Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-12-2016, 10:28 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:15 AM)Bzltyr Wrote:  You miss my point. Christianity exist - Christian morals exist - The Bible exists. These things contribute to Christian Morality which is part of the name of this thread. If anyone wants to discuss whether God exist I will in the proper thread.
For the purpose of this thread God does not have to exist because an ideology exist called Christian morality that is based on the Bible. And that is the subject of this thread.
If you want to say it's beyond the scope of this thread, I can accept that. It is relevant and even vital even to the ideology, but I understand it broadens the scope considerably. Nonetheless, it isn't what you originally said so it does seem like you're just back-tracking now.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 10:28 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:17 AM)Impulse Wrote:  
(15-12-2016 10:12 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I have stated many times so far that the Christian basis for morality is that if you know to do good and you do not it is sin. That is Christian morality.

Citation needed. Drinking Beverage


James 4:17New International Version (NIV)
17 If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 10:30 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:28 AM)Impulse Wrote:  
(16-12-2016 10:15 AM)Bzltyr Wrote:  You miss my point. Christianity exist - Christian morals exist - The Bible exists. These things contribute to Christian Morality which is part of the name of this thread. If anyone wants to discuss whether God exist I will in the proper thread.
For the purpose of this thread God does not have to exist because an ideology exist called Christian morality that is based on the Bible. And that is the subject of this thread.
If you want to say it's beyond the scope of this thread, I can accept that. It is relevant and even vital even to the ideology, but I understand it broadens the scope considerably. Nonetheless, it isn't what you originally said so it does seem like you're just back-tracking now.

It is beyond the scope of this thread. I have been trying to get people on point for a while now. I am not backtracking on anything I have said. If you show me where I will address it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 10:32 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:20 AM)Impulse Wrote:  
(15-12-2016 10:33 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Is there a thread on the lie of evolution?
And there went any shred of credibility... Laughat

Are we going to use ad hominem remarks or are we going to address the statements and the evidence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 10:34 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:19 AM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Not uphold fulfill.
Jesus came and put a higher standard on what it means to be Christian. Not a set of laws to adhere to with you body - your actions - but a renewing of the mind. It I sin to know to do good and not do it. That is a way higher standard than the 600 plus laws from Judaism.

What version of the bible are you reading? ALL the versions I have seen say he came not to abolish, but to uphold the old law. So, not only is the word "uphold", not "fulfill", but it specifically says the old law is not abolished - meaning it still stands. When I have heard Christians speaking of Jesus fulfilling the OT, it has meant that he is the messiah prophesized in the OT. That is how he fulfilled it. Fulfilling doesn't mean ending OT law in order to replace it. And, if it did, Christians would care about the 10 commandments. Fulfilling also doesn't apply to the entire old testament.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 10:40 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:32 AM)Bzltyr Wrote:  
(16-12-2016 10:20 AM)Impulse Wrote:  And there went any shred of credibility... Laughat

Are we going to use ad hominem remarks or are we going to address the statements and the evidence.
It's not ad hominem. I was making the valid point that anyone who can so easily dismiss what science has conclusively established has something seriously wrong with their method of evaluating information. There is no question that evolution is true. So, for you to call it a lie, either means you dismissed it without actually learning about it or you learned about it and didn't understand it. Meanwhile, if you think evolution is a lie, I have to assume then that you believe "God" created all living things - something that absolutely had not been established and even believers admit has to be accepted on mere faith.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
16-12-2016, 10:43 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:34 AM)Impulse Wrote:  
(16-12-2016 10:19 AM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Not uphold fulfill.
Jesus came and put a higher standard on what it means to be Christian. Not a set of laws to adhere to with you body - your actions - but a renewing of the mind. It I sin to know to do good and not do it. That is a way higher standard than the 600 plus laws from Judaism.

What version of the bible are you reading? ALL the versions I have seen say he came not to abolish, but to uphold the old law. So, not only is the word "uphold", not "fulfill", but it specifically says the old law is not abolished - meaning it still stands. When I have heard Christians speaking of Jesus fulfilling the OT, it has meant that he is the messiah prophesized in the OT. That is how he fulfilled it. Fulfilling doesn't mean ending OT law in order to replace it. And, if it did, Christians would care about the 10 commandments. Fulfilling also doesn't apply to the entire old testament.

Matthew 5:17King James Version (KJV)
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Beyond the scope but here goes - Fulfilling the law means that Jesus lived his life without sin and won back the worked from Satan. This is way beyond the scope and a short incomplete answer. Have you got a couple of days?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 10:51 AM (This post was last modified: 16-12-2016 10:56 AM by Bzltyr.)
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:40 AM)Impulse Wrote:  
(16-12-2016 10:32 AM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Are we going to use ad hominem remarks or are we going to address the statements and the evidence.
It's not ad hominem. I was making the valid point that anyone who can so easily dismiss what science has conclusively established has something seriously wrong with their method of evaluating information. There is no question that evolution is true. So, for you to call it a lie, either means you dismissed it without actually learning about it or you learned about it and didn't understand it. Meanwhile, if you think evolution is a lie, I have to assume then that you believe "God" created all living things - something that absolutely had not been established and even believers admit has to be accepted on mere faith.

This is what really pisses me off. You said "who can so easily dismiss what science..." It has nothing to do with dismissing science. I do not dismiss science.
Darwinism is a theory that lacks scientific evidence. The science disproves Darwinism.
Microbiologist do not dismiss science and believe that Darwinism cannot explain life's diversity.

You also said, "without actually learning about it or you learned about it and didn't understand it." I have learned about it and I do understand the theory. I don't accept it logically.
One geneticists sad that there would have to be 50,000 structural changes to a cow for it to go into the ocean and become a whale. Cow to whale is stated as a proof of evolution. 50,000 structural changes would require so many genetic changes through beneficial mutations and randomly selected changes that it is not possible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 10:58 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
All microbiologists feel that is so ? Or perhaps just one with religious cognitive dissonance?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 11:02 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 10:58 AM)adey67 Wrote:  All microbiologists feel that is so ? Or perhaps just one with religious cognitive dissonance?

Of course not all. What you are implying that his research is tainted due to his religion. That is not a valid argument.

All the biologist that believe in evolution believe it because they do not want to accept that God did it. Is my argument valid???????


“The reason we leaped at The Origin of Species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores.” Julien Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: