By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Lots of bashing for the belief of God....

r505Matt said:
dib8rman said:
r505Matt said:
dib8rman said:
pizzahut451 said:
And  how is atheism any diffrent than Christianity when it comes to evidence and faith? Is there any evidence that supports non-existance of God? HELL NO. Atheist believe theire is no God based on no evidence. Christians beleive there is a God based on no evidence. So we should ridicule Atehism as well right? But, Richard Dawking forbiid than anyone thinks anything even remotly bad about your supeiror beleif. Stop acting like atheism is a proven beleif or something. its not even close to that.

Well, I wasn't arguing for atheism there, just pointing out two very polar world views.

The comparison I was drawing was between world views versus ethnicity. It would seem that the OP basically said all african americans view the world in a unique way from other humans; if you care to remember the context of the OP at all pizza, that's what he was talking about or at least his example.

----

But I'll say this about your post though, Richard Dawkins if I remember correctly is a PR guy from Oxford, there is a fancy title but I don't remember it. Now Dawkins travels the world to debate popular theists and when asked who does he refuse to challenge and why? He said he only challenges "those who have a reason to believe it and all of it. Not people whose only cling to fame is that they can goof around with words." Now beyond what the man has sayed I don't know who the "anyone" category your mentioned is filled with.

You've made a mistake though, Atheism isn't about there being no god, it's that whatever god you choose to believe in that god has no holding on the changes of everyday action. That is to say that tributing and performing other rituals (prayer, mass, magicical invokation, sacrifice and so on) do  not change will not pause the laws of physics in favor of a miracle.

To put it plainly can you prove to me Unicorns exist? Well I can't prove to you that they don't either, but I can say that regardless of their existance or lack of - life goes on.

Actually, atheism is the rejection of belief of any deity or higher power. Agnostics believe in a possible higher power but it is indefinable. A belief in a powerless higher power is almost oxymoronic, but would still constitutes as a theistic belief. Essentially, you would be believing in a power that created the universe and life as we know it but has no power/reason/desire to influence/control/change. Believing in a powerless deity is still belief in a deity, that is merely ascribing a trait of powerless instead of the typical omnipotent.

Actually, he refferenced Richard Dawkins who is a noted Atheist, I only just paraphrased Dawkins position since I own a copy of his book "The God Delusion" and was able to summarize his point.

I may be coming off a bit wrong here then if your saying that I'm saying Atheists' believe in a powerless deity. No, the argument is meant to give an example of how powerless the theist deities are to the point where tangible attribution becomes non importable. It's an argument geared at miracle works which is a selling point for faith, which attempts to to make a claim to secret knowledge in a probability game using the same emotions involved when a person says maybe not knowing the odds: "well what are the odds?"

Suddenly I'm happy I didn't stick with satire on that response, explaining everything away like an old Victorian cartoon only to kill the joke.

Sorry for the post above also; I was in a rush.

Well, and I knew this would happen, but my actual choice of the word powerless isn't important. I was merely commenting on your idea of atheists believing in any kind of deity. Atheism, in the strictest yet simplest sense, is the rejection of belief of a higher power/celestial being/deity. Regardless of whatever traits any religion wants to add to their deity or choice, atheists simply reject the idea of the deity in the first place. Believing in any deity or any kind is theism.

Okay, agreed in this forum language isn't worth arguing about.

Again though just so I don't leave you confused, I'm not saying Atheist believe in a god of any kind. I only posted an argument what I think exposes how useless the theist god would be and then said that this is the usual atheist argument. The context was to explain that Atheists wont out right say there is no god, if one did then they would have a 50% chance of being correct... maybe 50.9999% chance. Perhaps one would say that they do not believe a god exists, but I can't think of one that will say they know a god or the gods don't exist.

If your going to say otherwise though, you need to e-mail Richard Dawkins and ask him to elaborate. =P



I'm Unamerica and you can too.

The Official Huge Monster Hunter Thread: 



The Hunt Begins 4/20/2010 =D

Around the Network
pizzahut451 said:
 

Are you saying that when something doesnt exist, you cant prove that it doesnt exist? So why even assume it doesnt exist?

Actually, existing God would NEVER give evidence to people about his existance.He would never allow humans to find evidence of him (considering thats actually possible) That would chnage the very foundation of life on Earth. That would ruin freedom of choice and will God gave to people and lots of other very important elements of human life. It would also destory the concept of faith and like I said, it all comes down to faith.So there could be God but there still coudlnt be any evidence of him, because he wouldnt allow it to be.

The rest of the post I agree with you


All hail pizza, for he knows exactly what god thinks and does, kneel to his knowledge.

 

ALL HAIL THE PROPHET PIZZAHUT451, he has knowledge no other human could know!

 

Pizza how do you know god would never show himself; it's a miracle!? Did God tell you that oh wise prophet?

----

Now if someone said martians would never let us know they existed because that would change the foundation of human life on Earth to you on a bus, would you move closer or further away from him?

(This is all tongue in cheek btw)



I'm Unamerica and you can too.

The Official Huge Monster Hunter Thread: 



The Hunt Begins 4/20/2010 =D

I think that he was talking about actually be phisically present like being in front of your eyes.
of course that the presence of Jesus is already a manifestation but not in the sense described above.



@DélioPT:

What evidence? Being born one way doesn`t classify as human nature. And if i`m not mistaken science hasn`t proven for sure. Also, a genetic "inclination" doesn`t mean that the religious concept of human nature is wrong.
As i said before, it doesn`t really matter what inclination per se, as it`s only wrong when practiced, just like every other sin. What`s wrong is the action.

Read scientific articles on the matter. All professionals agree that sexual orientation isn't a choice, regardless of the causes, and that for a homosexual homosexuality is natural and normal and healthy. I don't know what exactly you base your ideea of human nature o, but it certainly seems to have little to do with nature.

You didn`t prove a single thing. The only thing you showed was how you only see a "detail", if you will, don`t care what the context is and judhe the whole for the part. You ignore the difference that clearly exists between God and dictators just because you can`t see past the fact tha people should be held responsible for their choices. There isn`t freedom without consequences. Life has causes and consequences. It`s not just with our relation to God, in our own relations there is repercussions for the good and the bad and with God it`s no different.
More, you act like having no freedom and living in fear of a dictator, that gives you no real choice, that doesn`t love you or care about you, is the same as someone who loves you, died for you, lets you choose and gives everything to make you happy.

The consequences aren't a result of the actions themselves having a certain impact, but a result of the will of a person who decided that certain actions are wrong (because he says so), and that people sould suffer for doing them. Some actions are bad due to the results they cause, while many of the actions your god condemns don't have any actual negative consequences, but he condemns them anyway, because he feels like it. Also, this relationship you talk about is very one sided, with one side needing to submit to the whims of the other.

He also doesn't give you much of a chocie, as he makes sure that not chosing to submit to him leads you to perpetual unhappiness (including suffering for eternity in hell).

And I fail to see how Jesus's "sacrifice" proves any belevolence, when it is all a result of his own will, and nothing bad would've happend to him regardless.

You can handle pain and still find piece of mind and at heart, but if you haven`t piece of mind or at heart, then believe me, it will be a lot more devastating than any physical pain. The sense of void, for example, is more hurtful than any physical addiction.

Those addictions are usually a result of something, rather than a cause.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

sapphi_snake said:

@DélioPT:

What evidence? Being born one way doesn`t classify as human nature. And if i`m not mistaken science hasn`t proven for sure. Also, a genetic "inclination" doesn`t mean that the religious concept of human nature is wrong.
As i said before, it doesn`t really matter what inclination per se, as it`s only wrong when practiced, just like every other sin. What`s wrong is the action.

Read scientific articles on the matter. All professionals agree that sexual orientation isn't a choice, regardless of the causes, and that for a homosexual homosexuality is natural and normal and healthy. I don't know what exactly you base your ideea of human nature o, but it certainly seems to have little to do with nature.

You didn`t prove a single thing. The only thing you showed was how you only see a "detail", if you will, don`t care what the context is and judhe the whole for the part. You ignore the difference that clearly exists between God and dictators just because you can`t see past the fact tha people should be held responsible for their choices. There isn`t freedom without consequences. Life has causes and consequences. It`s not just with our relation to God, in our own relations there is repercussions for the good and the bad and with God it`s no different.
More, you act like having no freedom and living in fear of a dictator, that gives you no real choice, that doesn`t love you or care about you, is the same as someone who loves you, died for you, lets you choose and gives everything to make you happy.

