Your Internal Moral Compass

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
141

[quote]pat wrote:<< Dig all you want, it has never been refuted. >>>[/quote]And by proving the possible existence of any god in general, it proves the actual existence of no god in particular and in so doing DISproves the existence of THE one true and living God whose NONexistence is IMpossible.

IF, the bible’s God is God indeed.

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I’m off to the gym now, but I want to ask: Sloth do you consider the Cosmological argument valid?[/quote]He does if he takes Aquinas seriously which his church advances as the most authoritative of all human authors as pronounced by I think Leo XIII (could be wrong om which pope, but it was right in that era).

142

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

It will not suffice to say it’s flaw and expect me to take your word for it. Put your money where your mouth is. Prove it wrong.
[/quote]

I’ve seen you argue with Bodyguard over it and I have little interest in it to be honest. Declare that a win for team Theist!!!

Here you go: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Cosmological_argument

There are all the counter arguments. Go nuts.[/quote]

Did you notice none of the counter arguments prove it wrong? Did you miss that? Go on, pick one, we can discuss it all you want.
Further, I am asking you these things. Can can send you to a million web pages too. Are you going to let these nimrods speak for you?

I have read that wiki page a dozen times. This ain’t my first ride in the rodeo…

143

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I’m off to the gym now, but I want to ask: Sloth do you consider the Cosmological argument valid?[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you think, it’s what you can prove.

144

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Also Mr. Tri, look up the greek rendition for “fool” and see if it is the same word used in the original Greek text Jesus said. [/quote]That’s what I was waitin for. I jist knew you wouldn’t let me down. Go ahead n tell us. And then tell us what you meant by “fool”. Oh yeah. Jesus spoke Aramaic, though the gospels were written in koine Greek. One more thing. Like I told the rest of the Catholics around here. There will be no idolators in heaven. People with the wrong God are idolators. If you were actually doing His work you would be calling them out of their temples of baal. Not lying to them by telling them they’re OK just how they are.

That doctrine of invincible ignorance is one of the most damnable beguiling deceptions ever perpetrated upon the human race. You people are really gonna pay.
[/quote]

Aren’t you familiar with Catholic Jesuit Theologian Karl Rahner and his idea of the “anonymous christian?” I’m not defending atheism. Atheism is evil, but not every atheist is. I’m trying to demonstrate the point that just because someone calls themselves Christian doesn’t mean they are. Someone can say they are a Christian but through their actions demonstrate otherwise. Likewise, someone can call themselves an atheist, but through their actions demonstrate something close to a Christian. There is actually nothing God gets more annoyed about than hypocrites. They are even worse than Atheists. Jesus called the Pharisees fools many times. Jesus never sinned. Therefore, calling someone a fool isn’t necessarily sinning. There is no invincible ignorance. But there is mercy.

145

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]fibroblaster wrote: Ask yourselves what could make someone so insane that he would believe what Christians believe >>>[/quote]Clearly you have not studied Mormonism. They could much more effectively use an argument like this. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< What do you fools think Jesus meant >>>[/quote] when He said "but whosoever shall say [to his brother], Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< “not of this world” and “born from above”? We don’t belong to this world because we have been adopted as sons of God >>>[/quote]this is true. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< But instead of joining this happiness, YOUR JEALOUS BECAUSE YOUR PARENTS DIDN’T DO THE SAME FOR YOU. >>>[/quote]Absolutely false [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< So you become extremely bitter about the world, arguing for no reason then to be right. >>>[/quote]They argue to convince themselves that they are not accountable to the God they cannot avoid everywhere.[quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Whereas I argue because I also want you who are my brothers to have the same happiness. >>>[/quote]The gospel ain’t about “happiness”. It’s about resurrection and obediance in that order. The apostles weren’t too happy bein stoned and whipped and imprisoned. They DID have joy though. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< I am not controlled or brainwashed because if I were, then I would succumb to this world’s ideas. I am not afraid of humiliation, because I always know God is watching me try to herd in his lost sheep. [/quote]I could be wrong, but I sense that you mean this despite being totally screwed up in most of your goofball theology.
[/quote]

Listen, most atheists didn’t choose it. And what is there left to do after atheism? How does an atheist choose the right religion if all of them point different paths? There are more atheists who don’t wan’t to identify with Christianity, because it is the largest religion in america, and they are upset that their parents who loved them didn’t give the this important memo growing up. Imagine being or an atheist, being ridiculed by your peers that you are going to hell because you don’t believe in God? It is traumatic. So they get turned off.[/quote]

