[Merged] Why do you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence ? - Page 134

Wowbagger · 27th February 2013, 05:40 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

but to do so, they need to be programmed to do so.....who wrote the instruction program in the cell ?

I would like to remind you that:

Those who DO NOT think that DNA is a language or a code are the ones learning MORE about where it came from!

Those who insist that DNA is a language or a code are NOT gaining any new, nitty-gritty details about how it came about.

There is tremendous value in thinking of DNA as a replicating molecule, that had increased in complexity over time, through natural procecces.... regardless of belief about it or about God!

That is why this line of argument of yours is failing to impress us, here.

Slowvehicle · 27th February 2013, 05:41 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

no, not a campfire anecdotes, but a fact that occured in my presence.

...or so you assert. Might you be so kind as to explain why your unsupported assertion of an anecdote about a parlour trick is the reason you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence? Just to stay on topic, and all...

Slowvehicle · 27th February 2013, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

The duck tap danced and sang the Lord's praises in my presence. Fact. A goose nearby was possessed by the Devil at the same moment and took issue with the duck. Fact.

Heretic! The duck was obviously performing soft shoe, not tap...

dafydd · 27th February 2013, 05:46 AM

Originally Posted by punshhh

Existence cannot be addressed outside the study of ontology. Any other study is regarding phenomena already existing, not the origin of their existence.

I am aware of it, it doesn't provide a theory for our existence. Only an explanation of how our bodies developed on this planet. Similarly any other explanation of how things develop in nature does not explain existence.

Why does existence need a explanation?

tsig · 27th February 2013, 05:49 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

its hard to believe that " rational " atheists write and insist in such unscientific nonsense.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t287...-for-a-creator

Dr. Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project (that mapped the human DNA structure) said that one can "think of DNA as an instructional script, a software program, sitting in the nucleus of the cell."

Perry Marshall, an information specialist, comments on the implications of this.
"There has never existed a computer program that wasn't designed...[whether it is] a code, or a program, or a message given through a language, there is always an intelligent mind behind it."

DNA is not a computer code, can you take a computer program and throw it into a batch of chemicals and will it self organize into a computer?

tsig · 27th February 2013, 05:56 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

http://www.uncommondescent.com/faq/#nobdesn

http://creation.com/refuting-evoluti...from-evolution

http://dennisdjones.wordpress.com/20...design-theory/

thats a bad comparison. The DNA is a script like a computercode, or a written book.

but its not codified, specified, complex information, as contained in a book, or dna.

I have never seen a book self replicate.

IanS · 27th February 2013, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t288-the-genetic-code

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t288-the-genetic-code

but to do so, they need to be programmed to do so.....who wrote the instruction program in the cell ?

There is no " instruction program in the cell ".

And you can't magically produce any such "instruction program" by quoting the religious beliefs of barking mad creationists who preach on the internet.

The reason you are objecting so strongly to me correcting you on your misuse of the word "information" is because your entire argument of ID rests on you trying to claim that “living” cells, which are simply bundles of chemical molecules, somehow hear the voice of invisible supernatural gods.

As I said above, you and other religious fanatics may hear voices, but simple organic chemicals do not hear voices.

punshhh · 27th February 2013, 06:13 AM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

You exist as an organic body, yes or no?

Yes, but that does not say anything about existence other than, that organic bodies and the materials they are made of appear to exist.

punshhh · 27th February 2013, 06:22 AM

Originally Posted by Lowpro

Depends on whether you want to conflate the word with "purpose".

I wouldn't bring that word up here. The condition of existence is a big enough unknown to be going on with.

Quote:

I can tell you a lot about existence from an empirical perspective

Perhaps, but that may not stretch far beyond our local circumstance and we don't know if it is or is not a construct.

Quote:

Edited by Locknar:

Moderated content removed.

Perhaps, I have not read the thread. Why is a whole other can of worms.

RoboTimbo · 27th February 2013, 07:10 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

according to your world view, you cannot say, either its moral, or not.

