Zone1 Morality is natural phenomenon.

[ding]

Of course humans can be objective.

Have you changed your mind on that?

We can't discover any objective truth because we do not see what actually is.

All humans are unable to perceive objective reality.

 

[dblack]

You're all over the place on this thread. Didn't you say earlier that morality is a human construct?

Lol... Logic is a human construct.

If it's a human construct, then it's not objective.

Objectivity is also a human construct.

Anyway.... I'll read and respond to the rest later. I have skiing to do.

As ding has already stated repeatedly, if it's a human construct, then ultimately it's anything we want it to be.

Why?

 

[buttercup]

The bible is the word of your god your religious texts are of divine origin

5Bondservants,a obey your earthly mastersb with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, 6not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as bondservants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart,

So now you change your tune.

First humans cannot be objective now they are not the source of objective truth.

The very god you worship was incapable of envisioning a world without slavery to the extent that it ordered slaves to follow their masetr commands as if they were commands from your god himself

That's your "source of objective truth "

You clearly don't understand the Bible, or Christianity. Or God.

As someone else already told you earlier, you keep pointing to temporal laws that only applied to a certain group of people, for a certain time period.

The Bible is a collection of books that contains a number of different types of writing. One of those is historical. That means that some parts of the Bible speak about things that only applied for a particular period of time, for a specific group of people. And even then you're misinterpreting those passages, but we don't have time for a Bible study right now.

So whether you're doing that intentionally or innocently, you're just presenting a strawman.

So instead of pointing to the Old Testament temporal laws, you need to understand that what Christians look to is the unchanging nature and character of God.

Which is LOVE. Truth. Wisdom. Justice. Holiness. Goodness....etc.

That's what true morality is based on. Not temporal Old Testament covenants specifically for this fallen world, but God's unchanging nature.

Here's another list of qualities that are from the Spirit:

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

Galatians 5:22-23


And a little video for you:

 

[ding]

Logic is a human construct.

How so? Because it seems to me that by you saying that that you believe logic can be anything man wishes it to be. That it would be possible to eat a slice of cake and still have that slice of cake after eating it. Logic says that you can either have the piece of cake or eat the piece of cake but not both.

 

[buttercup]

Lol... Logic is a human construct.

Objectivity is also a human construct.

Anyway.... I'll read and respond to the rest later. I have skiing to do.

Why?

Oh my word. If you actually believe that the abstract laws of logic are a human construct then you clearly have not given this any thought at all.

 

[ding]

Objectivity is also a human construct.

How so? The definition of objective is:

expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations

of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind

 

[sparky]

Sure that's ONE of the problems. But I think the bigger problem is man's subjectivity. Think about it... if everyone became accountable overnight and was honest about what they did, our problems would be solved overnight.

well i agree Ding

but you have to admit it's a tad idealist to consider mankind morally self policing

and so we're back to the 'word of God' , filtered down through millennia of bias interpretation, political agenda, diverse religions and faiths as a 'guide'

how's that workin' out on this rock????

but i digress, for your consideration>



~S~

 

[ding]

well i agree Ding

but you have to admit it's a tad idealist to consider mankind morally self policing

Nor does mankind need to be morally self policing as the law of compensation (i.e. experiencing consequences of actions) takes care of that for them. Albeit in a statistical and not always timely fashion. But predictable surprises are inevitable when one normalizes his deviance to the standards. Why? Because error eventually fails.

 

[ding]

and so we're back to the 'word of God' , filtered down through millennia of bias interpretation, political agenda, diverse religions and faiths as a 'guide'

how's that workin' out on this rock

but i digress, for your consideration>



~S~

Great talk. Paul Harvey is da bomb. As to how it's working out on this rock... have some faith.

