| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
Considering the very justification for the existence of the United States of America, isn't it unwise to reject God? If you reject the deity, how do you justify unalienable rights? Come on Rick. | ||
| Hootowl |
The God-is-dead left doesn’t believe in the Constitution either. I’m reminded of some lyrics. God in a casket. Gone for eternity. We’ve got no rules. God in a casket. Lost all authority. Come watch the fools. | ||
| Blake |
Unfortunately, many people are unaware of that undeniable truth. They reject God and continue on as though nothing has changed. Recall Nietzsche's story of the madman who in the early morning marketplace raised a ruckus exclaiming, "I seek God! I seek God!" The many unbelievers in the market just laughed at him. They ridiculed and taunted him, "Did God get lost? Or is he hiding? Or maybe he has gone on a voyage or emigrated!" Thus they yelled and laughed. Then, writes Nietzsche, the madman turned in their midst and pierced them with his eyes. 'Whither is God?' he cried, 'I shall tell you. We have killed him—you and I. All of us are his murderers. But how have we done this? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Away from all suns? Are we not plunging continually? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is not night and more night coming on all the while? Must not lanterns be lit in the morning? Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? . . . God is dead. . . . And we have killed him. How shall we, the murderers of all murderers, comfort ourselves? The crowd stared at the madman in silence and astonishment. At last he dashed his lantern to the ground. "I have come too early," he said. "This tremendous event is still on its way—it has not yet reached the ears of man." Men did not truly comprehend the consequences of their rejection of God. Nietzsche predicted that someday people would realize the implications of their atheism; that it would spawn an age of nihilism, the destruction of all meaning and value in life. It seems little has changed though. People remain oblivious. Lifted and paraphrased from https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-w ritings/existence-nature-of-god/the-absurdity-of-l ife-without-god/ | ||
| Blake |
Nietzsche killed this thread! LOL! | ||
| H0gwash |
I believe in the god Voltaire said man had to create after he realized he did not exist. | ||
| Aesquire |
Shocking! | ||
| Blake |
Hogs, Philosophically, if you want to affirm and stand for things like truth, knowledge, logic, free will, and morality, then it is impossible for God to not be real. Absent God, all things are permissible. Absent God, we cannot know anything. Absent God, our nation's founding and the core justification for the unalienable rights we hold so dear are wiped away. Why do you think the Far Left so disdains God? For those who want to call "good" the murder of babies at birth, and for those who call "good" the promotion of theft, greed, and covetousness, God has no place. | ||
| Blake |
I don't believe in any of the false gods that people create so they can avoid dealing with the one real Supreme Being. It's always funny to me how people decry God and Christianity as man made, while imagining their own beliefs as somehow non-fiction. The Bible has hundreds of prophesies that have been fulfilled, and the overarching story told by dozens of different authors over thousands of years remains coherent and consistent to this day. | ||
| H0gwash |
I'll agree and say truth, knowledge, logic, free will, mortality etc have a diminished meaning absent an all knowing deity, but it is only a slightly decreased value without philosophical richness and embellishment of a central deity. What is left is still practical for secular life. I think the US constitution is strengthened rather than weakened by the amendment stating "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." I don't disdain god, I just dislike it when people use the Bible as a justification for wrongdoing. Since I believe god is actually a reflection of man's search for meaning, for me to hate god is to hate myself. There is plenty of greed and lust and murder among the godless and it is true that secular society has to constantly struggle to keep these in check. However, and with respect, there are also plenty of christians who get abortions and who steal and flaunt their greed and covet everything they can so the christian church has much internal work to do too. Regarding true gods and false gods, it can be *really hard* to tell the difference. Even amongst the hardcore Christians on this channel there are some differences in thought and practice. My non-commitment with any of them is more about looking at "the average practice between them" rather than at the specifics of any of them to get a good idea of what people generally consider to be good. | ||
| Blake |
Hogs, I never viewed you as far Left. I think the philosophical issue concerning God and reality is a lot more pragmatically consequential than you figure. The existence of criminals doesn't negate the existence of the law. An error prone mathematician doesn't raise questions concerning the truth of mathematics. A writer with poor spelling and grammar doesn't cast doubt on the existence of proper language. Religion has been abused by evil men since they recognized its utility for personal benefit. Gerard, it was corrupt self-serving religious authorities who schemed to have Christ crucified. You'll get zero argument from me about the crimes and evils perpetrated and covered-up by those claiming Godliness. King David himself sent a man to his certain death, essentially murdering him, so that he could have his wife. King David sincerely repented. That is EVERYTHING. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. I do agree that discerning the validity of one world view versus another may benefit from evaluating their relative overall contributions, the ethics and the societies they've embodied. Universities, hospitals, hospices, food banks, other charitable efforts, abolition, and education, are some contributions to consider. Ethics in warfare and imprisonment, tolerance of others, freedoms of speech and religion are some of the ethics to consider. What world view in general fostered the above more than any other? "Quench the thirsty, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for the sick, visit the imprisoned..." Only one world view offers Amazing Grace, salvation from a justly deserved Hell and redemption to God paid in full by Christ, the Word made flesh. What other God has done anything like that? All the rest require you to earn your way, all the way. | ||
