Well I’ll be dogg, they will certainly be appropriate hanging around their necks. Lol
Hey, I might sell some on havers whadduthink? Split the profit like man..
Originally Posted by frog:
Bill Gray, that was my point I think. I wouldn't sit and tell anyone to "give (insert whatever I believe or don't believe) a try". I promise you will be eternally happy if you do" because what makes you happy might not make someone else happy. If a person is truly happy as s/he is and didn't ask for advice on happiness or eternal salvation or whatever, why is there a need to anyone to assume one system of beliefs is "evident" and everyone must try that to be happy? We all have different lives and experiences, and some Christians, atheists, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and those of any other belief system are happy, productive, and aren't looking for a different set of beliefs. The point is one person's "faith" may make no sense to anyone else, but that is okay. That is what faith is and it really isn't anyone's business how much faith anyone has about a particular writing, action, or speech.
Faith isn't something anyone can really demand to quantify or qualify of another or challenge others due to "rightness", but more of a deeply held belief that may or may not be based on facts or be provable. If a person has deeply held beliefs that is wonderful as long as they aren't harming others based on them, but unless someone asks for a better way why do so many people of different religions say theirs is the only "right" way and/or challenge others to come believe as they do? Not all can be the "right" way, so every group but one (and which would that be since many "know" theirs is right?) is either wrong, lying, or perhaps there is more than one path that can lead to happiness and encourage treating others and self with respect and compassion.
I would personally never presume to ask someone how much faith s/he has or tell her/him that if only she would try on mine she would find it is the right one. I wouldn't assume my path is one that is right for others, and the problem with thinking our way is the only one to eternal life (if a person even believes it is possible or cares) is that the "knowledge" is based on faith and creates division and strife. That is obvious throughout human history, and with so many people and so many paths on the planet, wouldn't it be much more healing and helpful for each of us to respect each other's beliefs without trying to mold everyone else to our personal belief systems?
My dear Froggie,
Without evidence or reason, any religion is false. Therefor, religion must necessarily be false because they eschew reason and evidence, and embrace irrational faith.
Morality and purpose are achievable on a humanistic level. When we define such abstractions in terms we can actually understand, they are much more meaningful.
Any life led in fear of retribution, or upon reward, in the afterlife is a waste of the gift of life.
A good life is one which is examined, and which adds to the human collective experience. The best lives are those which are contexted honestly, in light of reason and in the absence of the wishful thinking of the religions.
It's not good enough to say "I'm OK, you're OK" without conditions. Islamist extremism which seeks to kill us for our philosophy is not OK. Neither is fundamentalist Christianity that murders certain doctors and seeks to actively engender into our children a mistrust of science.
We can no longer afford to deny the realities of the world. A couple of those realities include the recognition of science's discoveries and the notion that we invented and established the gods. To conclude less is to the abrasion of human advancement.
DF
My dear Froggie,
Without evidence or reason, any religion is false. Therefor, religion must necessarily be false because they eschew reason and evidence, and embrace irrational faith.
Morality and purpose are achievable on a humanistic level. When we define such abstractions in terms we can actually understand, they are much more meaningful.
Any life led in fear of retribution, or upon reward, in the afterlife is a waste of the gift of life.
A good life is one which is examined, and which adds to the human collective experience. The best lives are those which are contexted honestly, in light of reason and in the absence of the wishful thinking of the religions.
It's not good enough to say "I'm OK, you're OK" without conditions. Islamist extremism which seeks to kill us for our philosophy is not OK. Neither is fundamentalist Christianity that murders certain doctors and seeks to actively engender into our children a mistrust of science.
We can no longer afford to deny the realities of the world. A couple of those realities include the recognition of science's discoveries and the notion that we invented and established the gods. To conclude less is to the abrasion of human advancement.
