11 Nov 18
@chaney3 saidConjecture about an afterlife is subjective for believers and for non-believers ~ for everybody. The fact that believers believe something about the afterlife doesn't make it "objective". Just as a non-believer like me cannot turn his subjective beliefs about spiritual and religious matters into "objective" beliefs simply by way of the certainty with which I believe things to be true.
Not for believers.
11 Nov 18
@chaney3 saidIn contemplating supernatural matters, neither divegeester nor I can claim that our beliefs are "objective". What divegeester has in terms of supernatural matters ~ Jesus, "sin", the afterlife ~ which I don't have ~ is faith.
I'm surprised that Dive doesn't call you out on this.
11 Nov 18
@fmf saidIf we were to argue over what we both felt "A" represented, something good or
When you say "prove a point", what kind of thing are you talking about? You mean making a case in a court of law?
something bad, there has to be a common thread we both acknowledge that we
can use to reason with one another. Without that there is nothing that can be done
to either of our satisfaction.
@kellyjay saidGive me a scenario where the differing opinions you and I might have about whether something is "right" or "wrong" impacts either of us significantly and where something "evil" needs to have something done about it ~ where that issue is not governed by the law.
If we were to argue over what we both felt "A" represented, something good or
something bad, there has to be a common thread we both acknowledge that we
can use to reason with one another. Without that there is nothing that can be done
to either of our satisfaction.
11 Nov 18
@kellyjay saidI think you are talking about things that are under the jurisdiction of the law. You said this:
Not talking about laws, good and evil.
"If you think for example you have the right to do X, you do it. Others may think X is evil and therefore count all who do it evil through their actions. When those who have very strong personal views mix with one another, can there really be a solution, a real answer beyond arguments, fighting, and killing to stop the evil among us?"
Give me examples of X, please.
How is "killing" not governed by law?
I have a moral objection to "killing" in almost all circumstances. You have a moral objection to "killing" in almost all circumstances. I think my objection is the result of a subjective process, as is yours. But you reckon your objection is somehow "objective" but you're not explaining why.
11 Nov 18
@kellyjay saidWhat constitutes "satisfaction" for you is a matter for your subjective contemplation. Even our perceptions of what "common thread there has to be" is within the realm of the overlap of our different subjectivities. Multiply that by however many people there are in a given group, and that's the realm of culture, anthropology, philosophy, politics and religion. These are all realms comprising the culmination and conflicts of competing or coinciding subjectivites. That's why there are laws and legal institutions: to arbitrate and adjudicate.
If we were to argue over what we both felt "A" represented, something good or
something bad, there has to be a common thread we both acknowledge that we
can use to reason with one another. Without that there is nothing that can be done
to either of our satisfaction.
11 Nov 18
@chaney3 saidCall him (FMF) out over what exactly?
Not for believers.
I'm surprised that Dive doesn't call you out on this.
It would be refreshing if he did.
11 Nov 18
@fmf saidI told you I was speaking about good and evil, not about law.
I think you are talking about things that are under the jurisdiction of the law. You said this:
"If you think for example you have the right to do X, you do it. Others may think X is evil and therefore count all who do it evil through their actions. When those who have very strong personal views mix with one another, can there really be a solution, a real answer beyond argumen ...[text shortened]... ss, as is yours. But you reckon your objection is somehow "objective" but you're not explaining why.
That alone should have let you know I wasn't speaking about law.
11 Nov 18
@fmf saidIn a created world by a Holy and Good God, anything that keeps people from Him
Give me a scenario where the differing opinions you and I might have about whether something is "right" or "wrong" impacts either of us significantly and where something "evil" needs to have something done about it ~ where that issue is not governed by the law.
is evil and the laws of man are meaningless with this. You can force people to act
certain ways, even force them to recite prayers, go to church or mosque it doesn't
make anyone any closer to God. You can go willingly to church that doesn't bring
you to God either. What occurs between us and God all arguments and every
lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God keeps people from knowing
the truth. The first commandment of loving God is broken here.
Now evil also stops and keep people from loving and caring for each other this
is the 2nd commandment. Laws do not force people from treating each other
lovingly, the best they can do is cause us to be treated equally, fairly, without
favor or disrespect equally. Even here when we rejoice when laws are slanted to
do things against one group over another, that is evil with the law, when we
allow for double standards, that is evil.
Good requires a standard, humans cannot on our own generate one that could
be equally applied to all, and we don't even want to as we are so divided by so
many different things. We are broken when we setup anything that is false.
ESV Proverbs 11: 1
A false balance is an abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is his delight.