atheism

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solid Snake:
In closing I have a riddle for you: Whats the difference between you and a Mallard with a cold?

​

---

Well, I suppose the main difference between myself and a duck is 800 million years of evolution. Also, I don't have a cold.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solid Snake:
I find it hard to beleive there is any universal law to right and wrong. Its basicly as open as someones idea of the perfect world. No one's idea is going to be the same. There may be common ideas among people, but it's highly unlikely that a group of people will all share common ideals. The only reason for simularities relates to society and stuff.

---

Of course there are differences in opinion, but does opinion mean anything in relation to right and wrong? Should Hitlers views be regarded as the same as Mother Teresa's?Of course not. There are universal morals, whether or not an individual wants to recognize them makes no difference.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
Of course there are differences in opinion, but does opinion mean anything in relation to right and wrong? Should Hitlers views be regarded as the same as Mother Teresa's?
Of course not. There are universal morals, whether or not an individual wants to recognize them makes no difference.

---

In some ways I hesitate to disagree with you in that I do believe there are moral standards which can hold universally. However, though I doubt that "opinion" forms part of the moral standard, I do believe that it could and does take different forms dependent on circumstances - that it requires a degree of relativism in order to be universal.But in your attempt to put down relativism, you raise it inadvertently. You can rest assured I despise Hitler. Sadly I hold Mother Teresa's moral position quite troubling - she strikes me as having been a quite appalling person who manipulated the poor and suffering for ends which quite likely included her own egoism and a misguided devotion to an institution rather than a moral code. But I wouldn't want to compare her to Hitler!

you never know someones true intent behind there actions, excluding Jesus. no one is better than anyone in any real sense but the way they treat you affects your judgement of them and how much you trust them.------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

quote:

---

Originally posted by quicksink:
well then go home, KP, and call me when the fire starts pouring down from the heavens.

​

until then, science stands.

​

---

until then... but even then youd probably still deny it.------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

quote:

---

Originally posted by KingPenguin:
you never know someones true intent behind there actions, excluding Jesus. no one is better than anyone in any real sense but the way they treat you affects your judgement of them and how much you trust them.

---

Hey! I agree with you! Except for the Jesus bit. I don't think we can know the true motivation beyond any of his actions, because that would be to know the true mind of God which is beyond us.
You understand that I was saying that morality, even a universal morality, has to take account to some extent of relativism, because even those who are clearly good and well motivated to some, will seem quite else to others.
How we resolve these issues is of course extremely difficult.

Originally posted by KingPenguin:
you never know someones true intent behind there actions, excluding Jesus. no one is better than anyone in any real sense but the way they treat you affects your judgement of them and how much you trust them.Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:
Hey! I agree with you! Except for the Jesus bit. I don't think we can know the true motivation beyond any of his actions, because that would be to know the true mind of God which is beyond us.
You understand that I was saying that morality, even a universal morality, has to take account to some extent of relativism, because even those who are clearly good and well motivated to some, will seem quite else to others.
How we resolve these issues is of course extremely difficult.KingPenguin:
well the bible says that Jesus's motivation was love for all of gods children and thats what i have faith in so i came to that conclusion. How he does it and why he does love us is definetly beyond me, i would despise humans if i were God. Just look at how many times people sin, or do something morally wrong.------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

​

[This message has been edited by KingPenguin, 03-11-2002]

​

[This message has been edited by KingPenguin, 03-11-2002]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Darwin Storm:
[B] Best not to go down the path of absolute "right and wrong", since christianity can't make the same claim either. [/QUOTE]Actually, Christianity states that God's word is the absolute standard.

quote:

---

1.)Today, we agree incest is bad. In the old testement, it was a pretty common thing. In fact, the then commandments make specific reference to not coveting thy neibhors wife, but says nothing about having the hots for your sister.

---

Not true: read Leviticus 18; incest was outlawed shortly after the Israelites left Egypt.

quote:

---

2.)THE INQUISITION! Ain't it great! The INQUISITION! need I repeat?
3.)um Crusades... nasty mess that.

---

A favorite yet weak argument. First, I won't mention the millions and millions that have been killed by atheist/evolutionist fueled beliefs (Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot). Second, I challenge you to find Scriptural support for the inquistion and the crusades. Many ignoble things have been done in the name of "God" but that does not negate the Truths laid out in His word. That argument is like saying St. Andrews Cross is a symbol of racism simply because a group like the skinheads choose to wave it as their banner.

Joz, can you read my post #49? and respond? It is a follow up to my original post to which you responded. Thx

quote:

---

Originally posted by Punisher:
A favorite yet weak argument. First, I won't mention the millions and millions that have been killed by atheist/evolutionist fueled beliefs (Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot). Second, I challenge you to find Scriptural support for the inquistion and the crusades. Many ignoble things have been done in the name of "God" but that does not negate the Truths laid out in His word. That argument is like saying St. Andrews Cross is a symbol of racism simply because a group like the skinheads choose to wave it as their banner.