No, according to your world view, you cannot say. With our subjective morals, we can easily say that something is moral or not according to our subjective morals. Do you really not understand that?

According to your world view, you can only say something is moral if it is specifically addressed in your morally bankrupt bronze age novel.

So, is killing your neighbor for picking up sticks on the Sabbath moral, YES or NO?

Quote:

What is the moral difference between killing your neighbour, and killing his cat ?

We value human life due to our subjetive morals. If you were to read the Christian bible, you would see how disgusting its lack of regard for human life is. You should try reading it sometime.

Quote:

according to your world view, none.

No, as you now see, it is according to your Bible, killing homosexuals is a moral act. According to our subjective morals, we see it as a heinous act.

According to your "source of universal morals", is it moral to murder your daughter for having sex outside of marriage? YES or NO?

Lowpro · 27th February 2013, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by punshhh

Existence cannot be addressed outside the study of ontology. Any other study is regarding phenomena already existing, not the origin of their existence.

I am aware of it, it doesn't provide a theory for our existence. Only an explanation of how our bodies developed on this planet. Similarly any other explanation of how things develop in nature does not explain existence.

In what way does a theory that explain how we develop in nature miss out on explaining our existence, or are you trying to conflate the "how we exist" with the "why we exist" question.

TjW · 27th February 2013, 07:50 AM

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

Because they cherry pick the parts of the New Testament written by authors who said the old law was nullified (ignoring the question of why their god would issue such horrifyingly evil edicts in the first place) and disregard the parts written by authors who claimed that the old law was still very much in effect.

But this is still really odd. If the argument is:

Objective morals are provided by God.
Objective morals exist.
Therefore, God.

You need to have a set of morals that are objective. Objective morals, by definition, wouldn't change with time.
Gibhor is claiming that morals have changed.
By his own argument, he's disproved the existence of God.

Foster Zygote · 27th February 2013, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

according to your world view, you cannot say, either its moral, or not.

Yes, we can. We can say this because homosexuals are human beings who are contributing members of society. We can say this because we use logic to recognize that homosexuality between responsible, consenting adults causes no harm to anyone and is simply part of the pursuit of happiness and well-being that makes for a healthy society. The Bible, on the other hand, was written by people who did not use logic to formulate and justify a morality for the purpose of maintaining a healthy, productive society, but rather declared their mindless bigotry to be the unimpeachable law of the universe, thus refusing to justify or take responsibility for their actions.

Quote:

What is the moral difference between killing your neighbour, and killing his cat ?

The difference is that we place a much higher value on the life of other human beings than on cats. Not that killing a neighbor's cat is not a disgusting action deserving of civil punishment, but killing another human being is an action that causes harm to the human community. It matters because we want to live in a society in which we can prosper and grow.

Quote:

according to your world view, none.

Are passive/aggressive smilies the best you can offer to defend your position?

The universe may be indifferent to our survival or extinction, but it matters to us because we want to survive. We want to know that, even though we as individuals will die, the human species will continue on after us. We survive as a social species. Together, we can achieve things that are impossible alone. We can prosper greatly when we work for each other.

The great joke of this thread is that you declare your god to be the ultimate source of objectively correct morality, then when we point out the positively evil edicts attributed to said god, you say, "You don't have to obey those evil laws any more". Your "objective" morality has changed.

Foster Zygote · 27th February 2013, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by TjW

But this is still really odd. If the argument is:

Objective morals are provided by God.
Objective morals exist.
Therefore, God.

You need to have a set of morals that are objective. Objective morals, by definition, wouldn't change with time.
Gibhor is claiming that morals have changed.
By his own argument, he's disproved the existence of God.

Yep. The horrors of the Tanakh are an embarrassment to those who claim a gentle and loving god. Not that the central message of Christianity, "Love me or I will destroy you", is all that loving. At least some early Gnostic Christian groups, like the Marcionites, recognized this incompatibility and rejected the cruel god of Abraham.

dafydd · 27th February 2013, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by Lowpro

are you trying to conflate the "how we exist" with the "why we exist" question.

