Hell Is Real And Souls Go There

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
481

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
You can say no. But then why are you trying to take a moral high ground over God, a being with the power to be the final authority and judge.

You can say yes, but then I’ll ask you to prove that “evil” is a thing that exists.[/quote]
Evil is knowingly and willingly doing the opposite of what one believes to be good. If you believe pedophilia is wrong and you still engage in it then that is evil. If you were taught that it is OK then you are not evil. Whoever taught you it was OK, provided they believed it was wrong, would be evil. Now, as a society we may view pedophilia as evil, as we believe it’s “opposite” would be good, so we may condemn a man to prison for committing it regardless of his morality on that issue. We can say that maybe he isn’t evil but his act was and it is illegal so that’s how it goes. But that’s why he have laws: to remind certain people that regardless of what they personally believe is right or wrong society has made that choice for everyone.

At least that’s how I look at good and evil. And both do exist, at the very least, as concepts. [/quote]

Does anybody ever do any research at all? Moral relativity has been a dead argument for centuries. Yet, it keeps getting dredged up over and over again.
Moral relativity fails because it ignores one very important aspect, the victim.
You honestly believe that if one thinks that child rape is ok, that makes it ok? Or if society thinks it’s ok to rape and kill children, then it’s ok? What about the kids, don’t their opinions count?

Tell me what scenario justifies child rape as morally a-ok? That’s you job as a relativist, you have to take the most evil acts and justify them as being ‘good’ because it’s accepted by society.
The reason why relativity is a fail is because nobody can justify evil. [/quote]
Your response tells me you didn’t read what I posted or, you just don’t understand English. Show me where I said that believing something is OK makes it OK.

482

Hope you don’t feel harassed, by the way. Enjoying the conversation

483

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

No, one cannot “prove” the Bible is false, and it would serve no purpose to do so. A believer would still believe, because faith requires no proof. I actually envy people who are able to believe so completely in something without skepticism. It must be a wonderful feeling, one that I have missed out on all my life. [/quote]

You holding that firearm?

Do you believe you have an inherent right to it?
[/quote]

I believe that inherent rights are meaningless without the means to physically defend them. I am alive, but I don’t believe that my right to life is sufficient to prevent someone from killing me. I am free, but my right to liberty by itself doesn’t prevent my enslavement. I may be armed, but my right to remain so exists only insofar as I am able to physically remain in possession of a weapon, and the skills necessary to use it.

In short, while I am a great fan the idea of Jeffersonian rights and the documents penned to uphold them, I have little faith in them being mystical forces that will shield me from harm. I have seen too much evidence, in this country and abroad, to suggest that there are no inherent rights, only the contest of wills. The strong will do what they want, and the weak will endure what they must. Regardless of what who believes is their inherent right. [/quote]
Those pesky Melians. [/quote]

Uh huh. They believed in unalienable rights, and look what happened to them. I can’t count on the Spartans coming to my aid, so I have to be a Spartan myself.
[/quote]

So you make no claim to inherent rights, that can be infringed upon? Even in taking away that firearm?

484

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

More simply, my claim is this: that it’s written that it happened is not sufficient proof for a reasonable person to believe that a man rose from the dead three days after his murder.

[/quote]

Is child rape evil?

Prove to me “evil” so that this thing then may indeed fall within it.
[/quote]

I cannot, and neither can anybody else.

Being what I call an agnostic theist, however, I have the possibility of an objective morality. That I cannot prove it to you or anybody else is a universal feature of life on this planet, not a deficiency in my worldview. Because you, in fact, can’t prove a single this to me about evil either.[/quote]

So reasonable people CAN have devout faith in things they can not prove empirically.
[/quote]

Except that this problem of evil is internal to your worldview and has nothing to do with external objectivities.

My worldview sees the accidental death of an infant as a terrible thing, and it sees any entity who allows such to happen while having the power to easily stop it from happening as a supremely unjust entity.

This is no problem for me, because I do not believe in an interested, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent God.

You, however…

485

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Hope you don’t feel harassed, by the way. Enjoying the conversation[/quote]

If this is directed at me, I don’t feel harassed at all, and I intend to make no one else feel harassed.

