[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
So you’re saying you believe certain values are ‘good’ in and of themselves[/quote]
be. [/quote]
That’s pretty subjective you know.
Well, good-bye Mak.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
So you’re saying you believe certain values are ‘good’ in and of themselves[/quote]
No, he can’t be. [/quote]
And that’s the kicker. Here we have a worldview that tells humanity it most likely lacks free will, and that good and evil don’t actually exist. Yet, humanity has a non-real mission-- though all potential missions are equally truth–defined by values. Values that are all equally truth. No society will rise to any appreciable height from such a swamp.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
So you’re saying you believe certain values are ‘good’ in and of themselves[/quote]
No, he can’t be. [/quote]
And that’s the kicker.[/quote]
Sure is. Pity you won’t understand the value of addressing a whole post instead of a couple sentences.
[quote]forlife wrote:
what I said was that most people cannot change their sexual orientation,[/quote]
No, you never said that MOST people could not change sexual orientation. You said that it could not be done. And you said it many times. And you called those who did it liars, or confused.
Good, I wouldn’t want to go through that mess again. I was making a simple comparison as to how you reach conclusions by talking about the many times you mentioned your subjective experience. You’re doing the same thing here - Simply because you have not had a spiritual revelation you think that no one can, which is similar to your castigation of those who claimed that reparative therapy changed them for good.
I never claimed to know intimate details. But, I don’t think it takes much to figure out why you believe what you believe. And that, by the way, is what you and your motley crew of God haters do all the time.
You are the spectacle forlife and I don’t have to say why 
[quote]forlife wrote:
To the contrary, I’ve said that I don’t judge anyone for having a deep personal belief in god, because I’ve been there myself.[/quote]
I guess that depends on how you define the word “judge”. How many times have you ridiculed me, and others for our beliefs? Making fun of a persons faith seems to be okay with you and some of the others. But when you get it back you have a hissy fit.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
How do you know you aren’t misled yourself?[/quote]
and[/quote]
Ah, fascinating. Do go on.[/quote]
Go back to WoW, troll![/quote]
You compliment him by calling him a troll. At least a troll is amusing at times. This guy is far more sick and twisted than the typical troll.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
If I can’t disprove the divinity of their revelations, neither can you…[/quote]
But I haven’t tried to…[/quote]
Then how do you explain that their divine communication directly contradicts your own? Burying your head in the sand doesn’t make the logical conflict go away.
[/quote]
I don’t know that they had a ‘divine communication’ or if they chose to rebel from it. I know mine. You’re projecting YOUR experience and drawing conclusions as to what has happened with every single other person. I’m not.[/quote]
That is preciselywhat he does. And he’s done it across the board.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
i know this answer won’t satisfy you but anyway :
people don’t believe in a God because he is “real”, but because he is God.
then and only then, he is real because he is God.
your limited definition of “reality” make you ask wrong questions, and prevent you to understand the answers.
[/quote]
You’re right, it doesn’t satisfy me
Either god is an actual supernatural being, or he/she/it is fictional. A fictional idea can still motivate, inspire, and direct people who claim it is real rather than fictional, but this is a dangerous path. I don’t believe it is desirable or necessary for people to lie to themselves in order to contribute to the welfare of mankind. To the contrary, lies obfuscate and sometimes directly interfere with that mission.
This is where actual facts become important, and where faith falls short.
Either a person’s god actually created the universe or he didn’t.
Either their god actually watches over and protects believers or he doesn’t.
Either their god will judge and bless/condemn men, or he won’t.
Either our identities continue after death, or they don’t.
All of these are questions of FACT that don’t depend in the slightest on faith. The universe doesn’t care what people believe; either these things are real, or they are stories people tell themselves to feel better about their lives. And without evidence, claiming these things are true based on faith alone means absolutely nothing. [/quote]
How do you determine what that mission is and how do you find meaning and purpose behind it without some kind of faith?[/quote]
Meaning and purpose aren’t about FACTS, they are about VALUES. Values should be informed by facts where facts are available, but they can never be reduced to facts. Science can help us determine what is actually true, but science has nothing to say on what our values should be.
