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.
Not in every single case but generally if you believe that lying is absolutely wrong and you will be punished in this world or the next if you do lie, the probability that you are more honest is much higher than if you think that in some cases lying is ok and maybe even a good thing to do if it helps get you something that you want.Ed1wolf said: ↑
First, ancient jews believed in moral absolutes, therefore it is unlikely they lied,
ken: There are countless people today that believe in moral absolutes. That doesn’t mean they only tell the truth! You jokin’ right???
While there are no independent sources that claim Jesus was God, which would immediately make them not independent anyway in your eyes, they do claim that His followers believed He was God.Ed1wolf said: ↑
also there are multiple independent sources for many facts about him.
ken: I challenge you to list a single credible non religious independent source that claims Jesus was God.
Yes, I have, Matthew, John, His own brother James and Peter to name four. And one was initially a skeptic while Jesus was alive, ie his brother James.Ed1wolf said: ↑
In addition, we have the gospels which were written when many of the people that knew him were still alive and so would have accused the writers of being liars.
ken: These men who knew Jesus, have you read anything they wrote? If not, how do you know they didn’t accuse them of being liars?
Ed1wolf said: ↑
Those are only interpretations of the moral teachings, the actual moral teachings have not changed on any of those issues. Though women preachers is not a moral issue but rather a church government issue.
ken: No; when a church leader teaches (for example) that Homosexuality is an abomination against God, he is making that is a moral issue
How can you tell if a toy was made in the north pole?Ed1wolf said: ↑
No, but theoretically we could do so we could look at the characteristics of the toys and determine who made them and maybe where they were made.
ken: IN THEORY that could be done. But it never was, because if it were, they would see those that were made in the North Pole
Mine was more than a claim, I gave testimonial evidence by people that actually talked to him about his religious beliefs, all you had were pictures of him in Catholic churches and talking to priests, that tells us nothing about his actual beliefs. As I demonstrated earlier, pictures of me in a Buddhist temple tell you nothing about my religious beliefs. The historical FACTS I provided Totally refuted your claim that Hitler was a Christian.I was just refuting YOUR claim that Hitler and the Nazi's rejected Christianity.
First of all mid 20th century Germany was more educated than any nation on earth at the time. So they knew all about such arguments, but actually that is irrelevant. Objective and subjective just means something is real or it is just based on feelings, people understood this difference even in ancient times. Most of the Germans in WWII Germany were theologically liberal Christians who based their interpretations of God's morality on their own feelings. If they liked it, then they thought the bible was correct, if they didn't like it, they thought the bible was wrong.ken: But the subjective vs objective morality was not even a philosophical argument back then; so you have no way of knowing what they believed.
So if it were 1938 in Nazi Germany, and the Gestapo came to your door asking if you knew where any Jews were, and you had a Jewish family hiding in your attic, according to you; the right thing to do would be to point the family out to the Gestapo so they can be taken to Treblinka, or other such death camps for slaughter because telling the truth is always right and never wrong; is that correct?Not in every single case but generally if you believe that lying is absolutely wrong and you will be punished in this world or the next if you do lie, the probability that you are more honest is much higher than if you think that in some cases lying is ok and maybe even a good thing to do if it helps get you something that you want.
Great! So according to his fan club, he was God. Well according to Haile Selassie’s fan club, HE was God. They can’t all be God can they?While there are no independent sources that claim Jesus was God, which would immediately make them not independent anyway in your eyes, they do claim that His followers believed He was God.
The men who wrote the Bible.... You jokin’ right?Yes, I have, Matthew, John, His own brother James and Peter to name four. And one was initially a skeptic while Jesus was alive, ie his brother James.
I didn’t say “Orthodox Christianity” I said what is taught in Christian churches. Please leave those goal posts in tact.You misunderstood. I said that having women preachers is a church government issue, but the others you mentioned including homosexuality, ARE moral issues. And yes, orthodox Christianity and the Bible has always taught homosexuality is wrong for at least 3500 years.
There is an old book written about Santa Clause, and according to this book, some toys are made in the North Pole. To find out which are made in the North Pole, you must trace it back to the manufacturer on the label. If it can’t be traced, you know that toy was from the North PoleHow can you tell if a toy was made in the north pole?
