Where's God?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
892
54
Texas
✟109,913.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I did, see my post to interested atheist above.
You do not get to decide for others what convincing evidence is. You think what you have is convincing, that is why you believe God exists. I do not think it is convincing. If that is all you have then ok, thanks for the effort.
 
Upvote 0

Ed1wolf

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2002
2,928
178
South Carolina
✟132,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

Ed1wolf

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2002
2,928
178
South Carolina
✟132,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Well, if you hadn't taken three weeks plus to reply to my comment I could probably have told you directly; now it may take longer. Also, your question suggests to me that you are unaware of how some of your posts come acrss, so I'll find an example and analyse it in detail for you.
I only have a short time each day when I can respond to these posts and I try to respond to every one, so I have gotten about 9 pages behind. But I am all ears to your example.
 
Upvote 0

Ed1wolf

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2002
2,928
178
South Carolina
✟132,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
1. I need trusting relationships with others in order to survive.
2. Morality is the only good way to build those trusting relationships.
3. Therefore, if I want to survive, then I must choose morality.

And please don't reply by asking me one more time why I don't commit suicide (while patting yourself on the back with a huge grin at the supreme cleverness of your retort). If you ask me that, you will get the same answer I gave you every time you asked.

In addition to that objective reason, I have a subjective reason that, to me, is also very strong: Because I love people.
Wanting to survive is not an objective reason. The very fact that you use the term "wanting" shows that. It is a desire, which is a subjective feeling.
 
Upvote 0

Ed1wolf

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2002
2,928
178
South Carolina
✟132,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
ed: What is your foundation of morality that is objective? Since God ultimately created everything that exists, ultimately things circle back to Him by definition.

ia: If
God created everything that existed. Boy, you really like begging the question, don't you?
No, I already demonstrated His existence earlier in this thread.

ed: No, I said humans live according to what they THINK is real. Most people dont live according to reality. And if they are not Christians then they dont have an objective basis for morality. You misconstrued reality with morality.

ia: People all share a common human nature. While we are all different, we all value happiness and love, and we all wish to avoid pain. Therefore, we all have human values in common, upon which it is possible to create a sense of right and wrong. And while we may disagree about what is important, we rarely disagree about whether red is blue or hot is cold.
Agreed and your point is?

ed: According to science they do.

ia: According to science, there is no such thing as an unborn woman. Nor, according to science, do abortions affect unborn girls or unborn infants, because "woman", "girl" and "infant" are all things that cannot exist until after a baby is born.
A woman is a female human and a girl is a female human and an embryo with two XX chromosomes is a female human. What is your science to the contrary?

ed: Embryos and fetuses have all the characteristics we have just in a different form.

ia: What does personhood mean to you, Ed? How would you define a person?

If you and I were able, through some miracle of technology - or, for that matter, through a miracle - able to swap brains (my brain in your body, and yours in mine), then where would you be? In the USA, where I presume you live, or in China, where I live? Where would you be?
It depends if my personhood went with my brain. If so, then I would be in China. If not, then I would be in the USA. Personhood is nonphysical though partially produced by physical processes so most likely I would be in China. If a female transgender's brain was put in your body would you be male or female?

ed: Fraid not, as I demonstrated long ago on this thread.

ia: Claimed, not demonstrated. US slavery was based on the Bible.
You never refuted my demonstration.

ia: Also, I'm not so sure we should believe what the Bible says. History being written by the winners, and all that.
There is historical and archaeological evidence that the Bible is accurate.

ed: Most secular humanists are socialists, which is what I said above explaining what socialism is.
ia: Socialism certainly has good elements, including the idea that people should be provided for if they are in need. But most secular humanists are not socialists. You've already had the description they apply to themselves. If you wish to reject it, fine.
Most of the ones I have encountered were socialists or at least leaned in that direction.

ed: No, the NTS fallacy does not apply to Christianity because we actually have an objective definition of what a Christian is, it is called the Bible.

ia: And of course, the vast majority of Christians who would disagree with you about what a Christians should believe - well, they're just mistaken, aren't they?
Ed, in trying to avoid the No True Scotsman fallacy, you have just committed it again.
No, the vast majority of Christians that accept the historical view regarding an infallible authority of the Bible agree with me and each other about the essentials.
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Wanting to survive is not an objective reason. The very fact that you use the term "wanting" shows that. It is a desire, which is a subjective feeling.
I did not say my feelings were objective.

:sigh:

Once more.

We choose to survive. If we choose to survive and live a good life (any kind of a good life), then it is an objective fact that we need other people. It is an objective fact that the only way for us all to do that is to build trusting relationships with others. It is an objective fact that this requires rules of fairness.

And please do not respond by asking us one more time why we don't commit suicide. We don't commit suicide because we don't want to. If you ask me that again, you will get the same answer.

