(01-20-2014 02:13 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  The amount of logical fallacies, diversions, and flat out dishonesty in this thread is truly mind-boggling. It's a wonder some people manage to put on their pants in the morning.

EDIT: For the record I got to like page 4 of this thread before typing that. Frankly, I have a headache.

Who won?

(01-20-2014 01:24 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 12:36 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  To add to that, much of American Law is derived from English legal doctrines that came with English settlers, the same laws that have Judeo-Christian roots.

There are numerous quotes from the founding fathers that conservative christians may find surprising. LINK 1 LINK 2

“The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
~1797 Treaty of Tripoli signed by John Adams

You're talking government, I am talking about Law

(01-20-2014 02:24 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:05 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:02 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 01:59 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  HeartOfDixie:

If you use this as an argument for the case of God, you really must submit to the problem of evil. Especially when evil occurs in reality whereas law is an ideal.

Is law an ideal?

You suggested earlier that law was a natural phenomenon.

For the sake of argument: Even if law is a natural phenomenon. Evil still presents a problem as it is a natural phenomenon.

Evil is not a natural phenomenon it is constructed by people. That is why one group of people call something evil and others do not.

Evil is mentioned in the bible. The whole purpose of this argument is to explain why there isn't a God with those 3 traits. And why morals aren't drawn from divine command theory.

Yall are delving too deep into this now. It all comes down to what YOU believe, and what YOU have faith in. I prefer to keep the faith in the religion I was brought up to believe in and if Heaven exists like I believe it does then I'll go there because I accepted Jesus into my heart like I was told to do and if this is just some fairy tale then what's the worst that can happen, I end up in the dirt with the worms like all the naysayrs believe?

Cool, it's a win/win situation for this Christian.

(01-20-2014 02:06 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  God exists.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.

Right here is where "The problem of evil" breaks down... We burn forest to prevent a larger fire... A Tree would call that evil. A gardener would pune away a branch which is not bearing good fruit. He would plant some crops only to nourish soil and reap it for something else next year.

The problem with the "problem of evil" is that it is man centered. This was addressed by Paul a long, long time ago with the potter and the clay.

(01-20-2014 02:27 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:24 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:05 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:02 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 01:59 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  HeartOfDixie:

If you use this as an argument for the case of God, you really must submit to the problem of evil. Especially when evil occurs in reality whereas law is an ideal.

Is law an ideal?

You suggested earlier that law was a natural phenomenon.

For the sake of argument: Even if law is a natural phenomenon. Evil still presents a problem as it is a natural phenomenon.

Evil is not a natural phenomenon it is constructed by people. That is why one group of people call something evil and others do not.

Evil is mentioned in the bible. The whole purpose of this argument is to explain why there isn't a God with those 3 traits. And why morals aren't drawn from divine command theory.

This is like a group of ants in a forest somewhere trying to debate away manned space flight.

(01-20-2014 02:06 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  God exists.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.
An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence.
An omnipotent being has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.
A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.
If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God, then no evil exists.
Evil exists (logical contradiction).

And whosoever shall believe in Him shall have everlasting life. What's the worst that can happen besides leading a better life for yourself and trying to avoid evil?

(01-20-2014 02:30 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Yall are delving too deep into this now. It all comes down to what YOU believe, and what YOU have faith in. I prefer to keep the faith in the religion I was brought up to believe in and if Heaven exists like I believe it does then I'll go there because I accepted Jesus into my heart like I was told to do and if this is just some fairy tale then what's the worst that can happen, I end up in the dirt with the worms like all the naysayrs believe?

Cool, it's a win/win situation for this Christian.

(01-20-2014 02:35 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  And whosoever shall believe in Him shall have everlasting life. What's the worst that can happen besides leading a better life for yourself and trying to avoid evil?

That's what I was talking about when I posted this:

(01-20-2014 12:25 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  I don't think you can use Pascal's Wager as reason to believe and earn your ticket through the pearly gates.

Guess I'm not getting an explanation from Jedi Master on what was wrong with that.

(01-20-2014 02:32 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:06 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  God exists.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.

Right here is where "The problem of evil" breaks down... We burn forest to prevent a larger fire... A Tree would call that evil. A gardener would pune away a branch which is not bearing good fruit. He would plant some crops only to nourish soil and reap it for something else next year.

