|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 09:34:52 [Permalink]
|
Simon:
Unless the Bible can be objectively interpreted into a demonstrably correct version, it is useless as a moral guide, as people can make up -as I argue they do- their own interpretation to suit their need. |
Interestingly, no original version of the bible exists today. All that exists of the new testament was cobbled together over a 300 year period after Christ and is full of contradiction. Biblical scholars are in agreement on that, whether they are believers or not. So how can anyone really know for sure what God wants when even the gospels do not agree with each other? That, I think, is why there are so many Christian denominations. The point is, Christians, like atheists, must chose for themselves what is moral. They must look at the book and decide which part they want to use as a guide, at which point the choice is as subjective as how any atheist arrives at his morality.
The only difference is that they can find justification somewhere for how they choose in some verse or other in the bible. But clearly, not all Christians use the same verses to justify whatever it is that they decide is moral. Like 88, that places them in the position of sometimes having to apologies for the behavior of fellow Christians, who they think are getting it wrong, while at the same time criticizing atheists for lacking a foundation from which to derive their morality from.
The good news is that we tend to agree on many of the most important points, because living in a civilized society demands it of us. Morality is very likely a survival mechanism that grew out of our being a social animal.
One thing I find interesting is that even while admitting that atheists mostly behave themselves, as Christians mostly do, those of faith see the bible as keeping themselves from going apeshit. As though without it, they will all turn into crazed killers or something. In that way, they seem to take a much dimmer view of humanity than those of us who lack their brand of faith.
History has shown us that Christians, and other people of faith have acted badly, and atheists have acted badly. And for the same reason. Power. But most of us don't act badly. Most of us apply some form of the golden rule, much of which has been codified into law, because whether being a person of faith, or not, it works...
Several edits... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
 Posted - 04/06/2009 : 10:56:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Interestingly, no original version of the bible exists today. All that exists of the new testament was cobbled together over a 300 year period after Christ and is full of contradiction. Biblical scholars are in agreement on that, whether they are believers or not. |
That is very true. But, most Christians, especially literalism by-pass the problem, because they believe as an act of faith the that Bible was the divinely inspired, inherent word of God. That, regardless of all the mangled copies that exist for the earliest version, the precise version has been directed/ selected by God himself.
There are no evidences for that, obviously, but, as an act of faith, it is not really more difficult to believe than people rising from the dead or multiplying breads...
| So how can anyone really know for sure what God wants when even the gospels do not agree with each other? That, I think, is why there are so many Christian denominations. |
Well, as I mentioned, many Christians believe the Bible to be magically (I use the term interchangeably with miraculously, because it is what it boils down to) exempt from errors.
And, in fact, most Christian sects do use the same Bible, as most of the schism happened after the adoption of the "one true Bible".
Some currents like the Jehovah's witnesses do use their own translation, but they translated the same text as the ones contained in the King James Bible.
So, really, the divergences are entirely due to the interpretation of the Bible rather than in differences as to what constitute the Bible. Which illustrate how unclear and subjective the texts are.
|
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
byhisgrace88
Formerly "creation88"
USA
166 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 11:55:35 [Permalink]
|
(Please briefly include the source of human knowledge on this correct position for each topic, since many of us won't know; e.g. what verse in the New Testament outlines the position, or what biblical teaching lays the groundwork upon which the position rests?)
1) Divorce
2) Polygamy
3) Slavery
4) Capital punishment (death penalty) |
I will speak to each of these, but among Christians, I am one of the last people to ask this. I believe in right and wrong but I am one of the most "grace centered" Christians you will ever meet. Among Christians, I am nearly a rebel for the things I will admit that I do not think are sins. Polygamy is an interesting one, because while I hate the idea it is an example of something that everyone says is wrong, but I see very little basis to say that the bible ever condemns it. It was clearly okay in the OT, and is only spoken against in the NT saying that pastors should be a "man of one woman". I hate polygamy, but I'm not sure Christians know why they hate it. They just do.
Divorce is more clear cut. In Luke 16:18 Jesus says; "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery"
As far as slavery goes, the Bible definitely does not condone slavery as so many say. It does apply its principles to those who would undoubtedly be in slavery in the time and culture they were in. The idea's given in the bible speak against by implication. "Love your neighbor as yourself."
