Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   God says this, and God says that
gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 278 of 417 (26806)
12-16-2002 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by nator
12-16-2002 1:39 PM


quote:
'Religiously-based morality seems much more dangerous to me than humanistically-based morality because of this ability to dictate to large groups of people who will accept a moral code in it's entirety.
Humanistically based morality is weaker and it has no bite and no ability to spread, so that's why it's less dangerous? Interesting...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 1:39 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 2:06 PM gene90 has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 279 of 417 (26807)
12-16-2002 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by gene90
12-16-2002 1:11 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by gene90:
[B]
quote:
You rejected each of my source links as biased, yet refused to provide any information or sources critical of LDS which you would approve of.
quote:
As I recall, all your sources were either sites dedicated to atheism or ministries dedicated to opposing the LDS Church. Hardly unbiased sources. You said yourself that you could not find any LDS member sites that were critical of the church, and you used that as evidence of brainwashing or something similar. It could just mean there are a lot of happy customers but of course you didn't mention that possibility. Were you able to find middle ground perhaps the debate would have fared better, but you weren't able to find middle ground, were you? Everything was polarized.
No, think I linked to a site for gay LDS members who loved their church but not their church's homophoboic policies.
It is possible that there are a lot of happy customers (interesting you would use that word), but it is also true that members speaking out against the LDS church is very strongly discouraged, and that many people have been excommunicated for openly criticizing the church.
Maybe people are happy, and maybe they are afraid of speaking out. Maybe the reason there is very little moderate, middle of the ground criticism is because members get in trouble if they go public. This is exactly what many ex-Mormons claim happened to them. Are every single one of them lying?
You still have not pointed me to or helped me find anything critical of the LDS church that you would approve of.
quote:
AND you rejected the official LDS history as unreliable. So I wasn't the only one rejecting sources.
Well, do you have any independent, non-Mormon sources which verify your claims?
Why should I simply accept that which church people say is true of their church founder as historically-accurate if there isn't any outside verification?
quote:
I also know that it has done damage to several families which I personally know.
quote:
Hence a possible motive for axe-grinding.
Tuue, it's possible. I also happened to have done the most research into Mormonism compared to other sects.
quote:
Oh, by the way: see my recent messages in the "homosexuality" thread, re: use of "so-called".
Will do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 1:11 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:05 PM nator has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 280 of 417 (26808)
12-16-2002 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by gene90
12-16-2002 1:46 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
Quite the contrary, I've been making analogies of my own. Money in the bank, the exhibit at the art museum...
This hard empiricism is no better for your belief. Are you sure you want to go there?
quote:
What happens to the money when it is outside the vault is irrelevant to the analogy.
No it isn't. The fact that you can access it is the reason the analogy is faulty. It doesn't track with the claims made by religion.
quote:
And non-theists do the same. John is sitting around arguing with me because he insists that my view of what is in the box is wrong.
Sorry. No.
I insist that your view of what is inside the box is unfounded, not wrong, and that the fact that it is unfounded is sufficient to make it unreasonable.
Why is it that you cannot understand that "ignoring what we don't know" is different from "assuming that we know something for which we have no evidence?"
quote:
Because if it's pink it isn't invisible.
If it is intangible it isn't male. But you are just making semantic quibbles.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
[This message has been edited by John, 12-16-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 1:46 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:15 PM John has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 281 of 417 (26809)
12-16-2002 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by nator
12-16-2002 1:57 PM