I would agree that morality and purpose are achievable on a humanistic level, and yes, I would have to feel a system of beliefs made sense to have faith in any parts of it that weren't provable.. It doesn't matter to me whether God or the police see me not return the rich man's money. It matters to me because I feel it is a wrong thing for me to do to keep money that isn't mine when I know whose it is. Perhaps he needs it and perhaps he doesn't, but it doesn't matter since it isn't mine and he didn't give me permission to borrow or take it. it doesn't feel right to me whether no one ever knows or not (I would know though), and your point about the human collective experience is part of why it doesn't feel right to me. I make mistakes as anyone does, but I would hope my general contribution to the universe would be a positive one and not one of hate and fearful anger.
I believe that all we and all living things on the planet affect others and the ripples affect the rest of the web of life, so my choices aren't based on anyone standing over me or threatening me, or even promising me a reward for "good" behavior. Even as a child that idea disturbed me, and when I questioned various adults the response was always a variant on, "Because God said to or we will be punished". My question related to why anyone would need someone watching her/him and threatening punishment when choosing not to harm someone because it hurt someone unnecessarily could be reason in itself. Needless to say the priests and nuns weren't too happy with me most days
I also agree that that are limits to what can be tolerated and that spreading hatred and divisive words and acts doesn't seem to me to be following what the founders of various religions had in mind. I simply understand why people believe as they do historically and psychologically, and as long as they aren't harming others I feel it is their right and I have no desire to convince them otherwise. If they break civil laws or harm others it is a different thing entirely to me.
Bill Gray
Okay, Uno, we can finally come to an agreement. YOU come from pond scum and, I come from God. You can choose to live like pond scum and I will choose to follow God. And, we can live happily ever after.
Now, see, isn't it nice to agree with other folks, even folks who come from pond scum?
However, I see just one small problem in your camp. Deep tells us he came from an ape/monkey and you say you came from pond scum. How do you two, who are devout in your atheist religion, reconcile this difference? I suppose, just like there are different denominations in the Protestant church -- there must be different denominations within the atheist religion -- one is thepond scum denomination -- and the other is the ape/monkey denomination. Oh, well, as long as you both are happy.
This is interesting to me. Pond scum does exactly what nature intended pond scum to do, and the same goes for most species of primate actually. We are animals just as the rest of the primates are, and pond scum actually contributes more to the environment and the web of life than humans often do, so why the inference that being/evolving from either one of those organisms would be an insult? If you believe God created them and they are filling their purpose as his creation, why would it be an insult to have begun existence as either?
And from a biological standpoint it is actually possible to have evolved from both organisms, but I would guess you were being sarcastic and didn't really mean to have the answer to your question. You are right though...as long as they are both happy it all works I would say
Happy is the man who, in the course of a complete life, has everything he desires, provided he desires nothing amiss... Thou hast made us for thyself, O Lord, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in thee.
St. Augustine
St. Augustine
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by NashBama:
So let's say you see the hundred dollar bill fall out of the rich guy's pocket and return it. You view this as a good action.
I see the hundred dollar bill fall out and I keep it because I could use the grocery money. I see this as a good action because it helps me feed my family.
Same situation, two opposite choices, both choices viewed as good. So the question is, who is right or is good relative?
Kind of a silly premise. There is no "good" or "bad." If you are starving and need to feed your family, there is nothing but "good" here for you and no real harm done to the rich guy. On the other hand, i a cop sees you do that, you will be rightfully arrested for stealing.
Let's cut to the chase: You say "good" comes from the magical sky man and will offer zero empirical proof for the assertion. I insist, with ample evidence, that good and bad and what we call morals are a natural result of evolution of societal animals. Animals must have certain innate rules to follow or reproduction does not occur as freely. So we evolved from the pond scum all they way up to recognize threats and opportunities to further our genes to the next generation.
The basis for all this morality is, quite obviously, our innate need to reproduce. Every single law you can come up with will have genetic propagation as the basis. Ga head, try me.
