23 Mar 05
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeIf you'll note, earlier I said that we can be molded by our environment to wrong morals. Basically you do not believe in justice. That frightens me.
Darfius,
If --"He has set right from wrong in our hearts and we know when we are doing either" --then how do you account for the obvious existence of moral disagreement?
For example, you personally condone God sending of people to an agonizing eternity in hell for not believing what you believe. I don't.
Are you saying that, deep down, I rea ...[text shortened]... with every fibre of my being--that your metaphysical beliefs are morally perverse and sadistic.
23 Mar 05
Originally posted by DarfiusHe believes your conception of justice is not justice because it provides a disproportional punishment i.e. eternal damnation for what he believes are fairly minor offenses i.e. not believing that Jesus was God because of the dubious nature of the evidence to support such an assertion. Thus you are incorrect and narrow minded (no surprise there) to say he "does not believe in justice" when what he doesn't believe in is your twisted version of justice.
If you'll note, earlier I said that we can be molded by our environment to wrong morals. Basically you do not believe in justice. That frightens me.
23 Mar 05
Originally posted by no1marauderDoes Hitler deserve eternal punishment or 233,000 years of punishment?
He believes your conception of justice is not justice because it provides a disproportional punishment i.e. eternal damnation for what he believes are fairly minor offenses i.e. not believing that Jesus was God because of the dubious nature of the evidence to support such an assertion. Thus you are incorrect and narrow minded (no surprise there) ...[text shortened]... es not believe in justice" when what he doesn't believe in is your twisted version of justice.
23 Mar 05
Originally posted by DarfiusThat's the first meaning in my dictionary; I was using the term according to its more precise second meaning, to wit:
I believe so. It's basically a question with false premises, right?
A statement (as a response) that does not follow logically from anything previously said.
I believe your Hitler comment fits exactly into that definition. Believing that Hitler committed sufficient crimes to be eternally damned is vastly different from saying that 95-99% of the human race should be eternally damned for the "crime" of not believing that Jesus was God according to your standards. Would you agree with that assessment of your response?
23 Mar 05
Originally posted by no1marauderNo. Our views of crimes aren't the same as God's. Let me put it this way, male lions eat their young if the mothers don't protect them. Humans find this morally abhorrent. Imagine what we do that seems normal that God finds morally abhorrent.
That's the first meaning in my dictionary; I was using the term according to its more precise second meaning, to wit:
A statement (as a response) that does not follow logically from anything previously said.
I believe your Hitler comment fits exactly into that definition. Believing that Hitler committed sufficient crimes to be ...[text shortened]... esus was God according to your standards. Would you agree with that assessment of your response?
23 Mar 05
1 edit
Originally posted by DarfiusIt all comes down to that you believe that you have a personal pipeline to what God thinks that 99% of the human race doesn't. I can't imagine what God "thinks", if He exists, and neither can you but you insist you can. I really don't have any problem with you believing such a thing, but when you say that someone "does not believe in justice" because they disagree with your concept of justice you are being intolerant and narrow minded. Perhaps you merely misstated your position and meant to say "your concept of justice is flawed", a position you would then have to defend. Is that what you meant to say?
No. Our views of crimes aren't the same as God's. Let me put it this way, male lions eat their young if the mothers don't protect them. Humans find this morally abhorrent. Imagine what we do that seems normal that God finds morally abhorrent.
23 Mar 05
Originally posted by DarfiusIf your view of moral goodness and badness is not the same as God's, then what are you claiming when you say of God that He is morally perfect? You can't be claiming that He is morally perfect in the human sense, since you recognize that God finds some things morally abhorrent that are fine according to the human sense. But neither can you be claiming that He is morally perfect in some non-human sense, since have no idea what moral perfection in a non-human sense is like (for if you did, then contrary to your initial assumption you would not have a different view of moral goodness and badness than God's).
No. Our views of crimes aren't the same as God's. Let me put it this way, male lions eat their young if the mothers don't protect them. Humans find this morally abhorrent. Imagine what we do that seems normal that God finds morally abhorrent.
23 Mar 05
Originally posted by no1marauder
He believes your conception of justice is not justice because it provides a disproportional punishment i.e. eternal damnation for what he believes are fairly minor offenses i.e. not believing that Jesus was God because of the dubious nature of the evidence to support such an assertion. Thus you are incorrect and narrow minded (no surprise there) ...[text shortened]... es not believe in justice" when what he doesn't believe in is your twisted version of justice.
Speaking on behalf of others No1 ?
The disease is spreading.
