U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-05-2011, 09:22 PM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,435,128 times
Reputation: 106

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
There are a couple that I wanted to address, as I think you missed the point of my original question.
I think not. I've very kindly tried to provide very clear and concise answers to all your questions and you basically respond by 'looking the gift horse in the mouth.'

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
These are questions for you, not me. I don't believe, remember?
Here, once again, is my answer:

"If the Bible is reliable would it not naturally follow that what the Bible informs us about God's character is also reliable?"

This is what's known as a rhetorical question. I've also responded previously that I'm trying to keep an open mind. If, IYO, the Bible cannot be accepted as reliable, I would be looking for you to provide some sort of logical reasoning. As of now, I see no logical reason to doubt it's veracity.

Regarding your other questions:

"Is God's objective morality known by man?"

and:

"Can God's objective morality be known by man?"

I've answered yes to both. If that isn't clear and concise enough for you I really don't know what else I can do. What sort of answer would you prefer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
I am asking specifically about determining the veracity of divine revelation.

If I tell you that the fire marshall has demanded that you evacuate a building, you could ask a witness to back me up, or you could ask the fire marshall's office to verify what I said.
...or, if I believe that I have sufficient REASON, I could choose to take your word for it and evacuate the building.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
If I tell you that God told me something, how would you verify that my claim was true? What if I had other people who also claimed divine revelation supporting me?
If you made such a claim, would it be REASONABLE for me to believe you? If you had other people making such a claim, would that automatically make it REASONABLE for me to believe them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
This was the thrust of my question. If you are going to claim that God's absolute morality is divinely revealed you need a way to verify that revelation.
I'm well aware of the "thrust" of your question. The problem is that you appear to be under the assumption that the veracity of the Bible must automatically be assumed to be unsubstantiated. I'm all ears, why must we make such an assumption?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
...Otherwise your belief is placed in the hands of charlatans and lunatics who can claim anything they want and cry, "God told me so!"
Again, why should I or anyone assume that the Bible is the product of "charlatans and lunatics?"

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
No, I do not. First I don't understand what you mean by "makes sense".
"Makes sense" as in, is it logical and reasonable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
Logical consistency does not depend on a deity.
I'm inclined to disagree. Why should I be convinced of such a thing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
Reconciling the world I observe with my personal sense of "rightness" also does not require a deity.
...and what happens when others happen to disagree with your view of rightness? Would that make them right and you wrong or would it make you right and them wrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
I do not believe and I do not feel that, "everything is ultimately nonsense".
It seems to me that nihilism is the only logical alternative if there is no God. Morality can be viewed as nothing more than a human construct - ultimately, morality equates to nonsense from the nihilistic perspective.

If there is no God, there is no ultimate intrinsic purpose or meaning to existence.

If there is no God, there is no ultimate hope.

I think Camus had it right when he stated that the only really serious philosophical question left is suicide. You can't have it both ways. If one determines to believe that there is no God, they should be willing to affirm the logical consequences of such a decision.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
I don't understand how this has anything to do with your definition of absolute morality.
We've both been off topic from jump street. I think it's probably a little late to cry foul now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-06-2011, 07:05 AM
 
3,404 posts, read 2,254,644 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
I think not. I've very kindly tried to provide very clear and concise answers to all your questions and you basically respond by 'looking the gift horse in the mouth.'
You demand that I not make assumptions, but you refuse to articulate your views. Playing 20 questions so far has not helped to lay out your position at all. That is why I have been asking you to try something different. Lay out a coherent definition of your absolute morality, using your revealed truths or principles as axioms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24;21593270
[B
"If the Bible is reliable would it not naturally follow that what the Bible informs us about God's character is also reliable?"[/b]

This is what's known as a rhetorical question. I've also responded previously that I'm trying to keep an open mind. If, IYO, the Bible cannot be accepted as reliable, I would be looking for you to provide some sort of logical reasoning. As of now, I see no logical reason to doubt it's veracity.
I understand that is your basis for your argument. I am not arguing this point with you at this time. Articulate your beliefs on objective morality fully, and then we can discuss this, along with the rest of your argument.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
"Is God's objective morality known by man?"

and:

"Can God's objective morality be known by man?"

I've answered yes to both. If that isn't clear and concise enough for you I really don't know what else I can do. What sort of answer would you prefer?
Since you believe that God's objective morality is known and knowable, then I ask again, share it with me. I do believe that it should be comprehensive with regard to revelation. That is to be a known objective morality, you need to have ALL of the reveled portions. You should be able to list them, right? I am not so concerned with the elements of morality that are logically derived from the revealed truths, as we can derive those from the revealed portions.





Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
Again, why should I or anyone assume that the Bible is the product of "charlatans and lunatics?"
I was not specifically referring only to the Bible when I am referring to revelation. If you have no way of verifying revelation,you have no way of separating the Billy Grahams form the Benny Hinns, or even the Jim Jones. The only thing you can do is compare what the new "man of God" is saying to scripture. This gives you no basis for dismissing the claims of a man wanting to wage war, commit genocide, or kill his own son becasue God told him to, since God has, according to the bible, commanded all these things before,so they are not inconsistent with the nature of God. Thus my comment about leveing your beliefs open for abuse from charlatans ad thieves.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As far as the rest of this, if you want to discuss "is Atheism Nihilism?" you should start a new thread for it. If you don't want to defend the consistency of absolute revealed truth, just say so, and we can move on to other topics.

NoCapo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2011, 12:36 PM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,435,128 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
You demand that I not make assumptions, but you refuse to articulate your views.
I've made no such demands. However, I do reserve the right to question your assumptions before addressing the conclusions you've chosen to formulate based on such assumptions.

As I stated, things can be much less confusing if you simply attempt to understand my reasoning by asking questions rather than making unwarranted assumptions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
Playing 20 questions so far has not helped to lay out your position at all. That is why I have been asking you to try something different. Lay out a coherent definition of your absolute morality, using your revealed truths or principles as axioms.
It sure seems to me that you've played your fair share of "20 questions" as well. The apparent difference would seem to be that I welcome questions and you seem to be irritated by them.

What sort of "coherent definition" are you looking for? I'm not a mind reader. Can you provide some sort of example of what it is that I'm supposed to be articulating here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
I understand that is your basis for your argument. I am not arguing this point with you at this time. Articulate your beliefs on objective morality fully, and then we can discuss this, along with the rest of your argument.
In my view, I've already articulated this. You are of the apparent view that I have not. Please provide an example or give a clear illustration of what sort of articulation you're looking for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
Since you believe that God's objective morality is known and knowable, then I ask again, share it with me. I do believe that it should be comprehensive with regard to revelation. That is to be a known objective morality, you need to have ALL of the revealed portions. You should be able to list them, right? I am not so concerned with the elements of morality that are logically derived from the revealed truths, as we can derive those from the revealed portions.
Honestly, I don't get your reasoning here with respect to having a comprehensive list of objective moral standards. Hypothetically speaking, let's say that God only gave one commandment to Moses and that we have a written record of such an event. Even though we only had a record of this one commandment, how would that negate the notion of the existence of an objective moral principle? If God exists and the record of the transmission of such a code is true, any debate over the number or questions about whether or not they are comprehensive all strike me as being superfluous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
I was not specifically referring only to the Bible when I am referring to revelation.
No, you didn't "specifically" refer to "only" the Bible. However, you did attempt to equate Biblical revelation to revelation which may or may not be reasonably obtained through personal experience. There is a vast difference between the two.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
If you have no way of verifying revelation,you have no way of separating the Billy Grahams form the Benny Hinns, or even the Jim Jones. The only thing you can do is compare what the new "man of God" is saying to scripture. This gives you no basis for dismissing the claims of a man wanting to wage war, commit genocide, or kill his own son becasue God told him to, since God has, according to the bible, commanded all these things before,so they are not inconsistent with the nature of God. Thus my comment about leveing your beliefs open for abuse from charlatans ad thieves.
Your assertion strikes me as rather self-defeating. Scripture is precisely what it is that enables us to determine the difference between a Billy Graham and a Jim Jones. They need to bring much more to the table than a simple "God told me so."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
As far as the rest of this, if you want to discuss "is Atheism Nihilism?" you should start a new thread for it. If you don't want to defend the consistency of absolute revealed truth, just say so, and we can move on to other topics.
You know, I really don't blame you for wanting to avoid the task of defending your world view. I can sympathize with your apparent dilemma here, namely, that of being in the position of having to try and defend the indefensible or make sense out of nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2011, 11:18 PM
 
Location: NC, USA
7,088 posts, read 13,057,023 times
Reputation: 3984
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
What evidence, arguments, data or reasons are there to support the idea of atheism?

