OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 01, 2014, 09:12:08 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Orthodox priest debates Atheist  (Read 4485 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,254



« on: November 21, 2010, 10:04:33 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2010, 10:27:09 PM »

I know a bit about Matt's background, he was on his way to become a pastor in the Baptist faith. It was during which he read a passage in Isaiah, I believe, which had one of the prophets that was going to be attacked by a group of 'boys' and two she bears came forth and slaughted the group in protection of the prophet. Matt argued that a loving God wouldn't do such, however it's quite evident that the group was going against the will of God and had to be judged accordingly, but also the group represented a threat.

Anyway he started picking a part the Bible bit by bit, atheists love this guy because of his Biblical knowledge.

He runs a wiki and message board called Iron Chariots (a reference to the Judges 1:19 passage). I've registed on the MB but it seems like it is defunct for it seems no new memberships can be approved due to the nonexistence of an adminstrator. There's not much discussion going on either.

I'll watch the youtube video parts when I get home, but what's funny about him if you ever seen any of his videos he'll say "I don't know" to certain things. I guess in that respect atleast he is being honest, unlike other atheists who will say anything just in order to debunk a presenting argument.

The problem with atheism is it is a road that's only logical end is in nihilism. Also when debating with atheists the problem they have is spritiual not logical.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2010, 10:29:05 PM by Achronos » Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
LakaYaRabb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 209



WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2010, 10:35:51 PM »

There can be morality outside of Christianity, even in atheism. The Fathers of the Church speak of "natural virtues" that we have. You could even speak of a tendency to do good. If they are not cultivated, they are lost. These virtue can never be perfected nor lead to a completely moral life without God. You have to be baptized and work synergistically with God to cultivate true virtue.

The question is what kind of morality? Ultimately, it is an inwardly, empty, selfish morality.
Logged
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,254



« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2010, 10:43:23 PM »

I know a bit about Matt's background, he was on his way to become a pastor in the Baptist faith. It was during which he read a passage in Isaiah, I believe, which had one of the prophets that was going to be attacked by a group of 'boys' and two she bears came forth and slaughted the group in protection of the prophet. Matt argued that a loving God wouldn't do such, however it's quite evident that the group was going against the will of God and had to be judged accordingly, but also the group represented a threat.

Anyway he started picking a part the Bible bit by bit, atheists love this guy because of his Biblical knowledge.

He runs a wiki and message board called Iron Chariots (a reference to the Judges 1:19 passage). I've registed on the MB but it seems like it is defunct for it seems no new memberships can be approved due to the nonexistence of an adminstrator. There's not much discussion going on either.

I'll watch the youtube video parts when I get home, but what's funny about him if you ever seen any of his videos he'll say "I don't know" to certain things. I guess in that respect atleast he is being honest, unlike other atheists who will say anything just in order to debunk a presenting argument.

The problem with atheism is it is a road that's only logical end is in nihilism. Also when debating with atheists the problem they have is spritiual not logical.

My philosophy professor is an incredibly smart and gifted metaphysician in addition to being a Jesuit. He pointed out the flaws to us in class about how atheists deny any transcendent being or force and say that there can be morality outside of that. When it gets down to it, morality is confined to themselves (moral relativism), but they lack consistency in that. They are the first to complain if their package arrives late or someone cuts them off in traffic.

Just my thoughts.

In Christ,
Andrew

EDIT: Uh oh, Fr. Hans is not wearing a Roman collar....  Wink
« Last Edit: November 21, 2010, 10:55:23 PM by Shlomlokh » Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2010, 11:47:00 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,254



« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2010, 11:56:12 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

How is morality irrelevant? You don't believe it gives us a standard in which to live our lives? If it is irrelevant as you say, how does it make us to be anything more than cunning beasts waiting to be fed and rubbed against?

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2010, 12:10:49 AM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

How is morality irrelevant? You don't believe it gives us a standard in which to live our lives? If it is irrelevant as you say, how does it make us to be anything more than cunning beasts waiting to be fed and rubbed against?

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew

Maybe we are nothing more than 'cunning beasts', 'better' does not logically imply 'more true'; maybe humanity is not what you want it to be, maybe it's much darker and much more 'animalistic' than you'd like to believe?
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,973


black metal cat


« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2010, 12:12:31 AM »

I watched the first part, and bookmarked it, and may get to return again in the next couple days to watch further videos. I thought it was interesting, him mentioning the comprehension gulf problem, but applying it to morality instead of using it as a direct argument against the existence/irrelevance of God. I've sometimes thought that a version of this argument could be applied to the Christian God as it relates to eternal damnation. Thanks for the link, hopefully I'll remember to go back and listen to the rest...
Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,973


black metal cat


« Reply #8 on: November 22, 2010, 12:13:43 AM »

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

I'd say that this is a false dichotomy. I happen to enjoy both. Smiley
Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #9 on: November 22, 2010, 01:03:36 AM »

eh, had to switch to umbcOCF's YouTube versions... Reading the stupid comments by some on there was distracting me from the video itself.
The arrogance of some of those people is appalling, especially since most of them know nothing about our faith and simply treat us like they would like to treat others that they see as irrational, uneducated, primitive drones that know nothing about Science and reason.