______________________________________________________________________
Okay, so there is no good or bad and we're just robots enslaved to our genetic drive to reproduce. So using that concept, let's look at the following scenario.
A man who is flat broke and desperate for money to start a new life comes up with a plan. He kidnaps your child and holds him for ransom. You pay the ransom and the child is returned, but the man escapes and makes to Mexico. There, he starts a new life, gets married, and has children.
So using your premise, what this man did was good, right?
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by NashBama:
So let's say you see the hundred dollar bill fall out of the rich guy's pocket and return it. You view this as a good action.
I see the hundred dollar bill fall out and I keep it because I could use the grocery money. I see this as a good action because it helps me feed my family.
Same situation, two opposite choices, both choices viewed as good. So the question is, who is right or is good relative?
Kind of a silly premise. There is no "good" or "bad." If you are starving and need to feed your family, there is nothing but "good" here for you and no real harm done to the rich guy. On the other hand, i a cop sees you do that, you will be rightfully arrested for stealing.
Let's cut to the chase: You say "good" comes from the magical sky man and will offer zero empirical proof for the assertion. I insist, with ample evidence, that good and bad and what we call morals are a natural result of evolution of societal animals. Animals must have certain innate rules to follow or reproduction does not occur as freely. So we evolved from the pond scum all they way up to recognize threats and opportunities to further our genes to the next generation.
The basis for all this morality is, quite obviously, our innate need to reproduce. Every single law you can come up with will have genetic propagation as the basis. Ga head, try me.
______________________________________________________________________
Okay, so there is no good or bad and we're just robots enslaved to our genetic drive to reproduce. So using that concept, let's look at the following scenario.
A man who is flat broke and desperate for money to start a new life comes up with a plan. He kidnaps your child and holds him for ransom. You pay the ransom and the child is returned, but the man escapes and makes to Mexico. There, he starts a new life, gets married, and has children.
So using your premise, what this man did was good, right?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do all atheist believe stealing is wrong, or just you thinking there is no good or bad.
I know the atheist god "Dullard" has no morals, so it's easy to see the way you
view your inhuman life style.
.
Originally Posted by NashBama:
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Originally Posted by Chuck Norris:
What is "good" and where did it come from?
Good question. Here is a well-reasoned response:
Notre Dame: WLC vs. Harris
Good question. Here is a well-reasoned response:
Notre Dame: WLC vs. Harris
Excellent post, Chuck.
"Good" is a human concept, largely made up of what is conducive to human comfort and... what's the word? "happiness" is not quite sufficient. "Progress" isn't either. It has to do with perpetuation of our species in a positive and joyful manner. You've lived to see it, my vocabulary has failed me.
DF
Another question. "Good" is a concept to benefit human comfort and perpetuation of the species. Let's say I'm walking behind a rich old guy and a hundred dollar bill falls out of his pocket. He's rich, so he'll never notice it's missing. I'm not, so it would help me out.
Would it be good to keep the money since it would benefit me and provide a small amount of joy, even though it doesn't belong to me?
Would it be evil to return the money, since evil is a departure from good?
Interesting questions. If you feel this way, I see a Bait Car in your future.
The debate link DF posted is as convincing as anyone would reasonably want to hear as proof good comes from God. Thanks DF.
Originally Posted by Magpie:
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Originally Posted by Chuck Norris:
What is "good" and where did it come from?
Good question. Here is a well-reasoned response:
Notre Dame: WLC vs. Harris
Good question. Here is a well-reasoned response:
Notre Dame: WLC vs. Harris
Excellent post, Chuck.
"Good" is a human concept, largely made up of what is conducive to human comfort and... what's the word? "happiness" is not quite sufficient. "Progress" isn't either. It has to do with perpetuation of our species in a positive and joyful manner. You've lived to see it, my vocabulary has failed me.
DF
I watched it all df.
I for one appreciate your honesty.
Thanks, Maggie. I try. Actually, honesty is pretty easy for me, since the truth is on my side, here. Still, I appreciate your response.
