Fundy Trying To Pass Off Proof Of God

[KT45]

all I am saying, as this last quote testifies, is that atheists have NO REASON to be moral, since morality is subjective to them.

 

Cheers,

 

Sye

 

P.S. My other forums have slowed down a bit so I will try to post here more regularly.

No atheist have to be aware of the negative consquences involved when doing a immoral act. Because of this they do have reason to be moral

 

 

Can you address this

You ask "Are their absolute morals?" on your site. If I say no, then you ask "Is that absolutely true?". The problem is that the first statement doesn't match the second. The first is asking if morals are absolute. The second is asking if statements are absolute. On first glance it can be confusing but in the end your just asking if my statment is absolute.

 

Oh and here are some sins I don't think are absolutely wrong. Lying, stealing, envy, jealously and dishonoring your parents. If I can find any situation where it would be not be immoral to do these then is it absolutely immoral?

[mwc]

2 Timothy 3:16 says:

 

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"

 

What you must understand is that ANY claim to 'ultimate authority' MUST be self authorizing. The Bible claims to be the word of God as can be seen in that passage from Timothy, and supports that claim in the books that were included in the New Testament. Surely the fact that Jesus authorized the Old Testament scriptures is good enough for me

The council of Nicea did not 'authorize' the scriptures, they discovered which were 'God breathed' by their own (the scripture's) authority.

 

Now before you protest to my claim that 'ANY claim to ultimate authority,' must be self authorizing, consider your own ultimate authority. I imagine that if it is not God, then it is your own human reason, tell me what tells you that your human reason is valid?

 

You see, if Christians used anything else to give authority to the Bible, then whatever they used, be it archeology,Bible professors, or councils of Nicea , then THAT would be their ultimate authority and not the Bible.

Well, what you have there is an unknown author, under the guise of Paul writing to a Timothy, giving authority to something called the "scripture." However, since the author of the text does not define exactly what it is the reference is to your assumption that it is to your collection of texts is unfounded. This is far from "self-authorizing." For all we know he was referring to their contemporary version of "Harry Potter" or maybe "People" magazine. You have no idea and anything you say is guess work. You must now concede this point unless you can tell me exactly what he meant by "scripture" and that you have evidence that he was specifically speaking of your 27 books (some of which may not have even been written as he wrote his words) or 66 if we're going for the whole modern bible (unless you want to account for all the variations of bibles we have evidence of through the ages...then be my guest).

 

In addition, your concept of "self-authorizing" is flawed as well. Someone/thing might well declare themselves ultimate authority but they must also be recognized to be ultimate authority. The declaration is the easy part. Someone like Stephen Hawking didn't simply roll his wheelchair into an office at Cambridge and declare he was the theoretical physics genius of the world. He had to earn it. He had to be recognized as such as his knowledge surpassed all those in his field. They had to acknowledge his accomplishments. That's how this works. By your rules I'm the self-declared King of the Universe. Prove me wrong since my statement alone proves me right and I never need to demonstrate anything beyond that.

 

With all that aside, I would still like it if you would define the moral laws for me (and everyone) please.

 

mwc

[Guest milphog6]

mwc said everything i was going to say and more. i gave you the benefit of the doubt that the bible could self-authoritize, BUT nowhere does it say what books should be included as authoritative. that is because the bible was not one book like we have now. and that's what you haven't answered yet. who gave the various councils, translators, etc. the authority to "discover" which books were true?

[Canuckfish]

 

I know this seems like a dumb question oh wise one but what happens when you get a bunch of microevolution events spread out over time?? a big change? wouldn't that be considered macroevolution? Or am I just crazy?

 

The term is 'self-deceived.'

 

 

Wait a minute.....

 

I have 2 words for you Sye

 

The FLU

 

The strain evolves (Yes there are different strains). The latest scare (in memory) is the bird flu they fear a mutation (evolution) so it will become airborne and easily transferred person to person. Mutations no matter how small are evolution. The mutation (if it is better fit to survive) will carry on until a new mutation that is more suitable for survival. And we call this magic science maybe you should check it out it is rather interesting...Not only that it is based in reality. Any Questions?