Very true but not sure what you meant about this part… “they are upset that their parents who loved them didn’t give the this important memo growing up”[/quote]

They see their “christian” peers persecute them because they are atheists although atheism is all they knew because their parents told them this. They play the part their peers forced upon them. Everyone knows atheists can be good people of God and through their actions demonstrating christ’s message. The problem is, people tell atheists their whole life they are going to hell. If you were told you were going to hell your whole life, the only choice you have is to not believe in God. If someone tells you that you are ugly your whole life, then you may eventually be convinced of it, even if it is not true. So atheists have a hard time reconciling that a loving God would allow them to be persecuted and go to hell just because they were born this way. So they see hypocritical Christians leaping for joy that they are “saved” because they utter the words “I believe”, but these atheists were told by their own parents that God does not exist. [/quote]

I thought what you meant was something along those lines but wanted to be sure before I said you were incorrect, which you are. By the same logic I could say this.

Christians are told their entire life they will go to hell if they stop believing in god, so they have no choice but to believe in god. This is only because their parents told them god exists and they know nothing else.[/quote]

Actions speak louder than words. If that Christian stops believing in God, we need to assume his actions demonstrate this unbelief. People need to stop looking at believing in God as some kind of chore. Christians need to stop with this heretical “salvation by faith alone” Not only does it go against common sense, it goes against truth. If you approach faith with this twisted idea of avoiding hell, you are setting yourself up for failure. If you approach faith in conjunction with love, than you will be much better off. You aren’t supposed to believe in God because you have to. You’re supposed to believe in God because you want to.

146

[quote]pat wrote:<<< It doesn’t matter what you think, it’s what you can prove.[/quote]Somebody tell Pat, because he has me on ignore, (NA NA NA NA NA, sticks out my tongue =] ) that I’m still waiting for him to actually pit his Greek arguments against my biblical one. In other words the idol of Aristotle against the God of the universe. He won’t do it, but I’m duty bound to try. I’ll keep it very calm Pat. Even if you lie about me some more, curse me out and call me obscene expletives and compare me to Charles Manson and other stuff all in the name of Jesus like you did when you had no answers last time.

147

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ranengin wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ranengin wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:

Tell me, If the cosmological argument can serve as an indirect proof of existence of God [meaning if God does not exist we run into a contradiction] will you except it? Others mentioned arguments as well. not surprisingly, they aren’t good enough for you. no argument can convince an atheist due to him acting as the supreme judge of the soundness of the argument itself.[/quote]

If the cosmological argument were indeed valid I would change my position. It’s not, read the criticisms of it. I make my decision based on reason and evidence. Pat is doing himself no favours by peddling this bad argument.
[/quote]

Correct, the cosmological argument has been ripped to shreds by very informed and highly intelligent philosophers.

Pat chooses to ignore this.[/quote]

Like I said, it should be no problem to prove it, or me wrong…Go nuts.

Oh wait! I should just take your word for it??? Nah, back your shit up.
[/quote]

I’m not claiming to be a “very informed and highly intelligent philosopher”, you would be smashed in a debate with one by the way. Don’t let your ego get too big.

Anyhoo…

In a nutshell, the argument can be put more formally as follows:

  1. Every thing has either been caused to exist by something else or else exists uncaused.
  2. Not every thing has been caused to exist by something else.
  3. Therefore, at least one thing is itself uncaused.

There are several problems with this argument. The most crucial objection to the argument itself is that unless we know that premise 2 is true, the argument fails. If the universe is infinitely old, for instance, every thing could indeed be caused by something else before it; the series of causes could go back forever. But perhaps more importantly, one could hold that the argument succeeds without believing that God exists. There could be multiple uncaused causes (multiple gods) or the uncaused cause could be an unintelligent, impersonal force. Finally, the argument holds that God is required to explain the existence of the universe, but offers no explanation for why God exists. If you invoke God to answer the question “Why is there a universe rather than nothing?” you raise the further question “Why is there a God rather than nothing?” The fundamental question “Why is there something rather than nothing?” remains unanswered either way; so why invoke a potentially nonexistent God to explain a universe which we know exists?[/quote]

So you missed the part where I spoke of the argument from the point of contingency? You must of missed the whole post as I was very specific about the contingency part.
Kalam, which is the version you pasted, is indeed flawed and a bad rip-off from Aristotle.
The argument from contingency, removes time from the equation, that’s the reason I chose that form.

