Do we need God for Morality? [Spirituality & Religion]

@carsonfry

Sounds like carsonfry has a claim about the nature of morality for which he has not made an argument but baldly asserted.

Thanks. I did start at Gen 1:1. I'm halfway through 1 chronicles now.

@carsonfry Sounds like you know there isn't a god but desperately want to believe there is. Your almost paranoid care to avoid any terminology that displays doubt gives you away.

That book of fairy tales called "the bible" doesn't explain anything, it appears designed to confuse and bamboozle.

We give meaning and logic and truth to all that we experience as humans, before now and in the future. I believe man wrote the Bible. Here’s the thing you don’t have proof that he did. You have faith. I don’t believe that and I don’t believe in everything that is stated in the Bible. @carsonfry

@carsonfry it has to be a reliable resource. The bible is not that. They need scientific evidence to prove what they believe, no matter how many gaps there are in it. The so called evidence they claim is solid. The main issue ive found so far is... how a testible hypothesis is crated. Note: Created. They have to have a start which of course has no basis, its made up. That in its essence is proof enough to build from it. Actual evidence based upon fact is nowhere to be found.

@Reverend

Actually no. This question is much more heavily rooted in philosophy than science. Logic and argumentation rather than evidence.

@Pikachu I thought it was based in factual evidence. So its not?

@carsonfry [quote]God is the foundation of everything. He gives meaning and logic to everything. The Christian God. He gives meaning and logic and truth to all that we experience as humans, before now, now, and in the future. The Bible explains it all. Other books portray a different God, don't be confused because they are false prophets, and their logic does not work. I hope you will take 10 minutes or more to study this. You can start at Genesis 1.1.[/quote]

Amen, brother, amen.

@Reverend

The basis for morality?

No it's largely philosophical. I mean, there's certainly compelling evidence for the idea that morality has its roots in evolutionarily adaptive behaviour among social animals and no evidence that a supernatural being made it.
But the epistemic arguments for morality are really just philosophical.

@Pikachu did you respond to the wrong person? Lol

@Reverend

Nope.
You asked if the argument for morality is based in factual evidence, did you not?
If so, the answer is that while there is evidence showing that basic morality is an adaptive trait, the value and recognition of moral standards is primarily a philosophical argument.

@Pikachu Well Genesis has a lot to teach us about God and His creation, but it is not so relevant to us today. The life of Jesus changed everything, and you need to restart at the New Testament, remembering what you learned from the Old Testament. The Bible is true, nothing in it has been disproven. It is hard to understand sometimes, but not one word of it has been disproven. You have to take what you understand and leave the rest for further understanding. The language changes so quickly, that it is hard to understand everything the first time we read it. If you read it again and again and again, and you witness what happens day to day, it is obvious that it is true and gains better understanding every day.

@Pikachu I did not say "morality".

@carsonfry You did well at being a magnet to draw people to the post. Really, you did.

@carsonfry

lol so first i needed to start with genesis but now that you see i have i need to start somewhere else?
Nah man. I'll finish the OT first, thanks.

[quote]but not one word of it has been disproven[/quote]

Sure it has.
For instance, genesis tells us that birds were created on the 5th day and all land animals on the 6th. This is in direct contradiction to the fossil record and geology. It's been proven wrong.

Anyway, while one can claim that the bible has not been proven wrong, neither has it been proven right so it's kind of a null argument...


But that's not what this thread is about. You made some assertions in your first response. Can you make a case for them?

@Reverend

lol well given that this thread is about morality, i assumed that, that was what you were referring to.

Would you like to clarify?

@Pikachu @Pikachu I reject your premise. Your say the fossil records say otherwise. But who are the ones in charge of the fossil records and making the statements? We are living in the world of fake news. It is all about money. The Devil is all around us. These are the End Times.

But what was in the Old Testament was a foundation to the New Testament. The Life of Jesus changed everything, and it was prophesied in the Old Testament hundreds of times. It was in God's plan from the beginning. So, if you want to understand todays Christianity, you have to start at Matthew 1.1. But keep in mind what Genesis 1.1 said and everything else before Matthew 1.1.