DF
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by NashBama:
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Originally Posted by Chuck Norris:
What is "good" and where did it come from?
Good question. Here is a well-reasoned response:
Notre Dame: WLC vs. Harris
Good question. Here is a well-reasoned response:
Notre Dame: WLC vs. Harris
Excellent post, Chuck.
"Good" is a human concept, largely made up of what is conducive to human comfort and... what's the word? "happiness" is not quite sufficient. "Progress" isn't either. It has to do with perpetuation of our species in a positive and joyful manner. You've lived to see it, my vocabulary has failed me.
DF
Another question. "Good" is a concept to benefit human comfort and perpetuation of the species. Let's say I'm walking behind a rich old guy and a hundred dollar bill falls out of his pocket. He's rich, so he'll never notice it's missing. I'm not, so it would help me out.
Would it be good to keep the money since it would benefit me and provide a small amount of joy, even though it doesn't belong to me?
Would it be evil to return the money, since evil is a departure from good?
Interesting questions. If you feel this way, I see a Bait Car in your future.
LMAO! I love Tru TV! I consider it a vacation for the active mind. It's about as effective as meditation in temporarily removing the higher functions of thought, and giving the mind a rest.
DF
INVICTUS:
Do all atheist believe stealing is wrong, or just you thinking there is no good or bad.
I know the atheist god "Dullard" has no morals, so it's easy to see the way you
view your inhuman life style.
Wow. No, all atheists don't believe stealing is wrong by any means. Inhuman lifestyle? Lots of conclusions drawn without a lot of evidence perhaps? Not sure what an inhuman lifestyle is unless you aren't human....and no morals? I read somewhere there weren't to be stones cast or motes left in eyes....hmm.
Froggie,
Not all religious types believe that stealing is always wrong.
No one can stereotype atheists with regard to any philosophical consistency other than skepticism about the gods. Beyond that, we either do or do not collect stamps, etc.
Best,
DF
Yep, makes sense to me, DF.
Originally Posted by Magpie:
The debate link DF posted is as convincing as anyone would reasonably want to hear as proof good comes from God. Thanks DF.
You're welcome, Maggie. However, the premise upon which WLC bases a god-given morality is objective morality. The concept is absurd, as is his argument for it.
I hate to say it, but I suspect you've never examined the arguments against your prejudice. The most cursory examination of morality demonstrates that it is anything but objective.
DF
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
However, the premise upon which WLC bases a god-given morality is objective morality. The concept is absurd...
This "absurd" concept has brought many people to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Dr. Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project and one of the world's leading scientists, said that C.S. Lewis' arguments for the Moral Law "rocked my ideas about science and spirit down to their foundation" and "shone its bright white light into the recesses of my childish atheism."
Francis S. Collins, The Language of God. pp 22-31.
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Interesting questions. If you feel this way, I see a Bait Car in your future.
LMAO! I love Tru TV! I consider it a vacation for the active mind. It's about as effective as meditation in temporarily removing the higher functions of thought, and giving the mind a rest.
DF
I don't know about all of Tru TV, but I love Bait Car. Every one of them reminds me of Bill. They steal a car, and then tell the police that they were just parking it to help out the owner. Every one of them.
Originally Posted by Loki:
If God commanded you to kill your wife and kids or you would be ****ed to hell for eternity, would you do it? If so is that moral?
************************************************************************************************
Of course they would if they thought their god had told them to do it. Plenty of them have done that very thing.
shone its bright white light into the recesses of my childish atheism."
Yet there are many who would say that serious thinking/researching/seeking/experience and maturity shone bright light onto the childish recesses of accepting what an unseen and factually unproven God (or some other deity) would say must be the only way to live. So either way the same argument could be given, and it comes back to background, experience, and faith in something or another.
Originally Posted by Jennifer:
Originally Posted by Loki:If God commanded you to kill your wife and kids or you would be ****ed to hell for eternity, would you do it? If so is that moral?
