Re: [asa] Expelled

From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
Date: Mon Apr 28 2008 - 06:37:04 EDT

You persist in avoiding the real issue - as do Dawkins & the other soft
atheists. Christians (to limit believers to them for know) believe that
there is a standard of morality which has its source beyond the world & that
they have been given some insight into it, primarily in Jesus Christ.
Atheists believe - at least if their claims have any consistency and depth -
that there is and can be no such standard.

I realize that I am repeating the same point I've made before but that is
because you keep avoiding it - whether deliberately or nott I don't know.
If you continue to do so I'll end the conversation.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

----- Original Message -----
From: "PvM" <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
To: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Expelled

> What's the difference between the two cases. Why should a Christian
> adhere to society's interpretation of God's word when he finds support
> for a different moral standard in the Bible? There is similarly no
> compelling reason that suggests that a Christian is in a more
> privileged situation. Both have no more or less reason to accept or
> reject standards of morality. That Christians 'know' that God
> presumably has a set of standards of morality is of no real help to
> the Christian in deciding what morality is the correct one.
>
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 2:46 PM, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
>> Serious atheists don't just lack access to a standard of morality. They
>> know that there is no such standard unless they invent one for
>> themselves. &
>> they know that there is no reason why the standard they invent should
>> have
>> any resemblance to current moral standards developed largely through
>> religious traditions. E.g., there is no reason why any sort of respect
>> for
>> the welfare of other people beyond matters of self interest should be
>> maintained. & recognizing that morality is a product of evolution in
>> whole
>> or in part doesn't provide a solution. So morality has evolved to a
>> certain
>> point. So what? Why should a person who's realized that adhere to that
>> product?
>>
>> & playing the "So's your old man card" is no answer.
>>
>>
>> Shalom
>> George
>> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "PvM" <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
>> To: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
>> Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
>> Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 5:32 PM
>>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [asa] Expelled
>>
>>
>>
>> > And what does this gain us? Knowing that there is something we may
>> > never know during our lifetimes? One may turn around and argue that
>> > atheists are not constrained by a quest for searching for this elusive
>> > standard of morality and therefor can apply more appropriate standards
>> > when outlining standards for morality.
>> > What is so problematic about atheists not having access to a 'standard
>> > of morality' when Christians lack a similar clarity? In both cases it
>> > comes down to us defining our standards of morality. In the end we all
>> > work from subjective standards, whether or not we believe there is a
>> > Higher Being who has His own set of standards.
>> >
>> > Now what if our sense of morality evolved, that would add an even more
>> > interesting twist to this story.
>> >
>> > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 2:01 PM, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > You miss the point. If one believes in God as creator of the world
>> > > then
>> it
>> > > makes sense to believe that there are standards of morality which
>> > > have
>> some
>> > > source beyond the world even if we don't know in detail what those
>> standards
>> > > are. Denial of the existence of a creator means that there is no
>> > > basis
>> for
>> > > such a claim.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Shalom
>> > > George
>> > > http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "PvM" <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
>> > > To: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
>> > > Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
>> > > Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 4:56 PM
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Subject: Re: [asa] Expelled
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > I find the argument that atheists lack a moral standard of ethics
>> > > > quite flawed, as flawed as the idea that Christianity somehow
>> > > > provides
>> > > > us with a clear standard of morality. At best the Bible gives us
>> > > > guidelines which we attempt to interpret as best as we can to guide
>> > > > us
>> > > > in how we behave. However, the Bible is hardly a reliable or unique
>> > > > source of morality.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 3:52 PM, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> >
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > The soft atheists of coursel argue, with a good deal of truth,
>> > > > > that
>> > > > > religious people in general aren't a lot more moral than
>> > > > > atheists. >
>> > But
>> > > > > there is no reason for athiests like Dawkins to follow any
>> particular
>> > > syatem
>> > > > > of morality or ethics. OTOH, religious people have a moral
>> > > > > standard
>> > > by
>> > > > > which they can be judged. The point is not that atheists are
>> > > > > more
>> > > immoral
>> > > > > than believers but that they are unwilling or afraid to face up
>> > > > > to >
>> > the
>> > > > > consequences of their position.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Shalom
>> > > > > George
>> > > > > http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > From: David Heddle
>> > > > > To: PvM
>> > > > > Cc: David Campbell ; asa@calvin.edu
>> > > > > Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 5:10 PM
>> > > > > Subject: Re: [asa] Expelled
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'll take a stab--the answer is twofold. One is that his
>> > > > > statements
>> > > are
>> > > so
>> > > > > outrageous. His claims of child abuse will not resonate except
>> > > > > with
>> > > his
>> > > own
>> > > > > choir. The other is that his arguments against theism are so
>> childish
>> > > and
>> > > > > primitive--boiling down to "religious people are dumb" and "if
>> > > > > God >
>> > mad
>> > > > > everything, who made God?" Compared to intellectual atheists of
>> > > > > the
>> > > past,
>> > > > > such as Bertrand Russel, Dawkins is (when it comes to theology) a
>> > > > > lightweight. PZ tried to rescue him with the "Courtiers Reply"
>> > > > > but >
>> > that
>> > > is
>> > > > > little more than a justification and a rationalization to make a
>> > > > > simpleminded response instead of doing your homework.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > In my opinion, Dawkins is to atheism what Benny Hinn is to
>> > > > > theism.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > David Heddle
>> > > > > Associate Professor of Physics
>> > > > > Christopher Newport University, &
>> > > > > The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 2:51 PM, PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > How is Dawkins one of the best arguments against atheism?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:37 AM, David Campbell
>> > > <pleuronaia@gmail.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > By accepting the claim that evolution entails scientism and
>> > > > > > > by
>> > > doing > > a
>> > > > > > > poor critique, the movie to me does more to endorse
>> > > > > > > scientism >
>> > > > than
>> > > > > to
>> > > > > > > counter it. Of course, conversely Dawkins is one of the
>> > > > > > > best
>> > > > > > > arguments against atheism.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > Dr. David Campbell
>> > > > > > > 425 Scientific Collections
>> > > > > > > University of Alabama
>> > > > > > > "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of
>> > > > > > > clams"
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> > > > > > > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> > > > > > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> > > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Apr 28 06:40:27 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 28 2008 - 06:40:28 EDT