|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 23, 2006 21:41:52 GMT -5
What is faith? Why do you believe so strongly without any real proof of god? Why do you blindly believe?
I want every good reason you have about why i shouldnt say beep you to jesus. I do understand it is too late to turn back, because of the one unforgivable sin; it is unforgivable to doubt the holy spirit (from some verse in luke).
But, in any case, tell me why i shouldnt have doubted. Tell me why i shouldnt have thought.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 23, 2006 22:00:09 GMT -5
The fool has said in his heart there is no God. God is proven because of the impossibility of the contrary.
If there was no God who created the Heavens and the earth, who created us in His image, one cannot rightly account for being reasonable or logical. You cannot say that you can have meaningful discourse because you cannot even say anything is meaningful. If God did not exist, you cannot account for argueing or debating against God. Because you do not met the preconditions for intelligability.
If there was no god, you couldn't have reasonable, logical debate over the exists of God, because you couldn't account for reason or logic or even the value of a debate. The believer has a reason to believe in reason. It's logical for him to believe in logic. Because we acknowledge that we were created in the image of a reasonable, logical God.
However the unbeliever does not have a reason to believe in reason. It is illogical for him to believe in logic. He has no way to account for these things. The moment he attempts to use reason or logic against God he shows how his metaphysics does not comport with his epistomology. His view of the world contradicts his practice. In the atheist world, one cannot say that reason, logic, or meaningful discourse even exist. There is no universal, absolute ground for them to stand upon.
So the existence of God is proved by the impossibility of the contrary. But you attempting to use reason and logic show that you were created in the image of God, though you supress the truth in unrighteousness.
The atheist is in unbelief not because of intelligence but because of convenience. It's convenient to say there is no sin, no judgment day, no God to be accountable to. But it's a dream world, a fantasy, and one day that bubble is going to pop and you will find yourself in the court room of an angry God without a Savior having to give an account for your life.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 23, 2006 22:15:19 GMT -5
How has god been negatively proven? How do you know god created all this nuts...? I think, therefore I am. I meet all the qualifications of intelligability. A reasonable, logical god. The same god that took down the tower of babel becuase it was high enough to reach the heavens...? Lucky thing that no 747's have crashed into the pearly gates yet. It is quite logicall for me to believe in logic. I as a matter of fact do not believe in God becuase I believe in logic. Logically, a God cannot exist.
And lastly. It is not convienient for me to say there is no sin, no day of reckoning, and all that bullshit. I am accountable; to my self, and my friends. It isnt convienient not to believe in god... There have been times I have been nearly attacked by believers for my beliefs. Are you saying it would be easier for me to be an atheist? And yes, I do have a judgement day. Every thing i do affects my friends, my family, everyone I care about. They are my judges... my judgement day is how they see me.
Lastly, I would like to say, the "Holy Church" has covered up a hell of a lot of a truths... Like the Dead Sea Scrolls.... I call em as I see em. The church covers up, not I.
Notice how you havent actually given me evidence of God. No, you've only come up with some abstract bullshit that has proven nothing. But please, do continue making your assumptions about you and the rest of us unmoralistic, commy bastards.
But do remember, when you assume, you make an behind out of you. Not me, just yourself.
|
|
|
Post by jobafunky on Apr 23, 2006 23:04:59 GMT -5
Ok let's be more reasonable. Let's say that one is crashed on a deserted island with a nonbeliever, in fact this person is a native and has never heard of god. And presume your bible(s) were lost in the crash. You tell them about god but they already have several and say that you must present proof to get them to consider your god. What would you use as proof then?
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 23, 2006 23:14:54 GMT -5
God doesn't need evidence... look at nature! God speaks for itself..... =P....
The above words are commonly used by christians to beep themselves over in a debate. If you even think those words to be a valid response, I will lose all respect for you.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 23, 2006 23:16:54 GMT -5
Hold on here. How do you know that you think at all? Do you simply assume that you do?
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 23, 2006 23:42:11 GMT -5
Hold on here. How do you know that you think at all? Do you simply assume that you do? I have a brain. Said brain is capable of complex thought. Therefore... I think. Therefore... I am. The end. Wasn't that a fun story?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 23, 2006 23:52:25 GMT -5
Morluna,
You already believe in God.
But
How do you know? Ever seen it?
My point is that everyone assumes something. However there are certain assumptions which do not met the preconditions for intelligability - there is no god. However there is a presupposition which does met the preconditions for intelligability - in the beginning God.