Now, above you massacred the argument. Seriously, “Every thing has either been caused to exist by something else or else exists uncaused.” ← Uh, fuck no. That’s garbage. I am not going to let you massacre the argument like that. It’s calls the principle of sufficient reason, which basically says, for that which exists, there is a sufficient (or necessary) reason that ‘it’ exists.
The second premise is even funnier…“Not every thing has been caused to exist by something else.” ← LOL…what? whether that’s a premise or a conclusion I am not sure, but that doesn’t even belong in the cosmological form.
Do I need to go over the fact that the conclusion is a non-sequiter? How the hell do you get “…at least one thing is itself uncaused.” from those premises?

So here is an overview of the forms of the arguments and counter arguments:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cosmological-argument/

Dig all you want, it has never been refuted.
[/quote]

Pat, all versions of the cosmological argument have been shown to have flaws (critics).

Propeller head PHD philosophers live to criticize other philosopher’s arguments.

I have a feeling no matter what link or source is shown to you, you will simply close your eyes, plug your ears and start screaming LALALALALA

But go ahead and give me the author of the version of the argument you’ve bought into and I’ll do some research if I have enough time.

148

Romans 9:9-18

[quote]9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10 as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
13 “Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”
14 “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 in their paths are ruin and misery,
17 and the way of peace they have not known.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” [/quote]
Don’t worry, your bible butchering church will get you out of that ridiculously clear passage of quotations from the Old Testament in the new.

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< I’m trying to demonstrate the point that just because someone calls themselves Christian doesn’t mean they are. Someone can say they are a Christian but through their actions demonstrate otherwise. >>>[/quote]Ohhh you are correct. By their words too. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Likewise, someone can call themselves an atheist, but through their actions demonstrate something close to a Christian. >>>[/quote]A lie from the pit of hell though I believe you believe it. The whole book of Galatians specifically destroys this terrible falsehood. So does Romans 3 above and about a dozen other places in the New Testament and even glimpsed in the old. (51st Psalm for instance.) [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< There is actually nothing God gets more annoyed about than hypocrites. They are even worse than Atheists. >>>[/quote]Yep. I have addressed that repeatedly. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Jesus called the Pharisees fools many times. Jesus never sinned. >>>[/quote]That’s right. I’ll let you study a bit more to find out why He can do it and we can’t. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Therefore, calling someone a fool isn’t necessarily sinning. >>>.[/quote]For the record I don’t believe you were actually violating what was being prohibited. I’m jist askin ya. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< There is no invincible ignorance. But there is mercy. >>>[/quote] Your church begs to differ. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Ignorance Check about 2/3 of the way down the page. Also see the the Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. June 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. at the bottom. You do know what that is right?

149

The cosmological argument from the point of contingency is pretty sound actually, but it’s not a christian argument, and, strictly speaking, it’s not even a theistic argument.

And Pat already know that. I gave him this answer in my very first post on PWI. (in the “Atheism-o-phobia” thread).
He just use this line as a jab to pass the guard of his atheist opponents.
When they are in bad philosophical shape or not used to this kind of sparring, it’s sometimes enough to knock them down.

Just tell him “there may be a first cause but we can’t know anything about it” and you save your agnosticism. You can throw a “now, prove this first cause is actually Jesus” punch, but don’t expect an easy fight. Pat has an impressive stamina.

150

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

Romans 9:9-18

[quote]9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10 as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
13 “Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”
14 “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 in their paths are ruin and misery,
17 and the way of peace they have not known.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” [/quote]
Don’t worry, your bible butchering church will get you out of that ridiculously clear passage of quotations from the Old Testament in the new.

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< I’m trying to demonstrate the point that just because someone calls themselves Christian doesn’t mean they are. Someone can say they are a Christian but through their actions demonstrate otherwise. >>>[/quote]Ohhh you are correct. By their words too. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Likewise, someone can call themselves an atheist, but through their actions demonstrate something close to a Christian. >>>[/quote]A lie from the pit of hell though I believe you believe it. The whole book of Galatians specifically destroys this terrible falsehood. So does Romans 3 above and about a dozen other places in the New Testament and even glimpsed in the old. (51st Psalm for instance.) [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< There is actually nothing God gets more annoyed about than hypocrites. They are even worse than Atheists. >>>[/quote]Yep. I have addressed that repeatedly. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Jesus called the Pharisees fools many times. Jesus never sinned. >>>[/quote]That’s right. I’ll let you study a bit more to find out why He can do it and we can’t. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Therefore, calling someone a fool isn’t necessarily sinning. >>>.[/quote]For the record I don’t believe you were actually violating what was being prohibited. I’m jist askin ya. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< There is no invincible ignorance. But there is mercy. >>>[/quote] Your church begs to differ. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Ignorance Check about 2/3 of the way down the page. Also see the the Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. June 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. at the bottom. You do know what that is right?
[/quote]