Yep.

Lowpro · 27th February 2013, 08:23 AM

Objective morals in a "living document" of the Old and New Testament is a hilarious explanation and every time I hear it I crack up. It's Christian chauvinism at its finest.

Foster Zygote · 27th February 2013, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

i know you have it easy to point out what you think you can use as justification to be against the bible. If i would be you, i would rather make a serious and unbiased bible study, then you will understand these issues in a other light.

There are no excuses for the Bible's command to kill young women for making their own sexual choices. There are no excuses for its directive to kill friends and family who suggest adopting other religious beliefs. There is no forgiving the Bible for declaring that slaves are property.

Quote:

You would be more convincing, if you would point out , what positive evidence you have for your case of strong atheism. Thats not so easy, isnt it ?

Joobz has not made a case for strong atheism.

Foster Zygote · 27th February 2013, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

there is a dictate in german :

gleich mit gleich gesellt sich gern

Do you mean "Gleich und Gleich gesellt sich gern"?

Foster Zygote · 27th February 2013, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

If you can tell me ONE example of christian parents, that do this based on the teachings in the bible, i will answer your question.

That's the point. Don't you get it? Christian parents don't do what the god of the Bible declared to be just, because they employ their subjective moral judgement.

If YHWH's morality is objective, then why did he once command people to kill their daughters for having sex with their boyfriends?

dafydd · 27th February 2013, 08:38 AM

Gelijk and gelijk gezelt zich graag. What Gihbor is getting at is a mystery.

deaman · 27th February 2013, 09:16 AM

I've been following this thread and jumping in to comment, when I felt I had a point. But, I have to look at facts.

Gibhor, does not actually want to learn anything.

As far as I can tell, the phenomena known as Martyr Syndrome is at work here. For Gibhor, he feel he is fighting the "Good Fight", and fending off all us "pagens".

For him, it is a deep need for his self-esteem. Without this arguement, his faith is not validated.

But, I know how life works. We do influence each other, and even if it doesn't happen now, maybe one day, Gibhor's eyes will open to the plain truth.

We are responsible, for ourselves.
There is no reward for your life. (Other than the life, itself.)
There is no god.

Dancing David · 27th February 2013, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by punshhh

Yes, but that does not say anything about existence other than, that organic bodies and the materials they are made of appear to exist.

And yet that is existence... as it is.

GIBHOR · 27th February 2013, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by deaman

Gibhor, does not actually want to learn anything.

How about you ?

Quote:

For him, it is a deep need for his self-esteem. Without this arguement, his faith is not validated.

How about yours ? Or do you have something else than faith to present ?

GIBHOR · 27th February 2013, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

That's the point. Don't you get it? Christian parents don't do what the god of the Bible declared to be just,

Of course not. you have no clue what you are talking about. We do not follow certain commandments, because they were for a specific situation, for a specific folk, at a specific time. We let ourselfs guide by the teachings of Jesus.......

GIBHOR · 27th February 2013, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

Do you mean "Gleich und Gleich gesellt sich gern"?

yeah

Lowpro · 27th February 2013, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

How about you ?

How about yours ? Or do you have something else than faith to present ?

Is DNA a chemical? No seriously we'll do this stepwise if you want. Is. DNA. A. Chemical. Are its nucleotides a chemical?

RoboTimbo · 27th February 2013, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

We do not follow certain commandments, because they were for a specific situation, for a specific folk, at a specific time.

So, not objective then. Thanks for admitting it.

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

you have no clue what you are talking about.

LOL.

Foster Zygote · 27th February 2013, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

Of course not. you have no clue what you are talking about. We do not follow certain commandments, because they were for a specific situation, for a specific folk, at a specific time. We let ourselfs guide by the teachings of Jesus.......

That is an amazingly stupid argument. What you've just described is subjective morality. You pick and choose what you want to follow from the Bible's edicts.