Everyone has presuppositions. It would be impossible to live without them. However the question is what presuppositions are true and which ones are not.
As I explained earlier, only the presupposition "in the beginning God" makes any sense of logic, rationalism, or meaningful discourse.
|
|
|
Post by jobafunky on Apr 24, 2006 0:13:59 GMT -5
As I explained earlier, only the presupposition "in the beginning God" makes any sense of logic, rationalism, or meaningful discourse. You can do a brain scan to see your brain. There's no way to prove your presuposition of god and lacking any proof you should leave it out of the discussion or start a new thread on proving it or post in some of the threads that are trying and failing. Claims that you need god to make sense of logic, rationalism, or meaningful discourse are the closest thing to blasphemy towards those subjects. All of those can exist in a place where god isn't even known and in fact thrive there. With such statements it's almost begging an ad hom.
|
|
|
Post by dmclayton on Apr 24, 2006 1:17:05 GMT -5
The fool has said in his heart there is no God. God is proven because of the impossibility of the contrary. i spent an entire post criticising jess on his use of circular argumentation, and although he never denies it i want you all to know this is an example of such false reasoning. "god is real because he is not fake." the logic here is astounding. oi. i cannot imagine that anyone would ever take jesse seriously. also, jesse's usuage of 'presuppositions' is 'convenient' for him to convince himself and others of a rational existence of god. note: jesse's arguments are so unstable that you can simply reverse his words to make his statements false. presuppositions cannot be used as a logical explanation, but it can be adequately applied to theory. theory is not truth, though, and only an educated opinion--sometimes not so educated. laws, on the other hand, cannot be flawed to the extent that there must be no arguments against it. a law, then, is something that is regarded as true. so, jesse may retain his version of the truth in his head, but to everyone else it is nothing but an opinion; and vice-versa he labels your truths as evil, satan-possessed opinions. i now press onward to the topic: faith is a pipedream of desires, wants and needs that are often said to be required of human beings. people need something to believe and take hope in, while others need to be needed by something special like a savior born by immaculate conception. people need order so they create rules and religions to follow. people need social interaction. so the weak, and like-minded go to church once, twice and sometimes three times a week. people need answers to life, death and the meaning of it all. in the end, they need someone to blame.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 24, 2006 1:58:50 GMT -5
I know a thread has already been devoted to this somewhere. I specifically remember addressing these points. Jesse may remember it as the post where I taught him some Latin. At any rate, I suppose you are correct. Maybe I don't have a brain, but somehow this is being typed. Perhaps my fingers are doing the thinking for me?
Perhaps this isn't real. Maybe we're living in the Matrix. If so, I'm happy with my life the way it is. I don't think I need to take the blue pill (or is it red) to discover that I don't actually (or perhaps that I do actually) have a brain.
But then, I'm using logic (or am I), so perhaps this doesn't actually make sense to anyone (or does it).
I don't know because I can't prove God. Therefore I can't prove that my bicycle is black with yellow print. I can't prove that I am actually in my room, that two 75 watt bulbs are lighting my room at the moment. As a matter of fact, I can't even prove that watts exist. And all because I can't prove God. Crud. Does that mean the toaster won't work in the morning? I hope not, because I really need to have my daily waffle fix. At least I think it's a waffle fix, I can't prove that I'm not actually eating a piece of my spare tire.
At least I think that's what Jesse is saying. But I can't prove that I actually think, so maybe this doesn't make any sense.
It's bound not to make any sense though, because it's 2:57 in the morning and I've been writing a term paper all day. Of course, I can't prove that either. Oh well, maybe I'll go to sleep tonight and wake up as Richard Dean Anderson. That would be cool, and since I'm nonlogical, it could happen. Then I could do really cool stuff, like visit other worlds and stop hydrochloric acid leaks with chocolate bars. Although that would be dependant on the logical laws of physics and chemistry which I cannot prove.
I am so confused (or am I?).
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 24, 2006 6:44:27 GMT -5
We're not here to discuss OUR existence. I exist because I'm interacting with you, Jesse, who also exists, among all the other interacters of this thread who also exist. We're here to discuss a paranormal being's existance.
