Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The flaws of NT-based morality

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    You're creating a strawman, but I'm not sure if it's deliberate or if it's unintentional simply because you don't understand this topic as well as you think you do.

    One way of thinking about is to look at the nature of a circle. A circle, by its nature, is round, and by its nature is the definition of roundness. We don't look at a circle and declare that it's round based on some external standard of roundness. Rather, a circle is, in and of itself, the standard of roundness, and we could not know the concept of roundness apart from a circle. This is not circular reasoning. Well, you know what I mean.

    Substitute "circle" and "roundness" with "God" and "goodness" and maybe you'll begin to understand.
    Typically you miss the point with your smug condescension. If God’s moral nature is based upon himself it is circular, i.e. why is something “good”, it is good because God said it is. Hence a circular argument! Conversely, If God’s moral nature is based on something different he is not the source of moral values.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by seer View Post
      Right, and again what you view as evil is still relative and meaningless. You are making my case.
      What we attribute to a deity is merely a projection of human values. This explains why the Tribal god of the Moses condoned rape and murder of neighbouring tribes. This is tribal behaviour which Christians find unacceptable today. Same God, changing moral values...so for God “evil is relative and meaningless”.

      So you admit that you can not demonstrate that God is a myth - thank you.
      So you admit that you cannot demonstrate that God is not a myth – thank you.

      Nonsense Tass, in your world our survival is of no more consequence than the survival of past extinct species - which is zero.
      ‘Survival” is demonstrably the primary instinct of all living creatures? Some deluded humans even expect to survive eternally, which is indicative of the strength of the survival instinct.
      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

      Comment


      • You're so clueless, I wonder if you leave notes around your house reminding yourself to breath.

        Originally posted by Tassmoron View Post
        If God’s moral nature is based upon
        I'm going to stop you right there, because I never said or implied that God's nature was based on anything. Did you really not understand the circle analogy?

        Originally posted by Tassmoron View Post
        i.e. why is something “good”, it is good because God said it is.
        Yeah, I never said that, either. You're referring to the Euthyphro dilemma which I've already refuted.

        Don't forget to breath...
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          Substitute "circle" and "roundness" with "God" and "goodness" and maybe you'll begin to understand.
          Substitute "circle" and "roundness" with "Allah" and "goodness" and maybe you'll begin to understand why I point to the fact that what you are pointing to could lead to all kinds of evil and absurd consequences and it is and remains faith based. Because that is the line that extremist muslims follow. Starting to understand?

          And you could basically substitute it with anything including "Thor", "Mao" or whatever. And since your line of "reasoning" cuts of the part about justification, there is nothing to point to whithin those systems that would contradict the idea that "Allah", "Thor" or "Mao" was the absolute standard.

          By the way I have never seen a perfect circle. And yet I know what the idea about the perfect circle is and how it would be defined, so I am not bying into the idea that we do not determine it on external standard on roundness but on the actual circles we see.
          "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            I'm going to stop you right there, because I never said or implied that God's nature was based on anything. Did you really not understand the circle analogy?
            The analogy does not work. Sorry to say. See my post about it above.
            "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Charles View Post
              The analogy does not work. Sorry to say. See my post about it above.
              And still Charles we all wait for you, with bated breath, to produce a definition of goodness that doesn't beg the question!
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • Originally posted by seer View Post
                And still Charles we all wait for you, with bated breath, to produce a definition of goodness that doesn't beg the question!
                I think you have misunderstood quite many points regarding this, seer. My criticism of MM is both that his analogy does not work because it is a simplification of our understanding and that it could be used to justify just about anything. My criticism of your line of reasoning is that it is circular. You have a subjective preference for a circular position that I don't share. My position is founded on something rather different as pointed out again and again in this thread: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...tion-of-ethics

                As I have also often pointed out simple definitions, simple answers to difficult questions rather often will not work. So, perhaps, a second reading will make you see the points?
                "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Charles View Post
                  I think you have misunderstood quite many points regarding this, seer. My criticism of MM is both that his analogy does not work because it is a simplification of our understanding and that it could be used to justify just about anything. My criticism of your line of reasoning is that it is circular. You have a subjective preference for a circular position that I don't share. My position is founded on something rather different as pointed out again and again in this thread: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...tion-of-ethics

                  As I have also often pointed out simple definitions, simple answers to difficult questions rather often will not work. So, perhaps, a second reading will make you see the points?
                  Charles nothing you wrote or presented offered a non-circular definition of goodness or a non-question begging source for ethics. So you are hypocritical, demanding from us what you can not offer yourself. Suggesting that that is a flaw in our reasoning when you can not meet the same standard.
                  Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Charles View Post
                    Substitute "circle" and "roundness" with "Allah" and "goodness" and maybe you'll begin to understand why I point to the fact that what you are pointing to could lead to all kinds of evil and absurd consequences and it is and remains faith based. Because that is the line that extremist muslims follow. Starting to understand?

                    And you could basically substitute it with anything including "Thor", "Mao" or whatever. And since your line of "reasoning" cuts of the part about justification, there is nothing to point to whithin those systems that would contradict the idea that "Allah", "Thor" or "Mao" was the absolute standard.

                    By the way I have never seen a perfect circle. And yet I know what the idea about the perfect circle is and how it would be defined, so I am not bying into the idea that we do not determine it on external standard on roundness but on the actual circles we see.
                    Yeah, you're jumping way ahead of yourself. as I wrote earlier:

                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    Look, I know you reject theism. Fine, but that's not the point of this debate. The point is, is theism internally consistent, and, assuming it's true, can it account for an "ought"? The answers, of course, are yes, and yes. It really is OK for you to say, "I understand your position even if I fundamentally disagree with it." Nobody will expect you to resign from the "Atheist Kool Kids Klub". Trust me.

                    Of course the next step of the debate is, given that theism is internally consistent, do we have any reason to think it's true? But let's finish with the first step before we take another. OK?
                    Debating about which version of theism is true is step three in this discussion. You haven't even gotten past step one. You've sniffed around the edges of conceding it, but you haven't fully committed.
                    Last edited by Mountain Man; 09-12-2017, 07:57 AM.
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment

                    Related Threads

                    Collapse

                    Topics Statistics Last Post
                    Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                    14 responses
                    42 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post tabibito  
                    Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                    21 responses
                    129 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                    Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                    78 responses
                    411 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post tabibito  
                    Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                    45 responses
                    303 views
                    1 like
                    Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                    Working...
                    X