(February 10, 2016 at 5:14 am)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(February 9, 2016 at 3:29 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: is killing equivalent to murder?

Yes.

Quote:when a person is put to death by the justice system because of his/her crimes against humanity is that murder or justice?

That would be murder.

Quote:What is the just punishment for a murderer? 

Justice, like morality, is a human concept that is subjective to the scenario, culture, etc. There is no objectively "just" punishment for murder, though incarceration is certainly more human than the death penalty and does more or less the same job.

Quote:God explicitly says that murder it wrong,

Yeah, and then he orders the Israelites to kill other nations in droves. That never struck you as odd?

Quote:rape is wrong

Technically the Bible doesn't say that.

Quote:therefor genocide is wrong.

Not only does that logic not follow, but religiously-motivated genocide is condoned and celebrated in the Bible, especially the Old Testament.

Quote: He also says to that he does treat a person unfairly based on race, sex, class et cetera.

Wow...language is really starting to fail you, isn't it?


I think I understand what your'e saying, and no, the Bible is anything but an egalitarian document. It condones the purchase and use of slaves from foreign nations, it treats women as property rather than people, and it places both slaves and women in a class that is distinctly below and submissive to free, Jewish men. That is not a message of classless equality.

Quote:God own everything and person and the only reason anyone of use exist it because of His will.

Prove it.

Quote:He is so merciful and slow to anger He will allow you to speak lies about him and hasn't taken you out.

Maybe that's because he doesn't exist.

Quote:  He allowed me to blaspheme his name and has forgiven me. 

Maybe that's because he doesn't exist.

Quote:Also it takes more power and self-control to do what is necessary and right no matter your feelings on the matter.

Self control? You mean like when he allegedly raged out and destroyed virtually every living thing on Earth?

Quote:To have all power doesn't mean you use it in every situation. If you have ever observed a wise person who is full of knowledge they are not always letting everyone know how much they know. He set aside what He could do, which would be wiping all human kind out because we are all corrupt in our thinking and actions.

He set aside the wiping out of humanity? How so? One of his first acts as Gaud was to nearly annihilate life on Earth in a global flood. That's hardly setting aside the wiping out of humanity.

Quote:In order to redeem people from every nation, language, class, and tongue. So, that people may understand who He is and how wonderful and loving He was to step off his throne. To make himself of no reputation so that He may live a life like ours and die a death that we deserve. God is not evil but one that is both just and merciful. Lies about Him are of no help to the one who rejects Him. They will not aid them when judgement comes but it takes humility to see God for who He truly is. He is both amazing and good and will send his wrath against those who cling to their evil ways.

Seeing Gaud takes imagination, not humility.

If you believe that justice is a human concept then murder is just another form of death. In your view of reality murder would be no more wrong than dying in your sleep, and only frowned upon because of people's opinions. This would also be the case with rape and genocide. Since justice, as you view it, has no true grounds in your view of reality then rape is a form of sex and genocide just another way to die. It will only be deplorable because of the opinion of people at that time. So then when you judge God you are not expressing a fact, but only an opinion which is a product of your background and culture. So you may have felt differently if you lived in a different place or time. 

What is also a human concept is your description of God. It is easy to dislike and disapprove of your gaud because it is a total fallacy. Or as you would call it a straw man. The problem for you is that this lie will not save you when God makes His judgment. None of us can stand behind any lie we have told ourselves about God. The only thing that will save us from God's just judgment is in the sacrifice Jesus made for our sins. He paid the price in order that we may be saved from destruction and to a right and loving relationship with God. 

As for how God owns everything. Someone set everything in motion. Someone set up the laws of nature and even if you don't agree the moral law as well. These things were setup to reflect God's attributes and highlight our depravity and brokenness. Every living organism has a system by which it functions.  There is order to the world around us and we have to capacity to decipher our world. This is not the working of random chance but of God's intimate work in creation. Your worldview has no explanation that is congruent with reality in regards to life or morality. No one has definitively proven in a scientific fashion how life was started. Your world view can not give value for life or morality. All of your rage against God falls flat because you can't give an argument that stands up to reality.

Lastly I addressed slavery in this thread, I believe I also spoke on slavery but I can't find the link. Still, based on what you have stated about your view of justice slavery and rape's lack of merit is only based on human concepts. Based on your worldview your negative view on slavery has no more merit then anyone who views it positively.