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 24, 2006 9:04:49 GMT -5
I know a thread has already been devoted to this somewhere. I specifically remember addressing these points. Jesse may remember it as the post where I taught him some Latin. At any rate, I suppose you are correct. Maybe I don't have a brain, but somehow this is being typed. Perhaps my fingers are doing the thinking for me? Perhaps this isn't real. Maybe we're living in the Matrix. If so, I'm happy with my life the way it is. I don't think I need to take the blue pill (or is it red) to discover that I don't actually (or perhaps that I do actually) have a brain. But then, I'm using logic (or am I), so perhaps this doesn't actually make sense to anyone (or does it). I don't know because I can't prove God. Therefore I can't prove that my bicycle is black with yellow print. I can't prove that I am actually in my room, that two 75 watt bulbs are lighting my room at the moment. As a matter of fact, I can't even prove that watts exist. And all because I can't prove God. Crud. Does that mean the toaster won't work in the morning? I hope not, because I really need to have my daily waffle fix. At least I think it's a waffle fix, I can't prove that I'm not actually eating a piece of my spare tire. At least I think that's what Jesse is saying. But I can't prove that I actually think, so maybe this doesn't make any sense. It's bound not to make any sense though, because it's 2:57 in the morning and I've been writing a term paper all day. Of course, I can't prove that either. Oh well, maybe I'll go to sleep tonight and wake up as Richard Dean Anderson. That would be cool, and since I'm nonlogical, it could happen. Then I could do really cool stuff, like visit other worlds and stop hydrochloric acid leaks with chocolate bars. Although that would be dependant on the logical laws of physics and chemistry which I cannot prove. I am so confused (or am I?). XDDDDDDDDDDDDD Have I told you lately that I love you?
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 24, 2006 13:33:56 GMT -5
XDDDDDDDDDDDDD Have I told you lately that I love you? Yes, you have. Thanks. Love you too!
|
|
|
Post by dmclayton on Apr 24, 2006 17:15:55 GMT -5
....alright, topically, according to jesse's logic:
if god exists, then purple unicorns and smurfs (when melted can be turned into gold!) and a pantheon of greek gods also exist. we think them, therefore they exist! oi.
|
|
|
Post by Jules on Apr 24, 2006 22:56:20 GMT -5
God doesn't need evidence... look at nature! God speaks for itself..... =P.... The above words are commonly used by christians to f**k themselves over in a debate. If you even think those words to be a valid response, I will lose all respect for you. wow, you actually have respect for us? By your language I'd highly doubt that. Just a note....serious inquiries without the use of profanity are taken much more seriously on this board. Just ask some of the other non-believers (Valentine, Morluna, etc. ) who act civil and respectful. We may disagree and debate, but they are able to engage in intelligent discussions using actual vocabulary words (and some are really good at it since they are English majors So you might consider losing the foul language if you truly want to voice your opinions and have responses to your questions. Just what I've noticed in the interaction here.
|
|
|
Post by Jules on Apr 24, 2006 23:02:46 GMT -5
What is faith? Why do you believe so strongly without any real proof of god? Why do you blindly believe? I want every good reason you have about why i shouldnt say f**k you to jesus. I do understand it is too late to turn back, because of the one unforgivable sin; it is unforgivable to doubt the holy spirit (from some verse in luke). But, in any case, tell me why i shouldnt have doubted. Tell me why i shouldnt have thought. It is never too late. Until the point where you take your dying breath, you can still repent and trust Christ. So begin there. You being here shows that you are having at least SOME doubts about your doubts then, doesn't it? What does that imply? Pascal's wager in a nutshell: If the atheist is right and I am wrong, and there is no God, then I have lost nothing. I have lived a full and happy life in faith of someone who may not have existed in the end, but my life was better for it. And the lives of others around me was better for it. But if the atheist is wrong, and I am right, and there is a God, then he has lost everything. May seem simplistic, but then again, I'm still gonna come out ahead in the end even if I am wrong (which I don't believe for a minute, which is why it is called FAITH) So what will YOU do if you are wrong? Are you willing to take the chance that you just might be wrong?
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 26, 2006 22:09:47 GMT -5
It IS too late. According to the Bible, (from some verse in Luke, I can't recall that right now) it is unforgivable to deny the holy spirit.
I have seen Pascal's wager before. Very often, as a matter of fact. Here's an ideal that I know you hold.
Freedom. Liberty.
Those things I hold to be given to every single person on this planet. I'm against oppression of any kind. And in America, as free as we are, we are still oppressed by one more thing; the church.
Who has denied the gay's their right to marry? The Christians. Who has denied the women the right to abort? The Christians. Who has slowed the growth of our technology throughout civilization? This one doesn't just go to Christians; I spread the joy to every religion out there on this one.
