[quote]forlife wrote:
Chris, does that mean that if it was proven there is no god, you would join the Taliban, or at least wouldn’t fight against them?[/quote]
Well, if I go by moral relativism, then no of course not. How could I believe that the Taliban is wrong when they do not live among my society today. Then of course it wouldn’t be morally wrong to kill every single person in the Middle East either. So, guess it depends on how I feel that day.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]krsoneeeee wrote:
Well I think you’ve constructed a very simplistic view which works for you, ands that’s cool but it doesn’t mean its true - For example, the above references to “instances”, you pointed out inconsistencies on how civilizations have evolved independently.
[/quote]
Uh, no, that’s not what I was pointing out at all.
[/quote]
What? were you not pointing out the aztecs, nazi’s, stalins “evil” acts? I kinda read between the lines…
Just because a behaviour is bad or immoral doesn’t mean it didn’t put someone at an advantage. IE- people will do what advantages them whether its moral or not. IE IE - behaviour can be independent of a moral but its doesnt mean the morals arent there. IE IE IE behaviour can be independent of morals(free will) but morals are dependent on evolution. game set.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
Chris, does that mean that if it was proven there is no god, you would join the Taliban, or at least wouldn’t fight against them?[/quote]
Well, if I go by moral relativism, then no of course not. How could I believe that the Taliban is wrong when they do not live among my society today. Then of course it wouldn’t be morally wrong to kill every single person in the Middle East either. So, guess it depends on how I feel that day.[/quote]
No God=moral relativism
?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Chris, you eat the flesh of Jesus every Sunday. You even drink his blood.
[yeahyeah, symbolism][/quote]
Yes, every Sunday and usually every day except Saturday (we don’t have a daily Mass very often on Saturdays except across town. Why?
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Why is it on these religion threads, we always start with one topic (i.e. do people fear atheists) and end up debating: A) The existence of God B) Evolution vs. Creation or C) Can you prove the Bible[/quote]
Not sure.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
Chris, does that mean that if it was proven there is no god, you would join the Taliban, or at least wouldn’t fight against them?[/quote]
Well, if I go by moral relativism, then no of course not. How could I believe that the Taliban is wrong when they do not live among my society today. Then of course it wouldn’t be morally wrong to kill every single person in the Middle East either. So, guess it depends on how I feel that day.[/quote]
No God=moral relativism
?[/quote]
Well, Natural Law comes from, as you described it, an unknown uncaused cause which I call God. So, no God, no morals. And, I would still follow Natural Law though, because economically it is sound as well.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
Chris, does that mean that if it was proven there is no god, you would join the Taliban, or at least wouldn’t fight against them?[/quote]
Well, if I go by moral relativism, then no of course not. How could I believe that the Taliban is wrong when they do not live among my society today. Then of course it wouldn’t be morally wrong to kill every single person in the Middle East either. So, guess it depends on how I feel that day.[/quote]
No God=moral relativism
?[/quote]
Well, Natural Law comes from, as you described it, an unknown uncaused cause which I call God. So, no God, no morals. And, I would still follow Natural Law though, because economically it is sound as well.
[/quote]
Is there a reason that the uncaused cause couldn’t be a process of natural law or be natural law itself? I would say it’s unknowable either way at this point in history.
The beginning (and end) of the Abolition movement in slavery era America:
Slavery is immoral!
No sir, you have it wrong. You see, morality is relative. Presently it is moral to own and work slaves. And, it can remain moral from here to eternity. In fact, it can only become immoral in the future if you succeed in changing our customs today. So, if slavery today is as moral as anti-slavery of the future, why put yourself through the trouble?
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Chris, you eat the flesh of Jesus every Sunday. You even drink his blood.
[yeahyeah, symbolism][/quote]
Don’t Catholics believe that once you drink the wine and eat the cracker/bread in communion that it literally becomes the flesh of Jesus? If so, isn’t that ritual cannibalism?
If so, then that suggest to me that according to the bible, sometimes eating people is wrong and sometimes it’s good.
To the Catholics on this thread: Did I get something wrong? I don’t want to assign something to your belief system that isn’t really there.[/quote]
Well, I have always jokingly said you probably shouldn’t fuck with people that eat their king’s flesh and blood.
However, you do see a difference between eating someone that has lived forever and will never die and killing someone and eating them?