(February 11, 2016 at 8:03 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: If you believe that justice is a human concept then murder is just another form of death. In your view of reality murder would be no more wrong than dying in your sleep, and only frowned upon because of people's opinions.

Bingo. Communal morality only exists because people generally frown upon certain actions. What's the problem?

Quote:This would also be the case with rape and genocide.

Yeah, pretty much. You might think your morality comes from a higher source, but no. Christian morality exists because Christians frown on certain actions, and their guideline for doing that happens to be the Bible. It's still human-sourced morality, just like mine. You just don't realize it because you think your imaginary friend is involved.

Quote:Since justice, as you view it, has no true grounds in your view of reality

That's not what I said, and you can't put words in my mouth. Justice is a human concept, but that doesn't mean it has no grounds in reality.

Quote:then rape is a form of sex and genocide just another way to die. It will only be deplorable because of the opinion of people at that time.

Yup. You've got it. Because of the suffering involved in those forms of sex and death, humans have generally decided that those things aren't acceptable behavior. We don't need imaginary sky friends to establish that, and we don't need to believe in magic.

Quote:So then when you judge God you are not expressing a fact, but only an opinion which is a product of your background and culture. So you may have felt differently if you lived in a different place or time.

You're probably right. In fact, at another time in my life, I did feel differently. I believed more or less the same garbage you do. Now I've grown past that.

Quote:What is also a human concept is your description of God. It is easy to dislike and disapprove of your gaud because it is a total fallacy. Or as you would call it a straw man.

My "description" of Gaud is drawn from the pages of the Bible, and from Christian doctrine.

Quote:The problem for you is that this lie will not save you when God makes His judgment. None of us can stand behind any lie we have told ourselves about God. The only thing that will save us from God's just judgment is in the sacrifice Jesus made for our sins. He paid the price in order that we may be saved from destruction and to a right and loving relationship with God.

Prove it.

Quote:As for how God owns everything. Someone set everything in motion.

Prove it.

Quote:Someone set up the laws of nature and even if you don't agree the moral law as well.

Prove it.

Quote:These things were setup to reflect God's attributes and highlight our depravity and brokenness.

Prove it.

Quote:Every living organism has a system by which it functions.  There is order to the world around us and we have to capacity to decipher our world.

For once, I totally agree.

Quote:This is not the working of random chance but of God's intimate work in creation.

That I don't agree with. That you will have to prove.

Quote:Your worldview has no explanation that is congruent with reality in regards to life or morality.

Quite the contrary. You're the one with an unrealistic world view.

Quote:No one has definitively proven in a scientific fashion how life was started.

And yet you propose to tell me that ancient peoples, in their infinite wisdom and scientific acumen, did know how life started? Please.

Quote:Your world view can not give value for life or morality.

I've already explained why that isn't true and why life and morality are valuable, but I'm sure you were too busy spouting Bible nonsense to pay any attention to what I said.

Quote:All of your rage against God falls flat because you can't give an argument that stands up to reality.

Says the woman who has failed to refute anything I've presented.

Quote:Lastly I addressed slavery in this thread, I believe I also spoke on slavery but I can't find the link. Still, based on what you have stated about your view of justice slavery and rape's lack of merit is only based on human concepts. Based on your worldview your negative view on slavery has no more merit then anyone who views it positively.

That really depends on how we're measuring merit. Considering the current global attitude toward slavery, anti-slavery sentiments could be considered more meritorious than pro-slavery ones for a number of practical, objective reasons (like, say, not wanting to be ostracized by society or arrested for slave mongering).


So yes, human concepts can have more or less merit than other human concepts. Your Gaud, for instance, is a human concept, and as a concept he has significantly less merit than pretty much any other concept you could name.

(February 11, 2016 at 10:32 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(February 11, 2016 at 8:03 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: If you believe that justice is a human concept then murder is just another form of death. In your view of reality murder would be no more wrong than dying in your sleep, and only frowned upon because of people's opinions.

Bingo. Communal morality only exists because people generally frown upon certain actions. What's the problem?

Quote:This would also be the case with rape and genocide.