So, although we are guaranteed our rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, we can never be truly happy. Why? The Bible says gay marriage is wrong; a sin. What do we do about sins? We take our CHRISTIAN views, and turn them into AMERICAN laws.
The same with abortion; Thou shall not kill. So thus forth, you can not kill a fetus, because the fetus is living. While I'm on the subject, I'll point out... if someone raped your daughter, you'd beg her to abort.
So, thus, I have established the fact that Religion rules the American people's lives; Christian or not Christian.
So, what do I lose if I follow Pascal's wager? Everything. What do I gain? Nothing. That is your view.
If I follow Pascal's wager.....; look at it this way. If I lose, I lose everything. But here's the catch. If I win, I have gained everything. Thats right, I said everything. The one thing I hold dearest, that religion is trying to take away, is freedom. That is the one thing I gain if I follow atheism. Freedom.
If I am right, I have gained a life, albeit short , but a life, of freedom. Freedom of my mind. I want that freedom!
Ubi dubium ibi libertas!!!
And now, the more obvious fallacies to Pascal's Wager;
"First, it presumes that there is a god, a Christian God, who is spiteful and egotistical enough to demand belief under threat of eternal d**nation even though He provides no evidence of His existence nor reason for demanding belief. Also, the wager presumes that there is no cost to believing. But there is--not just in the tithes you pay to the church, but in the lifestyle it demands of you, the teachings you must learn, the time you must spend in church, and the loss of some of your freedom of thought and action."
I hope this clears things up with you about Pascal's Wager. It is an invalid arguement, for it gives you the choice of a chance of d**nation, or a chance of freedom. It does NOT take into account scientific evidence.
And Jules, I agree with you, I will be civil to you and any others here. I apologize.
Ubi dubium ibi libertas. I will live and die by that saying. It's latin, you guys find out what it means.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 26, 2006 22:17:41 GMT -5
Who says freedom and liberty is even good and that oppression is bad?
Of coarse as a Christian who believes in God given rights and God's plan for humanity I believe in freedom and liberty and am against opression. However I do not see how an atheist who denies a universal God can say these things are universally good. Because of your atheism you are forced to say that you simply "prefer" these things but you can't say that these things are universally good or that freedom and liberty is a "right" to everyone that nobody can deny.
Only God is in the authoratative position to dictate any unversal rights. If you say you are for freedom and liberty and are against opression simply because YOU are against those things, you are being completely arbitrary. You would have to give someone else the same amount of arbitrariness, in which case if they say "freedom and liberty are bad while opression is good" you as an atheist cannot condemn this.
Why do you even believe in being civil since your an atheist? Why do you feel you would have to apologize for anything? To apologize for something is to say that something, in this case not being civil, is wrong. But who's to say it's wrong?
It seems that as an atheist, your belief and your practice do not comport.
The only basis for metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics is God. "In the beginning God" is the only preconditions for reality (metaphysics), intellagibility (epistemology), and morality (ethics). If you question God you would also have to question reality, knowledge, and morality. There is no foundation for any of these to stand upon that is self-attesting and self-authorizing other then "In the beginning God". If you question that then you must question everything.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 26, 2006 22:37:05 GMT -5
Ok. So you want to play like that? Well, I have my born right do to what I want. I have a choice to make here; I can say something civil, which does not come to mind right now, or I can say beep off.
Society has established a way of talking and establishing oneself in a decent manner; one would say, intelligently. This was made to set ourselves apart from the animals, who would... nuts at their gatherings.... I believe god is fake. Did I ever say that a lack of belief in god equals a lack of belief in civility?
No, civility is what got science where it is.
Every choice I make tells me I have freedom. Every choice someone else makes for me, tells me I do not have freedom. I enjoy the feeling of having freedom. If there is one among us here who would reject the idea that freedom is overrated, and autocracy and an authoritative government should rule, make yourself known now.
Fear is what drives oppression. I do not like causing others pain or suffering of any sort; which includes fear as a control tactic. No, no.
It is in every human's born blood to want to be free and unoppressed. Animals show this characteristic too, when they try to run away from their owners.
