JoeT
|
JoeT
Well done Joe. There must be a huge multinational conspiracy in your mind.
No conspiracies. I just look at things with an illuminating light.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
JoeT
For scientists all over the world to create "legends" as you put it would they have to conspire to hide the truth that God made everything?
Where's your sense of humor? Did you leave it in a test tube someplace?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
JoeT
This is the point. Before you even agree to see the evidence, you reject it because it disagrees with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
How do you know? You judge before seeing it. That is pre-judging, which was shortened to create the word "prejudice".Quote:
You see what you want to see, not what is factual.
That is not what she said. Go back and read what she said.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
And I did not say what you said either. Why don't you go find what I really said.
That what she you said earlier when you said it.
Ooh ee ooh ah ah, ding dang walla walla bing bang.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Don’t take yourself too seriously; there may come a time when you find that you've put too much faith in yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
JoeT
Nothing wrong with putting faith in yourself , that's what I'm teaching my kids. The world is what you make of it, not dictated but an unseen being in the sky.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
My comment was that we tend to put too much gravity and too much faith in ourselves. I would suggest that we teach our kids faith, hope, and charity. I wouldn’t say that the world is what you make of it; rather I’d suggest that life is what you make of it. God has already MADE the world, to conform to his purpose, for his plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
“The difficulty of explaining "why I am a Catholic" is that there are ten thousand reasons all amounting to one reason: that Catholicism is true. I could fill all my space with separate sentences each beginning with the words, "It is the only thing that . . ." As, for instance, (1) It is the only thing that really prevents a sin from being a secret. (2) It is the only thing in which the superior cannot be superior; in the sense of supercilious. (3) It is the only thing that frees a man from the degrading slavery of being a child of his age. (4) It is the only thing that talks as if it were the truth; as if it were a real messenger refusing to tamper with a real message. (5) It is the only type of Christianity that really contains every type of man; even the respectable man. (6) It is the only large attempt to change the world from the inside; working through wills and not laws; and so on.” C. K. Chesterton
JoeT
Tom, I didn't reject your "evidence", I asked to see it, you haven't provided it. How can I determine whether it's factual if I haven't seen it?
My response to you was based on the fact that you won't supply these Historical documents. I have to assume that if you won't supply them that's because they either don't exist or they will not prove that you're correct.
So which is it?
I will read them with an open mind, but I will not search for them, I don't have the time. Since you already know what they are, it would be far easier for you to provide them so that I can read them.
Really, I don't know why this always has to be so difficult. If you have proof then why are you always so reluctant to share it?
My point exactly - but yet you did exactly that, in more than one message. For example:Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
----------------
No Tom, not true.
Historical documents do not prove God's existence, no matter how much you want it to.
You see what you want to see, not what is factual. If that's what you need in order to justify your belief, then fine.
-----------------
Before I had a chance you said that you would reject historical document that supported Biblical prophecy. I never refused.Quote:
My response to you was based on the fact that you won't supply these Historical documents.
But on the other hand, I am preparing for a conference, and have a fair amount of work to do. Why would I want to waste time presenting evidence for someone who says that if it agrees with what I claimed, that she will reject it?
I do exactly that.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
True Tom, I did say that, because even though I asked you wouldn't provide these historical documents, therefore I must assume that they aren't proof, otherwise wouldn't you supply them?
After all, it's your argument, if it's not one thing then it has to be the other, right? So, if you can't supply the proof, then it must not exist.
Precisely. Tj3 NEVER provided any "evidence" (i.e. OSE) for any of his religious claims.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
Tommy provided query after query, list after list, suggestion after suggestion, wild claim after wild claim, so just lots of Subjective Supported Evidence.
But NEVER has he provided OSE for any of his claims. - and I focus here on * the existence of "God" *.
As this topic is about "What is truth?" :
The Truth (in linguistics) is one and the same as factual data. What most people experience as true and as truth is some format of interpretation of data.
Any religious "truth" is a personal subjective supported view. It is about what people BELIEVE.
So far I have never seen any truth coming from Tj3's posts. If he disagrees with that opinion he is free to provide any evidence that would change my (and many other people's) views on this.
But how? Where's the dignity, the humanity, in a soulless man who came from a primordial soup?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
JoeT
Soulless ? Can you FIRST provide OSE that humanity has a soul? Soul is a religious claim, not a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
Fact as in TRUE or TRUTH.
What have dignity and humanity to do with our common origins out of the first lifeform , which you so euphemistally and negatively call "primordial soup"?
Life is not based on dignity and humanity. Life is based on best fitting the requirements to produce healthy descendants.
And as to religion and dignity and humanity... if these were linked than what went wrong so often in the history of mankind?
;)
.
.
this will go on forever... ^-^
Are you saying atheists have no dignity and no humanity? That your sense of dignity and humanity come only from your belief in god?Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
You have a lot to learn about the world.
JoeT777, even though I do believe in God, I don't believe that someone who doesn't have that faith is without dignity or humanity or a "soul".
Are you saying that without belief in God, being human isn't possible? That's a very judgemental misinformed opinion.