The doctrine of invincible ignorance is mercy. Why do you say my church? It is your church too. You descended from Catholicism. If you say atheists go to hell for being atheists, would it be fair to say that you are going to hell because you were born into a Church that pick and chose which ideas they liked out of Catholicism? Don’t you understand that your Christianity would be guilty of heresy and cannot be saved because you don’t have the sacraments? Is it your fault? No. This is how mercy works. You know that if it weren’t for the Catholic Church, you wouldn’t be a Christian. That is why the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation–because if it didn’t exist, neither would your Christianity.

151

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I’m off to the gym now, but I want to ask: Sloth do you consider the Cosmological argument valid?[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you think, it’s what you can prove.[/quote]

And what counts as proof?

I can’t prove to you that Zeus and the other Olympian gods don’t exist.

152

[quote]kamui wrote:
The cosmological argument from the point of contingency is pretty sound actually, but it’s not a christian argument, and, strictly speaking, it’s not even a theistic argument.

And Pat already know that. I gave him this answer in my very first post on PWI. (in the “Atheism-o-phobia” thread).
He just use this line as a jab to pass the guard of his atheist opponents.
When they are in bad philosophical shape or not used to this kind of sparring, it’s sometimes enough to knock them down.

Just tell him “there may be a first cause but we can’t know anything about it” and you save your agnosticism. You can throw a “now, prove this first cause is actually Jesus” punch, but don’t expect an easy fight. Pat has an impressive stamina.
[/quote]

Thanks for the heads up.

153

[quote]ranengin wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I’m off to the gym now, but I want to ask: Sloth do you consider the Cosmological argument valid?[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you think, it’s what you can prove.[/quote]

And what counts as proof?

I can’t prove to you that Zeus and the other Olympian gods don’t exist.[/quote]

Jesus is proof.

154

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:

[quote]ranengin wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I’m off to the gym now, but I want to ask: Sloth do you consider the Cosmological argument valid?[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you think, it’s what you can prove.[/quote]

And what counts as proof?

I can’t prove to you that Zeus and the other Olympian gods don’t exist.[/quote]

Jesus is proof.[/quote]

Zeus is my dad.

155

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< If you say atheists go to hell for being atheists, >>>[/quote]Nobody goes to hell for being atheists. They go to hell for high capital crimes before the throne of the most high God. There are no atheists anyway according to the 1st of Romans. Everybody knows the God who is actually there, but they refuse to acknowledge Him. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< would it be fair to say that you are going to hell because you were born into a Church that pick and chose which ideas they liked out of Catholicism? >>>[/quote] LOL!!! I was born baptized, communion and confirmed a CATHOLIC bub. I want nothing whatever to do with that church except to say “come out of her His people” [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Don’t you understand that your Christianity would be guilty of heresy and cannot be saved because you don’t have the sacraments? Is it your fault? No. This is how mercy works. You know that if it weren’t for the Catholic Church, you wouldn’t be a Christian. That is why the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation–because if it didn’t exist, neither would your Christianity.[/quote]Look man. I’ve been through all this with a half dozen Catholics here before you. Two of them have me on ignore now. I am not your “separated brother”. It might be possible that you are mine. DO NOT waste my time or yours. Your church is the most successful tool of Satan in all of history bar none. Forsake her and be free indeed.

156

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]fibroblaster wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]fibroblaster wrote: Ask yourselves what could make someone so insane that he would believe what Christians believe >>>[/quote]Clearly you have not studied Mormonism. They could much more effectively use an argument like this. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< What do you fools think Jesus meant >>>[/quote] when He said "but whosoever shall say [to his brother], Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< “not of this world” and “born from above”? We don’t belong to this world because we have been adopted as sons of God >>>[/quote]this is true. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< But instead of joining this happiness, YOUR JEALOUS BECAUSE YOUR PARENTS DIDN’T DO THE SAME FOR YOU. >>>[/quote]Absolutely false [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< So you become extremely bitter about the world, arguing for no reason then to be right. >>>[/quote]They argue to convince themselves that they are not accountable to the God they cannot avoid everywhere.[quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< Whereas I argue because I also want you who are my brothers to have the same happiness. >>>[/quote]The gospel ain’t about “happiness”. It’s about resurrection and obediance in that order. The apostles weren’t too happy bein stoned and whipped and imprisoned. They DID have joy though. [quote]fibroblaster wrote:<<< I am not controlled or brainwashed because if I were, then I would succumb to this world’s ideas. I am not afraid of humiliation, because I always know God is watching me try to herd in his lost sheep. [/quote]I could be wrong, but I sense that you mean this despite being totally screwed up in most of your goofball theology.
[/quote]

