Does God exist? (1 Viewer)

[volition]

if it is truly man made, surely another text should have surpassed it by now in terms of impact? but alas, man lies in wait...

This is a fancy way of saying "a million people believe it, so therefore its correct". It's an appeal to the majority.

 

[Emchem]

This is a fancy way of saying "a million people believe it, so therefore its correct". It's an appeal to the majority.

I don't think that is the point he is trying to make

 

[RTTTYTR]

its not about literary merit or textual beauty or anything, purely global impact and change.
none of those books have still had the same impact the bible has had
none of them have changed the world as much as the bible
how many people have died defending LOTR?
how many familys broken apart by the hitchhikers series?
if the bible were truly made up by people, something greater wouldve come along, its been roughly 1700yrs since it was compiled, a few thousand since the first books were written yet still, after the renaissance, after the information age and all the development of man and the world of literature and how far weve come since then...no text has equalled or surpassed it in impact, or changed the world as much as it as. if it is truly man made, surely another text should have surpassed it by now in terms of impact? but alas, man lies in wait...

How about these books for impact:

Sun Tzu's Art of War (Older than the 'Holy Bible' and still relevant today)
Playboy (AFAIK first porn, which revolutionised the modern world)
Plato's The Republic
Hitler's Mein Kampf (The ideology that led to the deaths of millions and the near extinction of the Jewish race) Whilst, it is a trajedy it was a major impact on world history.
Torah (it being the basis of the Old Testament)
Koran (playing a major impact in the contemporary world)
Darwin's 'On the Origin of Species'
Smith's 'The Wealth of Nations'
Marx's 'The Communist Manifesto'

The I Ching
The Iliad and The Odyssey by Homer
The Upanishads
The Way and Its Power, Lao-tzu
The Avesta
Analects, Confucius
History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides
Works, Hippocrates
Works, Aristotle
History, Herodotus
Elements, Euclid
The Dhammapada
Aeneid, Virgil
On the Nature of Reality, Lucretius
Allegorical Expositions of the Holy Laws, Philo of Alexandria
http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/grtinfluential.html

 

[Enteebee]

its not about literary merit or textual beauty or anything, purely global impact and change.
none of those books have still had the same impact the bible has had
none of them have changed the world as much as the bible
how many people have died defending LOTR?
how many familys broken apart by the hitchhikers series?
if the bible were truly made up by people, something greater wouldve come along, its been roughly 1700yrs since it was compiled, a few thousand since the first books were written yet still, after the renaissance, after the information age and all the development of man and the world of literature and how far weve come since then...no text has equalled or surpassed it in impact, or changed the world as much as it as. if it is truly man made, surely another text should have surpassed it by now in terms of impact? but alas, man lies in wait...

Meh the book is just a banner they fly to justify their preconcieved actions, the words merely rhetorical ammo for their preconcieved biases.

 

[Stevo.]

How about these books for impact:

Sun Tzu's Art of War (Older than the 'Holy Bible' and still relevant today)
Playboy (AFAIK first porn, which revolutionised the modern world)
Plato's The Republic
Hitler's Mein Kampf (The ideology that led to the deaths of millions and the near extinction of the Jewish race) Whilst, it is a trajedy it was a major impact on world history.
Torah (it being the basis of the Old Testament)
Koran (playing a major impact in the contemporary world)
Darwin's 'On the Origin of Species'
Smith's 'The Wealth of Nations'
Marx's 'The Communist Manifesto'

The I Ching
The Iliad and The Odyssey by Homer
The Upanishads
The Way and Its Power, Lao-tzu
The Avesta
Analects, Confucius
History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides
Works, Hippocrates
Works, Aristotle
History, Herodotus
Elements, Euclid
The Dhammapada
Aeneid, Virgil
On the Nature of Reality, Lucretius
Allegorical Expositions of the Holy Laws, Philo of Alexandria
http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/grtinfluential.html

Oh Snap!

 

[pattii]

Absolutely, and I think they are both unproven entities, but I always leave open the possibility that I could be wrong (as any rational & enlightened individual should).

you dont believe in god, so do you have morals?

Fantastic, can we define reality? (A common thread in philosophy is whether there is an objective reality.) Also can you define this "magic" you refer to (hell/hades/rebirth/whatever can you define all the terms used)

wtf?
what is the meaning of life?
where did we come from?
are there extra terrestrials out there?
your asking me a question, that i'd words cannot contain meaning.=\

Prove morals exist (with or without a god)

I just stated that my morals mean nothing to you

[/quote]Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behaviour") has three principal meanings. In its first descriptive usage, morality means a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong, whether by society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience. [/quote]lol wikki

btw, i thought you were trying to prove morality with god..=\

 

[katie_tully]

You can prove morality without God. If you want to try and confine all morals into a box, obviously there are going to be ones that an Atheist wouldn't adhere to because unless youre a Bible basher they wouldn't apply. That doesn't make the Atheist any less of a good person.

Now as far as 'where did morals originate', you can't say they originated from religion. Personally I think every human is born with, instinctively, a sense of what is right and wrong (unless you're sociopathic). Things like religion exist in regards to 'policing' these morals; to give them some basis.

 

[RTTTYTR]

you dont believe in god, so do you have morals?

I don't necessarily believe in the existance of objective universal morals

wtf?
what is the meaning of life?
where did we come from?
are there extra terrestrials out there?
your asking me a question, that i'd words cannot contain meaning.=\

All words contain ,meaning, all questions have an answer (usually several alternative answers), in accordance to interpretive theory, one must define any term used and all entities refered to. In short:

What is your reality? Define it and it's parameters and social constructs.
What is your magic? Define it and it's parameters & social constructs.
What is your meaning of life? As above.
Where do you think we come from?