Tom, I'm done arguiing. Either provide these historical documents or don't, but I won't argue about "wording" anymore. I'm starting to understand you a lot better, you like to fight, and I will not give you what you want. If you want a rational discussion about God, then I'm here, until then I will ignore you.
You simply want to waste my time. You want me to waste my time to post all sorts of information so that you can say that if they prove what I said, then you reject them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
If I don't you reject them and then twist and misrepresent what I said (you have already done so).
So Why bother? You will say the same thing no matter what I do.
See Altenweg, this is exactly what I mean. Cred has seen mounds of evidence for years from myself and others, and then just denies that he ever saw it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
As long as there are those who reject truth, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by marriaget
Then I guess we have to agree to disagree.
You don't know me Tom, so to say that I wouldn't read this evidence you have with an open mind isn't fair.
Personally, I think that you aren't showing it because it doesn't exist, which proves that what I said from the beginning was accurate.
If you really had proof then your argument with me wouldn't matter, you be up on a roof top screaming this evidence to anyone who would listen. Well, I'm here, and I'll listen, but apparently there's nothing to listen to.
I really don't want to fight with you. But it takes two people to come to an agreement, one can't do it alone.
Good luck and Peace.
Then show me the evidence. I have yet to see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
I'm not trying to start something here Tom, I really do want to see this evidence and judge for myself. You can even PM it to me if you want.
Again, I am reluctant to waste time on someone who has, I believe that is is three times, said that she rejects the evidence if it disagrees with her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
I am busy right now preparing to speak at a conference, and I am not willing to waste valuable time to go digging up information for someone who only wants to ridicule that which might offend what she wants to believe.
Delete - duplicate
I did not say that you would not read it - but you did say that you would reject it is it proved what I said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
I never understood that attitude. If I were wrong, I'd rather find out and know that truth is rather than take your attitude at rejecting anything which proves that you are wrong. You are just deceiving yourself, and closing your eyes.
If I miswrote my thoughts then I apologize, it happens, I am after all only human. Obviously what I wanted to say and the way I wrote it didn't come across the way I intended.
I would not reject what your proof says. I will read it with an open mind. Will I agree? I can't guarantee that, but it won't be just because you seem to think that I want to disagree with you, no matter what.
Really Tom, if there is evidence that God exists and is not just a belief then I would love to see it, becaue I do believe in God, so why would I reject proof that he does exist without a doubt, that would prove to me that my belief isn't wrong, I have no reason to reject vaild proof.
I too have more important things to do right now, I have to write a eulogy, help plan a funeral, sit with my Aunt and Uncles and discuss what happens now that my Oma is gone.
I guess turn the other cheek, or forgive and forget doesn't apply here.
I tried, but I can't force you to meet me half way, you do have to cover a bit of the terrain as well.
I find it hard to believe when you say that it was simply mis-spoken, after all just a few minutes ago, you admitted it, and confirmed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
Those were your words.Quote:
you seem to think that I want to disagree with you, no matter what.
I don't know - you surprised me when you stated that you would reject it out of hand, and we know that there are people who really don't want the truth - look at Cred!Quote:
why would I reject proof that he does exist without a doubt, that would prove to me that my belief isn't wrong, I have no reason to reject vaild proof.
I don't see this as a matter of offence. I am not offended. I feel sorry for those who take prejudicial stands. It is simply a matter that I must use my time wisely.Quote:
I guess turn the other cheek, or forgive and forget doesn't apply here.
I tried, but I can't force you to meet me half way, you do have to cover a bit of the terrain as well.
Tell you what, if, after this weekend, when I have more free time, if I truly see a change in your attitude and some willingness to consider the facts, I may re-consider.
I am saying that without God the human species is denied its dignity and its humanity. My statement was not intended as judgment; nor was my statement misinformed opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777But how? Where’s the dignity, the humanity, in a soulless man who came from a primordial soup?
JoeT
Quote:
Originally Posted by jillianleabAre you saying atheists have no dignity and no humanity? That your sense of dignity and humanity come only from your belief in god?
You have a lot to learn about the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
Virtuous morals or ethics are those things found good in the eyes of God. Without God, right and wrong become subjective; morality and integrity become matters of positive law as opposed to natural law. An autonomous authority requires “freedom from” morals as well as “freedom to” implement a proxy ethic independent of God’s will. As such the standard of right and wrong become subjective and differ from individual to individual (or from group to group); thus we hear the refrain "it might be wrong for you but its right for me." Morality in a godless world becomes a social construct based on the whim of the community, changing based on the will of the fittest. The fault seems to be that conclusions drawn are autonomous intellectual exercises; judgments are subjective reasoning not founded on absolute moral truths that only Christianity brings. Thus it can be said that agnosticism becomes the program of rationalism; where “Free thought begets free morals, or immorality- Restraint is thrown off and a free rein given to the passions. WHOEVER THINKS WHAT HE PLEASES WILL DO WHAT HE PLEASES (sic).”
Without virtuous morality, mankind is stripped of its dignity and humanity. Therefore you can see that by removing God, you remove virtuous morals and ethics which in turn deny dignity and humanity.