@Pikachu okay. Lets not focus on morality then. Is what ive gathered true for evolution?

@carsonfry

I've actually read the NT before. And most of the OT.
I'm just going through the OT again now.

[quote] But who are the ones in charge of the fossil records and making the statements? [/quote]

Scientists of all nationalities and organizations around the world are "in charge" if by that you mean they study it.

[quote]We are living in the world of fake news. It is all about money. The Devil is all around us[/quote]

If you're going to cry conspiracy and satan at any example which refutes your claim then there is nothing more to say.
If you're only interested in evidence which confirms your world view and you'll reject out of hand any that does not, then you're not approaching this subject with intellectual integrity.

In the same way that you have advised me to familiarize myself with the bible so that i may better understand, i advise that you familiarize yourself with the evidence of science.
I've begun to familiarize myself with the bible. Surely you can at least match my intellectual honesty🙂

@Reverend

[quote] Is what ive gathered true for evolution?[/quote]

Not even a little bit.

You strangely criticize hypothesis as being created. Of course they are. They are the idea you decide to investigate and the evidence will either confirm or dis-confirm the hypothesis.

[quote] Actual evidence based upon fact is nowhere to be found.[/quote]

Could not be further from the truth.
There is a great deal of factual evidence. This is evidence which i have offered to share with you before.
Don't make the mistake of thinking there is not factual evidence on the basis that you have not familiarized yourself with it.

@Pikachu i have agreed previously that evolution is not my strong suit. Is there evidence to support that it was not speculation or was something created to prove its existence? Also. Are there gaps in evolution? If so being as smart as scince claims to be, after billions of years, why are we just now discovering this? Was human kind retarded in the previous centuries? Science cant get weather correct, but we are expected to believe they know truth about evolution and creattion based on studies?

@Reverend

[quote] Is there evidence to support that it was not speculation [/quote]

Certainly.
We can talk transitional fossils or retrovirus or chromosomes or morphology or phylogeny.
All separate lines of evidence ALL pointing in one direction.

That doesn't mean we know everything about evolution. In the same way that we don't know everything about viruses. But would you question the germ theory of disease based on that? Perhaps you think that if we don;t know everything then viruses and bacteria are not in fact huge contributors to disease.

[quote]why are we just now discovering this?[quote][/quote][/quote]

The scientific method has not always existed. It's a relatively recent way of looking at the world.
Evidence-based conclusions rather than spiritualism and superstition. Science has proven over the last few centuries to be the best most reliable and [i]consistent[/i] tool for accurately describing the world around us. It is accepted as such in virtually every case by everyone...except where religious teaching is in contradiction with it.

@Pikachu is there a solid basis of evolution. Do you believe in natural selection?

@Pikachu im really trying to understand this. I just run into blocks with each step i take. Its almost like i need to have faith in science. That will never happen.

@Reverend

[quote]@Pikachu is there a solid basis of evolution. Do you believe in natural selection?
[/quote]

Yes and yes.

[quote]. Its almost like i need to have faith in science[/quote]

Nope.
You can trust science because it keeps on showing us true things about the world.
Think of it like the difference between evidence-based medicine and crystal healing.
One has demonstrable, objective outcomes while the other depends on a lot of wishful thinking and interpretation.

[quote]im really trying to understand this. [/quote]

That's good. Why don't we start with a basic example.

Using an evolutionary model we would expect to see life on earth going from less complex to more complex as adaptations compound. If we look at the fossil record, this is exactly what we see. Simple invertebrates to fish to reptiles to mammals and so on. These are separated by distinct geological layers. And while we do of course see simple organisms coexisting with complex ones ( just look at an earth worm) we never see something like a dolphin in a fossil bed with trilobites. Nowhere. Ever.
From a creation standpoint where the animals were created at around the same time we would expect to see animals at all stages of complexity mixed together. And yet we find these fossil beds with exclusively “simple” organisms.

The evolutionary explanation is that each organism evolved separately over a long period of time through common decent.

@Pikachu so you support Darwin? My problem is. There is not one gap but many to prove evolution.