The consequences aren't a result of the actions themselves having a certain impact, but a result of the will of a person who decided that certain actions are wrong (because he says so), and that people sould suffer for doing them. Some actions are bad due to the results they cause, while many of the actions your god condemns don't have any actual negative consequences, but he condemns them anyway, because he feels like it. Also, this relationship you talk about is very one sided, with one side needing to submit to the whims of the other.

He also doesn't give you much of a chocie, as he makes sure that not chosing to submit to him leads you to perpetual unhappiness (including suffering for eternity in hell).

And I fail to see how Jesus's "sacrifice" proves any belevolence, when it is all a result of his own will, and nothing bad would've happend to him regardless.

You can handle pain and still find piece of mind and at heart, but if you haven`t piece of mind or at heart, then believe me, it will be a lot more devastating than any physical pain. The sense of void, for example, is more hurtful than any physical addiction.

Those addictions are usually a result of something, rather than a cause.

Read scientific articles on the matter. All professionals agree that sexual orientation isn't a choice, regardless of the causes, and that for a homosexual homosexuality is natural and normal and healthy. I don't know what exactly you base your ideea of human nature o, but it certainly seems to have little to do with nature
Human nature isn`t about physical nature or how your body works, it`s more than that. But as i said, it`s not a question of being this way or the other, it`s about the choices you make. Being tempted this way or that way isn`t what matters.

 

The consequences aren't a result of the actions themselves having a certain impact, but a result of the will of a person who decided that certain actions are wrong (because he says so), and that people sould suffer for doing them. Some actions are bad due to the results they cause, while many of the actions your god condemns don't have any actual negative consequences, but he condemns them anyway, because he feels like it. Also, this relationship you talk about is very one sided, with one side needing to submit to the whims of the other.
First of all, one´s action always has consequences. If those are good or bad or a different matter. It isn`t that subjective because what we do or think always has a good or bad result, it may diverge according to one belief, but they still go by good or wrong to yourself and to others if they are the target of said action.
I can`t understand how you feel that some actions don`t have consequences but that`s a point of view. I have another. You can`t look at others point of view without looking at the context of that point of view. "Because he feels like it..." is an example of that, but honestly i can understand why you say it. All that i will say is that, we didn`t creat life, we didn`t create ourselves and everything that`s part of us, so maybe there`s more to us than one can reach in our understanding. Believe in God gives me more understanding of myself and Himself.
The relationship between God and us is the complete opposite of one sided. The love is mutual, He is my friend and Father and He loves me. How do i know this? Faith is an answer, as is what`s written in the Bible and so many more resons to feel certain about this.

 

He also doesn't give you much of a chocie, as he makes sure that not chosing to submit to him leads you to perpetual unhappiness (including suffering for eternity in hell).
It`s a choice, you might not like the outcome but it`s still a choice, as honest choice that you base solely on your will. Freedom.


And I fail to see how Jesus's "sacrifice" proves any belevolence, when it is all a result of his own will, and nothing bad would've happend to him regardless.
No. Death without God is the cause of our actions, not God`s. The good or the bad is fruit of our actions, decisions, etc. His goodness comes from the death of Jesus. Because if that didn`t happen there would be no salvation for us. We would live in sin and we would die in sin. Every sin we commit is another step away from God. So to save us and let us leave forever in peace and love He sacrificed Himself to show that those we die with Him, ressurrect with Him.
More, and seeing that he made us free, He still let us choose our path.

Those addictions are usually a result of something, rather than a cause.
Addictions are the result of something, yes. But it`s not the end. Even if they are a result, they have consequences in out lifes and sometimes deeper consequences. It`s not just the body that suffers, it`s their hearts that hurt in consequence.



Around the Network
pizzahut451 said:


 I dont think all humans can ever agree on universal laws, but that doesnt mean there is no universal and correct law. Hell, I dont know a single culture and religion where it says killing and steling are OK. 

I'm pretty sure their have been cultrures and religions in the past where killing and stealing are seen as OK. The Mongols, Aztecs etc.

