Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Best would be that Christians, Jews, Muslims, agnostics, atheists, and everyone in between put their collective heads together to minister to and raise up the less fortunate not only spiritually but especially in their everyday physical and emotional needs. Being preached at goes only so far.

---

I had the strange idea that this is what secular society is doing through the political process, and look, the measure of success is more not less poor. I agree that the Gospel of Jesus Christ needs to get outside the doors of the church

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Jesus must have been a self-righteous Christian. The teaching that poor life choices begin in the heart is His teaching, not mine.

---

Then what is your teaching, if not the same as Jesus?

Quote:

---

I said they had no basis for morality.

---

You need to expand your worldview. For a start, see WG's answer.

Quote:

---

I don't think you have any idea what the average Christian's morality is, but famous atheists like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao tend to work against your theory.

---

Of course I do. I've been surrounded by Christians my entire life as most Americans have. Naming 3 famous dictators doesn't do much for YOUR theory.

Quote:

---

Then what is your teaching, if not the same as Jesus?

---

It's the same.

Quote:

---

You need to expand your worldview. For a start, see WG's answer.

---

WG's answer was from scripture. Atheists deny the authority of scripture.

Besides, if two atheists disagree on a moral issue, how do they resolve the disagreement? They will not accept WG's answer, so how will they decide? They have no transcendent standard to appeal to. That's what I mean when I say they have no moral code.

Seems to me someone needs to get some perspective. Atheism, secularism, humanism, communism leads to very poor outcomes. Jesus wasn't about advancing the human society of the day by human means, he wanted people to put their focus on what is important,

Quote:

---

seek ye first the kingdom of God and all these things will be added unto you

---

What part of that tells you to advance any philosophy other than his. Christianity is about relationship, it has nothing to do with advancing secular outcomes and certainly nothing to do with advancing other beliefs

One of my favorite scriptures from Luke 2. "For this day in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord (the Messiah)."

Now who was born? A Saviour, and rather plainly for people who needed saving, for it says, "there has been born for you." There is salvation is no other place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

One of my favorite scriptures from Luke 2. "For this day in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord (the Messiah)."

Now who was born? A Saviour, and rather plainly for people who needed saving, for it says, "there has been born for you." There is salvation is no other place.

---

Yes, great message, unfortunately, today people don't think they need saving. The message of salvation has become unpopular, this is the age of grace, repentance is no longer preached, but rather we must meet people's needs before we have the right to speak to them of salvation, and allow any expression of human conduct without correction. The phrase " not that there is anything wrong with that has become common". We are having a great debate here at the moment, a real side show, because a sportsman dared to quote a scripture which enunciated a list of sins which included homosexuality. The fellow has been pillared by the press, his career destroyed, and even ministers have not stood by the word of God

Quote:

---

Yes, great message, unfortunately, today people don't think they need saving.

---

Even many confessing Christians seem not to see the need for it.

Quote:

---

a sportsman dared to quote a scripture which enunciated a list of sins which included homosexuality. The fellow has been pillared by the press, his career destroyed, and even ministers have not stood by the word of God

---

We might be entering an age where we will be called upon to suffer for our beliefs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Even many confessing Christians seem not to see the need for it.



We might be entering an age where we will be called upon to suffer for our beliefs.

---

I don't think that age ever ended, we just have the fortune to live in a place where overt persecution isn't acceptable, but that doesn't stop people using legal means to stop the message being preached. There might be free speech, but you can't say what you think with impunity.

Just read this concerning atheists and morality and thought it was pretty good.

"She knew she had certain moral duties, and that those duties lay outside of herself. But these duties could only be grounded in something transcendent and personal: God. "

https://reasonsforjesus.com/popular-...-H9DSFfAxk4uww

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

WG's answer was from scripture. Atheists deny the authority of scripture.

---

You continue your misreading of reality. Atheists deny the existence of a god. They certainly can appreciate parts of any religious book (scripture) that they deem praiseworthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Just read this concerning atheists and morality and thought it was pretty good.

"She knew she had certain moral duties, and that those duties lay outside of herself. But these duties could only be grounded in something transcendent and personal: God. "

---

Then how do you explain morality when exhibited by atheists?

Quote:

---

Then how do you explain morality when exhibited by atheists?

---

And again. The question is not one of whether or not atheists do good things. The question is how to define "good" or "moral".

Quote:

---

You continue your misreading of reality. Atheists deny the existence of a god. They certainly can appreciate parts of any religious book (scripture) that they deem praiseworthy.

---

Thank you for that excellent description of a person who denies the authority of scripture. The key is "that they deem praiseworthy." They take the place of authority

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

And again. The question is not one of whether or not atheists do good things. The question is how to define "good" or "moral".

---

So you agree that atheists do good? But you don't know why they do good? E.g., their basis for doing good. Do I have that right?

