Evolution False? Absolute proof inside.

[LittleLambofJesus]

Moral behavior is doing the right thing

Doing the right thing is moral behavior

You still have a tautology, which is what I said and you geniuses relished giving me a hard time over.

And with your quote here you can now never complain about ambiguity in the Bible, because that is its purpose. (I can't recall if I've seen you personally make that complaint, but it sure is seen around here quite often, and is a silly complaint per the exact reasoning you give here)

Don't you mean alleged geniuses

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf-5RaFnh2U


.

 

[HitchSlap]

Moral behavior is doing the right thing

Doing the right thing is moral behavior

You still have a tautology, which is what I said and you geniuses relished giving me a hard time over.

And with your quote here you can now never complain about ambiguity in the Bible, because that is its purpose. (I can't recall if I've seen you personally make that complaint, but it sure is seen around here quite often, and is a silly complaint per the exact reasoning you give here)

Are you the poster formerly known as razeonarock (or any of his half dozen or so alias')?

 

[46AND2]

Moral behavior is doing the right thing

Doing the right thing is moral behavior

You still have a tautology, which is what I said and you geniuses relished giving me a hard time over.

And with your quote here you can now never complain about ambiguity in the Bible, because that is its purpose. (I can't recall if I've seen you personally make that complaint, but it sure is seen around here quite often, and is a silly complaint per the exact reasoning you give here)

We gave you a hard time because it isn't tautology.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Moral behavior is doing the right thing

Doing the right thing is moral behavior

You still have a tautology, which is what I said and you geniuses relished giving me a hard time over.

And with your quote here you can now never complain about ambiguity in the Bible, because that is its purpose. (I can't recall if I've seen you personally make that complaint, but it sure is seen around here quite often, and is a silly complaint per the exact reasoning you give here)

When people try to present the bible as the absolute source of morality, I am going to have an issue with them claiming it is objective if it has moments so unclear that 5 people could read it and all could easily end up with different enough interpretations as for it to be nonfunctional.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

When people try to present the bible as the absolute source of morality, I am going to have an issue with them claiming it is objective if it has moments so unclear that 5 people could read it and all could easily end up with different enough interpretations as for it to be nonfunctional.

People should cite God as the ultimate source of morality, and they should present moral principles under the guidance of God's Holy Spirit as the foundation of morality, and their words should actually make sense, and they should be in accordance with the great principles laid down in God's Bible.

However, they should rise above certain notions the bible points out were used in the past. Stoning people for adultery, for instance, has biblical support in places, and yet Jesus clearly did not approve of that, and the pharasees knew Jesus so well they knew that Jesus would disapprove of stoning the woman they brought to him they "caught" in the "act" of adultary.

Let us ponder how to understand biblical morality based on that example.

 

[AV1611VET]

When people try to present the bible as the absolute source of morality, I am going to have an issue with them claiming it is objective if it has moments so unclear that 5 people could read it and all could easily end up with different enough interpretations as for it to be nonfunctional.

Kinda like the Second Amendment?

 

[Delphiki]

People should cite God as the ultimate source of morality

If this is true, then it is unfortunate for Christians that they, in actuality, worship a book (and one they can't even agree on at that).

 

[TLK Valentine]

Kinda like the Second Amendment?

Indeed -- treating such things as absolutes tends to cause problems...

 

[Queller]

Moral behavior is doing the right thing

Doing the right thing is moral behavior

You still have a tautology, which is what I said and you geniuses relished giving me a hard time over.

If you want to claim a tautology, then you need to show where I made this claim. I haven't.

I made the claim that doing the right thing because it is the right thing and not for a promise of reward or threat of punishment is the MORE moral thing to do.

That is NOT the same thing you are claiming I said.

 

[Dizredux]

Moral behavior is doing the right thing

Doing the right thing is moral behavior

You still have a tautology, which is what I said and you geniuses relished giving me a hard time over.