Capital punishment is a government issue. "Give to Ceaser what is Ceaser". Capital punishment is clearly not condemned, and our government allows it, so I don't have a problem with it. I am deeply saddened by Christians at times seeming to take pleasure in it. Life is valuable, and to make the death penalty something we are known making an issue we push is sick and embarrassing. |
Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desire, not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.-- C.S. Lewis |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 12:27:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by byhisgrace88
As far as slavery goes, the Bible definitely does not condone slavery as so many say. It does apply its principles to those who would undoubtedly be in slavery in the time and culture they were in. The idea's given in the bible speak against by implication. "Love your neighbor as yourself." |
But Jesus himself said (in Luke 12:47)
| And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. |
In Matthew 10:24, he says:
A student is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. |
Ephesians 6 (5 to 9) says:
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart.
Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men,
because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.
And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him. |
Timothy 6:
All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered.
Those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers. Instead, they are to serve them even better, because those who benefit from their service are believers, and dear to them. These are the things you are to teach and urge on them. |
Titus 2 (9 and 10) mentions:
| Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive. |
Finally, Peter 2:18 reads:
| Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. |
.
And that's the New Testament alone, so, it seems to me that you are framing your reading within what is socially acceptable. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 13:31:32 [Permalink]
|
| All of what you posted above is irrelevant to what I was saying. The charge made by atheists is that Christians have "blind faith" and that you are "rational" by the very nature of your atheism, and science. |
Javier's showing his ignorance again...rationality comes about from a desire to check things out. Atheism and trust in science are the results of rationality, not the basis of it.
Dammit, one would think that someone who likes to insult other's intelligence so much as he does, would not be so stupid.
| Since you are "rational" and you don't have "blind faith" is it "rational" for you to accept with no evidence that the pre big bang universe simply was self existent? |
Idiot...that's why I gave him links so he can read about it...besides, doesn't he know about the first law of thermodynamics? Matter and energy are interchangeable and cannot be created or destroyed?
Since he reads this, he's got no excuse for his ignorance unless, as he admits later on, he doesn't want to learn.
| And if it is, then why is it rational for you to have "blind faith" and not for Christians to have it? |
It's not "blind faith", there's actual evidence for the big bang. As for what was before it, scientists dont' know, but unlike religous people who are content to be ignorant, they're studying it.
| If I wanted to learn about the big bang, I certainly wouldn't talk to you about it. |
That's why I gave this guy links. So he can read what scientists have to say about it. At least he admits that he doesn't want to learn...though that has been obvious.
| If I wanted to learn about anything, I wouldn't go to you for teaching.I'm only pointing out an inconsistency in your argument. |
| Also, if you'd like to be treated well then respond well. You've already suffered long enough in purgatory thus your punishment for your temporal sins is satisfied. |
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 04/06/2009 13:36:01 |
|
|
|
WarfRat
New Member
49 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 14:36:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Originally posted by Machi4velli
People obviously need to be threatened with eternal torture to have morals.
|
I really don't think that's true of most people. It works for me, though.
|
So, governments threatens and coerces populations with fines, imprisonment, or death to impose a societal order of right and wrong.
|
"I believe...that one benefits the workers...so much more by forcing through reforms which alleviate and strengthen their position, than by saying that only a revolution can help them." |
| Edited by - WarfRat on 04/06/2009 14:42:45 |
|
|
|
WarfRat
New Member
49 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 14:37:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by WarfRat
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Originally posted by Machi4velli
People obviously need to be threatened with eternal torture to have morals.
|
I really don't think that's true of most people. It works for me, though.
|
So what's the big deal. Governments threatens and coerces populations fines, imprisonment, or death to impose a societal order of right and wrong.
|
Oops wrong button..... sorry. |
"I believe...that one benefits the workers...so much more by forcing through reforms which alleviate and strengthen their position, than by saying that only a revolution can help them." |
| Edited by - WarfRat on 04/06/2009 14:43:22 |
|
|
|
byhisgrace88
Formerly "creation88"
USA
166 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 15:39:36 [Permalink]
|
Simon, the question is not whether the Bible mentions it. The question is whether it condones it.
| And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. |
This was spoken in a parable and is speaking about being ready for the return of Christ. Using slavery as an illustration does not condone slavery.
| A student is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. |
This was just a fact. This is like saying that a lay worker is not above his boss. It does not speak to them being less in God's eyes. As you will see in the next verse....
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart.
Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men,
because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.
And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him. |
This one is interesting on many levels. Not only does it say that there is no favoritism with God, acknowledging that slavery shows favoritism to some over others, but it also describes why slaves should obey their masters. It's because we are called to do everything (including this) as if for the Lord and not men. It says here that God's eternal rewards are given to the slave and the free. This verse shows God's love for the slave, not His condoning of it.
