Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 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: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Faith and belief - The Almighty God revealed through his grandness
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 61 of 224 (497811)
02-06-2009 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Vacate
02-06-2009 7:06 AM


Vacate writes:
Who has decided that the morality written about in the bible is correct?
the question should be, does it work? Is it beneficial?
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Vacate, posted 02-06-2009 7:06 AM Vacate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Vacate, posted 02-06-2009 7:14 AM Peg has not replied

Vacate
Member (Idle past 4600 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 62 of 224 (497812)
02-06-2009 7:14 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Peg
02-06-2009 7:12 AM


the question should be, does it work? Is it beneficial?
Oddly enough though, that was not the question.
**ABE**
Too fast on the reply to notice that it was you, Peg, to reply and not Cedre simply avoiding the post!
To answer:
Sometimes it works and is beneficial and sometimes not. I am sure you will have little problem finding a few examples of moral concerns that we choose to ignore in our society today.
Edited by Vacate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 7:12 AM Peg has not replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 63 of 224 (497813)
02-06-2009 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Cedre
02-06-2009 6:48 AM


The ignorance of this post is stunning.
Spontaneous Generation, which was disproved by Pasteur, is not abiogenesis. The hypotheses we have for abiogenesis are not nonsensical, nor unsound (well, those are seriously considered, at any rate). This is a good article:
Abiogenesis - Wikipedia
As to morality and evolution, there is an ancient thread on that:
http://EvC Forum: morality, charity according to evolution -->EvC Forum: morality, charity according to evolution (I'm sure there are others)
Morality is not opposed to evolution, especially when one considers social organisms (termites, bees, ants, wasps, whales, dolphins, chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and probably every other herd/pack out there).
Darwin didn't exactly fail medicine school. He was simply not interested in becoming a doctor.
Your ignorance is certainly not your fault, unless you choose to remain willfully ignorant. Before you make such ridiculous claims, try doing some research (and avoid the creationist sites, as they do nothing but distort what science actually says).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Cedre, posted 02-06-2009 6:48 AM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Cedre, posted 02-06-2009 7:53 AM kuresu has replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 163 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 64 of 224 (497816)
02-06-2009 7:37 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Peg
02-06-2009 6:32 AM


but can you disprove any of those 3 realities???
Easy.
Your god apparently breaks the cause and effect reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 6:32 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 5:40 PM Larni has replied

Cedre
Member (Idle past 1489 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 65 of 224 (497819)
02-06-2009 7:53 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by kuresu
02-06-2009 7:17 AM


At first glance evolution seems to rhyme well with morality. Their argument is that individuals of a population need to behave morally to a degree because by carring for the other members of the population this helps the population by increasing their survival rate. Well this argument isn't complete because it fails when it comes to the more intelligent creatures. creatures like termites, bees, ants, wasps, act on insticnt.
Take for example human beings, we do not adhere to insticnt so the question of morallity is kind of up to the individual to decide for himself. Take abortion for example how does that benefit the overall population of the human species, it kills off what are otherwise healhty babies, that would have lived on to generate healthy babies of their own. And this killings are done under the banner of freedom of choice, apparently woman have the right over their bodies, yet the child's rights are not carefully considered.
Or take rape, rape will help the population of human beings in due course by increasing the number of indivuduals. Yet we all no that it is morally incorrect to force anyone into having sex. Or take hitler for example he belived that the German's were the only superior race, he believed this morally and for humanity to take its next evolutionary step he deemed it only right to kill of the so-called lower races, and most German's agreed.
Evolution fails to explain morallity in this instances and there are more examples but I'll stop here.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by kuresu, posted 02-06-2009 7:17 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Huntard, posted 02-06-2009 7:58 AM Cedre has replied
 Message 68 by kuresu, posted 02-06-2009 8:15 AM Cedre has not replied
 Message 76 by Modulous, posted 02-06-2009 8:42 AM Cedre has replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 66 of 224 (497820)
02-06-2009 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by Cedre
02-06-2009 7:53 AM