How do you know they were telling the truth? People do lie ya know! I also pointed out in his Book Mien Kampf where he claimed to be doing the lords work by protecting from the Jews. There were pictures and videos of Priests spraying holy water on the Nazi planes as they took off to bomb the allies. The anti-Semitism of the Christians and Catholics during that time period is not in dispute.Mine was more than a claim, I gave testimonial evidence by people that actually talked to him about his religious beliefs, all you had were pictures of him in Catholic churches and talking to priests, that tells us nothing about his actual beliefs.
*Objective morality means “X” is right (or wrong) no matter the situation.First of all mid 20th century Germany was more educated than any nation on earth at the time. So they knew all about such arguments, but actually that is irrelevant. Objective and subjective just means something is real or it is just based on feelings, people understood this difference even in ancient times. Most of the Germans in WWII Germany were theologically liberal Christians who based their interpretations of God's morality on their own feelings. If they liked it, then they thought the bible was correct, if they didn't like it, they thought the bible was wrong.
Because paleontologists believe that dinosaurs existed in multiple time periods not just one, ever hear of the Jurassic, Cretaceous, Triassic and etc.? So plainly the experts disagree with you.Why?
They have found some evidence of such an event, just not strong evidence. Ever hear of the huge hydraulically caused fossil graveyards such as the one at the Rock of Gibraltar. Also that the last Ice Age was probably caused by a perturbation of the earths axis, and one of the few things strong enough to cause such a perturbation would the tremendous amount of weight of the water that covered the earth. But since the flood probably occurred 2 million years ago, most of the evidence has been eroded away.If the entire Earth were at one time covered with water, how do you know science would not be able to see evidence of such an event?
Because it has all the characteristics of an effect and an effect requires a Cause.ken: How do you know the Universe was created?
No; the experts disagree with you because the experts agree the Dinosaurs did exist.Because paleontologists believe that dinosaurs existed in multiple time periods not just one, ever hear of the Jurassic, Cretaceous, Triassic and etc.? So plainly the experts disagree with you.
In other words, scientists do not support your claim that at one time the entire planed was covered with water.They have found some evidence of such an event, just not strong evidence. Ever hear of the huge hydraulically caused fossil graveyards such as the one at the Rock of Gibraltar. Also that the last Ice Age was probably caused by a perturbation of the earths axis, and one of the few things strong enough to cause such a perturbation would the tremendous amount of weight of the water that covered the earth. But since the flood probably occurred 2 million years ago, most of the evidence has been eroded away.
How do you know, and how would the Universe be different if it didn’t have the characters of an effect?Because it has all the characteristics of an effect and an effect requires a Cause.
Then you are very gullible. If someone points to a picture and makes up some story about it, you automatically believe it. I thought atheists were supposed to be skeptical. I guess they are only skeptical about religion but believe anything politicians say.To me it would. Obviously nothing would for you; but most reasonable people would at least consider you have no problem with Buddhism judging from the photo
Because as I demonstrated earlier that most Germans at the time were theologically liberal, liberal "Christians" believe in subjective and relative morality. They dont believe God's word is objectively true.ken; What makes you think the people of Germany at that time believed morality was subjective rather than objective?
It wasn’t just someone pointing to a picture; it was a newspaper article, I provided pictures of religious inscription on the Nazi uniform, and Hitler even eluded to religion in his book Mein Kampf. All you provided was second and third hand information of unsubstantiated claims.Then you are very gullible. If someone points to a picture and makes up some story about it, you automatically believe it. I thought atheists were supposed to be skeptical. I guess they are only skeptical about religion but believe anything politicians say.
Liberal by whose standards? Todays standards; or the standards of 80 years ago? Todays conservatives would be considered liberal just 30 years ago. What do you think the liberals of 80 years ago would be considered today? It is on record that there was much hatred between the Christians/Catholics and the Jewish people 80 years ago. This hatred would make it easy for a faithful Christian to hate the Jews during that time, and still be considered a good Christian/Catholic. It wasn't some non existent objective/subjective morality argument that made it easy for the Germans to kill the Jews during that time, it was the hatred that society had for the Jews during that time. Many Christians even to this day claim the Jews killed Jesus.Because as I demonstrated earlier that most Germans at the time were theologically liberal, liberal "Christians" believe in subjective and relative morality. They dont believe God's word is objectively true.
