Originally posted by FMFStop badgering him. If you don't like the answer, stop asking the question... again and again and again.
Unbelievers ~ by definition ~ do not believe in "eternal life" and do not believe there are such things as "God's commands".
But of course, you're dodging. My question was: Why are you directing your [b]"Christians are not to be unloving to people [...] because Christ supported being loving" advice at me ~ a non-Christian ~ rather than the Christians at which it ought to be directed?[/b]
Originally posted by Suzianneyou'll be the first to know fairy cakes, no worries.
No doubt they do not know the 'real' you.
But of course, I'm calling this representation of you that you present on these forums as the 'real' you. Do let us know if that is not the case, would you?
Originally posted by SuzianneKingOnPoint is talking to me as if he thinks I am a believer in Christ on some level. This gap in perception is what is driving the discussion that we are having.
Stop badgering him. If you don't like the answer, stop asking the question... again and again and again.
GoogleFudge Sent
================================
Originally posted by KingOnPoint
Without God, there is no morality.
Absolutely wrong.
Secular morality is not only possible but vastly superior to subjective theistic morality.
You have to be utterly ignorant or stupid [or evil] to claim otherwise.
================================
If there is no God, then whatever a human being or more than one says something is "morality" is irrelevant and a waste of effort. Without God, we have no more right to call anything a noun so that it comes into existence.
We have no power over another when it comes to making rules for another. And without God, there is no evil. You might call it "evil," but you have no power to bring "evil" into existence by your calling it so.
Our Creator is the one who rules over us. Without God, humans do not rule over others' spiritual conditions.
King James Version
================
Romans 7: 5 - 8
For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
Romans 5: 12, 13
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Originally posted by KingOnPointI don't think there is the difficulty with defining the word "evil" that you seem to suggest. Furthermore I think its meaning is pretty well understood. I would offer a definition of "evil" as being egregiously immoral and sociopathic action that is gravely detrimental and/or damaging to others, and which stems from an abject lack or even absence of empathy and compassion.
We have no power over another when it comes to making rules for another. And without God, there is no evil. You might call it "evil," but you have no power to bring "evil" into existence by your calling it so.
Originally posted by FMFJust because we label something doesn't mean it has come into existence. We are not creators of anything that I know of in our universe. Innovation is not creation, "something out of nothing." Our labels on things do not bring them into existence. Labels are only descriptions of what we might want to communicate. But we don't give them power to come into existence with any value for any other human being. Without God there is no eternal consequence for what someone might call "evil." Without God, there is no such thing as evil. Our label is vain.
I don't think there is the difficulty with defining the word "evil" that you seem to suggest. Furthermore I think its meaning is pretty well understood. I would offer a definition of "evil" as being egregiously immoral and sociopathic action that is gravely detrimental and/or damaging to others, and which stems from an abject lack or even absence of empathy and compassion.
God is the Creator.
Originally posted by KingOnPointThere is definitely "evil" in the world and people who are both religious and not religious, who are superstitious and not superstitious, who declare themselves to be immortal and those who do not, they know what "evil" is, they know it exists, and they experience it and some even perpetrate it. If you want to believe that your God figure created "evil" and is therefore responsible for its existence, then that is fine by me.
Just because we label something doesn't mean it has come into existence. We are not creators of anything that I know of in our universe. Innovation is not creation, "something out of nothing." Our labels on things do not bring them into existence. Labels are only descriptions of what we might want to communicate. But we don't give them power to come ...[text shortened]... what someone might call "evil." Without God, there is no such thing as evil. Our label is vain.
Originally posted by FMFWhat are you blathering on about?
There is definitely "evil" in the world and people who are both religious and not religious, who are superstitious and not superstitious, who declare themselves to be immortal and those who do not, they know what "evil" is, they know it exists, and they experience it and some even perpetrate it. If you want to believe that your God figure created "evil" and is therefore responsible for its existence, then that is fine by me.
Originally posted by FMFNo thanks. If you started on page 18 and it's now page 32, then you've probably repeated yourself several times already.
I've been in discussion with KingOnPoint [Christian love, "sin", morality, evil] since about page 18. You should contribute if you've got anything pertinent or interesting to say.