I just stated that my morals mean nothing to you


btw, i thought you were trying to prove morality with god..=\

So would you define morality as equivalent to the authority of the law? Why is the law moral and just? Do we live in a just society?

 

[ubernuton]

god and religon is an excuse to abuse people in the knowlege that they will have a better afterlife if they deserve it otherwise they deserve to be abused there hole lives
religon is evil what matters is the here and now

 

[katie_tully]

Compelling argument.

 

[pattii]

I don't necessarily believe in the existance of objective universal morals

you dont have to, you just have to know that they are there if you wanna be a killer. k?

All words contain ,meaning, all questions have an answer (usually several alternative answers), in accordance to interpretive theory, one must define any term used and all entities refered to. In short:

What is your reality? Define it and it's parameters and social constructs.
What is your magic? Define it and it's parameters & social constructs.
What is your meaning of life? As above.
Where do you think we come from?

seriously, do u want me to buy you a dictonary? it's like $5 at A&G..
why are you asking me?
why do you care what i think?
why dont you come to your own conclusions?
whats your purpose for asking theese questions?

So would you define morality as equivalent to the authority of the law? Why is the law moral and just? Do we live in a just society?

:rofl:Your asking me?

Ive been smoking since i was 14 and your asking me if the law defines my morals?
i believe that they are ethically right and that people like me SHOULD abide by them but hey, not everyone is perfect right?
May i add some people do use the laws as guidelines for their morals and beliefs. Not me tho.

BTW. whats with the questions?=\
Are you going through the 'why mmommy is the skkyy blue?', 'but what if?' stage?

 

[KFunk]

You can prove morality without God.

If you have found a way to do so I will be very impressed. I'm resigned to the view that morality is a social construction on par with beauty and other aesthetic values.

seriously, do u want me to buy you a dictonary? it's like $5 at A&G..
why are you asking me?
why do you care what i think?
why dont you come to your own conclusions?
whats your purpose for asking theese questions?

His questions aren't unreasonable. What you think is important, in this instance, because he is trying to interpret your claims/questions (etc). I expect his aim is to clarify your position so that he might better understand or critique it. Simple (though for that very fact, potentially flawed) candidate answers include:

Reality = A four dimensional space populated by matter which acts according to physical laws (some might be inclined to add 'mind substance' or 'sensory experience' to this).

Meaning of life = N/A... life has no inherent meaning/purpose (these things are constructed by us).

Where we come from = Random particles formed stable systems (atoms, then macromolecules) which formed self replicating structures, which gained in complexity - forming cells ... yada, yada, yada... humans. (A further question beyond this is 'why is there something rather than nothing?' To that I reply: I don't know).

 

[cupcake08]

Now as far as 'where did morals originate', you can't say they originated from religion. Personally I think every human is born with, instinctively, a sense of what is right and wrong (unless you're sociopathic). Things like religion exist in regards to 'policing' these morals; to give them some basis.

if morals are instinctive, how do you explain moral relativity? how do you explain one culture that considers slaughter perfectly justified & morally correct when another culture sees the same behaviour as abhorrent? or are only some morals instinctive while others are socially negotiated?


also avoiding acts of murder/killing as the best way of sustaining society does not neccessarily render it morally wrong. say there was a period of mass famine and the best means of the surivival of society was to turn to cannibalism; would murder on that account suddenly become morally correct? are morals therefore the product of the needs of a society at a particular time?

 

[sam04u]

Personally I think every human is born with, instinctively, a sense of what is right and wrong (unless you're sociopathic). Things like religion exist in regards to 'policing' these morals; to give them some basis.

Katie I would like to say that the Qur'an agrees with your hypothesis. Muslims believe also that every human being is born with a sense of what is right and wrong. Infact, the Qur'an states that if a human being is left to be on their own, they will come to the conclusion that god exists.

However, where a decisive contradiction lies in the idea that sociopaths do not have a sense of what is right and wrong. Although they do not feel guilt for their own actions, why not try and take the life of a sociopath. Chances are they'll cry for justice, because they then believe what has happened to them is wrong. I think sociopaths just enter a state (either through believing they are above what is right or wrong) or that they are infallible, that they become immune to feelings of guilt.

If morals are instinctive, how do you explain moral relativity? how do you explain one culture that considers slaughter perfectly justified & morally correct when another culture sees the same behaviour as abhorrent?

You have a distinct lack of knowledge on moral relativity within not only any one religion, not only one sect of a religion, but even within each individual.

Do you know of any one religion which has a definate set of morals without a grey area? Any text which perfectly distinguishes between right and wrong?

Is it an eye for an eye? or turn the other cheek?
Is it come to them where they are? or to each his own?

There is moral relativity everywhere, especially in religion. Without a doubt humans are born with a sense of right and wrong.

It's the communities which we are born into though, that make us deviate from the natural sense of right and wrong. In some communities, even cannibalism was practised. You can't honestly say that humans would naturally turn to cannibalism had religion never existed.

 

[katie_tully]

also avoiding acts of murder/killing as the best way of sustaining society does not neccessarily render it morally wrong. say there was a period of mass famine and the best means of the surivival of society was to turn to cannibalism; would murder on that account suddenly become morally correct? are morals therefore the product of the needs of a society at a particular time?

Um yes. Who do you decide to eat? The loser who lost paper, scissors, rock?

 

[pattii]

<3 i do realise his questions are unreasonable, i just wanted him to actually think about what he was asking me.

=\cannibalism is a hot topic read myblog

 

[sam04u]

cannibalism is a hot topic read myblog

No.

 

[pattii]

yes.

 

[sam04u]

I lied, I already have. I just wanted to attract attention to it (as I am now), so more people can have the pleasure of reading it.

 

[pattii]

did u comment? was it ok? it's my first blog everrr