Subject:
|
Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 24 Oct 2003 17:55:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
658 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
|
| |
| |
Aside from these genetic issues, on what basis would you prevent
brother/sister marriages?
|
Cultural values.
|
And what are those cultural values based on? The reality of genetic
inbreeding, so it kinda loops back on itself. Saying cultural values is
saying that it is genetic issues, which is not in thcharacterizede “aside
from” column. I think you need to be more specific.
|
Brother/sister unions are taboo in most cultures AFAIK. That could point to a
genetic component that discourages such unions thereby avoiding inbreeding. Or,
all of the brothers and sisters who tried to procreate produced
retarded/defective/serile offspring that ceased the lineage.
It may not have a basis in morality, but it still seems “wrong”, or “not right”.
I think the genetic “wrongness” of such a union may have preceded any religious
admonition to refrain from it.
| |
| |
As far as we (or they) were able to ascertain God’s will. I start from a
point that God is Absolute Morality, Absolute Goodness. Any perception of
God that is less than that reflects misunderstanding.
|
If God gets to define what Absolute Morality and Absolute Goodness is. We
get to judge which particular god has the correct model of Absolute Morality
and Goodness, though.
|
There can be only one, no? (Absolute Morality, that is)
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
I am 100% atheist; do you therefore assert that it is impossible
for me to have non-religion-based morality?
|
Eventually, yes. I believe that there is no compelling reason to be good
without God.
|
I would go further and say that there is no transcendent “good” or “evil.”
That’s not to say that these concepts are wholly arbitrary, but I argue
that they are artifacts of our evolution as social organisms.
|
|
|
I think that that is exactly the case-- that they are wholly arbitrary.
| |
| |
We disagree. I would define God as “Good”, and the absence of God “Evil”.
Since you are atheistic, your assertion would make sense.
|
Onwards Christian soldiers, marching ass-backwards,
slay your Christian neighbors, as you’ve done before
Your definition is suspect.
|
You can’t define God by the actions of His followers. God’s followers are
imperfect creatures.
| |
| |
| |
The compelling reason to be “good,” in the sense that you describe, is
societal pressure consistent with evolutionary pressures.
|
Hmm. I don’t see humanity as a whole progressing towards goodness. On the
contrary, the most horrific acts of barbarism in history occured in the 20th
century.
|
I think we have become more effiecient at barbarism is all. Or perhaps with
increased population, we indulge in it on a more epic scale.
|
Okay, but we agree that humanity hasn’t progressed much towards goodness?
| |
| |
| |
| |
God is holy, mysterious, and good. Characterizations of God other than
that are at best inaccurate.
|
Without being (particularly) dense, I’m not sure exactly what “holy” means.
|
Holy would be ultimate goodness, worthy of worship and adulation.
|
So why don’t we skip the intervening newspeak and say that Goodness is worthy
of worship and adulation?
|
Semantics? God is obviously a concept that defies understanding. If you wish
to refer to God as an entity of Ultimate Goodness, fine. I think the key is to
acknowledge a separate, Holy entity that is distant and apart from ourselves.
| |
| |
| |
However, I’ve said before that if God (or the Deity of one’s choice) is
beyond human comprehension, then there is no way to assess His goodness or
holiness, and He’s only mysterious if He actually exists. And, if He
does exist, then He could be transcendently vile, cruel, and evil, but if
He convincingly pretends to be good, how would you know?
|
You can’t; it’s all faith.
| |
In short, there’s no way, short of a pure leap of faith, to conclude that
God has any particular characteristic (except mysteriousness).
|
Exactly.
|
So choice of faith is sheer hit or miss? Oh no, I feel a parody coming on...
YOU BET YOUR LIFE meets LETS MAKE A DEAL avec PYTHONESQUE
|
I like the convergence of the “Montys”:-) It also seems inspired by the Q court
from the “Return to Farpoint” bookend episodes of ST:TNG:-)
(snip good humor:-)
| |
Monty God: Say the secret woid and win the special prize.
|
How could a God who does Groucho imitations be cruel???
| |
Yes, John, you are
guilty of Pride in thinking that you have chosen the right door. Let’s open
the door: ETERNAL Damnation!
John: (struggling with demons trying to wrestle him into the pit to ask one
last question): Hey, that’s not fair! Which was the right door, then?
Monty God: You won’t like the answer.
John: (Gasping as he pokes a demon in the eye): Just tell me.
Monty God: You really won’t like the answer.
John: Just...tell...me!
Monty God: (revealing door hidden behind drapes): Door Number 42, of
course...
...via Douglas Adams
(but that would have been giving away the outcome if I put that at the top)
:-)
|
lol If God has a sense of humor (and I think He does), I wonder if He worked
some on Douglas when he died? :-)
| |
| |
| |
I absolutely think that the eradication of religion (and the willingness to
believe in other unsubstantiated fictions, such as astrology, Jon Edward,
or trickle-down economics) would be incredibly beneficial to humanity.
|
Again, we disagree. I would point to the failure of Russian Communism, but
that is another debate. I would assert when religion is eradicated,
something replaces it, and that something is not necessarily better.
|
Bad example: Soviet Communism was run as a state religion.
|
I disagree. What is a “state religion”? Rather, it was a state that took the
place of the function of religion-- not by design, but in effect.
| |
| |
| |
| |
Without (religion), we are lost and doomed to self-destruction.
|
But which religion?
|
|
|
I know that answer for me. God has revealed Himself to me via Christianity. I
do not discount other religions such as Islam; I do not presume to limit how God
cares to reveal Himself unto others.
But I firmly believe that we all have a “God-shaped void” in our hearts that
only God can fill.
| |
| |
I should have said, “without God, we are lost and doomed to
self-destruction”. Religion is merely a particular group’s understanding of
God.
|
ETERNAL Damnation if you guess wrong.
|
Your words, not mine:-) I don’t believe that at all. I do believe that if you
choose not to be with God, you will experience eternal hell.
| |
| |
Religion (talking about Christianity here) is not about “feeling good”. It
is about how we treat and serve each other. We love God by serving
humanity. To save our lives we must loose them to God (in service to
humanity).
|
Athiests can and do the same thing - yet they are evil? Hmmmmm (creeping out
to peep behind Door Number 42...)
|
Not quite the same. The motivation is different. I do good as a response to
the love shown me by God. Atheists do good because....? I’m not sure of the
answer to that question, but I’d bet that if unpacked enough, the answer would
be selfish gain somehow.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
220 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
