Battle Talk ~ Battle Royale VII
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
Intrinsic wrongness
Intrinsic wrongness
Isaiah: My quoting of Stalin was meant to avert this very thing of tit for tat one upmanship. Sometimes, atheists think the world would be a better place if we just got rid of theist thinking. (and in some respects, yes.) But atheists cannot claim any better.
Analogous: The problem with this sort of reasoning is that it fails to take into consideration the fact that Marx developed the theme of Communism as a reaction to Christianity, (remember opiate of the masses?). So Stalin, Hitler and all the European despots were a by-product of the failure of Christianity to live up to its promises. Hitler’s anti-semitism was fueled by Catholicism. If a god existed who was capable of making good on the religious promises these despots would have no cause other than their own petty greed. It’s the setting aside, the pious attitude, the, “I’m right and you’re wrong and on your way to hell” attitude that facilitates the demonizing, which is the first step in inciting to bloodletting.
Isaiah: In short, eliminating "god" solves nothing.
Analogous: How would we ever know? God and god’s of one flavor or another have always been the favorite recruiting station for crusades, jihads and every other bloody grab for power anyone can recall. Even the warring nations that surrounded Israel during OT times had their gods and goddesses to facilitate and justify the expansionism. Curiously enough, every king that came to power had his prophets and “sayers” who were consequently, also the court reporters and record keepers of the kings triumphs. Every tale told was a partial historical account with a religious tone “over-layed” to make it appear the kings victories were sanctioned by the particular deity they appealed to. The OT was no different.
Religion begins by damning man as having some intrinsic “wrongness” within him from birth. But consider man has been propagating this psychology for thousands of years. If you teach a large majority of the world population, down through history, that something is wrong with them that only belief in a deity can repair, is it any wonder man is going to behave accordingly? What would happen if we began teaching man that he is born “NORMAL” with the capacity to be normal and that all crimes and unethical behavior is NOT due to some intrinsic wrongness that he is incapable of making right, but only that his behavior is NOT NORMAL and must be addresseed in a manner that instructs towards normalcy? Instead of having psychological justification and religious explanations to sanction these behaviors, man would have to consider the possibility that the only cause of all such behavior is ignorance or genuine insanity. No god needed. Now we can define normal in ways that eliminates the levers of power aggrandizement and manipulation that the abnormal always advantage in recruiting their armies of god.
Isaiah: (Hey, even Hitler was a "good" "Christian". Ever see what was on the belt buckles of SS troops? Gott mits uns - god is with us.)
Analogous: Indeed.
:think:
Intrinsic wrongness
Isaiah: My quoting of Stalin was meant to avert this very thing of tit for tat one upmanship. Sometimes, atheists think the world would be a better place if we just got rid of theist thinking. (and in some respects, yes.) But atheists cannot claim any better.
Analogous: The problem with this sort of reasoning is that it fails to take into consideration the fact that Marx developed the theme of Communism as a reaction to Christianity, (remember opiate of the masses?). So Stalin, Hitler and all the European despots were a by-product of the failure of Christianity to live up to its promises. Hitler’s anti-semitism was fueled by Catholicism. If a god existed who was capable of making good on the religious promises these despots would have no cause other than their own petty greed. It’s the setting aside, the pious attitude, the, “I’m right and you’re wrong and on your way to hell” attitude that facilitates the demonizing, which is the first step in inciting to bloodletting.
Isaiah: In short, eliminating "god" solves nothing.
Analogous: How would we ever know? God and god’s of one flavor or another have always been the favorite recruiting station for crusades, jihads and every other bloody grab for power anyone can recall. Even the warring nations that surrounded Israel during OT times had their gods and goddesses to facilitate and justify the expansionism. Curiously enough, every king that came to power had his prophets and “sayers” who were consequently, also the court reporters and record keepers of the kings triumphs. Every tale told was a partial historical account with a religious tone “over-layed” to make it appear the kings victories were sanctioned by the particular deity they appealed to. The OT was no different.
