• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Does morality exist without God?

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Davidjayjordan

Guest
Love is an emotion, just like any other, and is a product of chemical/electrical reactions that take place within the human brain. We can see it and measure it. It has absolutely nothing to do with a god.

No brain synapsises, do not connect automatically, but we personnally choose what connects with what. Atheists want to dispel any responsibility but all science says that people choose, synapsyeses are made not designed to connect.

If we make the right connect with stimuli to love actions then eventually we have a pattern of love and choose it more often, but nothing is a given, we must choose.

No excuses.

Love must be chosen, the Lord is love and He must be chosen.

Its rational and logical, but still it must be chosen.
 
Upvote 0
D

Davidjayjordan

Guest
Some people who say they were atheists were never really atheists. True atheists are good people. Period.

Goodness and badness is an illusion as only the Lord is good, and all powerful and LOVE.

All people are the same, with neither power to be good or be loving. They must choose love and then they can show love.

They are not love incarnate, God IS LOVE.

Any tyhat display love are displaying the Lord's love. Real love is from the Lord.

Man's love is selfish and self centered and limited etc etc etc..

No one can take pride in their actions, humility comes when you know it is from the Lord.

Its the siolution for all mankind. Not because we want it to be, but because it is.
 
Upvote 0
D

Davidjayjordan

Guest
Anyone at anytime can show love. An atheist can have love, simply by yielding to that inner voice of the Lord that says to love in that particular situation they find themselves. A religious person can reject that voice just as with an atheist. A religious person can obey his law that makes him look good in the eyes of his peers, rather than DO what the Lord of love tells him to do.

An atheists can obey that voice and just do what is necessary and what is loving, even though he says He does not believe in God.

If he or she is listening to that voice of love, then his or her defeinition of God is wrong, and he or she is believeing in God, as GOD IS LOVE. JESUS IS LOVE.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
31,203
15,670
Seattle
✟1,248,836.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
marriage was started for man and a woman


so why are we re defining marriage with civil union??

hm hm


For the same reason women are no longer considered property and not arranged when people are children.
 
Upvote 0

dcyates

Senior Member
May 28, 2005
1,513
88
60
Calgary, AB.
✟2,162.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Yes, only thousands of years after the fact. Oh and having to fight tooth and nail to get it. Same with black people. Do you ever post anything remotely factual or is your entire worldview so twisted that you think women's suffrage came about because of the bible?

And do you ever NOT post anything out of sheer ignorance? Yes, women's suffrage came about due to the influence of the biblical worldview, and it wasn't "thousands of years after the fact." As I've already posted here:
dcyates said:
I wouldn't make the claim that in either ancient Judaism, or early Christianity, did women enjoy full equality with men. But compared to their lot elsewhere in the world, they certainly enjoyed an elevated status closer to it. In the Greco-Roman world, women were largely confined to the home (and to the inner rooms of the home, if possible), and when they were allowed out in public, they were always escorted and could speak to any male only through another male with whom they were in some regard embedded (i.e. a father, husband, brother, son). Only harlots spoke to men without some sort of male intermediary.
It was with the advent of Christianity that females really began to grow in status. In fact, even as early as the writings of Paul (which constitute the earliest writings of the New Testament) do we find Christian women positively revelling in their newfound freedom. To the point where Paul felt compelled to reign them in, not because they weren't equal with men, but rather because, given the social conventions of the day, their freedom in Christ was regarded as too improper and thus too potentially scandalous.

dcyates said:
As well, in addition to my earlier comment re: Gen 1.27, nowhere else in ancient literature are women depicted as the heroes of the story as often as they are in the Bible. In the early chapters of Exodus, for example, over and over again it's the women who are cast as saviours, saving the lives of men.
Nowhere else in ancient literature do you find a figure like Deborah, a Judge of all Israel, where it's made very clear that Barak, although the commander of Israel's army, is nevertheless definitely under Deborah's authority (Judges 4-5). And even there, besides Deborah, the hero of the story, the one who ultimately defeats and kills the enemy commander is not Barak, but "Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite" (Judges 4.17-22).
Nowhere else in ancient literature do you find books dedicated to telling the stories of women, like the book of Ruth, or the book of Esther.
Nowhere else in ancient literature do you find a song of praise to a woman of virtuous accomplishment as is found in Proverbs 31.
And certainly nowhere else in ancient literature would you find a statement such as Paul's, where he declares that, in Christ, "there is neither Jew nor Gentile, there is neither slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 4.28). Or where the apostle Paul bids, "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the Church and gave himself up for her.... Husbands ought also to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the Church" (Ephesians 5.25, 28-29). We have to remember, the Greeks of this time believed that true friendships could only be found between equals, and since women were not equal with men, men could never experience as close a relationship with a woman -- even a wife -- as they could with another man. To them, wives were for procreation, and little else.

dcyates said:
Why should it suddenly bother men that half the human race were being left out of this purported "equality picture"? It certainly hadn't bothered them before. And why was it only in the Christian West that women came to enjoy anywhere near the same status as men?
In point of fact, it was during the Middle Ages -- that so-called "Dark" period between the "glories" of imperial Rome and the Renaissance, with its return to Classical thinking -- that women came to be seen as persons of will, who were thus to be wooed with the formulation of courtly love rituals and poetry, rather than simply as objects which could be bargained for political or material gain.
 
