This is a great illustration. New Atheism can’t build the social capital (and eventually economic capital) religion can. It’s morals, well, aren’t. They’re just opinions. There’s no reason to even call them morals. Just call them opinions. A 'mora’l statement from an NA’er is full of caveats. First, a faith-based statement…“Robbery is evil.” As opposed to…“Personally, I feel like robbery is evil. Of course, this is a baseless emotional response, as good and evil doesn’t exist. Therefore, those who disagree with my opinion on robbery have the same moral high (low) ground as myself, an opinion.”
[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< inspite of what you might think, there are still things that are important to me. >>>[/quote]Au contra’ire my dear friend. I KNOW there are things that are important to you. They’re important to you because you bear the image of a God you incessantly deny like the the first of Romans says you will. There has been no person ever born who did not have a whole catalog of things that were important to them. The only difference between them in this regard is what version of the denial of the source of that importance they employ to suppress the truth of the living God in their unrighteousness. Again, just like Paul says in the first chapter of Romans.
You folks can jump up and down and yell about how idiotic the bible is all you want, but I’m watching the divine truth of it lived out here right before my eyes. [quote]ephrem wrote:<<< The simple fact that there are things that are important to me is enough in itself to be valuable or meaningful. >>>[/quote] That is a statement of blind whistling in the dark faith with utterly no, and I do mean NO basis in science or objectively verifiable logic in any way. Not even by your standards. [quote]ephrem wrote:<<< I’m not denying you your experience but here you are, seemingly saddened by my way of life, whishing I’d come to your flock as if your set of values and beliefs are better and of higher standing. >>>[/quote] I’m not offering you a set of values. I’m proclaiming a supernatural resurrection from death in sin and uncertainty to life and the only truly objective source of anything whatsoever in the Christ of God who defeated this death and uncertainty on behalf of all those who would call on His name.
Once again, the gospel of Jesus Christ IS NOT the acquiescence to a set of intellectual propositions among competing options. It is the only possible bridging of the chasm of sin between God and man in the person of the only being in all of history who was both. He is the eternal creator God born one of us, except He was begotten of the Father without sin. He lived thirty three years on this earth knowing no sin of His own, but suffering the penalty on our behalf as if He had. Because He had no sin He was raised from that penalty of death on the third day bringing me with Him from that grave. Maybe you too. It’s no longer I that live, but Christ who lives in me and the life that I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20) [quote]ephrem wrote:<<< And I don’t believe you’re meaningless, nor do I believe kamui or pat are meaningless. >>>[/quote] I know you don’t and this belief is in utter blinking neon contradiction to what you claim is the foundation of your belief system. It’s a wish. A groovy idea and nothing more. On your stated basis that is. The truth is that this belief arises form the remaining image of your God, broken though it is in sin, whose saving truth you are presently blind to because His Spirit has not yet raised you from death in father Adam. [quote]ephrem wrote:<<< I value you based on the feedback I get from you and how that allows me to further my explorations of what it means to be human. >>>[/quote]Ok pal… no more feedback. Aw man now there went all my value and everybody else’s who suddenly decides to withhold feedback from you as well. Come on Bub. This is no better than tickling and goo goo talk being the basis for valuing infants. [quote]ephrem wrote:<<< How can that ever be a bad thing? >>>[/quote] How can it ever be ANYthing? Good or bad, for longer than it takes your mood to change?
Goodmorning!
I hope you enjoy the ride, because I am.
What’s important to me has value because it’s important to me. How’s that not logical? The reasons for why things are important to me run the gamut, but they require no basis in science, just my knowledge.
Where’s the science or verifiable logic in that? Wait, you don’t need them, you have faith. How lovely that must be (:
Well, if that’s the case I’d stop what you’re doing and trust in the Lord to guide me to Him because you aren’t doing a great job, to be honest.
It’s an internet forum T, the whole concept of a forum board is feedback. What else do you expect me to do with half the world between us?
Why is that important? The only certainty you have is death and taxes, so why does that matter?
Your response says nothing about how good a job I may or may not be doing. God is not a pragmatist.
