Objective vs subjective

[Jethro Bodine]

Hey jesse,

Ok well these ideas are getting paradoxical, it will be hard to rebuttle without creating another paradox. But ill try.

You cant prove something doesnt exist to prove it in fact exists. You can only prove what exists because only existing things have a existing state.

And this what I was saying, that if something exists it can be proven. If god actually exists he can be proven.

But since this has not been proven as of this moment it can't possibly ever be proven, right? I'm certain that is what your argument boils down to whether you want to agree with that or not.

I liken it to all the people who would have argued over the centuries that steel and iron simply do not, and can not float on water. The problem is they passed judgment on that too soon. I don't think it wise and rational and logical to assume it's not to soon to pass judgment that their is no Judge who will judge the sins of the earth. Pure logic and rationale tells us to assume there is until it is proven that there is not.

 

[Free]

And this what I was saying, that if something exists it can be proven. If god actually exists he can be proven.

That all depends what you mean by "proven".

Our current understanding on science answering moral questions is very cloudy, some say yes, some say no. As for me I dont hold any view.

Science deals with the empirical and our five senses, by definition. It therefore cannot and will not provide answers to questions of morality. That is the realm of philosophy and theology.

And that brings up another problem--your use of the word "evil". If God does not exist, nothing can be truly good or truly evil; it is all a matter of personal preference.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Our current understanding on science answering moral questions is very cloudy, some say yes, some say no. As for me I dont hold any view.

It's very easy to see, if one is honest with themselves, that to do no harm to another human being is an undeniable truth that governs mankind.

What happens is, when people are confronted with this truth they cast it away because it conflicts with what they feel is so essential to what they must do, and then they claim there is no way to discern truth, and that it doesn't even exist. That's not very scientific and rational and logical....you know, the things they insist you must use to discern truth.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Science deals with the empirical and our five senses, by definition. It therefore cannot and will not provide answers to questions of morality. That is the realm of philosophy and theology.

There was a day when I would have agreed with this. I don't anymore.

The wisdom and truth, of 'moral' behavior is proven by what it produces. This is what I was getting at in the beginning. So many people say God can't be real, but the evidences of God are so easily proven, the attribute of 'not evil' being one of them.

 

[poetofparables]

But since this has not been proven as of this moment it can't possibly ever be proven, right? I'm certain that is what your argument boils down to whether you want to agree with that or not.

I liken it to all the people who would have argued over the centuries that steel and iron simply do not, and can not float on water. The problem is they passed judgment on that too soon. I don't think it wise and rational and logical to assume it's not to soon to pass judgment that their is no Judge who will judge the sins of the earth. Pure logic and rationale tells us to assume there is until it is proven that there is not.

Jethro,

Im not sure what you mean.

 

[Free]

There was a day when I would have agreed with this. I don't anymore.

The wisdom and truth, of 'moral' behavior is proven by what it produces. This is what I was getting at in the beginning. So many people say God can't be real, but the evidences of God are so easily proven, the attribute of 'not evil' being one of them.

I'm not sure if your answer is meant to show how you disagree with my statement.

 

[poetofparables]

That all depends what you mean by "proven".


Science deals with the empirical and our five senses, by definition. It therefore cannot and will not provide answers to questions of morality. That is the realm of philosophy and theology.

And that brings up another problem--your use of the word "evil". If God does not exist, nothing can be truly good or truly evil; it is all a matter of personal preference.

Good points you brought up,

Proven, yes theres a few meanings for proven.

Why would nothing be truly good or evil without god?

 

[Rick W]

There was a day when I would have agreed with this. I don't anymore.

The wisdom and truth, of 'moral' behavior is proven by what it produces. This is what I was getting at in the beginning. So many people say God can't be real, but the evidences of God are so easily proven, the attribute of 'not evil' being one of them.

Something like evil is the lack of good like darkness is the lack of light, cold the lack of heat, silence the lack of sound?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jethro,

Im not sure what you mean.

What I'm getting at is one day there will be no doubt about whether God exists, or not. No matter what you believe now, the truth is the truth and choosing to believe something as truth or not doesn't change what really is the truth.

Which leads to the next logical path of thinking. It's scientifically illogical to assume there is no God simply because for now we can not directly prove it. The world certainly does not operate in this logic in regard to it's affairs--you know, the logic it demands that the truth of God must be discerned with. If it did, we would not, today, be flying and sailing tons of steel over vast oceans of water.

Scientific wisdom demands that you assume there is a Judge of all things until it can be proven that He does not exist.
It's the exact wisdom only a fool would cast aside in, say, the first flight into outer space. But it seems to be okay to discard that wisdom when it comes to whether or not a moral Judge stands at the ready when we die.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Something like evil is the lack of good like darkness is the lack of light, cold the lack of heat, silence the lack of sound?

I think so.

(I see you noticed I used 'not evil' in place of 'good').

 

[Rick W]

I think so.

(I see you noticed I used 'not evil' in place of 'good').

Well, it was pronounced a bit with the double use of the apostrophe, yes.