Fortunately, you don’t need to believe in a supernatural being in order to value love, integrity, and courage. There are many atheists/agnostics who demonstrate these values more fervently and more consistently than many believers. Of course, there are many believers who also demonstrate these values. The point is that the values themselves are independent of a person’s belief/disbelief in a supernatural being.[/quote]
Correct me if I’m wrong. So you’re saying you believe certain values are ‘good’ in and of themselves. How do you determine what good values are and what bad values are? Are they determined by mankind in your view? Is the knowledge of this innate in each person? Or is it something else?[/quote]
No, I’m saying that values are different from facts. A fact is either true or it is not. Values make no statements about what is true or false. Now, if you were to declare that hatred results in being sent to an eternity of hell, that falls within the realm of facts because it is either true or it isn’t. Saying that hatred is bad, without making any factual assertions about it, is only a value statement that is outside the scope of science.
To answer your question though, I believe values are determined by mankind. They may also be innate, to the extent that they are genetically driven. But I don’t believe they have a supernatural source.
[post removed. bad thread :p]
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
i know this answer won’t satisfy you but anyway :
people don’t believe in a God because he is “real”, but because he is God.
then and only then, he is real because he is God.
your limited definition of “reality” make you ask wrong questions, and prevent you to understand the answers.
[/quote]
You’re right, it doesn’t satisfy me
Either god is an actual supernatural being, or he/she/it is fictional. A fictional idea can still motivate, inspire, and direct people who claim it is real rather than fictional, but this is a dangerous path. I don’t believe it is desirable or necessary for people to lie to themselves in order to contribute to the welfare of mankind. To the contrary, lies obfuscate and sometimes directly interfere with that mission.
This is where actual facts become important, and where faith falls short.
Either a person’s god actually created the universe or he didn’t.
Either their god actually watches over and protects believers or he doesn’t.
Either their god will judge and bless/condemn men, or he won’t.
Either our identities continue after death, or they don’t.
All of these are questions of FACT that don’t depend in the slightest on faith. The universe doesn’t care what people believe; either these things are real, or they are stories people tell themselves to feel better about their lives. And without evidence, claiming these things are true based on faith alone means absolutely nothing. [/quote]
How do you determine what that mission is and how do you find meaning and purpose behind it without some kind of faith?[/quote]
Meaning and purpose aren’t about FACTS, they are about VALUES. Values should be informed by facts where facts are available, but they can never be reduced to facts. Science can help us determine what is actually true, but science has nothing to say on what our values should be.
Fortunately, you don’t need to believe in a supernatural being in order to value love, integrity, and courage. There are many atheists/agnostics who demonstrate these values more fervently and more consistently than many believers. Of course, there are many believers who also demonstrate these values. The point is that the values themselves are independent of a person’s belief/disbelief in a supernatural being.[/quote]
Correct me if I’m wrong. So you’re saying you believe certain values are ‘good’ in and of themselves. How do you determine what good values are and what bad values are? Are they determined by mankind in your view? Is the knowledge of this innate in each person? Or is it something else?[/quote]
No, I’m saying that values are different from facts. A fact is either true or it is not. Values make no statements about what is true or false. Now, if you were to declare that hatred results in being sent to an eternity of hell, that falls within the realm of facts because it is either true or it isn’t. Saying that hatred is bad, without making any factual assertions about it, is only a value statement that is outside the scope of science.
To answer your question though, I believe values are determined by mankind. They may also be innate, to the extent that they are genetically driven. But I don’t believe they have a supernatural source.
[/quote]
You mentioned something about a mission earlier, what is that mission?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
How do you know you aren’t misled yourself?[/quote]
and[/quote]
Ah, fascinating. Do go on.[/quote]
Go back to WoW, troll![/quote]
You compliment him by calling him a troll. At least a troll is amusing at times. This guy is far more sick and twisted than the typical troll. [/quote]
If I’m really that sick and twisted you should really put me on ignore. I don’t put you on ignore because you unintentionally make me laugh, and I can’t deprive myself of that level of hilarity.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
How do you know you aren’t misled yourself?[/quote]
and[/quote]
Ah, fascinating. Do go on.[/quote]
Go back to WoW, troll![/quote]
You compliment him by calling him a troll. At least a troll is amusing at times. This guy is far more sick and twisted than the typical troll. [/quote]
If I’m really that sick and twisted you should really put me on ignore. I don’t put you on ignore because you unintentionally make me laugh, and I can’t deprive myself of that level of hilarity.[/quote]
Your meter is wrong - You care a great deal about what I have to say, otherwise you would not be responding - Idiot.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
If I can’t disprove the divinity of their revelations, neither can you…[/quote]
But I haven’t tried to…[/quote]
Then how do you explain that their divine communication directly contradicts your own? Burying your head in the sand doesn’t make the logical conflict go away.