The problem with the "problem of evil" is that it is man centered. This was addressed by Paul a long, long time ago with the potter and the clay.

(01-20-2014 02:33 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  This is like a group of ants in a forest somewhere trying to debate away manned space flight.

God has a moral code. God says murder and theft are evil. What aren't you getting? Just because you feel like an ant trying to process this doesn't mean others do.

You are working under the ethical relativist point of view. Functioning under divine command theory is required for this discussion.

(01-20-2014 02:32 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:06 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  God exists.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.

Right here is where "The problem of evil" breaks down... We burn forest to prevent a larger fire... A Tree would call that evil. A gardener would pune away a branch which is not bearing good fruit. He would plant some crops only to nourish soil and reap it for something else next year.

The problem with the "problem of evil" is that it is man centered. This was addressed by Paul a long, long time ago with the potter and the clay.

Evil exists. I do not agree that it originates from man.

(01-20-2014 02:41 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  God has a moral code.

For *US* to follow not for him to follow..

Quote:You are working under the ethical relativist point of view. Functioning under divine command theory is required for this discussion.

I may discuss this any way I wish. The line of discussion here is making a box of your liking, trying to stick God in that box, and when he does not fit crying out there is no God..

(01-20-2014 02:37 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:30 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Yall are delving too deep into this now. It all comes down to what YOU believe, and what YOU have faith in. I prefer to keep the faith in the religion I was brought up to believe in and if Heaven exists like I believe it does then I'll go there because I accepted Jesus into my heart like I was told to do and if this is just some fairy tale then what's the worst that can happen, I end up in the dirt with the worms like all the naysayrs believe?

Cool, it's a win/win situation for this Christian.

(01-20-2014 02:35 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:06 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  God exists.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.
An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence.
An omnipotent being has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.
A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.
If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God, then no evil exists.
Evil exists (logical contradiction).

And whosoever shall believe in Him shall have everlasting life. What's the worst that can happen besides leading a better life for yourself and trying to avoid evil?

That's what I was talking about when I posted this:

(01-20-2014 12:25 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  I don't think you can use Pascal's Wager as reason to believe and earn your ticket through the pearly gates.

Guess I'm not getting an explanation from Jedi Master on what was wrong with that.

Faith: 1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

This pretty much sums it all up. As far as Pascal's Wager, that was the first I'd ever heard of it. I don't dig too deep, if I see or read something, I take it at minimal value because I won't let things coincide with my own personal beliefs, thus not wanting to delve too deep into this conversation about faith. You either have it or you don't. Being apologetic will get you nowhere if you don't believe in God and accept Jesus into your heart.

(01-20-2014 02:44 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:41 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  God has a moral code.

For *US* to follow not for him to follow..

Quote:You are working under the ethical relativist point of view. Functioning under divine command theory is required for this discussion.

I may discuss this any way I wish. The line of discussion here is making a box of your liking, trying to stick God in that box, and when he does not fit crying out there is no God..

You aren't really following this.

This is an argument AGAINST the religious God, Yahweh. Why would you analyze it under any principle accept the divine command theory? No religious person believes in ethical relativism as the answer for morality. You are not prepared to enter this discussion, I assure you.

(01-20-2014 02:46 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Faith: 1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

This pretty much sums it all up. As far as Pascal's Wager, that was the first I'd ever heard of it. I don't dig too deep, if I see or read something, I take it at minimal value because I won't let things coincide with my own personal beliefs, thus not wanting to delve too deep into this conversation about faith. You either have it or you don't. Being apologetic will get you nowhere if you don't believe in God and accept Jesus into your heart.

Exactly right. Faith is the only reason to accept God. If it is a logical wager such as Pascal's, I imagine that wouldn't be acceptable. Amazing that faith is the determining factor to decide eternity. Odd game, eh?

(01-20-2014 02:47 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:44 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:41 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  God has a moral code.

For *US* to follow not for him to follow..

Quote:You are working under the ethical relativist point of view. Functioning under divine command theory is required for this discussion.

I may discuss this any way I wish. The line of discussion here is making a box of your liking, trying to stick God in that box, and when he does not fit crying out there is no God..