I absolutely love these arguments, intensity and all.

486

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I believe that inherent rights are meaningless without the means to physically defend them. [/quote]

I’m not asking if those rights act as a force field, only if you believe you have them. Sounds like you do.

[quote]I am alive, but I don’t believe that my right to life is sufficient to prevent someone from killing me.[/quote] Not only doesn’t deny the right to your life, but you seem to claim such a right.

But that’s not the question.

Now this does seem to deny the existence of such rights. Ok, so as long as the government is strong enough to disarm you, then it is perfectly within their “right” to do so.

487

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

No, one cannot “prove” the Bible is false, and it would serve no purpose to do so. A believer would still believe, because faith requires no proof. I actually envy people who are able to believe so completely in something without skepticism. It must be a wonderful feeling, one that I have missed out on all my life. [/quote]

You holding that firearm?

Do you believe you have an inherent right to it?
[/quote]

I believe that inherent rights are meaningless without the means to physically defend them. I am alive, but I don’t believe that my right to life is sufficient to prevent someone from killing me. I am free, but my right to liberty by itself doesn’t prevent my enslavement. I may be armed, but my right to remain so exists only insofar as I am able to physically remain in possession of a weapon, and the skills necessary to use it.

In short, while I am a great fan the idea of Jeffersonian rights and the documents penned to uphold them, I have little faith in them being mystical forces that will shield me from harm. I have seen too much evidence, in this country and abroad, to suggest that there are no inherent rights, only the contest of wills. The strong will do what they want, and the weak will endure what they must. Regardless of what who believes is their inherent right. [/quote]
Those pesky Melians. [/quote]

Uh huh. They believed in unalienable rights, and look what happened to them. I can’t count on the Spartans coming to my aid, so I have to be a Spartan myself.
[/quote]

So you make no claim to inherent rights, that can be infringed upon? Even in taking away that firearm?
[/quote]

No, because no claim to inherent rights, in and of itself, will stop someone who wants to disarm, enslave or kill me from doing so. I might personally attempt to prevent this from happening, of course, but that depends entirely on my will and ability, not necessarily on my faith in inherent rights.

488

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

More simply, my claim is this: that it’s written that it happened is not sufficient proof for a reasonable person to believe that a man rose from the dead three days after his murder.

[/quote]

Is child rape evil?

Prove to me “evil” so that this thing then may indeed fall within it.
[/quote]

I cannot, and neither can anybody else.

Being what I call an agnostic theist, however, I have the possibility of an objective morality. That I cannot prove it to you or anybody else is a universal feature of life on this planet, not a deficiency in my worldview. Because you, in fact, can’t prove a single this to me about evil either.[/quote]

So reasonable people CAN have devout faith in things they can not prove empirically.
[/quote]

Except that this problem of evil is internal to your worldview and has nothing to do with external objectivities.

My worldview sees the accidental death of an infant as a terrible thing, and it sees any entity who allows such to happen while having the power to easily stop it from happening as a supremely unjust entity.

This is no problem for me, because I do not believe in an interested, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent God.

You, however…[/quote]

It isn’t a problem for me at all. My God gives eternal life. All lives are his. We might as well be lower than maggots when measured against him. Yet he invites us into his kingdom for eternity. When was the last time you had the mercy to invite maggots into your home to escape the cold and perhaps a bite to eat? Even for 5 minutes.

The problem I see in your worldview is this.

“I believe child dismemberment is morally evil. Regardless of personal opinion. It’s not like choosing a favorite color.”

But that screams for an intelligent, final, all-powerful author-judge. A dumb, cold, universe doesn’t dictate that raping the children of groups outside of your own (or even within your own) to be an evil thing. Only a conscious will could determine such a thing.

Now, I do note that you call yourself an agnostic theist?

But, judging by your criticisms, you must at least claim SOME knowledge of a deity. Because your complaints still apply to…it (or them). It, they, aren’t saving infants from lightning strikes. So you do know that this it, or them, is still an unjust it or them.