quote:
Well, do you have any independent, non-Mormon sources which verify your claims?
There weren't any online. It was all too polarized. PBS did a show entitled "American Prophet" which I have not yet seen.
quote:
Are every single one of them lying?
I'm sure that some members probably resent their leaving, but I've never heard of anyone 'getting in trouble'. What troubles me is that you're insinuating that the church policy is to make people that leave miserable. It's ridiculous.
quote:
I also happened to have done the most research into Mormonism compared to other sects.
Another sign that you have an axe to grind.
quote:
Why should I simply accept that which church people say is true of their church founder as historically-accurate if there isn't any outside verification?
What kind of verification? Journal entries? All of these such things are under Church control, so you can do like Nos did and claim we edit everything (a claim that is non-falsifiable). We're fascinated by our own history, of course.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 1:57 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 2:11 PM gene90 has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 282 of 417 (26810)
12-16-2002 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by gene90
12-16-2002 1:56 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
quote:
'Religiously-based morality seems much more dangerous to me than humanistically-based morality because of this ability to dictate to large groups of people who will accept a moral code in it's entirety.
Humanistically based morality is weaker and it has no bite and no ability to spread, so that's why it's less dangerous? Interesting...

Um, noooo...
It most certainly has the ability to spread, but it is actually stronger because it is not based upon what faith you may or may not have.
It is stronger because it is not based upon fear of punishment, but upon doing good for it's own sake.
Don't get me wrong; certain parts of Christian morality are wonderful. Other parts are not so wonderful, and others still are downright awful.
The dangerous part is, like during the crusades, or during legalized slavery, or what have you, is that harmful, dehumanizing, despicable "Christian Morality" is accepted by large numbers of people who simply do what they are told to get into heaven/stay out of hell.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 1:56 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:18 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 283 of 417 (26811)
12-16-2002 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by gene90
12-16-2002 2:05 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by gene90:
[B]
quote:
Well, do you have any independent, non-Mormon sources which verify your claims?
quote:
There weren't any online. It was all too polarized. PBS did a show entitled "American Prophet" which I have not yet seen.
Well, that should tell you something.
quote:
Are every single one of them lying?
quote:
I'm sure that some members probably resent their leaving, but I've never heard of anyone 'getting in trouble'. What troubles me is that you're insinuating that the church policy is to make people that leave miserable. It's ridiculous.
No, I am stating that people leave the church because they were made miserable while they were in it.
quote:
I also happened to have done the most research into Mormonism compared to other sects.
quote:
Another sign that you have an axe to grind.
...or that I know a bit of what I am talking about.
quote:
[b]Why should I simply accept that which church people say is true of their church founder as historically-accurate if there isn't any outside verification? [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]What kind of verification? Journal entries? All of these such things are under Church control, so you can do like Nos did and claim we edit everything (a claim that is non-falsifiable). We're fascinated by our own history, of course. [/B]
So, does the church ever let outside scholars study the historical documents?
Also, since the Church is a church, and not an academic institution, why couldn't the records have been altered over time? I mean, your church does a lot of secret things. Secercy is very big in the LDS mythos.
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 12-16-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:05 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:24 PM nator has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 284 of 417 (26812)
12-16-2002 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by gene90
12-16-2002 1:54 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
But they don't have to live in any social structure.
Yeah, you do. Our key adaptation is social structure. Even if you deny that, it would be very hard to avoid society.
quote:
God's law cannot be eluded.
Right, and when God's law includes slaughtering sinners the executioner cannot be blamed either.
quote:
Bit religious people generally have morals that non-theists do not.
Wait. Aren't you anti-stereotype Gene? Or is it only a problem when the stereotype offends you? I happen to believe exactly the opposite and that really seems to piss you off.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 1:54 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:29 PM John has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 285 of 417 (26813)
12-16-2002 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by John
12-16-2002 2:01 PM


quote:
The fact that you can access it is the reason the analogy is faulty.
I'm talking about the money when it's in the vault. What happens when it leaves the vault is irrelevant to the analogy. But fine: when the bank closes at night and you can't access it does the money cease to exist? After all, you cannot check it.
quote:
I
Yes. You. I wasn't talking about you.
quote:
I insist that your view of what is inside the box is unfounded, not wrong, and that the fact that it is unfounded is sufficient to make it unreasonable.
How is "unfounded" equated with "unreasonable"? If I claim that there's a rock in that box in the museum, my claim is unfounded. But that doesn't make it unreasonable. It only becomes unreasonable if you presuppose that there are no rocks anywhere, that they do not exist. What is "reasonable" and what is not is at least partially based upon worldview and what you already believe or disbelieve. Theism and atheism are both unfalsifiable because there is no evidence for or against God. And an agnostic who claims that Christianity is wrong is an internal contradiction and inconsistent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by John, posted 12-16-2002 2:01 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by John, posted 12-16-2002 2:31 PM gene90 has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 286 of 417 (26815)
12-16-2002 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by nator
12-16-2002 2:06 PM