Religion begins by damning man as having some intrinsic “wrongness” within him from birth. But consider man has been propagating this psychology for thousands of years. If you teach a large majority of the world population, down through history, that something is wrong with them that only belief in a deity can repair, is it any wonder man is going to behave accordingly? What would happen if we began teaching man that he is born “NORMAL” with the capacity to be normal and that all crimes and unethical behavior is NOT due to some intrinsic wrongness that he is incapable of making right, but only that his behavior is NOT NORMAL and must be addresseed in a manner that instructs towards normalcy? Instead of having psychological justification and religious explanations to sanction these behaviors, man would have to consider the possibility that the only cause of all such behavior is ignorance or genuine insanity. No god needed. Now we can define normal in ways that eliminates the levers of power aggrandizement and manipulation that the abnormal always advantage in recruiting their armies of god.
Isaiah: (Hey, even Hitler was a "good" "Christian". Ever see what was on the belt buckles of SS troops? Gott mits uns - god is with us.)
Analogous: Indeed.
:think:
Last edited:
Heino
New member
I did not say anything about a cause coming from outside of the universe. I must confess that I am not a cosmologist, but I know enough to know that there is no definitive word on the cause for the universe, yet, or whether something outside the universe is possible. In fact, I know enough to know that modern cosmologists consider the universe to be an OPEN system, not a closed one. Other physicists suggest the possibility of multiple universes. This is not my field, so I cannot really discuss this too far. I do not think it would make any difference if God came from outside the universe, another universe, or if this universe was closed. The reality is that we know that it all started some way. We know about the big bang, the expansion of space-time, the cosmic background echo, the galaxies moving away from a central point, the universe age. I have no problem with any of that.
Because so much of science depends on the "cause and effect" principle, it is impossible for me to imagine something not having a cause. Something caused the Big Bang. Whether it was God, is something we cannot use science to determine. I happen to believe that He is behind it at some point, but I'm not going to place my bet on where that place is, exactly. I do not believe it is possible to capture God. We may only look at creation, and ponder, for our minds, smart as we are, still have much to learn.
Heino
New member
Re: Impossible!
Re: Impossible!
Re: Impossible!
That is a good question, but I have no idea, and I am not going to place my bet on any answer right now. I would leave that up to the Theologians. There is nothing in my biological studies that suggested it. Perhaps it is a conceptual thing, not material, and we do not understand exactly what the ancients meant when they wrote about it. I don't really know -- I have to confess that I am not an expert on my Church's teachings. It will make a good topic for conversation when I go back to Gottingen this fall, and meet my friend and Pastor.
Heino
New member
I think this may be a language problem. My Pastor/Friend studied Hebrew and Greek in College, and he said that the Hebrews refered to God in the Neutral Gender, that he was both male and female at the same time. English lacks the Neutral gender, so it defaults to Masculine Gender. All Old-World languages have Male, Female, and Neutral Genders, but English only has Male and Female. There is the obligatory "it", but it can never be used on people.
isaiah 1:18
New member
Some aspects are indeed factual (Adaptation to some respect and natural selection to some respect). But many ideas born of evolutionary concepts are pure speculation that is allowed to pass as fact under the banner of science, but has yet to be proven or experimented in such a manner as to be able to falsify.
But the rest of your post was quite good.
isaiah 1:18
New member
Re: Intrinsic wrongness
Re: Intrinsic wrongness
Isaiah's rebuttal: Mmm. Indeed. BTW, I like your format.
Re: Intrinsic wrongness
Isaiah's rebuttal: Mmm. Indeed. BTW, I like your format.
Heino
New member
I keep seeing this from creationists; they keep saying that evolution is a random thing. It is not. Nothing in nature is random. Everything is caused by something. It is the law of cause and effect.
Einstein said that God does not play dice! Nothing is random, not even evolution. Everything is driven by something.
I would like to hear from this person exactly which parts of evolutionary theory he things to be unscientific. As a biologist, I find that evolution is a great "unifying" theory of life, chemistry, and other sciences. DNA and Genetics makes much more sense when you see it through an evolutionary viewpoint. I have yet to see a good coherent and scientific creation "science" that unifies anything. From what I have read this far, "Creation Science", is a uniquely American Phenomenon, and it does not unify anything. It is a divisive shaft.
I find this strange, because as a biologist who has studied apes and monkeys in detail, I know for a fact that humans did not lose their hair. We have as many Hair Follicles on us as a chimp or Gorilla. The only difference is how long the hair is.