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
Chris, does that mean that if it was proven there is no god, you would join the Taliban, or at least wouldn’t fight against them?[/quote]
Well, if I go by moral relativism, then no of course not. How could I believe that the Taliban is wrong when they do not live among my society today. Then of course it wouldn’t be morally wrong to kill every single person in the Middle East either. So, guess it depends on how I feel that day.[/quote]
No God=moral relativism
?[/quote]
Well, Natural Law comes from, as you described it, an unknown uncaused cause which I call God. So, no God, no morals. And, I would still follow Natural Law though, because economically it is sound as well.
[/quote]
Is there a reason that the uncaused cause couldn’t be a process of natural law or be natural law itself? I would say it’s unknowable either way at this point in history.[/quote]
Yes, because Natural Law cannot cause anything. It is not Karma.
I think natural law should be defined.
The framework for which the physical world operates within.
Can we agree on that one? Does anyone want to add more? Does someone have their own definition that they would like to add or even replace this one with?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
so what you’re saying is because I’m religious…I do not question? Isn’t that some kind of logical fallacy as well?[/quote]
You’re less likely to question.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]swoleupinya wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
The Bible that we read today is more accurate than writings from Socrates, Plato and many other ancient writings. But since the Bible talks about God just dismiss it.
[/quote]
Accurate in what sense?
[/quote]
100%, haven’t seen one thing in the Bible refuted for 11 years (how long I’ve listened to objections and gave objections).[/quote]
You don’t look for objections, you look for something to fit with your worldview.[/quote]
Um…what? Oh, that is right you’re my spiritual director. How did I forget?
Because I am Catholic, that some how makes me void of reasoning faculties? I don’t question anything? Interesting, since I’m one of the most critical (correction: critical in a correct matter, not using straw man arguments) people of the Catholic Church on this board. [/quote]
Not because you’re Catholic, because you’re religious. Stop making everything about how people hate Catholics more than everyone else. Just because Hitler was Roman Catholic, doesn’t mean everyone automatically considers Catholicism the ultimate evil.[/quote]
Yeah Brother Chris Mak is an equal opportunity hater. Catholics are not at the head of the line he hates all Christians equally.
[/quote]
It’s also not all about Christianity. Stop trying to play the victims here, it’s really sad.
[quote]kamui wrote:
there is bad societies
therefore you cannot directly derive a working definition of Good and Evil (morality) from the “laws and morals that societies establish to govern themselves”.
in other words :
since you can’t take social values for granted, defining morality requires a way to evaluate values. [/quote]
bad ideas don’t survive very long in the face of good ones
almost like natural selection for ideas
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Yes, I read much, read 3-4 hours a day. Not sure what you’re getting at, or is this another ad hominem. You can refute a bunch of stuff in the Protestant Bibles, I would guess if you pick up a Protestant Bible there is about 2000 mistakes. However, never came across one in the Catholic Bible (with the right credentials).[/quote]
We get it, you’re a Catholic groupie. Go hit on a Pastor and calm the fuck down.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Why is it on these religion threads, we always start with one topic (i.e. do people fear atheists) and end up debating: A) The existence of God B) Evolution vs. Creation or C) Can you prove the Bible[/quote]
Not sure.[/quote]
Because when Atheist try to explain what it is that forms their worldview, Christians get butthurt and have to make it about them.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The beginning (and end) of the Abolition movement in slavery era America:
Slavery is immoral!
No sir, you have it wrong. You see, morality is relative. Presently it is moral to own and work slaves. And, it can remain moral from here to eternity. In fact, it can only become immoral in the future if you succeed in changing our customs today. So, if slavery today is as moral as anti-slavery of the future, why put yourself through the trouble?
[/quote]
Neither.
And on and on it goes. Committed God hating pagans with the equivalent of a scriptural soundbite acting as though their Styrofoam spitballs carry any substantive weight whatsoever. And no I’m not wasting my time explaining this the one millionth grade school misrepresentation of biblical truth in this thread alone. Look it up.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The beginning (and end) of the Abolition movement in slavery era America:
Slavery is immoral!
No sir, you have it wrong. You see, morality is relative. Presently it is moral to own and work slaves. And, it can remain moral from here to eternity. In fact, it can only become immoral in the future if you succeed in changing our customs today. So, if slavery today is as moral as anti-slavery of the future, why put yourself through the trouble?
[/quote]
[/quote]
Thanks for responding to my point. Oh wait, you didn’t. Get yourself a coloring book and crayons, the big boys are talking important stuff.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
It’s also not all about Christianity. Stop trying to play the victims here, it’s really sad.[/quote]
When you stop attacking Christians I’ll stop saying that you’re attacking Christians.