Byt the way, could you explain what it was about the specific situation, folk and time that made it morally just to own slaves, kill a woman for having sex, or kill friends or family who suggested that you join another religion? I'd really like to know, seeing as you have such an enormous, raging clue for the Bible.

deaman · 27th February 2013, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

How about you ?

I am willing to learn. When I say my ears are open, I actually mean it. What experiment do you suggest in order to prove god's existence?

How about yours ? Or do you have something else than faith to present ?

I do not understand what you mean. Please explain.

Remember Gibhor, I have nothing to gain or lose by being shown to be wrong, except knowledge and experience. I am perfectly willing to be proved wrong. I am a human being, and humans are sometimes right, and sometimes wrong.

It would be silly, for me, to pretend to be 100% right, 100% of the time.

So, how will you prove god?

dafydd · 27th February 2013, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

yeah

Yes.

dafydd · 27th February 2013, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by deaman

So, how will you prove god?

We don't even know which god, or why all the other gods except Gihbor's god do not exist.

joobz · 27th February 2013, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

We do not follow certain commandments, because they were for a specific situation, for a specific folk, at a specific time.

Welcome to moral relativism.

GIBHOR · 27th February 2013, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by deaman

So, how will you prove god?

How will you prove me strong atheism to be true ?

your question is nonsense.

joobz · 27th February 2013, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

How will you prove me strong atheism to be true ?

your question is nonsense.

both questions are dumb.
we have no evidence for god, and therefore have no way to presume one exists or doesn't exist.

deaman · 27th February 2013, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

How will you prove me strong atheism to be true ?

your question is nonsense.

I am a strong athiest (I guess). The details of my life are probably very close to yours. What would you consider viable proof for strong athiesm?

I don't believe in god or gods.

I mean, you don't believe in many gods either, correct? Do you believe in Zues or Apollo? Do you believe in the Baptist god, or the Mormon god?

RoboTimbo · 27th February 2013, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

How will you prove me strong atheism to be true ?

your question is nonsense.

Why are you unable to prove your god? Is it imaginary?

Giordano · 27th February 2013, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by Lowpro

Is DNA a chemical? No seriously we'll do this stepwise if you want. Is. DNA. A. Chemical. Are its nucleotides a chemical?

I've tried step by step on how evolution can add new "information" to the genome. Couldn't get GIBHOR to even begin to engage in the discussion. Good luck!

Giordano · 27th February 2013, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by GIBHOR

explain it then. i am all ears.

You posted exactly the same statement before. When I provided the evidence, you had requested, you not only ignored my response, but you also explicitly stated that you were under no obligation to read what I had provided.

Of course the forum involves reading not hearing; perhaps you are trying to say that you are all ears, but no eyes? I thought that clever wording of lies to beguile people was the work of satan in your religion, not god.

BadBoy · 27th February 2013, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by deaman

I am a strong athiest (I guess). The details of my life are probably very close to yours. What would you consider viable proof for strong athiesm?

I don't believe in god or gods.

I mean, you don't believe in many gods either, correct? Do you believe in Zues or Apollo? Do you believe in the Baptist god, or the Mormon god?

yes, but prove that you dont believe in a God or Gods, that the thing. Just saying that you dont, doesnt mean its true.

deaman · 27th February 2013, 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by BadBoy

yes, but prove that you dont believe in a God or Gods, that the thing. Just saying that you dont, doesnt mean its true.

Lol!!!

27th February 2013, 05:40 AM	#5321
Wowbagger The Infinitely Prolonged Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space) Posts: 13,518	Originally Posted by GIBHOR but to do so, they need to be programmed to do so.....who wrote the instruction program in the cell ? I would like to remind you that: Those who DO NOT think that DNA is a language or a code are the ones learning MORE about where it came from! Those who insist that DNA is a language or a code are NOT gaining any new, nitty-gritty details about how it came about. There is tremendous value in thinking of DNA as a replicating molecule, that had increased in complexity over time, through natural procecces.... regardless of belief about it or about God! That is why this line of argument of yours is failing to impress us, here.
	__________________ WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where *you* could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!!