| Sami |
''Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.'' -John Adams. | ||
| Blake |
As we are now witnessing the proof thereof. Sham impeachments. Coup attempts from within juggernaught bureaucracy. Corrupt dishonest "news" media. Violence against the right, police, religion. We'll come out of it, or maybe not. We'll see. Maybe the virus will help pull us together. The Left sees that potential, so now they are trying to counter. Another sham investigation. Pray for revival. | ||
| Gregtonn |
My thought on atheism: "To declare "There is no God." is to declare you know all there is to be known and you are therefore... God."_G | ||
| Aesquire |
I'd disagree with the quote, in that that atheists are not necessarily nihilistic or arrogant, which is also true for Christians, Muslims, Scientologists, etc. ( woke mandatory disclaimer  ) As to the Thread Question... I assume you think the justification for our God given rights is, based on the belief in God? Thus unbelievers have no justification for demanding those rights? I'm not sure. I don't really reject the justification. I believe in a higher power beyond my ken, and chose a Pantheist faith, instead of a Monotheist, but if the morality of the mythos is sound, the mental image you prefer is irrelevant. Ymmv. Thus I'm uncertain that thesis is incorrect. I don't think I can answer that for another. | ||
| H0gwash |
Since the beginning of time people have fought. Coups, corruption, lies, violence is not specifically a Marxist thing, it is more a generic power struggle thing. Sadly, it is a part of life. | ||
| H0gwash |
Judges routinely dismiss subpoenas for God. | ||
| Sami |
God is not a preference in the sense that strawberry ice cream is a preference. God is man's final purpose, God is our beginning and our end. To denigrate God comes at a price. Are we willing to pay that price? Marxists are fighting a culture war to overthrow God in the public sphere. Their long march through the institutions relies on removing God from the minds of men. Judges often serve as useful idiots in their march through the institutions. | ||
| H0gwash |
Atheists are fighting to keep God out of the administrative side of the public realm. For example it would be constitutionally inappropriate for some government tax auditor to start harassing you on your taxes because he thought you were not 'christian enough'. Private citizens do not surrender their right to express their own religious thoughts when they enter the public realm and God is with them always if that's how they really feel. | ||
| Gregtonn |
I assume you think the justification for our God given rights is, based on the belief in God? Thus unbelievers have no justification for demanding those rights? Absolutely not. God given rights are not based on belief. Atheists are indeed arrogant in that they "know" there is no God and are therefore the most knowing beings in their universe. If you doubt or are unsure you are agnostic. Nihilism is an escapist's way of avoiding defining themselves or the world around them. I believe in a higher power beyond my ken. In this we have total agreement. G | ||
| Sami |
H0gwash, I don't know what you mean by the administrative side of the public realm. In what sense is God constitutionally inappropriate in the public realm? Certainly you can expect that a tax auditor doesn't harass you in that way, but why even expect that he would harass you in the first place? Also, what is ''christian enough''? What's a private citizen? Is he different from a public citizen? Who is making the distinction here? If God is always with us, then He is also with us in the constitution and in public schools. God is omnipresent, after all. | ||
| Blake |
If you don't think unalienable rights require God, could you revise the Declaration of Independence and the preamble to the Constitution accordingly while still justifying and affirming said individual unalienable rights and blessings? (Message edited by Blake on April 06, 2020) | ||
| Aesquire |
Absolutely not. God given rights are not based on belief. Uh.... If you don't believe in God & don't believe those rights flow from Divine Love ( or how you choose to phrase it ) then heck yes, they are based on Belief. However, I agree with you that THEIR belief changes not our belief/assertion that there are Universal rights, truths, and objective reality. ( so... I'd say you phrased the above quote incorrectly, more than you are wrong ) Much of Sami's complaint here is that those who reject the premise reject the rights that are justified by the premise. ( that Nietzsche is dead, and there is a God ) Not so sure on that. God is not a preference in the sense that strawberry ice cream is a preference. God is man's final purpose, God is our beginning and our end. To denigrate God comes at a price. Are we willing to pay that price? The paragraph after this is correct. 4 assertions above... I'd argue that belief in the One and Only God of the Jews, or the Greek Pantheon, is, indeed, a choice. You may argue one choice is wrong, but it's still a choice. Chocolate for me, thanks. I won't argue with your beliefs on purpose, alpha-Omega or the theoretical risks of criticizing unfairly a God. I don't recall a Deity that has been reported to not care what you think if it. I could have missed it. | ||
| Sami |
Aesquire, of course people are free to choose between options. Vanilla ice cream for me, two scoops, please. My point was that the object of choice is not always a matter of preference, but sometimes a matter of objective right and wrong. We can agree that choosing for vanilla ice cream is neither ''right'' nor ''wrong''. What is a matter of right and wrong is, for example, 2+2=5. Sure, you could choose to claim 2+2=5, but it would be objectively (factually) incorrect. Some choices are factually neutral, such as choosing between chocolate and vanilla ice cream. Other choices are factually incorrect, such as claiming that 2+2=5. Not all choices are created equal. Some choices are right, others are wrong, and yet others are neutral. |
