Yes.
If you want me to scientifically verify this kind of belief, I really cannot help you there buddy.
If you want me to scientifically verify this kind of belief, I really cannot help you there buddy.
Buy on AliExpress.com
The Moral Law. Ratonality of Faith (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter rounder
- Start date
Buy on AliExpress.com
You are too much sometimes 
You are misunderstanding one fundamental fact. All of the insight that physics ever obtained is based on observations in the universe. To use your poker example. If you know the rules of poker then you can know something about the probability of a particular outcome of poker. But knowing the rules of poker does not tell anything about the probability of MAKING the rules of poker. I hope you can see the difference.
You are misunderstanding one fundamental fact. All of the insight that physics ever obtained is based on observations in the universe. To use your poker example. If you know the rules of poker then you can know something about the probability of a particular outcome of poker. But knowing the rules of poker does not tell anything about the probability of MAKING the rules of poker. I hope you can see the difference.
Interesting twist. So you're saying that without an objective morality everyone has their own standards and they may very well conflict with everyone else's.
And therefore objective morality is a necessity. This is a controversial position right now. We're talking about stuff like "should the declaration of human rights apply to primitive tribes in say Papa New Guinea that have almost no knowledge of our civilization?"
I'm willing to sit on the fence a while longer on this one.
And therefore objective morality is a necessity. This is a controversial position right now. We're talking about stuff like "should the declaration of human rights apply to primitive tribes in say Papa New Guinea that have almost no knowledge of our civilization?"
I'm willing to sit on the fence a while longer on this one.
A quick point on an infinite universe, what your physics professor thinks.
An infinite universe would have to exist in every direction forever
The notion that the universe is infinate cannot be empirically justified in any way. It is a metaphysical proposition. This idea has been refuted by the majority of the scientific community, because of the fact that the universe is expanding. If the universe is expanding, the spacial dimensions themselves are expanding, thus we can say that at this very moment in time, the universe is finite.
An infinite universe would have to exist in every direction forever
The notion that the universe is infinate cannot be empirically justified in any way. It is a metaphysical proposition. This idea has been refuted by the majority of the scientific community, because of the fact that the universe is expanding. If the universe is expanding, the spacial dimensions themselves are expanding, thus we can say that at this very moment in time, the universe is finite.
I will need some time, but I can prove to you that an objective Moral truth does exist.
Fair enough.
No, it's not really too logical. First off, my idea of free will is doing whatever I want whenever I want. I can commit suicide right now, I have this power, why does it matter that God knows whether or not I will commit suicide?
Do you really think it is abuse to teach your children not to lie, steal, cheat, be jealous, curse etc..
If you taught your son these things and threatened to punish him if he did otherwise, are you being abusive? No, you are merely being a parent. This could very well what God is being through the Bible.
If you taught your son these things and threatened to punish him if he did otherwise, are you being abusive? No, you are merely being a parent. This could very well what God is being through the Bible.
Is it abusive to tell kids that if they don't obey god's irrational and jealous rules they will burn in hell? Yes. Is it abusive to tell man that the more he may doubt his faith and the more he must still insist on sticking to it over rational inquiry? Yes. Is it abusive to enforce moral rules that hurt noone just because some old man in a priest's gambit is repressing his own sexuality? Yes. Is it abusive to incite guilt in people, thereby destroying their sense of self esteem and self worth? Yes. Is it abusive to insist that everything good man may ever do in his lifetime he will never have the credit for it? Yes. Is it abusive to demand that man shall believe and obey a god that can never be perceived or understood, negating man's ability to reason? Yes, it's intellectually corrosive. Is it abusive to make man follow arbitrary moral rules that have no basis in man's own well being or happiness, simply to avoid punishment? Yes, in the sense that it perverts what morality actually is. Is it abusive to cast doubt on any act of altruism or kindness by stigmatizing every human action to be nothing more than obeying orders? Yes.
Finally, is it fraud of the highest order to mask all this abuse under the cloak of moral righteousness? Yes.
The "better" you are as a believer, the more of religious doctrine you actually believe, the more it poisons your mind and your psychological well being. The more you believe the more you convince yourself that you are nothing but a worthless sinner who isn't capable of anything and doesn't deserve credit for anything. In other words, the perfect slave.
And you don't have to look very far to notice this. Have you ever met a really, really religious person? They dedicate almost their whole lives to this fantasy, giving up possibility of self realization and achievement.
Finally, is it fraud of the highest order to mask all this abuse under the cloak of moral righteousness? Yes.
The "better" you are as a believer, the more of religious doctrine you actually believe, the more it poisons your mind and your psychological well being. The more you believe the more you convince yourself that you are nothing but a worthless sinner who isn't capable of anything and doesn't deserve credit for anything. In other words, the perfect slave.
And you don't have to look very far to notice this. Have you ever met a really, really religious person? They dedicate almost their whole lives to this fantasy, giving up possibility of self realization and achievement.
What I find amazing here is this. How many people can you name have confessed that Christianity has destroyed their lives and has transformed them into depressed, hostile, and angry human beings?
