Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   We are the gods..
John
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 142 (15717)
08-19-2002 8:34 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by degreed
08-18-2002 6:37 PM


quote:
Originally posted by degreed:
One of my favorite passages is "judge a tree by the fruit that it bears". That's God's polite way of saying "you're smart enough to know that if it stinks, it's probably shit".
I like this one too. And the body of Christ smells pretty rancid.
quote:
If God did create the universe, as the Bible claims, then He needs to exist outside of the dimensions that make up the universe.
Same argument works for pretty much any creator god, yes?
quote:
This is also referenced throughout the Bible as God says that He "was and is and is to come".
Can you cite some verses? I know I have seen something similar but I can't find it.
quote:
But the slowly developing point is that the Bible notes that forgiveness is only granted to those who truly repent of their wrongs and truly attempt to pursue a relationship with Jesus.
There are verses in the Bible which suggest otherwise. Halcyonwaters, on this forum, has been discussing this point with me. HW takes the opposite view than you.
quote:
The difference, to me, is that i'm not required by God to be religious (i can't stand religion).
It seems likely to me that this is representative of the early church, though its hard to say with certainty.
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
[This message has been edited by John, 08-19-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by degreed, posted 08-18-2002 6:37 PM degreed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Tokyojim, posted 09-02-2002 3:34 AM John has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 32 of 142 (16144)
08-28-2002 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by mark24
08-13-2002 3:40 PM


i agree, mark. allen needs to take a chill pill b4 ill even consider reading his monolithic text.
however i will agree that humans are the masters of their own fates and masters of the fate of the earth
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by mark24, posted 08-13-2002 3:40 PM mark24 has not replied

  
Tokyojim
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 142 (16390)
09-02-2002 3:12 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by dogmai
05-08-2002 7:25 PM


Dogmai,
Interesting post. My suggestion is for you to read Job 38:1 - 41:34. If there is no God, you are right. We humans are supreme. If that were true, I'd really be worried. Power becomes the name of the game. There would be no real right and wrong. If you are in control, you can do whatever you want. There are no moral laws to stop you from treating people like animals or even killing them to advance your cause and control. How unfair life would be. If you have a tough life, you might as well just end it. There is no hope for justice against your oppressors. You are just stuck - a pawn of the oppressor. Imagine what would happen if you removed the influence of Christianity from this world. First of all, America might not even exist and if it did, it wouldn't be the Land of the Free. A lot of the freedoms you enjoy today came about because there were people who believed in a Supreme Being who made all mankind equal and therefore everyone has equal rights. Where else in the world do you find this kind of a view apart from the influence of Christianity?
You speak with great authority as if you know what you are saying is true, but it is simply your own made up religion. You would rather believe that you are a god and live however you want to than submit to a Holy Creator to whom you are accountable. But imagine if your next door neighbor started to do the same thing and you were on the receiving end of some injustice. You would be quick to cry "That's not fair. That's wrong. You shouldn't do that! That's not right." But with your worldview, you have no right to appeal to some moral law because none outside of what man has set up exists. And even then, man's laws only apply if you are caught. If you are not caught, murder is not wrong. It certainly is not a sin because there is no God to sin against.
I can't agree with your views because you cannot live by them. Sorry, probably too much to think about all at once.
Regards, Tokyojim

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by dogmai, posted 05-08-2002 7:25 PM dogmai has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Quetzal, posted 09-02-2002 9:18 AM Tokyojim has replied
 Message 36 by Mammuthus, posted 09-02-2002 9:42 AM Tokyojim has replied

  
Tokyojim
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 142 (16394)
09-02-2002 3:34 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by John
08-19-2002 8:34 PM


John, Excuse me for budding in to your conversation here, but two quick things. First the verses you are looking for that speak of God as "the One who was, who is, and who is to come" are Revelation 1:4, 8; 4:8; and 11:17. There may be other passages as well.
You mentioned talking with Halcyon. What thread is that?
Tokyojim
------------------
"Only one life, 'twill soon be past. Only what's done for Christ will last."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by John, posted 08-19-2002 8:34 PM John has not replied

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5872 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 35 of 142 (16409)
09-02-2002 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Tokyojim
09-02-2002 3:12 AM


I certainly don't agree with what little of dogmai's OP I could understand, but by the same token I don't feel up to letting your reply stand unchallenged.
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyojim:
Dogmai,
Interesting post. My suggestion is for you to read Job 38:1 - 41:34. If there is no God, you are right. We humans are supreme.