Would you mind telling me why a theory that is about the genetic change in populations over time would explain morality? Oh, and you still haven't provided any way to determine if YOUR god is indeed resposible for all of this.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Cedre, posted 02-06-2009 7:53 AM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Cedre, posted 02-06-2009 8:15 AM Huntard has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 67 of 224 (497822)
02-06-2009 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Peg
02-06-2009 6:17 AM


quote:
1. life does not arise from non living matter
2. laws require a law maker
3. the law of cause of effect means something must have been the cause
Argument 1 says that creationism is false and that life is eternal.
Since you disagree with the first part and we both disagree with the second it looks as if that isn't any good.
Argument 2 makes the mistake of confusing natural laws (descriptive) with the legal system (prescriptive law). Natural laws are simply regularities of behaviour. Since any law-maker or any law-making must rest on such regularities (how else can they operate ?) it would seem that your argument has it reversed. "Law"-makers require already-existing "laws".
Argument 3 is simply wrong. There is no "law of cause and effect" and if there were we cannot say that it applies to the universe. This is because there may be no time prior to the existence of the universe and it is very hard to see how cause and effect could apply without time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 6:17 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Cedre, posted 02-06-2009 8:31 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 96 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 6:17 PM PaulK has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 68 of 224 (497824)
02-06-2009 8:15 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by Cedre
02-06-2009 7:53 AM


Take for example human beings, we do not adhere to insticnt
Um, right. That's wrong right there. Human beings have a large amount of learned behavior, but we still operate on instinct for a good number of things.
Or take rape, rape will help the population of human beings in due course by increasing the number of indivuduals. Yet we all no that it is morally incorrect to force anyone into having sex.
Um, ants aren't allowed to have sex. If they do, they're killed.
Page not found | TIME
Rape can destroy the fabric of society, and increased rates of rape occur in places where society has basically crumbled. Everyone raping does not lead to a secure community, and a secure community is necessary to the survival of the species. Of course, raping people from outside your community helps increase genetic diversity, but that we've largely moved on from this in no way means that morality and evolution are at odds. It just means that we can define what is acceptable behavior, and it is we who create new morality, not god.
Anyhow, we should take arguments regarding the evolutionary implications on morality to the appropriate threads (such as the one I linked to earlier). Suffice it to say that god, if he is the creator of morality, is indistinguishable from evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Cedre, posted 02-06-2009 7:53 AM Cedre has not replied

Cedre
Member (Idle past 1489 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 69 of 224 (497825)
02-06-2009 8:15 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Huntard
02-06-2009 7:58 AM


Re: Huntard
Good point you brought up there about how a theory that is aimed at explaining change in genotype over time would explain morality? What known mechanisms of evolution could have resulted in morality. Morality is outside the sphere of science, how can chemistry and physics; natural law, empirical science want to explain and understand morality that falls within the scope of faith and belief system. Its ludicrous. Your question I will sadly not give an answer for, it is another topic entirely, and I do not see myself getting into it at the moment. Howvere there are various sides that you can visit on the web that deal with this issue. I'll encourage you to visit links from both sides of the debate those who support the God of the bible and those who are against that viewpoint. I want you to get a balanced view just as I have, the evidence points more strongly toward the God of the bible.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Huntard, posted 02-06-2009 7:58 AM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Vacate, posted 02-06-2009 8:28 AM Cedre has replied

Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 70 of 224 (497828)
02-06-2009 8:26 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Peg
02-06-2009 6:51 AM


