• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Where does morality come from?

Discussion in 'Ethics & Morality' started by Searching_for_God, Apr 28, 2019.

  1. Kylie

    Kylie Atheist and Proud

    +3,017
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    No it isn't objective because you don't have the qualifications to interpret those photos. You've admitted you don't.

    I have done. I've provided you with sources, and they're far more reliable than a guy with no qualifications making comments on something he doesn't understand.
     
  2. gradyll

    gradyll In the grip of grace

    +1,021
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    thank you for the comment, however is it really that hard to see an ilium on a pelvis? If it is then let me know, I guess your not qualified for this conversation, but yeah I know what an ilium looks like. If you need help a quick google search for what an ilium looks like is easy. We live in the age of the internet theologian, I am not a mechanic by trade but i youtube it and I can perform 90% of the mechanical stuff on my car. Am I qualified, no. But I can you tube and google search and for 90% of stuff that is good enough. So, yes I know what an ilium is, and yes I know that the position of the ilium relates to how someone walks, and it makes sense since the legs are attached to the pelvis. With you, you were posting random internet articles, and if you are not going to use the actual facts of the matter, and if you wish to just post text walls (which is not really a debate tactic I like), then you should post peer review, or actual photos. Like I said, it does not take a degree to know what an ilium does or what it looks like, if you need help let me know.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2019
  3. Kylie

    Kylie Atheist and Proud

    +3,017
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    You do not seem to have an interest in a rational discussion. You keep insisting that you know better than the experts, despite the fact that you admit you are unqualified.
     
  4. gradyll

    gradyll In the grip of grace

    +1,021
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    I don't think high school biology needs a degree to understand. I am no expert and yet I understand it. But anyway, I know you don't have evidence for macro evolution or you would have presented it already. So talk to you later.

    great talk.

    I enjoyed it, I hope you did too.
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2019
  5. Eight Foot Manchild

    Eight Foot Manchild His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

    +841
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    You don't even know what the theory of evolution is, let alone possess any understanding of its mechanisms.

    Case in point,

    Please name for us the chemical barrier that would allow for microevolution to occur, but disallow macroevolution.

    Take your time.
     
  6. gradyll

    gradyll In the grip of grace

    +1,021
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    ad hominem. Because you cannot possibly know this. Unless you entered my brain through my ear and photographed all my thoughts. Which I assume you cannot do. So again this is just a fallacy.


    sure, nature reproduction.

    it's a logical barrier for evolution, monkeys don't mate with man, therefore man did not come from monkeys.
    don't need any time but thanks.

    take your time responding.
     
  7. Eight Foot Manchild

    Eight Foot Manchild His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

    +841
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    It's very easy to know this, actually. If someone claims to understand something, all you have to do is read what they themselves have said about the subject to see if they're claim is substantiated.

    For example, if someone claimed to know about how powered flight works, and then talked about how airplanes fly by flapping their wings up and down, you would know for certain that they actually don't know anything about powered flight.

    Similarly, the reason I know for certain that you don't know anything about the ToE is because you write stuff like this,

    'Monkeys mating with man' is not a mechanism for evolution. That's not what macroevolution is, nor has it ever been. You have a fake, cartoon misunderstanding of this subject, which you wouldn't have if you so much as cracked a basic biology textbook.

    Thank you for making an example of yourself.
     
  8. gradyll

    gradyll In the grip of grace

    +1,021
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    no sir, you cannot possibly know what is in my brain. It's impossible. When you say to someone that they don't know something, that is an unverified claim. They can be wrong about it 99 times out of a hundred, but there is always the chance they are correct. So again, you prove my point regarding all of this. Unverified claims is what atheists do best.


    since you claim my understanding is cartoonish, I figure I will call you on your bluff and show you how cartoonish evolution really is.

    let me sum up evolution for you.

    That fishy fish life swam until they ran out of water, climbed up on shore, developed lungs, grew legs, became titans of their time, frayed the scales til they became feathers, shrunk, climbed a tree, jumped off a branch, flew around, and became birds. Or for men- the fishy fish swam til they ran out water, climbed up on land, grew lungs and fur this time, scampered around at the feet of giant tweety bird T rexes, til they ditched walking on all fours for two legged transportation, climbed trees, jumped down from trees to build a fire, shed their fur, grew a bigger brain, and now believes we came from monkeys.

    or this one:

    that life sprang from an electrocuted mud puddle, that fishy fish sprouted legs and crawled up on shore, that those same fishy fish split off in two different directions- mammalian and reptilian, that those reptilian frayed their scales until they became feathers, shrunk down in size, climbed a tree, jumped off a branch, flew around and became tweety birds. Or that the mammalian family ditched the four legged transportation for two, grew a tail, climbed a tree, swung around from the branches until their tails fell off and they fell out the trees, built a fire, shed the fur, grew a beard, and now believe we came from monkeys.


    again the mechanism that fails in evolution is that numerous rounds of micro evolution will apparently never change the animal into another animal. Micro evolution can do all sorts of things but they still reproduce within the same animal group. Once you have a change that is large enough to call it another animal, it would not pass down because the animal would not reproduce with it's own kind, so there is a logical flaw there as well. But you can find proof of this if you like, but it's much better to belittle and mock, than have honest debate. I am starting to understand atheists. And don't worry, your not alone in this. You are in good company with nearly every atheist I have talked to on here. Not to mean that it's honest or good.
     