This is by far the most retarded thread I have ever seen anywhere, and that says alot since its the internet… holy fuck…
[quote]Ace92 wrote:
This is by far the most retarded thread I have ever seen anywhere, and that says alot since its the internet… holy fuck…[/quote]Thank you so very much for gracing us with your towering presence and elevating it to your clearly superior and exalted level of cerebral prowess. This priceless contribution of yours will be forever with me as a humbling reminder of my many limitations in those times when I regrettably slip into thinking more highly of myself than I ought. You’re a force for good in the world. Don’t ever let anyone tell you otherwise.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Ace92 wrote:
This is by far the most retarded thread I have ever seen anywhere, and that says alot since its the internet… holy fuck…[/quote]Thank you so very much for gracing us with your towering presence and elevating it to your clearly superior and exalted level of cerebral prowess. This priceless contribution of yours will be forever with me as a humbling reminder of my many limitations in those times when I regrettably slip into thinking more highly of myself than I ought. You’re a force for good in the world. Don’t ever let anyone tell you otherwise.
[/quote]
You owe me a sarcasm detector. The needle spun so hard and fast into the red it broke right off and went sailing up and out the window.
I personally enjoyed the points ace brought to the table. I really sat back and thought about my position. I realized ace’s head is buried deep in the sand and he knows no other way of responding.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Ace92 wrote:
This is by far the most retarded thread I have ever seen anywhere, and that says alot since its the internet… holy fuck…[/quote]Thank you so very much for gracing us with your towering presence and elevating it to your clearly superior and exalted level of cerebral prowess. This priceless contribution of yours will be forever with me as a humbling reminder of my many limitations in those times when I regrettably slip into thinking more highly of myself than I ought. You’re a force for good in the world. Don’t ever let anyone tell you otherwise.
[/quote]
You owe me a sarcasm detector. The needle spun so hard and fast into the red it broke right off and went sailing up and out the window.[/quote]
My two favorite quotes from this thread thus far that are supposed to be talking about other folks that totally apply to a whole lot of Catholics and overly religious people in general
“Sociologically speaking, in a general sense, it doesn’t seem to be a particularly happy, joyful or comfortable demographic as a group. It would be an interesting study though, to analyze what that stems from.”
“As long as self obsessed human beings with different favorite colors are allowed to determine right and wrong this world will languish in it’s own corruption.”
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Ace92 wrote:
This is by far the most retarded thread I have ever seen anywhere, and that says alot since its the internet… holy fuck…[/quote]Thank you so very much for gracing us with your towering presence and elevating it to your clearly superior and exalted level of cerebral prowess. This priceless contribution of yours will be forever with me as a humbling reminder of my many limitations in those times when I regrettably slip into thinking more highly of myself than I ought. You’re a force for good in the world. Don’t ever let anyone tell you otherwise.
[/quote]
You owe me a sarcasm detector. The needle spun so hard and fast into the red it broke right off and went sailing up and out the window.[/quote]I just put you down for one Trib-Tech snarkometer for Christmas. =]
[quote]kamui wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote] is “you shall kill” compatible with other rules (any rules, even chessgame rules), yes or no ?
if “no” is the answer, then we KNOW that killing is immoral. [/quote]
By that definition war is always immoral.
Correct?
Even is war is inevetable and necessary to protect your country, the act of war in itself is immoral.
[/quote]
War itself is not an act. It’s a time.
During this time, we do many things. some are moral. some are amoral and a lot of them are immoral.
but strictly speaking, inevitable things are not immoral. They are amoral by definition.
[/quote]
Redefining the meaning of words and acts like this kamui, so it fits your worldview, is your own peculiar brand of relativism.
[/quote]
relativism is an attempt to solve the problem of evil by denying its existence.
I’m probably as biased as everyone else, and i’m probably guilty of many intellectual errors, but i’m definitely not a relativist. [/quote]
That is the best ‘nutshell’ statement I have ever heard! Well done…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Thanks for your elaborate reply pat, I appreciate that.
Altough I disagree with this at a fundamental level, it also assumes a level of control of female reproductive rights I find disturbing.
If a women chooses to abort a pregnancy the abortion has an emotional impact, that’s undeniable. But it’s her own decision and she has to live with that choice.
[/quote]
The difference in our views is where the ‘human’ part of human life applies. I apply it sooner then you, because I don’t attribute it’s value to neurological function alone, but as a gestalt being. The stance that you can remove it and simply replace it at a time more convenient is not one I can understand since it is never ever replaceable.
I don’t see either as a victim. They are both people who have a right to live so long as they, not somebody else chooses it.
I’d be interested in what you find. I can certainly see a evolutionary down side. It would be interesting if there were a medical or physical downside as well. Like I said, they don’t seem to be a very happy demographic. But there are multiple issues as to why that may be.