Is atheism logically coherent?
Of course, since there is no real evidence that any of the gods actually exist, Atheism is a logical belief.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2011, 06:03 AM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,435,128 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty Rhodes View Post
Of course, since there is no real evidence that any of the gods actually exist, Atheism is a logical belief.
It's interesting that you chose not to address the first question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2011, 06:52 AM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,435,128 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
Again I answer, I am not referring to how Christians are to treat homosexuals or polygamists.

I have not claimed the Bible gives any instruction in the New Testament on how believers are to treat homosexuals.
Good. Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
I have claimed, and you are agreeing with me, that condemnations of homosexuality is one of the great moral principles carried throughout the OT and NT.
I would not quite agree that prohibitions against homosexuality necessarily qualify as a "great" moral principle. It simply describes the practice as being properly understood as sin. Sin covers a broad category

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
But, this is pointless to discuss, because I was using this example to deal with your claim that the entirety of God's absolute moral law could be derived from the "two great commandments"
In order for one to properly love God, they would logically need to get to know God. This would encompass the entire discipline of theology and Biblical hermeneutics. In other words, being intensely interested in knowing what pleases and displeases God.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
This was the statement I was trying to refute, however it appears that you didn't mean that statement to be an actual answer to my question.
My statement was made with the intention of addressing any supposed misgivings over the simplicity over the concept of an objective moral framework. The fact that Jesus provides a basic two commandment SUMMARY is a superb illustration. It's really nothing complicated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
If this is the case, then we have no argument and have been talking in circles for quite some time. In fact, this was the point I have been trying to make for several posts.
Talking in circles? I would be more inclined to view it as an attempt on your part to make an issue out of something that is actually a non-issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
We are however back to the original question, can you fully define the absolute moral framework of God, or does it remain something nebulous, to be interpreted differently by different people?
I see absolutely nothing "nebulous" or complicated about the concept of an absolute moral framework.

Logically, there can only be one TRUE interpretation. Disagreements over such true absolute prohibitions would not equate to non-existence of the such true absolute prohibitions.

The only thing complicated here is your apparent purposeful intention to make it more complicated than it actually is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
Like I said originally, I am not sure that I have ever seen a full definition of an absolute morality by any of its adherents.
You've seen it...you're simply choosing to reject it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
The closest I can come, would be something like "Do what God has commanded and conform to the moral principles revealed by the behavior of God as recorded in scripture", but I am not convinced that this would sufficient to arrive at God's objective morality.
Identify those things that are classified as wrong and avoid them. Identify those things that are right and do them.

Objective morality provides the basis for making a determination between that which is objectively right and that which is objectively wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCapo View Post
The tie-in to the rest of the discussion is that if our understanding of God's objective morality is contingent on our understanding of his character and the moral principles he embodies, we need to examine these aspects of scripture carefully.
Ding! We have a winner folks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2011, 04:55 AM
 
39,242 posts, read 10,913,531 times
Reputation: 5100
Originally Posted by NoCapo
The tie-in to the rest of the discussion is that if our understanding of God's objective morality is contingent on our understanding of his character and the moral principles he embodies, we need to examine these aspects of scripture carefully.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
..
Ding! We have a winner folks.
Not if Da Capo finds the God of the Bible us unedifying and unbelievable as I do (cracks another tub of popcorn)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2011, 06:39 AM
 
5,462 posts, read 5,944,384 times
Reputation: 1804
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
It's interesting that you chose not to address the first question.
He probably saw the fact that when other people did their comments were ignored and found no reason to bother again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2011, 07:14 AM
 
2,319 posts, read 4,098,685 times
Reputation: 2076
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCfromNC View Post
He probably saw the fact that when other people did their comments were ignored and found no reason to bother again.
Exactly. Ignored and/or danced around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 09:44 AM
 
2,996 posts, read 4,925,125 times
Reputation: 1793
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astron1000 View Post
Do you think atheism can be equated with (or perhaps at least a subset of) logical positivism? This is not a trick question. Just wondering about other's thoughts.
By using the term 'positivism' I assume you mean beliefs that are affirmative (?) . Yes, every single one of us have an affirmative set of beliefs about the reality we are apart of , for our very existence, existence of the Cosmos, and other major considerations on a grand scale. Each demand an affirmative response as to their origin, meaning, purpose, Cause, et al... Trying to avoid this in dialogue , is rather disengenuous on behalf of any people group that says ' We just proclaim a negative for a worldview' ; by default of our existence, it requires an affirmative declaration (even if one chooses not to divulge that publicly) .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top