  9. HitchSlap

    HitchSlap Burn the torch!

    +5,000
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    Sounds like you're still unclear how we can be good without god.
     
  10. Eight Foot Manchild

    Eight Foot Manchild His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

    +841
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    It's only unverified, until that person verifies it by demonstrating they don't know anything at all about the subject.

    Which you have verified. Over and over again.

    You have yet to be right even once. When that happens, there will be something to talk about.

    No, you prove my point, every time you try to talk about the ToE. You don't know what it is. You don't know what its mechanisms are. Your apprehension of it is not represented in any primary or popular-level scientific literature on the subject. You can't cite any scientific source to validate your criticisms, because your criticisms don't even apply to what the ToE actually is, only to your fake, cartoon misunderstanding of it.
     
  11. ToddNotTodd

    ToddNotTodd Iconoclast

    +2,333
    Seeker
    Married
    In the 8 or so years since you last posted this, it doesn’t seem like you’ve bothered to learn what evolution actually says...
     
  12. gradyll

    gradyll In the grip of grace

    +1,021
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    sir, what if I am not saying everything I know about the subject? What if I am purposefully deceiving you, like the parables do to the unbeliever? What if I am stretching the truth? You simply don't know because you can't read my mind. Again you prove my point that the logic of your posts is lacking.


    but you forget that it is possible. And if it is possible, then your objective statement "that I don't know what I am talking about" is not logically sound. Nor verifiable simply because it is possible that I do know what I am talking about, and maybe you dont.


    I know I know, no one knows what evolution is because it's so complicated that the uninformed does not understand it. It's monkey to man ideology. And there is no evidence of monkey to man transitions, so the entire building falls. Even if I didn't understand evolution, and I do, all I need is a weak point. And it falls. Do you know everything about christianity to refute it? No, you find one contradiction and the whole thing fails. It's just that finding that one contradiction 99% of people either don't try or can't find it.
     
  13. Eight Foot Manchild

    Eight Foot Manchild His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

    +841
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    Again, if and when you make a single criticism relevant to the actual ToE, we will have something to talk about.

    No, I allow that it's possible, but until such time that you can demonstrate an understanding, there is nothing to talk about.

    You're confused.

    You don't know what evolution is. That's why the criticisms that you think you're making of evolution don't even actually apply, because you're critiquing a fake, cartoon version of evolution that exists nowhere outside your imagination.
     
  14. gradyll

    gradyll In the grip of grace

    +1,021
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    sir, you lost this debate clearly.


    post refuted.

    next.
     
  15. gradyll

    gradyll In the grip of grace

    +1,021
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    sir even it was remotely accurate that I didn't understand what evolution was, I found a weakness, and no one can prove it to me. Biologists, astronomers and other scientists on this very site have failed. All I ask for is one missing link between two types of animals. Is it really that hard? There should be millions of walking transitions if evolution were even remotely true. I know you think you can do better than those scientists, and I am all game. But right now your logic is "Lets make fun of the christian long enough he goes away." Your logic is not, lets debate honestly. And good luck with scaring me away. My God is bigger and badder than your god. And yes I said 'your god" because you have faith just like any religion. And I can prove it, any time you wish.
     
  16. ToddNotTodd

    ToddNotTodd Iconoclast

    +2,333
    Seeker
    Married
    If you still believe that evolution says we “came from monkeys” then you don’t understand evolution.

    And if you’re down to reposting 8 year old content instead of coming up with new material, everyone can see that you’re stuck in a misinformation rut.

    Post refuted.

    Next...
     
  17. Eight Foot Manchild

    Eight Foot Manchild His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

    +841
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    You can't even have a 'debate' if you don't know what the subject is, and you absolutely can't 'win' one.
     
  18. Hans Blaster

    Hans Blaster New Member

    49
    +66
    Atheist
    Private
    What does any of this have to do with the origins, or source, of morality?

    I can't speak for my fellow non-believers, but I will grant that your god is bigger than mine, since mine definitely does not exist as I have no god, and haven't for a long time. If your god is real, then it is by definition "larger" than my non-existent god. If your god is not real, then your conception of it is still vaster than my conception of a god I neither have, nor conceive of. I suspect the others would say something similar.

    So trying to restart the original topic...

    It seems to me that morality is the evolved response for our social primate species making it possible for us to thrive through cooperation.

    I leave you to your devices.
     
  19. Moral Orel

    Moral Orel Proud Citizen of Moralton Supporter

    +1,790
    United States
    Agnostic
    Married
    Your Logical Fallacy Is Strawman
     
  20. Kylie

    Kylie Atheist and Proud

    +3,017
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    You're gonna need more than that.
     
Loading...