I read posts here that call different things, "harmful to humanity." Others call something, "good" or "bad" or "evil."
A very simple question, who gets to decide the definition of "harmful to humanity" and what is there critieria? The same for "good," "bad," and "evil?" These are not material terms. If everything is material isn't there just "is" and not these moral declarations if one is being thoroughly atheist?
Help me understand your position so I am fair and honest about the views. Thanks.
The one thing he definitely won't do is admit he's wrong and that God is not perfect, timeless, moral or real.
Oh, even though God changed His Mind between the Old Testament and the New Testament? Why change if not to rectify a mistake?
Ahhh, I get about as tired of the slavery argument as you guys do the watchmaker argument.
Very thorough and not the "mistranslation" claim.
@WS - "Slavery argument" - OMG that is TOOOOO FUNNY! So, the way you guys weasel out of the FACT that slavery is condoned in the bible is by trying to re-define it, saying that "it wasn't as bad" as the slavery we had in America. Let me get this straight - a person can beat his "servant" and as long as he/she didn't die *within a couple of days*, everything is just peachy keen, but somehow that's not as bad as what we had in America.
Yes, we are tired of the watchmaker argument because it is invalid. You are tired of the slavery argument because it is indefensible.
I just read your link to the christian think tank article. It attempts to refute the immorality of the New Testament's apparent approval of slavery. It contrasts New Testament slavery with New World slavery. It concludes that form of slavery practiced during the New Testament period was MUCH NICER than the later slavery of Africans. In both forms of slavery, one person owns another person, and is granted the legal right to kill his slave. But in suggesting, as atheists often have the temerity to do, that god or the bible approved of slavery, we must not make the mistake of thinking of that holy, kindly, and perfectly reasonable NT slavery was unacceptable and cruel. Nonsense - it was damned wonderful to be a slave in those good old bible days! Just ask the white, christian apologists at the christian think tank.
Wretched Saint, if that lame excuse for slavery satisfies your ethical concerns, you did not really have any ethical concerns to begin with.
That link you provided COMPLETELY misses the point. The problem is not that MEN condoned slavery -- even if these were "holy" men like Paul. The problem is that GOD/JESUS condoned slavery.
It gets back to trying to have it both ways. Either God is perfect or he isn't. Either God is the source of morality or he isn't. The fact that God's morality is outdated PROVES that his morality is not timeless -- as morality from a perfect God would be.
Get it? God is not all he's cracked up to be. His own divinely-inspired scripture betrays him.
The FACT is that the Bible reflects the morality and level of ignorance that existed in the Biblical era and area . . . precisely as it MUST if it's written without the benefit of God's input. The Bible is NOT divinely inspired. God is NOT perfect. And that applies to BOTH the Old and New Testaments.
These simple facts are beyond the reach of apologetics. They can ONLY be ignored by denial.
And THAT is the truth.
But then again . . . you have faith. You don't really want the truth.
@ Atheist Exile - You rock! Put it there! Slam it down.
Why thanks, Mabel . . . are you married? :-)
Why thanks, Mabel . . . are you married? :-)
@ Atheist Exile - Why no AE, but I'm too busy eating meat to care about such things.
@WS I would like to know how you, as a supposed good person aren't totally ashamed by splitting hairs on "What is Slavery'. Slavery is slavery - and you have the arrogance and dare I say, ignorance to send Atheists to christainthinktank - where xians are justifying slavery in their bible. Unbelievable.
It's a trap!!! Some people argue for argument's sake. WS is now on my troll list...to be ignored.
After all of this debate, I think the answer is simple - we're all human with the ability to think and discuss the material world around us. At this point in time, we have no evidence of thoughts, ideas, writings, or discussions on moral behavior coming from any source other than humans. This certainly doesn't change just because someone way back when thought up an imaginary, magical being. To specifically address your question, we all use labels and some of these labels are less objective than others. In our view, even if you're a theist, there is no god deciding these things for you - so guess what your use of terms like good and evil is just as fuzzy and easily manipulated.