 

It is STILL A FLU STRAIN, and not a cat! Plus no increase in genetic information.

Now, how do you account for universal, abstract, invariant laws apart from God?

[Lunar Shadow]

Typical apologist tactic of moving the goal posts you have yet to state that the evolution that took place had to change species... There for I here by ordain you a piss poor apologist numbskull.... It is so easy to dismiss evidence for you because you invisible sky daddy will reward your deceiving words in his name when you are rotting in the ground.

 

 

As I have said to you before, I am done with you if you are gonna split hairs and ignore the evidences then you are not worth the waste of time.... This is not victory on your part stupidity does not equal victory. It just means that your lack of intellect is beyond reprehensible and should be painful.... If there were a god it would be.

 

The term is 'self-deceived.'

 

 

And for a definition of that term I suggest you look in the mirror

[Asimov]

Not quite, but close. The Bible authorizes itself in many ways, not only by the claim of authority. For instance it calls the reasoning of those who reject it 'foolishness.' When I hear people try to account for universal, abstract, invariant laws, outside of God, it authenticates the Bible by the foolishness that is spouted. Just keep an eye on this thread if you are not convinced. In fact I see a post below which might help.

 

What are you talking about? Could you list these universal, abstract, invariant laws? Could you prove that they could only come from God?

 

What foolishness?

 

All mutations are increases in information.

 

What kind of rebuttal is that? Just call what I say foolishness and suddenly I'm wrong? Mutations are increases in information. That is what a mutation is.

[Canuckfish]

You might not realize but what you said here is unbelievable rude....you have no idea how much I suffered, or how I agonized over my decision. So please don't act like you have any idea who I am or why I made the choices I did....

 

Many people think that the first sin in the Garden of Eden was eating the apple. The first sin actually was when Eve decided to be autonomous. The instant she decided that her mind would decide between Satan and God, her mind was no longer in submission to God.

 

I could have saved you some agonizing. The second you decided to be autonomous, your mind was no longer in submission to God.

 

believe me, I DID consider what you are saying...but what you are asking is imposible....as well as horiffic. Should I stone my child because he is unrully? Kill witches? It would be imposible in this day and age to obey ALL of the old testiment laws.

 

That is because this day and age is not under submission to God. As I said, I believe that some of those laws were intended for that culture and its ceremonies. Surely you can understand though, that if the reason you cannot follow God's laws is because they don't comport with today's society, then your priorities are a tad off. You are putting the authority of today's society over God. This may help you in today's society, but it does diddly for your eternal wellbeing.

 

please don't throw out that same tired old "you were never a christian" bit....I've heard it 5 million times before. If you want to have a civil conversation the first step is to not resort to ad-hominems.

 

When was your mind totally under submission to God, and when did it cease to be?

 

again, my choice to walk away was very painful and difficult for me...

 

Again, it didn't need to be. The second that you decided that you could choose, the choice was already made.

 

if reason is a gift from your god, then why does my reason tell me YOUR god does not exist...

 

Because you are 'suppressing the truth in unrighteousness.'

 

seriously though....this statement is so silly I don't even know where to begin....there are plenty justifications for reason outside the bible....even *gasp* OTHER RELIGIONS..... you might not know this, but there are actually other people out there who claim to know things about god WITHOUT READING THE BIBLE. I know it sounds crazy but its true.

 

This is EXACTLY my point. They reason without God and do not give Him the credit. They know God when they reason, yet they suppress the truth.

 

and this is supposed to me what to me exactly? I could claim that according to my world view pink flamingos will come a destroy the world someday....but that doesn't mean it will happen.

 

Right, because your claim carries ZERO authority.

 

All you say is the "explanation makes sense to me" right after you got through claiming that our ability to reason is based on the bible, you go and think for yourself instead..... shame on you...you're no better than me. Using your OWN brain to think for yourself....how COULD you?

 

My reasoning is in submission to God.

