The desire to earn money to excess (beyond meeting your basic needs for food, clothing and shelter) is motivated by envy.It depends on what you do with that money but in many, perhaps most cases, I agree that it leads to greed. It is not money that is evil, it is the love or worship of it that causes evil. God knows we need money to live.Now you're back to endorsing thought-police.
Please define "fact".What corresponds to what is the case.Do the biblical teachings come from the 66 writings we call the Bible canon? Do these writings actually convey to the reader God and according to these writings His thoughts, commands, warnings, and decrees?If you can't verify that something "corresponds to what is the case" then you can't call it a FACT.
You're simply dressing up OPINION by painting it with a cheap coat of "FACT".
There are many external pieces of evidence and proof than just me.
Yours, to date, depends solely on yourself as a reliable witness.
Why should I believe you?
Who else believes in this Thog and where is this documented?
Are there 66 canonical ancient writings we call the Bible? Yes or no?
Do these writings all convey information about the being called God therein as to His speaking to them and revealing information to humanity?
Is that a true statement that they do recount such things? Yes or no?
It is a choice. You have a volition even if it is in bondage to sin and has the disposition to reject God.Error-slave can only make errors.I have no idea what point you are making.I say, if you follow god, then you are a god-slave.
Others say, if you DON'T follow god, then you are an error-slave.I say, if you are an error-slave, how can you be expected to identify "the truth"?????????????????????
Others say, if you DON'T follow god, then you are an error-slave.I say, if you are an error-slave, how can you be expected to identify "the truth"?????????????????????It becomes willy nilly, doesn't it, if you have no fixed and absolute reference point?
No, we are not what God intended since the Fall.Your hypothetical god should plan ahead a little better.I guess "omniscience" is out-the-window?
That purpose demonstrates to us that without God we are in a sea of moral relativism.
Different families develop unique customs.Dolphins, wolves, and apes all have eccentric customs they pass down to their children.By instinct.And learned behavior.
Do they think and reason that eating another animal is wrong? Do they debate whether one takes the prey from another is wrong or do they just do it if they are stronger and are able to do so? Do they have elaborate laws on what is an is not to be done?For example, apes will sometimes [1] make a false alarm call to scare the troop away from a choice piece of food, but if they are caught (lying and stealing), the troop beats them senseless.
Okay. How is that morally good? Behaviour is what is. How does what is correspond to what ought to be? Perhaps it keeps you alive. Are you saying that makes it moral? Whatever keeps you alive is morally acceptable?
For example, apes will sometimes [1] make a false alarm call to scare the troop away from a choice piece of food, but if they are caught (lying and stealing), the troop beats them senseless.[1] How is that immoral?
There are many external pieces of evidence and proof than just me.Why should that matter?
If you have a personal relationship with an all-powerful god, who cares if anyone believes you?
Yours, to date, depends solely on yourself as a reliable witness.When you say "depends", what are you talking about. Thog is non-contingent.
Why should I believe you?YOU SHOULDN'T.NEVER TRUST SOMEONE ELSE'S GNOSIS.FIND YOUR OWN GNOSIS.
Who else believes in this Thog and where is this documented?Thog created the concept of religion a hundred thousand years ago and all religions are aspects of Thog.
All religions are evidence of this.
If you don't believe me, it's because Thog doesn't want you to believe me.
Are there 66 canonical ancient writings we call the Bible? Yes or no?Are you Catholic? Because if you're not Catholic, you might want to figure out how the Council of Nicaea cherry-picked the early Christian writings.
Do these writings all convey information about the being called God therein as to His speaking to them and revealing information to humanity?Well, I know the Book Of Mormon certainly does.
Is that a true statement that they do recount such things? Yes or no?That's the "unverifiable" part.
Others say, if you DON'T follow god, then you are an error-slave.I say, if you are an error-slave, how can you be expected to identify "the truth"?????????????????????It becomes willy nilly, doesn't it, if you have no fixed and absolute reference point?Your hypothetical god must be a moron if they expect error-slaves to be able to figure out which religion is "the right one".
How is anyone supposed to know?
That purpose demonstrates to us that without God we are in a sea of moral relativism.Even with a hypothetical god, we're still in a "sea of moral relativism".I've never heard any Christian anywhere ever demonstrate a comprehensive list of moral AXIOMS.Please make your moral AXIOMS EXPLICIT.
Okay. How is that morally good? Behaviour is what is. How does what is correspond to what ought to be? Perhaps it keeps you alive. Are you saying that makes it moral? Whatever keeps you alive is morally acceptable?Apparently, at least in animals, the most successful strategies promote survival of the species.
For example, apes will sometimes [1] make a false alarm call to scare the troop away from a choice piece of food, but if they are caught (lying and stealing), the troop beats them senseless.[1] How is that immoral?It's two of the same behaviors identified in your magical ten-commandments.Lying and stealing.
Please make your moral AXIOMS EXPLICIT.Moral laws stem for ten.
What all these laws and the others boil down to is doing unto others what you would want them to do to you. Do you want someone to murder you, steal from you, lie to you, cheat on you, want what is yours? Then you should treat others the same way.
1. Is the one making the alarm aware they are lying?
2. Do they know they are stealing?
Apparently, at least in animals, the most successful strategies promote survival of the species.In a universe devoid of meaning why does it matter what animals do?
Why are you creating meaning in what is ultimately meaningless?
Why do you continually look for meaning and find it significant?
You continually borrow from my Christain worldview, not an atheistic or materialistic worldview.
Thus, you are inconsistent.
In an atheistic worldview, you are determined.
You are just a machine.
The way your electrochemical processes react to stimuli and outside influences such as your environment determines what you will do.
What is moral about that.
It is just the way things are. Why should my electrochemical functions or anyone else act in the same way? If they do, bonus. You live!
Your hypothetical god must be a moron if they expect error-slaves to be able to figure out which religion is "the right one".Now you are using ad hominem implications for what would it say about those who believe in this God? Are they morons too?
Can you show me that you are not a slave to those desires that control you?
I contend we are all slaves to something if you want to use the slave analogy.
It is by the grace of God, His mercy, and His revelation that we come to the truth. Take that statement however you want.
Would you please explain what you mean by this term?I'm a GNOSTIC DEIST.
I'm a GNOSTIC DEIST.Would you please explain what you mean by this term?
It is important to maintain a constant awareness of and vigilant respect of our epistemological limits.
Please make your moral AXIOMS EXPLICIT.Moral laws stem from ten.Would you say it is wrong to murder?You're missing the point. Why is it wrong to murder and how do we determine what constitutes murder?
What's the underlying principle?
What all these laws and the others boil down to is doing unto others what you would want them to do to you. Do you want someone to murder you, steal from you, lie to you, cheat on you, want what is yours? Then you should treat others the same way.What if I like having people attack me and test my strength so I go around attacking people to test their strength?
This "principle" is fundamentally SUBJECTIVE.
I want MORAL MATHEMATICS. I want to be able to calculate how morally "right" or "wrong" an action or inaction is WITHOUT contextual SUBJECTIVE OPINION. Like this, [LINK]
What is wrong with murder? It is the intentional and malicious taking of innocent life.
What's the underlying principle?The underlying principle is that 1) all human beings have a basic right to live, 2) murder takes away that right, 3) all human beings should be treated equally under the law or there is no justice.
What if I like having people attack me and test my strength so I go around attacking people to test their strength?Then you live by the fallacy of might makes right.
Why should that matter?Because the truth matters. Because anyone can make a delusional claim or believe something that is not true.