Why can't people on both sides learn to have a constructive, respectful discussion?
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #10 on: November 22, 2010, 01:23:04 AM »

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

I'd say that this is a false dichotomy. I happen to enjoy both. Smiley

Hear, hear!
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,831



« Reply #11 on: November 22, 2010, 01:25:47 AM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it,
and yet you feel compelled to comment.

Quote
but I must ask,
no, you need not.
Quote
what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd.
then the enlightenment folks should have quit their bitchin' about the Inquisition.

Quote
Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.
just has everything to do with the agency of the human person in reality.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,831



« Reply #12 on: November 22, 2010, 01:26:17 AM »

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

I'd say that this is a false dichotomy. I happen to enjoy both. Smiley

Hear, hear!
Deaf, deaf!
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #13 on: November 22, 2010, 01:33:17 AM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it,
and yet you feel compelled to comment.

Quote
but I must ask,
no, you need not.
Quote
what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd.
then the enlightenment folks should have quit their bitchin' about the Inquisition.

Quote
Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.
just has everything to do with the agency of the human person in reality.

You have a real gift, to be able to make words flow forth from you and, at the same time, say nothing at all...good job, keep it up!
« Last Edit: November 22, 2010, 01:35:16 AM by GiC » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,831



« Reply #14 on: November 22, 2010, 01:58:51 AM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it,
and yet you feel compelled to comment.

Quote
but I must ask,
no, you need not.
Quote
what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd.
then the enlightenment folks should have quit their bitchin' about the Inquisition.

Quote
Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.
just has everything to do with the agency of the human person in reality.

You have a real gift, to be able to make words flow forth from you and, at the same time, say nothing at all...good job, keep it up!
and yet you feel compelled to comment.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #15 on: November 22, 2010, 01:59:37 AM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it,
and yet you feel compelled to comment.

Quote
but I must ask,
no, you need not.
Quote
what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd.
then the enlightenment folks should have quit their bitchin' about the Inquisition.

Quote
Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.
just has everything to do with the agency of the human person in reality.

You have a real gift, to be able to make words flow forth from you and, at the same time, say nothing at all...good job, keep it up!
and yet you feel compelled to comment.

Slow night.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #16 on: November 22, 2010, 02:10:26 AM »

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

I'd say that this is a false dichotomy. I happen to enjoy both. Smiley

Which do you like better, the porno or the literature? Or do you find them equally satisfying?
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,973


black metal cat


« Reply #17 on: November 22, 2010, 02:19:06 AM »

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

I'd say that this is a false dichotomy. I happen to enjoy both. Smiley

Which do you like better, the porno or the literature? Or do you find them equally satisfying?

They fulfill different needs, so I'm not sure how fair it'd be for me to compare them. If I was forced to decide... well, I'm not a big fiction reader, but if it was a choice between books in general and porn, books would win hands down. Hmm, then again, it's been 17 months since I've had sex, that's an important factor...  Maybe that's a little too much info, but hey, you did ask about my satisfaction vis-a-vis pornography, so you sort of let the door open there...  angel
Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #18 on: November 22, 2010, 02:25:01 AM »

My previous experiences with porn have shown me that using it makes me more tempted to go out and have sex, not less. J--king off with porn isn't enough eventually, I would need to go act out the fantasy.

I don't have sex either, and the best way to keep me from doing it is to channel those energies elsewhere, like in sports.  Smiley

You have a different experience?
« Last Edit: November 22, 2010, 02:25:41 AM by lubeltri » Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #19 on: November 22, 2010, 02:27:17 AM »

Haha, I feel like I'm on HBO's Real Sex at 1am. Perhaps it's time I went to bed!  Wink
Logged
serb1389
Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
Global Moderator
Merarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 8,377


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2010, 10:27:39 AM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything?

If you had watched the first 3 minutes of the first video you would see that the ENTIRE debate is centered around.....guess what!?!?  MORALITY!  (the topic of the debate is morality and the role of God (or not) in it)

Sorry...couldn't pass the opportunity to poke fun.   Wink Cheesy Grin Grin

Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 13,640


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2010, 01:07:29 PM »

Quote from: GiC
Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd.


Until somebody does something to youRoll Eyes

 police

 laugh
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #22 on: November 22, 2010, 10:46:35 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

Objective morality isn't.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,943


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2010, 11:04:03 PM »

Oh good. Universtiy of Maryland...

Went there
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #24 on: November 23, 2010, 04:51:37 AM »

Just watched the debate. Hans Jacobse, I would buy him a beer for that, I gained immense respect for him and his knowledge is fascinating. His depth is shown by how Matt after Hans presented his first argument, struggled in the comprehension of the certain arguments presented forth.

What I found most interesting is that Matt says he will change his belief based on evidence. Therefore the question must be rasied, since he was once a baptist, what kind of evidence was there that God did not exist, because obviously such evidence would make you become an atheist which Matt has become.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 23, 2010, 05:41:46 AM »

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

Objective morality isn't.