I'm not sure I agree with the use of the semantically-loaded term "supreme" with regards to man's place in the world. Certainly we as a species have been the most effective in all the history of life on Earth at modifying and manipulating the environment to suit our own ends. If that equates to "supreme", then I suppose it's fairly accurate. On the other hand, both dogmai's extreme anthropocentrism and your christian worldview somehow (correct me if I'm wrong) seem to be setting humans outside of the context of their environment - like we were somehow special or occupied some special place in the great scheme of things. This is patently untrue. We are unequivocally the biological products of the peculiar conditions on this planet. Just like every other species of animal - no more, no less.
quote:
If that were true, I'd really be worried. Power becomes the name of the game. There would be no real right and wrong. If you are in control, you can do whatever you want.
This is simply incorrect. It denies everything we have learned about animal behavior, and flies in the face of all of the current research into the evolution of sociality, reciprocal altruism, etc. You are attempting to play the old "all morality flows from God" card. Humans are "moral" because it is expedient to be so (expediency in this context means the achievement of material benefits together with the avoidance of unpleasantness in interaction with others). We have evolved over the last 10-15 million years to be pretty adept social animals. We have a lot of behaviors ingrained in us that allow us to function as a member of a group. With the vastly increased complexity of social interactions beyond the family/troop level, coupled with a fairly well-developed ability to communicate, we were able to codify some rules for interaction that permitted a certain stability in - and theoretically brought achievement of benefit to - a wider group. Religion is one way these rules are handed down the generations and laterally transmitted to others in the extended tribe. But it's only ONE of many transmission paths. Worse, it seems to have recently evolved to be less a simple rules-set for social interaction, and more akin to a parasitic organism whose sole purpose is to propagate itself. Many modern religions - and resurgent fundamentalist christianity is definitely in this category - today appear to be more interested in extending and maintaining control than in providing "moral guidance".
quote:
There are no moral laws to stop you from treating people like animals or even killing them to advance your cause and control.
There may not be "moral laws" (whatever those are), but "morality" - religious or philosophical - never stopped humans from doing whatever they wanted anyway. If religion were to go away completely tomorrow, I don't think anyone would notice. Secular law is what regulates modern human behavior and interaction. Even total fundamentalist theocracies like Iran under Khomeini relied on secular law and secular power, rather than moral suasion, to control those elements seeking to "buck the system". What's scary about theocracies isn't their reliance on secular power - all forms of government do the same - but their use of secular power to impose their particular religous trappings and beliefs on the populations under their control. There are innumerable examples from human history where a dominant religion used secular power for control. There are also innumerable examples where secular authorities cloaked themselves in the trappings of religion to do the same thing. As far as "killing each other like animals", there has been just as much unjustifiable slaughter in the name of religion as there has (some would argue more) in the name of any other ideology.
quote:
How unfair life would be. If you have a tough life, you might as well just end it. There is no hope for justice against your oppressors. You are just stuck - a pawn of the oppressor.
Unfair? Life is unfair - or rather completely unfeeling - not some highly-subjective version of "fair" (which means what, in the context in which you used it?). After all, you're born, you struggle through life, and then you die. What's fair about that? Actually, if you look at it rationally, the impetus for suicide should theoretically be higher under a religious worldview - after all, if you're guaranteed a wonderful eternity in whatever passes for heaven in your particular sect, why struggle? - let's get to the good part sooner. Naturally, this tendancy is why nearly every religion proscribes suicide. You can't replicate the meme if everybody's dead. There have certainly been enough cults (now mostly defunct for obvious reasons) who did just that (from Heaven's Gate to Jonestown).
As to the bit about oppressors, I'd have to say that I have never heard of a religion overthrowing an oppressor. Historically, the only solution to oppression is for a bunch of falible humans to get fed up with it, get together and either seek to get rid of the oppressor (rebellion) or overthrow the whole system (revolution). This is very much a secular change, accomplished through secular means. Praying to a deity doesn't seem particularly effective in the real world.
quote:
Imagine what would happen if you removed the influence of Christianity from this world. First of all, America might not even exist and if it did, it wouldn't be the Land of the Free. A lot of the freedoms you enjoy today came about because there were people who believed in a Supreme Being who made all mankind equal and therefore everyone has equal rights. Where else in the world do you find this kind of a view apart from the influence of Christianity?
What on Earth are you on about? I'd love to hear how you arrived at that little conclusion. The first colony in the US was formed for commercial reasons. It wasn't until the Puritans arrived that any religious bits appeared - they were looking for some out-of-the-way place where they could practice their rather odious little heresy in peace. Not much of a foundation for a new nation.
If you're trying to bring in that old, oft-refuted argument that the US was founded as a "Christian nation", you've got a tough sell. Please show in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution (as amended) what and where any principle is enshrined that didn't stem straight from rationalism and the Enlightenment - an almost wholly secular movement. The US is "free" because the founders - whether christian, deist, or agnostic - firmly believed in and adhered to (or at worst acquiesced to) the humanist principles of the Enlightenment. In point of fact, the Declaration was most vociferously opposed (and Jefferson forced to remove the bit about slavery) by the fundamentalist christian Rutledge from South Carolina. Christians, in other words, nearly put paid to the whole experiment because they DIDN'T agree that all men were created equal - negroes weren't men, they were property.
quote:
You speak with great authority as if you know what you are saying is true, but it is simply your own made up religion.
I agree with you here (for different reasons, obviously). Dogmai is just making the whole thing up.
quote:
You would rather believe that you are a god and live however you want to than submit to a Holy Creator to whom you are accountable. But imagine if your next door neighbor started to do the same thing and you were on the receiving end of some injustice. You would be quick to cry "That's not fair. That's wrong. You shouldn't do that! That's not right." But with your worldview, you have no right to appeal to some moral law because none outside of what man has set up exists. And even then, man's laws only apply if you are caught. If you are not caught, murder is not wrong. It certainly is not a sin because there is no God to sin against.
What a strawman! It's quite simple, really. Neither I nor my neighbor would contravene social constraints - with or without religion - because 1) it isn't expedient to do so since there will undoubtedly be repercussions; 2) it violates the evolutionary stable strategy of reciprocity (you really should read up on game theory - it's fascinating, especially "tit-for-tat" behavior and the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma); and 3) there is no way to determine beforehand that you won't get caught - the future is too unpredictable (and the more egregious the antisocial behavior, the greater the risk and the more extreme the retribution. Only an idiot or sociopath would even try it.)
"Sin" as most christians define it only exists in the mind of the christian who believes in it, since the only conceivable retribution for "sinning" occurs after death in some hypothetical afterlife. Want to talk about the bait and hook of religious indoctrination, sometime?
quote:
I can't agree with your views because you cannot live by them.
If it makes you feel any better, I don't agree with dogmai either. I think his entire argument is based on faulty logic and a complete lack of understanding about the evolution of the cultural affect called religion, the biological basis for behavior, and the psychology of belief.
quote:
Sorry, probably too much to think about all at once.
Regards, Tokyojim