Ed1wolf said: ↑
Not in every single case but generally if you believe that lying is absolutely wrong and you will be punished in this world or the next if you do lie, the probability that you are more honest is much higher than if you think that in some cases lying is ok and maybe even a good thing to do if it helps get you something that you want.
ken: So if it were 1938 in Nazi Germany, and the Gestapo came to your door asking if you knew where any Jews were, and you had a Jewish family hiding in your attic, according to you; the right thing to do would be to point the family out to the Gestapo so they can be taken to Treblinka, or other such death camps for slaughter because telling the truth is always right and never wrong; is that correct?
Such an elusive and suspicious reply would probably get your house searched, and you taken to the concentration camps along with your stow-aways.No, there are ways of telling the truth without telling the whole truth and of course you can always say nothing. Such as if they are in the attic you can say that they are closer to the sky than I am. That is a true statement but doesn't reveal any real information.
No, not all were His fan club at first, there were skeptics that were changed after He rose from the dead. Only God can raise someone from the dead. And there is strong evidence He rose from the dead. Selassie never rose from the dead and no skeptics were ever converted by him.Ed1wolf said: ↑
While there are no independent sources that claim Jesus was God, which would immediately make them not independent anyway in your eyes, they do claim that His followers believed He was God.
ken: Great! So according to his fan club, he was God. Well according to Haile Selassie’s fan club, HE was God. They can’t all be God can they?
Some yes, if you found out someone was the Son of God and rose from the dead, you would want to write it down and spread the news too.Ed1wolf said: ↑
Yes, I have, Matthew, John, His own brother James and Peter to name four. And one was initially a skeptic while Jesus was alive, ie his brother James.
ken: The men who wrote the Bible.... You jokin’ right?
Since the characteristics of Christianity are written down and the majority of Christians have believed them for 2000 years, you can make a strong argument that if the church does not have those characteristics then it is probably not a Christian church. Just as in biology if an animal does not have most of the characteristics of a dog, then it is probably not a dog.Ed1wolf said: ↑
You misunderstood. I said that having women preachers is a church government issue, but the others you mentioned including homosexuality, ARE moral issues. And yes, orthodox Christianity and the Bible has always taught homosexuality is wrong for at least 3500 years.
ken: I didn’t say “Orthodox Christianity” I said what is taught in Christian churches. Please leave those goal posts in tact.
But how do you know the book is accurate?Ed1wolf said: ↑
How can you tell if a toy was made in the north pole?
ken: There is an old book written about Santa Clause, and according to this book, some toys are made in the North Pole. To find out which are made in the North Pole, you must trace it back to the manufacturer on the label. If it can’t be traced, you know that toy was from the North Pole
Your argument is very flawed. Nature and homosexuality do not co-exist.Good Evening. I am Zed Aliz Zed
And this shall be a briefing on Morality. and issues with different kinds of it.
What is Morality?
The basic creed of every civilization and fundamentally the basis of "Good" and "Evil" the idea itself is probably as old as Humanity is. as even without written language, there is always an unspoken code.
or for definition
ob·jec·tive
əbˈjektiv/
adjective
- 1.
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
And the second stance the one I will be arguing for.
sub·jec·tive
səbˈjektiv/
adjective
adjective:
The main argument for those of the Abrahamic religion is that God is Omnipotent and Omniscience so he decides Morality. which you would think would mean its Objective based on that argument but even then that's, not a good point.
- 1.
based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions
simply because it can be taken apart simply by saying "well if Lucifer was even more powerful would you follow his creed?" most Christians would say no. but then they admit that morality cant is objective as if it comes from a higher power. then it changes depending on who holds power.
a secondary argument is God in the bible has a personality. a goal of some sorts and a large portion of what he commands us to do helps him not us. so it could be argued his morality itself is subjective and he simply pushes it objectively on us. that would also explain how it changes throughout the Bible
once wearing mixed fabric was a sin. see Leviticus for detail around the homosexuality. (which if you are going to quote don't lay with a man I best hope that shirt and pants are all cotton or of the same fabric or your a hypocrite)
but seeing as how no one seems to follow the mixed fabric rule and many argue Leviticus does not apply any longer thanks to Jesus you can see a change of law and morality.