What exactly falls under this so called "objective morality"?
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #26 on: November 23, 2010, 10:47:08 AM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it,
and yet you feel compelled to comment.

Quote
but I must ask,
no, you need not.
Quote
what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd.
then the enlightenment folks should have quit their bitchin' about the Inquisition.

Quote
Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.
just has everything to do with the agency of the human person in reality.

You have a real gift, to be able to make words flow forth from you and, at the same time, say nothing at all...good job, keep it up!
You are both blessed in that respect. laugh
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,254



« Reply #27 on: November 23, 2010, 11:37:29 AM »

Just watched the debate. Hans Jacobse, I would buy him a beer for that, I gained immense respect for him and his knowledge is fascinating. His depth is shown by how Matt after Hans presented his first argument, struggled in the comprehension of the certain arguments presented forth.

What I found most interesting is that Matt says he will change his belief based on evidence. Therefore the question must be rasied, since he was once a baptist, what kind of evidence was there that God did not exist, because obviously such evidence would make you become an atheist which Matt has become.
I also appreciate how he said he was willing to admit he did not know something. It's a breath of fresh air to see an atheist who does not believe he possesses all knowledge (not saying all of them do, mind you. )

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #28 on: November 23, 2010, 12:07:34 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

In the words of The Dude, that's just... like... your opinion man.
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #29 on: November 23, 2010, 12:27:33 PM »

What I kind of take issue with is the negative reaction to Fr. Hans Jacobse statement about bloodshed, concentration camps and gulags...
He did say that he wasn't speaking that against Matt, but rather against the Atheist movement.

Not only that, but someone brought up Godwin's Law, which in my opinion, was just immature and stupid. There are connections, and it isn't like we are talking about totally different subjects. Atheism, Hitler, Communism and Morality were within the scope of the discussion (that is, God & Morality and if it can exist apart from him).

I think it's going to be interesting in the next century to see how upcoming generations such as my own (Generation Y) and others decide to react to 20th Century movements that were driven by Atheism, Marxism, Fascism and Darwinism... I have a feeling it might end up just like the Sexual Revolution in the 60s, just being thrown aside and rejected by new generations...
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #30 on: November 23, 2010, 12:29:35 PM »

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

Objective morality isn't.

What exactly falls under this so called "objective morality"?

Fair question...but I'm thinking they just throw in the word 'objective' to feel good about themselves.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2010, 12:30:51 PM by GiC » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #31 on: November 23, 2010, 12:32:30 PM »

What I kind of take issue with is the negative reaction to Fr. Hans Jacobse statement about bloodshed, concentration camps and gulags...
He did say that he wasn't speaking that against Matt, but rather against the Atheist movement.

Not only that, but someone brought up Godwin's Law, which in my opinion, was just immature and stupid. There are connections, and it isn't like we are talking about totally different subjects. Atheism, Hitler, Communism and Morality were within the scope of the discussion (that is, God & Morality and if it can exist apart from him).

I think it's going to be interesting in the next century to see how upcoming generations such as my own (Generation Y) and others decide to react to 20th Century movements that were driven by Atheism, Marxism, Fascism and Darwinism... I have a feeling it might end up just like the Sexual Revolution in the 60s, just being thrown aside and rejected by new generations...

Have you looked at society lately? The sexual revolution is now the status quo...it's just no longer 'revolutionary', it's normal. Look around you and get used to it, for better or worse, this is how society's evolving.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 23, 2010, 12:38:36 PM »

What I kind of take issue with is the negative reaction to Fr. Hans Jacobse statement about bloodshed, concentration camps and gulags...
He did say that he wasn't speaking that against Matt, but rather against the Atheist movement.

Not only that, but someone brought up Godwin's Law, which in my opinion, was just immature and stupid. There are connections, and it isn't like we are talking about totally different subjects. Atheism, Hitler, Communism and Morality were within the scope of the discussion (that is, God & Morality and if it can exist apart from him).

I think it's going to be interesting in the next century to see how upcoming generations such as my own (Generation Y) and others decide to react to 20th Century movements that were driven by Atheism, Marxism, Fascism and Darwinism... I have a feeling it might end up just like the Sexual Revolution in the 60s, just being thrown aside and rejected by new generations...

Have you looked at society lately? The sexual revolution is now the status quo...it's just no longer 'revolutionary', it's normal. Look around you and get used to it, for better or worse, this is how society's devolving.

There, fixed.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #33 on: November 23, 2010, 12:57:00 PM »

What I kind of take issue with is the negative reaction to Fr. Hans Jacobse statement about bloodshed, concentration camps and gulags...
He did say that he wasn't speaking that against Matt, but rather against the Atheist movement.

Not only that, but someone brought up Godwin's Law, which in my opinion, was just immature and stupid. There are connections, and it isn't like we are talking about totally different subjects. Atheism, Hitler, Communism and Morality were within the scope of the discussion (that is, God & Morality and if it can exist apart from him).

I think it's going to be interesting in the next century to see how upcoming generations such as my own (Generation Y) and others decide to react to 20th Century movements that were driven by Atheism, Marxism, Fascism and Darwinism... I have a feeling it might end up just like the Sexual Revolution in the 60s, just being thrown aside and rejected by new generations...

