The governing body don't.
They always say "" uninspired, uninspired,,,we're uninspired...."""
A simple rebuttal to the recent 'Last Minute Repentance' change.
by nicolaou 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
TonusOH
Sea Breeze: If you were not a product of the God of the bible, you would not even be able to admit that you have notions of good and evil as you have done above.
Your god does not have 'notions' of good or evil. In the universe as you envision it, there are no notions of good or evil. There is only what god claims is good or evil, and they are absolute... until such time as they are not.
I have asked you, numerous times, if you can or cannot determine what makes murder wrong. Or theft, or rape, or deception, or any of a number of actions that we deem immoral or wrong. You avoid answering this, because to do so invalidates the idea that only god can determine right or wrong. You do this, even though we both know you could describe why any of those actions are wrong. It's easy enough for a child to understand, which we witness all the time when parents explain to them why something is good or bad.
Pretty much everyone -including religious people- can do this. The idea that we cannot determine what is right or wrong without god fails the moment we admit that we can explain why certain actions are good or bad. We can use this very same method to explain why we don't get upset at rocks or chemicals, or why we don't put animals on trial.
-
Sea Breeze
I have asked you, numerous times, if you can or cannot determine what makes murder wrong. Or theft, or rape, or deception, or any of a number of actions that we deem immoral or wrong.
Of course I can, and you can too. The question is why can we do that?
The idea that we cannot determine what is right or wrong without god fails the moment we admit that we can explain why certain actions are good or bad.
That's ridiculous. You are saying that because we can determine right from wrong, that explains why we can do it.
If you and I were trekking through the jungle in the Congo and came across a 747 jet airplane in the forest, you would never tell yourself because its here, that explains why its here. And if you tried to write a peer reviewd paper using that reasoning, you'd be laughed away as a nut.
And that is just exactly the kind of "logic" you are trying to employ here. It makes no sense. Why should chemicals care what reaction they have? In the atheist paradigm that’s pretty much all we are right?
One chemical reaction goes fizz, another one goes bang. Who cares? That’s how atheists describe their formation right? It’s all just chemicals and chance.
So, even if we grant the miracle of everything appearing from nothing (which is a huge grant) your burden is to explain how rocks, electricity, primordial soup, chemicals, poisonous gases, predation, and blind chance can provide any kind of basis whatsoever in determining that murder is wrong.
So, go ahead, try to do it.
The reality is that blind, random chance gives every reason to doubt that we could be sure about anything morally.
But atheists do not treat their moral certitude as something coming from chemical reactions. They parade their morality as something that is rock solid and logically unassasilable, because they have it. But how can accidents provide anything other than more accidents? How can you be sure that your moral certitude about murder is anything other than just another roadstop along happanstance highway?
If atheists were honest, they would have to conclude that their certitude about murder is.... just another accident.
But they don't treat it that way do they? They must borrow from the Christian worldview and claim that they just "know it". And again, this claim of just knowing it is a dead giveaway that atheists don't really believe their own made up story about accidents, chemical reactions, lightning bolts in a primiordial soup, etc, etc, etc.
The bible gets it right, and the rabbit hole atheists crawl in to try and hide from God in won't work:
Romans 2 - Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God?.......
When Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.
Even the most remote tribes who have been cut off from the rest of civilization observe a moral code similar to everyone else’s. Although differences certainly exist in civil matters, virtues like bravery and loyalty and vices like greed and cowardice are universal.
If man were responsible for that code, it would differ as much as every other thing that man has invented. Where, then, do we get these laws of what should be done?
-
nicolaou
Why should chemicals care what reaction they have? In the atheist paradigm that’s pretty much all we are right?
One chemical reaction goes fizz, another one goes bang. Who cares? That’s how atheists describe their formation right? It’s all just chemicals and chance.You're so hung up on this. I'm no more a bag of chemicals than you are just "dust from the ground". You really have no idea how insulting you are do you Sea Breeze?
-
Touchofgrey
Sea breeze
Name one cruel sadistic act performed by a atheist that Also hasn't been done by a Christian.
Name one kind and charitable act performed by a Christian that also has been done by a atheist.
The man made god of the bible only started handing out supposed moral guidance some 6000 years ago (adam and eve and look how that story turned out)what did humanity do before that ? As there's clear evidence that humans have existed on the earth for a lot longer than that.
The prison systems in the Christian world are overflowing many are struggling to keep up with the increased numbers, the vast majority of these inmates will claim membership of a Christian religion or a belief in a god ,very few even taking percentages into account will be atheists.
-
TonusOH
Sea Breeze: The question is why can we do that?
The "why" is irrelevant. In fact, I can demonstrate that it is irrelevant even if god exists.
Let's start by dismissing the idea that god has 'written a law in our hearts.' If this was the case, laws and moral codes would be superfluous. Why do we need laws and moral codes? Because the most base human motivator -the one we are born knowing above all else- is selfishness. What do parents need to do for their children? Teach them and discipline them to help them rein in their selfish nature and become useful members of society.
How do they begin? By using that selfishness to help them develop empathy, which is the first basis of moral behavior. How many times have we heard a parent tell a child "how would you feel if this was done to you?" Even when we are older and able to use logic and reason to understand why we have codes and laws, we still use empathy to no small degree.
Later, we can use our knowledge and understanding and experience to draw logical conclusions regarding the need for laws and moral codes. Put simply, what would happen to a society that decided that murder, theft, rape, and deception were normal behavior that was not controlled? It would destroy itself. How does a human society thrive? By addressing our in-built selfishness, through moral codes and through laws and law enforcement. If goodness was our natural state, none of this would be necessary.
There, we have a simple approach to determining right and wrong. We use it all the time and throughout our lives. There should be no question that this is the case. Because we can do this, we do not need someone to implant these in our minds. Even if god existed, his input is unnecessary; we have a clear and sensible basis for developing morals and determining what is right and what is wrong. The history of human laws demonstrates that this development was gradual and tracked with societal development, which also makes sense. The bigger and more sophisticated our societies became, the more sophisticated our laws had to be.
That is why we can do that. It strikes me that a species that is so driven by base desires like selfishness and sexual gratification aligns more closely with evolution than with the kind of god you claim to worship. A god who creates a world like this comes across as something of a sadist.
-
cofty
Sea Breeze - If you actually believe that you are a moral imbecile. If you are only pretending to believe that why should anybody waste their time conversing with you?