Law itself is mostly reflected upon Morality but depends on whose in power. so really the bible does not deal in morality but in law. as the law does not claim to always reflect morality, after all, there are many law's here in the US which are seemingly [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] and helps no one and yet exist for some odd reason.
Laws also directly change year to year and sometimes in opposition to the generally held morality of the time. which makes sense as if Law is reflected on morality than it goes on the morality of whoever decides the Law.
Morality varies person to person even within those of the same faith and sect.
Where does that Leave Good and Evil?
That's just it. I don't think there is any such thing as Good or Evil. while there is Illegal and Legal there is no real Good or Evil. such things require consistency and Objectivity. but if the bible changes and the general message changes and both are from the same being that he himself is not solid but liquid. and changes as well. as does every Animal we all change over time. in one way or another.
so you yourself, if you are Christian, can argue that let us use Homosexuality as an example. you can argue it against the biblical law but you can't exactly argue it immoral. especially when even within the Christian faith it is becoming more accepted and overtime if the religion still exists in the coming century will probably be treated like that mixed fabric rule. and completely ignored.
I Myself am Deist and see the only morality there is, is the law of nature. which is unbreakable. so there is no point trying to follow it. as you already do.
everything else is man-made. morality itself a construction of thought. a needed tool and one we can not exist currently without but one that should not be considered in stone. as everything changes. Law. People. Time. and so we should welcome such change and keep tweaking our codes and creeds until we find the perfect set if possible.
If you have read this far without storming off I applaud you and would love to hear your thoughts or arguments on the mater. though I probably have heard them all and countered them all at one point.
Good Night.
Ed1wolf said: ↑
Mine was more than a claim, I gave testimonial evidence by people that actually talked to him about his religious beliefs, all you had were pictures of him in Catholic churches and talking to priests, that tells us nothing about his actual beliefs.
ken: How do you know they were telling the truth? People do lie ya know!
ken: I also pointed out in his Book Mien Kampf where he claimed to be doing the lords work by protecting from the Jews. There were pictures and videos of Priests spraying holy water on the Nazi planes as they took off to bomb the allies. The anti-Semitism of the Christians and Catholics during that time period is not in dispute.
Yes, that is part of it, but objective morality also means that it objectively exists irrespective of what you believe about morality and it is objectively rational. And subjective morality also means that it is based on feelings and not on anything objectively rational thereby making it objectively irrational.Ed1wolf said: ↑
First of all mid 20th century Germany was more educated than any nation on earth at the time. So they knew all about such arguments, but actually that is irrelevant. Objective and subjective just means something is real or it is just based on feelings, people understood this difference even in ancient times. Most of the Germans in WWII Germany were theologically liberal Christians who based their interpretations of God's morality on their own feelings. If they liked it, then they thought the bible was correct, if they didn't like it, they thought the bible was wrong.
ken: *Objective morality means “X” is right (or wrong) no matter the situation.
*Subjective morality means extenuating circumstances perceptions and personal biases are taken into consideration before determining if “X” is right/wrong or not.
Example; (Using the analogy of lying we spoke of earlier) if lying were objectively wrong, that would mean if it were 1938 and the Gestapo came to your door asking if you knew of any Jews, and you knew you had an innocent family hiding in your attic, Objective morality would demand you tell the Gestapo the truth resulting to the innocent deaths.
Subjective morality would require you to consider extenuating circumstances, and your personal opinion before determining if telling the truth under such conditions is the right thing to do.
Subjective morality would require you to consider extenuating circumstances, and your personal opinion before determining if telling the truth under such conditions is the right thing to do.
There were also multiple independent sources that say Hitler was in good standing with the Catholic church until his death. Multiple independent sources often contradict each other; they can’t all be right ya know!Yes, but it is unlikely that multiple independent sources would all lie about the same thing.