 

[sparky]

have some faith.

well it's what i have faith in that's admittedly my issue ding.....~S~

 

[ding]

well i agree Ding

but you have to admit it's a tad idealist to consider mankind morally self policing

and so we're back to the 'word of God' , filtered down through millennia of bias interpretation, political agenda, diverse religions and faiths as a 'guide'

how's that workin' out on this rock????

but i digress, for your consideration>



~S~

My sentiments are exactly the same as Paul's sentiments. 100%, no deviation whatsoever. I would hope that comes out in my posts. The only thing I think you might question is defending God, but I'm not defending God as much as I am protecting others who might be influenced by attacks on God. He might see it different. I'm sure he'll let me know when the time is right.

 

[ding]

well it's what i have faith in that's admittedly my issue ding.....~S~

I hear you, but like everything else, that too shall pass.

 

[Foxfyre]

Only because people have surrendered morality to religion and culture and have fallen for the lie that religion and cultural beliefs are unassailable,

It is entirely possible to construct a moral framework using science and rational thought alone.

Please reread my post. How do you know what is moral and what is not unless you have some kind of ethical structure via culture or religion to evaluate something? What is it that prompts people to care about people or creatures they have never seen, probably will never see? We are the only species on Planet Earth with that capability. Why is that? And I am not speaking of climate change or any phenomenon related to events or circumstances. I mean caring about somebody you have never met. I can assure you the American Indians of previous centuries did not. I can assure you most of those in the Roman Empire did not. I can assure you that those hunting endangered species do not.

Who decides and how do they decide what is moral or not moral and how is that determined unless conscience is part of that equation? If you confer and make up a set of rules to go by. How is it determined whether the death penalty--for example only please and not to prompt a discussion on the death penalty--is moral or not unless conscience is part of the equation? And where do conscience come from? It sure doesn't come from science or what passes for rational thought these days.

 

[sparky]

How do you know what is moral and what is not unless you have some kind of ethical structure via culture or religion to evaluate something?

Another fair Q FF

as an aside, i'll point to nature , being as i live with, and subsequently spend more time with animals than humans

animals have a sense of justice , they form packs, have leaders ,and quite frankly are superior in that their ethics are simple, not complex

or, maybe i've just been out in the woods too long......?


~S~

 

[Donald H]

How does creation affect how you live your life and behave towards friends, family, and community?

Not in the least.

How does not knowing precisely how creation came about affect your relationship with God?

I have no relationship with any gods or supernatural beings.

The questions you're asking don't apply to me. You could ask me why it makes a difference to me whether Catholic believe in the Genesis myth or evolution. That would at least indicate that you're not trying to spam the discussion because you're being challenged by atheists. Otherwise, your comments just show that you don't take others seriously.

As I suggested to ding, if you don't want to discuss the topic then why not just leave? Do you consider yourself to be a missionary for your church?

Knowing precisely is not the question. There's no precision with Genesis and evolution, they're not compatible and don't need to be compared one against the other.

Choose on or the other. (you're free to add your qualification)
I choose evolution without any qualifications. I completely reject creation.

We can work with either of our beliefs but you can't just assume that I have a relationship with your god.

 

[Donald H]

Another fair Q FF

as an aside, i'll point to nature , being as i live with, and subsequently spend more time with animals than humans

animals have a sense of justice , they form packs, have leaders ,and quite frankly are superior in that their ethics are simple, not complex

or, maybe i've just been out in the woods too long......?


~S~

Ethical structure in animals isn't acquired via religion.

Do you really believe that humans have no ethics without religion?

Oh, and you need to be reminded that humans are animals too.

 

[ding]

Do you really believe that humans have no ethics without religion?

No. It's innate, which is one of the proofs of God.

 

[ding]

Oh, and you need to be reminded that humans are animals too.

I bet that goes over big with sparky

 

[ding]

Ethical structure in animals isn't acquired via religion.

Correct. Order from chaos, which is another proof of God.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I love your unsubstantiated accusations.

It's not an accusation, just because you're sensitive and defensive about it. It's just what religious people do. They first assume the religion is truth, then all new information is manipulated to fit it.