Have you looked at society lately? The sexual revolution is now the status quo...it's just no longer 'revolutionary', it's normal. Look around you and get used to it, for better or worse, this is how society's evolving.

Have you seen Generation Y?

Generation Y typically rejects values from Generation X and the Baby Boomer Generation. This includes the Sexual Revolution, Sexual Promiscuity in our Generation is not looked upon as something that is good or honorable, free love is not ascribed to.
I even notice this being in college. Our Generation doesn't really believe in abstinence before marriage, but that doesn't mean we believe you can sleep with whoever, whenever you want to. People in Generation Y tend to be monogamous, yet do not remain abstinent.

There is a BIG difference between the Sexual Revolution of the 60s and what we see in upcoming generations today. Even what you seen in the media (in advertisements, movies, etc...) is often not accepted by youth.

Even from what I've seen growing up in this generation, people living a sexual life as they would have during the sexual revolution are seen in very negative lights and aren't respected. It is expected that you have a monogamous relationship (and for our generation, it doesn't matter if you're heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual).

Again, you might want to learn about the up-coming generations. It seems that the upcoming generations have viewed Generation X, and especially the Baby Boomers as causing damage to the world (especially in ecological terms) and they tend to reject those generations and their values, and are typically holding more traditional values (though for different reasons, and in different ways than other generations)
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,831



« Reply #34 on: November 23, 2010, 01:11:42 PM »

What I kind of take issue with is the negative reaction to Fr. Hans Jacobse statement about bloodshed, concentration camps and gulags...
He did say that he wasn't speaking that against Matt, but rather against the Atheist movement.

Not only that, but someone brought up Godwin's Law, which in my opinion, was just immature and stupid. There are connections, and it isn't like we are talking about totally different subjects. Atheism, Hitler, Communism and Morality were within the scope of the discussion (that is, God & Morality and if it can exist apart from him).

I think it's going to be interesting in the next century to see how upcoming generations such as my own (Generation Y) and others decide to react to 20th Century movements that were driven by Atheism, Marxism, Fascism and Darwinism... I have a feeling it might end up just like the Sexual Revolution in the 60s, just being thrown aside and rejected by new generations...

Have you looked at society lately?
LOL. Greeky writes from San Francisco...

Quote
The sexual revolution is now the status quo...it's just no longer 'revolutionary', it's normal. Look around you and get used to it, for better or worse, this is how society's evolving.
like nuclear proliferation.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #35 on: November 23, 2010, 02:53:18 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

How is morality irrelevant? You don't believe it gives us a standard in which to live our lives? If it is irrelevant as you say, how does it make us to be anything more than cunning beasts waiting to be fed and rubbed against?

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew

Maybe we are nothing more than 'cunning beasts',
Then why bother pursuing things like personal freedom? Isn't that what you value above all?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #36 on: November 23, 2010, 04:28:22 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

How is morality irrelevant? You don't believe it gives us a standard in which to live our lives? If it is irrelevant as you say, how does it make us to be anything more than cunning beasts waiting to be fed and rubbed against?

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew

Maybe we are nothing more than 'cunning beasts',
Then why bother pursuing things like personal freedom? Isn't that what you value above all?

Because it has been objectively demonstrated to advance a people and a society, it is our natural condition, it is the condition in which we evolved and our existence began...we are by nature free entities, to be otherwise is to go against our very essence.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #37 on: November 23, 2010, 04:43:04 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

How is morality irrelevant? You don't believe it gives us a standard in which to live our lives? If it is irrelevant as you say, how does it make us to be anything more than cunning beasts waiting to be fed and rubbed against?

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew

Maybe we are nothing more than 'cunning beasts',
Then why bother pursuing things like personal freedom? Isn't that what you value above all?

Because it has been objectively demonstrated to advance a people and a society, it is our natural condition, it is the condition in which we evolved and our existence began...we are by nature free entities, to be otherwise is to go against our very essence.
1. Why should we bother advancing our natural condition. Since life involves more suffering than joy for most, why not just nuke the planet?
2. How can an atheist believe in freewill or even a human nature/essence? I think that if I were to be an atheist, Marx and Sartre would make much more sense on this point.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2010, 04:43:42 PM by Papist » Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #38 on: November 23, 2010, 07:15:41 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

How is morality irrelevant? You don't believe it gives us a standard in which to live our lives? If it is irrelevant as you say, how does it make us to be anything more than cunning beasts waiting to be fed and rubbed against?

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew

Maybe we are nothing more than 'cunning beasts',
Then why bother pursuing things like personal freedom? Isn't that what you value above all?

Because it has been objectively demonstrated to advance a people and a society, it is our natural condition, it is the condition in which we evolved and our existence began...we are by nature free entities, to be otherwise is to go against our very essence.
1. Why should we bother advancing our natural condition. Since life involves more suffering than joy for most, why not just nuke the planet?

Because survival and progress is programmed into us from our evolutionary past, it's only natural that we desire these things; without them, we would not exist in the first place.

