(March 27, 2013 at 1:46 pm)catfish Wrote: So, is a dickhole the same as an asshole?
.
No, a dickhole is the same as a catfish
ronedee Wrote:Science doesn't have a good explaination for water
Biblical Inerrancy - mandatory to be Christian?
|
(March 27, 2013 at 1:46 pm)catfish Wrote: So, is a dickhole the same as an asshole? No, a dickhole is the same as a catfish ronedee Wrote:Science doesn't have a good explaination for water
Is your childish behavior much of a problem in the real world???
(March 27, 2013 at 1:56 pm)catfish Wrote: Is your childish behavior much of a problem in the real world??? Is yours? catfish Wrote:So, is a dickhole the same as an asshole? ronedee Wrote:Science doesn't have a good explaination for water
Well? Is it the same or not?
All assholes are dick holes, but not all dick holes are assholes?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould (March 27, 2013 at 1:39 pm)CleanShavenJesus Wrote: atheism versus nihilism Sorry to make you angry. It is not my intention. How does atheism not entail moral relativism? And how does moral relativism not entail nihilism? All atheists are moral relativists All moral relativists are nihilists All atheists are nihilists How does this logic break down? How is an atheist not a moral relativist? How is a moral relativist not a nihilist? I would hope to encourage you to consider the destructive implications of your beliefs, not become more nihilistic. I understand that atheists can act against what their beliefs imply intellectually, and this is necessary to follow the conscience rather than the mind sometimes. But on paper, the two equate. Prove me wrong. (March 27, 2013 at 11:58 pm)jstrodel Wrote: How does this logic break down? How is an atheist not a moral relativist? How is a moral relativist not a nihilist?There are other ways of discerning moral truth than by listening to god's opinions on them. He may be very powerful, but what makes his ideas of morality anything more than subjective? (as he has modified them before) John Adams Wrote:The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
Before I get to that, where does the above syllogism fail? This is in another thread also.
God created everything, and has knowledge of the created orders nature, so God's morality is not only God's opinions but represents the most accurate appreciation of the nature of things. Because God is God, God's beliefs are more important than people. (March 28, 2013 at 12:50 am)jstrodel Wrote: God's morality is not only God's opinions but represents the most accurate appreciation of the nature of things.Therefore, one could successfully argue the merits of god's perfect morals on their own. If god's morals really are perfect, then we should end up with them after enough searching. It seems, though, that they are far from it. Of course, Christians will point away from the OT (which god did, at some point, declare to be the standard for morality) and towards "Christian morals". I am not certain exactly what these "Christian morals" are, and how much room for interpretation there is (theoretically, there shouldn't be any, otherwise it's subjective). John Adams Wrote:The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion. (March 27, 2013 at 11:58 pm)jstrodel Wrote: All atheists are moral relativists All humans are either male or female All males have a penis All humans have a penis ^ That doesn't seem to make much sense, does it? Neither does your conclusion. Not shockingly, might I add. I'll say you're correct about atheists being moral relativists, hence the correct line in my comparison "all humans are either male or female". But then you go ahead and say all moral relativists are nihilists? How the hell are all moral relativists nihilists? Where are you even getting that from? Then, from that, you jump to say all atheists are nihilists. All atheists are nihilists just as every human on Earth has a penis. Actually, if I were to make my own comparison parallel to yours, it would actually go like this: All humans are either male or female All males have a vagina All humans have a vagina ....because the statement "all moral relativists are nihilists" is as incorrect as "all males have a vagina". Prove to me that all moral relativists are nihilists. ronedee Wrote:Science doesn't have a good explaination for water |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|