Now how many poeple can you name have confessed that Christianity gave meaning, love, virtue, hope, and happiness to their lives and has transformed them into loving human beings?
The fact of the matter is simple, Christianity promotes beautiful values in life such as forgiveness, love, mercy, kindness etc.. Here's what we as humans have to accept, being overly diplomatic is actually more harmful than helpful.
Imagine the Bible saying this," Okay, look, you can be good and bad, but I would prefer you to be good, so do me a favour and please be a good person". Remember that God is addressing the entire world here, and a universal human attribute is response to certainty and assertiveness far more than leniancy and softness.
If a couple had a kid and raised their son based on striict moral values and beliefs and also resorted to old fashioned punishment and supreme discipline.
Now imagine that same couple had a kid and raised him with utmost leniancy, letting him pee on the neighbourse lawn, hit girls, curse at people etc...Sure they may be giving him his freedom and democracy, and even his human rights but what are the consequences ultimately?
Which approach do you think will produce a well-mannered and respected man in society?
You see God as this harsh and hateful human being, but really many parents act this way towards their own children, this does not mean that God is unjust and hateful.
Now how many poeple can you name have confessed that Christianity gave meaning, love, virtue, hope, and happiness to their lives and has transformed them into loving human beings?
The fact of the matter is simple, Christianity promotes beautiful values in life such as forgiveness, love, mercy, kindness etc.. Here's what we as humans have to accept, being overly diplomatic is actually more harmful than helpful.
Imagine the Bible saying this," Okay, look, you can be good and bad, but I would prefer you to be good, so do me a favour and please be a good person". Remember that God is addressing the entire world here, and a universal human attribute is response to certainty and assertiveness far more than leniancy and softness.
If a couple had a kid and raised their son based on striict moral values and beliefs and also resorted to old fashioned punishment and supreme discipline.
Now imagine that same couple had a kid and raised him with utmost leniancy, letting him pee on the neighbourse lawn, hit girls, curse at people etc...Sure they may be giving him his freedom and democracy, and even his human rights but what are the consequences ultimately?
Which approach do you think will produce a well-mannered and respected man in society?
You see God as this harsh and hateful human being, but really many parents act this way towards their own children, this does not mean that God is unjust and hateful.
People who take drugs usually don't complain about the drugs while they're taking them, do they? Quite the opposite, they say what a fantastic ride it is.
I would submit, however, that none of those people really took it seriously in the sense that I described. A little christianity isn't particularly harmful, otherwise the effects upon society would be very noticeable. But that is just the corollary, people don't really believe all that stuff, because it's irrational.
And irrational beliefs are harmful. So if you believe the good ones (Jesus loves me) and ignore the harmful ones (I'm under constant surveillance, not even my thoughts are free), then it's a bit like kids who have an imaginary friend. It's a fantasy, but it's a positive one.
Yes, using the threat of force. Or more importantly, guilt. Do this or else. This is the essence of Christianity.
My biggest criticism isn't the threat of force, it's the deception, and the absurd logic that is supposed to justify it. Be good, or else you're going to hell. But god loves you, he would never do anything to hurt you. But he will definitely send you to hell.
And do you know how I know men invented this? Because when guys like Stalin ruled they were saying the exactly same things. Stalin is the father of our nation, he is a comrade, he loves you. But he will definitely send you to Siberia if someone overhears you criticizing the government.
If so, let's just tell it like it is. You're a slave to god, and he wants absolute obedience. Why do you think that message wouldn't sell? Why, because telling the truth is less useful for a dictator than deception.
Are you kidding? Have you seen that graph that says "number of people killed in the bible, god vs the devil"? Do you have any idea of the blind carnage that happens in the bible? Only a psychopath could find those tales heartwarming. And this is supposed to be the book to set the moral standard?
I would submit, however, that none of those people really took it seriously in the sense that I described. A little christianity isn't particularly harmful, otherwise the effects upon society would be very noticeable. But that is just the corollary, people don't really believe all that stuff, because it's irrational.
And irrational beliefs are harmful. So if you believe the good ones (Jesus loves me) and ignore the harmful ones (I'm under constant surveillance, not even my thoughts are free), then it's a bit like kids who have an imaginary friend. It's a fantasy, but it's a positive one.
Yes, using the threat of force. Or more importantly, guilt. Do this or else. This is the essence of Christianity.
My biggest criticism isn't the threat of force, it's the deception, and the absurd logic that is supposed to justify it. Be good, or else you're going to hell. But god loves you, he would never do anything to hurt you. But he will definitely send you to hell.
And do you know how I know men invented this? Because when guys like Stalin ruled they were saying the exactly same things. Stalin is the father of our nation, he is a comrade, he loves you. But he will definitely send you to Siberia if someone overhears you criticizing the government.
If so, let's just tell it like it is. You're a slave to god, and he wants absolute obedience. Why do you think that message wouldn't sell? Why, because telling the truth is less useful for a dictator than deception.
Are you kidding? Have you seen that graph that says "number of people killed in the bible, god vs the devil"? Do you have any idea of the blind carnage that happens in the bible? Only a psychopath could find those tales heartwarming. And this is supposed to be the book to set the moral standard?