PastorAIO:


This one is more than circular, it loops and dives and 'boomerangs' upon itself in a variety of ways.

1) From the very start, you have God right there in the premises. 'God created everything'.

2) Why bother with the evil part. why not just say, God created Good and there are good things in the world so therefore God exists. The evil part is an extra appendage.

3) Evil is not a thing, and neither is Good. It is a functional state of things. Both are. A knife chopping vegetables for dinner is good for the diners. a knife stuck in someone's gut is evil. Good and evil functions can be found for just about any object. None of these suggest the existence of God in the slightest.

4)The idea of evil as a lack of deficiency of good is Rubbish. when a knife is slicing your guts nothing in the knife is deficient. The knife remains intact. Rather Good and Evil are interwoven like Yin and Yang. They are two sides of a single coin. You cannot say one side is based on the other side. The nonexistence of one is also the nonexistence of the other. There is no such thing as UP if there is no such thing as DOWN.

johnydon22:
This is not the first time this guy has brought the morality argument here and have been trashed many times. . . its just a very feeble argument that has no basis and am just too tired of treating the same old crap over and over again!

malvisguy212:
this may sound embarrassing to you, but seriously, you still need to read the bible with open mind.

The verse you quote (Jeremiah) actually indicate the law is written in the heart of the Jews.

Hebrews 8:10
This is the covenant I will establish with
the PEOPLE OF ISREAL after that time,
declares the Lord. I will put my laws in
their MIND and write them on their
HEART. I will be their God, and they will
be my people.



Galatian3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither
slave nor free, nor is there male and
female, for you are all one in Christ
Jesus
.

malvisguy212:
there can't be Good without evil, the both must exist for man to have option to reject God.

PastorAIO:

Don't worry about this part it seems that you are really busy attacking Muslims and anyway this part hasn't got anything to do with the main bone of contention which is morality not whether the existence of evil supports God or not. If how to answer this is what is keeping you away, please don't worry, come back lets continue to discuss morality.

PastorAIO:


No, Actually it is a promise that one day it will be written on their hearts. Paul on the other hand admits that the Gentiles have always had the law written on their hearts.

PastorAIO:




I said don't worry about that Good and Evil part. We are discussing Morality are we not.

-So far we have concluded that Gentiles have Morality written on their hearts.

-According to Jeremiah the Jews didn't even have an innate Morality.

-Morality manifests variously in different peoples.

-I then claimed that Morality can be explained without recourse to a Moral law giver. Specifically, The Theory of Evolution can account for Morality.

This is where we have to continue from.

mustymatic:

Yeah that's right.

malvisguy212:
are you an atheist now ? Or does the quran say otherwise of "morality demand a law giver" ?

malvisguy212:
let me ask you a question here. Is the foundation of morality supernatural or natural ?

PastorAIO:


What is the distinction between Supernatural and Natural. I believe that those are terms that you are using without any definition or clear idea of what you mean by them.

PastorAIO:
Let me repeat this point:

Morality is instinctive in humans AND Morality can be explained by the Theory of Evolution without recourse to a God.

malvisguy212:
On a naturalistic view moral values are
just the behavioral byproducts of
biological evolution and social conditioning. But if you check the
atheistic view there doesn’t seem to be
anything that makes this morality
objectively binding and true.

If there is no God, then any reason for
regarding the herd morality evolved by
homo sapiens on this planet as
objectively true seems to have been
removed. Take God out of the picture,
and all you seem to be left with is an
ape-like creature on a speck of dust
beset with delusions of moral grandeur.

PastorAIO:


Why must morality be objectively binding and true?




If that is your problem then you'll have to find a way to get over it, but not by inventing some fictitious god to buttress what is patently obvious to all to be nothing but your own personal bias.

malvisguy212:
okay, atheists should not complained to God when evil happened because according to Richard dawkin " when evil happened, man is only dancing to the molecules of there DNA"

For what I can understand in your comment"we should defined good and evil " as that which supports the well-being” of conscious creatures.

Whereby eliminate the idea of God ? What about moral value? You are not a christian nither are you a muslim or an atheist, what's your belief ?

PastorAIO:


Somehow I don't see atheists complaining to God for anything. By very definition of Atheist I imagine that they'll try an infinite number of other measures before they resort to complaining to God.


I have absolutely no idea how you can understand that from anything I said. I've said no such thing.



I neither said eliminate the idea of God. I said that Morality is no evidence for the existence of God. This has no bearing on whether or not I believe in the existence of God.

what about Moral Value? Please explain. What about it?

this world isn't just divided up into christian, muslim, or atheist. I believe a great variety of things.

malvisguy212:
man was created in God’s image.

Part of that image makes man a moral being. We are moral agents who make moral choices and are able to differentiate between right and wrong. The basis upon which we differentiate between right and wrong is our knowledge of God’s law, and that knowledge comes from two sources, revelation and conscience.

Ecclesiastes 3:11
He has made everything beautiful in its
time. He has also set eternity in the
human heart; yet no one can fathom
what God has done from beginning to
end.
Thank you for your Time.

PastorAIO:


Many observers might dispute that and say that it would seem that most Theists have created a God in their own image. The god of violent people is often violent. The God of liars is often a liar. The god of morons is often a slowpoke.



Morality is more often sourced from society. The society you grow up in will determine your moral values often. The revelation is often provided by the society. The society's morality bears down on our conscience and makes us feel guilty if we transgress it.
For instance your morality, you claim, is sourced from the revelation in the bible. As we all know the bible is a book produced by Jewish people. So Jewish morality is what is found therein.