489

Isn’t there a story about a hawk catching a dove or sparrow or whatever, and the dove asks him why he is he doing that to him. The hawk answers that it is a stupid question that isn’t even valid.

490

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

No, one cannot “prove” the Bible is false, and it would serve no purpose to do so. A believer would still believe, because faith requires no proof. I actually envy people who are able to believe so completely in something without skepticism. It must be a wonderful feeling, one that I have missed out on all my life. [/quote]

You holding that firearm?

Do you believe you have an inherent right to it?
[/quote]

I believe that inherent rights are meaningless without the means to physically defend them. I am alive, but I don’t believe that my right to life is sufficient to prevent someone from killing me. I am free, but my right to liberty by itself doesn’t prevent my enslavement. I may be armed, but my right to remain so exists only insofar as I am able to physically remain in possession of a weapon, and the skills necessary to use it.

In short, while I am a great fan the idea of Jeffersonian rights and the documents penned to uphold them, I have little faith in them being mystical forces that will shield me from harm. I have seen too much evidence, in this country and abroad, to suggest that there are no inherent rights, only the contest of wills. The strong will do what they want, and the weak will endure what they must. Regardless of what who believes is their inherent right. [/quote]
Those pesky Melians. [/quote]

Uh huh. They believed in unalienable rights, and look what happened to them. I can’t count on the Spartans coming to my aid, so I have to be a Spartan myself.
[/quote]

So you make no claim to inherent rights, that can be infringed upon? Even in taking away that firearm?
[/quote]

No, because no claim to inherent rights, in and of itself, will stop someone who wants to disarm, enslave or kill me from doing so. I might personally attempt to prevent this from happening, of course, but that depends entirely on my will and ability, not necessarily on my faith in inherent rights. [/quote]

Agreed. But that’s not my question. I’m not questioning that if believing in inherent rights erects a force field. I don’t believe they do, and I’m not bashful in stating that we have certain inherent rights. I’m just asking if you feel the same way.

Or, do you simply not believe you actually posses any rights to that fire arm. Rights that the government is then truly infringing upon when they take it from you?

491

[quote]Sloth wrote:
My God gives eternal life. All lives are his. We might as well be lower than maggots when measured against him.
[/quote]
I thought we were made in His image?

492

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
My God gives eternal life. All lives are his. We might as well be lower than maggots when measured against him.
[/quote]
I thought we were made in His image? [/quote]

Does not equal to be made as he is. Only in his image. Context throughout the entirety of scripture makes this pretty darn clear.

493

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Agreed. But that’s not my question. I’m not questioning that if believing in inherent rights erects a force field. I don’t believe they do, and I’m not bashful in stating that we have certain inherent rights. I’m just asking if you feel the same way.

Or, do you simply not believe you actually posses any rights to that fire arm. Rights that the government is then truly infringing upon when they take it from you?
[/quote]
How can one have an inherent right to something that isn’t inherent?

494

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Agreed. But that’s not my question. I’m not questioning that if believing in inherent rights erects a force field. I don’t believe they do, and I’m not bashful in stating that we have certain inherent rights. I’m just asking if you feel the same way.

Or, do you simply not believe you actually posses any rights to that fire arm. Rights that the government is then truly infringing upon when they take it from you?
[/quote]
How can one have an inherent right to something that isn’t inherent? [/quote]

Like universal health care?

495

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
My God gives eternal life. All lives are his. We might as well be lower than maggots when measured against him.
[/quote]
I thought we were made in His image? [/quote]

Does not equal to be made as he is. Only in his image. Context throughout the entirety of scripture makes this pretty darn clear.
[/quote]
So we are a reflection of what He is? And aren’t we supposed to follow the example of His Son? I would think that if God loves us then the concept of being measured against him is meaningless.

496

Or, on the right-wing side. Like private property?

497

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

More simply, my claim is this: that it’s written that it happened is not sufficient proof for a reasonable person to believe that a man rose from the dead three days after his murder.

[/quote]

Is child rape evil?

Prove to me “evil” so that this thing then may indeed fall within it.
[/quote]

I cannot, and neither can anybody else.