************************************************************************************************Of course they would if they thought their god had told them to do it. Plenty of them have done that very thing.
It is sad that a person's own sense of right and wrong (as in murdering someone) would cease to function when overridden by an unseen commander threatening a theoretical outcome. It seems to me that at some point a sense of not wishing to harm others might come to a person without the threat of hellfire and brimstone hanging over his head....but it doesn't matter what the threat with some people I know.
Originally Posted by Jennifer:
Everyone knows right from wrong/good from bad. Some just ignore the right way to live for whatever reason, and that goes for plenty of people that call themselves christians. Some of the worse people in the world, to use semi's phrase, wear the christian hat. I read some of bill's insults and wonder how in the world he could think anyone in their right mind would want to worship the same thing he does and become the kind of person he is.
Today at 6:53 PM 
Everyone knows right from wrong/good from bad. Some just ignore the right way to live for whatever reason, and that goes for people that call themselves christians too. Some of the worse people in the world, to use semi's phrase, wear the christian hat. I read some of bill's insults and wonder how in the world he could think anyone in their right mind would want to worship the same thing he does and become the kind of person he is.
Today at 6:54 PM
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Originally Posted by Magpie:
The debate link DF posted is as convincing as anyone would reasonably want to hear as proof good comes from God. Thanks DF.
You're welcome, Maggie. However, the premise upon which WLC bases a god-given morality is objective morality. The concept is absurd, as is his argument for it.
I hate to say it, but I suspect you've never examined the arguments against your prejudice. The most cursory examination of morality demonstrates that it is anything but objective.
DF
================
DF “Natural Science is about facts not norms”.
“It tells us what is, not what ought to be.”
“it might tell us how we are but not what’s wrong with what we are”.
It would make much more sense for you to claim that there is no morality.
Morality is not a prerequisite for non-belief.
“take God out and you truly have apes with no moral obligation.”
“Science cannot tell us we have a moral obligation to take actions which are condusive to human flourishing.” [quotes by Clint]
DF make your arguments without morality and you will see yourself more relaxed for the balance of your life.
You’re riding with the burr of morality under your saddle. It is totally un-necessary for your unbelief in God.
Talk to the TD cage, they're the ones that posted it twice. You do know them don't you? Of course you do, they're the ones that banned you. LOLOLOL
Originally Posted by Jennifer:
Talk to the TD cage, they're the ones that posted it twice. You do know them don't you? Of course you do, they're the ones that banned you. LOLOLOL
"He" figured it was your whining that did it.
Hi Jennifer,
You declare, "Everyone knows right from wrong/good from bad. Some just ignore the right way to live for whatever reason, and that goes for plenty of people that call themselves Christians. Some of the worse people in the world, to use Semi's phrase, wear the Christian hat. I read some of Bill's insults and wonder how in the world he could think anyone in their right mind would want to worship the same thing he does and become the kind of person he is."
Jennifer, my Friend, suppose you go to a doctor and he tells you that you have CANCER, but, that there is still time to cure it. Is he insulting you by telling you that you have CANCER? Is he being nasty and insulting, is he showing hate, when he tells you that your CANCER can still be cured?
Will you hate him for telling you that you have terminal CANCER -- but, that he can help you stop it?
Well, my Friend, replace the word CANCER with the condition of being "SPIRITUALLY DEAD" -- and, I ask you -- if a Christian, me or any other Christian -- tells you that you are currently SPIRITUALLY DEAD -- but, that we know how you can be fully healed, how you can be totally cured and made completely Spiritually Healthy -- is that insulting you or is it truly caring about your eternal soul?
Jennifer, any Christian who truly cares about you and show that concern --you label it as HATE. No, my Friend, it is not HATE; it is, believe it or not, Christian LOVE.
So, if Dr. Bill, or any Dr. Christian, tells you that you can be made SPIRITUALLY WHOLE again -- that is LOVE, not HATE.