You aren't really following this.

This is an argument AGAINST the religious God, Yahweh. Why would you analyze it under any principle accept the divine command theory? No religious person believes in ethical relativism as the answer for morality. You are not prepared to enter this discussion, I assure you.

Like I said It does not follow from God’s omniscience, omnipotence, and goodness that the world He creates will be completely free from evil.

*WHATEVER* God this is according to your argument some evil may lead to some greater good.

A parent may spank a child, but that does disprove the parent’s love for that child, in fact loving discipline is often a sacrifice by the parent for their child. So long as there is at least some small chance that the evil that exists in this world is for greater good, the logical version of the POE is disproved.

(01-20-2014 02:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Like I said It does not follow from God’s omniscience, omnipotence, and goodness that the world He creates will be completely free from evil.

Yes, it does. I can't provide you the tools to understand that.

(01-20-2014 02:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  *WHATEVER* God this is according to your argument some evil may lead to some greater good.

A parent may spank a child, but that does disprove the parent’s love for that child, in fact loving discipline is often a sacrifice by the parent for their child. So long as there is at least some small chance that the evil that exists in this world is for greater good, the logical version of the POE is disproved.

I hope you realize how absurd it was to claim that an argument against God/Divine Command theory was invalid by citing a moral guideline such as relativism.

(01-20-2014 02:30 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Cool, it's a win/win situation for this Christian.

There's a loss in believing a fairy tale your entire adult life.

(01-20-2014 02:49 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:46 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Faith: 1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

This pretty much sums it all up. As far as Pascal's Wager, that was the first I'd ever heard of it. I don't dig too deep, if I see or read something, I take it at minimal value because I won't let things coincide with my own personal beliefs, thus not wanting to delve too deep into this conversation about faith. You either have it or you don't. Being apologetic will get you nowhere if you don't believe in God and accept Jesus into your heart.

Exactly right. Faith is the only reason to accept God. If it is a logical wager such as Pascal's, I imagine that wouldn't be acceptable. Amazing that faith is the determining factor to decide eternity. Odd game, eh?

Not at all... Amazing that we have the choice to believe and step up when we leave this life.

Isn't there a faith that believes in reincarnation?

(01-20-2014 02:54 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Like I said It does not follow from God’s omniscience, omnipotence, and goodness that the world He creates will be completely free from evil.

Yes, it does. I can't provide you the tools to understand that.

(01-20-2014 02:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  *WHATEVER* God this is according to your argument some evil may lead to some greater good.

A parent may spank a child, but that does disprove the parent’s love for that child, in fact loving discipline is often a sacrifice by the parent for their child. So long as there is at least some small chance that the evil that exists in this world is for greater good, the logical version of the POE is disproved.

I hope you realize how absurd it was to claim that an argument against God/Divine Command theory was invalid by citing a moral guideline such as relativism.

I was busy with a useful major in college not huffing it through the rigorous field of philosophy.

What I can tell you is this... One person doing future good for another can be, at the time, perceived as evil. That you don't think that is (1) possible or (2) relevant is beyond my control.

A being is not morally culpable in allowing preventable evil if he has a "morally sufficient reason" for so doing.

Please resume dismissing the argument because of its "category" rather than addressing the point.

(01-20-2014 03:08 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:54 PM)Fatalisk Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Like I said It does not follow from God’s omniscience, omnipotence, and goodness that the world He creates will be completely free from evil.

Yes, it does. I can't provide you the tools to understand that.

(01-20-2014 02:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  *WHATEVER* God this is according to your argument some evil may lead to some greater good.

A parent may spank a child, but that does disprove the parent’s love for that child, in fact loving discipline is often a sacrifice by the parent for their child. So long as there is at least some small chance that the evil that exists in this world is for greater good, the logical version of the POE is disproved.

I hope you realize how absurd it was to claim that an argument against God/Divine Command theory was invalid by citing a moral guideline such as relativism.

I was busy with a useful major in college not huffing it through the rigorous field of philosophy.

What I can tell you is this... One person doing future good for another can be, at the time, perceived as evil. That you don't think that is (1) possible or (2) relevant is beyond my control.

Please resume dismissing the argument because of its "category" rather than addressing the point.

I'm an engineering major. Senior year.