Quote
2. How can an atheist believe in freewill or even a human nature/essence? I think that if I were to be an atheist, Marx and Sartre would make much more sense on this point.

Well, I don't know about freedom of will, I don't know that any truly have that. Our will is programmed by our genes, by our neural pathways, by our upbringing, by our environment in general, the uncertainty principle allows for some randomness but not in a deterministic manner. As for our nature/essence, that's nothing more than our programming, arguably our initial programming independent of random influences and environmental interaction...it's the original source code to our existence, if you will.

But these have little to do with freedom in the social/political sense, this freedom is the natural environment of mankind, it is the proper interaction between the neural network that is our brain and everything we encounter...it is a signaling issue, not a computational one, if you will.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,831



« Reply #39 on: November 23, 2010, 07:26:00 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

How is morality irrelevant? You don't believe it gives us a standard in which to live our lives? If it is irrelevant as you say, how does it make us to be anything more than cunning beasts waiting to be fed and rubbed against?

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew

Maybe we are nothing more than 'cunning beasts',
Then why bother pursuing things like personal freedom? Isn't that what you value above all?

Because it has been objectively demonstrated to advance a people and a society, it is our natural condition, it is the condition in which we evolved and our existence began...we are by nature free entities, to be otherwise is to go against our very essence.
Not in the survival of the fitest, where the weak always yield to the strong. Hobbes' State of Nature-unlike Montesquieu's, Rousseau's and Locke's-is found in nature.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #40 on: November 24, 2010, 02:40:16 PM »

What I kind of take issue with is the negative reaction to Fr. Hans Jacobse statement about bloodshed, concentration camps and gulags...
He did say that he wasn't speaking that against Matt, but rather against the Atheist movement.

Not only that, but someone brought up Godwin's Law, which in my opinion, was just immature and stupid. There are connections, and it isn't like we are talking about totally different subjects. Atheism, Hitler, Communism and Morality were within the scope of the discussion (that is, God & Morality and if it can exist apart from him).

I think it's going to be interesting in the next century to see how upcoming generations such as my own (Generation Y) and others decide to react to 20th Century movements that were driven by Atheism, Marxism, Fascism and Darwinism... I have a feeling it might end up just like the Sexual Revolution in the 60s, just being thrown aside and rejected by new generations...

Have you looked at society lately? The sexual revolution is now the status quo...it's just no longer 'revolutionary', it's normal. Look around you and get used to it, for better or worse, this is how society's evolving.

Have you seen Generation Y?

Generation Y typically rejects values from Generation X and the Baby Boomer Generation. This includes the Sexual Revolution, Sexual Promiscuity in our Generation is not looked upon as something that is good or honorable, free love is not ascribed to.
I even notice this being in college. Our Generation doesn't really believe in abstinence before marriage, but that doesn't mean we believe you can sleep with whoever, whenever you want to. People in Generation Y tend to be monogamous, yet do not remain abstinent.

There is a BIG difference between the Sexual Revolution of the 60s and what we see in upcoming generations today. Even what you seen in the media (in advertisements, movies, etc...) is often not accepted by youth.

Even from what I've seen growing up in this generation, people living a sexual life as they would have during the sexual revolution are seen in very negative lights and aren't respected. It is expected that you have a monogamous relationship (and for our generation, it doesn't matter if you're heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual).

Again, you might want to learn about the up-coming generations. It seems that the upcoming generations have viewed Generation X, and especially the Baby Boomers as causing damage to the world (especially in ecological terms) and they tend to reject those generations and their values, and are typically holding more traditional values (though for different reasons, and in different ways than other generations)

ISTM you are both partially right. It is undeniable that the so-called sexual revolution of the 60s and 70s, together with the ensuing feminist and gay rights movements, has had an effect - most likely permanent - on public morality and sexual ethics. If "Generation Y" is different from the Baby Boomers and Generation X, it is not so in that it's sexual ethics represent a return to pre-1960s standards. So there has been an evolution/devolution.

But the sexual ethics of the latest generation are indeed not those of the sexual revolution, or even those of Seinfeld. There has indeed been a movement away from the extremes of the 60s and 70s. Glory to God!

When I was an anarchist, there were always some radical polyamorists around, but even in such far left circles they were not the norm and were generally looked upon as a bit of a curiosity.

So while we don't have a return to traditional morality, we also have a rejection of some, though not all, of anti-traditional morality.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2010, 02:43:40 PM by JLatimer » Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #41 on: November 24, 2010, 03:06:14 PM »

Quote
The sexual revolution is now the status quo...it's just no longer 'revolutionary', it's normal. Look around you and get used to it, for better or worse, this is how society's evolving.
like nuclear proliferation.

Good point. If there is any moral concept that is outdated, it's the idea of "progress". What's funny to me is that our village atheists here on OC.net (and generally speaking in society at large), while often implying that they understand and follow Nietzsche, do not really grasp how utterly meaningless the idea of "progress" is since Nietzsche. Claiming to be thoroughgoing and liberated anti-traditionalists, they are usually really just Enlightenment Traditionalists, which is to say, Modernists. Moreover, they are almost always anti-authoritarian democrats (to be clear, I am not referring to the Democratic party, but to the δέμος). Nietzsche  would not approve.  Smiley
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #42 on: November 24, 2010, 03:09:39 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

How is morality irrelevant? You don't believe it gives us a standard in which to live our lives? If it is irrelevant as you say, how does it make us to be anything more than cunning beasts waiting to be fed and rubbed against?