27th February 2013, 05:41 AM	#5322
Slowvehicle Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...not where I seemed, nor was calculated to be...but no-one need worry... Posts: 2,156	Originally Posted by GIBHOR no, not a campfire anecdotes, but a fact that occured in my presence. ...or so you assert. Might you be so kind as to explain why your unsupported assertion of an anecdote about a parlour trick is the reason you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence? Just to stay on topic, and all...
	__________________ "Science is a wall against which we crash all of our ideas. The ones that survive are the ones we keep, but they are still subjected to periodic crash tests." -Foster Zygote "And in science the default is that you're wrong. EVERYONE is wrong. You only can be not wrong if you have evidence to back up your claim." -Dinwar "That is not my circus; those are not my monkeys." -Howard Tayler

27th February 2013, 05:43 AM	#5323
Slowvehicle Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...not where I seemed, nor was calculated to be...but no-one need worry... Posts: 2,156	Originally Posted by dafydd The duck tap danced and sang the Lord's praises in my presence. Fact. A goose nearby was possessed by the Devil at the same moment and took issue with the duck. Fact. Heretic! The duck was obviously performing soft shoe, not tap...
	__________________ "Science is a wall against which we crash all of our ideas. The ones that survive are the ones we keep, but they are still subjected to periodic crash tests." -Foster Zygote "And in science the default is that you're wrong. EVERYONE is wrong. You only can be not wrong if you have evidence to back up your claim." -Dinwar "That is not my circus; those are not my monkeys." -Howard Tayler

27th February 2013, 05:46 AM	#5324
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,448	Originally Posted by punshhh Existence cannot be addressed outside the study of ontology. Any other study is regarding phenomena already existing, not the origin of their existence. I am aware of it, it doesn't provide a theory for our existence. Only an explanation of how our bodies developed on this planet. Similarly any other explanation of how things develop in nature does not explain existence. Why does existence need a explanation?
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

27th February 2013, 05:56 AM	#5326
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,718	Originally Posted by GIBHOR http://www.uncommondescent.com/faq/#nobdesn http://creation.com/refuting-evoluti...from-evolution http://dennisdjones.wordpress.com/20...design-theory/ thats a bad comparison. The DNA is a script like a computercode, or a written book. but its not codified, specified, complex information, as contained in a book, or dna. I have never seen a book self replicate.
	Last edited by tsig; 27th February 2013 at 05:58 AM.

27th February 2013, 05:49 AM	#5325
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,718	Originally Posted by GIBHOR its hard to believe that " rational " atheists write and insist in such unscientific nonsense. http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t287...-for-a-creator Dr. Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project (that mapped the human DNA structure) said that one can "think of DNA as an instructional script, a software program, sitting in the nucleus of the cell." Perry Marshall, an information specialist, comments on the implications of this. "There has never existed a computer program that wasn't designed...[whether it is] a code, or a program, or a message given through a language, there is always an intelligent mind behind it." DNA is not a computer code, can you take a computer program and throw it into a batch of chemicals and will it self organize into a computer?

27th February 2013, 06:00 AM	#5327
IanS Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 1,006	Originally Posted by GIBHOR http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t288-the-genetic-code http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t288-the-genetic-code but to do so, they need to be programmed to do so.....who wrote the instruction program in the cell ? There is no " instruction program in the cell ". And you can't magically produce any such "instruction program" by quoting the religious beliefs of barking mad creationists who preach on the internet. The reason you are objecting so strongly to me correcting you on your misuse of the word "information" is because your entire argument of ID rests on you trying to claim that “living” cells, which are simply bundles of chemical molecules, somehow hear the voice of invisible supernatural gods. As I said above, you and other religious fanatics may hear voices, but simple organic chemicals do not hear voices.
IanS Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 1,006

27th February 2013, 06:13 AM	#5328
punshhh Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Rural England Posts: 4,165	Originally Posted by Dancing David You exist as an organic body, yes or no? Yes, but that does not say anything about existence other than, that organic bodies and the materials they are made of appear to exist.