quote:
It most certainly has the ability to spread, but it is actually stronger because it is not based upon what faith you may or may not have.
That's a valid argument, however humanistic morals are still 'optional', as whether or not you follow them the outcome is still the same.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 2:06 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 315 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 5:53 PM gene90 has not replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 287 of 417 (26816)
12-16-2002 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by nator
12-16-2002 2:11 PM


quote:
Well, that should tell you something.
Well yeah it does tell me something and you're not going to like what it tells me.
quote:
No, I am stating that people leave the church because they were made miserable while they were in it.
I don't know about that. I've heard that some congregations are 'cold' but I'm glad I joined.
quote:
...or that I know a bit of what I am talking about.
Of that, I'm not sure. But I do know you did this 'research' for a reason. And I'm fairly sure I know why. You're out on a vendetta against the LDS church.
quote:
So, does the church ever let outside scholars study the historical documents?
We publish a lot of the documents as History of the Church. I don't know how the system works beyond that.
quote:
Also, since the Church is a church, and not an academic institution, why couldn't the records have been altered over time?
As I said, the claim is unfalsifiable. Also, as I've said, you'll say just about anything to justify your position, won't you? Including unfounded accusations of intellectual dishonesty?
By the way, I didn't know we had secrets.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 12-16-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 2:11 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 2:49 PM gene90 has replied
 Message 298 by joz, posted 12-16-2002 2:53 PM gene90 has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 288 of 417 (26817)
12-16-2002 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by John
12-16-2002 2:12 PM


quote:
Even if you deny that, it would be very hard to avoid society.
Still, you could be a hermit or a fugitive.
quote:
Right, and when God's law includes slaughtering sinners the executioner cannot be blamed either.
If Christianity theology is correct, is it wrong for God to kill sinners?
quote:
Wait. Aren't you anti-stereotype Gene?
No, I'm stating fact. Non-theists only have to live the laws of their country. Christians are supposed to go further than that, help people and not lust and that sort of thing.
If I were to say that atheists were "stupid", "evil", or "dishonest" that would be an opinion.
And another thing. Quoting myself:
quote:
Bit religious people generally have morals that non-theists do not.
I said "generally". I allow lots of exceptions. Unlike the intolerant claims on your website.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by John, posted 12-16-2002 2:12 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 311 by John, posted 12-16-2002 4:52 PM gene90 has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 289 of 417 (26819)
12-16-2002 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 285 by gene90
12-16-2002 2:15 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
I'm talking about the money when it's in the vault.
And your analogy is not like the claim made by religion about God. Hence it is a false analogy and a fallacy.
quote:
Yes. You. I wasn't talking about you.
What?
John is sitting around arguing with me because he insists that my view of what is in the box is wrong.
Is that not me?
quote:
How is "unfounded" equated with "unreasonable"?
Strike me as tautological actually-- id, by definition.
quote:
If I claim that there's a rock in that box in the museum, my claim is unfounded. But that doesn't make it unreasonable.
Sure it does. You pulled it out of thin air.
quote:
It only becomes unreasonable if you presuppose that there are no rocks anywhere, that they do not exist.
ummmm.... no. The existence of other rocks has nothing to do with the existence of this particular rock in this particular box.
quote:
What is "reasonable" and what is not is at least partially based upon worldview and what you already believe or disbelieve.
Your version of what is reasonable is essentially "anything that anybody makes up"
quote:
And an agnostic who claims that Christianity is wrong is an internal contradiction and inconsistent.
Not knowing whether there is a God is not necessary to argue that a particular religion is wrong, or highly questionable. Internal contradictions are quite sufficient for the purpose. Religion and GOD are not the same thing.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:15 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:41 PM John has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 290 of 417 (26820)
12-16-2002 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by John
12-16-2002 12:59 AM