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill
Jennifer, my Friend, suppose you go to a doctor and he tells you that you have CANCER, but, that there is still time to cure it. Is he insulting you by telling you that you have CANCER? Is he being nasty and insulting, is he showing hate, when he tells you that your CANCER can still be cured?
****************************************************************************************************************
Another stupid post from you. A non-belief in your god is nothing like having cancer or any other disease and if a doctor told me it was, or started spouting the crap you do about atheists and others that don't believe like you do, not only would I change doctors and report him, I'd do my best to slap his lips off his face.
But Bill, you aren't the doctor and you don't have any facts or knowledge based on anything but your own personal faith in a book upon which to base any "diagnosis" of anything for anyone. You would have no knowledge of my or anyone's spiritual health except based on your narrow version of what you read in a book and believe on faith. Just because someone else doesn't happen to live by your personal beliefs doesn't mean s/he is spiritually dead. That sounds arrogant to me that with no reproducible test result or knowledge of another's life to assume spiritual anything about him, and then inform him only you and those who unquestioningly agree with your interpretation could be the one to know how to bring someone's spirit to life. The part that is amazing to me is that you would expect everyone else to just take your word for it that the book is the absolute only guide to being spiritually alive. Amazing.
The assumption that a person is spiritually dead because she doesn't follow the exact teachings you personally happen to believe sounds pretty arrogant to me as well, but I do recognize that you do believe you are trying to do "good". Actually that attitude is a reason many turn away from Christianity in the first place, but I realize rejection that will be duly interpreted in predictable ways as well.
Hi Jennifer,
My Friend, your head is buried so deeply in the dark sands of atheism -- that, you cannot even see when a person is trying to be nice to you. Are you so full of hatred, that you can see nothing but hatred all around you?
I do not know what happened to you when you were in a church as a young person. I know that I, too, had a very bad experience at a church in Sheffield when I was 12 years old. But, Jennifer, I do not allow that bad experience to completely engulf me in hate -- as you seem to do.
Whatever your hurt -- I do pray that you will meet a Christian, somewhere, who can show you the love of God. That happened to me and it changed my life completely. I pray the same happens for you.
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill
Bill, I'm happy you are happy with your choice of belief systems, and perhaps Jennifer is happy with hers as well. I would personally say the line between showing love and showing hate would be that loving is accepting the other's value as s/he is whether it is exactly as you are or not and respecting his freedom of choice in this life, and hate would be feeling you are somehow superior and dismissing the other's beliefs or choices as inferior, and then aggressively insisting that you must make everyone believe as you do to "save" them whether they want your assistance or not.
Now if they hired you to give them religious advice sure, but randomly telling people they are all wrong and spiritually dead, inhuman, having a cancer, and whatever else is intended to be negative doesn't seem loving to me. If some people have tried what you are describing and found it really wasn't what they were looking for that is their right I believe. You have the right to your choices and everyone else does to theirs.
Bill, once again you try that "something happened to you" and "hatred" crap. I was nice to you when we first started posting, but I got sick of you accusing me of things, saying awful things to me and other non-believers, and doing just what you're trying to pull in your post. I have told you that nothing bad happened to me, how I loved and still love the people that I went to church with, and how I gradually just lost the belief. But you being the lying ******* you are just can't resist saying things that you know are not true. You ask people why they don't believe and when they tell you you just disregard it and make up your own story about their lives. That is exactly what you did with me and what you're still trying to do.
I'm not surprised that YOU had a bad experience at church, because I imagine that as a child you were the same smug, lying, arrogant thing you are now, and that someone put you in your place. It's you that is being eaten alive by hate and bitterness. You hate anyone that doesn't believe or doesn't believe the way you do. You think you're so special and it just chaps your *** that there are people you don't impress and that just don't buy your line of BS.
You know very well that RP is not from New York but you keep saying he is, making fun of a New York accent, and talking about how he looks. Well bill, how about the accent in your home? Has RP ever once said anything about that? What you and others falsely say is hatred and bitterness on my part is only my way of saying that I don't respect you, I see you for what you are, you're not special or above attack when you attack others. You can try all the little tricks in your fundie book, but they don't work on me and others.
quote: Originally Posted by frog:Bill, I'm happy you are happy with your choice of belief systems, and perhaps Jennifer is happy with hers as well. I would personally say the line between showing love. . . You have the right to your choices and everyone else does to theirs.
Hi Frog,
If you see Jennifer, blindfolded, and walking toward a cliff where you know she will lose her life if you do not warn her -- will you warn her? Or will you just say, "She has the right to make her own choices. So, why should I stop her when she is just walking?" Will you do that -- even though you know she is heading toward physical death?
No, you will not. Nor can I refuse to warn her that she is walking, blindfolded, toward spiritual death. Notice, I say that I "warn her" -- not that I would "force her." If I do not warn her, her fate is on my shoulders -- and I will have to answer to Him for that neglect one day. If I do warn her, her fate is on her own shoulders -- and her eternal choice is her own.
That, my Friend, is the difference. And, for a Christian believer -- who prays that every soul will be saved -- that is an eternal difference.
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill
Originally Posted by Bill Gray:
Hi Uno,
However, I see just one small problem in your camp. Deep tells us he came from an ape/monkey and you say you came from pond scum. How do you two, who are devout in your atheist religion, reconcile this difference?
Bill
Good lord. All this time you've been here and you don't know this elementary concept?
The study of evolution doesn't just inform us but screams from every branch of science that we all came from the same stuff. Pond scum, deep ocean heat vents, trans-spermia, invisible man in the sky, whatever it was that started life, we ALL evolved from it. We can trace our ancestry in one unbroken line from the very beginning of life all the way to now. We are distant cousins of the apes that live today. We share a common ancestor, That ancestor had an ancestor that was something akin to a tree shew 65 million years ago. That shrew had a simpler ancestor long before it and so on all the way back to the Beginning/
We all share common DNA with the housefly and the pine tree. ALL life is based on the same basic blueprint that evolved from the pond scum hundreds of millions of years ago.
Originally Posted by NashBama:
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Okay, so there is no good or bad and we're just robots enslaved to our genetic drive to reproduce. So using that concept, let's look at the following scenario.
A man who is flat broke and desperate for money to start a new life comes up with a plan. He kidnaps your child and holds him for ransom. You pay the ransom and the child is returned, but the man escapes and makes to Mexico. There, he starts a new life, gets married, and has children.
So using your premise, what this man did was good, right?
For him, sure. For me, not so much. He took my genetic progeny from me and threatened to end my reproductive purpose. His strategy worked for him.
I'm sure that what this man did could be construed as "legal" by ancient standards and perhaps by some standards even today in some parts of the world. After all, Egyptian rulers kidnapped and enslaved millions for the purpose of procreation and labor.
We humans are the only animals that have evolved the intelligence that permits a system of punishment for those who try to end the reproductive "right" of others. Those are ensconced in our set of laws personified by the constitution so, no, this guy did not do "right" according to our newly evolved set of laws.
Still, all laws have, at some level, a reproductive aspect. There is no such thing as "good" or "bad." Those are purely human concepts that have and are evolving.
If you see Jennifer, blindfolded, and walking toward a cliff where you know she will lose her life if you do not warn her -- will you warn her? Or will you just say, "She has the right to make her own choices. So, why should I stop her when she is just walking?" Will you do that -- even though you know she is heading toward physical death?
****************************************************************************************************************
You just get crazier and crazier. Your little "analogies" are just bizarre. So bill, do you often go walking around cliffs wearing a blindfold? Maybe your family needs to put you on a leash. If someone said I had to spend a lifetime with you I would walk off a cliff.
Look! Up in the sky!
It's a bird! It's a plane! it's....it's......
Mullah SuperBill of the TaliBeeG!
Dun-dun DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH!
*facepalm*
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by Bill Gray:
Hi Uno,
However, I see just one small problem in your camp. Deep tells us he came from an ape/monkey and you say you came from pond scum. How do you two, who are devout in your atheist religion, reconcile this difference?
Bill
Good lord. All this time you've been here and you don't know this elementary concept?
The study of evolution doesn't just inform us but screams from every branch of science that we all came from the same stuff. Pond scum, deep ocean heat vents, trans-spermia, invisible man in the sky, whatever it was that started life, we ALL evolved from it. We can trace our ancestry in one unbroken line from the very beginning of life all the way to now. We are distant cousins of the apes that live today. We share a common ancestor, That ancestor had an ancestor that was something akin to a tree shew 65 million years ago. That shrew had a simpler ancestor long before it and so on all the way back to the Beginning/
We all share common DNA with the housefly and the pine tree. ALL life is based on the same basic blueprint that evolved from the pond scum hundreds of millions of years ago.
=====================
Bill you will have to agree with unoi on this point. He has been reading his Bible. Adam was formed from the particles of the Earth. Old news.
He still doesn't understand DNA.
Originally Posted by Bill Gray:
quote: Originally Posted by frog:Bill, I'm happy you are happy with your choice of belief systems, and perhaps Jennifer is happy with hers as well. I would personally say the line between showing love. . . You have the right to your choices and everyone else does to theirs.
Hi Frog,
If you see Jennifer, blindfolded, and walking toward a cliff where you know she will lose her life if you do not warn her -- will you warn her? Or will you just say, "She has the right to make her own choices. So, why should I stop her when she is just walking?" Will you do that -- even though you know she is heading toward physical death?
No, you will not. Nor can I refuse to warn her that she is walking, blindfolded, toward spiritual death. Notice, I say that I "warn her" -- not that I would "force her." If I do not warn her, her fate is on my shoulders -- and I will have to answer to Him for that neglect one day. If I do warn her, her fate is on her own shoulders -- and her eternal choice is her own.
That, my Friend, is the difference. And, for a Christian believer -- who prays that every soul will be saved -- that is an eternal difference.
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill
I do see that to you this is a valid analogy, but it really isn't one unless you believe that a physically existing cliff is the exact same thing as a particular religious belief. The difference is that Jennifer has the same basic view of physical reality that you (or the rest of humanity) do and it isn't just your opinion that there is a cliff there based on a book you read and maybe someone who told you there is a cliff there, and that she will die if she walks that way. If a person with average human eyesight looks that direction s/he will see a cliff, but that isn't how it works with religion or politics. So sure, if I see a person about to walk off a physical cliff with a blindfold (why on earth someone would be doing that I have no idea though) I would call out to her or guide her. I understand that your spiritual cliff is just as solid as a physical cliff to you, but it isn't to others just as you probably don't believe a cow is be your ancestor no matter how many times I insist that it is. Just as you want to be respected in your belief in that spiritual cliff others want to be respected in their belief that you are wrong.
If, however, this "cliff" is one that I read about or someone told me about and that I believe in, but really no reproducible or even remotely concrete fact can back up, and especially since I know that her blinders aren't really blinders, but more a difference of opinion from mine, nope, I'm not going to go dragging her back from the edge only I see. My point is you have shared your beliefs, the writings, your experiences, and some don't share your interpretations of it. That doesn't mean anyone is running off any spiritual cliffs, but that some see your "cliff" as your opinion just as you see their beliefs as unenlightened. I know that you won't see what I mean with the analogy, but there it is.
Aw gee, Frog. This is loaded with "feel good" "worldly" views. I'm bumping your ticket to hell to first class. Enjoy the ride.
Oh, this post was almost today's Stop Making Sense Award winner.