quote:Morality having no truth value is not the same as a denial of moral fact.
Really? Because a moral fact is the same thing as a moral truth and you certainly denied that.
quote:A moral fact would be that Texans think Oklahomans don't wash on Sundays.
No, it isn’t. If you want to communicate you really shouldn’t make up your own meanings.
quote:What is the truth value of this morality? It hasn't got one.
Obviously it does. Whether or not Texans believe that Oklahomans don’t wash on Sundays has a truth value. Whether or not Oklahomans don’t wash on Sundays has a truth value. Whether Oklahomans are “smelly dirty critters” has a truth value. Whichever you meant you are not only wrong to call it a “moral fact” you are also wrong to say it doesn’t have a truth value. But they aren’t moral facts since none of them has any moral component. They are just putative facts.
quote:We talk about your morality being true. That's shorthand for your moral judgements being compatible with mine.
That would be another case of you inventing your own terminology and causing confusion.
Again the problem is that you say things you don’t mean.
quote:Is your definition of moral truth limited to the subjective opinion of the holder born of the holder's experience or does it include something else?
My definition of a moral truth is simple. It is a moral claim that is true. If it’s just a subjective opinion that would be doubtful. Is it your assertion that - in the case of morality - subjective opinions are always true?
quote:To have doubts is part of being human and our faith overcomes these doubts. Embrace the times when you have doubts as an opportunity to recognize them as the enemy's lies and deny them, thus making your faith even stronger.
So you obviously refuse to consider the possibility that you might be wrong.
A moderately clever deceit. You ask if dwise1 will c9 sided the possibiiity that he is wrong. But whether he answers “yes”or “no” you will argue that he has faith.
However, the two answers are not at all equivalent. Having the honesty to admit the possibility of error is not at all like religious faith. Not at all like your dismissal of doubt as “the lies of the Enemy”. It certainly does not justify any claim that atheism is a religion - if it did you could characterise almost any belief about the universe as a religion. Even the belief that the sun will rise tomorrow.
So I don’t see your answer as honest. It’s the rhetoric of the apologist.
quote:I am sure this point is nothing new to you, if you have had many folks try to "convert" you (whatever that means). I am not trying to do that at all, simply pointing out for all to see that atheism is faith based at it's very core
I have certainly seen people try this falsehood. But surely an unquestioning dogmatism is more indicative of “faith” in the religious sense. So how can a degree of tentativity - a characteristic of science - be taken as proving that atheism “is faith based at its core”. That would make science even more based in “faith”. Which is hardly how the term is usually used,
quote:I resent the notion that somehow atheism is above reproach. It isn't. It deserves the exact same scrutiny we give any faith.
Nobody has said that atheism is above reproach or should not be scrutinised. Indeed, learning about atheism as dwise1 suggested would be an essential part of any honest scrutiny.
quote:The fact that this forum is filled with those who have lost their way from faith does not surprise me in the least. There is false doctrine in every aspect of our lives. Every TV show / game / movie / book has completely accepted a false doctrine of Naturalism. Naturalism is taught to every single child in public school in the USA and in most of the private Christian schools as well.
There’s a lot of falsehood there. I gave up on Christianity for a number of reasons - but the big one was reading the Bible. Naturalism wasn’t an issue.
I very much doubt that naturalism is taught in “most of the private Christian schools”. Or really even in public schools. You don’t say what you mean (although I can guess). There is a significant distinction between teaching science over sectarian dogma and teaching naturalism.
quote:It's pretty tough to hear the truth through all that noise.
Don’t go blaming other people. The truth can be found but you have to work at it.
quote:General reply to PaulK, ringo and honestly anyone else who attempts this kind of thing: You are wasting your time. You will never affect my faith in Jesus Christ and any attempts to humiliate / mock / harass me get met with the exact same thing: Love and forgiveness as Jesus teaches.
I am not trying to humiliate, mock or harass you. I am pointing out what you are doing. Your refusal to engage in honest discussion only supports my points. And making false accusations is hardly compatible with”Love and forgiveness”.
quote:There is a story in the Bible (I am not able to quote chapter verse off the top of my head) where Jesus tells his apostles that if you give the message and someone refuses to listen you simply wipe your feet at their door and move on.
Of course listening does not mean automatic agreement. I listened. You didn’t like it because I dared to point out what I heard.
quote:It is not my place to convince anyone here of anything. I leave those kinds of difficult things to almighty God.
In other words you won’t even explain what you mean by “naturalism” being taught in many private Christian schools. How convenient that we must wait for God to do that. It’s also hardly compatible with subjecting atheism to actual scrutiny (but then grossly stretching the definition of “faith” to try to label atheism a religion is hardly scrutiny, is it?)
quote:I do what I can for those inside my "circle of influence" as I like to refer to it.
