Re: [asa] Expelled

From: <mrb22667@kansas.net>
Date: Mon Apr 28 2008 - 11:53:11 EDT

I accept and agree with your point, George -- and if Pim doesn't, I'm not sure
why he avoids it. It's almost obvious enough to be a truism. Atheists deny any
absolutely objective basis for morality.

I think part of what Pim and myself are exploring as a different direction is
that despite this, Atheists obviously have not become (by general societal
standards) completely immoral people -- why not? They would say they just
adopted the current set of societal standards, and they would go on to press us,
by asking "what's wrong with that?". We and they both know that they still
deny that these standards carry any kind of absolute authority. Therefore they
don't have any foundation by which to call anything absolutely immoral or
absolutely good. But this doesn't [most of?] them from functioning "as if it
were so" according to whatever societal whims that have evolved or whatever.

I don't think this necessarily need bother the Christian, Pim. If God uses
biological evolution to bring about his creation of life, then why should it
bother us if a kind of "societal evolution" brought about morality? We still
recognize the absolute foundation undergirding it, and that is significant for
the Christian. Whatever variations various societies and times develop around
it, they are all roughly around the same theme: treat others as you would be
treated. The Christian then recognizes the even greater imperative to Love God
 with everything.

--Merv

Quoting George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>:

> 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.
>

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 11:54:27 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 28 2008 - 11:54:29 EDT