[/quote]
I don’t know that they had a ‘divine communication’ or if they chose to rebel from it. I know mine. You’re projecting YOUR experience and drawing conclusions as to what has happened with every single other person. I’m not.[/quote]
If you had a real divine communication, how is it logically possible for them to have had a real divine communication?
Are you saying that anyone that disagrees with you is either deluding himself about the divinity of his communication or is rebelling against that communication?
If not, how do you logically reconcile the discrepancy?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Your meter is wrong - You care a great deal about what I have to say, otherwise you would not be responding - Idiot.[/quote]
I care a great deal about you raging, as it amuses me. Herp-a-derp.
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
If I can’t disprove the divinity of their revelations, neither can you…[/quote]
But I haven’t tried to…[/quote]
Then how do you explain that their divine communication directly contradicts your own? Burying your head in the sand doesn’t make the logical conflict go away.
[/quote]
I don’t know that they had a ‘divine communication’ or if they chose to rebel from it. I know mine. You’re projecting YOUR experience and drawing conclusions as to what has happened with every single other person. I’m not.[/quote]
If you had a real divine communication, how is it logically possible for them to have had a real divine communication?
Are you saying that anyone that disagrees with you is either deluding himself about the divinity of his communication or is rebelling against that communication?
If not, how do you logically reconcile the discrepancy?[/quote]
Rebelling, lying, misapplying, whatever. That’s between God and man to sort out. I don’t project what MUST have transpired onto them. YOU’RE the one doing that.
Fletch, if you’re asking what my values are, at the top I would put love, integrity, and courage.
I had these same values as a Christian, but now I value them without fear of hellfire for falling short, or greed for eternal reward for blind obedience.
[quote]forlife wrote:
but now I value them without fear of hellfire for falling short, or greed for eternal reward for blind obedience. [/quote]
Who cares what your motivation is? The goodness of those motivations don’t–as with any other value–exist as an objective thing. No motivation is ‘more good’ than the other. You might as well be prideful about having the Good favorite color.
Heck, why take pride in the motivation behind values if you believe arriving at those values is, by far, most likely to be outside of your control, a free-will.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
If I can’t disprove the divinity of their revelations, neither can you…[/quote]
But I haven’t tried to…[/quote]
Then how do you explain that their divine communication directly contradicts your own? Burying your head in the sand doesn’t make the logical conflict go away.
[/quote]
I don’t know that they had a ‘divine communication’ or if they chose to rebel from it. I know mine. You’re projecting YOUR experience and drawing conclusions as to what has happened with every single other person. I’m not.[/quote]
If you had a real divine communication, how is it logically possible for them to have had a real divine communication?
Are you saying that anyone that disagrees with you is either deluding himself about the divinity of his communication or is rebelling against that communication?
If not, how do you logically reconcile the discrepancy?[/quote]
Rebelling, lying, misapplying, whatever. That’s between God and man to sort out. I don’t project what MUST have transpired onto them. YOU’RE the one doing that.[/quote]
No dude, you’re not getting it.
My point is that these people are equally convinced that YOU are the one that is either rebelling, lying, or misapplying your so-called divine communication. Why does that matter? Because it demonstrates that none of you believers have a reliable method for knowing what is actually TRUE. You’re all convinced you are right and everyone else is wrong, even when people use the same holy book as you. And you’re too blind to realize that you are just as biased in your beliefs as they are.
This recent argument between Chris and Tiribulus on the divinity of the Catholic church is a classic example. Both are sincere, both are convinced god has told them the TRUTH, yet logically both cannot be right.
Whatever. I’m not going to belabor the point further.