Jump to content

Glenn101

Members
  • Content Count

    3,417
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,350 Excellent

About Glenn101

  • Rank
    Just Basic
  • Birthday 04/26/1946

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Seven Springs, North Carolina

Recent Profile Visitors

3,852 profile views
  1. If you mean by empirical evidence, I will agree. But God is detectable through spiritual means.
  2. Of course it means nothing to Buddhists in China or anyone else until they have been taught what it means. What are your views as to the existence of God? The existence of a Supreme Being that created the universe?
  3. If my memory (not a stable ally lately) serves me correctly, the downward spiral in reproduction is mainly in the white population. Latinos and Blacks still seem to be reproducing at higher than maintenance levels.
  4. Science is neutral on morals. Thus we are left with subjective reasoning which can and does change. This type of subjective morals is alive and maybe not so well in the U.S. of A. I do not think I can take this any further. I would only be repeating myself. I will allow you the last word.
  5. Agreed. In the Biblical case it surely seems to be referring to an organized body of people.
  6. Do you believe that id did not apply to Matthias who was selected to take the place of Judas Iscariot or to Paul who was an apostle but not one of the twelve?
  7. Because "God hath set some in the church." (1 Corinthians 12:28) "And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." (Acts 2:47) Sounds like two good reasons to look for such a church.
  8. I am not going to simply say that all moral codes are moral relativism because that does not leave room for the possible existence of an objective morality and an entity or entities that exist on a higher plane than ours which know and understand objective morals. I was not arguing for the existence of such an one, only what morals would in the absence thereof.
  9. Negative. I have merely been maintaining that human beings are subjective (I hope that there is no real dispute on that point) and that moral codes originated by human beings are also subjective and subject to change as human perspectives change.
  10. I agree with that. But I have not been debating anything about the existence of God. My posts have all been assuming that there is no God with the point being that all moral codes would be subjective. Moral relativism.
  11. All of my posts have been assuming that there is no God. It is others who keep throwing God into the mix.
  12. I am not arguing for the existence of God here. There would first have to be a consensus that there indeed is a god in order to try to find the real one. What I am debating is in opposition to your last statement. I have yet to see a cogent argument for objective morality without God. Every argument revolves around the premise that someone or a group of someones has found that eternal truth but they inevitably run into a conflict when it is pointed out that there are other people and cultures that would disagree with the someone or group of someones. The basic argument seems to be that if
  13. Isn't there a difference between sacrificing oneself versus being sacrificed?
×
×
  • Create New...