Well there is no doubt that certain behaviours are frowned upon do to cultural or personal influence, but not everything. Going to extremes allows us to be able to separate the differences between something that is relatively wrong, like smoking a joint in a toy store, and that which is intrinsically wrong like raping and murdering a child.
By saying that morality is not relative isn’t denying that culture influences behaviour. It means that what’s truly right and what truly wrong, are not deniable. Some things you can’t make right no matter what, and that’s where relativism runs out of road.
[quote]
This is odd. If human life is sacred and killing human life is always wrong, exceptions to that rule make the rule relative. So what is a moral killing?[/quote]
Defense of you or your family? If somebody was trying to hurt you or your family and your only move is to terminate his life then that is amoral. You didn’t really have choice. When you don’t have a choice there is no morality. Morality requires you had options.
The more extreme example of child rape, there’s never not a choice there, so it’s always categorically, under all circumstances, morally wrong.
Some baptist preacher made a great quote "If you don’t have an option to say ‘no’, then your ‘yes’ means nothing.’ It’s not directly applicable, but it still makes a good point.
[quote]Ace92 wrote:
This is by far the most retarded thread I have ever seen anywhere, and that says alot since its the internet… holy fuck…[/quote]
So? fuck off, nimrod. No one said you had to participate. Go jack-off to a “I wanna fuck a t-vixen” thread because no one in your local vicinity thinks you’re worth lifting a leg and pissing on. Idiot.
I just wanted to take this opportunity to wish Pat a happy thanksgiving (sincerely) and praise him for his commitment to glorifying the holy God with his life and speech. Truly every bit of the resurrecting, transforming, sanctifying power of the gospel according to Rome is exemplified in these posts. Every bit.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Your response says nothing about how good a job I may or may not be doing. God is not a pragmatist.[/quote]
He does not need to be, being all powerful and all.
However, I am not and if he sees it fit to make up rules for me he better be pragmatic about it.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Your response says nothing about how good a job I may or may not be doing. God is not a pragmatist.[/quote]
He does not need to be, being all powerful and all.
However, I am not and if he sees it fit to make up rules for me he better be pragmatic about it. [/quote]He better? Or else what? You’ll be mad?
I do not say anything based in itself on how I think anybody will respond. I say what I do because it’s obedience to His Word. I do not go out of my way to be offensive. (usually). The gospel is however offensive or it is not the gospel.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Your response says nothing about how good a job I may or may not be doing. God is not a pragmatist.[/quote]
He does not need to be, being all powerful and all.
However, I am not and if he sees it fit to make up rules for me he better be pragmatic about it. [/quote]
He better? Or else what? You’ll be mad?
[/quote]
No, I will just conclude that he is a bit off a dick.
Granted, not much of a dick, given his power, maybe not even a dick, just a bit inattentive or careless, but not exactly someone whose rules I could or even should live by, given that I do not quite have his resources and I am not as unattached to the outcome.
edit: it is “let them eat cake, writ large”
[quote]storey420 wrote:
My two favorite quotes from this thread thus far that are supposed to be talking about other folks that totally apply to a whole lot of Catholics and overly religious people in general
“Sociologically speaking, in a general sense, it doesn’t seem to be a particularly happy, joyful or comfortable demographic as a group. It would be an interesting study though, to analyze what that stems from.”
“As long as self obsessed human beings with different favorite colors are allowed to determine right and wrong this world will languish in it’s own corruption.” [/quote]
What the fuck does being Catholic have to do with anything? We aren’t discussing faith and religion here. I can’t speak my mind or speak for myself?
I think your letting sterotype and bigotry colour your view.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]storey420 wrote:
My two favorite quotes from this thread thus far that are supposed to be talking about other folks that totally apply to a whole lot of Catholics and overly religious people in general
“Sociologically speaking, in a general sense, it doesn’t seem to be a particularly happy, joyful or comfortable demographic as a group. It would be an interesting study though, to analyze what that stems from.”
“As long as self obsessed human beings with different favorite colors are allowed to determine right and wrong this world will languish in it’s own corruption.” [/quote]
What the fuck does being Catholic have to do with anything? We aren’t discussing faith and religion here. I can’t speak my mind or speak for myself?
I think your letting sterotype and bigotry colour your view. [/quote]
“We aren’t discussing faith and religion here.” — You wanna read through the whole thread and rethink your statement here bud? I’ll give you a hint, I don’t even have to scroll back one page to debunk that statement.