Upvote 0

dcyates

Senior Member
May 28, 2005
1,513
88
60
Calgary, AB.
✟2,162.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married

It never ceases to amaze me how often those on the ideological left present an argument, then quote a like-minded source which shares the same obvious agenda, and then act as if they've just provided substantive proof for their position. It's like this...

Village atheist: "I believe the Bible is stupid and evil. And here's proof for that belief: 'The Bible is stupid and evil', which I found on pg. 2 in a book called, The Bible Is Stupid and Evil, published by A.A.P.B.B.S.E. (The Atheist Association for the Propagation of the Belief that the Bible is Stupid and Evil). So there you have it! I would just like to see any of you Christian morons even try to refute such irrefutable proof like that. So, hah!"
 
Upvote 0

dcyates

Senior Member
May 28, 2005
1,513
88
60
Calgary, AB.
✟2,162.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Interesting.
I went to this link:
Women's suffrage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here's what I got using the "find" feature of my browser.
Christianity - 0 hits
Protestant - 0 hits
Bible - 0 hits
Religion - 3 hits (one being a citation at the end of the article!)
Catholic - 1 hit (Catholicism)

I did the same thing for the article specific to the US Women's suffrage movement:
Women's suffrage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Christianity - 1 hit
Here is the paragraph:
"n an age when many Protestant denominations were promoting "muscular Christianity" with a stress on social activism as part of the Social Gospel, the suffragists became involved as well.[17] Schultz argues that suffragists promoted swimming competitions, scaled mountains, piloted aeroplanes and staged large-scale parades to gain publicity and emphasize their new physical activism. In a sense, they spectacularized suffrage by thrusting their bodies in the public sphere rather than remaining behind closed doors. In New York in 1912 they organized a 12-day, 170-mile "Hike to Albany'. In 1913 the suffragist "Army of the Hudson" marched the 225 miles from Newark to Washington in 16 days, with numerous photo opportunities and press availabilities along the way that gained a national audience. The Woman Voter magazine claimed the hikes generated $3 million worth of free publicity. The women, says Schultz, "staked a symbolic claim on the polity," as they contrasted their democratic rights to assemble and speak freely with the denial of full citizenship in terms of voting. Simultaneously they undermined the myths of women's physical and political inferiority.[18]
The monthly women's magazine The Delineator, in the 1890s to the 1920s was edited by Charles Dwyer, Theodore Dreiser and William Hard. They emphasized the "New Woman" who enjoyed sports such as golf, archery, and gymnastics, appreciated new technologies such as automobiles, and embraced social reform.[19]"

Protestant - 2 hits
"The Mormon issue made the Utah situation unique. In 1870 the Utah Territory, controlled by Mormons, gave women the right to vote. However, in 1887, Congress disenfranchised Utah women with the Edmunds–Tucker Act, which was designed to weaken the Mormons politically and punish them for polygamy. In 1867-96, eastern activists promoted woman suffrage in Utah as an experiment, and as a way to eliminate polygamy. They were Presbyterians and other Protestants convinced that Mormonism was a non-Christian cult that grossly mistreated women.[40] The Mormons promoted woman suffrage to counter the negative image of downtrodden Mormon women. The Mormons dropped the polygamy requirement in 1890 and in 1895 Utah adopted a constitution restoring the right of woman suffrage. Congress admitted Utah as a state with that constitution in 1896.[41]"

And:
"In an age when many Protestant denominations were promoting "muscular Christianity" with a stress on social activism as part of the Social Gospel, the suffragists became involved as well.[17]"

Bible - 1 hit:

"Elizabeth Cady Stanton's strong opinions didn't always make her popular. One young woman from Seneca Falls refused to ride in the same carriage, saying, "I wouldn't have been seen with her for anything, with those ideas of hers." In 1851, she met 31-year-old Susan B. Anthony who, stung by discrimination against women in the temperance movement, gradually diverted her considerable energy to the cause of women's rights. Anthony emerged as a gifted organizer—Stanton, a sharp thinker. Together, they became a formidable partnership that would last until Stanton's writing of The Woman's Bible, a controversial work that alienated many suffrage activists in 1896."