What you are doing is giving a definition of moral behavior. All definitions are tautologies.

What I think Queller is saying is that doing something because it is the right thing to do is different from a definition because we are getting into motivation. Doing something because it is the right thing to do is quite different than doing something because you will get into trouble if you don't. Returning a wallet because it is the thing to do is much different than returning a wallet because a policeman saw you pick it up.

Dizredux

 

[AV1611VET]

What you are doing is giving a definition of moral behavior. All definitions are tautologies.

What I think Queller is saying is that doing something because it is the right thing to do is different from a definition because we are getting into motivation. Doing something because it is the right thing to do is quite different than doing something because you will get into trouble if you don't. Returning a wallet because it is the thing to do is much different than returning a wallet because a policeman saw you pick it up.

Dizredux

I wonder what Queller thinks of draft dodgers?

 

[Dizredux]

I wonder what Queller thinks of draft dodgers?

And that has what to do with moral behavior as a tautology?


Dizredux

 

[[serious]]

I wonder what Queller thinks of draft dodgers?

I wonder what draft dodger think of flying clams

 

[HitchSlap]

People should cite God as the ultimate source of morality, and they should present moral principles under the guidance of God's Holy Spirit as the foundation of morality, and their words should actually make sense, and they should be in accordance with the great principles laid down in God's Bible.

However, they should rise above certain notions the bible points out were used in the past. Stoning people for adultery, for instance, has biblical support in places, and yet Jesus clearly did not approve of that, and the pharasees knew Jesus so well they knew that Jesus would disapprove of stoning the woman they brought to him they "caught" in the "act" of adultary.

Let us ponder how to understand biblical morality based on that example.

Ponder all you like.

 

[Queller]

What you are doing is giving a definition of moral behavior. All definitions are tautologies.

What I think Queller is saying is that doing something because it is the right thing to do is different from a definition because we are getting into motivation. Doing something because it is the right thing to do is quite different than doing something because you will get into trouble if you don't. Returning a wallet because it is the thing to do is much different than returning a wallet because a policeman saw you pick it up.

Dizredux

or only because the owner offered a reward.

But thank you, now there are at least two people who see the point I was making.

 

[Queller]

I wonder what Queller thinks of draft dodgers?

I'm not sure how that matters. Depending on the reason they are draft dodgers they may be doing what they believe is right IN SPITE of the fact they will be punished for not doing what they believe is wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm not sure how that matters. Depending on the reason they are draft dodgers they may be doing what they believe is right IN SPITE of the fact they will be punished for not doing what they believe is wrong.

Judges 17:6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

 

[keith99]

They found dinasour bones with carbon in it, so does that not mean, they were less the 60k years old?

I went for 3 or 4 pages after this post.

It is NOT Carbon that would matter, it is Carbon14 and it is that Carbon14 has a half life of 5730 years. Which means after 5730 years half the carbon14 in a sample will have decayed to Carbon12. Another 5730 years and half of what was left will have decayed.

Finding Carbon has nothing to do with Carbon dating.

It would be rare for fossils as that process is the replacement of carbon by another element while maintaining the macro physical structure.

It is so amusing when Creationists make multiple mistakes in one statement and claim to be experts.

 

[Queller]

Judges 17:6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

Umm, OK. And?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Queller

I'm not sure how that matters. Depending on the reason they are draft dodgers they may be doing what they believe is right IN SPITE of the fact they will be punished for not doing what they believe is wrong.
​

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

Judges 17:6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
​

Umm, OK. And?

Since the Israelites wanted a king like the heathen nations had, instead of YAHWEH as their King, He, thru Samuel, gave them Saul.

1Sa 8:
5 They said to Samuel, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have.”
6 But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to YAHWEH.
7 And YAHWEH told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected Me as their king"
[Acts 13:21]

Acts 13:
20 After these things He gave them judges until Samuel the prophet.
21 Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul
the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for forty years.

.