Being what I call an agnostic theist, however, I have the possibility of an objective morality. That I cannot prove it to you or anybody else is a universal feature of life on this planet, not a deficiency in my worldview. Because you, in fact, can’t prove a single this to me about evil either.[/quote]

So reasonable people CAN have devout faith in things they can not prove empirically.
[/quote]

Except that this problem of evil is internal to your worldview and has nothing to do with external objectivities.

My worldview sees the accidental death of an infant as a terrible thing, and it sees any entity who allows such to happen while having the power to easily stop it from happening as a supremely unjust entity.

This is no problem for me, because I do not believe in an interested, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent God.

You, however…[/quote]

It isn’t a problem for me at all. My God gives eternal life. All lives are his. We might as well be lower than maggots when measured against him. Yet he invites us into his kingdom for eternity. When was the last time you had the mercy to invite maggots into your home to escape the cold and perhaps a bite to eat? Even for 5 minutes.

The problem I see in your worldview is this.

“I believe child dismemberment is morally evil. Regardless of personal opinion. It’s not like choosing a favorite color.”

But that screams for an intelligent, final, all-powerful author-judge. A dumb, cold, universe doesn’t dictate that raping the children of groups outside of your own (or even within your own) to be an evil thing. Only a conscious will could determine such a thing.

Now, I do note that you call yourself an agnostic theist?

But, judging by your criticisms, you must at least claim SOME knowledge of a deity. Because your complaints still apply to…it (or them). It, they, aren’t saving infants from lightning strikes. So you do know that this it, or them, is still an unjust it or them.
[/quote]

A bull elephant will forcibly mate with juvenile females if given the opportunity. In our society this is called “child rape”. In elephant society this is called “a big, strong bull elephant doing whatever the fuck he wants.” Other elephants, typically female, will attempt to prevent him from doing so, but attempting to stop a big, strong bull elephant from doing whatever the fuck he wants is a tricky proposition, to say the least. Is the bull elephant immoral or evil? Is his creator evil for letting him perpetrate this crime against child elephants? Does the universe care about the crime of elephant child rape?

498

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
My God gives eternal life. All lives are his. We might as well be lower than maggots when measured against him.
[/quote]
I thought we were made in His image? [/quote]

Does not equal to be made as he is. Only in his image. Context throughout the entirety of scripture makes this pretty darn clear.
[/quote]
So we are a reflection of what He is? And aren’t we supposed to follow the example of His Son? I would think that if God loves us then the concept of being measured against him is meaningless. [/quote]

This isn’t really debatable. We’re talking about an omnipresent, omniscient being. Compared to that, we are lower than a maggot is to us.

499

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Is the bull elephant immoral or evil? Is his creator evil for letting him perpetrate this crime against child elephants? Does the universe care about the crime of elephant child rape?[/quote]

So you’re saying the evil–the reality of it being evil–of child rape is a fairy tale. I think.

Edit: And so there is no evil or moral wrong in me supporting banning guns, too. Obviously.

500

[quote]Sloth wrote:

But, judging by your criticisms, you must at least claim SOME knowledge of a deity. Because your complaints still apply to…it (or them). It, they, aren’t saving infants from lightning strikes. So you do know that this it, or them, is still an unjust it or them.
[/quote]

I don’t claim to know this deity, if it exists, to be omnipotent, or omniscient, or omnibenevolent.

I think that things cannot exist without being contingent upon something else, and since things exist, I think that something exists upon which they are contingent. Something uncontingent. This I call God. And beyond this, I know nothing of Him–if He exists, which I do not know even enough to call myself a real, true theist.

As for your worldview, it is much easier to criticize, because it’s so clearly defined. God is supremely good, and yet He chooses to allow infants to die accidental deaths.

If I chose to allow an infant to die an accidental death, having the ability to stop the tragedy without inconvenience and yet refused to do so, you would call me evil. (I hope.)

And yet you will not call God evil, despite the fact that He does something which, done by me, would make me evil. You do this simply by saying, “if God does it, then it is not evil.” Which is either a brilliant coup-de-grace, or an utter cop-out, depending upon where one stands.