Nope.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Tokyojim, posted 09-02-2002 3:12 AM Tokyojim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Tokyojim, posted 09-03-2002 9:33 AM Quetzal has replied
 Message 52 by Tokyojim, posted 09-05-2002 10:19 AM Quetzal has replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 36 of 142 (16411)
09-02-2002 9:42 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Tokyojim
09-02-2002 3:12 AM


So, if you did not believe in your particular religious view you would try to kill and get away with it and act in a sociopathic manner and if oppressed you would not resist? And all that prevents you from commiting all sorts of mayhem is fear of retribution from some mythical higher being or fear of punishment from said mythical being? Your religion does not sound particularly appealing the way you have framed it...it actually sounds rather feeble.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Tokyojim, posted 09-02-2002 3:12 AM Tokyojim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by gene90, posted 09-02-2002 1:19 PM Mammuthus has not replied
 Message 39 by Tokyojim, posted 09-03-2002 9:57 AM Mammuthus has not replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 37 of 142 (16434)
09-02-2002 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Mammuthus
09-02-2002 9:42 AM


Not something that needs to be advertised, that's for sure.
I think Christianity (and probably other ethical religions or religious philosophies I am not familiar with) are good because they encourage us to behave. In fact we're supposed to even struggle to have control over our thoughts and words. This is good, if we would actually live these commandments we would do very well.
But to claim that without religion we would be rioting in the streets is to do a disservice to the good qualities innate in most of humanity. I think most people don't need to be taught the most basic principles of right and wrong, I think it is born into them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Mammuthus, posted 09-02-2002 9:42 AM Mammuthus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Tokyojim, posted 09-03-2002 10:32 AM gene90 has replied

  
Tokyojim
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 142 (16481)
09-03-2002 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Quetzal
09-02-2002 9:18 AM