27th February 2013, 07:10 AM	#5330
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,847	Originally Posted by GIBHOR according to your world view, you cannot say, either its moral, or not. No, according to your world view, you cannot say. With our subjective morals, we can easily say that something is moral or not according to our subjective morals. Do you really not understand that? According to your world view, you can only say something is moral if it is specifically addressed in your morally bankrupt bronze age novel. So, is killing your neighbor for picking up sticks on the Sabbath moral, YES or NO? Quote: What is the moral difference between killing your neighbour, and killing his cat ? We value human life due to our subjetive morals. If you were to read the Christian bible, you would see how disgusting its lack of regard for human life is. You should try reading it sometime. Quote: according to your world view, none. No, as you now see, it is according to your Bible, killing homosexuals is a moral act. According to our subjective morals, we see it as a heinous act. According to your "source of universal morals", is it moral to murder your daughter for having sex outside of marriage? YES or NO?

27th February 2013, 07:12 AM	#5331
Lowpro Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 4,520	Originally Posted by punshhh Existence cannot be addressed outside the study of ontology. Any other study is regarding phenomena already existing, not the origin of their existence. I am aware of it, it doesn't provide a theory for our existence. Only an explanation of how our bodies developed on this planet. Similarly any other explanation of how things develop in nature does not explain existence. In what way does a theory that explain how we develop in nature miss out on explaining our existence, or are you trying to conflate the "how we exist" with the "why we exist" question.
	__________________ "If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers

27th February 2013, 07:50 AM	#5332
TjW Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: up in the air Posts: 9,974	Originally Posted by Foster Zygote Because they cherry pick the parts of the New Testament written by authors who said the old law was nullified (ignoring the question of why their god would issue such horrifyingly evil edicts in the first place) and disregard the parts written by authors who claimed that the old law was still very much in effect. But this is still really odd. If the argument is: Objective morals are provided by God. Objective morals exist. Therefore, God. You need to have a set of morals that are objective. Objective morals, by definition, wouldn't change with time. Gibhor is claiming that morals have changed. By his own argument, he's disproved the existence of God.
	__________________ TjW People like TjW -- Kelly

27th February 2013, 08:11 AM	#5333
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,389	Originally Posted by GIBHOR according to your world view, you cannot say, either its moral, or not. Yes, we can. We can say this because homosexuals are human beings who are contributing members of society. We can say this because we use logic to recognize that homosexuality between responsible, consenting adults causes no harm to anyone and is simply part of the pursuit of happiness and well-being that makes for a healthy society. The Bible, on the other hand, was written by people who did not use logic to formulate and justify a morality for the purpose of maintaining a healthy, productive society, but rather declared their mindless bigotry to be the unimpeachable law of the universe, thus refusing to justify or take responsibility for their actions. Quote: What is the moral difference between killing your neighbour, and killing his cat ? The difference is that we place a much higher value on the life of other human beings than on cats. Not that killing a neighbor's cat is not a disgusting action deserving of civil punishment, but killing another human being is an action that causes harm to the human community. It matters because we want to live in a society in which we can prosper and grow. Quote: according to your world view, none. Are passive/aggressive smilies the best you can offer to defend your position? The universe may be indifferent to our survival or extinction, but it matters to us because we want to survive. We want to know that, even though we as individuals will die, the human species will continue on after us. We survive as a social species. Together, we can achieve things that are impossible alone. We can prosper greatly when we work for each other. The great joke of this thread is that you declare your god to be the ultimate source of objectively correct morality, then when we point out the positively evil edicts attributed to said god, you say, "You don't have to obey those evil laws any more". Your "objective" morality has changed.
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