Listen, most atheists didn’t choose it. And what is there left to do after atheism? How does an atheist choose the right religion if all of them point different paths? There are more atheists who don’t wan’t to identify with Christianity, because it is the largest religion in america, and they are upset that their parents who loved them didn’t give the this important memo growing up. Imagine being or an atheist, being ridiculed by your peers that you are going to hell because you don’t believe in God? It is traumatic. So they get turned off.[/quote]

Very true but not sure what you meant about this part… “they are upset that their parents who loved them didn’t give the this important memo growing up”[/quote]

They see their “christian” peers persecute them because they are atheists although atheism is all they knew because their parents told them this. They play the part their peers forced upon them. Everyone knows atheists can be good people of God and through their actions demonstrating christ’s message. The problem is, people tell atheists their whole life they are going to hell. If you were told you were going to hell your whole life, the only choice you have is to not believe in God. If someone tells you that you are ugly your whole life, then you may eventually be convinced of it, even if it is not true. So atheists have a hard time reconciling that a loving God would allow them to be persecuted and go to hell just because they were born this way. So they see hypocritical Christians leaping for joy that they are “saved” because they utter the words “I believe”, but these atheists were told by their own parents that God does not exist. [/quote]

I thought what you meant was something along those lines but wanted to be sure before I said you were incorrect, which you are. By the same logic I could say this.

Christians are told their entire life they will go to hell if they stop believing in god, so they have no choice but to believe in god. This is only because their parents told them god exists and they know nothing else.[/quote]

Actions speak louder than words. If that Christian stops believing in God, we need to assume his actions demonstrate this unbelief. People need to stop looking at believing in God as some kind of chore. Christians need to stop with this heretical “salvation by faith alone” Not only does it go against common sense, it goes against truth. If you approach faith with this twisted idea of avoiding hell, you are setting yourself up for failure. If you approach faith in conjunction with love, than you will be much better off. You aren’t supposed to believe in God because you have to. You’re supposed to believe in God because you want to.[/quote]

Anyways you were still wrong about the atheist part, which is fine since you don’t understand it.

157

[quote]Sloth wrote:

Where do your morals come from? Your atheistic reasoning. Well so did his! Westboro is crude. Stalin was a mass murderer. Please explain how you and Stalin use the same source, atheistic reasoning, and we’re all supposed to believe it’s just soooo much more reliable. Is this fun now Therajraj? You digging it?
[/quote]

Since you can lump all atheist ‘reasoning’ together does that mean I can lump all theist moral systems together?

Boy you guys are doing some messed up things in the Middle East…

Only fair right?

158

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< It doesn’t matter what you think, it’s what you can prove.[/quote]Somebody tell Pat, because he has me on ignore, (NA NA NA NA NA, sticks out my tongue =] ) that I’m still waiting for him to actually pit his Greek arguments against my biblical one. In other words the idol of Aristotle against the God of the universe. He won’t do it, but I’m duty bound to try. I’ll keep it very calm Pat. Even if you lie about me some more, curse me out and call me obscene expletives and compare me to Charles Manson and other stuff all in the name of Jesus like you did when you had no answers last time.
[/quote]

Kinda find this ^^ interesting so why not

159

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

Where do your morals come from? Your atheistic reasoning. Well so did his! Westboro is crude. Stalin was a mass murderer. Please explain how you and Stalin use the same source, atheistic reasoning, and we’re all supposed to believe it’s just soooo much more reliable. Is this fun now Therajraj? You digging it?
[/quote]

Since you can lump all atheist ‘reasoning’ together does that mean I can lump all theist moral systems together?

Boy you guys are doing some messed up things in the Middle East…

Only fair right?
[/quote]

When didn’t you folks lump us all together? We’re all deluded sheeple. Brainwashed. Ready to go a killing if we think God gave us an update on our orders through his image on a piece of toast. C’mon stop.

160

Look, you want to take a look at sources, grouping folks together? Then let’s do it. Let’s roll up our sleeves and do it. That reasoning ability, your source, has been the very same source used by men like Stalin. You drew different conclusions, but you used the same damn source. Same source, different conclusions, same absolute moral weight, zero.