Heino
New member
Oh, please!!! Always we have to talk about the Nazis. I am sick of hearing about it. Adolph Hitler was not a scientist, and had a distorted view of Darwin, just as he had a distorted view of Socialism. The People who Blow up buildings and shoot people because they belong to a cult, and think that God wants them to do this are not Christians, even though they might claim to be. They distort Christianity. Hitler was an occultist. He associated with Madam Blavatsky (an occultist and scam artist), and wanted us to worship the old Teutonic Pagan Gods like Wotan and Thor.
I have to object to using the description "Nazi" to describe everything you do not like, and the linking of all things that are unwanted to Nazis and Hitler. There is no comparison. What is this fascination you have with Nazis? You have organizations of Nazis (we have banned them in Germany) who think Hitler was a great guy, I watch the History Channel and see nothing but World War 2 and Nazis, and you are so quick to call everyone a Nazi when you don't like them. It is wrong to use loosely that word.
Heino
New member
You too. Please stop using Nazi so light. I know you are just responding to the other guy, who is calling evolutionists Nazis. Everyone must learn to get a grip and stop calling everyone a Nazi. It is very distracting and divisive, and causes people to lose track of the issue... whatever the issue was. I forgot already!
isaiah 1:18
New member
Heino. Please re-read my posts so that you can correct yourself as far as me calling evolutionists Nazis.
What I was saying is that The Nazi Leader, adolf, was a "good christian." Notice the quotes around Christian and good. It had nothing to do with evolutionists inspite of the FACT the he partly used evolutionary thinking to justify killing jews.
And Heino, what parts of Evolutionary theory are unscientific? That's simple. The parts that have not be set to experimentation such that they can be falsified. That's why it is called a THEORY.
And the origin of species is based on a random process for life occuring. Are you going to argue that? Nah. It all stems from the big bang theory. Certain forces and processes came together in a random fashion to create life. Unless, you are of another school of evolution, that being not the mainstream school, then I fail to see what you are arguing.
Lastly, please go read the NY times article. You will see that I see the same buffonery that you see when evolutionists say humans lost their hair.
(p.s. quit skim reading.)
What I was saying is that The Nazi Leader, adolf, was a "good christian." Notice the quotes around Christian and good. It had nothing to do with evolutionists inspite of the FACT the he partly used evolutionary thinking to justify killing jews.
And Heino, what parts of Evolutionary theory are unscientific? That's simple. The parts that have not be set to experimentation such that they can be falsified. That's why it is called a THEORY.
And the origin of species is based on a random process for life occuring. Are you going to argue that? Nah. It all stems from the big bang theory. Certain forces and processes came together in a random fashion to create life. Unless, you are of another school of evolution, that being not the mainstream school, then I fail to see what you are arguing.
Lastly, please go read the NY times article. You will see that I see the same buffonery that you see when evolutionists say humans lost their hair.
(p.s. quit skim reading.)
LightSon
New member
I confess that I am fascinated with Hitler and what he accomplished using Nazism. And why not? He was a significant mover in the last century. He also represented great evil and he did it right in front of (and with consent of) the masses. So I won't apologize for my interest. There are lessons to be learned.
When looking for a convenient evil hyperbole, Hitler and Nazis are an easy choice, perhaps too easy. But I agree that we should be more careful in drawing parallels.
I can understand why you are sick of hearing about it, but I doubt whether your feelings are sufficient to shut down references to this topic. Sorry. I'll try to do my part in being careful.
Respectfully,
LightSon
New member
Thanks for your candor; knowing your orientation helps me to understand you better.
I have to disagree. Had you said omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent appear self contradictory, then I might agree. Christians have been sparing about the dynamics of these attributes for millennia. Just because we lack consensus or the ability to fully explain their dynamics, does not mean God cannot exist.
Again, you have made a charge against one particular theological paradigm. This is not a good reason to preclude God from existing. At best, your observation impugns a particular interpretation.
As a Christian, I pray you find good reason to believe.
LightSon
New member
Your congeniality makes any effort a pleasure.