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew

Maybe we are nothing more than 'cunning beasts',
Then why bother pursuing things like personal freedom? Isn't that what you value above all?

Because it has been objectively demonstrated to advance a people and a society, it is our natural condition, it is the condition in which we evolved and our existence began...we are by nature free entities, to be otherwise is to go against our very essence.

How does Death figure into your construction of the human being as by nature free? And Eros?

On the other hand, if man is a 'cunning beast', or perhaps merely a featherless biped, why do you ascribe to him such outlandishly unbeastly characteristics as freedom?  laugh
« Last Edit: November 24, 2010, 03:16:47 PM by JLatimer » Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #43 on: November 26, 2010, 03:58:25 AM »

I have alot of respect for Matt given where he's come from. He's very intelligent, and in my opinion came across on top in this debate. Although the priest had some interesting statements, they didn't seem to be very coherently organized, (as he tended to wander) and I thought some of his comments associating secularism with nazi death camps etc. were unecessary and damaged his credibility with the audience quite a bit. He seemed a bit too "preachy" at times, and didn't answer the questions posed to him as directly or as effectively as I had hoped he would. Nonetheless, an interesting one, thanks for posting.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2010, 03:58:48 AM by Ortho_cat » Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #44 on: November 26, 2010, 04:05:01 AM »

Fr. Hans makes a good point in the Q&A segment saying that the man who reads literature and seeks to understand more will be a far more human person than the one who watches pornography all the time, who will become animalistic. I'm sure you know people in both categories and are more than capable of comparing them.  Smiley

I'd say that this is a false dichotomy. I happen to enjoy both. Smiley

hmm a little of column A, a little of column B, eh?  Cheesy
Logged
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #45 on: November 26, 2010, 09:26:26 AM »

As to whether one can have personal morality without religion, the answer seems clear enough to me: yes; I know lots of atheists and agnostics who are generally morally upstanding people. ISTM the questions that follow, however, are, what sort of morality(-ies)? and, are some moralities better than others? and, why does it matter?

First off, it doesn't seem to me a coincidence that most morally upstanding atheists living in Christian/post-Christian societies tend to espouse basically Christian morals. Why is that?

How does the atheist justify adherence to one morality amidst a multiplicity of possible moralities?

The last question, why does it matter?, is really just Ivan Karamazov's statement 'Without God, everything is permissible' in question form. An atheist certainly can be moral, but there doesn't seem to be any absolute reason why he should be; and without a should/ought, morality is dead.

Without God or the gods, each man must necessarily be his own moral arbiter. It is not enough to say, let the community decide: traditional societies have, rightly I think, always connected the community with the gods: 'our gods' defines 'our community'. The atheist society is necessarily a society of individuals, not a community.

As to public morality, which is to say, as to whether we can have a cohesive and just society, without religion, I would say that seems more difficult: on that question the historical verdict seems more likely to be in the negative.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2010, 09:45:18 AM by JLatimer » Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
StGeorge
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 707


St. George


« Reply #46 on: November 27, 2010, 07:08:34 PM »


The last question, why does it matter?, is really just Ivan Karamazov's statement 'Without God, everything is permissible' in question form. An atheist certainly can be moral, but there doesn't seem to be any absolute reason why he should be; and without a should/ought, morality is dead.

Without God or the gods, each man must necessarily be his own moral arbiter. It is not enough to say, let the community decide: traditional societies have, rightly I think, always connected the community with the gods: 'our gods' defines 'our community'. The atheist society is necessarily a society of individuals, not a community.

As to public morality, which is to say, as to whether we can have a cohesive and just society, without religion, I would say that seems more difficult: on that question the historical verdict seems more likely to be in the negative.

Something I've reflected on lately: if, as many atheists claim, there is no life after bodily death, then the universe ceases to exist when the person ceases to exist.  I do not mean this relationship along the lines of Berkleyan idealism but in the sense that, for the individual, the existence of reality itself fades concomitant with one's own fading out of existence.    

« Last Edit: November 27, 2010, 07:10:42 PM by StGeorge » Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #47 on: November 27, 2010, 07:21:10 PM »


The last question, why does it matter?, is really just Ivan Karamazov's statement 'Without God, everything is permissible' in question form. An atheist certainly can be moral, but there doesn't seem to be any absolute reason why he should be; and without a should/ought, morality is dead.

Without God or the gods, each man must necessarily be his own moral arbiter. It is not enough to say, let the community decide: traditional societies have, rightly I think, always connected the community with the gods: 'our gods' defines 'our community'. The atheist society is necessarily a society of individuals, not a community.

As to public morality, which is to say, as to whether we can have a cohesive and just society, without religion, I would say that seems more difficult: on that question the historical verdict seems more likely to be in the negative.