 

 

I know, I'm being snarky...sorry if it offends you

 

Not at all. I expect it.

 

...but you don't seem to realize how inconsistent your view really is..... I'm willing to admit my view may not be entirely consistent... but the world view I now embrace has room for inconsistencies. Yours does not...or at least shouldn't.

 

Please tell me how you make sense out of your ability to reason outside of God, then give me ONE inconsistency in my reasoning.

 

As far as the support for my reasoning, my reasoning is in submission to God, and the interpretation of the laws makes sense to me. I really don't think I should be building a railing around the roof of my house. I was up there cleaning the gutters yesterday, so I had my chance, but I declined.

[Guest milphog6]

2 Timothy 3:16 says:

 

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"

 

What you must understand is that ANY claim to 'ultimate authority' MUST be self authorizing. The Bible claims to be the word of God as can be seen in that passage from Timothy, and supports that claim in the books that were included in the New Testament. Surely the fact that Jesus authorized the Old Testament scriptures is good enough for me

The council of Nicea did not 'authorize' the scriptures, they discovered which were 'God breathed' by their own (the scripture's) authority.

 

Now before you protest to my claim that 'ANY claim to ultimate authority,' must be self authorizing, consider your own ultimate authority. I imagine that if it is not God, then it is your own human reason, tell me what tells you that your human reason is valid?

 

You see, if Christians used anything else to give authority to the Bible, then whatever they used, be it archeology,Bible professors, or councils of Nicea , then THAT would be their ultimate authority and not the Bible.

Well, what you have there is an unknown author, under the guise of Paul writing to a Timothy, giving authority to something called the "scripture." However, since the author of the text does not define exactly what it is the reference is to your assumption that it is to your collection of texts is unfounded. This is far from "self-authorizing." For all we know he was referring to their contemporary version of "Harry Potter" or maybe "People" magazine. You have no idea and anything you say is guess work. You must now concede this point unless you can tell me exactly what he meant by "scripture" and that you have evidence that he was specifically speaking of your 27 books (some of which may not have even been written as he wrote his words) or 66 if we're going for the whole modern bible (unless you want to account for all the variations of bibles we have evidence of through the ages...then be my guest).

 

In addition, your concept of "self-authorizing" is flawed as well. Someone/thing might well declare themselves ultimate authority but they must also be recognized to be ultimate authority. The declaration is the easy part. Someone like Stephen Hawking didn't simply roll his wheelchair into an office at Cambridge and declare he was the theoretical physics genius of the world. He had to earn it. He had to be recognized as such as his knowledge surpassed all those in his field. They had to acknowledge his accomplishments. That's how this works. By your rules I'm the self-declared King of the Universe. Prove me wrong since my statement alone proves me right and I never need to demonstrate anything beyond that.

 

With all that aside, I would still like it if you would define the moral laws for me (and everyone) please.

 

mwc

 

you missed this very important point. who gave the various councils, translators, etc. the authority to "discover" which books were true? and where can we find out who gave them the authority?

[Canuckfish]

Typical apologist tactic of moving the goal posts you have yet to state that the evolution that took place had to change species...

 

It didn't?!? News to me.

 

The term is 'self-deceived.'

 

And for a definition of that term I suggest you look in the mirror

 

Well in that case I"M RUBBER AND YOU ARE GLUE...

 

Cheers!

 

 

What are you talking about? Could you list these universal, abstract, invariant laws? Could you prove that they could only come from God?

 

Lets start with the law of non-contradiction. It came from God by the impossibility of the contrary.

 

 

All mutations are increases in information.

 

What kind of rebuttal is that? Just call what I say foolishness and suddenly I'm wrong? Mutations are increases in information. That is what a mutation is.

 

Sorry, I did not feel that it deserved a response. Hopefully no one here did either. Maybe you should post your sources for mutations that increase genetic information.

 

(This would go a lot better if other people on this thread policed their own when it came to outlandish statements).