Even today, many cultures are struggling with Western morals. There was a story in Pakistan of a woman who was punished by an elder for something her brother did and was gang raped. That may not be a religious difference (I'm pretty sure Islam is against rape), but it is a cultural one.



@DélioPT:

Human nature isn`t about physical nature or how your body works, it`s more than that. But as i said, it`s not a question of being this way or the other, it`s about the choices you make. Being tempted this way or that way isn`t what matters.

You don't know what you're talking about. Just give it a rest.

First of all, one´s action always has consequences. If those are good or bad or a different matter. It isn`t that subjective because what we do or think always has a good or bad result, it may diverge according to one belief, but they still go by good or wrong to yourself and to others if they are the target of said action.
I can`t understand how you feel that some actions don`t have consequences but that`s a point of view. I have another. You can`t look at others point of view without looking at the context of that point of view. "Because he feels like it..." is an example of that, but honestly i can understand why you say it. All that i will say is that, we didn`t creat life, we didn`t create ourselves and everything that`s part of us, so maybe there`s more to us than one can reach in our understanding. Believe in God gives me more understanding of myself and Himself.

I'd say it's made you more ignorant than you would've been otherwise. Just look at your first paragraph.

The relationship between God and us is the complete opposite of one sided. The love is mutual, He is my friend and Father and He loves me. How do i know this? Faith is an answer, as is what`s written in the Bible and so many more resons to feel certain about this.

Faith is not an answer. It's quite the opposite, a clouding of judgment.

It`s a choice, you might not like the outcome but it`s still a choice, as honest choice that you base solely on your will. Freedom.

Wrong, the outcome is bases solely on the will of the deity. Amd Hitler also gave those who would oppose him a choice. Submit or die. It was an honest choice, freedom and all that.

No. Death without God is the cause of our actions, not God`s. The good or the bad is fruit of our actions, decisions, etc. His goodness comes from the death of Jesus. Because if that didn`t happen there would be no salvation for us. We would live in sin and we would die in sin. Every sin we commit is another step away from God. So to save us and let us leave forever in peace and love He sacrificed Himself to show that those we die with Him, ressurrect with Him.
More, and seeing that he made us free, He still let us choose our path.

A nonsensical paragraph. This will probably be the last time I reply to you.

Addictions are the result of something, yes. But it`s not the end. Even if they are a result, they have consequences in out lifes and sometimes deeper consequences. It`s not just the body that suffers, it`s their hearts that hurt in consequence.

The hearty is part of the body (it is an organ after all).



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

sapphi_snake said:

@DélioPT:

Human nature isn`t about physical nature or how your body works, it`s more than that. But as i said, it`s not a question of being this way or the other, it`s about the choices you make. Being tempted this way or that way isn`t what matters.

You don't know what you're talking about. Just give it a rest.

First of all, one´s action always has consequences. If those are good or bad or a different matter. It isn`t that subjective because what we do or think always has a good or bad result, it may diverge according to one belief, but they still go by good or wrong to yourself and to others if they are the target of said action.
I can`t understand how you feel that some actions don`t have consequences but that`s a point of view. I have another. You can`t look at others point of view without looking at the context of that point of view. "Because he feels like it..." is an example of that, but honestly i can understand why you say it. All that i will say is that, we didn`t creat life, we didn`t create ourselves and everything that`s part of us, so maybe there`s more to us than one can reach in our understanding. Believe in God gives me more understanding of myself and Himself.

I'd say it's made you more ignorant than you would've been otherwise. Just look at your first paragraph.

The relationship between God and us is the complete opposite of one sided. The love is mutual, He is my friend and Father and He loves me. How do i know this? Faith is an answer, as is what`s written in the Bible and so many more resons to feel certain about this.

Faith is not an answer. It's quite the opposite, a clouding of judgment.

It`s a choice, you might not like the outcome but it`s still a choice, as honest choice that you base solely on your will. Freedom.

Wrong, the outcome is bases solely on the will of the deity. Amd Hitler also gave those who would oppose him a choice. Submit or die. It was an honest choice, freedom and all that.