Quote:

---

Thank you for that excellent description of a person who denies the authority of scripture. The key is "that they deem praiseworthy." They take the place of authority

---

You're welcome.

Don't you do the same with scripture? You consider it to be based in authority since you deem it so? That key works both ways.

Quote:

---

So you agree that atheists do good? But you don't know why they do good? E.g., their basis for doing good. Do I have that right?

---

That they do "good" has never been in contention. I've said that from the beginning. The point is that they have no authority for determining what is "good" other than their own personal impressions. If two atheists disagree on what is "good", they have no superior moral authority to appeal to.

Quote:

---

Don't you do the same with scripture? You consider it to be based in authority since you deem it so? That key works both ways.

---

That's a good point. It's similar to the authority a policeman has. I recognize his authority. My recognition does not give him authority, but rather acknowledges it. The same is true of the Bible. I recognize the authority it has, but my recognition does not give it authority. It simple acknowledges it.

I think you are playing with words. All people have the capacity for good and evil. That some choose to exercise that is the human condition. Innately we know the rules but some choose not to follow them. Noone ever had to teach child to say no. I acknowledge the authority of someone greater than myself but some people are not capable of this

I'm not sure what you mean by having "the capacity" for good or evil. Paul settled the issue of the goodness of man in Romans 3. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your meaning.

“There is none righteous, not even one;
11 There is none who understands,
There is none who seeks for God;
12 All have turned aside, together they have become useless;
There is none who does good,
There is not even one.”
13 “Their throat is an open grave,
With their tongues they keep deceiving,”
“The poison of asps is under their lips”;
14 “Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness”;
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood,
16 Destruction and misery are in their paths,
17 And the path of peace they have not known.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Quote:

---

That they do "good" has never been in contention. I've said that from the beginning. The point is that they have no authority for determining what is "good" other than their own personal impressions. If two atheists disagree on what is "good", they have no superior moral authority to appeal to.

---

You don't have that authority either if you want to be frank about it. You can be motivated by the book and words of ancient man, but you cannot control the words or motivations of others, no matter how you choose to categorize them, or judge their words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

I think you are playing with words. All people have the capacity for good and evil. That some choose to exercise that is the human condition. Innately we know the rules but some choose not to follow them. Noone ever had to teach child to say no. I acknowledge the authority of someone greater than myself but some people are not capable of this

---

I tend to agree, each human chooses his/her own path, some are rockier than others. Some have better options and conditions than others.

Does that explain the dufus being foisted on us by the god loving minority?

Quote:

---

you cannot control the words or motivations of others, no matter how you choose to categorize them

---

Never suggested I could.

Quote:

---

, or judge their words.

---

Like you are judging (evaluating) my words?

Quote:

---

I tend to agree, each human chooses his/her own path, some are rockier than others. Some have better options and conditions than others.

---

Absolutely true.

Quote:

---

You don't have that authority either

---

I'm not sure what you mean by that. If you're saying that the authority does not reside in me, then you are right. If you are saying I have no higher authority to appeal to, then you are not correct. My higher authority is God's Word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

The point is that they have no authority for determining what is "good" other than their own personal impressions.

---

Both atheists and Christians determine what is good by personal impressions. The atheist by an informed conscience. The Christian by books written over 2,000 years ago which, among other things, contain instructions to slay every man, woman and child in battle. Which is superior?

Quote:

---

It's similar to the authority a policeman has. I recognize his authority. My recognition does not give him authority, but rather acknowledges it. The same is true of the Bible. I recognize the authority it has, but my recognition does not give it authority. It simple acknowledges it.

---

The authority of the policeman is based on the law of the community. The authority of the Bible has no basis except its own self-referential claims. Like you admit, you may recognize it but such recognition does not give it authority.

Quote:

---

Both atheists and Christians determine what is good by personal impressions.

---

Not true. It's on the level of saying we determine what is legal based on personal impressions of the Constitution.

Quote:

---

The Christian by books written over 2,000 years ago which, among other things, contain instructions to slay every man, woman and child in battle.

---

You would have to understand the circumstances of the invasion of Canaan. I don't think you do.

Quote:

---

The authority of the policeman is based on the law of the community. The authority of the Bible has no basis except its own self-referential claims. Like you admit, you may recognize it but such recognition does not give it authority.

---

Read the prophecies of Daniel and Isaiah 53 and get back with us. Check out the empty tomb and let us know what you think. Read the accounts of the life of Jesus. To suggest that the Bible has no basis for authority is simply not true.

Again you have turned politics into religion. For the record I and many others are not bound by your religious interpretations, nor are your fellow Christians. It personally doesn't matter what you believe only that you voted for and support the policies of a PROVEN liar and cheater. Doesn't matter what you quote to justify it either.