Yeah, pretty much. You might think your morality comes from a higher source, but no. Christian morality exists because Christians frown on certain actions, and their guideline for doing that happens to be the Bible. It's still human-sourced morality, just like mine. You just don't realize it because you think your imaginary friend is involved.

Quote:Since justice, as you view it, has no true grounds in your view of reality

That's not what I said, and you can't put words in my mouth. Justice is a human concept, but that doesn't mean it has no grounds in reality.

Quote:then rape is a form of sex and genocide just another way to die. It will only be deplorable because of the opinion of people at that time.

Yup. You've got it. Because of the suffering involved in those forms of sex and death, humans have generally decided that those things aren't acceptable behavior. We don't need imaginary sky friends to establish that, and we don't need to believe in magic.

Quote:So then when you judge God you are not expressing a fact, but only an opinion which is a product of your background and culture. So you may have felt differently if you lived in a different place or time.

You're probably right. In fact, at another time in my life, I did feel differently. I believed more or less the same garbage you do. Now I've grown past that.

Quote:What is also a human concept is your description of God. It is easy to dislike and disapprove of your gaud because it is a total fallacy. Or as you would call it a straw man.

My "description" of Gaud is drawn from the pages of the Bible, and from Christian doctrine.

Quote:The problem for you is that this lie will not save you when God makes His judgment. None of us can stand behind any lie we have told ourselves about God. The only thing that will save us from God's just judgment is in the sacrifice Jesus made for our sins. He paid the price in order that we may be saved from destruction and to a right and loving relationship with God.

Prove it.

Quote:As for how God owns everything. Someone set everything in motion.

Prove it.

Quote:Someone set up the laws of nature and even if you don't agree the moral law as well.

Prove it.

Quote:These things were setup to reflect God's attributes and highlight our depravity and brokenness.

Prove it.

Quote:Every living organism has a system by which it functions.  There is order to the world around us and we have to capacity to decipher our world.

For once, I totally agree.

Quote:This is not the working of random chance but of God's intimate work in creation.

That I don't agree with. That you will have to prove.

Quote:Your worldview has no explanation that is congruent with reality in regards to life or morality.

Quite the contrary. You're the one with an unrealistic world view.

Quote:No one has definitively proven in a scientific fashion how life was started.

And yet you propose to tell me that ancient peoples, in their infinite wisdom and scientific acumen, did know how life started? Please.

Quote:Your world view can not give value for life or morality.

I've already explained why that isn't true and why life and morality are valuable, but I'm sure you were too busy spouting Bible nonsense to pay any attention to what I said.

Quote:All of your rage against God falls flat because you can't give an argument that stands up to reality.

Says the woman who has failed to refute anything I've presented.

Quote:Lastly I addressed slavery in this thread, I believe I also spoke on slavery but I can't find the link. Still, based on what you have stated about your view of justice slavery and rape's lack of merit is only based on human concepts. Based on your worldview your negative view on slavery has no more merit then anyone who views it positively.

That really depends on how we're measuring merit. Considering the current global attitude toward slavery, anti-slavery sentiments could be considered more meritorious than pro-slavery ones for a number of practical, objective reasons (like, say, not wanting to be ostracized by society or arrested for slave mongering).


So yes, human concepts can have more or less merit than other human concepts. Your Gaud, for instance, is a human concept, and as a concept he has significantly less merit than pretty much any other concept you could name.

How can you ask me for proof when you believe that life came out of random chance? (I am not dodging your questions but if we don't start with your presuppositions I don't think we will get anywhere with my proofs.) God has made the world. He set up laws of nature which are predictable.  Yet if this world was made out of chaos I believe there would be a continued display from chaos. If this is the case then we could not assume that the past would like the future. So the idea of proof only works when there is a ordained order set up and kept up by a being who has a purpose.  So I guess were to start is back to the beginning. What are your view of the origins of the world? If you would please oblige me because I believe you have touched on this subject but a clear and concise statement will help me truly understand what you think about how the world came about.

If justice has grounds in reality that means that it is not a human concept.  Godzilla is a human concept but it does not reflect reality. Either justice is real and does not end with the Human mind or it is just as imaginary as Godzilla. Since I am asking about your genesis of the world would you please explain your views on the origin of morality?