Quetzal,
Thanks for your reply to my post. I’ll try to respond a little to what you wrote to explain my self better. No doubt you will still disagree, but that’s OK. My feelings are not hurt. I don't know how to post like you did. I liked your format. So my reply might be hard to figure out. If so, I apologize.
Also, l am writing from Japan and my computer also types Japanese so it seems this computer is reading my aposterisk as a Japanese character. So interspersed in my comments you will see various Japanese characters. Just interpret it as an asterisk plus a letter. Sorry for the confusion. Not sure how to fix that problem.
My original post:
Dogmai,
Interesting post. My suggestion is for you to read Job 38:1 - 41:34. If there is no God, you are right. We humans are supreme.
Quetzal's reply:
I'm not sure I agree with the use of the semantically-loaded term "supreme" with regards to man's place in the world. Certainly we as a species have been the most effective in all the history of life on Earth at modifying and manipulating the environment to suit our own ends. If that equates to "supreme", then I suppose it's fairly accurate. On the other hand, both dogmai's extreme anthropocentrism and your christian worldview somehow (correct me if I'm wrong) seem to be setting humans outside of the context of their environment - like we were somehow special or occupied some special place in the great scheme of things. This is patently untrue. We are unequivocally the biological products of the peculiar conditions on this planet. Just like every other species of animal - no more, no less.
*********************************************
My reply to Quetzal's reply:
Let me start by asking you what your worldview is? Yes, I do stand by a Biblical worldview because I think it makes the best sense and is the best explanation of the way things are.
In calling man supreme, it is true in the Christian worldview that the earth and the animal kingdom were created for God’s glory first of all, but God also created it for man. So in Christianity, man is supreme — fundamentally different and of more value than the animals. Only humans were created in God’s image and only humans have a spirit that lives on after death. This is what the Bible teaches. So yes, I do believe that we are special! Is. 45:18 says that God did not create the earth to be empty, but He formed it to be inhabited. He created it specifically for us humans to live on. It is interesting that of all the heavenly bodies we see, only the earth is so well prepared for support of life. Some believe that is just luck of course. Yes, we humans are special. No other creature that God created was created in God’s image. Man was the last thing God created — the climax of his creation. Jesus became man to pay for the sins of mankind. He did not become an angel or an animal(animals cannot sin anyway). So yes, we have different points of view on the identity of mankind. You state 'This is patently untrue.' I'm sorry but you are exercising faith when you make a dogmatic statement like that. That is your particular belief and you are entitled to hold that belief, but you have no proof for that outside of the fact that it fits your worldview.
This is one great thing about Christianity. We humans are special. God loves us and created us in His image. Therefore, we not only have value in His eyes, but we have intrinsic value as a person because we are His special creation. I believe this is an important truth that has been lost in today’s society with the acceptance of evolution. Which has more value — a rock you pick up on the ground or one that has been carved into a useful tool? Usually it is the one that has been carved into a useful tool. If we are not created by God, our lives really have little meaning if any. If we evolved, like you said, 'We are unequivocally the biological products of the peculiar conditions on this planet. Just like every other species of animal - no more, no less.' This is really a very degrading view of humans. It frees us to treat each other as the mammals(animals) that we are. Who says we are entitled to certain human rights? What makes China’s treatment of it’s people any less humane than the way the US treats people? It is just 'different strokes for different folks'right? Neither can be right or wrong in your worldview. Just different.
I’m sorry, but I beg to differ on that kind of thinking. I believe we all actually have value and deserve to be treated with respect. The reason I believe this is true is that we are all special creations of God who created us in His own image and who loves us with an everlasting love. If my neighbor was created by God and is loved by God, if Jesus died for the sins of my neighbor as well as the sins of my enemy, I better also love, accept, and forgive them. I had better also respect them and treat them with dignity. When I don’t, I am sinning against their Creator. This is the only solid basis for human rights in my opinion and it is also why, in my opinion, that we find human rights being upheld best in countries that have a background in Christianity or others that have been influenced by those countries.
Quetzal, why do YOU believe that we should treat others with love and respect? Why do YOU believe that we need to protect the rights of the oppressed and the weak? What is the basis for your opinion? Whatever it is, in the end, it is just your opinion I'm sure.
Do you agree that if God doesn’t exist that there can be no ultimate right and wrong, just human opinion? And if you happen to live in a country where the power holding elite do not hold to your opinion about human rights, you’re in big trouble. That is why power becomes so important in the evolutionary view. It follows then that, who has the power is much more important than what is good and bad or right and wrong in people’s opinions, right?
You are fortunate to live in the US, but if you lived in Communist China, or behind the iron curtain a few years ago, you would have tasted firsthand the dangers of atheism. In their minds, since there is no god to whom they are accountable to, they are free to live however they want to. They believe are free to treat people however they want to if it will help them accomplish their goals. No one can stop them and when they die, there is no judgment to worry about. They are absolutely FREE! It is that kind of view that is scary to me.
*********************************************************************
MY ORIGINAL POST:
If that were true, I'd really be worried. Power becomes the name of the game. There would be no real right and wrong. If you are in control, you can do whatever you want.
**************************************************************
QUETZAL'S SECOND REPLY:
This is simply incorrect. It denies everything we have learned about animal behavior, and flies in the face of all of the current research into the evolution of sociality, reciprocal altruism, etc. You are attempting to play the old "all morality flows from God" card. Humans are "moral" because it is expedient to be so (expediency in this context means the achievement of material benefits together with the avoidance of unpleasantness in interaction with others). We have evolved over the last 10-15 million years to be pretty adept social animals. We have a lot of behaviors ingrained in us that allow us to function as a member of a group.
*****************************************************************
MY REPLY TO YOUR REPLY:
Then why don’t we all follow those ingrained behaviors?! Perhaps it is because we have come to the point where we realize that it doesn’t matter if we follow them or not. We are not responsible to anyone after we die so if we can get away with it, we’re home free.
***************************************************************
QUETZAL's SECOND REPLY CONTINUED:
With the vastly increased complexity of social interactions beyond the family/troop level, coupled with a fairly well-developed ability to communicate, we were able to codify some rules for interaction that permitted a certain stability in - and theoretically brought achievement of benefit to - a wider group. Religion is one way these rules are handed down the generations and laterally transmitted to others in the extended tribe. But it's only ONE of many transmission paths.
*************************************************
MY REPLY TO QUETZAL'S SECOND REPLY cont.:
So at least you do see some value in religion, but I take issue with you here. If religion is not true, it is a cruel and repressive instrument made up by men and there is no reason whatsoever that anyone should believe in it or follow it. I mean, why not go out and enjoy yourself and have free sex(as long as you take precautions?) I can give you a lot of reasons why not to, but that is beside the point. Why tell the truth when it hurts you? Why not cheat here and there on your income taxes? Why not spread lies and true dirt about your co-worker in order for you to get ahead and have others look down on them? If religion isn’t true, it is of no other value than to give ideas for morality. But even then, they are only man made ideas that have no real authority. No real reason to follow them — except the moral expedience idea.
I believe that the morality presented in the Bible is expedient to follow not because our ancestors over the years got together and came up with ideas that work, but rather because they are God-given rules of absolute morality. Because they are God-given, naturally they are also expedient. The expedience of following God’s laws lends further evidence to them being God-given.
Plus, I have never seen a copy of these rules of social interaction that our ancestors decided on. Please show me where I can find a copy. If it is just some kind of vague obsure thing, how are we to know what it is? Perhaps you would be willing to research this and compile a list of all the moral laws that belong in this moral code our ancestors discovered. However, I bet if I asked someone else to do it, they would come up with a totally different list. So in the end there is no concrete list after all is there? So we're back where we started.
***************************************************************
QUETZAL'S SECOND POST CONTINUED:
Worse, it(religion) seems to have recently evolved to be less a simple rules-set for social interaction, and more akin to a parasitic organism whose sole purpose is to propagate itself. Many modern religions - and resurgent fundamentalist christianity is definitely in this category - today appear to be more interested in extending and maintaining control than in providing 'moral guidance'.
***************************************************************
MY REPLY TO QUETZAL'S SECOND REPLY cont:
Quetzal, come on. Religion exists in this theoretical role only in the mind of scientists and sociologists who try explain how it came to be. But talk to Jesus or to Mohammed and you can bet that was not their intention. That is a nice little idea that might fit your worldview, but it is not fair for you to make that kind of evaluation of Christianity at least when the Bible itself says something totally different. Jesus did intend for His teachings to be spread across the earth. In fact, He clearly commands His followers to go into all the world and preach the gospel — (What is the gospel? the teaching that all men are sinners and stand condemned before God. They need to repent and seek His forgiveness and trust in or believe in the Savior, Jesus, who died for them and was resurrected in victory over death.)
I guess I would qualify as a fundamentalist Christian since I believe the Bible.
Actually, what do you mean by a 'fundamental Christian'? Is someone who takes the Bible seriously a fundamental Christian?
I certainly do not believe that Fundamental Christianity is a parasitic organism. I myself am a missionary in Japan and have seen many lives changed and people set free from their sin. I have seen people find a new joy and a new purpose for living. I have seen people find a new peace in the midst of their circumstances and a new attitude toward life that better enables them to live.
Fundamentalist Christianity is only restrictive to those who are not willing to bow the knee to God because they feel like their freedoms are restricted. For the most part — of course there are exceptions - those who do bow their knee to God, find Him to be their joy and satisfaction, even if following Him does involve denying self at times. God is not some big meanie in the sky who tries to control our lives so that we can't have any fun. On the contrary, all His laws are given to protect us from harm and to provide good things for us. He gives us His laws simply because He loves us. Not to tellus what is right and wrong, not to tell us the best way to live and leave us to figure it out for ourselves would be unloving. In the end, it is quite simple. We can choose to obey or to disobey, but we must take responsibility for our choices.
Recently I met an unmarried girl who was mad at God because she said He let her get pregnant. She thinks the government should support her since her boyfriend left her. It was her choice to sin and there is responsibility that comes with our choices. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t help her raise her kid, but I am saying that she cannot claim to deserve that kind of help. It was her immoral choice that put her in that position to begin with. Often times, we blame God for the consequences of our own sin. We are blinded by our sin and our sense of judgment is distorted as a result. Everything is always someone else’s fault. We’re quick to lay the blame on others.
Quetzal, you have made a lot of assumptions in the above paragraphs, all of which stem from your worldview. You stated them as if they were facts, when in reality they are just tenets of your faith. Research into the evolution of sociality and reciprocal altruism is all based on an atheistic worldview - religion evolving over time and the hows and the whys. There can be other reasons for people’s behavior besides expedient morality, but in an evolutionary world view, there is no room for the idea that perhaps God really did reveal His moral truth to mankind. You can just as easily interpret the same facts you research in socialty to harmonize with the Bible. The difference between you and I is simply that we have different starting positions. My bias is that I believe the Bible is true and look at the facts to see how they fit in with that worldview. Your bias is that you start with an evolutionary worldview and interpret all the facts within that framework. We’re both biased and now the trick is to see whether the facts fit better with the Biblical worldview or the evolutionary worldview. Of course you could add other worldviews into the equation as well.
Let me tell you how I interpret the facts of human sociality. First of all, I believe that mankind is basically sinful - not origianlly created that way, but sinful since Adam & Eve's sin written about in Genesis 3. Why? The Bible teaches this and it fits the facts. You don’t need to teach a kid how to sin. Lying comes naturally. Hitting and fighting come naturally. Does a thankful heart come naturally? Not in my kids at least. Does an honest heart come naturally? Not in my kids at least. Does a polite attitude come naturally? Not in my kids at least — in spite of the fact that we try and provide a good example, albeit imperfect of course, to them. We humans have a natural inclination to be self-centered, to go our own way even if it is not right. Again, I’m not saying we always choose what is wrong. I agree that maany of us choose the moral thing because it is the expedient thing to do. That is very different than choosing it because it is right and therein lies the problem. When it is expedient to choose the wrong thing, we are then free to do it and we often do.
So humans have a natural inclination to sin and need to be trained how to live properly, how to do what is right. But education alone, although helpful, won’t do it. You can know what is right and still not want to do what is right. You might not even be able to do what is right. The Bible calls us slaves to sin. I’m not asking you to believe this, just explaining my worldview.
Well, I’ve written too much already and will stop here. Sorry, I only got through your first two paragraphs of your reply to me. I doubt neither you or I can keep this kind of posting every day. I'm sure you have a life too. So please be patient with me if I don't post every day.
Regards,
Tokyojim
PS I apologize to everyone for such a long post!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Quetzal, posted 09-02-2002 9:18 AM Quetzal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Mammuthus, posted 09-03-2002 10:02 AM Tokyojim has replied
 Message 46 by Quetzal, posted 09-04-2002 4:15 AM Tokyojim has not replied
 Message 48 by Quetzal, posted 09-04-2002 10:55 AM Tokyojim has replied