No. Death without God is the cause of our actions, not God`s. The good or the bad is fruit of our actions, decisions, etc. His goodness comes from the death of Jesus. Because if that didn`t happen there would be no salvation for us. We would live in sin and we would die in sin. Every sin we commit is another step away from God. So to save us and let us leave forever in peace and love He sacrificed Himself to show that those we die with Him, ressurrect with Him.
More, and seeing that he made us free, He still let us choose our path.

A nonsensical paragraph. This will probably be the last time I reply to you.

Addictions are the result of something, yes. But it`s not the end. Even if they are a result, they have consequences in out lifes and sometimes deeper consequences. It`s not just the body that suffers, it`s their hearts that hurt in consequence.

The hearty is part of the body (it is an organ after all).

I'd say it's made you more ignorant than you would've been otherwise. Just look at your first paragraph.
I`d say that sounds like an insult, but who am i to say such a thing? I`m just ignorant.

A nonsensical paragraph. This will probably be the last time I reply to you.
If you don`t believe in God that must be truly nonsensical.

Faith is not an answer. It's quite the opposite, a clouding of judgment.
For someone who doesn`t know what faith is, you sure do know a lot of what means to have faith.

Wrong, the outcome is bases solely on the will of the deity. Amd Hitler also gave those who would oppose him a choice. Submit or die. It was an honest choice, freedom and all that.
You make it sound arbitrary. Saying Hitler gave people a choice is not just historically wrong as i`m pretty sure jews waren`t given any choices and having a choice doesn`t correspond to any dictatorship i have seen. Here in Portugal we had that for almost 50 years and it was do or be punished. When you do something against God`s will at least you are given the option to ammend or to continue.

The hearty is part of the body (it is an organ after all).
You do like to be literal about everything! :D
I said heart but in the context of "broken hearts" caused by love... that kind of heart. 



trestres said:
pizzahut451 said:
r505Matt said:
pizzahut451 said:
dib8rman said:
RCTjunkie said:

I find that on the internet forums, people are very respectful to different genders, races, and sexual orientations, but there is something about the belief in God that pushes some (certainly not all) people to become extremely bigoted, more generalizing, and overall more hateful and hostile to this specific group of people. 

Take this random quote:

"I've noticed Christians are hypocrites."

What if we replaced "Christains" with another group:

"I've noticed African Americans are hypocrites."

It seems more hateful and politically incorrect, right? So why is it that people with a belief in God are seemingly excluded for the political corectness that help protects so many other groups?

I know certain groups of people were oppressed over time, but there should be a call for equality, not revenge......

Maybe I'm just too sensitive, but it just comes off that way to me......

Starting today I'm going to start beliving in African American belief diety thing-a-mabob.. damn does that even make sense?

Last I checked a good chunk of African Americans were theists though so then can a theist still be a theist but also be atheist?

I know being a pinker pigment doesn't make you a theist or atheist though... why am I even bothering.

Sad OP is sad. World views are to be criticized and ridiculed when asserted to be correct without any evidence to the claim. In the theist case the very virtue of Christianity is the absence of evidence aka faith.


And  how is atheism any diffrent than Christianity when it comes to evidence and faith? Is there any evidence that supports non-existance of God? HELL NO. Atheist believe theire is no God based on no evidence. Christians beleive there is a God based on no evidence. So we should ridicule Atehism as well right? But, Richard Dawking forbiid than anyone thinks anything even remotly bad about your supeiror beleif. Stop acting like atheism is a proven beleif or something. its not even close to that.

This is one of the more ridiculous things I've read in one of these kinds of discussions. Let's set this up simply (though it is probably falsely dichotomous). If there is no God, there cannot be evidence for either side of the debate. It would be impossible to find evidence supporting or disproving the existence of God. You cannot prove or disprove something that does not exist.Are you saying that when something doesnt exist, you cant prove that it doesnt exist?

However, if there is a God, then there could be evidence to prove the existence of God, but there will still be no evidence to disprove God's existence. In both cases, you cannot have evidence to disprove something, it is logically impossible, therefore the burden of proof falls on believers, not atheists.Actually, existing God would NEVER give evidence to people about his existance.He would never allow humans to find evidence of him (considering thats actually possible) That would chnage the very foundation of life on Earth. That would ruin freedom of choice and will God gave to people and lots of other very important elements of human life. It would also destory the concept of faith  and  like I said, it all comes down to faith.

