That Boat Don't Float!!

[sandwiches]

You're still not quite getting to the answer.

Is it a matter of biology - your feelings towards others?

Yes.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's how irrational the 'rational' minds of atheists get... the problem here being in that if it were true it simply moves the problem - because where did the alien's own life begin?

Yup -- good ol' abiogenesis -- the evolutionists' nightmare.

They can't explain it.
They can't falsify it.
They can't recreate it.
They can't monitor it.
They can't quantify it.
It left no evidence behind.
​

Yet, they say, it happened.

 

[AV1611VET]

For the sake of argument, let's say they went feral, like other animals. And?

And why all the hoopla about why it happened?

Blaming it on Doom, blaming it on the environment, etc.

 

[Freodin]

Thank you for actually answering. Three or four others seem to have missed the question

Two guys deal with the next bit better than I can...

As British biologist J. B. S. Haldane wrote in 1927, "If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose my beliefs are true . . . and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms."
George Gilder -- Evolution and Me
also at
CSC - Evolution and Me

"My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too - for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist - in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless - I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality - namely my idea of justice - was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know if it was dark. Dark would be a word without meaning.
Lewis, C. S., “Mere Christianity” in (2002) "The Complete C S Lewis", (Harper; San Francisco), p30.

I have to leave for work now, so I´ll tackle that later that evening.

The desire to harm comes from man's free will moving himself from God's Will.

Now you are being inconsistent.

Your question was "Where does this 'want' (a desire) come from?" Answering it with "this want comes from 'free will' is as contentless as dingdongs rant"

What is "free will"? It is a term for humans ability to want something (a desire). So humans desire comes from them having desires? No, you need an explanation for the origin of a "free will desire", just as much as you´d like to have one for the "moral desire".

And if you consider such an explanation, you need to ask yourself why the origins should be different. If a desire to hurt can come from (whatever explanation for) "free will"... why can the desire not to hurt not come from the same source?

It is almost the same as I said in my post #216 in this thread - http://www.christianforums.com/t7465918-22/ ... you just cannot extempt a creator from its responsibility: if he is necessary for the one half, he is necessary for the other as well. If he isn´t, he isn´t necessary for both.

 

[Montalban]

Yes.

Then your 'feelings' towards others and concerns for them are governed by chemicals, not an actual sense of moral responsibility. One could in theory give you the right chemicals to make you feel the opposite then!

 

[Montalban]

I have to leave for work now, so I´ll tackle that later that evening.

Now you are being inconsistent.

Your question was "Where does this 'want' (a desire) come from?" Answering it with "this want comes from 'free will' is as contentless as dingdongs rant"

The desire to do harm is what I was addressing

What is "free will"? It is a term for humans ability to want something (a desire). So humans desire comes from them having desires? No, you need an explanation for the origin of a "free will desire", just as much as you´d like to have one for the "moral desire".

No. Free Will is a gift from God

And if you consider such an explanation, you need to ask yourself why the origins should be different. If a desire to hurt can come from (whatever explanation for) "free will"... why can the desire not to hurt not come from the same source?

I'm not arguing that 'free will' comes from some chance alignment of chemicals in my brain that in effect 'trick' me into believing my beliefs are genuine.

It is almost the same as I said in my post #216 in this thread - http://www.christianforums.com/t7465918-22/ ... you just cannot extempt a creator from its responsibility: if he is necessary for the one half, he is necessary for the other as well. If he isn´t, he isn´t necessary for both.

That's like saying the United States is responsible for you voting Republican - because they give you a choice, including not to vote!

God is responsible for giving us Free Will. What we do with that gift is up to us, because if it were not up to us then logically it wouldn't be free.

In East Germany they allowed you to vote, but you only had one party to choose from. They called themselves the Democratic Republic of Germany (DDR) but it's not really 'democratic' if you don't have a choice.

So being free neither forces you to make a particular choice, nor does it negate that choice by making all choices the same result.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why do creationists never tell us why creationism is right?

Why should we have to?

Some things are just self-evident.

all they ever do is try to tell us why evolution is wrong,

Yup.

try and tell us all why we should be creationists without mentioning evolution.

You may not agree with this, but you are creationists -- you guys are just too busy laughing and being condescending to notice.

Think about it.

Which word is used more in daily conversations? evolution or creation?

One is ten times more likely to say the word "created", than he is to say the word "evolved".

 

[SkyWriting]

It's still missing the point. The point is not whether they were pesecutes, made to suffer, or kill for their faith.

The statement that Christianity is true because of people willing to suffer/be killed/be persecuted is nullified by the fact that other faiths have people in the same situation.

