Should we work to get rid of Christianity?

[El Cid]

No they wouldn't necessarily. A lot of the Old Testament laws are to do with health reasons, such as not eating shellfish, and being monogamous would be in line with that. Such promiscuousness would also lead to a more unstable society, and a loving family is the best environment for children.

Laws for these considerations could easily come from man alone.

Possibly but some of the other laws are even more restrictive such as forbidding covetousness, lying in all cases, and theft in all cases.

 

[El Cid]

He's never revealed Himself as such. "I am that I am" is the best you have. All the other scriptures regarding God's nature are nothing more than the clanging bells of fallen men's personal ideals.

Yes, He has to His followers through experience.

 

[El Cid]

"Could" being the operative word.
For those asserting is, not could, could is not enough.

I never claimed absolute certainty, only evidence for it.

See above.

Which post are you referring to?

 

[El Cid]

Really? The whole point of Godel's theorems is that no consistent axiomatic system can do that.

Yes, without going "outside' the system. But you can resolve the inconsistencies by going outside it.

 

[El Cid]

No, you've suggested that this is possible but shown no evidence that it's real. Besides, we still have no experience of such cross-dimensional causation, so this has no bearing on the inductive argument.

I provided the science that points to it, so it is nevertheless a rational assumption. What cross dimensional causation? It is just causality within a time dimension that is different from ours.

 

[El Cid]

Human laws can be broken while natural laws cannot, so they are not the same kind of thing.

That is because matter doesnt have free will.

Eyes and ears have etiological functions, not purposes, and such functions do not come from personal beings.

Evidence?

If God can have order without being an effect, then so can the universe. You give no reason for thinking that having a beginning would preclude this.

No, order is brought about by laws, unless the universe had a personal cause, it would just be random and chaotic.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Yes, without going "outside' the system. But you can resolve the inconsistencies by going outside it.

The point was that Godel's theorems do not apply to the universe as a whole because they only apply to a subset of axiomatic formal systems. The universe is not such a system, and itself goes beyond any such system, so there is no need to go beyond the universe in order to solve anything.

 

[Tetsugaku]

I provided the science that points to it, so it is nevertheless a rational assumption. What cross dimensional causation? It is just causality within a time dimension that is different from ours.

You suggestion was cross-dimensional in that it required a cause in one temporal dimension producing an effect in a different temporal dimension. But the broader point remains that this speculative hypothesis undermines any inductive or abductive argument for the universe being caused, given that we have no confirmed experience of this new kind of causation ever having happened.

 

[Tetsugaku]

That is because matter doesnt have free will.

But we have free will and can't violate the laws of nature either, so that doesn't explain the difference. The point remains that human laws and the laws of nature are completely different things.

Evidence?

Do you not know what an etiological function is?

No, order is brought about by laws, unless the universe had a personal cause, it would just be random and chaotic.

Obviously false, as proven by God's mind - whose alleged order cannot be the product of any laws and yet is neither random nor chaotic. There's no reason why the universe itself couldn't likewise possess order not gifted from any anterior source.

 

[Whatsisface]

Possibly but some of the other laws are even more restrictive such as forbidding covetousness, lying in all cases, and theft in all cases.

All laws that could come from man alone.

 

[El Cid]

Loaded question - I don't think my opinion is superior, in an objective sense.
That's what opinion means.

So why should he be thrown in jail for a different subjective opinion? Especially since humans dont have any objective value either if there is no God.

 

[El Cid]

They would probably not want to be aborted.

Why do you think that is?

But a condemned prisoner wouldn't want to be executed, if asked, and that's another example of a killing that's considered justified.

Actually most of the world doesnt think abortion is justified in the second and third trimesters.

 

[El Cid]

No, they don't.
Human laws exist to punish disobedience; natural "laws" cannot be disobeyed by matter and energy.

Thats because it doesnt have free will but they both do the same basic thing, create and maintain order.

Did Einstein prove it?
If not, nobody should care that he said it.

No, he didnt prove it, but he is considered the most intelligent human who ever lived,

It turned out that they were right - it was only shown to be a reasonable assumption after the fact.

No, if it was not considered a reasonable assumption prior to launch they never would have launched the space program.

 

[El Cid]

Argument from factual knowledge. " Somalia has fewer laws than any other country. Iraq comes in a close second"

We were talking about which nation is the freest and the person that responded before you joined in said the nation with the fewest laws, but just having the fewest laws does not necessarily make it the most free and you proved it with those two countries. They certainly are not the most free. Sorry try again.

 

[El Cid]

If genocide were an across the board culturally rational and inert action for everybody, even the victims - like providing and eating a bag of Doritoes, how would they know either way whether it was an immoral action or not? Immoral actions usually have negative and unwanted consequences either immediately felt, or felt over time, and/or focused to an individual or to an entire group. That's how we measure it.

Who is we?

God can't provide an objective example here either. He led the way engaging directly in genocide twice according to scriptures.

No, God never engaged in genocide. Genocide is destroying a group just because of WHO they are, like the Germans did to the jews in the Holocaust. God only destroyed groups because of WHAT they DID, ie evil acts. So it was capital punishment ordered by the Judge of the Universe.

 

[El Cid]

You're begging the question by assuming these things have those kind of purposes rather than etiological functions.

So you deny that eyes are for seeing and ears are for hearing?

 

[Tetsugaku]

So you deny that eyes are for seeing and ears are for hearing?

No, that's their etiological function. Do you know what that means?

 

[Eightcrackers]

So why should he be thrown in jail for a different subjective opinion?

It's not just A different opinion.
It's a near-unaimous different opinion.

Especially since humans dont have any objective value either if there is no God.

Nor do we seem to need one.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Why do you think that is?

In general, people do not want to die.

Actually most of the world doesnt think abortion is justified in the second and third trimesters.

So?
They can lobby to get their law changed, if they live in a democracy.

 

[Eightcrackers]

No, he didnt prove it, but he is considered the most intelligent human who ever lived,

By whom?
You?