Origin of God's Morality.

[Davian]

Why does every one need a dictionary nowdays....?

That would be misrepresenting what I asked.

So, why do you have the words "Honesty, Integrity, Fidelity" in your sig?

 

[Davian]

I do not deny it, I am simply unconvinced.

If it has been met, can you show where? No?

Willful ignorance is a great blocking tool......

I will take that as a "no".

 

[Davian]

Step up to the plate with some criteria, and examples both positive and negative, and I will let you know.

How is that list of testable criteria coming along? Do you have anything yet? No?

Always questions.......never answers....

Always claims, and never substantiation.

I gather that your list is not doing well.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Huh, I always thought the Big Bang Theory was accepted by most cosmologists as opposed to Steady State or some of the more recent (and unsupportable) hypothoses proposed. Rapid expansion from a singularity seems to explain most observable events in the universe....but this really should be discussed on a different forum, not apolgetics....

Big bang is a model is a model that starts after T = 0.

It described the expansion of the universe etc, not the origins of it.

 

[DogmaHunter]

They STILL kill equal numbers, just not the percentage you quote.

Last time I checked, ebola, zika, etc didn't kill 100 million people.

Go ask those Africans who deal with ebola constantly, go ask those who work with AIDS, go ask those who combat malaria.

These are third world countries. Obviously, they don't have the same level of "comfort" as us in the first world. Nevertheless, they still do better then a couple centuries ago, where pretty much the entire world lived in such a state.

Ironically also, AIDS is rampant in large by catholic clerics telling them that condoms are from the devil...........

Why is there so much more need for aid in Africa

Because those are third world countries.

, if we've solved the hunger issues?

I never said that we "solved" any issue. Nore did I claim that there are no problems in the world. Read what I write. I wrote that today is the best time to live in as opposed to centuries past.

I did not say that it's the best time to live in going forward. I did not say that it can't be better.

Catholics didn't do that. Protestants did.

Serious case of head in sand, it seems.

Yeah, they have a great economy, too.

I don't complain.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I might add that one of the chief scientists of that theory is a Catholic priest.

Not to mention, a cosmologist.

And when the pope tried to use his theory in some form of god-argument, that cosmologist wrote a letter to the pope with the request to stop doing so.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Whatever you believe Darwin's theory to be, I reject it,

That's a weird thing to say....

So, you will reject it, whatever (as in: no matter what) it says?

pssssst: your dishonesty is showing.

 

[DogmaHunter]

So you don't know, but it ain't God.

No, the bolded part was not part of his statement. That's just your (dishonest) addition to it.

[quote
I'd say it is God[/quote]

Why?

Everything in existence requires design

Does your god exist?

We call the designer God.

Who designed your god?

special pleading argument in 3..2..1...

 

[DogmaHunter]

Ok, if it's not random, then how would you describe it? If it's not random, what would you call it?

An intellectually honest person doesn't invent names or use loaded words for things that are unkown.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Simple Definition of law

• : the whole system or set of rules made by the government of a town, state, country, etc.

In other words, laws are systems made by someone.

 

[David4223]

MOD HAT ON

Address the content of the post and not the character of the poster.

Further violations may result in staff actions being issued.

Thank you.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Root of Jesse]

https://churchpop.com/2016/05/05/one-huge-difference-between-christianity-and-most-other-religions/

 

[Root of Jesse]

An intellectually honest person doesn't invent names or use loaded words for things that are unkown.

What name have I invented? What loaded words have I used? Please, be specific.

 

[Root of Jesse]

No, the bolded part was not part of his statement. That's just your (dishonest) addition to it.

I'd say it is God

Why?



Does your god exist?



Who designed your god?

special pleading argument in 3..2..1...

Nope. God don't need no special pleadin'. But he loves you so much that he allows you to believe what you want.

 

[Root of Jesse]

That's a weird thing to say....

So, you will reject it, whatever (as in: no matter what) it says?

pssssst: your dishonesty is showing.

What does it say that's believable and provable?

 

[Root of Jesse]

Not to mention, a cosmologist.

And when the pope tried to use his theory in some form of god-argument, that cosmologist wrote a letter to the pope with the request to stop doing so.

Got a link to that?

 

[Davian]

Got a link to that?

It is tempting to think that Lemaître’s deeply-held religious beliefs might have led him to the notion of a beginning of time. After all, the Judeo-Christian tradition had propagated a similar idea for millennia. Yet Lemaître clearly insisted that there was neither a connection nor a conflict between his religion and his science. Rather he kept them entirely separate, treating them as different, parallel interpretations of the world, both of which he believed with personal conviction. Indeed, when Pope Pius XII referred to the new theory of the origin of the universe as a scientific validation of the Catholic faith, Lemaître was rather alarmed. Delicately, for that was his way, he tried to separate the two:
“As far as I can see, such a theory remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question. It leaves the materialist free to deny any transcendental Being… For the believer, it removes any attempt at familiarity with God… It is consonant with Isaiah speaking of the hidden God, hidden even in the beginning of the universe.”

link

 

[Root of Jesse]

It is tempting to think that Lemaître’s deeply-held religious beliefs might have led him to the notion of a beginning of time. After all, the Judeo-Christian tradition had propagated a similar idea for millennia. Yet Lemaître clearly insisted that there was neither a connection nor a conflict between his religion and his science. Rather he kept them entirely separate, treating them as different, parallel interpretations of the world, both of which he believed with personal conviction. Indeed, when Pope Pius XII referred to the new theory of the origin of the universe as a scientific validation of the Catholic faith, Lemaître was rather alarmed. Delicately, for that was his way, he tried to separate the two:
“As far as I can see, such a theory remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question. It leaves the materialist free to deny any transcendental Being… For the believer, it removes any attempt at familiarity with God… It is consonant with Isaiah speaking of the hidden God, hidden even in the beginning of the universe.”

link

Yeah, I thought you'd go there, just wanted to be sure. This says nothing, other than that Lemaitre didn't see things the same way as the pope. It's his theological opinion, and it's the pope's theological opinion. The pope's opinion (for it's not dogmatic teaching), might have more weight, but neither was a theologian. And yet, what the pope says is true. People often wonder how God could declare "Let there be light" before there was a sun and stars. Yet the Big Bang describes an explosion of energy. By the way, the pope didn't say it was a scientific validation of the Catholic faith. He said it was a validation of the Biblical account of creation. Quite a big difference.

 

[bhsmte]

Yeah, I thought you'd go there, just wanted to be sure. This says nothing, other than that Lemaitre didn't see things the same way as the pope. It's his theological opinion, and it's the pope's theological opinion. The pope's opinion (for it's not dogmatic teaching), might have more weight, but neither was a theologian. And yet, what the pope says is true. People often wonder how God could declare "Let there be light" before there was a sun and stars. Yet the Big Bang describes an explosion of energy. By the way, the pope didn't say it was a scientific validation of the Catholic faith. He said it was a validation of the Biblical account of creation. Quite a big difference.

What the pope said is true based on what evidence?

 

[Root of Jesse]

What the pope said is true based on what evidence?

The description of the Big Bang is what the Creation account speaks of. There was a light before there were sun and stars. Whether you acknowledge it as 'evidence' or not.