[AbsolutPauer]

Please tell me how you make sense out of your ability to reason outside of God, then give me ONE inconsistency in my reasoning.

 

Alright Canucklehead, I'll see what I can do.

 

You claim that reason is dependent upon the existence of God, so it must be either a creation of God or be inherent to His nature. If it is a creation of God, then the axioms upon which logic is constructed (law of identity, law of noncontradiction, law of excluded middle, etc.) are not logically necessary and could be otherwise than they are. God could have made the law of noncontradiction false. For example, it would be possible for the Earth to be both closer to the Sun than Pluto and farther away from the Sun than Pluto. This is absurd, however, and we are left, reductio ad absurdum, with the conclusion that reason cannot be dependent upon God, insofar as it is posited as a creation of God.

 

If, on the other hand, reason is posited as inherent to God's nature such that the laws of logic are immutable, we still do not escape the problem that the laws of logic are contingent upon God's nature and could be different if His nature were different. Thus, it would still be possible for the law of noncontradiction to be false, which is absurd.

 

To reply that God's nature could not be such that the law of noncontradiction would be false would be to apply a standard of logic that is not dependent upon God, but upon which God depends, which would defeat your own argument.

 

I have shown you an inconsistency in your reasoning. Now I ask you, how do you make sense of your reason in light of your belief that reason is dependent upon God?

 

Special thanks to Michael Martin

[Kuroikaze]

 

Please tell me how you make sense out of your ability to reason outside of God, then give me ONE inconsistency in my reasoning.

 

As far as the support for my reasoning, my reasoning is in submission to God, and the interpretation of the laws makes sense to me. I really don't think I should be building a railing around the roof of my house. I was up there cleaning the gutters yesterday, so I had my chance, but I declined.

 

 

I could go on at length about the nonsense you posted, but most of it was just opinions or rank dismisals of my personal struggles....I'm not going to let you turn this into a insult match.

 

I clearly showed you were your inconsistency was...the fact that you can't see it just shows how deluded you are.

 

You CLAIM to only believe the bible, but your belief that the laws can be divided into 3 does not COME from the bible....it came from Thomas Aquinas. Therefor your position is just as relative as mine is.

 

 

 

That is because this day and age is not under submission to God. As I said, I believe that some of those laws were intended for that culture and its ceremonies. Surely you can understand though, that if the reason you cannot follow God's laws is because they don't comport with today's society, then your priorities are a tad off. You are putting the authority of today's society over God. This may help you in today's society, but it does diddly for your eternal wellbeing.

 

 

you manage to completly miss the point....If you actually obeyed all the OT laws in THIS society then you would, likely, be inprisoned or even excuted for crimes. I very much doubt the judge will accept the "she was a witch" defense for murder.

 

My priorites are right on the money....I'd rather improve the lives of others around me than kiss up to some being you can't even prove is there. Why don't you ask yourself why so many of the laws in the bible seem designed to make us miserable..... Why do so many of them seem totally and completly immoral by our societies standards?

 

Oh yeah, we are sinners so we don't know what will really make us happy right? Bull crap, I'll decided what makes me happy or unhappy. If god doesn't like it he is free to let me know anytime he wants...........

 

..........

 

 

Well, he hasn't said anything yet, but I'll let you know if he does.

[Kuroikaze]

 

Many people think that the first sin in the Garden of Eden was eating the apple. The first sin actually was when Eve decided to be autonomous. The instant she decided that her mind would decide between Satan and God, her mind was no longer in submission to God.

 

I could have saved you some agonizing. The second you decided to be autonomous, your mind was no longer in submission to God.

 

 

 

On this point I completely agree....once a person has decided to make up their own damn mind about things instead of just believing what their pastor or some 2,000 year old book tells them, they are free.

 

Sure I submit my self to authority, all the time in my daily life, the governments authority, My boss' authority, my landlords authority. However, in these cases I can clearly see the purpose, and need for those authorities, as well as full knowledge of the consequences of disobeying.

 

The point is, that I CHOOSE to submit my self to these authorities...you are effectively telling me to turn off my brain and never think about the consequences of my actions.

 

If you ask me, you're the one REALLY in danger of having no moral standards because you have, admittedly, given up the right to decide right from wrong.

 

As much as you might claim to base your standard on God, questions still remain, Your understanding of god comes out of your culture, the church you attend, the family you grew up in, and so on. How do you know these are right? If you are not allowed to think for yourself?

 

Of course I have the same influences, but I admit those infulences, and admit the relative nature of said influences. Therefore I am more than willing to change my ideas if proof can be offerd that I am wrong.

 

You on the other hand, blindly hold on to the idea that your opinion is right. The nature of your beliefs make them much harder to change than mine...thus you run the risk doing horible things to other people and believing them to be moral.

 

If you don't think it can happen just read about the crusades, or the way our country treated the indians.

[Lunar Shadow]

I clearly showed you were your inconsistency was...the fact that you can't see it just shows how deluded you are.

 

 

See that’s the problem he just likes to have his tantrum and ignore anything anyone has just said by saying the same damn thing over and over and over again until we give up.... IMHO not worth the time or effort for the sheer fact that this one is so wrapped up in his own little dream world he will never poke his head up for a reality check and realize the fallacies in which he operates. The one I have seen over an over is his circular reasoning. But we have seen time and time again this is nothing new to us.... and Christians who don't pay attention to the history of this board are doomed to repeat it :grin

[Astreja]

I was a nominal Christian (baptized as an infant) and never did find any measure of genuine Christian belief. The story made no sense to me from the start, and the more I learned of the history and theology the more I detested it.

Detesting something does not make it untrue.

Neither does it make it unfalse, sir.

Many people detest Christianity as they love their autonomy too much.

And some, like me, are simply appalled by the concept of using human sacrifice to "make things right."

 

In my opinion, anyone who accepts the "sacrifice" of Jesus as a good thing is morally bankrupt, not by virtue of the mythical Original Sin, but by allowing someone else to take the fall for them. It is wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Nothing can redeem the crucifixion myth in my eyes.

[Lunar Shadow]

Typical apologist tactic of moving the goal posts you have yet to state that the evolution that took place had to change species...

 

It didn't?!? News to me.

 

 

Show me Sye come on show me where you said that The expample of evolution that I needed to provide had to be from one species to an other. Oh wait you never did, you just asked for an example of observable evolution thats all you said and thats what I provided. So either you have no clue what you are saying, you are just moving the goal posts, or you don't know what the hell evolution is. None of wich would surprise me all that much.

[Guest michaelrosenweig]

We will see who the idiot, fuck tard, and retard is when the end comes and you find yourself being judged by someone who you do not think exists. "The Evil Demon Himself"

 

who will send your sorry ass to a real HELL, like it or not, that is the way it is, and you will find out when you are dead that what Iam saying is true.

 

aside from that bullshit, here is the real deal, if you will listen with an open mind.

 

this idiot has been prayed for and HAD two incurable diseases by man's standard vanish from my body. these were ulcerative colitis, and the other was Rheumatoid artritis.

 

this fuck tard, as you call it had his girlfried call me when a twister was abover her home in western new York. she said Michael, please pray, my son and me are about to lose our homes to a tornado. that twister vanished as quickly as it formed. This happened in october of 2001

 

There is actual documentation in a hospital about how sick unto death I was. This happened from 1975 to 1985. further, I can get notarized documentaion, actual medical records, forgive the redunantcy to back up what I am saying.

 

Pertaing to the tornado, my girlfriends son took a video of it coming close to their house.

 

all kidding aside.

 

May bad karma fall on me if I would lie about what I believe to be miracles

still I remain,

Very Truly Yours,

Michael J. Rosenweig

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

for all you scientists out there: What caused the photons, protons, electrons, energy particles, cosmic dust, and gravity fields to form? Does anyone have an answer for me? Email me privately, and I have other pretty good points of interest for you.

