits displayed by Christians (the bride of Christ) in this forum? If they say that the good fruits are divine (but impossible) targets Jesus wants Christians to aim for, then his advice on recognizing them relates only to bad fruit. Therefore, no Christian can grow good fruit for God. (Which contradicts scripture.) But if good spiritual fruit is possible for Christians, then where have we seen it displayed by them in this forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted August 21, 2017 Share Posted August 21, 2017 On 8/18/2017 at 9:03 PM, TheRedneckProfessor said: It is not the natural state of your mare to be bridled and harnessed. Who could blame her from bucking against being manipulated into a condition that is not her natural state. Now imagine your mare represents humanity and the bridle and harness represent the christian ideology of sin, hellfire, and "redemption". Again, you will see that it is not the natural state of humanity to be bridled and harnessed. We're not angry at god; we just don't feel like his people have any right telling us how to live or what is, and is not, natural. Especially not when we get lectured on absolutes and objective morality by people who are anything but objectively moral. jesus might be an okay guy; but his bride is a complete cunt. By this reasoning, we should all be walking around naked....everything in the natural state, unbridled... Seems a bit hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted August 21, 2017 Super Moderator Share Posted August 21, 2017 4 hours ago, end3 said: By this reasoning, we should all be walking around naked....everything in the natural state, unbridled... Seems a bit hypocritical. I'm not sure how you jump from "I'd rather not wear the chains of a slave" all the way to "I'd rather not wear clothes at all"; but, even if we made that leap, how is it hypocritical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now