Mein Kampf was about Hitlers views, not necessarily Nazi views. Mein Kampf means “my struggle”, not The Nazi struggle.Mein Kampf was propaganda to convince ordinary Germans to accept Nazi doctrine so he had to pretend to be a Christian in order to convince the German people who considered themselves Christians. I am not denying that some Christians may have been Nazis even some orthodox biblical Christians. But overall as I have demonstrated earlier, most of Germany was theologically liberal and didn't accept the infallible authority of the bible, which is a heretical position.
Just because something takes into consideration beliefs, feelings, and extenuating circumstances, does not make it irrational.Yes, that is part of it, but objective morality also means that it objectively exists irrespective of what you believe about morality and it is objectively rational. And subjective morality also means that it is based on feelings and not on anything objectively rational thereby making it objectively irrational.
Ed1wolf said: ↑
Because paleontologists believe that dinosaurs existed in multiple time periods not just one, ever hear of the Jurassic, Cretaceous, Triassic and etc.? So plainly the experts disagree with you.
ken: No; the experts disagree with you because the experts agree the Dinosaurs did exist.
Most scientists do not believe that the entire planet was covered with water 2 mya but they do agree that it was covered in water around 2 bya shortly after the formation of the earth just as the bible says in Genesis 1:2.Ed1wolf said: ↑
They have found some evidence of such an event, just not strong evidence. Ever hear of the huge hydraulically caused fossil graveyards such as the one at the Rock of Gibraltar. Also that the last Ice Age was probably caused by a perturbation of the earths axis, and one of the few things strong enough to cause such a perturbation would the tremendous amount of weight of the water that covered the earth. But since the flood probably occurred 2 million years ago, most of the evidence has been eroded away.
ken: In other words, scientists do not support your claim that at one time the entire planed was covered with water.
We know because the evidence points to the universe having a beginning and changing. If the universe was eternal and no beginning then it would not be an effect and not need a cause.Ed1wolf said: ↑
Because it has all the characteristics of an effect and an effect requires a Cause.
ken: How do you know, and how would the Universe be different if it didn’t have the characters of an effect?
Umm you do know that the German newspapers were totally controlled by the Nazi government, right? I already explained that Mein Kampf was propaganda to a country that considered themselves Christian and Hitler wanted to get their votes. Do you think he would have gotten elected if he immediately attacked Christianity? Use your brain, Hitler did. I provided quotes from people that actually knew Hitler personally, his childhood friend, Joseph Goebbels, Martin Borman, and I can provide even more from people that knew him and heard him speak. All independent sources. You are going to have to do a lot better than pictures from Nazi newspapers trying to get out the Christian vote!Ed1wolf said: ↑
Then you are very gullible. If someone points to a picture and makes up some story about it, you automatically believe it. I thought atheists were supposed to be skeptical. I guess they are only skeptical about religion but believe anything politicians say.
ken: It wasn’t just someone pointing to a picture; it was a newspaper article, I provided pictures of religious inscription on the Nazi uniform, and Hitler even eluded to religion in his book Mein Kampf. All you provided was second and third hand information of unsubstantiated claims.
In a nutshell, theological liberals are people who consider themselves Christians but deny the supernatural in the bible. This includes the supernatural delivery of God's moral laws. This is true today and 80 years ago. There would be slight differences in their views of certain moral issues, that is true because society has changed. But the Bible and its teachings have never changed. For example 80 years ago most liberals would believe that homosexual behavior is wrong while most today would see nothing wrong with it. But neither group would primarily believe that for biblical reasons, the liberals of the mid twentieth century would argue against it from nature not the bible.Ed1wolf said: ↑
Because as I demonstrated earlier that most Germans at the time were theologically liberal, liberal "Christians" believe in subjective and relative morality. They dont believe God's word is objectively true.
ken: Liberal by whose standards? Todays standards; or the standards of 80 years ago? Todays conservatives would be considered liberal just 30 years ago. What do you think the liberals of 80 years ago would be considered today?