 

[Rick W]

Why would nothing be truly good or evil without god?

Is good then a personal preference or a judgment based on feelings or both or something else? Did it evolve too?
Where would good come from without God?

Getting back to Jesus Christ.

Luke 6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
Luke 6:33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
Luke 6:34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.

 

[Free]

Good points you brought up,

Proven, yes theres a few meanings for proven.

Why would nothing be truly good or evil without god?

If there is no objective moral lawgiver, there is no objective moral law. If there is no objective moral law, there is no way to differentiate good from evil and morality becomes relative. Without being grounded in something objective and absolute, the terms "good" and "evil" become personal preferences, losing any real meaning.

 

[Malachi]

Why would nothing be truly good or evil without God (capitalized for our discussion)?

Since God's attributes include His absolute holiness, righteousness, goodness, and perfection, God Himself is the sole true standard of what is truly good.

And we know that the opposite of God is another sentient being -- a creature who is also an evil spirit -- who is in fact committed to evil with his whole being. That is Satan. So without God and Satan the universe would be morally neutral, just like a piece of wood.

Furthmore God put into every human being a "conscience", which is essentially the ability to recogize good and evil, sin and righteousness. Thus all humans recognize ( consciously or unconsciously) that (a) there is a supreme God and (b) there is good and evil in the world. There is not a single religion which does not perceive this.

Those who claim to be "atheists" simply deceive themselves. An objective examination of nature and the universe establishes that there is a Creator and a Designer behind the universe. Even Einstein had to come to this conclusion.

 

[Rick W]

Furthmore God put into every human being a "conscience", which is essentially the ability to recogize good and evil, sin and righteousness. Thus all humans recognize ( consciously or unconsciously) that (a) there is a supreme God and (b) there is good and evil in the world. There is not a single religion which does not perceive this.

Romans 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Romans 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;

 

[poetofparables]

Since God's attributes include His absolute holiness, righteousness, goodness, and perfection, God Himself is the sole true standard of what is truly good.

And we know that the opposite of God is another sentient being -- a creature who is also an evil spirit -- who is in fact committed to evil with his whole being. That is Satan. So without God and Satan the universe would be morally neutral, just like a piece of wood.

Furthmore God put into every human being a "conscience", which is essentially the ability to recogize good and evil, sin and righteousness. Thus all humans recognize ( consciously or unconsciously) that (a) there is a supreme God and (b) there is good and evil in the world. There is not a single religion which does not perceive this.

Those who claim to be "atheists" simply deceive themselves. An objective examination of nature and the universe establishes that there is a Creator and a Designer behind the universe. Even Einstein had to come to this conclusion.

The God of the bible himself has visited some things on the human race that by the standards of christian morals today could only be accepted as evil acts. But we are to trust that those extreme actions are a manifestation of Gods goodness, but if I someone was to do those things today most christians would condemn those actions.

 

[Rick W]

Manifestations not of goodness but of judgment against a rebellious people. So The Law was introduced but as human nature is the people couldn't do all the law either as commanded by God and those sins held as accusation from Satan.
There was but one way to reconcile the people to God and that through the Lamb of God who could fulfill The Law.

And I think the judgment of God is another thing people fear as they do admitting the truth of themselves. Acceptance of God's ultimate authority and judgment is very difficult to accept due to the pride within the hearts of man. And that pride is glaringly demonstrated through his rebellion.

 

[poetofparables]

Manifestations not of goodness but of judgment against a rebellious people. So The Law was introduced but as human nature is the people couldn't do all the law either as commanded by God and those sins held as accusation from Satan.
There was but one way to reconcile the people to God and that through the Lamb of God who could fulfill The Law.

And I think the judgment of God is another thing people fear as they do admitting the truth of themselves. Acceptance of God's ultimate authority and judgment is very difficult to accept due to the pride within the hearts of man. And that pride is glaringly demonstrated through his rebellion.

Ok.

 

[Malachi]

But we are to trust that those extreme actions are a manifestation of Gods goodness, but if I someone was to do those things today most christians would condemn those actions.

Actually I was not dealing with the other attributes of God to respond to your query. So let's talk about this issue.

God is not only absolute goodness, but He is also absolute holiness, righteousness and justice. Because of His holiness He does bring severe judgments and wrath on sinners and evildoers. In fact, He wiped out the human race except for Noah and his family. But God also gave those evildoers 120 years to repent and forsake their sins. So God's grace, His holiness, His justice, and His wrath are always in perfect balance. The great city of Nineveh repented altogether and was altogether spared after the preaching of Jonah.

 

[Butch5]

If truth is objective and absolute then why do religious people struggle to produce the evidence of their claims. When religious people claim that they know the "Truth" isn't that in their minds an objective claim. If it is in fact an objective claim then shouldn't these religious people have a massive body of theoretical evidence to support the claims they make.

I believe the answer is yes. I think the reason some can't supply that evidence is because what they believe isn't truth. There has been a good bit of error brought into the church over 2000 years.