Teaching Creationism is a crime.

Originally posted by KellyJay
"One that is true for all time, all people, irrespective of context."

I am all for truth that is timeless and holds all people too, but without a
single standard across all time for all people, who is to say this "X" is true
for all no matter what? I get that God could, since He is a timeless source
that is greater than man; however, without God are y ...[text shortened]... ing your
views on what you think is good and true on others who may not agree
with you?
Kelly

It has been the aim of philosophy since Greek times to get at the truth, to find those statements that are objectively and unquestionably tru for all people in all contexts. Descartes found the ultimate reduction 'I think therefore I am' as the only statement he could reasonably say was true objectively for all people. If I say "It is a cold day", that is not an objective truth, because to an Icelander it might be warm. You get the idea. So the statement 'Hate is not conquered by hate. Hate is conquered by love' seems to be one of thosestatements. All the negative energy of the hate is dissipated by the positive energy of love and it evanesces. Jesus, of course, to his credit, adopted this as one of his key messages - turn the other cheek, love thy neighbour etc.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]Vincent van Gogh
You mean the former (failed) pastor who aspired to become an artist in God's service, stating: "...to try to understand the real significance of what the great artists, the serious masters, tell us in their masterpieces, that leads to God; one man wrote or told it in a book; another in a picture."

That Vincent van Gogh?[/b]

The very same. The flawed genius of his time. Certainly didn't adopt the adage that anything was okay so long as you could get away with it.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]One that is true for all time, all people, irrespective of context.
I was more leaning toward the "truth" part.
What is truth?[/b]

What is Truth? Truth is that which is eternal, is always the same, never decays.

Originally posted by KellyJay
What a worthless question, it is a matter of how people behave and you
have people in all belief systems AND or non belief systems. People will
kill in the name of "pro life", people will steal while pushing aid for others.
People do evil things, and they do try to hide their evil actions by trying
to hide in good causes or groups. What motivation is re ...[text shortened]... nd so on, and you can have that in or out side of religious beliefs or even
non beliefs.
Kelly

It's not a worthless question. People are always ready to cite atheism as the cause for the killing under Pol Pot and Mao because those states were an 'atheist utopia'. But they were also both also an 'agricultural utopia', so far I've never seen anyone blame agriculture as the cause of the killings.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
It has been the aim of philosophy since Greek times to get at the truth, to find those statements that are objectively and unquestionably tru for all people in all contexts. Descartes found the ultimate reduction 'I think therefore I am' as the only statement he could reasonably say was true objectively for all people. If I say "It is a cold day", that is ...[text shortened]... credit, adopted this as one of his key messages - turn the other cheek, love thy neighbour etc.

Listen, I have lived in Alaska, Arizona, Guam and a few other places, and I
can tell you that cold can be different depending on what your used
to, I agree. I've been outside playing games while it was 40 degrees out
while in shorts and tea shirt while in Alaska because that was a heat wave,
and was freezing because it was 80 at night, because during the day it was
over 115 for several days in a row in Arizona.

Your views about what is right and wrong can be rejected by anyone else
no matter how noble you think your views are, so who are you to tell
someone else that they need to conform to what you are telling them. It
takes something beyond man or greater than man that can rule over all of
us to bind us to his/her rules about right and wrong. If you did it, or tried,
you just be another guy trying to force your views upon everyone else.
Kelly

Originally posted by Proper Knob
It's not a worthless question. People are always ready to cite atheism as the cause for the killing under Pol Pot and Mao because those states were an 'atheist utopia'. But they were also both also an 'agricultural utopia', so far I've never seen anyone blame agriculture as the cause of the killings.

People kill for next to no reasons, having one does not change that people
die. Atheism isn't a cure for murder.
Kelly

Originally posted by Pianoman1
The very same. The flawed genius of his time. Certainly didn't adopt the adage that anything was okay so long as you could get away with it.

Maybe he was not really an atheist as you suppose. Perhaps he just did not know. I think that is what agnostics claim. Maybe they just don't know any better.

The Instructor

Originally posted by KellyJay
People kill for next to no reasons, having one does not change that people
die. Atheism isn't a cure for murder.
Kelly

What relevance does that have to anything I've been posting in this thread? Sometimes you make absolutely no sense at all.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
It has been the aim of philosophy since Greek times to get at the truth, to find those statements that are objectively and unquestionably tru for all people in all contexts. Descartes found the ultimate reduction 'I think therefore I am' as the only statement he could reasonably say was true objectively for all people. If I say "It is a cold day", that is ...[text shortened]... credit, adopted this as one of his key messages - turn the other cheek, love thy neighbour etc.

"Descartes found the ultimate reduction 'I think therefore I am'..." Without disputing Descartes' strenuous efforts to reduce his considerable explorations to an irreducible minimum core fact, 'I am therefore I think' makes sense to me. Am I wrong?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
What relevance does that have to anything I've been posting in this thread? Sometimes you make absolutely no sense at all.

Atheism if I understand everyone here who has defined it is everyone who
either does not have a faith or rejects a faith in God. Which puts all crimes
against anyone at the feet of Atheist no different that those that kill others
in a name of some god that think that way, or believe that way however
you want to describe it. So if you have any leadership from any group or
country would be laid at their feet. It may not direct anyone to kill in the
name of Atheism, but it most isn't stopping anyone either.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Listen, I have lived in Alaska, Arizona, Guam and a few other places, and I
can tell you that cold can be different depending on what your used
to, I agree. I've been outside playing games while it was 40 degrees out
while in shorts and tea shirt while in Alaska because that was a heat wave,
and was freezing because it was 80 at night, because during th ...[text shortened]... did it, or tried,
you just be another guy trying to force your views upon everyone else.
Kelly

Couldn't quite follow the contorted logic here. None of what you say has any bearing on the thesis: hate is not conquered by hate. Hate is conquered by love. Which is what we we discussing.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
Couldn't quite follow the contorted logic here. None of what you say has any bearing on the thesis: hate is not conquered by hate. Hate is conquered by love. Which is what we we discussing.

"... hate is not conquered by hate. Hate is conquered by love."

Absolutely. God's motivation in providing for reconciliation of mankind without denying His Justice is Unfailing Love.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Atheism if I understand everyone here who has defined it is everyone who
either does not have a faith or rejects a faith in God. Which puts all crimes
against anyone at the feet of Atheist no different that those that kill others
in a name of some god that think that way, or believe that way however
you want to describe it. So if you have any leadership ...[text shortened]... direct anyone to kill in the
name of Atheism, but it most isn't stopping anyone either.
Kelly

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about Kelly.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about Kelly.

i think he's saying that if a man likes bananas and then goes on a killing spree, that unless the bananas stop the man from killing that they are guilty by proxy. atheism didnt stop chairman mao.......so by kellys logic, it might as well have pulled the trigger itself, just like morally redundant bananas

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i think he's saying that if a man likes bananas and then goes on a killing spree, that unless the bananas stop the man from killing that they are guilty by proxy. atheism didnt stop chairman mao.......so by kellys logic, it might as well have pulled the trigger itself, just like morally redundant bananas

No, he did not say anything about bananas, so that is not it. The idea here is that atheism is a belief system that has no moral code like Judaism or Christianity. Therefore, atheism does nothing to refrain the atheist from committing acts of evil like murder. Judaism and Christianity have commands against acts of evil such as murder.

Islam is another belief system that has a moral code that commands the murder of those that have a belief system that is counter to Islam. It is worse than atheism in my opinion.

The Instructor