Is morality objective or subjective?

[Dubious]

Buddy, if Biblical is incest bothers you; wait till you gear about Evolutionary incest.

We all come from a single common ancestor.

This may be a good place to start...



The resemblance is uncanny!

[Age]

Is that why you find it particularly galling when science undermines or contradicts the Bible? It must seem like a sort of betrayal.

Do you find it particularly galling when new science undermines or contradicts the old science? It must seem like some sort of betrayal.

From where I'm looking science is simply the process of Orthodox Christian process of theosis. But instead of getting closer and closer to (being unified with) God, it pursues unification with reality/nature. It pursues Truth.

Whatever that is.

Is there anyone here who thinks or believes that the 'God' word and 'Reality/Nature' could not be necessarily the same?

If yes, then why?

[Age]

It's long been proven to be as Hitchens wrote:

I love it when people use passive voice to hide their lack of substance. It's "been proven," has it?

Well, Mr. Hitchens, I'm quite certain, knows he was wrong now.

Mr. Hitchens knew that he was going to know as much after he died as before he was born...and so will you. Otherwise, you haven't refuted anything I wrote which proves to me, among a myriad of other times, that you're incapable.

To repeat the question:

If your brain tells you to believe in the bible, why do you believe that without any encountered skepticism?

If people like "immanuel can", that is; those who are totally fixated onto and with 'their belief/s', then if "Immanuel can" was born into let us say the "Islam", then "Immanuel can" would be 'fighting' here for "islam", the quran, and the word of Allah, just as much as 'it' is fighting now for "christianity", the bible, and the word of God.

Now this is the very issue with people who have and hold onto 'beliefs'. No matter what period of time, nor what country, and culture these people are brought up in, whatever they were told 'to believe', they 'just do'. With as you suggest here 'without any skepticism at all.

And the funniest thing of this is realizing that if "immanuel can" was born into and grew up in "islam", then "immanuel can" would be one of the very ones worshiping for the very thing "immanuel can" 'now currently' hates and detests.

[Age]

No, seriously, after Yahweh plucked the original mating pair out of thin air, why did He feel it was necessary to give them penises and vaginas? Why make reproduction all about sex? About copulation. Incest to begin with, of course, but we all know just how tumultuous discussions of human sexuality have become of late. And then the part where He anchored the libido in the most primitive part of the brain...all but guaranteeing turbulent conflicts.

That's the best He could come up with?

Buddy, if Biblical is incest bothers you; wait till you gear about Evolutionary incest.

We all come from a single common ancestor.

Incest doesn't bother me. It does bother most Christians though. Also, in a No God world, nature doesn't send you to Hell if incest is a...sin?

In so-called 'God's world', which is just the One Universe, Itself, then if human beings are living in 'a world' that they do not like, 'a hell', then this is because adult human beings are just 'missing the mark', or 'sinning' in another word.

Obviously no one can get sent anywhere else, (heaven nor hell) after the Wrongly called 'death' of a human body. And, just as obvious is the fact that the way human beings behave, or misbehave, makes 'life' on earth a Heaven, or a Hell.

"Incest in the Bible refers to sexual relations between certain close kinship relationships which are prohibited by the Hebrew Bible. These prohibitions are found predominantly in Leviticus 18:7–18 and 20:11–21, but also in Deuteronomy." wiki

Well the children of "adam" and "eve" would have been fairly close kinship relationships, which as some believe is where all of you human beings came from, right?

Unless, of course, God was sculpting more 'couples' and placing them around the earth, which God never spoke about and thus mentioned before, in the bible.

Prohibited. Unless of course you're God.

Which close kinship relation was God, Itself, meant to be have sex with?

[Age]

Incest doesn't bother me

Congenital disabilities and genetic disorders don't bother you?!? Well, well! Aren't you thpethial?

It does bother most Christians though.

Congenital disabilities and genetic disorders bother most people.

Also, in a No God world, nature doesn't send you to Hell if incest is a...sin?

It is quite literally what nature does. Repetitive incest reduces genetic diversity which lands you in a very special kind of hell.

The hell of wide-spread congenital disabilities and genetic disorders.

"Incest in the Bible refers to sexual relations between certain close kinship relationships which are prohibited by the Hebrew Bible. These prohibitions are found predominantly in Leviticus 18:7–18 and 20:11–21, but also in Deuteronomy." wiki

Yeah! Because actively avoiding incest promotes genetic diversity and reduces the risk of congenital disabilities and genetic disorders!

Prohibited. Unless of course you're God.

Prohibited. Unless of course you're Nature.

You are special kind of stupid. The kind of stupid who only sees the letter, but not the spirit of the law.

You are the objectively immoral kind of stupid.

And, you are looking at, seeing, ,and have concluded all of 'this' completely 'objectively', and not 'subjectively' in anyway at all right "skepdick"?

[Skepdick]

Buddy, if Biblical is incest bothers you; wait till you gear about Evolutionary incest.

We all come from a single common ancestor.

This may be a good place to start...



The resemblance is uncanny!

Did you skip the biology/evolution class?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_univ ... n_ancestor

[Skepdick]

Is there anyone here who thinks or believes that the 'God' word and 'Reality/Nature' could not be necessarily the same?

