Why the desire to sin?

[Ken-1122]

And I never asked you if it would work either.

No you claimed I said it would work. Your exact words from post #471 were:
"WHY did Lincoln HAVE to end slavery by force, when you say just sharing the Golden Rule with them would have sufficed."
I never said that.

What I wanted to know was what argument YOU WOULD USE to convince them that they were morally obligated to do something.

In this case, I would not attempt to use moral agruments to convince immoral people that they should behave morally, I would use force. What about you?

Ken

 

[Joshua260]

No you claimed I said it would work. Your exact words from post #471 were:
"WHY did Lincoln HAVE to end slavery by force, when you say just sharing the Golden Rule with them would have sufficed."
I never said that.

In this case, I would not attempt to use moral agruments to convince immoral people that they should behave morally, I would use force. What about you?

Ken

You're the one who keeps focusing on what would work. That has never been what I was talking about. If you think it was, you have misunderstood me. All I'm interested in is what argument you would use to convince the plantation owners that they were morally OBLIGATED to free their slaves. Wether your argument would work is irrelevant. So are you EVER going to answer me?

 

[Ken-1122]

You're the one who keeps focusing on what would work. That has never been what I was talking about. If you think it was, you have misunderstood me. All I'm interested in is what argument you would use to convince the plantation owners that they were morally OBLIGATED to free their slaves. Wether your argument would work is irrelevant. So are you EVER going to answer me?

I've already answered you. I wouldn't use moral arguments against immoral people, I would use force. What about you?

Ken

 

[Joshua260]

Who are these non-religious philosophers who claim your idea of God is necessary?

I didn't claim that. I simply made the observation that you "...do not understand what it means when philosophers say that God [or anything] exist necessarily."

That’s because it isn’t based upon faith.

I have no choice but to conclude that your belief that the universe did not have a beginning but has always existed is based on (blind) faith until you provide some evidence.

So why did you bring it up only now to say it isn't revelant?

I wish you would not keep taking us around in circles!! You said "First of all; if you are under the impression the US Civil war was fought strictly to end slavery, you might wanna brush up on your history." This statement is irrelevant because it is NOT what the discussion was about.

Did the bible say “indentured servitude”? No it says slaves. Or are you suggesting the bible was interperted incorrectly.

No, I am saying that YOU are interpreting the bible incorrectly.

I agree!

FINALLY!!! My statement to which you finally agreed to was that "it is therefore reasonable to suspect that some people would willfully deny the existence of God, even when presented with evidence." and that was my point of this entire exchange!!

 

[Joshua260]

I've already answered you. I wouldn't use moral arguments against immoral people, I would use force. What about you?

Ken

This is particularly disturbing. So, YOU are the one who is going to decide who IS moral and who is NOT moral!

Anakin: "We need a system where the politicians sit down and discuss the problem. Agree what's in the best interests of all the people, and do it."
Padme: "That's exactly what they do, the trouble is that people don't always agree."
Anakin: "Then they should be made to."
Padme: "By whom? Who's going to make them?"
Anakin: "I don't know. Someone."
Padme: "You?"

 

[Ken-1122]

This is particularly disturbing. So, YOU are the one who is going to decide who IS moral and who is NOT moral!

In this particular instance? YES! Why does that surprise you? Didn't you a few posts back claim Hitler was immoral?


Ken
PS Care to answer my question?

 

[Ken-1122]

I didn't claim that. I simply made the observation that you "...do not understand what it means when philosophers say that God [or anything] exist necessarily."

So why don't you explain it to me then.

I have no choice but to conclude that your belief that the universe did not have a beginning but has always existed is based on (blind) faith until you provide some evidence.

I think we have a different interpretation of what the Universe is.

No, I am saying that YOU are interpreting the bible incorrectly.

How could I interpret the Bible incorrectly; I didn’t even make a statement! I asked you a question; Of all the places in the Bible where slavery is mentioned, does it say slavery is wrong? A simple yes or no will do.

Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

Anakin: "We need a system where the politicians sit down and discuss the problem. Agree what's in the best interests of all the people, and do it."
Padme: "That's exactly what they do, the trouble is that people don't always agree."
Anakin: "Then they should be made to."
Padme: "By whom? Who's going to make them?"
Anakin: "I don't know. Someone."
Padme: "You?"

I believe this scenario would be particularly difficult to the person attempting to use the Bible rather than the Golden rule to come to agreement; with the Golden Rule, all you have to do is ask the slave owners, would you like to be treated the way you treat your slaves. With the bible, there is so much information in it that you can find examples where slavery appears to be condoned, and examples where slavery appears to be forbidden; thus an agreement will never be reached.
Not a very good scenario to make your point.

Ken