And please don't respond by ignoring the phrase "any kind of a good life" and saying my choice of a good life is subjective. My reply applies to any kind of a good life. Any kind. We need trusting relationships to survive and live any kind of a good life. Get it?
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
No, I already demonstrated His existence earlier in this thread.

..using arguments that sound to me like the following:

The Argument from Cat Vomit
1. Some things in the universe (such as cat vomit) have a unity of diversity.
2. God is reported to have a unity of diversity.
3.Therefore, God exists.

The Argument from Night and Day
1. Jeremiah said that night and day follow a pattern.
2. Night indeed follows day, and day indeed follows night.
3. How did Jeremiah know that? It's a miracle!
4. Therefore, God exists.

The Argument from Incompleteness.
1. No logic system is complete.
2. This argument uses logic.
3. Therefore, God exists.

The Argument from Limited Observation
1. We are limited in how far back in time and space we can observe.
2. If we cannot observe it, then it is nonphysical.
3. God is said to be nonphysical.
4. Therefore, God exists.

The Argument from the Definition of Good
1. God defines what words mean in English.
2. God defined that the English word "good" means whatever God is.
3. Based on this definition, God's character is "good".
4. Therefore, God is good.
5. Therefore, theists get to make the United States a theocracy.

The Argument from Incredulity
1. We don't know anything beyond the observable universe.
2. If we don't know something, then Ed1Wolf gets to make it up.
3. Therefore Ed1Wolf is right.
4. Therefore, God exists.

The Argument from Proof
1. I have proven this.
2. What? You think I said I have proven it? Straw man!
3. Your logic is invalid. You use a straw man.
4. Therefore I have proven it.
5. Therefore, God exists.

The Argument from Ed1Wolf's Feelings
1. Ed1Wolf subjectively feels that God's character is objectively good.
2. It is objective truth that anything that Ed1Wolf subjectively feels is objective truth.
3. Therefore it is objectively true that God's character is objectively good.
4. The Bible's strong recommendations perfectly conform to God's character.
5. Therefore the Bible's strong recommendations about morality are infallible.

All of these arguments are bunkers.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 4, 2006
3,868
1,065
.
✟95,047.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
No, I already demonstrated His existence earlier in this thread.


Agreed and your point is?


A woman is a female human and a girl is a female human and an embryo with two XX chromosomes is a female human. What is your science to the contrary?


It depends if my personhood went with my brain. If so, then I would be in China. If not, then I would be in the USA. Personhood is nonphysical though partially produced by physical processes so most likely I would be in China. If a female transgender's brain was put in your body would you be male or female?


You never refuted my demonstration.


There is historical and archaeological evidence that the Bible is accurate.


Most of the ones I have encountered were socialists or at least leaned in that direction.


No, the vast majority of Christians that accept the historical view regarding an infallible authority of the Bible agree with me and each other about the essentials.
Well, Ed, it's been fun, but I haven't got the time or patience to correct you any longer. If you think that a fetus is a woman, a humanist is a socialist or that you have already shown that God exists, you're only fooling yourself.

Thank you for the conversation. Sixty-six pages is indulging you far enough, though.
 
Upvote 0

Ed1wolf

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2002
2,928
178
South Carolina
✟132,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Neither do the mafia demand compliance, they just strongly recommend it.

Uh, huh.

So do we rename the Ten Commandments the Ten Strong Recommendations?

So are you saying that threatening eternal hell to the disobedient does not qualify as demanding obedience? What would qualify as a demand?
God does not threaten hell, He warns about it. The biggest difference is that God warns you about hell out of selfless love, the mafia threatens punishment and demands compliance in order to selfishly get something out of you that he wants or needs. God has no needs so needs nothing from you nor demands compliance from you. He loves you and wants to you to spend eternity with Him out of your own free will and choice.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
God does not threaten hell, He warns about it.
Why doesn't he just get rid of it?

Why doesn't he simply just offer heaven? Take it or leave it. If you are not interested, you can elect to have your life ended. Is that not more humane than eternal torment?
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
A woman is a female human and a girl is a female human and an embryo with two XX chromosomes is a female human.
And an egg next to a sperm is a female human?
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Upvote 0

Ed1wolf

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2002
2,928
178
South Carolina
✟132,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
ed: I dont know, it depends on what kind of god.
See what the god does and use their moral conscience to make that determination.

dm: Ah, so you say if I were in another universe with another God, I should let my moral conscience decide.

And does the same apply to this universe? Should we also let our moral conscience decide if we should follow God?

Sounds quite subjective to me. The moral conscience varies widely. Some have a conscience against drinking alcohol. Others don't. Some have a conscience forbidding divorce. Others don't. Some have a conscience against profanity. Others don't. And now you say use our conscience to determine if we follow the God of our universe?
I find that it is better to use reason as a moral guide.
Yes, the moral conscience can very widely, that is why you need to anchor your morality in the objectiev moral character of the Creator of the Universe who created the moral laws of the universe. Reason and conscience can lead you anywhere morally. Lenin thought he was very reasonable and so did his followers and look what he led to.

ed: If you mean, use your conscience then yes.

dm: This is in response to, "I contend that the only way they could determine if their God is good is to use similar criteria to what humanists use to determine good."