Something I've reflected on lately: if, as many atheists claim, there is no life after bodily death, then the universe ceases to exist when the person ceases to exist.  I do not mean this relationship along the lines of Berkleyan idealism but in the sense that, for the individual, the existence of reality itself fades concomitant with one's own fading out of existence.    



Just how they say how is started. Nothing to nothing.

Logged


I'm going to need this.
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #48 on: November 27, 2010, 07:32:44 PM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2010, 07:33:05 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,973


black metal cat


« Reply #49 on: November 29, 2010, 10:54:50 AM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,831



« Reply #50 on: December 07, 2010, 01:39:44 AM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #51 on: December 07, 2010, 03:06:05 AM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.

We are 'moral' for the same reason we value 'morality', it's programmed into us through millions of years of evolution as social animals. It's nothing metaphysical or mysterious, it's a simple matter of programming.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,831



« Reply #52 on: December 07, 2010, 03:55:22 AM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.

We are 'moral' for the same reason we value 'morality', it's programmed into us through millions of years of evolution as social animals. It's nothing metaphysical or mysterious, it's a simple matter of programming.
Who's "we"? I don't seem to recall you placing too much value on morality, nor claiming to be "moral."
Your determinism is showing. Which is a problem, because without free will, there is no such thing as the liberty of which you claim to be so excessively fond.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #53 on: December 07, 2010, 12:40:35 PM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.

We are 'moral' for the same reason we value 'morality', it's programmed into us through millions of years of evolution as social animals. It's nothing metaphysical or mysterious, it's a simple matter of programming.
Would a materialist have to subscribe to determinism?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #54 on: December 07, 2010, 12:53:28 PM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.

We are 'moral' for the same reason we value 'morality', it's programmed into us through millions of years of evolution as social animals. It's nothing metaphysical or mysterious, it's a simple matter of programming.
Who's "we"? I don't seem to recall you placing too much value on morality, nor claiming to be "moral."
Your determinism is showing. Which is a problem, because without free will, there is no such thing as the liberty of which you claim to be so excessively fond.

And yet, I tend not to murder, rape, or steal on a regular basis...what is commonly labeled 'morality' is little more than proper social behavior. The kind of behavior required for humans to live together. You seem to be over analyzing the whole issue, it's quite simple. As for liberty, that's nothing more than the lack of the use of violence by the state against her citizens. I don't see how 'determinism' matters one way or the other in that regard.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #55 on: December 07, 2010, 01:01:14 PM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.

We are 'moral' for the same reason we value 'morality', it's programmed into us through millions of years of evolution as social animals. It's nothing metaphysical or mysterious, it's a simple matter of programming.
Would a materialist have to subscribe to determinism?

I think everyone has to ascribe to a certain degree of determinism, I mean we all expect the laws of physics to keep operating tomorrow and for the sun to rise on schedule. Humans and animals are also governed by the laws of physics, so there is a certain amount of determinism. However, there is also randomness in DNA transcription and cell mitosis, the brain is an analog system allowing for randomness due to quantum fluctuation, and the brain being a neural network makes probabilistic calculations that may or may not be used in the next step of thought. So while there is a certain degree of determinism and while we are certainly programmed by our genes as well as other environmental factors, the system is complex enough with enough randomness that it would not be possible to predict outcomes, thus not making everything strictly deterministic, I would rather argue that the universe is a stochastic process.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #56 on: December 07, 2010, 01:20:40 PM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.

We are 'moral' for the same reason we value 'morality', it's programmed into us through millions of years of evolution as social animals. It's nothing metaphysical or mysterious, it's a simple matter of programming.
Would a materialist have to subscribe to determinism?

I think everyone has to ascribe to a certain degree of determinism, I mean we all expect the laws of physics to keep operating tomorrow and for the sun to rise on schedule. Humans and animals are also governed by the laws of physics, so there is a certain amount of determinism. However, there is also randomness in DNA transcription and cell mitosis, the brain is an analog system allowing for randomness due to quantum fluctuation, and the brain being a neural network makes probabilistic calculations that may or may not be used in the next step of thought. So while there is a certain degree of determinism and while we are certainly programmed by our genes as well as other environmental factors, the system is complex enough with enough randomness that it would not be possible to predict outcomes, thus not making everything strictly deterministic, I would rather argue that the universe is a stochastic process.
In a materialistic framework, could it be that what we see as "randomness" is not truely random, but a deterministic process that is simply too complex for us to, as of yet, map out?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #57 on: December 07, 2010, 01:53:01 PM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.

We are 'moral' for the same reason we value 'morality', it's programmed into us through millions of years of evolution as social animals. It's nothing metaphysical or mysterious, it's a simple matter of programming.
Would a materialist have to subscribe to determinism?

I think everyone has to ascribe to a certain degree of determinism, I mean we all expect the laws of physics to keep operating tomorrow and for the sun to rise on schedule. Humans and animals are also governed by the laws of physics, so there is a certain amount of determinism. However, there is also randomness in DNA transcription and cell mitosis, the brain is an analog system allowing for randomness due to quantum fluctuation, and the brain being a neural network makes probabilistic calculations that may or may not be used in the next step of thought. So while there is a certain degree of determinism and while we are certainly programmed by our genes as well as other environmental factors, the system is complex enough with enough randomness that it would not be possible to predict outcomes, thus not making everything strictly deterministic, I would rather argue that the universe is a stochastic process.
In a materialistic framework, could it be that what we see as "randomness" is not truely random, but a deterministic process that is simply too complex for us to, as of yet, map out?

