Origin of God's Morality.

[Archaeopteryx]

From the Apologetics SoP:
As a general guide for posting topics, non-Christians who are challenging Christianity should offer arguments as to why Christian beliefs are incorrect or untrue. Similarly, threads started by Christians should contain an argument why Christian beliefs are true and correct. All thread topics must contain an identifiable argument against or for the Christian faith. All participants should endeavor to support their arguments, and their rebuttals, with evidence.

I don't believe your snarky one liners come even close to qualifying.....maybe you are the one who should go home....

Interesting how you didn't highlight the sentence that follows immediately after that. In any case, what am I supposed to present an argument against? Root of Jesse has presented nothing worth mounting a counter-argument.

 

[Davian]

Who, do you believe, actually believed in a flat earth?

While it is tempting to cite some celebrities that were recently in the news railing against the flat-Earth deniers, I could look to the ancient writers that believed in an immovable Earth.

The Old World

• Davian
• Oct 17, 2014
• 1

Are you implying that the quantity of believers is some indication of the veracity of a belief?

 

[Davian]

No, it's built on the Roman panopoly of gods in the ancient world. Just as we use Roman and Arabic numerology, still, we use the names that were given when they were given.

So there is evidence for Thor then.

 

[Davian]

I won't waste my time.

I wasn't holding my breath waiting for you to deliver on that one.

Talk is cheap.

 

[civilwarbuff]

.

 

[civilwarbuff]

I wasn't holding my breath waiting for you to deliver on that one.

Too bad....the results would have been interesting.....

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Too bad....the results would have been interesting.....

You know you haven't really contributed much to this discussion apart from drive-by comments?

 

[civilwarbuff]

You know you haven't really contributed much to this discussion apart from drive-by comments?

Sort of like looking in a mirror, wouldn't you say?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Sort of like looking in a mirror, wouldn't you say?

Sort of like you got nothing worthwhile to contribute?

 

[DogmaHunter]

That's because you don't bother yourself with religion.

And the juvenile responses continue......

You clearly aren't interested in an honest exchange.
Whatever man...

 

[DogmaHunter]

Don't hold your breath for that happening......

There's nothing on there I haven't heared before.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

There's nothing on there I haven't heared before.

They seem to be content at merely gesturing toward the arguments rather than actually discussing them.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I can only judge your apologetics abilities by what you've presented thus far, which isn't much.

As if that means anything.

You have no basis for concluding that I am insincere in my questioning. Either present a case or go home.

Other than that it's obvious to me you're here playing games, you're right, I have no basis. There are those who sincerely want to know the Truth, for them I have all the time in the world.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Having glanced through the site, which have I been referred to in the past by the way, it appears to offer the same stock standard arguments. You seem to be under the impression that the atheists here have never encountered or considered these before. Even if that were the case, it's beside the point. This is an apologetics discussion forum where Christians are invited to present and defend their case for Christianity. Unless you intend on using that source to support your arguments in some way - arguments you have yet to present - it does nothing to further the discussion in any meaningful way.

Frankly, it's not surprising that you consider these arguments as stock. They're stock because they're Truth. Truth doesn't waver, not one little bit.
I will admit that I don't know a whole lot of atheists, so I really don't know whether you, or any other atheist (few that you are) know, or have really considered, the argument. And while you're quick to accuse me of skimming, you 'glanced at' an entire website, meaning you didn't read and consider what it says.
You say Christians are invited to present and defend their case for Christianity, well, thanks, it's a Christian board. But I have presented several arguments, but as my colleague notes, it's a whole bunch of 'nope, not good enough'. Why not give reasons why an argument isn't good enough?
Let me ask you a question: Do you believe that everyone in the world is obligated to do good?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

As if that means anything.
Other than that it's obvious to me you're here playing games, you're right, I have no basis. There are those who sincerely want to know the Truth, for them I have all the time in the world.

You claim to have a case - in fact, you claim to have a case for Christianity so strong that it would be irrational to remain a nonbeliever - and yet, when pressed to present this ostensibly forceful and cogent case, you retreat behind accusations of insincerity. So whose playing games here? It's you. Either present your case or go home.

 

[Root of Jesse]

While it is tempting to cite some celebrities that were recently in the news railing against the flat-Earth deniers, I could look to the ancient writers that believed in an immovable Earth.

The Old World

• Davian
• Oct 17, 2014
• 1

Are you implying that the quantity of believers is some indication of the veracity of a belief?

An immovable earth is different from a flat earth. Everyone says that prior to Columbus, they thought that ships would fall over the edge of the horizon, yet we know that the belief (that people thought ships would fall over the edge) isn't true.
I'm not implying anything. I want to know where your accusation of flat-earth believers comes from. It suggests that that group of people is stupid...

 

[Root of Jesse]

So there is evidence for Thor then.

You say so.

 

[Root of Jesse]

And the juvenile responses continue......

You clearly aren't interested in an honest exchange.
Whatever man...

I'm completely interested in honest exchange. I have no reason to believe I'll get it from you.

 

[Root of Jesse]

They seem to be content at merely gesturing toward the arguments rather than actually discussing them.

Why put in good work and effort on something that's not going to bear any fruit? You guys certainly haven't done anything to promote your point of view...

 

[Root of Jesse]

You claim to have a case - in fact, you claim to have a case for Christianity so strong that it would be irrational to remain a nonbeliever - and yet, when pressed to present this ostensibly forceful and cogent case, you retreat behind accusations of insincerity. So whose playing games here? It's you. Either present your case or go home.

I asked you a question. Did you even bother to consider it?