No, of course not. I meant what I said. Use the way that humanists use to determine good. We use reason. The conscience is just a feeling, and that is not a reliable guide.
Humans are not Mr. Spock, our reason is often controlled by our feelings as well. See above about Lenin. Using pure reason in moral decisions often leads to using people as a means to an end. If all you want to have is fun, then it is very reasonable to abort your child when you get pregnant but is it the moral thing to do?
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Yes, the moral conscience can very widely, that is why you need to anchor your morality in the objective moral character of the Creator of the Universe who created the moral laws of the universe.
You write this in response to the discussion where I was explaining to you that Christians vary widely on morals. Some Christians think drinking beer is sin. Others disagree. Some think divorce is sin. Others disagree. Some think killing people in war is sin. Others disagree. Some think using God's name as a swear word is sin. Others disagree. Some think you need to worship on Saturday. Others disagree. We could go on and on. Many Christians use the same Bible, and have different opinions on what is right and wrong.

And your response is to thump your chest and claim that you follow the objective moral character of the Creator, and all other Christians who disagree with you do not?

All I can do is read what you say, and shake my head in sorrow.

Reason and conscience can lead you anywhere morally.
I suggest you read a book on moral reason before you condemn it.

And if reason is so bad, why do you write, using reason, to condemn all reason? Haven't you just cut off the branch you are sitting on?

Regarding conscience, yes, that is just a feeling. Feelings vary from person to person. The problem for you is that, when we ask you about God's goodness, all you can seem to come up with is that your conscience says he is good. And then you condemn using conscience. Go figure.

Lenin thought he was very reasonable and so did his followers and look what he led to.
Flat earthers thought they were very reasonable.

The solution to faulty reasoning is good reasoning.

Humans are not Mr. Spock, our reason is often controlled by our feelings as well.
My response to that is the same as my response to people who keep hitting themselves on the head with a hammer. If hitting yourself on the head with a hammer is bad, and letting feelings control your reason is bad, then don't do it.

Next.
Using pure reason in moral decisions often leads to using people as a means to an end.
And so you use reason to reach the conclusion that all use of reason is bad?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ed1wolf

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2002
2,928
178
South Carolina
✟132,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
ed: That only applies to teaching in the church.

dm: It's not just in the church. The Bible says, "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord." (Colossians 3:18) That is not equal to the husband's position.
Yes in the home, the husband is the head of the household. Every organization needs leaders, God has designed men to be the leader of the household. But both husband and wife are of equal value, just in different roles. Just like you and your boss are of equal value, you just have different roles.

ed: And it is not degrading.

dm: That depends on your view. To me it is degrading to tell a person you may not speak in church because you are of the wrong gender.
Is it degrading that you cannot be a mother? Everyone has different roles in every organization. All roles in the family and the church are of equal value as I stated above.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,245
2,832
Oregon
✟732,006.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
Yes in the home, the husband is the head of the household. Every organization needs leaders, God has designed men to be the leader of the household. But both husband and wife are of equal value, just in different roles. Just like you and your boss are of equal value, you just have different roles.

Is it degrading that you cannot be a mother? Everyone has different roles in every organization. All roles in the family and the church are of equal value as I stated above.
In my household, leadership is a group effort. Both my wife and I share that leadership role. She is not my boss and I'm not her boss. We are a team and make decisions together. Both of us are the heads of the household. Neither above the other.

I'm very glad that women are experiencing a greater voice in the Christian world, though clearly not enough. Women have a way of reaching out and including a wider and more inclusive spiritual perspective that we men could learn from.
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
God has designed men to be the leader of the household. But both husband and wife are of equal value, just in different roles. Just like you and your boss are of equal value, you just have different roles.
...and slaves and masters have equal value, just different roles?

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

― George Orwell, Animal Farm
 
Upvote 0

Ed1wolf

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2002
2,928
178
South Carolina
✟132,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I didn't say Psalms 137:9 was a command. It is a blessing on those who commit the horrible crime of dashing babies against rocks:

Do you or do you not think it is wrong to pronounce a blessing on those who murder Babylonian babies ?
No, it is not a blessing, it is how the soldiers that do it will feel because of all the evil the Babylonians had done to the jews. But that does not mean that they SHOULD feel that way. It is a prediction of how they will feel.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
No, it is not a blessing, it is how the soldiers that do it will feel because of all the evil the Babylonians had done to the jews. But that does not mean that they SHOULD feel that way. It is a prediction of how they will feel.

I disagree that killing babies makes people happy

And if the Psalmist was saying, look, baby killing give you a happy feeling, but don't do it, he was quite incompetent at expressing his thoughts. That sure is not what I read in this Psalm. It looks to me like a blessing being pronounced on an evil act.

 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.