Now again, this is assuming a dichotomy when that's not really the case, so I think it's better to say whether or not there is a higher power or not. Since God and other possible celestial beings can be classified as a higher power, that wording probably works better. 

Lastly, it can be difficult to discern what is actually evidence and what is merely just a 'red herring' in the end. Maybe there is some true evidence in the Bible or Koran or other religious work that truly points to a higher power but we will probably never know (in life that is).

Are you saying that when something doesnt exist, you cant prove that it doesnt exist? So why even assume it doesnt exist?

Actually, existing God would NEVER give evidence to people about his existance.He would never allow humans to find evidence of him (considering thats actually possible) That would chnage the very foundation of life on Earth. That would ruin freedom of choice and will God gave to people and lots of other very important elements of human life. It would also destory the concept of faith and like I said, it all comes down to faith.So there could be God but there still coudlnt be any evidence of him, because he wouldnt allow it to be.

The rest of the post I agree with you

What do you mean God would never give evidence to people about his existence? Are you a Christian? I mean, according to the Bible God himself sent his only son into human form to save humanity. What do you mean no evidence? That is evidence...the biblical evidence for the ones who beleive. I was talking about divine evidence that even an atheist person cant deny. Something of logical or scientific nature. Maybe even a visual or spirital nature.Something mesurable.

And if you are a Christian you should know that, according to the Christian Church, faith is destroyed either ways once you die, no matter if you are a Christian or not, because God reveals himself to you. I meant the faith on Earth. While you are alive.if God himself would reveal himself than faith wouldnt make any sense than. God would revail himself to you, but only after you die and leave this world..  There's no more faith there once you see that in what you blindly believed. What remains is the hope that you will once reach Heaven after you cleanse yourself from sin (unless of course you chose to reject God when he revealed himself and asked if you wanted him forever in your life, in which case you will be going to hell, which is NOT a place, but an eternal state of suffering of the soul caused by your own choice of rejecting God and he granting your wishOh, an expert I see. I wrote the same thing about Hell few posts back, I am glad someone agrees with me the concept of christian Hell and didtn fall for all ''demons will eat you'' foolishness.)

Either ways, I don't believe in that. I was raised a Christian, but made my own choices.Are you a christian now? But if you say you are a Christian, I still cannot believe you deny God would give evidence of his existence, since Jesus was sent not only to save us, but to reveal many Misteries, including the Holy Trinity.Jesus spoke about God but he didnt actually give evidence of him to the living people. see my first point above.

Answers in bolded



r505Matt said:
pizzahut451 said:
r505Matt said:
pizzahut451 said:
Rath said:
pizzahut451 said:
 


As long as those morals given by XXXXXXXX are perfecttly correct too, I dont see a reason why you shouldnt listen to XXXXXX. That is, assuming XXXXXX ia giving correct, good and righteous morals. If XXXXXXXX is givng false and bad morals, than XXXXXX doesnt hold much credit or value in comprassion with God. LIKE I SAID BEFORE, IN THIS ARGUMENT, IT ALL COMES DOWN TO WEATHER YOU BELIEVE IN UNVERSAL OR SUBJECTIVE MORALS. I don't think you know the difference between the 2.


Lets say for the sake of argument that morals are objective. Different groups claim to have the correct set of morals. What is it that makes you certain that your morals are the correct and objective ones?


What you desicribed there doesnt differ from subjective morals.If the morals are objective there can be only 1 set of cerrect morals, and what makes me certain that my morals are correct is faith/the principles I beleive in. I dont see how ANY morals Christ gave to people can any reasonable and good person consider wrong. His morals are objectivly correct.


That's only from your perspective. Your basing that on a subjective belief of what is right and wrong. I took a few philosophy classes in college, one of them was about this topic exactly. Is there an objective set of morals? A universal true set of right and wrong? That class was one of the best classes I've ever taken, but in the end, it amounted to one thing. We can never know. There is NO possible way to truly know. We can debate and theorize and think and discuss all we want. But in the end, there is really no way to know for sure either way.