  
Tokyojim
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 142 (16483)
09-03-2002 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Mammuthus
09-02-2002 9:42 AM


Mammuthus wrote:
So, if you did not believe in your particular religious view you would try to kill and get away with it and act in a sociopathic manner and if oppressed you would not resist? And all that prevents you from commiting all sorts of mayhem is fear of retribution from some mythical higher being or fear of punishment from said mythical being? Your religion does not sound particularly appealing the way you have framed it...it actually sounds rather feeble.
*********************************************************
MY REPLY:
No, sorry, you are misunderstanding me. I admit that I could have made it clearer so I apologize for that. Here is what I mean. An atheist does good things too. Not many atheists will end up become mini Hitlers and Stalins or even criminals. The point is though, that if they do choose that kind of life, they are still acting in accordance with their worldview. We can't criticize them except to say it is illegal and we don't like what they are doing. That kind of life and attitude is the logical outworking of their worldview if lived out to the extreme. Even Darwin was afraid of a slippery slide into violence if his evolutionary theory were translated into a philosophy of life. It is not morally wrong or sinful to do what Hitler and Stalin did because in the evolutionary worldview, there can be no such thing as ultimate morality. Why? There is no Lawgiver.
The following is a quote from Hitler that is found on a wall of either Auschwitz or Birkenau Nazi death camp.
"I freed Germany from the stupid and degrading fallacies of conscience and morality.....We will train young people before whom the world will tremble. I want young people capable of violence--imperious, relentless and cruel." Hitler
Don't forget that his views were developed and nurtured in the mind of the most educated nation at that time in history and brought forth on the soil that had also given birth to the Enlightenment. However, we should not be surprised because man was beginning to live without God and the further we get from God, the more likely we are to see something like that happen. Seeing it go to that extreme is very unusual though.
Is fear of retribution the reason I choose not to live such a life? Yes and No. I do have a healthy fear of breaking Godfs laws, just as I hope you have a healthy fear of breaking the laws of the State. I personally think this kind of a fear, or shall we say a respect for the law, is a good thing.
But more than that, I believe that God loves me and made the supreme sacrifice of the life of His Son, Jesus on the cross. He has showered His grace upon me though I am not deserving and I love Him. I am thankful to Him and I want to live for Him and to please Him. In doing so, He tells me to love others, follow the 10 commandments, and most of all to love Him. My motivation for living my life the way I do is to bring glory to God, to show my love for Him, and to do something of eternal value with my life. Ifm sorry if that sounds feeble to you, but I am not ashamed of it and I wouldnft trade my life for the life of someone who does not know God, no matter how much money they have etc.
I think everyone refrains from wrong at times because of fear of retribution. That is the whole purpose of human instituted laws. If you want proof for that, just think what would happen if we took away all laws and let people do whatever they wanted to.
Don't expect you to agree, just wanted to clarify my view.
My thoughts for the day
Tokyojim

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Mammuthus, posted 09-02-2002 9:42 AM Mammuthus has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 40 of 142 (16484)
09-03-2002 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Tokyojim
09-03-2002 9:33 AM


So in effect you are at heart a completely immoral person who is only constrained from running amok in society because of 1) fear of reprisal from your god 2) anticipation of a reward from said god in a hypothetical afterlife as I asked before? I am an atheist and find your worldview to be far more "immoral" than my own if this is the case.
As to your "sermon" on those refusing to "bend their knees" to your God...many a dictator has used this type of logic to slaughter anyone who opposes them.
You also seem to consider atheism an origanized religion which illustrates just how little you understand about other worldviews...I guess you would, by the logic of your post, consider all Hindus to be evil as well.
As to the advantage of living in the US versus China...it has nothing to do with your religion...it has to do with the freedom to not be forced to practice your religion as you have the freedom not to share my worldview.
You also avoid any mention of the countless atrocities committed in the name of various religions including christianity.
Your post to Quetzal has very little to do with religion or a "loving god" and everything to do with power and control and the wish for both.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Tokyojim, posted 09-03-2002 9:33 AM Tokyojim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Tokyojim, posted 09-03-2002 11:07 AM Mammuthus has replied

  
Tokyojim
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 142 (16487)
09-03-2002 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by gene90
09-02-2002 1:19 PM


Gene90, glad you think that Christianity is a good thing, but I certainly disagree with your reasons. If Christianity is not true, it is not good. It is a lie. However, from your point of view, I can see how it would be a good thing. The more people who live by the morality of the Bible, the easier it becomes for unbelievers to live in society. However, you, being more intellectually enlightened than these foolish believers, know that the Bible really isnft true. So if it isn't true, you also know that there is really no harm in breaking a few laws here and there. You enjoy the benefits you receive from living in the same world as the foolish believers, while at the same time, you feel free to your life your own way. It is a way to have your cake and eat it too. In this sense, atheists benefit from the existence of Christians in this world, even if they donft like what they believe. These poor misguided Christians have to follow this archaic moral code in the Bible while they themselves are free to live however they want. And because others do follow the garchaic moral code of the Bible or at least try to follow it) society is generally more orderly and civil, a better place to live in. I'm sure some will object to that statement. I'm not claiming that Christians never do anything wrong or haven't made serious mistakes of judgment in the past. But when they do, it is just that. A mistake that doesn't fit with their worldview. However, when atheists do such things, it is in total harmony with their worldview. That is a big difference.
************************************************************
GENE90's REPLY continued:
But to claim that without religion we would be rioting in the streets is to do a disservice to the good qualities innate in most of humanity. I think most people don't need to be taught the most basic principles of right and wrong, I think it is born into them.
*************************************************************
MY REPLY:
Ifm sorry. Ifm not claiming that. What I said was misleading. As I stated in the above post, what I am saying is that when atheists do choose to act that way, they are acting in a way that is harmonious with their beliefs, or within the boundaries of their worldview. For atheists, there is no ultimate right and wrong or absolute standard for morality so no one can tell them that what they are doing is wrong. We can say it is illegal or that we donft like it or that we donft think it is good, but you cannot make a moral judgment on the act itself since there is no ultimate code of morality to which to appeal. Many atheists make this mistake and in doing so actually provide evidence for the existence of God.
But the fact that everyone tries to appeal to a code of morality is strong evidence to me that one does indeed exist. This is a problem for the evolutionary worldview.
I agree with you that most people do not need to be taught the most basic principles of right and wrong. You are right. It is born into them. And the Bible tells us that God put it there. We also have a God-given conscience which can be dulled with continual sinning. The problem then is not so much not knowing what is right and wrong, rather the problem is doing it.
How many people do you know who have faithfully followed even their own particular code of morality throughout their lives? No one, right?! How about you? Have you always been faithful to your particular code of morality? I can answer that for you because I find the answer in the Bible. No one has and that is the problem. Even though we know what is right, we don't always do it, do we? But so what?! If there is no judgment after death, so what?
This lends support to the Biblical teaching that we humans are not born innately good. Sure, we all have the capacity for good, but the Bible says we are not. Rather, we born with an innate tendancy to sin or with a sin nature as the Bible puts it. So what we need is the power to change, the power to do what is right even when our bodies and minds tell us to do otherwise.
You can teach kids until you are blue in the face, but if you can't change their heart, the core of the problem, you can't do much to actually change them.
Teaching kids is great and necessary, but why should your opinion hold any more value than their opinion? Even if the majority of people agree with you, ultimately, from an eternal perspective, what does it matter if they agree with your views of morality or not? This is a free world isn't it? We can believe whatever we want to right? But in a totally free world where there is no God, we have to admit that in the end, it doesn't matter whether we live a good or a bad life, as long as we are willing to deal with the consequences of our actions in this life. This truth kind of makes our actions, even our lives meaningless doesn't it? And yet I would venture to say that you don't live like that. I'm sure you live your life as if it has real meaning in spite of what your worldview tells you.
Please understand. I'm not trying to make you angry, just to consider that perhaps there are some inconsistencies in your worldview. Just trying to provide some food for thought.
Regards,
Tokyojim
Regards,
Tokyojim