I however agree that we can also source morality from 'within'. This is a morality that has nothing to do with what we've learnt from our society and environment but a moral compass that we find within ourselves. You can access this morality when you silence the mind and cut out all the learnt ideas and values that you picked up from your upbringing or from your reading of books (like the bible), or from your environment. If you silence all these thoughts and perturbations of the mind and bask in a visceral essence then you'll gain access to another ethical guide light.



Time and Eternity. everything is beautiful in it's right Time. Time is but a span. from here to there. Eternity is all encompassing. Eternity is in the heart. Make that visceral connection and through away the books.

malvisguy212:
the nature and attribute of God in the bible is beyond imagination. if people were to have invented the God of Christianity, it is unlikely that it would be the demanding God of the Bible. The God of the Bible is described as holy , without sin and without the ability to commit sin. The holiness of God is described as being above anything that humans can attain, such that no human can stand before Him as holy. Behaving more morally upright than most other people is not sufficient to escape the punishment of the God of the Bible.
In all religions, salvation is attained by human effort, its is only in Christianity salvation is the free gift of God.

But He said, "You cannot see My
face, for no man can see Me and
live!" ( Exodus 33:20)
When He passes me I cannot see
Him. When He goes by, I cannot
perceive Him ( Job 9:11)
The Almighty is beyond our reach
( Job 37:23)
Soo the christian God does not look like 'god' invented in human mind.

Alright:
1. If objective moral values do not exist,
moral language cannot be predicated to
objective acts, but only to subjective
opinions regarding objective acts
2. Moral language can be predicated to
objective facts
3. Therefore, objective moral language
exists

Very briefly, my point here is the words
"RIGHT" and "WRONG" and in all their
variances are either attributed to ACTS
themselves our opinions about acts
themselves.There is absolutely NO other
way the words may be predicated, so
these two categories are exhaustive. An
example of each:
a. Slavery is wrong
b. I think of slavery as wrong
In the first, moral language (the word
"wrong" is attributed to the ACTUAL ACT of slavery. In the second, moral language is PREDICTED TO MY OPINION. What I am arguing is that, if objective moral values do not exist, then sentences of the first type are meaningless. The reason is that if there is no objective moral reality, then
moral language doesn't refer to any
existent thing.
Why do we say this word?
Slavery is wrong if objective morality do not exist ? Instead of "I THINK slavery is wrong.

malvisguy212:
Why do people generally think that some actions are “right” and some actions are “wrong,” regardless of their subjective opinions? Why do most people believe that it is “evil” or “wicked” (1) for an adult to torture an innocent child simply for the fun of it? (2) for a man to beat and rape a kind, innocent woman? or (3) for parents to have children for the sole purpose of abusing them sexually every day of their lives?

Although objective morality may be
outside the realm of the scientific
method, every rational person can know
that some actions are innately good,
while others are innately evil. the man
who says that it is morally acceptable To
Molest little children, is just as mistaken
as the man who says that 2 + 2 = 5”
Most rational people do not merely feel
like rape and child abuse may be wrong; they are wrong innately wrong. Just as two plus two can really be known to be four, every rational human can know that some things are objectively good, while other things are objectively evil.

However, reason demands that
OBJECTIVE GOOD AND EVIL can only exist if there is some REAL, objective point of REFERENCE. If something (e.g., rape) can be legitimately criticized as morally wrong, then there must be an objective standard “some ‘higher law which transcends the provincial and transient’ which is other than the particular moral code and which has an obligatory character which can be recognized”

How can an atheists call something atrocious,wicked or evil? According to atheism, man is nothing but matter in motion . Humankind allegedly evolved from ape or should we say rocks and slime over billions of years. How could moral value come from rocks and slime? Who ever speaks of “wrong rocks,” “moral minerals,”or “corrupt chemicals ? People do not talk about morally depraved donkeys, evil elephants, or immoral monkeys.Pigs are not punished for being immoral when they eat their young. Komodo dragons are not corrupt because 10% of their diet consists of younger Komodo dragons. Killer whales are not guilty of murder. Male animals are not tried for rape if they appear to forcibly copulate with females. Dogs are not depraved for stealing the bone of
another dog. Moral value could not arise from rocks and slime.

The fact that humans even contemplate
morality testifies to the huge chasm
between man and animals and the fact
that moral value could not have arisen
from animals. Atheistic evolutionists
have admitted that morals arise only in
humans.

The moral argument for God’s existence
exposes atheism as the self contradictory, atrocious philosophy that
it is. Atheists must either reject the
truthfulness of the moral argument’s first premise (“If objective moral value exists, then God exists”) and illogically accept the indefensible idea that objective morality somehow arose from rocks and reptiles, or (2) they must reject the argument’s second premise (“Objective moral values exist”), and accept the insane, utterly repulsive idea that genocide, rape, murder, theft, child
abuse, etc. can never once be condemned as objectively “wrong.”
What’s more,if atheism is true, individuals could never logically be
punished for such immoral actions, since“no inherent moral or ethical laws” would exist.

harakiri:


FREETHINKER: Acknowledges the abnormalities and inconsistencies of religion thus in search of truth and enlightenment.

ATHEIST: Some (not all) have gone through the free thinker phase and concluded religion is nothing more than man-made hogwash.


While telling "delusiongirl" that god will forgive her (for daring to have doubts of spoon fed religious trash), you should go on your knees begging the remaining 49,999 gods of other religions round the world that werent brought to your ancestors during the slave trade era. In retrospect, all your ancestors who died before the slave trading missionaries brought christianity must be rotting in tartarus...er..i mean hell fire coz they never knew the christian god. Thumbs up for a loving god.