Page 3 of 34 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 334

Thread: Creation "science" and a Bible-based morality

  1. Top | #21
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,455
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,341
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    So, abuse by god is just a moral test?
    I think abuse done in the name of God is a test to see whether the person thinks it wasn't actually God’s will or whether they will rationalize it as being just and loving.

  2. Top | #22
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,633
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,106
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    Do you really think that morality without god is based on "anything goes"?
    Well Ken Ham was saying that if enough people agreed that the student should be killed then that could be a moral thing to do....

    It is difficult to imagine a scenario where every type of killing is acceptable but I think that is theoretically possible.

    "Anything goes" would at least involve things like homosexuality, pornography, divorce, racism, etc.
    Social communities evolved into existence and they require an anti-anything goes set of rules to be sustainable. That happened without a god well before there was a god. Heck communal animals exhibit this level of restraint.

  3. Top | #23
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,455
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,341
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Social communities evolved into existence and they require an anti-anything goes set of rules to be sustainable. That happened without a god well before there was a god. Heck communal animals exhibit this level of restraint.
    I think Rome is an interesting example - with orgies and according to Alan Watts slave girls were fed to lions to entertain the crowds...

    Sometimes the emperor declares himself to be a god....

  4. Top | #24
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,633
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,106
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Social communities evolved into existence and they require an anti-anything goes set of rules to be sustainable. That happened without a god well before there was a god. Heck communal animals exhibit this level of restraint.
    I think Rome is an interesting example - with orgies and according to Alan Watts slave girls were fed to lions to entertain the crowds...

    Sometimes the emperor declares himself to be a god....
    No, it isn’t a good example when communal colonies exist across different species of animals.

  5. Top | #25
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,806
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    15,552
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    From Ken Ham's "The Genesis Solution" - Two Castles - the opposition is attacking the literalist Creationist view while the church is attacking the issues like pornography and homosexuality or attacking each other....
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=1509s



    In "The Genesis Solution" Ken Ham says that the Bible (and a literal Genesis) is the foundation for wearing clothes and being against homosexuality (God didn't make "Adam and Steve"). It says that evolution justifies racist views, divorce, abortion, and relativistic morality.

    So promoting Creationism can have moral reasons so that you have a strong foundation when trying to promote Biblical values like being against homosexuality, and men being the spiritual head of the family. So that gives Christians more reasons to support Creation science....

    Though of course modern day slavery is still wrong - or it is ok under certain circumstances in Bible times....
    https://answersingenesis.org/kids/bi...omote-slavery/
    https://answersingenesis.org/bible-q...pport-slavery/

    Updated pictures:
    https://answersingenesis.org/apologe...g-the-message/





    About clothing:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=1010s
    "What did God do? He gave them coats - the first blood sacrifices are covering for their sin - beautiful picture of something to come wasn't it?"
    I don't understand why you posted this? What's your position on this? My personal view is that Ken Ham is a loony and about as interesting as Ronald McDonald. For the same reasons.

  6. Top | #26
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,633
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,106
    Rep Power
    100
    excreationist seems to like posting a lot about stuff they allegedly don't believe, but allegedly find 'compelling'.

  7. Top | #27
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,442
    Archived
    2,799
    Total Posts
    4,241
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    From Ken Ham's "The Genesis Solution" - .......
    Why should anyone give a fuck what Ken Ham thinks? Has he ever said or done anything that would make a debate about his opinions worthwhile? Do you find Ham's arguments credible (the ones you referenced)? If so, why?

  8. Top | #28
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,442
    Archived
    2,799
    Total Posts
    4,241
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    What does it mean to "be against homosexuality"? There are gay people. How do I "go against" them? What should I attack?
    Ken Ham thinks homosexuality is immoral in a similar way that people often think paedophilia is, especially if the person acts on their desires. Going against it would involve speaking out against it and discouraging it. In more recent versions of the picture this has become "gay marriage" and this would involve fighting the laws, chuches, etc.
    Again, why should we give a fuck what Ken Ham thinks? His nonsense has been debunked over and over, and one doesn't have to look very far to find good rebuttals to most of Ham's opinions. If you find his claims to be credible, make your case, don't just link to the garbage he puts out.

  9. Top | #29
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Port Clinton, Ohio
    Posts
    4,642
    Archived
    591
    Total Posts
    5,233
    Rep Power
    73
    Also, based on these re-posts, Ham ain't nearly as much fun as the old Jack Chick comic book tracts. At least Chick had the sinners covered with skin lesions and roasting in the hellfire. Long live Jack Chick, except he's dead, and maybe in heaven. Or just growing mold underground.

  10. Top | #30
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,455
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,341
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    I think Rome is an interesting example - with orgies and according to Alan Watts slave girls were fed to lions to entertain the crowds...

    Sometimes the emperor declares himself to be a god....
    No, it isn’t a good example when communal colonies exist across different species of animals.
    It is about "anything goes"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •