Im agnostic athiest. I don't think a god exists, but of course, everything is possible when were considering something supernatural/Impossible to test...
Considering the fact that the current topic seems to be geared towards ethics, i guess i'll say what i think about ethics :smile.gif: Basically, to me, things that are "wrong" are actions that hurt other people or beings unneccesarily (Beings referring to animals). This includes things that indirectly hurt a person (like stealing). I stress "other". Is suicide wrong? I actually don't think so. What right do we have to stop them from taking there (probably painful) life? It is there body after all. Is prostitution wrong? If both people are doing it willingly and acknowledge the possibility of std's, than no its not wrong (Although if one has a std and doesn't tell the other, that would be wrong...). Are drugs wrong? No, as long as the impaired person refrains from drunk driving of course (which would probably hurt someone). We have no right to tell what people may put in there body, in my opinion.
My ethics come from the fact that if society is ethical, it would benefit us all one way or another. :smile.gif:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from illford_baker »
the gay sex would give me easy access to his spine so i can drive a screwdriver into it with a hammer.
Considering the fact that the current topic seems to be geared towards ethics, i guess i'll say what i think about ethics :smile.gif: Basically, to me, things that are "wrong" are actions that hurt other people or beings unneccesarily (Beings referring to animals).
As far as I know, God gives the law so we don't destroy ourselves. The ethics/morals Christians preserve have really only one purpose, which is to prevent people who do not yet know better from destroying their own soul. God really only has one law, which is love. That probably sounds very sappy, but it's not sappy. The only way I can explain it is this: One man said to C.S. Lewis, "God is love!" Lewis replied, "Yes, and you shall pay dearly for it."
Imagine telling someone without microbiology that they have to clean their hands when they're not visibly dirty.
Considering the fact that the current topic seems to be geared towards ethics, i guess i'll say what i think about ethics :smile.gif: Basically, to me, things that are "wrong" are actions that hurt other people or beings unneccesarily (Beings referring to animals).
Just curious, are you vegetarien?
Nope, but i did say "unnecesarily"... Although, i actually don't have problem with hunting, as i view that more as a part of nature (Even if its just recreation).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from illford_baker »
the gay sex would give me easy access to his spine so i can drive a screwdriver into it with a hammer.
You can only miss the point so hard before it's obvious you want to miss the point. When you're done that, I'll respond to one of your replies.
Sorry it has to be that way.
I don't mean to be offensive, but you keep repeating this mumbo jumbo and I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say. It's as if you're not even trying to make your point clear. You didn't respond to my previous posts, and you didn't respond to any of my points now. If I'm misunderstanding something you've said, you don't even bother correcting me and explaining what you really meant. Instead you write yet another post that has gone through this one-way encryption.
All I can think when reading your posts is wishy washy metaphorical La-La Land nonsense. Clearly I'm not smart enough to understand anything you have to say.
Well, if you want to know what it means you could at least ask, instead of assuming it is nonsense. If a person responds in a way that is not a simple question, I assume their intent is not genuine and don't bother. This may be incorrect but after having debated Atheists in many forums for a number of years I find it works best.
Also, I've been away a bit and have only had time to keep up with Icy for the most part.
I doubt you are not smarter than I am, but what exactly requires clarification? I don't do long posts.
I personally am vegetarien. Humans don't need meat to live, so I would call that unnecesarily killing.
The only reason we don't need meat is because we've found suitable substitutes. However, you're a wimp if you think that killing animals is bad. They're just animals, they won't invent a new thing beneficial to us or anything.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Tell me this, when in the world did virtual posts gain the ability to crap?" -Monork2 on ROBLOX.com
Well, if you want to know what it means you could at least ask, instead of assuming it is nonsense.
I assumed that you meant what you said. You were saying that explaining morality (that was supposedly authored by God) to people who don't understand God (or theology, or whatnot) is like explaining washing hands to a person ignorant of microbiology. Is this not what you meant?
I had just said there is no morality. God does not author morality, but the way he is existentially (if we can even use such a term) establishes a way of being. In the same way that fire burns cloth or hardens clay, but melts and purifies a metal like gold, so does the presence of God affect a person. The person who goes against this way is existentially transforming their soul into clay, cloth, straw, whatever metaphor you want. If they were to be exposed to God, they would burn. Rules are insufficient because they can be obeyed externally for show, while the person remains corrupt.
God does not author morality, but the way he is existentially (if we can even use such a term) establishes a way of being. In the same way that fire burns cloth or hardens clay, but melts and purifies a metal like gold, so does the presence of God affect a person. The person who goes against this way is existentially transforming their soul into clay, cloth, straw, whatever metaphor you want. If they were to be exposed to God, they would burn. Rules are insufficient because they can be obeyed externally for show, while the person remains corrupt.
This part of the post makes no sense to me at all. What does it mean to say "God existentially establishes a way of being"? That the nature of God's existence defines some sort of "way of being"? What is this "way of being"? If it's not morality, then what does it have to do with it? What does it mean to "go against this way"? How does a person get exposed to this God?
How do you know any of this?
I have no idea what to make of it. It's just another riddle.
This.
What does it mean to say "God existentially establishes a way of being"? That the nature of God's existence defines some sort of "way of being"? What is this "way of being"?
Christ says, "I am the way." The way which God's being establishes is his Word, who also is God. Who also is a person. The 'Tao' is how that Chinese philosopher understood him, albeit impersonally as without revelation.
How does a person get exposed to this God?
In the context of our discussion, I was referring to the judgment. That is our guaranteed exposure.
How do you know any of this?
Some people told me that I trust, I read some, and some I experienced firsthand. How do you know what you know?
Proof for God:
Red Sea myth we have found Roman chariots and other things in there that prove the sea parting truly happened. (I mean why would a bunch of Romans say "Dude lets go drive our chariots into the sea and drown just for fun.")
Proof for God:
Red Sea myth we have found Roman chariots and other things in there that prove the sea parting truly happened. (I mean why would a bunch of Romans say "Dude lets go drive our chariots into the sea and drown just for fun.")
When they recently cleaned up a lake near where I live they found about a dozen cars from as early as 1930's. I seriously doubt god had anything to do with it.
Proof for God:
Red Sea myth we have found Roman chariots and other things in there that prove the sea parting truly happened. (I mean why would a bunch of Romans say "Dude lets go drive our chariots into the sea and drown just for fun.")
Boat sank?
Roman version of throwing away broken furniture? Angry sinaites throw it in there?
A bunch of roman chariots in the sea don't prove God for exactly the same reason finding toys in your stocking doesn't prove Santa Claus.
Yeah and I recall hearing that the red sea was a lot lower a few millennial ago and prone to flash floods.
Although morality may find it's roots in our evolutionary genetics, I fail to see how this means those feelings are preferrable. Evolutionary morality is pretty descriptive about why we have morals, but I don't feel there is any evidence those morals are preferable to others.
Although morality may find it's roots in our evolutionary genetics, I fail to see how this means those feelings are preferrable. Evolutionary morality is pretty descriptive about why we have morals, but I don't feel there is any evidence those morals are preferable to others.
Read the topic; no one has argued that. It would be a completely stupid argument to make.
There was some talk of evolutionay morality, and I know noone claimed that it should be used as a model, but it's natural for some people to assume that social interactions should be governed by the ordinary feelings individuals hold. Most people believe individuals are naturally untrustworthy and bad, so we need to encourage that behavior in select individuals.
When they recently cleaned up a lake near where I live they found about a dozen cars from as early as 1930's. I seriously doubt god had anything to do with it.
Well no **** it doesn't say in the Bible anything about cars and in fact that is probably the least valid argument you could possibly give towards this.
Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?-Discovered 1920
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.-Discovered 1911 (This is also funny the Bible states that our Solar System formed from a Nebula!)
The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsoever] passeth through the paths of the seas.-Discovered 1854
So please explain how they knew this some 1,000-2,000 years ago when the Bible was created. It took us quite some time to figure this out so in my opinion this can only mean one thing. And of course the Atheists will try and deceive this and say that it is not proof yet it is.
Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?-Discovered 1920
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.-Discovered 1911 (This is also funny the Bible states that our Solar System formed from a Nebula!)
The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsoever] passeth through the paths of the seas.-Discovered 1854
So please explain how they knew this some 1,000-2,000 years ago when the Bible was created. It took us quite some time to figure this out so in my opinion this can only mean one thing. And of course the Atheists will try and deceive this and say that it is not proof yet it is.