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by gene90, posted 09-02-2002 1:19 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by gene90, posted 09-03-2002 10:37 AM Tokyojim has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 42 of 142 (16488)
09-03-2002 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Tokyojim
09-03-2002 10:32 AM


Hey Tokyojim.
I stopped reading your message shortly after the start because you made some assumptions about my worldview and my opinion of the Bible that you have no factual basis to make and which are incorrect. I just don't have time and am not very interested in hearing a commentary, regardless of how intelligent it may be, on someone's judgement of my entire worldview that they believe they can sum up from one post over the Internet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Tokyojim, posted 09-03-2002 10:32 AM Tokyojim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Tokyojim, posted 09-03-2002 11:12 AM gene90 has not replied

  
Tokyojim
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 142 (16490)
09-03-2002 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Mammuthus
09-03-2002 10:02 AM


Thanks Mammuthus for your reply. First let me say, I'm not trying to rile your feathers. If you find my views offensive, I'm sorry, but I am not at all ashamed of what I believe.
YOU WROTE:
So in effect you are at heart a completely immoral person who is only constrained from running amok in society because of 1) fear of reprisal from your god 2) anticipation of a reward from said god in a hypothetical afterlife as I asked before? I am an atheist and find your worldview to be far more "immoral" than my own if this is the case.
*****************************************
MY REPLY:
Yes, Mammuthus, I am an immoral person at heart, but God is in the process of changing me. Let me change that. He has changed me. He has forgiven me and given me a new heart and I am grateful. II Corinthians 5:17 And yes, I do anticipate a reward from God in the future because He promises rewards for all who are in heaven. The reward is not heaven itself because that is a gift from God to all His children. But the rewards are given for good works done with proper motives in our hearts. I mentioned that a higher motivation is love for God and expressing my gratefulness to Him for all He has done for me. I'm sorry if that is offensive to you, but I'm more concerned what God thinks.
Question for you: Do you believe in an absolute standard for morality or is it anything goes? Every man does what is right in his own eyes? How do you determine what is right and wrong or perhaps I should ask if you even believe in right and wrong. But I guess that is covered in the first question.
**********************************************************
MAMMUTHES continues:
As to your "sermon" on those refusing to "bend their knees" to your God...many a dictator has used this type of logic to slaughter anyone who opposes them.
*******************************
You may be right here, but that doesn't mean that it isn't valid if there is a Creator like the Bible teaches. God demands obedience from us because He deserves to be obeyed. He loves us and knows that obedience is the most fulfilling life. He wants to protect us from trouble which we will experience when we decide to go our own way. He wants to protect us from emptiness in our hearts when we reject Him. He wants us to experience an abundant life. Jesus said "I came that they might have life, and have it more abundantly."
********************************
MAMMUTHUS continues:
You also seem to consider atheism an origanized religion which illustrates just how little you understand about other worldviews...I guess you would, by the logic of your post, consider all Hindus to be evil as well.
************************************************************
Sorry. Of course it is not an organized religion, but don't fool yourself that it isn't a religion. I'm sure you have read the Humanist Manifesto and seen how many of it's signers view their ideas as religious. I can find some quotes for you if you want.
Hinduism evil? In some ways, any worldview that leads people away from true God is evil, but rather than evil, I just believe it is wrong. I'm sure we are agreed on that point.
As to the advantage of living in the US versus China...it has nothing to do with your religion...it has to do with the freedom to not be forced to practice your religion as you have the freedom not to share my worldview. I consider all humans to be sinful at heart because that is what the Bible says and as you look around, it is hard to disagree with that. Why does evil abound so much in this world?
By the way, when you use the word evil in the above question, how do you define evil and good as an atheist?
**************************************************************
MAMMUTHUS continues:
You also avoid any mention of the countless atrocities committed in the name of various religions including christianity.
You are right that Christians have made big mistakes in the past. I freely admit that. No one is perfect and they will make mistakes again in the future. I am ashamed at some of the terrible things that have been done in the name of Jesus. However, not to belittle those atrocities or excuse them in any way, but the atrocities committed by Christians pale in comparison to those committed by atheists. (That is not a personal attack against you, just a statement of fact.) And the big difference between the two is that a Christian is violating his worldview when he commits sins like that, but an atheist is not. It is not inconsistent with an atheistic worldview to do such things since there is no standard of morality.
**********************************************
MAMMUTHUS continues:
Your post to Quetzal has very little to do with religion or a "loving god" and everything to do with power and control and the wish for both.
**************************************************************
MY REPLY:
My comments with regards to power were made upon the assumption that the evolutionary atheistic worldview is correct. If it is, then power and control becomes very important doesn't it?
Mammuthus, perhaps this is a personal question, but what was it that so turned you off to Christianity in the past? There must have been some deep hurts that you experienced in the past or something that greatly influenced you against Christianity to warrant your disdain. If that is too personal, I'm sorry. Just ignore it.
Regards,
Tokyojim

