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.
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.I did, see my post to interested atheist above.
Sorry, right now dont have time for another thread.Rather than burden this thread with yet another topic, evolution, I responded here: A biologist challenges evolution | Christian Forums .
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.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.
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.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.
No, I already demonstrated His existence earlier in this thread.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?
Agreed and your point is?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.
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: 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.
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: 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?
You never refuted my demonstration.ed: Fraid not, as I demonstrated long ago on this thread.
ia: Claimed, not demonstrated. US slavery was based on the Bible.
There is historical and archaeological evidence that the Bible is accurate.ia: Also, I'm not so sure we should believe what the Bible says. History being written by the winners, and all that.
Most of the ones I have encountered were socialists or at least leaned in that direction.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.
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.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.
I did not say my feelings were objective.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.
No, I already demonstrated His existence earlier in this thread.
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.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.
Ok,but your claims about evolution were refuted in that thread.Sorry, right now dont have time for another thread.
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.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?
Why doesn't he just get rid of it?God does not threaten hell, He warns about it.
And an egg next to a sperm is a female human?A woman is a female human and a girl is a female human and an embryo with two XX chromosomes is a female human.
Some places, yes. Some place, not so much.There is historical and archaeological evidence that the Bible is accurate.
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: 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.
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?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.
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.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.
I suggest you read a book on moral reason before you condemn it.Reason and conscience can lead you anywhere morally.
Flat earthers thought they were very reasonable.Lenin thought he was very reasonable and so did his followers and look what he led to.
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.Humans are not Mr. Spock, our reason is often controlled by our feelings as well.
And so you use reason to reach the conclusion that all use of reason is bad?Using pure reason in moral decisions often leads to using people as a means to an end.
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: 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.
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.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.
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.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.
...and slaves and masters have equal value, just different roles?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.
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 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.
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?