None of that makes any sense without Conspiracy Logic.
Considering the fact that the current topic seems to be geared towards ethics, i guess i'll say what i think about ethics :smile.gif: Basically, to me, things that are "wrong" are actions that hurt other people or beings unneccesarily (Beings referring to animals). This includes things that indirectly hurt a person (like stealing). I stress "other". Is suicide wrong? I actually don't think so. What right do we have to stop them from taking there (probably painful) life? It is there body after all. Is prostitution wrong? If both people are doing it willingly and acknowledge the possibility of std's, than no its not wrong (Although if one has a std and doesn't tell the other, that would be wrong...). Are drugs wrong? No, as long as the impaired person refrains from drunk driving of course (which would probably hurt someone). We have no right to tell what people may put in there body, in my opinion.
My ethics come from the fact that if society is ethical, it would benefit us all one way or another. :smile.gif:
Just curious, are you vegetarien?
Imagine telling someone without microbiology that they have to clean their hands when they're not visibly dirty.
cool story, but...
You can only miss the point so hard before it's obvious you want to miss the point. When you're done that, I'll respond to one of your replies.
Sorry it has to be that way.
Nope, but i did say "unnecesarily"... Although, i actually don't have problem with hunting, as i view that more as a part of nature (Even if its just recreation).
Well, if you want to know what it means you could at least ask, instead of assuming it is nonsense. If a person responds in a way that is not a simple question, I assume their intent is not genuine and don't bother. This may be incorrect but after having debated Atheists in many forums for a number of years I find it works best.
Also, I've been away a bit and have only had time to keep up with Icy for the most part.
I doubt you are not smarter than I am, but what exactly requires clarification? I don't do long posts.
The only reason we don't need meat is because we've found suitable substitutes. However, you're a wimp if you think that killing animals is bad. They're just animals, they won't invent a new thing beneficial to us or anything.
I had just said there is no morality. God does not author morality, but the way he is existentially (if we can even use such a term) establishes a way of being. In the same way that fire burns cloth or hardens clay, but melts and purifies a metal like gold, so does the presence of God affect a person. The person who goes against this way is existentially transforming their soul into clay, cloth, straw, whatever metaphor you want. If they were to be exposed to God, they would burn. Rules are insufficient because they can be obeyed externally for show, while the person remains corrupt.
This.
Christ says, "I am the way." The way which God's being establishes is his Word, who also is God. Who also is a person. The 'Tao' is how that Chinese philosopher understood him, albeit impersonally as without revelation.
In the context of our discussion, I was referring to the judgment. That is our guaranteed exposure.
Some people told me that I trust, I read some, and some I experienced firsthand. How do you know what you know?
Red Sea myth we have found Roman chariots and other things in there that prove the sea parting truly happened. (I mean why would a bunch of Romans say "Dude lets go drive our chariots into the sea and drown just for fun.")
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffBoat sank?
Venit, quessit, induravit.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffYeah and I recall hearing that the red sea was a lot lower a few millennial ago and prone to flash floods.
Venit, quessit, induravit.
http://anarchyinyourhead.com/
http://www.strike-the-root.com/
http://mises.org/
There was some talk of evolutionay morality, and I know noone claimed that it should be used as a model, but it's natural for some people to assume that social interactions should be governed by the ordinary feelings individuals hold. Most people believe individuals are naturally untrustworthy and bad, so we need to encourage that behavior in select individuals.
http://anarchyinyourhead.com/
http://www.strike-the-root.com/
http://mises.org/
Well no **** it doesn't say in the Bible anything about cars and in fact that is probably the least valid argument you could possibly give towards this.
Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?-Discovered 1920
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.-Discovered 1911 (This is also funny the Bible states that our Solar System formed from a Nebula!)
The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsoever] passeth through the paths of the seas.-Discovered 1854
So please explain how they knew this some 1,000-2,000 years ago when the Bible was created. It took us quite some time to figure this out so in my opinion this can only mean one thing. And of course the Atheists will try and deceive this and say that it is not proof yet it is.
None of that makes any sense without Conspiracy Logic.
My Pathfinder Campaign for the denizens of MCF: http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/1939035-where-are-we-sandbox-pathfinder-campaign-ooc/