And you're wrong about god giving freedom to everyone. I quote the bible: "Slaves (servants), be OBEDIENT to those that are your MASTERS according to the flesh, with FEAR and TREMBLING, in singleness of your heart, AS UNTO CHRIST." ,,,Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians, Ch.6, Verse 5
You have just assumed a god existed, to prove your point. That is not right. No, when debating, you assume the OTHER person's position, to gain a new perspective. I assume a god, you assume there is no god, make your points from there.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 26, 2006 22:47:48 GMT -5
That is what I just did. I stood in your position as an atheist, looked around, and saw no reason to believe in reality, knowledge, or morality. There are no grounds for the atheist to stand upon for these things because atheism does not met the preconditions for these things.
I do not deny that you make choices. However how can you say that a certain choice is right and that a certain choice is wrong? What if someone makes a choice to rape or to murder? Who is to say these things are wrong? They have the ability to make choices just as you do. That is not the question. That question is that, as an atheist, how can you say ANY choices are right or wrong??
You never said that lack of believe in God equals lack of believe in civility. I did in a sense. Though I know you do believe in civility, you haven't succifient reason to believe in civility, or else you haven't given any.
You say that society established a way of talking and behaving in a decent manner. So then is society the final authority for behavior? What if society says that nobody has to act decently? If society is the dictator of morality and behavior, what if society as a whole says slavery is good as it once did? What is our society becomes as Nazi germany and becomes racist? In those cases would slavery and rasicm then become good because society says they are good? Is morality subjected to society (as you have claimed) or is society subjected to morality (as the bible claims)?
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 26, 2006 22:53:52 GMT -5
What are the preconditions?
My own morals, established by myself, tell me what is right and wrong.
I can not change society, so, at least for now, I will conform to society. Society said slavery and rascism were good because the bible agreed with it. Also, most of the time, slavery occured when one civilization took over another. The women and children were made into slaves. There was no rascism involved, simply an excersise of control, and power. The losers were enslaved.
And what if questions do not make very valid points, being hypothetical. The likelyhood of that happening over rules the reactions of myself in such an event.
|
|
|
Post by Jules on Apr 26, 2006 23:51:14 GMT -5
YOU ARE NOT DEAD YET - SO IT ISN'T TOO LATE. It is called the unpardonable sin, and it is actually blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Don't give up - seek God and you WILL find Him. If you believe in the unpardonable sin (do you?) as an atheist you are concerned about not being forgiven? NEVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES would I ever encourage a woman (including myself) to abort a baby. Ever. Absolutely no circumstance. You will wager eternity for the sake of freedom? Interesting, so will I. And I have it already: FREEDOM (from death, sin, judgment, hell, God's holy wrath, etc.) it is the only true Freedom and it is found only in Christ. "If the Son has set you free, you are free indeed." Maybe we have more in common than I thought....you should try freedom given by your Creator and not a Constitution, it rocks! As for your Latin life phrase, I'd say where there is doubt, there is BONDAGE, not freedom. IN fact, I DO say that because the Bible says this: Everything that does not come from faith is sin. And sin is bondage, and leads to death. So, you might consider getting a new phrase. Here's some LATIN for you as well: Sola gratia Sola fide Sola scriptura Solo Christo Soli Deo gloria THAT is what I live and die by -
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Apr 27, 2006 14:38:48 GMT -5
Have you ever done something wrong? If so, what happened? You just misinterpreted your own feelings?!
If you establish your own morality, then is it relative to the situation? If in one situation you feel it is OK to lie to someone, then it is good? If in another you think it is bad, then its wrong?
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Apr 27, 2006 14:47:35 GMT -5
If you say that you establish your own system of morality, then do you think that everything you do is right? And everything that someone does opposite of you is wrong?
Sorry for all the questions but it is absurd to think you make your own morality.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 27, 2006 17:37:38 GMT -5
If I do something, it is becase I feel it is the right descision to make. Later, when I have gained more knowledge, and I realise what I have done is wrong, then I admit my mistake.
But don't get me wrong; religion has something good in it. The morality it tries to instill in you is great! This is especially true in christianity, all that loving and caring; and christians are supposedly the largest donors in the country ( the problem with that though, is that 85% of this country is christian....)!
So, there is a beauty in religion; but not an answer.
Also, no, I do not believe that everything that someone does opposite of me is wrong. Remember, everyone has reasons for their views. I'd always like to hear them out before making any descisions. It's not WHAT you believe, but WHY.
That answers your post, Josh.
Now, Jules. This isn't a wager. This isn't playing a game of hold em with your friends. If I'm wrong, I will burn in hell forever, supposedly. Actually, many many different hells, seeing as there are thousands upon thousands of religions.