I don't know. Please list their names and the circumstances so we can compare.

 

[BananaSlug]

And why all the hoopla about why it happened?

Blaming it on Doom, blaming it on the environment, etc.

They certainly were not going "feral". Their actions were most likely caused by several circumstances. It could be a disorder of the brain, their lifetime experiences growing up, or their experiences in high school. Human beings are the only animals that kill each other because of philosophical differences, part of our aggression stems from our ancestors being predators. It is all predatory behavior.

 

[SkyWriting]

One is ten times more likely to say the word "created", than he is to say the word "evolved".

Check science journals. The worded "evolved" is virtually nonexistent in research.

 

[AV1611VET]

They certainly were not going "feral".

How do you know?

If that's not going feral, I'd hate to see one go feral.

 

[Montalban]

That's what mind altering drugs do, they make the violent placid and the placid violent and it's that simple, witch doctors have been using them for thousands of years and doctors give them out every day.

So am I to take it that you didn't go to school? you talk as if life is something you only just realised you had and only just found out about.

If then at the end of the day that you want to argue the 'truth' of a matter of you being nothing but chemicals reacting then you are in fact underming the very argument you are trying to make by arguing for the 'truth' of the matter!

I'll repeat this quote for you...

As British biologist J. B. S. Haldane wrote in 1927, "If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose my beliefs are true . . . and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms."
George Gilder -- Evolution and Me
also at
CSC - Evolution and Me

 

[BananaSlug]

How do you know?

If that's not going feral, I'd hate to see one go feral.

1 : of, relating to, or suggestive of a wild beast <feral teeth> <feral instincts>
2 a : not domesticated or cultivated : wild b : having escaped from domestication and become wild <feral cats>

It's not feral. They had calculated and planned what they were going to do. I really don't think anybody has really figured out why they did it. The most likely explanation is that Harris was a clinical psycopath with a massive superiority complex and Klebold was depressive. In any case, people who are psycopaths are usually born that way (a strong link to genetics).

Viding, Essi; Blair, R. James R.; Moffitt, Terrie E.; Plomin, Robert (2005). "Evidence for substantial genetic risk for psychopathy in 7-year-olds". Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 46 (6): 592. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00393.x. PMID 15877765.

People who "go feral" are animalistic, not violent killers.

 

[Montalban]

You may have only had one party but you had quite a few candidates to choose from.

It doesn't matter they were all candidates from the one party.

Why do creationists never tell us why creationism is right?

I don't know. Why?

all they ever do is try to tell us why evolution is wrong,
try and tell us all why we should be creationists without mentioning evolution.

Are you saying then that evolution can't be wrong until another theory - creation - is proven correct?

That's a novel approach to ideas.

 

[Montalban]

I don't know. Please list their names and the circumstances so we can compare.

What would it matter to compare?

 

[Montalban]

Check science journals. The worded "evolved" is virtually nonexistent in research.

The worded "evolved"???

Can you show me the survey of science journals by which the word "evolved" is shown to be non-existent?

 

[AV1611VET]

People who "go feral" are animalistic, not violent killers.

I see my point is going over your head, isn't it?

If we are all animals, what prevents us from going feral?

And please don't answer me if you're not going to be specific.

This "clinical psychopath" stuff doesn't cut it.

That's just a fancy way of saying they "went feral".

I think the truth of the matter is, you don't know what makes any animal go feral, not just Homo sapiens.

The kind of answer I'm really looking for, BS, is something on the order of: "Zoologists say, Kelbold and Harris..."

I don't care what some fancy psychiatrist has to say.

If they were truly sick, why didn't their parents take them to a vet, like any evolutionist would?

 

[AV1611VET]

I was even going to start a vote and ask people if they thought that AV1611VET had help or hindered the creationists cause, but then I thought to myself, I'm not really bothered if you have or not because it's all a load of old twaddle anyway.

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, aren't you?

 

[Montalban]

AV1611VET it is amazing the lengths you will go to in order to keep yourself believing, why do you do it? you know it's all a load of old twaddle so why do you bother?

But it's not twaddle in any absolute sense, because simply at this point chemicals in your brain are firing to tell you that it is twaddle.

It's wholly subjective. And, according to you, the right chemical changes can change your state of mind.

Therefore your skeptism is simply a chemical reaction.

All that you feel to be twaddle is simply because of this. Given the right combination of drugs, you'd become a Christian!

 

[Montalban]

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, aren't you?

Unfortunately it's not really an opinion at all, but chemicals firing to tell her it is so. All her ideas of truth are just perceptions from those chemicals.