quote:
If lack of evidence for God is sufficient, how can lack of evidence be used in argument?
Yes. I see that is a tautology.
I'll try again to make my point:
If lack of evidence for God is sufficient for an atheist to claim there are no gods (no religion is correct), how can an atheist criticize Christianity for its lack of evidence, and be consistent?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by John, posted 12-16-2002 12:59 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 308 by John, posted 12-16-2002 4:25 PM gene90 has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 291 of 417 (26821)
12-16-2002 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by gene90
12-16-2002 1:54 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by gene90:
[B]
quote:
If they want to live within a social structure with other people, yes.
quote:
But they don't have to live in any social structure.
It is quite difficult to live completely outside of society. Nearly everyone lives inside a social structure.
quote:
Or they could design their own social structure.
Sure, like all primates have done for a LONG time. Social structure is our thing.
quote:
And even in the current US social structure we cannot agree on what is morally acceptable or not. And besides, if you can elude the law, theoretically an atheist can do whatever he wants. God's law cannot be eluded.
If God said it was moral to rape and kill, would it then be moral to rape and kill?
If not, then God is bound by morality, not the other way around.
quote:
Therefore the theist is obligated to follow morals or face justice, the atheist is merely encouraged to have morals and possibly face justice. Or the atheist can just move somewhere where the laws are different.
Well, isn't that kind of why we have hunderdes of flavors of Christianity alone?
quote:
There is no evidence, BTW, that Christians/religious people behave more morally that non-theists.
quote:
Bit religious people generally have morals that non-theists do not.
Unsupported assertion.
quote:
In fact, there is evidence that certain kinds of behavior, like child molestation, is more common among fundamentalist Christians than among the general population.
quote:
That could be a statistical fluke or cultural problem amongst a sect or in a geographic area where lots of fundamentalists happen to live. You can use statistics to support anything if you're creative enough.
Or it could be true.
The following is a link to an extensive list of sex abuse incidences put out by a progressive Epicopalian website. It lists all denominations:
Sustainable Women's Clothing and Accessories | Reformation
84 Baptist Ministers
219 "Bible" Church Ministers (fundamentalist/evangelical)
39 Episcopalean Ministers
32 Lutheran Ministers
32 Methodist Ministers
12 Presbyterian Ministers
32 various Church Ministers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 1:54 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by gene90, posted 12-16-2002 2:47 PM nator has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 292 of 417 (26824)
12-16-2002 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by John
12-16-2002 2:31 PM


quote:
And your analogy is not like the claim made by religion about God.
????
Just like God the money in the bank is not generating any evidence you can detect with the senses. Therefore, if a lack of evidence is sufficient to disbelieve God, then a lack of evidence is sufficient for you to avoid investing in banks. Or else you are inconsistent.
quote:
Sure it does. You pulled it out of thin air.
That sounds tautological to me. "Anything unfounded is unreasonable", therefor if the rock is unfounded it is unreasonable.
I disagree.
(From Merriam-Webster OnLine, Dictionary by Merriam-Webster: America's most-trusted online dictionary )
reasonable: being in accordance with reason b : not extreme or excessive
I see nothing "extreme" or "excessive" about a rock sitting in that box. Therefore I disagree with "unfounded"="unreasonable".
If I hadn't been outside yet today and I guessed the sun were up by now that guess would be unfounded by observation. But it would not be unreasonable. Plus it is loaded to call something "reasonable" or "unreasonable" because it is an appeal to your worldview, not to logic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by John, posted 12-16-2002 2:31 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 316 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 5:55 PM gene90 has not replied
 Message 322 by John, posted 12-16-2002 6:53 PM gene90 has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024