(February 16, 2016 at 9:02 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: How can you ask me for proof when you believe that life came out of random chance? (I am not dodging your questions but if we don't start with your presuppositions I don't think we will get anywhere with my proofs.)

First off, I don't believe life came out of random chance. Life came out of chemistry and time. I suppose chance played a role, but life was probably inevitable considering that it seems to be a natural product of the Universe and its behavior.

Quote: God has made the world.

*Sigh*...Prove it. You can't refuse to prove any of your claims and then go making yet more claims which must yet be proven before they can be assumed to be true.

Quote:He set up laws of nature which are predictable.

While I acknowledge that nature is predictable and that we're able to describe it with natural laws, there is no evidence to support the notion that your Gaud was necessary for that to happen. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Quote: Yet if this world was made out of chaos I believe there would be a continued display from chaos.

Goody for what you believe. I believe in drawing conclusions from evidence.

Quote:If this is the case then we could not assume that the past would like the future.

You don't know that. Maybe we could. How can you draw that kind of conclusion from a hypothetical situation? Now you're just making up rules as you go along.

Quote:So the idea of proof only works when there is a ordained order set up and kept up by a being who has a purpose.

No. The idea of proof also works in a Universe that behaves consistently and was created by no one.

Quote:  So I guess were to start is back to the beginning. What are your view of the origins of the world? If you would please oblige me because I believe you have touched on this subject but a clear and concise statement will help me truly understand what you think about how the world came about.

Technically that doesn't matter, since my view on the origins of the world have nothing to do with whether any evidence exists for yours. As for how planets form, I'm told that has to do with energy slowing, cooling, and forming into stars, rocks, and other kinds of matter. That's probably a vast oversimplification, but at least it's borne out by evidence.

Quote:If justice has grounds in reality that means that it is not a human concept.

Upon what evidence is that assertion based?

Quote: Godzilla is a human concept but it does not reflect reality.

Actually, Godzilla was based directly on the destruction of the Atomic Bomb, and that's why he was such an effective cinematic tool in Japan. Godzilla is a direct reflection of the reality of what Japan suffered in World War II. Way to not know what you're talking about. Again.

Quote:Either justice is real and does not end with the Human mind or it is just as imaginary as Godzilla.

Your argument is based on the unsupported assertion that human concepts have no basis in reality.


Love is a human concept, and it's based on the reality of our social interactions and how we feel about each other and about things.


Science is a human concept, and it's based on the reality of how the Universe behaves and the consistency with which it behaves.


Justice is a human concept, and it's based on the reality that humans collectively wish to cooperate with each other and remove those who selfishly threaten the herd.


Most human concepts, in fact, have some basis in reality. Your Gaud, for instance, is based on the reality that ancient peoples had no way of explaining or understanding weather events, disease, or really much of anything.

Quote:Since I am asking about your genesis of the world would you please explain your views on the origin of morality?

We've been over this. Empathy. It all boils down to the Golden Rule. We're a social species, and morality is an evolved trait that helps us cooperate and survive. We can recognize when we don't want something to happen to us, and we're able to reason out that if we wouldn't want something done to us, we shouldn't do it to others. This is the social contract that keeps society from disintegrating. Your Gaud is not needed to explain it.

I don't quite understand your view of the creation of the universe. Do you believe there was structure then time or that nothing+time created structure and that structure created everything else, with a little random thrown in. If creation isn't random then the opposite is true which makes creation planned or purposeful. So who was planning? This is my proof. The world is not random nor is it made by random means. It has structure and works in a certain way, because there is a purposeful being behind it. This is why I can give you proof. If there is no function behind the earth, as you have stated before, then proof is not possible because there is no way that the world should work. You can't say "that is wrong" and "that is right" about anything. All your evaluations would be arbitrary or just opinions but not definitive, objective, or concrete. 

Yet you did say 

Quote:While I acknowledge that nature is predictable and that we're able to describe it with natural laws, there is no evidence to support the notion that your Gaud was necessary for that to happen. Quite the contrary, in fact.

would you explain how you see this as possible.
You spoke about predictability from chaos. How can you believe that structure could come from chaos (being the total lack of order). There is no order in chaos, so the only thing there could be, would be chaos. This is why I can say that "with chaos you can't assume or predict".