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Mammuthus, posted 09-03-2002 10:02 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Mammuthus, posted 09-03-2002 12:19 PM Tokyojim has replied

  
Tokyojim
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 142 (16491)
09-03-2002 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by gene90
09-03-2002 10:37 AM


GENE90,
I sincerely apologize. You are right I did make some assumptions because it seemed that you were supporting MAMMUTHUS is his post. However, I stand by my post that religion is not good if it is not true. It was that that I was mainly speaking to and I got carried away. Sorry if I chased you off.
Tokyojim
PS If you can get over my insult, may I ask you what your worldview is?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by gene90, posted 09-03-2002 10:37 AM gene90 has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 45 of 142 (16496)
09-03-2002 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Tokyojim
09-03-2002 11:07 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tokyojim:
[B]Thanks Mammuthus for your reply. First let me say, I'm not trying to rile your feathers. If you find my views offensive, I'm sorry, but I am not at all ashamed of what I believe.
I respond:
You make a lot assumptions without any basis.
Tokyojim continues:
Hinduism evil? In some ways, any worldview that leads people away from true God is evil, but rather than evil, I just believe it is wrong. I'm sure we are agreed on that point.
I say:
No I don't agree that Hindu's are evil because of their worldview...maybe they are right and you are wrong and evil.
I said:
As to the advantage of living in the US versus China...it has nothing to do with your religion...it has to do with the freedom to not be forced to practice your religion as you have the freedom not to share my worldview.
Tokyojim answers:
I consider all humans to be sinful at heart because that is what the Bible says and as you look around, it is hard to disagree with that. Why does evil abound so much in this world?
I respond:
What does that have to do with my statement about the relative issues of living in America versus China? Maybe there is so much evil in the world because religious fundamentalist bigots try to foist their worldview on others by violence.
Tokyojim asks:
By the way, when you use the word evil in the above question, how do you define evil and good as an atheist?
I reply: That which does harm....oh and religious fundamentalism
**************************************************************
I said:
MAMMUTHUS continues:
You also avoid any mention of the countless atrocities committed in the name of various religions including christianity.
Tokyojim replies:
You are right that Christians have made big mistakes in the past. I freely admit that. No one is perfect and they will make mistakes again in the future. I am ashamed at some of the terrible things that have been done in the name of Jesus. However, not to belittle those atrocities or excuse them in any way, but the atrocities committed by Christians pale in comparison to those committed by atheists. (That is not a personal attack against you, just a statement of fact.)
I say:
Would you care to back that statement up with some facts Tokyojim?
Tokyojim says:
And the big difference between the two is that a Christian is violating his worldview when he commits sins like that, but an atheist is not. It is not inconsistent with an atheistic worldview to do such things since there is no standard of morality.
I say: How would you know? You have no concept of what my worldview is much less anyone elses. You are in absolutely no position to claim what is consistent or inconsistent in anybody's worlview outside of your own...no wonder gene90 did not want to interact with you...you are arrogant beyond belief.
**********************************************
I said:
MAMMUTHUS continues:
Your post to Quetzal has very little to do with religion or a "loving god" and everything to do with power and control and the wish for both.
**************************************************************
Tokyojim's REPLY:
My comments with regards to power were made upon the assumption that the evolutionary atheistic worldview is correct. If it is, then power and control becomes very important doesn't it?
I say: Why?
Tokyojim asks:
Mammuthus, perhaps this is a personal question, but what was it that so turned you off to Christianity in the past? There must have been some deep hurts that you experienced in the past or something that greatly influenced you against Christianity to warrant your disdain. If that is too personal, I'm sorry. Just ignore it.
I reply: No it is not too personal. Nothing hurtful...I just never saw any reason to believe what I heard in church (catholic by the way before I stopped going when I was 9). Some reasons of the top of my head though the list is not exhaustive
1) The arrogance of other people telling me what their version of god wants is no plus...and perhaps it is your desire to paint me as anti-christian but I have specifically stated fundamentalism. Are you protestant? Catholic? Unitarian? Branch Davidian? which one is right or are they all wrong .)
2) I decided to get an education and not follow others blindly
3) naturalistic explanations i.e. science has better explained the world we live in for every circumstance I have encountered.
4) I never was much into myths
Tokyojim, you did not "rile me up". I have seen this type of arrogance coupled with prejudice, lack of any kind of insight into other views, and boatloads of assumptions stated by fundamentalists such as you over and over. You will never convince me you are right just as I will most likely never convince you my worldview is correct....the conversation was actually pointless come to think of it...doh!
Cheers
Mammuthus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Tokyojim, posted 09-03-2002 11:07 AM Tokyojim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Tokyojim, posted 09-04-2002 10:25 AM Mammuthus has replied
 Message 67 by Tokyojim, posted 09-06-2002 12:47 PM Mammuthus has replied
 Message 68 by Tokyojim, posted 09-06-2002 1:21 PM Mammuthus has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024