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

So Easy To Be An Atheist!

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by crepuscule View Post
    An objective law (such as your God’s moral law) can not change, true; what can change is your interpretation of that law.
    One can change one's view as he studies the texts more in depth, and more often than not the texts and meaning are plain and not open to "interpretation." Any more than what you just wrote is open to interpretation.

    For example: if a train moves at 60 km/h and a person walks forward in that train’s aisle with 5 km/h, then the speed of that person (relative to an outside observer) was once thought to be objectively 65 km/h; simply the sum of those speeds. But since Einstein we now calculate that speed to be objectively slightly less than 65 km/h. Neither the objective speed nor the objective law describing said speed has changed: it’s our interpretation/formulation of that law that has.

    So a moral objectivist may think today a given act is morally wrong, but s/he could be of a different opinion tomorrow, even though on both days s/he believes the moral judgment of that act to be objectively true.
    I'm not sure what you are getting at this seems to describe a moral relativist. But let me give an example. Growing up in the 50s and 60s sex outside of marriage was generally frowned on, it wasn't just a religious thing but a cultural thing. By my middle teens I changed my belief on this and was rather promiscuous. I was not religious, and I saw no logical reason to deny my desires. The same with smoking weed and such. And I could just as easily have change my beliefs back. Now as a Christian I see both excesses as morally wrong, and I know Scripture well enough to know that these behaviors are sin, and the only way I could go back is to change my worldview, which is not likely to happen.
    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


    • #47
      Originally posted by Tassman View Post
      Interesting how god's moral laws seem to coincide with the social prejudices of the day.
      That just does not make sense, what prejudices of the day?
      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


      • #48
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        And authority is what it all comes down to for you, because you're a fascist authoritarian who holds a "might makes right" view of morality that has been mocked for thousands of years, but you make a continued fool of yourself on this forum parading it around constantly. Disgusting.
        How does that rant change anything I said? It is obvious that the law of God would have an inherent governing authority that a moral theory like utilitarianism just doesn't have. And yes God's immutable moral character and omniscience does define right. What else would - our morally fickle, ignorant natures?
        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


        • #49
          Originally posted by seer View Post
          Except I am comparing these to the law of God, which can not be changed or evaded no matter what the individual does or doesn't do. In principle neither moral objectivism or moral relativism have inherent moral authority. No so with the law of God.
          There is no evidence for that at all. What you have is a book of obsolete morals. The explanation given for its construction is entirely fictional. There is no such thing as God’s law because there is no God. What you do have are men’s laws attributed to God, who turns out to be a man made myth. This is why we allow change, because it is us, not God who makes the decisions.
          “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
          “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
          “not all there” - you know who you are

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
            There is no evidence for that at all. What you have is a book of obsolete morals. The explanation given for its construction is entirely fictional. There is no such thing as God’s law because there is no God. What you do have are men’s laws attributed to God, who turns out to be a man made myth. This is why we allow change, because it is us, not God who makes the decisions.
            Of course FF, you must be right! Why didn't I see it before...
            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


            • #51
              Originally posted by seer View Post
              Of course FF, you must be right! Why didn't I see it before...
              Because it pleases you to ‘see’ something else.
              “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
              “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
              “not all there” - you know who you are

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by seer View Post
                Of course FF, you must be right! Why didn't I see it before...
                Must be the blinding scales of scripture.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                  Because it pleases you to ‘see’ something else.
                  So?
                  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


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by seer View Post
                    So?
                    So, if being atheist was easy, you would be atheist too.
                    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                    “not all there” - you know who you are

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by seer View Post
                      One can change one's view as he studies the texts more in depth, and more often than not the texts and meaning are plain and not open to "interpretation." Any more than what you just wrote is open to interpretation.
                      That doesn't explain the dozens (at least) of church denominations. Of course you don't agree with their interpretations, but that's beside the point.

                      I'm not sure what you are getting at this seems to describe a moral relativist.
                      It does not; it's not about moralism but about physics; and the laws of physics are objective, not subjective.