 

Hey idiot, I don't know the answer to your question! But guess what! I don't make up shitty fake answers like you retards do! (besides, I'm no scientist, so I'm sure someone knows, and even if not, someone will eventually)

 

Now idiot, tell me what caused your god?

If protons, electrons, energy particles, cosmic dust and gravity fields NEED to have "come from something", then so does the evil demon you worship.

What's that? No he doesn't? Oops. You either play by the rules or you don't play, fuck tard. If your god doesn't require a creator, there's no reason all the other stuff requires one too.

[Dhampir]

First off, I have had a tornado form directly over my head, spiral winds whipping me all over the road, rain falling to the ground and flying back up, only to disappear "miraculously", and there was NO ONE to pray it gone because no one knew it had happened.

 

Second, Rheumatoid Arthritis is not completely incurable. I don't know much about ulcerative colitis, and by much I mean anything, but what proof do you have that the only possible way that disease could have been cured by prayer other than your belief? You say that 'by man's standards' those diseases were incurable, but in truth, 40 years ago certain diseases were incurable that aren't now. I'm sure your case isn't unique, nor do I think I would find that all cases where people have gone into remission from it were christian.

 

Could have been an experimental treatment, or spontaneous remission (it's not all that uncommon), or it could have been misdiagnosed. I know of a study that shows that people who were prayed for were not more likely to survive--I believe it was open heart surgery. The point is that you have nothing to base your belief on aside from the emotionalism I read in your posts--the hope that your belief is real. That you have something to pin your faith on. You need something real to justify your belief, just as we need something real to justify your justification. You sir, are in the same boat as us, you just don't want to acknowledge that your questions.

 

Third, it looks to me like you didn't answer Nick's question. All name calling and belittling aside, if all things within the universe had to have a creator, then what created the god that created the universe?

[Astreja]

We will see who the idiot, fuck tard, and retard is when the end comes and you find yourself being judged by someone who you do not think exists. "The Evil Demon Himself"

 

who will send your sorry ass to a real HELL, like it or not, that is the way it is, and you will find out when you are dead that what Iam saying is true.

Ah, yes. More faith-based fearmongering.

 

Michael, I believe with every fiber of my being that a true god would not under any circumstances create such a place as the Christian concept of hell. I see the place for what it truly is, a construct of power-hungry mortals that is used to keep the unwashed masses in line. The concept was so successful at terrorizing the uneducated that it was adopted by Islam as well.

 

I trust that any extant gods are good, not evil. And yes, I'm prepared to stake everything I am on this assertion. Better to go knowingly and honourably and uncomplaining into the fire than to slander a genuinely loving being with accusations of torture.

May bad karma fall on me if I would lie about what I believe to be miracles

Oh, I have relatively little doubt that you've had interesting experiences and that you honestly think you're telling the truth. I'm just not prepared to accept your experience as proof of one particular deity who consistently seems to ignore 99% of the prayers. But somebody has to be in that 1%, so consider yourself a very fortunate statistical anomaly.

 

As for the state of your karma, I leave it in the hands of this fine lady:

[Guest milphog6]

wow, i'm glad that we have absolute proof with no other explanation except god's almighty magic. i think if you look at the world around you, things happen everyday. good, bad, indifferent, and they don't need some higher purpose or cause', they just happen. you see a long time ago people didn't understand the world around them, so they made up stories of why things happened, storms, death, animal attacks, etc. maybe that helps some people, but there are a lot of us in the world who can see a tornado and know that it is because of the weather, and when the conditions are not right, the tornado stops. example, "proof" of god's love is a rainbow, these magical light beams that god supposedly put in the sky to remind us that he would never destroy the world with a flood. hmmm...i must be part god because on a sunny day miraculously i can make these light beam promises with a garden hose.

[Canuckfish]

 

You claim that reason is dependent upon the existence of God, so it must be either a creation of God

 

It isn't, so we can dump that one.

 

If, on the other hand, reason is posited as inherent to God's nature such that the laws of logic are immutable, we still do not escape the problem that the laws of logic are contingent upon God's nature and could be different if His nature were different.