Religion - 0 hits

Catholic - 2 hits

Here is the paragraph for one hit:
"The opposition to women's suffrage in the United States included organizations like the National Organization Against Women's Suffrage and women like Helen Kendrick Johnson. In New York, upper class women who thought they had a behind-the-scenes voice often opposed suffrage because it would dilute their influence. At first the anti-s let the men do the talking, but increasingly they adopted the mobilization techniques pioneered by the suffragists.[21] The antis easily won the 1915 New York State referendum, using the argument that women voters would close the saloons. But the suffragists won the 1917 referendum, arguing that the saloons were Germanic (at a time when Germany was hated); the Tammany Hall machine in New York City deserted the antis as well. Nationwide, male voters made the decision and the opposition was led by Southern white men (afraid that black women would vote), ethnic politicians (especially Catholics whose women were not allowed a political voice) and the liquor forces (who realized correctly that most women would vote dry.)[22][23]"

The other two:
"Politicians responded to the newly enlarged electorate by emphasizing issues of special interest to women, especially prohibition, child health, public schools, and world peace.[58] Women did respond to these issues, but in terms of general voting they shared the same outlook and the same voting behavior as men.[59]
The suffrage organization NAWSA became the League of Women Voters and Alice Paul's National Woman's Party began lobbying for full equality and the Equal Rights Amendment which would pass Congress during the second wave of the women's movement in 1972 (but it was not ratified and never took effect). The main surge of women voting came in 1928, when the big-city machines realized they needed the support of women to elect Al Smith, while rural dries mobilized women to support Prohibition and vote for Republican Herbert Hoover. Catholic women were reluctant to vote in the early 1920s, but they registered in very large numbers for the 1928 election--the first in which Catholicism was a major issue. [60] A few women were elected to office, but none became especially prominent during this time period. Overall, the women's rights movement was dormant in the 1920s as Susan B. Anthony and the other prominent activists were dead and apart from Alice Paul few younger women came along to replace them.
In states where women were allowed to vote, the passage of Prohibition laws has been determined to have been more likely.[61] In United States presidential elections, women's suffrage has been charged with changing the outcome of presidential elections. Barack Obama won both the male and female vote in 2008. [62]
It has been argued that without women's suffrage, the Republicans would have swept every election but one between 1968 and 1974. Another result of Women's suffrage is the steady rise of government spending between the 1920's and the present, as women are more risk averse than men and support "safety net" type income distribution and social welfare programs such as Medicare, Social Security, and public education. [63]
This came about in direct contradiction to what was expected by some writers prior to the passage of women's suffrage. In fact, it was stated by one opponent to suffrage that women voters would be "thriftier and less wasteful than men." [64]"

Not a whole lot going on in women's suffrage for something that made such a big impact, huh?

All of this just goes to show why wikipedia is ultimately unreliable when it comes to serious research. I could just as easily edit all these articles so that they say the exact opposite of what they currently do.
 
Upvote 0

fenix144

Je me souviens.
Nov 5, 2011
488
15
✟23,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Bloc
It never ceases to amaze me how often those on the ideological left present an argument, then quote a like-minded source which shares the same obvious agenda, and then act as if they've just provided substantive proof for their position. It's like this...

Village atheist: "I believe the Bible is stupid and evil. And here's proof for that belief: 'The Bible is stupid and evil', which I found on pg. 2 in a book called, The Bible Is Stupid and Evil, published by A.A.P.B.B.S.E. (The Atheist Association for the Propagation of the Belief that the Bible is Stupid and Evil). So there you have it! I would just like to see any of you Christian morons even try to refute such irrefutable proof like that. So, hah!"

Funny how you didn't address anything and instead went on whining about the left and the atheists.

You seriously need to let go of the bipolar view of the world.

Oh btw : ''It never ceases to amaze me how often those on the ideological right present an argument, then quote a like-minded source which shares the same obvious agenda, and then act as if they've just provided substantive proof for their position.

D:
 
Upvote 0

sandwiches

Mas sabe el diablo por viejo que por diablo.
Jun 16, 2009
6,104
124
46
Dallas, Texas
✟29,530.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
All of this just goes to show why wikipedia is ultimately unreliable when it comes to serious research. I could just as easily edit all these articles so that they say the exact opposite of what they currently do.

I'm sure you have evidence that does back up the claims that the Bible has brought about equality.
 
Upvote 0

TomZzyzx

Newbie
Mar 23, 2011
857
41
✟24,184.00
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
HeathenWarrior said:
If Morality does not exist without God, then where is the morality I have seen many atheists showing? Many of them seem more loving then religious folks. If their morality did not come from "God", then where did it come from?

Moral rules are self evident in the same way that mathematical truth is self evident. We don't invent morality, we discover it like we discover multiplication tables. Morality is universal, applying equally to all people. If a specific act is wrong for one person, then it is equally wrong for everyone. Since God created everything, then he also created morality.
 
Upvote 0
J

JuJuBelly

Guest
All of this just goes to show why wikipedia is ultimately unreliable when it comes to serious research. I could just as easily edit all these articles so that they say the exact opposite of what they currently do.
My challenge to you then. Go to Wikipedia, edit a dozen articles with non factual information, bookmark them, and return later to see what has become of your non factual edits.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.