As for justice, science, and love you are borrowing from my worldview. As you are assuming that there is a function to humans and the world. But if there is no function, then there is no proper way for the world to work. Staying within your view point, love (like justice) works because of society yet society is a collection of people. So what I read and understand that you are saying is that love is a reality because people have "conceived" of this idea, for use as a society, to feel a way about something.
To me, if love is just a mental thing then it is as arbitrary as tinker bell. Everyone must believe enough in it and when they don't it ceases to exist. That is not reality. For love to be real/concrete it must function outside of our own "concepts". 
Love is a person, Jesus Christ, who laid His life down for those who were His enemies. That is true love because even if no one believed in it, it would not take away the fact that it still happened.

(February 22, 2016 at 3:31 pm)Rekeisha Wrote:

Quote:While I acknowledge that nature is predictable and that we're able to describe it with natural laws, there is no evidence to support the notion that your Gaud was necessary for that to happen. Quite the contrary, in fact.

would you explain how you see this as possible.
You spoke about predictability from chaos. How can you believe that structure could come from chaos (being the total lack of order). There is no order in chaos, so the only thing there could be, would be chaos. This is why I can say that "with chaos you can't assume or predict".

Ramsey theory states that in any sufficiently large sequence of randomness, there will be pockets of order. So, no, you're wrong.

(February 22, 2016 at 3:31 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: As for justice, science, and love you are borrowing from my worldview. As you are assuming that there is a function to humans and the world. But if there is no function, then there is no proper way for the world to work. Staying within your view point, love (like justice) works because of society yet society is a collection of people. So what I read and understand that you are saying is that love is a reality because people have "conceived" of this idea, for use as a society, to feel a way about something.
To me, if love is just a mental thing then it is as arbitrary as tinker bell. Everyone must believe enough in it and when they don't it ceases to exist. That is not reality. For love to be real/concrete it must function outside of our own "concepts". 

Do you have a subconscious? Are the products of your subconscious mind objectively real?

(February 22, 2016 at 3:31 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: Love is a person, Jesus Christ, who laid His life down for those who were His enemies. That is true love because even if no one believed in it, it would not take away the fact that it still happened.

Funny, it doesn't feel like love. It feels more like a threat.

(February 22, 2016 at 3:31 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: I don't quite understand your view of the creation of the universe.

My view on the creation of the Universe is that it wasn't created. It just happened.

Quote:If creation isn't random then the opposite is true which makes creation planned or purposeful. So who was planning?

"Planned" and "purposeful" are not opposites of random. The opposite of random would be "ordered," or something along those lines.

Quote: This is my proof. The world is not random nor is it made by random means.

That is not proof. That is an assertion that you would need to prove, and even if it were true you would still need to demonstrate why it necessitates the existence of your god.

Quote: It has structure and works in a certain way, because there is a purposeful being behind it.

Oh look. Another assertion.


A structured Universe with consistent laws does not demand an intelligence as an explanation.

Quote: This is why I can give you proof.

What proof? You still haven't shown any.

Quote: If there is no function behind the earth, as you have stated before, then proof is not possible because there is no way that the world should work.

A reality with no intended purpose could still behave consistently, and as long as reality behaves consistently it's possible to prove things. You seem to have conflated purpose with order and meaninglessness with chaos, but there's no logical reason to draw that parallel. Ordered things can still be totally meaningless, and random things can have an intended purpose (like a coin toss, for instance).

Quote: You can't say "that is wrong" and "that is right" about anything. All your evaluations would be arbitrary or just opinions but not definitive, objective, or concrete.

Yet you did say 

Quote:While I acknowledge that nature is predictable and that we're able to describe it with natural laws, there is no evidence to support the notion that your Gaud was necessary for that to happen. Quite the contrary, in fact.

would you explain how you see this as possible.
You spoke about predictability from chaos. How can you believe that structure could come from chaos (being the total lack of order). There is no order in chaos, so the only thing there could be, would be chaos. This is why I can say that "with chaos you can't assume or predict".

You seem to have this idea that if reality wasn't created, then it consists only of chaos. That is not correct. A reality with no intelligent creator could still behave consistently. Chaos is only one of a vast number of forces at play in the Universe, and even if the Universe were completely without chaos, that still wouldn't prove a creator in and of itself.