27th February 2013, 08:17 AM	#5334
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,389	Originally Posted by TjW But this is still really odd. If the argument is: Objective morals are provided by God. Objective morals exist. Therefore, God. You need to have a set of morals that are objective. Objective morals, by definition, wouldn't change with time. Gibhor is claiming that morals have changed. By his own argument, he's disproved the existence of God. Yep. The horrors of the Tanakh are an embarrassment to those who claim a gentle and loving god. Not that the central message of Christianity, "Love me or I will destroy you", is all that loving. At least some early Gnostic Christian groups, like the Marcionites, recognized this incompatibility and rejected the cruel god of Abraham.
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

27th February 2013, 08:18 AM	#5335
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,448	Originally Posted by Lowpro are you trying to conflate the "how we exist" with the "why we exist" question. Yep.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

27th February 2013, 08:23 AM	#5336
Lowpro Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 4,520	Objective morals in a "living document" of the Old and New Testament is a hilarious explanation and every time I hear it I crack up. It's Christian chauvinism at its finest.
	__________________ "If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers

27th February 2013, 08:27 AM	#5337
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,389	Originally Posted by GIBHOR i know you have it easy to point out what you think you can use as justification to be against the bible. If i would be you, i would rather make a serious and unbiased bible study, then you will understand these issues in a other light. There are no excuses for the Bible's command to kill young women for making their own sexual choices. There are no excuses for its directive to kill friends and family who suggest adopting other religious beliefs. There is no forgiving the Bible for declaring that slaves are property. Quote: You would be more convincing, if you would point out , what positive evidence you have for your case of strong atheism. Thats not so easy, isnt it ? Joobz has not made a case for strong atheism.
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

27th February 2013, 08:30 AM	#5338
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,389	Originally Posted by GIBHOR there is a dictate in german : gleich mit gleich gesellt sich gern Do you mean "Gleich und Gleich gesellt sich gern"?
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

27th February 2013, 08:36 AM	#5339
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,389	Originally Posted by GIBHOR If you can tell me ONE example of christian parents, that do this based on the teachings in the bible, i will answer your question. That's the point. Don't you get it? Christian parents don't do what the god of the Bible declared to be just, because they employ their subjective moral judgement. If YHWH's morality is objective, then why did he once command people to kill their daughters for having sex with their boyfriends?
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

27th February 2013, 08:38 AM	#5340
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,448	Gelijk and gelijk gezelt zich graag. What Gihbor is getting at is a mystery.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

27th February 2013, 09:16 AM	#5341
deaman Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 2,729	I've been following this thread and jumping in to comment, when I felt I had a point. But, I have to look at facts. Gibhor, does not actually want to learn anything. As far as I can tell, the phenomena known as Martyr Syndrome is at work here. For Gibhor, he feel he is fighting the "Good Fight", and fending off all us "pagens". For him, it is a deep need for his self-esteem. Without this arguement, his faith is not validated. But, I know how life works. We do influence each other, and even if it doesn't happen now, maybe one day, Gibhor's eyes will open to the plain truth. We are responsible, for ourselves. There is no reward for your life. (Other than the life, itself.) There is no god.
deaman Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 2,729	Last edited by deaman; 27th February 2013 at 09:17 AM.

27th February 2013, 10:34 AM	#5342
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,702	Originally Posted by punshhh Yes, but that does not say anything about existence other than, that organic bodies and the materials they are made of appear to exist. And yet that is existence... as it is.
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager

27th February 2013, 11:17 AM	#5343
GIBHOR Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,978	Originally Posted by deaman Gibhor, does not actually want to learn anything. How about you ? Quote: For him, it is a deep need for his self-esteem. Without this arguement, his faith is not validated. How about yours ? Or do you have something else than faith to present ?
GIBHOR Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,978

27th February 2013, 11:19 AM	#5344
GIBHOR Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,978	Originally Posted by Foster Zygote That's the point. Don't you get it? Christian parents don't do what the god of the Bible declared to be just, Of course not. you have no clue what you are talking about. We do not follow certain commandments, because they were for a specific situation, for a specific folk, at a specific time. We let ourselfs guide by the teachings of Jesus.......
GIBHOR Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,978

