“Can Science Tell Us Right From Wrong?”

Hi Lexum,

 

Asking a panel of devout atheists "Can Science Tell Us Right From Wrong?” -- is similar to asking a panel of canines if their food should have more meat in it.  Duh!

 

The only answer this panel was seeking is "The Bible Is Wrong!" and "God Does Not Exist!"  So, duh, you expect them to understand (or admit) that morals -- positive Biblical morals, not moral relativism --  come from God?

 

This question fits into the same category as the age old trap, "Do you still beat your wife?"    

 

No.  Oh, then you used to beat her?

 

Yes.  You still beat your wife?

 

Next subject, please!

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Maybe science can't, but common sense can.

“Can Science Tell  Us Right From Wrong?”

You are right Bill. I just wanted the atheist crowd to see what they are blindly supporting.

When a group of these people decide what is in the best interest for everyone else based on scienceism they will wish good old Bible thumpin was back. They at least had free will.

___________________

OMG, OMG, stop it!!!!!!!!!!

________________________________

Keep up the good work, Bill. Your Christianity is showing.

 

Duh: Used to express disdain for something deemed stupid. Used by someone to a person that is believed to be slow-witted.

_______

Corrected that for you.

Don't you love it when the kiddies come out to play!!!

 

---

 

...and our conscience.  We know common sense and conscience can at times be unreliable, but then so can belief if not kept in check.

 

For me, it's a matter of empty or less than I can be if I existed apart from God, not that I'd suddenly feel the need to rob a convenience store, annihilate the opposite sex or hate puppies.

The scary thing about this situation is, on the insistence of Dawkins the average atheist sees themselves as a certified scientist with the obligation to accept wholesale any position on science as undeniable truth.

The truth is one must pay the full price of becoming educated about scientific theories and not argue based on only what Dawkins tells tainted by an agenda.

A blaring example: in session 8 or 9 of the conference to which I posted the link, one person complained about all the “God channels” and that the atheist had not one TV channel devoted solely to scienceism [atheist tainted science].

This ten session conference was hosted by and in an atheist forum with most all of the principle atheists in attendance and as participating speakers. The purpose of my posting a link to the conference was to educate many on the forum here as to what the atheist agenda was all about. The first response was by an atheist, here on this forum, who without even looking at it declared it stupid. Later a believer who apparently watched the link called it a good listen.

I sent an e-mail to the director of the conference with the above story explaining a scienceism station would be a waste of time because the average atheist already knows everything.

I did contact Apologetics Press and they were familiar with the conference. Ironic to say the least.

It seems believers know more about the Bible, science and the atheists own sources of confusion than anyone else.

________________

No, we wish you would grow up.

lexum speaks again, unencumbered by the thought process.

If "believers" really know the Bible, they wouldn't be believers.

_____________________________

Bill, you seem to have a thing for kiddies going out to play. Are you one of those that stands at the playground to watch?

In the topic "Who Created God? Where did God Come From?" you put a picture of a baby girl with no shirt on. This was after you had the nerve to imply Wooley was a Pedophile because he had a picture of a baby in a diaper dancing, for which you were the one that probably had him banned for.

Why can you post those kind of pictures but someone else is a pedophile if they do?

Why are you running from my questions & refusing to answer about this???

---

You come across as pretty arrogant and self-righteous.  If your intent was to educate anyone it failed miserably.  Just a note for your future helpful posts...insulting your audience doesn't make anyone want to listen to you or respect what you are saying.  Do you feel better now since you picked a fight by insulting people?  Guess you showed everyone here

---

True.

---

Yes, I had the urge to join that kind group of people who were so loving and compassionate toward the members of the forum.  How mature.

---

Don't you mean when those you feel superior to come to post?  Feel better now?

 

Makes sense to me.

Skippy

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Frog you missed the point. I’m sure you didn’t watch the panel discussion by some of the leading atheist proponents suggesting that there is possibly in the near future enough scientific evidence and understanding of the human brain to predict what behavior is best for an outcome of human flourishing. An example was that if scientists understanding of the brain concluded that it is better that a woman should be considered property of men would you be willing to accept that premise based on your trust of science.

In other words are you willing to trade religion with its inconsistencies for the ‘Journal of approved behavior on the part of humans as allowed based on scientific study’?

I think any reasonable person can see we are somewhere between the two now. At this point we are free moral agents. Be careful what you wish for.

 

incidentally frog I wish you wouln't fly off the handle so often.

---

No, actually I didn't miss any point, but you didn't get what I was saying.  You seem to think that all atheists would blindly follow and agree with everything these people say, and one more time I will say I couldn't care less what they say or who they are.  I think you miss the point that atheists aren't running around blindly following anyone generally, and that is the point.  I don't think you will find many atheists who would blindly do much of anything, and if you think they would you don't understand what most atheists are all about.

 

Good you are here to set all those atheists right about how they should think and what they should appreciate though.  I'm sure everyone feels more informed and that your post will inspire them to change their opinions.  Yeah, you are right on that handle thing.  I need to just fall in and do what I am told and think how you feel is right for me and everyone else, and things will be fine...lol.

Frog it is obvious you are not on the forum to explore any virtues the religious might have.

If you just simply don’t believe in God why all the fuss on here.

Historically the atheist have come here for sympathy or to practice the current atheist dogma of n

“no patience for believers” and that the proper thing to do is be ugly to them. If you are not aware of this you have not been on the forum here paying attention nor have you kept up with the “new atheist” teachings.

Rather than rehash this again pay attention. If you truly don’t follow any atheist doctrines or Dawkins you just crawled out from under a rock. I suggest you go to the link and listen to the “Great Debate” panel discussion and short lectures of the front runners that are trying to take away your freedom for sure.

---

Hmm.  So you know why I am here, you know where I need to go to learn more, and you believe I am fussing.  Also, you seem to think that you know how I should think and what I should have noticed since I have come here, and you feel the need to tell me to "pay attention".  Do you realize that telling an adult on a forum to "pay attention" is condescending and rude and that I didn't ask you to explain it to me in the first place?  I just didn't see things as you did, and while I totally believe you have that right, I don't see why you have to be rude to me because I don't.

 

And no, I have no interest in that link.  I don't care what they think and whoever they aren't they most likely don't represent me anyway.  What I believe and how I live aren't determined by a great debate or what some guy thinks anyway, so I am not interested in wasting my time listening to him.  If someone else wants to that is cool, but I am just not interested.  So you have decided that if I don't see things as you think I should that I just crawled out from under a rock or I'm not paying attention. That is very polite as well...perhaps I have other reasons or am just not interested, but you have to say those things to me.  You don't seem to see that I am not against any group no matter how many times I say it..I have been in different religions and do know how it feels to believe, and I wouldn't think of making fun of or trying to talk anyone out of that feeling.  I've been where I didn't believe in any gods, where I did, and where I believed deeply, and I have participated in some Eastern rituals and see why they believe as they do.  

 

The funny thing is I didn't come here to bash anyone, nor do I think that any particular group acts in a particular way totally and each member all the time.  I like a good discussion, I do learn from all the viewpoints here, and I have said many times I don't believe anyone needs to get ugly to anyone.  So seriously, are you trying to get me to dislike you or something?  I'm not here with any particular agenda, I am happy if you have found a path you feel good about, and my own path feels right to me.  So perhaps since I feel no need to show you how "real" Christians feel and you know now that I am not interested in being identified with the guy you mentioned or whatever his beliefs are, we can have respectful discussions.