JoeT
I know many people who do not believe in God, and the are some of the most virtuous people I know. The have wonderful morals and ethics, they know right from wrong.
You think what you please, and that is that God exists, and you do as you please, you just justify it because you claim it's "God's will".Quote:
WHOEVER THINKS WHAT HE PLEASES WILL DO WHAT HE PLEASES
Believing in God has nothing to do with being a good person. I've know many believers that are the worst people that humanity has ever seen, but they think that going to church, praying for forgiveness is enough, because they believe in God. So, they beat their wife and children, molest their 5 year old daughter, cheat in business and on their taxes, but go to church every Sunday.
I have a friend who is an atheist. He volunteers at the Humane Society every week, he gives money to charity, he loves his children, and his wife.
So, who is better? The man who believes in God, or the man who believes in being a good person?
Double post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
So you feed into the moral relatavism. The same moral relatavism that one tribe may use [ they are inferior, or not like us or don't think like us ] to justify committing genocide against another?
Certainly you're entitled to your opintion, but I fully, 100% disagree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
Morality is not only found in religion. It's found in community and society, not the will of the fittest. You make it sound like a dictatorship - the man in charge sets the morals - but that's not how things work in functioning societies. For example, it's not good for society if we go around squashing people's rights and killing people who wear red shirts. Those things make society bad. So, we don't do them. Are morals subjective? Sure, some of them are. Many Christians think premarital sex is wrong, I think there's nothing wrong with it. But the BIG morals - the one's that legislate the world we live in; those come about through humanity - "god" is not required.
You might think your statements aren't misinformed opinion, but I still say they are. You are essentially saying without god one can't be moral. If that's not your intention, you might want to revise your thoughts - because that's how it's coming out. Non-Christians are capable of being good, moral, law-abiding, fantastic people, all without the fear of god/hell/the devil. In fact, many Christians commit horrible atrocities, indicating that even though they have that fear, and they have that inherant morality you imply, they ignore it and do what they want.
Altenweg, jillianleab, et al:Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
Morality includes those things natural and those things supernaturally revealed by God. In addition it includes those truths necessary for man's salvation. Ethics may be thought of as the science of morality's implementation. In short, morality is all actions that move man towards God's good. Since Christians seek good from God, those truths given from God, must be absolute. What they shouldn't seek is that good that is described by Epicurus, what feels pleasurable or avoids pain is good (see first paragraph of link.) . God doesn't say to one group seek goodness in feeding the poor, and say to another eat all the apple pie you can. Thus, in response to the opening question, yes there is an absolute truth, which in turn relates to an absolute moral guide. (c.f. St. Thomas Aquinas, The Summa Theologica)
"Now human law is ordained for one kind of community, and the Divine law for another kind. Because human law is ordained for the civil community, implying mutual duties of man and his fellows…
But the community for which the Divine law is ordained, is that of men in relation to God, either in this life or in the life to come. And therefore the Divine law proposes precepts about all those matters whereby men are well ordered in their relations to God. Now man is united to God by his reason or mind, in which is God's image. Wherefore the Divine law proposes precepts about all those matters whereby human reason is well ordered. But this is effected by the acts of all the virtues: since the intellectual virtues set in good order the acts of the reason in themselves: while the moral virtues set in good order the acts of the reason in reference to the interior passions and exterior actions. It is therefore evident that the Divine law fittingly proposes precepts about the acts of all the virtues: yet so that certain matters, without which the order of virtue, which is the order of reason, cannot even exist, come under an obligation of precept; while other matters, which pertain to the well-being of perfect virtue, come under an admonition of counsel." St. Thomas Aquinas, The Summa Theologica Part II, I, Q 100
Consequently, it is precisely because its “God's will” that I attempt to work out my salvation with fear and trembling. (cf Phil 2:12). (Also see the following link.) Furthermore, whether people beat “their wife and children, molest their 5 year old daughter, cheat in business and on their taxes”, doesn't change the virtues in morality - absolute truth remains absolute.
More important, this is a poor attempt to excuse the rule by the exception – which of course isn't done in this particular example. With this kind of moral rationalization we can excuse indiscriminate murder because your friend didn't fill out his taxes properly, which we know to be flawed reasoning. And, we see the reverse of this logic in your atheist friend; because he does a few good things to deny God is deemed right. Virtuous morals, like God's truth, are absolute and to throw off that tenet is to say “WHOEVER THINKS WHAT HE PLEASES WILL DO WHAT HE PLEASES” It seems that both your friends are in error.
JoeT
What a BS reply : is that all you could manage ?Quote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
You did not even react to the drift of my post...
You SUGGEST (of course without any OSE or other support) that I feed on "moral relativism", and than start referring that claimed relativism to inferiority and genocide.
What a total nonsensical rubbish!!
You showed with your post that you have no inkling of "what is truth?"
While you posted this drab in this specific topic.
How sad, how very sad...
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
.
.
The absolute truth, Cred, is that you attack those you disagree with, and your post is OSE of it.
Hitler truly believed in a superior race, eugenics, which fits in with the theory of evolution. Is Hitler's truth any more true than yours or mine? Who is to judge who is misinterpreting when there are no absolutes?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:54 AM. |