All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered.
Those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers. Instead, they are to serve them even better, because those who benefit from their service are believers, and dear to them. These are the things you are to teach and urge on them. |
| Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive. |
| Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. |
Each of these three explain why slaves should show respect to their masters even when it is not deserved. Because it would be noticed, and would be a good witness to the effects of the grace of God. If slaves were respectful, and didn't talk back, or steal in spite of the unfair cards they were dealt, people would wonder why they were different.
None of these verses even remotely condone slavery in any way. You will say that I came up with some lame excuse or justification for them. This is not true. When looked at fairly and honestly, they do nothing but speak to the situation, and in no way condone, or encourage slavery.
|
Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desire, not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.-- C.S. Lewis |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 18:42:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by byhisgrace88
You will say that I came up with some lame excuse or justification for them. This is not true. When looked at fairly and honestly, they do nothing but speak to the situation, and in no way condone, or encourage slavery. |
The justification you use is indeed lame: the re-definition of a word to ease your conscience.Condone:
To overlook, forgive, or disregard (an offense) without protest or censure. "Condone" does not mean "encourage." If God doesn't say "slavery is bad," and doesn't punish slaveholders, then yes, He is indeed condoning it.
Besides, God did once unambiguously condone slavery (no need for argumentum ad Webster's), by telling the Israelites that it was okay to beat their slaves, so long as they didn't kill them, and told them that they should take only foreigners as slaves. God may have changed His mind about it, but that doesn't erase His previous attitude towards the practice. The fact that He once said, "it's perfectly fine," and then later says nothing about the acceptibility of the institution (and certainly doesn't condemn it) speaks volumes.
It's like a father who's a farmer who teaches his son the proper way to beat horses, and then a few years later simply looks the other way while his son continues to beat horses. Saying that the father doesn't condone the practice is ludicrous.
As ludicrous as saying that God doesn't condone slavery.
That is the "fair and honest" assessment. Saying (as you did) that the NT describes slavery without judging it is exactly what the word "condoning" means. To state that it is not (as you did) is to deny the plain English meaning of the word.
And by doing all that, you are condoning the Bible's condoning of slavery. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 20:04:49 [Permalink]
|
Pretty much, the Bible take slavery as a fact of life, one that is natural and not a shameful crime that should be done away with, and that's condoning.
The NT also go to some length to explain how the slaves should be obedient to their masters; you argue that it does so for propaganda purposes but
a) Whatever you use slavery for, you are still using slavery.
b) It is very conjectural, the Bible does not give any hints of such final objective. To me, it seems more like people should accept their lot in life and focus on the next one, and that its true of slaves too. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Zebra
Skeptic Friend
USA
354 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 20:26:09 [Permalink]
|
Thank you for your response to my question(s).
Originally posted by byhisgrace88
... Polygamy is an interesting one, because while I hate the idea it is an example of something that everyone says is wrong, but I see very little basis to say that the bible ever condemns it. It was clearly okay in the OT, and is only spoken against in the NT saying that pastors should be a "man of one woman". I hate polygamy, but I'm not sure Christians know why they hate it. They just do. |
So, to summarize:
You hate polygamy.
Christians in general hate polygamy.
"Everyone" says it's wrong
....yet there's "very little" basis to say that the bible ever condemns it. Really, there's no basis other than one line that says that deacons (I believe that's closest to the original Greek word) are to have "but one wife".
So, then, from what source does the moral judgment come from, by which you and other Christians, and "everyone" (well, not everyone) decides that polygamy is wrong?
| Divorce is more clear cut. In Luke 16:18 Jesus says; "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery" |
Agreed. So, why, then, do so many non-Catholic denominations act like divorce is not "wrong"? Why do so many Christians get divorced, & remarry?
| As far as slavery goes, the Bible definitely does not condone slavery as so many say. It does apply its principles to those who would undoubtedly be in slavery in the time and culture they were in. The idea's given in the bible speak against by implication. "Love your neighbor as yourself." |
Why has the view by devoutly religious people, Christians, of what's "right" & what's "wrong" changed over the centuries, if morality is from God and is relayed to people through the Bible? Slavery used to be OK in the U.S. Now, it's clearly an abomination. Did God change? Did God decide humans in this part of the world were ready for a change, & without changing any words in the Bible did he manage to convey his new expectation of morality in regards to slavery to a bunch of people? Or, is slavery still OK, and we have gone off of God's moral path by stopping the practice?
| Capital punishment is a government issue. "Give to Ceaser what is Ceaser". Capital punishment is clearly not condemned, and our government allows it, so I don't have a problem with it. I am deeply saddened by Christians at times seeming to take pleasure in it. Life is valuable, and to make the death penalty something we are known making an issue we push is sick and embarrassing. |
Does "Love your neighbor as yourself" not apply, in the treatment of prisoners?
