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.
1) it discusses things as 'good', yet does not provide a framework outside Christianity to define what 'good' is. How is the OP defining it?
2) It assumes that there is a moral and guiding compass apart from Christianity, yet does not provide any evidence or support. What is motivating the atheist to do the 'good' that 1) describes?
3) It builds an argument on the (incorrect) assumption that Christians believe in Christianity in order to avoid hell. This fails to recognize that Heaven is a remaking of earth in which the Christian enjoys eternal fellowship with the Father and Son and Holy Spirit, as well as all other believers. If somebody is 'only believing' in order to avoid Hell, this is not what they would want Heaven to be. They want Heaven to be the same life they currently have, and simply wish to avoid punishment. This would indicate they don't actually know Jesus, and would be an issue of salvation to discuss with this person.
4) External actions cannot (and are not) the defining characteristic of what is 'good' or 'bad' or 'moral' or 'right' or 'just', etc. Internal heart orientation speaks to the character of a person. And all persons are separated from God due to an innate sinful nature, and the only means to repair this separation is through the shed blood of Jesus as Lord and Savior.
1) it discusses things as 'good', yet does not provide a framework outside Christianity to define what 'good' is. How is the OP defining it?
2) It assumes that there is a moral and guiding compass apart from Christianity, yet does not provide any evidence or support. What is motivating the atheist to do the 'good' that 1) describes?
3) It builds an argument on the (incorrect) assumption that Christians believe in Christianity in order to avoid hell. This fails to recognize that Heaven is a remaking of earth in which the Christian enjoys eternal fellowship with the Father and Son and Holy Spirit, as well as all other believers. If somebody is 'only believing' in order to avoid Hell, this is not what they would want Heaven to be. They want Heaven to be the same life they currently have, and simply wish to avoid punishment. This would indicate they don't actually know Jesus, and would be an issue of salvation to discuss with this person.
4) External actions cannot (and are not) the defining characteristic of what is 'good' or 'bad' or 'moral' or 'right' or 'just', etc. Internal heart orientation speaks to the character of a person. And all persons are separated from God due to an innate sinful nature, and the only means to repair this separation is through the shed blood of Jesus as Lord and Savior.
2) It assumes that there is a moral and guiding compass apart from Christianity, yet does not provide any evidence or support. What is motivating the atheist to do the 'good' that 1) describes?
Nipped for space ...
This atheist: We only have each other. That's why we try and help each other. I actually think its more of a duty to help. I know some theist can't process that.
This atheist: We only have each other. That's why we try and help each other. I actually think its more of a duty to help. I know some theist can't process that.
You mention the word 'duty'. Why do you have said 'duty'? If there is no God / higher power, where is this 'duty' coming from? Internally? Society? Other environmental factors?
You mention the word 'duty'. Why do you have said 'duty'? If there is no God / higher power, where is this 'duty' coming from? Internally? Society? Other environmental factors?
We evolved to live in groups, and to read other peoples emotions.
You mention the word 'duty'. Why do you have said 'duty'? If there is no God / higher power, where is this 'duty' coming from? Internally? Society? Other environmental factors?
All three. Nature and nurture. I think its definitely both, to varying degrees, in individuals.
For me, a living system offers a mechanism and predicts evolution. So morals may be evolving like they do in people. It would have been cool to see the earlier humans to actually see the steps in morals. Maybe. Then behaviors feed back into getting coded into the DNA.
When the protein concentration changes it may code in the dna. It looks like it was coded in from the beginning for the next generations but it wasn't. More study need on that tho.
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.
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.
like it makes it any more realistic.