27th February 2013, 11:21 AM	#5345
GIBHOR Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,978	Originally Posted by Foster Zygote Do you mean "Gleich und Gleich gesellt sich gern"? yeah
GIBHOR Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,978

27th February 2013, 11:26 AM	#5346
Lowpro Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 4,520	Originally Posted by GIBHOR How about you ? How about yours ? Or do you have something else than faith to present ? Is DNA a chemical? No seriously we'll do this stepwise if you want. Is. DNA. A. Chemical. Are its nucleotides a chemical?
	__________________ "If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers

27th February 2013, 11:49 AM	#5347
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,847	Originally Posted by GIBHOR We do not follow certain commandments, because they were for a specific situation, for a specific folk, at a specific time. So, not objective then. Thanks for admitting it. Originally Posted by GIBHOR you have no clue what you are talking about. LOL.

27th February 2013, 12:01 PM	#5348
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,389	Originally Posted by GIBHOR Of course not. you have no clue what you are talking about. We do not follow certain commandments, because they were for a specific situation, for a specific folk, at a specific time. We let ourselfs guide by the teachings of Jesus....... That is an amazingly stupid argument. What you've just described is subjective morality. You pick and choose what you want to follow from the Bible's edicts. Byt the way, could you explain what it was about the specific situation, folk and time that made it morally just to own slaves, kill a woman for having sex, or kill friends or family who suggested that you join another religion? I'd really like to know, seeing as you have such an enormous, raging clue for the Bible.
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

27th February 2013, 12:52 PM	#5349
deaman Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 2,729	Originally Posted by GIBHOR How about you ? I am willing to learn. When I say my ears are open, I actually mean it. What experiment do you suggest in order to prove god's existence? How about yours ? Or do you have something else than faith to present ? I do not understand what you mean. Please explain. Remember Gibhor, I have nothing to gain or lose by being shown to be wrong, except knowledge and experience. I am perfectly willing to be proved wrong. I am a human being, and humans are sometimes right, and sometimes wrong. It would be silly, for me, to pretend to be 100% right, 100% of the time. So, how will you prove god?
deaman Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 2,729

27th February 2013, 03:13 PM	#5350
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,448	Originally Posted by GIBHOR yeah Yes.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

27th February 2013, 03:16 PM	#5351
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,448	Originally Posted by deaman So, how will you prove god? We don't even know which god, or why all the other gods except Gihbor's god do not exist.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

27th February 2013, 03:55 PM	#5352
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: That's how you get ants Posts: 17,495	Originally Posted by GIBHOR We do not follow certain commandments, because they were for a specific situation, for a specific folk, at a specific time. Welcome to moral relativism.
	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

27th February 2013, 04:52 PM	#5353
GIBHOR Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,978	Originally Posted by deaman So, how will you prove god? How will you prove me strong atheism to be true ? your question is nonsense.
GIBHOR Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,978

27th February 2013, 04:56 PM	#5354
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: That's how you get ants Posts: 17,495	Originally Posted by GIBHOR How will you prove me strong atheism to be true ? your question is nonsense. both questions are dumb. we have no evidence for god, and therefore have no way to presume one exists or doesn't exist.
	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

27th February 2013, 04:58 PM	#5355
deaman Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 2,729	Originally Posted by GIBHOR How will you prove me strong atheism to be true ? your question is nonsense. I am a strong athiest (I guess). The details of my life are probably very close to yours. What would you consider viable proof for strong athiesm? I don't believe in god or gods. I mean, you don't believe in many gods either, correct? Do you believe in Zues or Apollo? Do you believe in the Baptist god, or the Mormon god?
deaman Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 2,729	Last edited by deaman; 27th February 2013 at 06:18 PM.

27th February 2013, 05:01 PM	#5356
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,847	Originally Posted by GIBHOR How will you prove me strong atheism to be true ? your question is nonsense. Why are you unable to prove your god? Is it imaginary?