Thank you. I appreciate your perspective as an outsider. Much of the tensions with atheists is a backlash to an issue that creationists have laid the groundwork for. In other words, by being so literal in our Genesis interpretation, we are perceived as having thrown down the gauntlet. It MIGHT be easier for me to relax my position if I didn’t feel it would impugn the veracity of God and the overarching message of scripture. I strongly feel that divine inspiration has superintended over scripture and as such, this colors my treatment of it.
Well said. I will stipulate to your view of science. I simply question whether the evolutionary model has been arrived at through honest means. The model appears to be ideologically driven to interpret the evidence in a particular way, in a similar manner that religion tends to be driven to a particular interpretation of scripture.
Point taken.
Yes God manifests His power and majesty in creation: Earth, Man, the cosmos, etcs.
The specifics I know about God’s person, however, are derived from scripture. God reveals Himself (His thoughts) in this way, IMO. So to the degree that scriptural inspiration is undermined, my surety of who God is becomes suspect. I know God, in part, by what He has said about Himself. If that Biblical record was fabricated (not from God), then so is my perception of God a fabrication.
By looking into the night sky, I am awed by God’s power, yet would tend to feel insignificant by comparison. By looking into God’s word, I come to understand that even with the cosmos as a backdrop, I am unique and valued in God’s eyes. I am not insignificant, because Christ died for me and knows me by name.
re:Time being the enemy of Evolution
re:Time being the enemy of Evolution
this statement might be true in theory, but in fact fossils are being systematically searched for nowadays as never before, and any tendency to decay in fossils (which by the way have lasted tens of millions of years, and are likely to last a while longer),-any tendency to decay will be more than offset by all the new ones being discovered. In just the last few months four new hominid fossils have been discovered, three of them about 6-7 myo placing them at the dawn of hominid evolution, and the fourth, Homo sapiens idahli, from Ethiopia nicely filling in a gap at the dawn of modern man about 160,000 years ago, thus providing a virtually complete det of human transitional forms.
re:Time being the enemy of Evolution
this statement might be true in theory, but in fact fossils are being systematically searched for nowadays as never before, and any tendency to decay in fossils (which by the way have lasted tens of millions of years, and are likely to last a while longer),-any tendency to decay will be more than offset by all the new ones being discovered. In just the last few months four new hominid fossils have been discovered, three of them about 6-7 myo placing them at the dawn of hominid evolution, and the fourth, Homo sapiens idahli, from Ethiopia nicely filling in a gap at the dawn of modern man about 160,000 years ago, thus providing a virtually complete det of human transitional forms.
re Time is the enemy of Evolution -part 2
re Time is the enemy of Evolution -part 2
I forgot to add in my above statement that because the fossil record is being filled in so rapidly, therefore time is in fact the enemy of Creationists. Evolution is filling the gaps whereas creation "science" is at a standstill.
re Time is the enemy of Evolution -part 2
I forgot to add in my above statement that because the fossil record is being filled in so rapidly, therefore time is in fact the enemy of Creationists. Evolution is filling the gaps whereas creation "science" is at a standstill.
re Stalinism and atheism
re Stalinism and atheism
It is indeed unfortunate that Stalin and Polpot gave atheism a bad name; though I would maintain theism was not their primary target. The point is that ANY extreme fundamentalism whether theistic or atheistic, is evil. I don't think that Stalin and Polpot would be recognised as soul mates by "normal" philosophical, Humanistic atheists.
There are similar arguments: Hitler gave Eugenics a bad name (sorry Heino), and of course Christians are quick to point out various historical Christians (quite a lot ), who have given christianity a bad name: Ivan the Terrible, Torquemada, for instance.
re Stalinism and atheism
It is indeed unfortunate that Stalin and Polpot gave atheism a bad name; though I would maintain theism was not their primary target. The point is that ANY extreme fundamentalism whether theistic or atheistic, is evil. I don't think that Stalin and Polpot would be recognised as soul mates by "normal" philosophical, Humanistic atheists.
There are similar arguments: Hitler gave Eugenics a bad name (sorry Heino), and of course Christians are quick to point out various historical Christians (quite a lot ), who have given christianity a bad name: Ivan the Terrible, Torquemada, for instance.
- Status