What you are doing doesn’t seem to be very nice.
quote:I have delivered the message. I wipe my feet at the door of any who refuse to hear me. I give you nothing but love and forgiveness now.
It doesn’t look like that. It looks more like you running away - and making false accusations - because your claims are untrue and you know it.
quote:This is the core of my faith.
I believe that your are showing the core of your faith, but it is neither love, nor forgiveness.
That “faith” and “religion” should be interpreted in broad ways just so that you can label atheism a religion? That Christian schools are somehow teaching naturalism but you refuse to say what you mean by that? An odd message and incomplete message, and not one you should expect to be unquestionably believed.
quote:I am a man of faith, and I am willing to engage anyone who wants to hear my words in good faith.
That isn’t true, though is it? I am willing to listen to your words in good faith, yet you refuse to engage.
quote:For those who will not hear, it is not my place to force you to believe. I wipe the dust from my feet at your door and move on
I do not believe that Jesus intended that the disciples should expected to be believed in absolutely every claim that they made - no matter whether it is part of Jesus’ message or not. And yet that seems to be your interpretation.
quote:This is the Faith and Belief section of the board. This supposed to be a place for people of faith to share their beliefs. The OP was started to talk about how we as individuals pray. I am very willing to engage in a discussion about that.
If you were right about the forum’s purpose and if I had introduced these topics that would be a quite proper response. But since you are wrong about the purpose and you introduced both topics yourself it looks more like an excuse to run away from a discussion that isn’t going your way.
(The sample question for the forum is “Is God an objective reality or a subjective concept?” - that hardly conveys the idea that it is solely for believers to share their beliefs)
quote:But then I see 15000 post count ppl like you and ringo here. Why? The only reason you post in here is to do the work of the enemy. I see these obvious traps for what they and I will not surrender my joy by waging in some pointless circular discussion that you have likely had a bunch of times already.
My objective here is quite otherwise. You will note that neither point is an attempt to stamp on your faith. It is not crucial to Christianity to label atheism a religion, nor to accuse other Christians of denying God. Nor are there any traps in my writing.
quote:I have been given my marching orders already. I am to speak my message for all who will hear and let God almighty take care of the things that are beyond my control. There are plenty of faith hating forums on this board where you can go and speak to other like minded folks. But can you let those who want to share their experiences of faith be left in peace here?
Had you stuck to sharing your experiences of faith I would not have responded. But you did not. And I very much doubt that God has an interest in promulgating your personal opinions.
This board is dedicated to discussion. It is not one where you can expect to get away with making false claims unchallenged. You do not get to dictate the purpose of this board or demand that members who have been here for 18 years should bow to your wishes.
quote:And if you can't stop, you should maybe do some internal reflecting on just why you feel the need to try so hard to stomp out any faith you see being shared. The enemy is using you brother.
If you can’t stop telling falsehoods and try to paint yourself as being persecuted just because you get caught telling falsehoods maybe you should do some internal reflection. And think about whose side YOU are on.
quote:Iron does indeed sharpen iron, but I will get none of that here. These folks cannot hold a candle to the minds of Hitchens and Dawkins. I've seen those types, the so called "champions of atheism", be hilariously destroyed in public debates by Lennox for example.
Even if that was entirely true, it wouldn’t mean that you don’t have something to learn. You are not Lennox, for a start. Indeed the fact that you are running away because you can’t defend your assertions indicates that you do have a lot to learn. (For a start, critically examine your own arguments to see how they stand up - or in your case, don’t). That you compound the defeat with further laughable falsehoods is another error.
In fact I very much doubt that Lennox won his debates by pretending that he hadn’t been making an argument, only “sharing his faith” or claiming that his opponent was persecuting him and should leave. So maybe you shouldn’t be implying that you are anywhere near his equal.
quote:They have nothing new to add to the discussion and I will not waste any time on their simplistic traps, only add them to my prayers
quote:@paul If you know Lennox and his work, and his arguments do not convince you than mine sure won't. Regardless buddy please try and hear this: I am *not* trying to convince you of anything.
Presumably you gave up when you found that your assertions were indefensible.
quote:I came here to speak to others of faith about prayers and the nature of my experiences with God.
And yet the points I took issue with were not about either, were they? What you came here to do matters much less than what you actually do.
quote:So please just move on in peace and love my brother, you are wasting your time I assure you.
You may indeed be a lost cause, mired in dishonesty and delusion - and I don’t refer to Christianity. But even that doesn’t mean that I am wasting my time by correcting your falsehoods. The truth is important, whatever you may think.