Yes. That is possible. "Randomness" (quantum/post-modern) or not (classical/modern), it seems to me the key claim of determinism is that the spirit/freedom is essentially an epiphenomenon of physics/matter/nature/whatever-you-want-to-call-it. Hence, "the illusion of free will". A materialist is certainly bound to accept determinism so-defined; otherwise, if he grants spirit a non-material cause/existence, he is no longer a materialist.
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #58 on: December 07, 2010, 01:59:10 PM »

The question wasn't really if athiests and others who don't believe in God can be moral. The question was really that can morality exist without God. That is, can it exist, even if God doesn't? I would have to say the answer is no, it can't.

Why not? Some atheists believe that morality can be created by culture, or intellect, or even that there is morality to some extent embedded in our very nature.
So they claim. However, they are yet to demonstrate it. Without God, all things are permitted.  An atheist may be moral, but he is incapable of justifying why he should.

We are 'moral' for the same reason we value 'morality', it's programmed into us through millions of years of evolution as social animals. It's nothing metaphysical or mysterious, it's a simple matter of programming.
Would a materialist have to subscribe to determinism?

I think everyone has to ascribe to a certain degree of determinism, I mean we all expect the laws of physics to keep operating tomorrow and for the sun to rise on schedule. Humans and animals are also governed by the laws of physics, so there is a certain amount of determinism. However, there is also randomness in DNA transcription and cell mitosis, the brain is an analog system allowing for randomness due to quantum fluctuation, and the brain being a neural network makes probabilistic calculations that may or may not be used in the next step of thought. So while there is a certain degree of determinism and while we are certainly programmed by our genes as well as other environmental factors, the system is complex enough with enough randomness that it would not be possible to predict outcomes, thus not making everything strictly deterministic, I would rather argue that the universe is a stochastic process.
In a materialistic framework, could it be that what we see as "randomness" is not truely random, but a deterministic process that is simply too complex for us to, as of yet, map out?

Yes. That is possible. "Randomness" (quantum/post-modern) or not (classical/modern), it seems to me the key claim of determinism is that the spirit/freedom is essentially an epiphenomenon of physics/matter/nature/whatever-you-want-to-call-it. Hence, "the illusion of free will". A materialist is certainly bound to accept determinism so-defined; otherwise, if he grants spirit a non-material cause/existence, he is no longer a materialist.
That's what I was getting at. Thank you for expressing it more clearly than I.  Smiley
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #59 on: December 17, 2010, 06:11:56 PM »

You can see Fr. Hans' opening statement as well as the videos of the debate on the American Orthodox Institute website.

http://www.aoiusa.org/blog/2010/12/can-there-be-morality-without-god/

http://www.aoiusa.org/blog/debates/

Please place these links in a more appropriate place if needed.
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #60 on: December 17, 2010, 08:37:52 PM »

This has been posted here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,31458.0.html
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,973


black metal cat


« Reply #61 on: April 04, 2011, 04:57:23 AM »

My previous experiences with porn have shown me that using it makes me more tempted to go out and have sex, not less. J--king off with porn isn't enough eventually, I would need to go act out the fantasy.

I don't have sex either, and the best way to keep me from doing it is to channel those energies elsewhere, like in sports.  Smiley

You have a different experience?

For me masturbation is mostly a psychological thing... akin to feeding a mild addiction. But as with most mild addictions, I can give it up when I want to and feel like I have a reason to, and after the initial withdrawal period, I'm fine.

EDIT--took out some personal info, just for the sake of propriety (wait, I'm talking about this subject and worried about propriety?! anyway...)
« Last Edit: April 04, 2011, 05:10:05 AM by Asteriktos » Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,824



« Reply #62 on: April 04, 2011, 02:08:53 PM »

Fr. Hans Jacobse (Orthodox Christian priest of Ft. Myers, FL) debates with Matt Dillahunty (head of atheist group in Texas). I personally know Fr. Hans and he is a wonderful priest and pastor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3sYBqpW9o

It's a debate in 9 parts (I'm on part 3 right now). The whole premise from the atheist perspective is that there can be morality outside of the existence of God. What do you all think of the debate?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well, I haven't watched any of it, but I must ask, what does morality have to do with anything? Morality is nothing but a quaint idea that makes some weak people comfortable, to tie 'morality' to arguments about truth is nothing short of absurd. Something doesn't have to be moral to be true and just because something is true, it doesn't mean that we have to like that it's true. The most horrendous and intolerable reality is equally likely to be true as the most palatable and loved reality...in short, morality is irrelevant.

You could say the same thing about truth. What I am driving at is that truth as an adjective is just as meaningless as morality without eternal values--that is God, without whom all else is word games.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.271 seconds with 90 queries.