Quote:As for justice, science, and love you are borrowing from my worldview.

If you think your religion invented the concepts of justice, science, and love, then you are a blithering idiot with no concept of reality.

Quote: As you are assuming that there is a function to humans and the world. But if there is no function, then there is no proper way for the world to work. Staying within your view point, love (like justice) works because of society yet society is a collection of people. So what I read and understand that you are saying is that love is a reality because people have "conceived" of this idea, for use as a society, to feel a way about something.

No, you've got it backwards. Cooperative, intimate human interaction is a reality, and love is just what we decided to call it.

Quote:To me, if love is just a mental thing then it is as arbitrary as tinker bell.

Bully for you. Obviously you don't know what arbitrary means.

Quote: Everyone must believe enough in it and when they don't it ceases to exist. That is not reality.

You're so dangerously close to self-awareness that it makes me weep for what could have been if you had just a few more brain cells.

Quote:For love to be real/concrete it must function outside of our own "concepts". 
Love is a person, Jesus Christ, who laid His life down for those who were His enemies. That is true love because even if no one believed in it, it would not take away the fact that it still happened.

If it were true you'd be able to prove it, but we've been over that already.

You say that my statements are assertions and you say that the universe doesn't need an intelligent being behind to make it be ordered. Can you prove this? How is order kept? 

Quote:You seem to have this idea that if reality wasn't created, then it consists only of chaos. That is not correct. A reality with no intelligent creator could still behave consistently. Chaos is only one of a vast number of forces at play in the Universe, and even if the Universe were completely without chaos, that still wouldn't prove a creator in and of itself.

I apologize if I gave you that idea. I believe that the only reason there is anything is because of God who is the creator of everything. Without God there would be nothing. 

Quote:A structured Universe with consistent laws does not demand an intelligence as an explanation.

Does an organized room demand intelligence? When is the last observable case of spontaneous organization?

Quote:What proof? You still haven't shown any.

What would you accept as proof?

Quote:A reality with no intended purpose could still behave consistently

behaving consistently and having a way it should function are two different things. If things don't have a function then there isn't a certain way they should work. So justice and love are arbitrary no matter the human consensus.  Can you name one thing that has no function?

Quote:If you think your religion invented the concepts of justice, science, and love, then you are a blithering idiot with no concept of reality

Again I apologize that I have not been clear. I believe that it is God who is the originator of justice, science, and love. He created all things and justice and love are a reflection of His nature. He is the reason that life is sustained and why we as humans long for love as well as justice. I do not believe in God because of a religion but because I know Him.

It would seem that Ramsey Theory is saying that there is no such thing as chaos and I would agree with that.

Not all my thoughts align with reality. It is the same with feelings. You may not feel like Jesus' death on the cross, for your sins, but that doesn't stop His death from being an act of love. You may not hold the same definition of love as God does. So He defines it as this in 1 Cor 13. His love is not like the way you may view love because His ways are not our ways. You can't grasp the depths of God's love without the understanding your sin and God's Holiness. Since He is just and holy He must punish evil which would mean the destruction of all humanity. Yet, He is creating a people for himself. So, He has made a way through Jesus Christ who took on our punishment in order that we may know Him.

He didn't need to "make a way"; he needed to forgive us for being literally unable to obey his rules. Instead, what he did was offer a vicarious sacrifice of blood-magic (of himself) in order to atone for the infractions against the rules he made (himself), and in order to "cash in" that atonement, one must submit to the will of this deity-- which just happens to consist of a lot of the weird prejudices and world-views common in the ancient Near East, among a particular people in Canaan.

How this isn't the most obvious priest-con-game on the planet baffles me. Listening to you Christers prattling on about the "love of God" and then listing all the things God expects of you (and me!) is a bit like watching the movie The Invention of Lying, where everyone just automatically believes everything Ricky Gervais says.

Paul uses the word "agape", which means "selfless love, one that demands no repayment" (according to the translators at BibleHub), and yet those of us outside your little (big) cult can clearly see that there are numerous strings attached... apparently, including sacrificing your ability to actually understand what humans have discovered since the invention of the Scientific Method in favor of the priest-writings of Bronze/Iron Age sheepherder-warrior-priests.