Who confers and carries out the death penalty? Who makes laws about punishment for crimes (in a democracy)? People do (in the U.S., mostly Christians). "Government" is not some machine; in a democracy, it reflects the will of the people and is literally carried out by the actions of the people (some of them, at least).
Besides, you're using Matthew 22:21 out of context; that quote was literally about Jesus recognizing Caesar as the man on the coin and the man to whom coin was to be paid, and (on a more prosaic note) about paying taxes to the government, & while a broader meaning can be read into it, IMO it's quiiiiiite a stretch to try to extend it to meaning that executing people is OK in a government for the people & by the people, where the executing is done by the people.
Matthew 22:15 Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words.
16 They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are.
17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"
18 But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me?
19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius,
20 and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"
21"Caesar's," they replied.
Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." |
Killing someone as an official route for getting revenge seems quite opposite to "giving to God what is God's". Why not let God take care of the sinner in His own way, in His own time?
So: It looks an awful lot like Christians have to decide what they think is moral (as a society), including sometimes deciding that what the Bible says is OK isn't what they think is OK.
Edited to add a little bit, and change the last paragraph to refer to "Christians" not all believers in any god/s. |
I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone* -Dick Cheney
*some restrictions may apply |
| Edited by - Zebra on 04/06/2009 20:34:45 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 22:50:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by WarfRat
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Originally posted by Machi4velli
People obviously need to be threatened with eternal torture to have morals.
|
I really don't think that's true of most people. It works for me, though.
|
So, governments threatens and coerces populations with fines, imprisonment, or death to impose a societal order of right and wrong.
|
Actually, I was just joking. Nothing keeps me in line.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
WarfRat
New Member
49 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2009 : 05:37:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Actually, I was just joking. Nothing keeps me in line.
|
Of that I have no doubt! |
"I believe...that one benefits the workers...so much more by forcing through reforms which alleviate and strengthen their position, than by saying that only a revolution can help them." |
|
|
|
Zebra
Skeptic Friend
USA
354 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2009 : 09:15:38 [Permalink]
|
On review of 1 Timothy, I stand corrected. It's not one line that says a [male church official] should have "only one wife", it's two lines (3:2, 3:12). First time, the Greek is "episkopon" and the second time, the Greek is "diakonoi" (pl of diakonos, I believe), so there are TWO types of male church officials who, it is advised by whomever wrote 1 Timothy & who may or may not have been experiencing direct inspiration from God, should have "only one wife."
What a relief for the rest of us!
But I'm still kinda waiting to hear from where stems the deep moral conviction among Christians* that polygamy is wrong.
(*most, not all, although the numbers of "most" are considerably reduced if you don't allow FLDS believers to be called "Christian").
Me, not having an absolute sense of morality emanating directly from God to me, think that polygamy isn't wrong, if practiced among consenting adults with consideration & fairness for all, but recognize that considering an arrangement of more than 2 people to be "marriage" would require a societal reconsideration of the practical considerations around marriage: what rights, what responsibilities, what assumed duration? The members of such a group relationship might need to be able to review & change their relationship(s) periodically without the requirement for costly legal action to rearrange & regroup.
But that's just me, an immoral (amoral?) atheist who had to consider for myself what I thought about polygamy, and why. |
I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone* -Dick Cheney
*some restrictions may apply |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2009 : 13:01:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by byhisgrace88
I'm not trying to dismiss you or your post, I just don't have the time to go step by step through a video like that. The only thing I will comment on is that his definition of morality is a human definition of morality, therefore invalidating anything said thereafter. He says that we are wrong about theism defining morality because morality is A, B or C. To which I would say again, there is no basis to be able to start on that definition.
|
There is a book I really think you should read.
It's called "The Science of Good and Evil" by Michael Shermer, and is a kind of scientific approach to morality and ethics.
But, if you dogmatically insist that the basis for morality is God, end of story, then we will never find common ground.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
From Javier, the xian concept of "morality"