Actually most of the Nazis including Hitler himself hated jews for economic and moral reasons, not religious reasons. He thought they were parasites on the nation of Germany, he thought they were human parasites biologically. Many of the ordinary Germans did justify their hate with religion, though it made no sense since jews founded Christianity. And yes the leadership of the RCC did very little to correct the laity and their irrational and sinful hatred of jews.ken: It is on record that there was much hatred between the Christians/Catholics and the Jewish people 80 years ago. This hatred would make it easy for a faithful Christian to hate the Jews during that time, and still be considered a good Christian/Catholic. It wasn't some non existent objective/subjective morality argument that made it easy for the Germans to kill the Jews during that time, it was the hatred that society had for the Jews during that time.
Only a few uneducated fundies believe that jews living today are guilty of killing Jesus. I have been a Christian for over 40 years and have never met a Christian that believed such nonsense.ken: Many Christians even to this day claim the Jews killed Jesus.
Oh so now science claims the “one time event” flood of Noah’s Ark happened 2 billion years ago? Do you have anything to back that up? Or is this just an empty claim.Huh? What in the world are you mumbling about? I never denied the existence of dinosaurs and most Christians dont.
Most scientists do not believe that the entire planet was covered with water 2 mya but they do agree that it was covered in water around 2 bya shortly after the formation of the earth just as the bible says in Genesis 1:2.
We only know of what we have studied, and we haven’t studied anything that we know is eternal, so if we did see something eternal; without a beginning, we wouldn't recognize it as such.We know because the evidence points to the universe having a beginning and changing. If the universe was eternal and no beginning then it would not be an effect and not need a cause.
Hitler wrote that book long before he came to power. As a matter of fact, Hitler was in prison when he wrote that book so obviously the German news papers were not controlled buh the Nazi government at that time.Umm you do know that the German newspapers were totally controlled by the Nazi government, right? I already explained that Mein Kampf was propaganda to a country that considered themselves Christian and Hitler wanted to get their votes. Do you think he would have gotten elected if he immediately attacked Christianity? Use your brain, Hitler did. I provided quotes from people that actually knew Hitler personally, his childhood friend, Joseph Goebbels, Martin Borman, and I can provide even more from people that knew him and heard him speak. All independent sources. You are going to have to do a lot better than pictures from Nazi newspapers trying to get out the Christian vote!
C'mon; that’s your definition; something you made up. Show me something that supports this claim.In a nutshell, theological liberals are people who consider themselves Christians but deny the supernatural in the bible.This includes the supernatural delivery of God's moral laws. This is true today and 80 years ago.
80 years ago there were many conservatives believed that interracial marriage was wrong, and they argued this position from a biblical standpoint claiming God created different races for a reason and that we should not mix them. Today Conservatives have no problem with interracial marriage.There would be slight differences in their views of certain moral issues, that is true because society has changed. But the Bible and its teachings have never changed. For example 80 years ago most liberals would believe that homosexual behavior is wrong while most today would see nothing wrong with it. But neither group would primarily believe that for biblical reasons, the liberals of the mid twentieth century would argue against it from nature not the bible.
I’m talking about christian attitudes of 80 years ago.Actually most of the Nazis including Hitler himself hated jews for economic and moral reasons, not religious reasons. He thought they were parasites on the nation of Germany, he thought they were human parasites biologically. Many of the ordinary Germans did justify their hate with religion, though it made no sense since jews founded Christianity. And yes the leadership of the RCC did very little to correct the laity and their irrational and sinful hatred of jews.
Actually most of the Nazis including Hitler himself hated jews for economic and moral reasons, not religious reasons. He thought they were parasites on the nation of Germany, he thought they were human parasites biologically. Many of the ordinary Germans did justify their hate with religion, though it made no sense since jews founded Christianity. And yes the leadership of the RCC did very little to correct the laity and their irrational and sinful hatred of jews.
There are multiple other things you can try too. You can say they are not in any room of the house, the attic is not a room. God will honor anyone trying to remain truthful in all things. There was a case in Africa where soldiers were looking for Christians and missionaries and God made them invisible to the soldiers even though they were standing right in front of the jeep they were driving.Such an elusive and suspicious reply would probably get your house searched, and you taken to the concentration camps along with your stow-aways.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?