If yes, then why?

Irrelevant. The focus-point was the methodology of iterative self-transformation. Whatever the pursuit.

Moral progress. Approaching the Moral. Moving away from the Immoral.
Negentropy. Distance to normality. Away from chaos/entropy.
Heideger's Becoming. The process of becoming. As opposed to unbecoming.
Self-improvement vs self-destruction. Whether the self is the individual; or the collective self. Closer and closer to being better. Further and further from being worse.
Science. Getting closer and closer to truth. As opposed to closer and closer to falsehood.

Spot the pattern.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theosis_( ... _theology)

[Age]

Is there anyone here who thinks or believes that the 'God' word and 'Reality/Nature' could not be necessarily the same?

If yes, then why?

Irrelevant. The focus-point was the methodology of iterative self-transformation. Whatever the pursuit.

Moral progress. Approaching the Moral. Moving away from the Immoral.

From where I'm looking science is simply the process of Orthodox Christian process of theosis. But instead of getting closer and closer to (being unified with) God, it pursues unification with reality/nature. It pursues Truth.

So, from where "skepdick" is looking from, science is simply a process, pursuing unification with Reality/Nature/God, Itself.

To "skepdick", 'science' pursues Truth, supposedly, even though "skepdick" has no clue what 'Truth' is anyway.


Negentropy. Distance to normality. Away from chaos/entropy.
Heideger's Becoming. The process of becoming. As opposed to unbecoming.
Self-improvement vs self-destruction. Whether the self is the individual; or the collective self. Closer and closer to being better. Further and further from being worse.
Science. Getting closer and closer to truth. As opposed to further and further from truth.

Spot the pattern.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theosis_( ... _theology)

Oh, and by the way, when, and if, you also come-to-know thy 'Self', then you will also see, and understand, what you are missing here, exactly?

[Will Bouwman]

...your belief that science is an offshoot of Christianity?

Well, I know the history. Verifiably, it is.

If it is so conducive to science, why did it take 1620 years of Christianity for the Novum Organum to occur to anyone?
Apart from being a muslim and being born before Francis Bacon, what did Ibn al-Haytham do that disqualifies him as a scientist?

[nemos]

What's "normal" about a person claiming to be a Christian and yet insisting on believing something he should know that the Bible says isn't true?

You'll have to explain that to me.

It is not characteristic of normal people to believe what is written, but rather to interpret it according to their own life experiences.
It is typical for normal people to doubt, to feel emotions, including fear, and to use things for their own interests, including religion with all its attributes.
Show me a normal Christian, in your understanding, who still retains the ability to be human, and not just a mindless puppet whose job it is to quote bible verses. I think that a properly programmed robot could be a true Christian in your sense.

By the way, where do you think the devil lives. Of course, you still have room for your thoughts.

[Skepdick]

...your belief that science is an offshoot of Christianity?

Well, I know the history. Verifiably, it is.

If it is so conducive to science, why did it take 1620 years of Christianity for the Novum Organum to occur to anyone?
Apart from being a muslim and being born before Francis Bacon, what did Ibn al-Haytham do that disqualifies him as a scientist?

Last I checked the scientific revolution started before Bacon published; and was actively happening concurrently with Bacon publishing. I'm thinking you are confusing science with philosophising about science. Again.

It's also cute how you are trying to pit Islam vs Christianity, when the very idea of "Natural law" originates from cultures which believe in a natural law-giver.

[Harbal]

Last I checked the scientific revolution started before Bacon published;

I'm guessing that means you googled it immediately before you posted.

[Will Bouwman]

Well, I know the history. Verifiably, it is.

If it is so conducive to science, why did it take 1620 years of Christianity for the Novum Organum to occur to anyone?
Apart from being a muslim and being born before Francis Bacon, what did Ibn al-Haytham do that disqualifies him as a scientist?

Last I checked the scientific revolution started before Bacon published; and was actively happening concurrently with Bacon publishing.

And if you check what I have written, you will find you are pushing against an open door.

I'm thinking you are confusing science with philosophising about science. Again.

I think you are confusing my view with that of Immanuel Can.

It's also cute how you are trying to pit Islam vs Christianity, when the very idea of "Natural law" originates from cultures which believe in a natural law-giver.

Well yes, Islam, Christianity and other cultures believe in a natural law giver, but there are others who don't believe there is a supernatural natural law giver.

[nemos]

...your belief that science is an offshoot of Christianity?

Well, I know the history. Verifiably, it is.

Science is only a tool meant to minimize the subjective component in the understanding of facts.
Not that religion couldn't use it, it's just not clear for what purpose.
Is it not enough for you to believe in what is written in the Bible?
You really want to question what is written and check for compliance with objectivity?
If the scriptures of the Bible are confirmed, then you will be able to proudly proclaim that you knew the truth even without any science.
But what will you do if the facts turn out to be contrary to what is written? Will you change the scriptures or their interpretation, similar to the prophecies of Nosterdamus?

[Skepdick]

Last I checked the scientific revolution started before Bacon published;

I'm guessing that means you googled it immediately before you posted.

As a ball-park estimate you don't know (without looking it up) that the Renaissance started around the 1500s ?

1500 is less than 1620. Google it, or consult a calculator if you don't believe me.