Thanks for the clarification Peg,
quote:
of course they are intelligent and i wasnt trying to imply that they were not, i was simply saying that intelligent people also believe in God.
Any person who believes in a creator must by necessity believe that ALL humans are intelligent.
Fair enough. I believe you when you say you had no ill intent, but in the future, you might like to be a little bit more careful about how you phrase such claims. The first version of your claim was a red rag to a herd of atheistic bulls who did not appreciate having their intellects belittled. If you had just been a little clearer, there might not have been such offence caused or taken.
It appears then, that we are agreed that there are intelligent people who believe in gods and intelligent people who don't. Further, I hope we can agree that there are intelligent Christians, intelligent Hindus, intelligent Zoroastrians, etc. as well as stupid atheists, stupid Christians, etc.
This is why appealing to the intelligence of those who hold an idea is considered fallacious. There are intelligent folks on all sides of the religious debate. At least some of them must be wrong.
Mutate and Survive

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 6:51 AM Peg has not replied

Vacate
Member (Idle past 4600 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 71 of 224 (497829)
02-06-2009 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Cedre
02-06-2009 8:15 AM


Who decided?
I want you to get a balanced view just as I have, the evidence points more strongly toward the God of the bible.
On that note could you please answer my previous question: Who has decided that the morality written about in the bible is correct?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Cedre, posted 02-06-2009 8:15 AM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Cedre, posted 02-06-2009 8:46 AM Vacate has replied

Cedre
Member (Idle past 1489 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 72 of 224 (497831)
02-06-2009 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by PaulK
02-06-2009 8:07 AM


PaulK, what you fail to understand is that God has the power to bring forth life at will (even without living matter), he commands life, the bible says that he is life. Naturally it is impossible to bring forth life from nothing, we know this to be true, as logic would guide us. But God presides over logic, and at times he will act miraculously. The fact that something may seem unnatural for us doesn't imply that it has to be for God aswell, remember natural laws fall short as far as God is concerned. And in his infinite wisdom and almighty power God had no snag creating life.
IF we reason that god is the creator of everything that exist including laws, than in fact the natural laws also have a lawmaker.
And as far as cause and effect is concerned, these principles are a part of our daily experience, and that is how it goes, we have never seen an effect without a cause.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by PaulK, posted 02-06-2009 8:07 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by PaulK, posted 02-06-2009 8:53 AM Cedre has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 73 of 224 (497833)
02-06-2009 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Peg
02-06-2009 6:20 AM


i will stand by that. Intelligent people do believe in God and hopefully its because, like Kepler and Newton, they have studied and reasoned on the world around them and the realities of that world. i will stand by that. Intelligent people do believe in God and hopefully its because, like Kepler and Newton, they have studied and reasoned on the world around them and the realities of that world.
And many intelligent people do not believe in God. What is your point?
So by arguing that intelligent people believe in God you are implying that stupid people do not believe in God, right?
So are you calling Einstein stupid?
Einstein believed in the god of Spinoza, that is Einstein religious beliefs mostly paralled pantheism (all of nature and the universe is God). Einstein did not believe in a personal God of the Jews or the Christians and he certainly did not believe in Jesus being the son of God.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 6:20 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Granny Magda, posted 02-06-2009 8:38 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied
 Message 97 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 6:54 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 74 of 224 (497834)
02-06-2009 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by DevilsAdvocate
02-06-2009 8:35 AM


Hi DA,
I don't mean to butt in, but if you read on a bit, you'll find that Peg has already recanted that claim. Apparently it was not what she intended to say, just a case of poor phrasing. I think it's best to leave it at that.
Mutate and Survive

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-06-2009 8:35 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 75 of 224 (497835)
02-06-2009 8:39 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Peg
02-06-2009 6:51 AM


of course they are intelligent and i wasnt trying to imply that they were not, i was simply saying that intelligent people also believe in God.
Sorry had to dig down, I did not see this statement. You have to be careful what you write because it seemed you were implying that anyone who did not believe in God was unintelligent, which not even the brunt of religious people believe.
Any person who believes in a creator must by necessity believe that ALL humans are intelligent.
Hmmm, are mentally handicapped people intelligent? You have to define terms here, specifically, what are you qualifying as intelligent?
When it comes to belief in God, there are only 3 types of people...those who do, those who dont and those who dont care.
True, no one is debating this. Your point?
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 6:51 AM Peg 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