 

It ain't and it can't be. God is who He is.

[Astreja]

Oh, and a couple of other stats:

 

Spontaneous remission rate for rheumatoid arthritis seems to be in the area of 25%.

 

And I have a question for Michael: Which went first, the arthritis or the colitis? If the arthritis, and you suddenly cut back on your daily dose of NSAIDs, it's conceivable that the irritation in the colon also went into remission.

 

Disclaimer: I am not a doctor, but I hang out with 'em and type up a mean X-ray report.

[Canuckfish]

 

Please tell me how you make sense out of your ability to reason outside of God, then give me ONE inconsistency in my reasoning.

 

I clearly showed you were your inconsistency was...the fact that you can't see it just shows how deluded you are.

 

Well you could have posted one inconsistency after I asked for it. The fact that you can't is telling.

 

You CLAIM to only believe the bible, but your belief that the laws can be divided into 3 does not COME from the bible....it came from Thomas Aquinas. Therefor your position is just as relative as mine is.

 

Hmmmm. You have to misrepresent what I said, in order to make it conform to your notion that it is wrong. Show me where I said I ONLY believe the Bible. Clearly I said that the Bible is my ultimate authority, and not that it is only what I believe. I believe that my name is Sye and it is nowhere written in the Bible. I can believe this and STILL have the Bible as my ultimate authority.

 

you manage to completly miss the point....If you actually obeyed all the OT laws in THIS society then you would, likely, be inprisoned or even excuted for crimes. I very much doubt the judge will accept the "she was a witch" defense for murder.

 

First of all, as I stated repeatedly, some of the laws were only intended for the people of the OT, and not for us. With that said, what is earthly imprisonment compared to eternity with God?!?

 

 

My priorites are right on the money....I'd rather improve the lives of others around me than kiss up to some being you can't even prove is there. Why don't you ask yourself why so many of the laws in the bible seem designed to make us miserable..... Why do so many of them seem totally and completly immoral by our societies standards?

 

Because society is after the will of man, not the will of God.

 

Oh yeah, we are sinners so we don't know what will really make us happy right? Bull crap, I'll decided what makes me happy or unhappy.

 

Yup, just like Hitler did. (By the way, happiness is not the Christian goal, serving God is)

 

If god doesn't like it he is free to let me know anytime he wants...........

 

Oh He'll let you know buddy. Count on that one.

 

(By the way, how was it again that you said you accounted for universal, abstract, invariant laws outside of God?)

 

Cheers!

 

In my opinion, anyone who accepts the "sacrifice" of Jesus as a good thing is morally bankrupt

 

By what absolute standard do you call anything 'morally bankrupt?' If morality is a preference, who should care what YOU choose to call immoral?

 

By the way, the cruxifiction was the most heinous crime ever on earth. It was a terrible thing. God used that horror to wash away the sins of those who love Him though. I'd call THAT wonderful.

[KT45]

Is decieving people or lying absolutely immoral? If I can find one situation where it is not immoral to lie would it be absolutely immoral? What if I can find scripture where God lies/decieves people is it then absolutely immoral?

[Astreja]

In my opinion, anyone who accepts the "sacrifice" of Jesus as a good thing is morally bankrupt.

By what absolute standard do you call anything 'morally bankrupt?' If morality is a preference, who should care what YOU choose to call immoral?

I am currently in a mortal body, living a finite life in a universe that changes immeasureably with every passing second. I have no particular need of absolute standards and have found relative truths to be adequate for my needs.

 

And I'm not taking roll call on who does and does not agree with my particular version of morality. It would be useless to claim better morality by virtue of superior numbers -- That's an ad populum logical fallacy.

 

It's enough that I perceive something to be wrong, and I don't particularly care if I'm outnumbered. In my own mind, the critical battle has already been won.

[Canuckfish]

It's enough that I perceive something to be wrong, and I don't particularly care if I'm outnumbered. In my own mind, the critical battle has already been won.

 

Thank goodness you are not a Hitler then. (At least I hope you aren't)