​

---

Oh please dont Hovind-ize the board with this utter nonsense about evolution. Stalin and Pol Pot murdered millions to keep themselve in power and Hitler murdered jews because he thought thats what God wanted...he says so in his book,Mein Kaft. Evolutionary science is simply OBSERVATION of change. True evolutionists DONT PARTICIPATE in the process...they merely record it. As soon as you start to participate,thats no longuer evolutionary science...it becomes EUGENICS,which is what Hitler tried to do...the creation of a perfect race.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
Of course there are differences in opinion, but does opinion mean anything in relation to right and wrong? Should Hitlers views be regarded as the same as Mother Teresa's?

​

Of course not. There are universal morals, whether or not an individual wants to recognize them makes no difference.

---

Could you please quote a universal moral ?Morals are a product of society, they change as society and
situation change.People who are raised in a particular society may choose to
reject the morality of that society, but cannot be said to
be acting against the morals of another, to them, alien
society.Hitler's actions can be considered against morality because he
was raised in a culture founded in christian morality, which he
clearly broke.Is incest immoral (I'm not in favour of it myself I hasten to
add). It is illegal in the western world, and appears to be
regarded in the Bible as unacceptable, and yet it was normal
in Ancient Egypt to the extent that it wasn't even recognised
within the culture.What makes something MORAL ?It is a societal definition, not an absolute.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Punisher:
[b]You are getting to the root of my question which is this: How can an evolutionist believe in the validity of reason?[/QUOTE]

​

We use reason because it works.

​

It works, in the practical sense, to help us do what we want to do, and to help us understand the natural Universe.

​

quote:

---

How can time and chance acting on matter produce reason?

---

​

You are oversimplifying evolution to say that it is only 'time and chance acting on matter'. The big part you are leaving out is selection by the environment. Those individuals with a greater ability to reason would have been selected for if it was a reproductive advantage.

​

quote:

---

If you see a chemical reaction, it doesn't occur to you to say that it is true or false, it just is. So, my Christian/creation beliefs are just a complex chemical reaction in my head. And your beliefs are simply a different chemical reaction. So why do you think my chemical reaction is false and yours is true.

---

​

Post-modern relatavism?

​

Be careful, this will almost certainly backfire on you. If there is no objective reality and all perceptions are equally valid, then Satanism is just as "true" as Christianity.

​

[QUOTE]It appears that atheist evolutionists borrow reason from theism to argue their case. For those who do not believe in God, the only consistent position is nihlism. Basically, anything goes. If we are the process of chemical reactions, then the strongest survive and absolute standards of right and wrong do not exist. Right and wrong is in the eye of the beholder. So, your atheism must rest on an unsupported presuppostion, not on a claim to reason.[/b]

---

OK, but what does this have to do with Biology and the ToE?Would you care to discuss the evidence?

quote:

---

Originally posted by LudvanB:
Oh please dont Hovind-ize the board with this utter nonsense about evolution. Stalin and Pol Pot murdered millions to keep themselve in power and Hitler murdered jews because he thought thats what God wanted...he says so in his book,Mein Kaft. Evolutionary science is simply OBSERVATION of change. True evolutionists DONT PARTICIPATE in the process...they merely record it. As soon as you start to participate,thats no longuer evolutionary science...it becomes EUGENICS,which is what Hitler tried to do...the creation of a perfect race.

---

I'm not sure what Hovind-ize means. I know who he is but I don't read his stuff. My examples of Hitler and Stalin was more of a side note. My response was similiar to yours. True Christians understand that the crusades and the inquisition were misguided and NOT an example of Biblical Christianity.

​

[This message has been edited by Punisher, 03-11-2002]

I thought the topic was atheism. Sorry if I mis-read the subject line of the post. I am discussing the evidence in a number of threads.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:
[b]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
Of course there are differences in opinion, but does opinion mean anything in relation to right and wrong? Should Hitlers views be regarded as the same as Mother Teresa's?
Of course not. There are universal morals, whether or not an individual wants to recognize them makes no difference.

---

In some ways I hesitate to disagree with you in that I do believe there are moral standards which can hold universally. However, though I doubt that "opinion" forms part of the moral standard, I do believe that it could and does take different forms dependent on circumstances - that it requires a degree of relativism in order to be universal.But in your attempt to put down relativism, you raise it inadvertently. You can rest assured I despise Hitler. Sadly I hold Mother Teresa's moral position quite troubling -
she strikes me as having been a quite appalling person who manipulated the poor and suffering for ends which quite likely included her own egoism and a misguided devotion to an institution rather than a moral code. But I wouldn't want to compare her to Hitler!
---Although this is a tangent, I think your absurd commentary on Mother Teresa needs clarification. An "appalling person"?, "manipulated the poor and suffering"? "her own egoism and a misguided devotion to an institution"? This is one of the most entirely non-objective commentaries on a subject which you clearly have a biased and non-knowledgable of...Mother Theresa did indeed tend to the poor, lepers, the elderly, the sick and did so not for self aggrandizement but rather out of the goodness of her heart. Although doing something in this manner may be a foreign concept to you (yes, this is clearly an ad hom attack), please don't defame Mother Theresa in the process. If your capable of it, please present your factual date and a logical explanation which "proves" that Mother Theresa was an "appalling person", that she "manipulated the poor and suffering" and "her own egoism and a misguided devotion to an institution"?