Page 5 of 34 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 334

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

  1. Top | #41
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,435
    Archived
    2,799
    Total Posts
    4,234
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Ken Ham might say that the ten commandments should be followed because they are from God, and whether they are seen by sinful humans as "good" or original is irrelevant.

    Based on the Bible and Genesis, Ken Ham would think it is pretty clear that the Bible speaks against pornography (lust), homosexuality, divorce, euthanasia, abortion, public nudity and revealing clothing, etc.
    Yes, certain people have said that God wants us to do such-and-such, and never to do so-and-so. But there's no reliable way for us to know that these are actually the thoughts and desires of God. What do we do when other people say that God actually desires something completely different?
    Well Christians disagree a lot but they try to do the best they can to understand "God's word"...
    What Ham thinks is irrelevant. Do you endorse Ham's beliefs on these subjects? If so, why? And why the fuck are you acting as a shill promoting Ham's ideas if you don't agree with them, if that is the case?

  2. Top | #42
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,435
    Archived
    2,799
    Total Posts
    4,234
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post

    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.
    It talks about creation vs evolution as the foundation of morality. I am in between.
    What is this supposed to mean? In-between what? Well established science versus religious dogma? How can one be in-between these ideas that are so fundamentally contradictory? Do you find the claims of Biblical creation credible?

    How do you define morality? Do you agree with the Bible that slavery is ok and homosexuals should be killed? If yes, how do you justify your ideas with anything other than "the Bible says so"?

  3. Top | #43
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,454
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,340
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post

    No kidding. And animals have already shown ‘anything goes’ isn’t a natural state for social communities. They managed it without god.
    My point is that "anything goes" can sometimes happen like innocent(?) slave girls being fed to lions for entertainment.

  4. Top | #44
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,538
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,011
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post

    No kidding. And animals have already shown ‘anything goes’ isn’t a natural state for social communities. They managed it without god.
    My point...
    Point?
    ...is that "anything goes" can sometimes happen like innocent(?) slave girls being fed to lions for entertainment.
    Those people believed in gods too.

  5. Top | #45
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,454
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,340
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by atrib View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post

    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.
    It talks about creation vs evolution as the foundation of morality. I am in between.
    What is this supposed to mean? In-between what? Well established science versus religious dogma?
    See:
    https://talkfreethought.org/showthre...lling-evidence
    https://talkfreethought.org/showthre...ed-simulation)
    https://talkfreethought.org/showthre...ided-evolution

    Basically I believe I'm probably in a simulation and there is an intelligent force that isn't obvious and I'm unable to convince skeptics of its existence.

    How can one be in-between these ideas that are so fundamentally contradictory?
    Well millions of years of naturalistic evolution appears to be true but I believe that most simulations didn't explicitly simulate the past from the start (the big bang) to the end but rather generated a plausible past based on various things.

    Do you find the claims of Biblical creation credible?
    I think most of the things in the Bible never happened. I think Genesis 1 is poetry - see option 2:
    https://www.lifesplayer.com/bible.php

    How do you define morality?
    Well I'm a fan of Kohlbergs stages of moral development.

    Do you agree with the Bible that slavery is ok and homosexuals should be killed?
    No

    If yes, how do you justify your ideas with anything other than "the Bible says so"?
    I believe external intelligent forces exist. I don't think I can really know anything about them... as the Bible says "Satan can appear as an angel of light" (I find it a relevant concept)
    Last edited by excreationist; 07-27-2021 at 04:56 AM.

  6. Top | #46
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,454
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,340
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Point?
    ...is that "anything goes" can sometimes happen like innocent(?) slave girls being fed to lions for entertainment.
    Those people believed in gods too.
    Ken Ham is talking about a particular God and Christians didn't worship the Roman gods including Caesar...

  7. Top | #47
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,538
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,011
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Point?
    ...is that "anything goes" can sometimes happen like innocent(?) slave girls being fed to lions for entertainment.
    Those people believed in gods too.
    Ken Ham is talking about a particular God and Christians didn't worship the Roman gods including Caesar...
    You don't say. So the position is only one god had anything to do with moral standards. Just add that to the heap of YEC BS.

  8. Top | #48
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,454
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,340
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Ken Ham is talking about a particular God and Christians didn't worship the Roman gods including Caesar...
    You don't say. So the position is only one god had anything to do with moral standards. Just add that to the heap of YEC BS.
    Yeah the other gods are false gods perhaps from demons or Satan himself.... (apparently)

  9. Top | #49
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,801
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    15,547
    Rep Power
    62
    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....
    This is a myth about ancient Rome. The reason Christianity has the moral values it does is because it's a product of the Roman empire. Christian morals are Roman morals. The Bible is basically Judaism shoehorned into a Stoic box.

    Both Epicureanism and Stoicism teach the same thing as would later pop up in Christianity. Don't give into carnal pleasures. Be disciplined. Don't be overly emotional. Be frugal. Don't waste money. Honour your family. Be dutiful, etc etc. These two philosophical/religious school were totally dominant in the period when Christianity was formed.

    The reason why we know so much about Roman decadence is because the Romans themselves were horrified about decadent Romans, and wrote about it. These authors were then copied and kept alive by Christian monks. As a way to prove how Rome had been decadent and fallen and now with Christianity it was now a moral place. In spite of nothing much changing. It was the same place before and after the conversion to Christianity.

    Juvenal was a pagan Roman author and playwrite writing satires where he mercilessly mocks decadent Romans. He comes across as any later Christian. His moral values are indistinguishable.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juvenal

    The main difference between Christian and pre-Christian Rome was one of free speech. But it wasn't Christianity that created this culture. It was Augustus, who destroyed free speech in order to destroy the Roman republic and make himself dictator.

    When Nero singled out Christians as horrendous and an evil conspiracy and persecuted them. Nobody bought into his bullshit. For this mobs stormed his palace and forced him out of power. These weren't Christians. These were pagans. Everybody thought the way he treated Christians was immoral. And above all, everybody thought the way Nero was behaving, ie a life of orgies and sex, was immoral.

    I suggest reading about the pre-Christian pagan cult of Isis. It's basically Christianity. It's exactly the same ideas and faith. Just with other symbols. Born in Egypt around 300 BC and spread throughout the Roman empire. Roman's were really into Christian style moral values long before Jesus was ever born. It goes all the way back to the foundation of the Roman Republic (510 BC) and probably even further back.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysteries_of_Isis

    The Roman gladiatorial games have at this point become largely mythic activities. Gladiators were basically WWF style wrestlers. It was all staged for entertainment and gladiators rarely died. Baked into the numbers of those dead in the gladiatorial games were condemned prisoners. Those sentenced to death got executed in the arena. No, they didn't get to fight as gladiators. They were just killed. Just like Europe continued to do after Rome became Christian. The Roman gladiatorial games was mostly just stage shows to celebrate various significant events. Comparable to us today going to the movies.

    Christians criticizing the immorality and decadence of Rome is stupid. Because they are basically criticizing themselves.

  10. Top | #50
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,801
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    15,547
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post

    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.
    It talks about creation vs evolution as the foundation of morality. I am in between.
    In between what?

    Evolution teaches us that the fittest survive. If you're nice and have a lot of friends you are more likely to survive and spread your genes.

    Creation teaches us that God is powerful, we are not, if we aren't nice to each other he will torture us for eternity.

    In both models the threat of death encourages us to be kind to each other. The result is the same.

Posting Permissions

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