You think it's wrong to kill and steal and lie and cheat. You believe in the 7 deadly sins as sinful. But morals are not that simple. Maybe other cultures/religions/species (talking about possible aliens here since we're talking about universal morals) don't have a problem with murder.  Most of us do, but who's to say we are right? You are just assuming we are right, but in fact we could be wrong. Or maybe there are no morals and what we believe in as right and wrong is merely a higher human powers' attempts to control the masses.

That's pretty much the entire meaning behind Assassin's Creed's creed of "Nothing is true, everything is permitted". Who's to say your right and that idea is wrong? You can assume and believe all you want, but there is no answer to be found, and if you think you've found the answer, you haven't. Now maybe like a multiple choice quiz, you could get lucky and stumble on the right answer, but you won't know until you get your test scores back. What you're trying to argue is that you guess on your multiple choice test, and you know you got it all correct. Maybe you did, maybe you didn't, but the key point is that you do now know, and you will not know until later, if ever (death).


I actually agree with you, I dont know if you noticed that.I did say its all about faith a few posts bac, I dont know if you read that. I dont think all humans can ever agree on universal laws, but that doesnt mean there is no universal and correct law. Hell, I dont know a single culture and religion where it says killing and steling are OK.  I dont think any culture promotes stealing as a correct moral. I beleive to christ's morals because of his 2 messages ''Dont ever do anything that you dont wish to be done to yourself'' and ''respect and love your God''. i just dont see how any reasoable  human can consider those 2 messages wrong. (which are basiclly all christ's messages gathered into 2). They just ''feel'' correct

I somewhat agree with you too, my only point is even if they seem like good morals to EVERYONE on the planet, that doesn't mean they are good morals. We would be basing our idea of good off of what we think, in terms of relativity, is good. Not to mention there is SOOO much grey when it comes to morals. 

So you bring up the golden rule. Treat others as you want to be treated. So if I wanted to be murdered (strange thought, but still) then I rightfully should go commit murder. I'm treating others as I want to be treated. Or maybe, in a less extreme example, what if I like pain (masochistic). Should I think inflict pain on others? Most people see that as wrong, but it follows the golden rule or treating others the way you want to be treated. That thought/idea/moral doesn't hold much weight in serious ethics discussions. 

As for the previous post, let's talk about unicorns. Let's now assume for a moment, without doubt, that unicorns never existed in reality. Assuming that statement to be true, it would be 100% impossible to find evidence of a unicorn, whether it be eyewitness or fossil remains or anything. According to what we've assumed to be true, you would NEVER ever ever be able to prove or disprove the existence of unicorns. There would be no evidence to find. That's my only point. Assuming for a moment that God does not exist, you would not be able to find evidence ever. Atheists believe God doesn't exist. Asking an atheist to find proof God doesn't exist (even if he does) is the same as me asking you to find proof that unicorns don't exist (assuming you don't believe in unicorns, if you do, put in some other mythological creature you don't believe in). That's my only point there.


''Grey area'' doesnt disprove universal morals actually. ''grey area'' are most of the time taken out of context made up by humans to disprove universal morals such as ''burn and kill the innocent baby to save the world'' etc etc... They really annoy me sometimes.

If you want to get killed and /or tortured than you are not rational and/or mentally healthy person, you are most likely a sick or mentaly ill person and as such, not in position to make your own choices and guide your own life, let alone follow your own morals. And before you say ''but pain is considerd good by some people, pain is not universally a bad thing''  let me tell you that that answer can be flawed, because using that logic you can make anything look normal. It would be like saying ''its not un-normal  for another human being to have 10 heads and 8 legs, because he is born that way'' despite that being an extreme gentic disorder in the person's development. The same can be said about people who consider getting tortured and killed a good or normal thing.

 

As for unicorns, we could, by using some scientific, historic, logical or biological mesaures, determan if the creature that fits to the describtion of the unicorn existed or not in the past. The same cant be said for God, because no laws of science logic or biologiy apply to him. At least not the laws we know about. Thats why its impossible for each side to show the evidence of thier belief. Its all about faith. Also, if you go 2 or 3 pages back, you'll see I've never actually asked for evidence of non-existance of God. He said all ideologies without evidence should be ridiculed to which I replied with saying Athesim also provides no evidence for its ideology and should also be ridiculed.

 

Also, what is your view on God? Are you a theist or atheist?