                      But let me give an example. Growing up in the 50s and 60s sex outside of marriage was generally frowned on, it wasn't just a religious thing but a cultural thing. By my middle teens I changed my belief on this and was rather promiscuous. I was not religious, and I saw no logical reason to deny my desires. The same with smoking weed and such. And I could just as easily have change my beliefs back. Now as a Christian I see both excesses as morally wrong, and I know Scripture well enough to know that these behaviors are sin, and the only way I could go back is to change my worldview, which is not likely to happen.
                      But it could happen, right? Each day, moral objectivists such as Christians change their worldview and become atheists or muslims or whatever. That necessarily implies a change of belief in at least some laws they up to then believed to be objective and unchangeable.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by crepuscule View Post
                        That doesn't explain the dozens (at least) of church denominations. Of course you don't agree with their interpretations, but that's beside the point.
                        I said most things, and most the moral imperatives in the New Testament are quite clear.

                        It does not; it's not about moralism but about physics; and the laws of physics are objective, not subjective.
                        Ok, then why bring it in?

                        But it could happen, right? Each day, moral objectivists such as Christians change their worldview and become atheists or muslims or whatever. That necessarily implies a change of belief in at least some laws they up to then believed to be objective and unchangeable.
                        Correct, but changing a worldview is much more difficult than me (as an agnostic back then) deciding that promiscuity was not immoral. So the case of the theist and non-theists are not analogous. The believer has a moral an objective standard that he attempts to live up to, the atheist only has whatever he decides is right. And if what he thinks is right conflicts with his present desire for whatever, why not just change what he believes is right thereby removing the conflict? It would be perfectly rational do do so.
                        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


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                          There is no evidence for that at all. What you have is a book of obsolete morals. The explanation given for its construction is entirely fictional. There is no such thing as God’s law because there is no God. What you do have are men’s laws attributed to God, who turns out to be a man made myth. This is why we allow change, because it is us, not God who makes the decisions.
                          Why is your designation not "atheist" instead of "unspecified". You are clear here that you believe God does not exist.

                          Please change your designation.


                          Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by seer View Post
                            It is obvious that the law of God would have an inherent governing authority
                            What? By "authority" do you just mean "power to punish"? Or is there something else you mean by that word?

                            In my vocabulary, "authority" is something voluntarily granted to a person by society (e.g. democratically elected politicians have authority to govern), if it not granted voluntarily it is merely "power" / "dictatorship" not "authority". So the phrase "inherent authority" is oxymoronic to me - you can't have inherent authority.

                            a moral theory like utilitarianism just doesn't have.
                            If what you mean is, "in atheism there isn't a deity armed with a carrot and stick to "back up" the morality system with rewards and punishments for obedience/disobedience" then I agree. Is that all you're trying to say in this thread? If so, can you perhaps elaborate as to why you see that concept as important?

                            And yes God's immutable moral character and omniscience does define right.
                            Yawn. I see zero reason whatsoever to accept this claim on your part as true. It's about as plausible and uninteresting as saying my cat defines right and wrong. If you want to say "I seer, personally follow God's rules as my definition of right and wrong", sure. And I regard that roughly the same way I would regard "I seer, personally flip a coin before taking an action to decide what is right and wrong".

                            What else would - our morally fickle, ignorant natures?
                            Reality would. By learning about the world through observation and experience, and by empirical study and scientific research, we can observe and measure how our actions affect ourselves and others in society. We can come to understand how different actions affect people's freedom, happiness, well-being etc.
                            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                              There is no such thing as God’s law because there is no God.
                              Be a peach and change your 'faith' designation to atheist, eh? This post rather puts the lie to 'unspecified'.
                              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                              sigpic
                              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                                This post rather puts the lie to 'unspecified'.
                                Um, "unspecified" is tautologically true. He is literally not specifying it. It's a somewhat amusing self-referential truth.
                                "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                                "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                                "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                230 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                428 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                305 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,518 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X