Where there is doubt, there is bondage? How? That proverb only asks you to question your beliefs. Would you run a server without testing it? No. Would NASA launch a rocket without testing it? No. You must always always always always always, test what you hold to be true.
Everything that does not come from faith is a sin? Well, better get off your computer. Now. Technology comes from science, observation, knowledge, and reason. You do not take science, observation, knowledge, and reason on faith. They do not come from a holy book ( unless you worship your average school textbooks...). And remember, I'm an atheist. I'm not going to burn.
And as far as freedom goes; Christ is not marching his behind up to Congress and demanding gay rights. No, until Christ himself is out there protesting for our country's rights, I will enjoy the freedom given to me by the U.S. Constitution.
A couple more things; "death, sin, judgment, hell, God's holy wrath," Why is god so negative? Why must he force us to accept him under threat of eternal punishment? "I created you, so worship me" is the kind of attitude given by god. And I'll tell you why he forces us to accept him; The Church. If the common peasant of the early days of christianity truly believed he was going to hell without the sacraments, he would tithe. He would not protest. He would tithe and tithe and tithe for the sake of God's love. The church is a business; that's something you will have to come to terms with someday. A tax-free business that uses fear tactics to keep the society in line.
Later, I will also talk to you about whether or not god is really good or not. I'm not writing that now.
Lastly, I would like to point out your circular arguement:"If the Son has set you free, you are free indeed." That gets you and me nowhere; The bible is true because it is god's word, God's word is true because it says so in the bible. That's basically your arguement in a wider perspective. Don't use the bible to prove your religion, it makes you look "stoopid."
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Apr 27, 2006 17:56:48 GMT -5
Anyways, guys, I believe we are all atheists. Im just take this one (or 2, is Jesus a god?) god further. When you know why you believe everyone else's god is false, you will know why I believe your's is.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Apr 28, 2006 10:14:26 GMT -5
I don't understand? Are you saying it is not circular when you say, " This is right or wrong, because I say it is right or wrong?" Is that not what establishing your own morality is doing?
If you don't think that everything that is done opposite of your is wrong, then where does your morality really come from? Maybe I am misunderstanding you. If you establish your own morality are you not the 'standard?' So anything that is done opposite of you is opposite of that standard.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 29, 2006 10:22:07 GMT -5
atheistbibleburner,
You said you make your own morality, then you said when you gain knowledge that something is wrong you change your actions.
I see this as a contradiction. Is morality subjected to you or are you subjected to morality? Do you define morality or should morality dictate you?
Which one does it look like:
* Morality above * You beneath
Or
* You above * Morality beneath
If morality is subjected to you, meaning you define morality and that morality comes from you, then do you grant the same amount of arbitrariness to others to define their own morality even if their morality directly contradicts your own?
And if you are subjected morality, meaning morality should dictate you and that morality comes from without yourself, where does this outside morality come from?
Does morality exist merely because you say it does or does morality exist even outside of your personal acknowledgment?
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 29, 2006 20:02:41 GMT -5
What is faith? Why do you believe so strongly without any real proof of god? Why do you blindly believe? I want every good reason you have about why i shouldnt say f**k you to jesus. I do understand it is too late to turn back, because of the one unforgivable sin; it is unforgivable to doubt the holy spirit (from some verse in luke). But, in any case, tell me why i shouldnt have doubted. Tell me why i shouldnt have thought. It is never too late. Until the point where you take your dying breath, you can still repent and trust Christ. So begin there. You being here shows that you are having at least SOME doubts about your doubts then, doesn't it? What does that imply? Pascal's wager in a nutshell: If the atheist is right and I am wrong, and there is no God, then I have lost nothing. I have lived a full and happy life in faith of someone who may not have existed in the end, but my life was better for it. And the lives of others around me was better for it. But if the atheist is wrong, and I am right, and there is a God, then he has lost everything. May seem simplistic, but then again, I'm still gonna come out ahead in the end even if I am wrong (which I don't believe for a minute, which is why it is called FAITH) So what will YOU do if you are wrong? Are you willing to take the chance that you just might be wrong? *nods* This I can agree with Jules. I respect you for saying what you've said here. If you're wrong, you've lost nothing because the way you have lived has improved your own life, and hopefully the lives of others around you. I've met a few other Christians who have said the same about their faith and I respect that. If you do what you do and believe what you believe in an effort to seek betterment in all paths of life and afterwards, good for you. That's what any faith system or philosophy is really about. I would argue that you should not try to press your beliefs on others.. but that's another issue... I like what you've said here.
|
|