Healthy skepticism of ALL worldviews is good. Skeptical of non-belief like found in Atheism? Post your challenging questions. Responses are encouraged.
When we get into these discussions ( objective/subjective) we always hit that wall of you not knowing the difference between THAT something IS ( that there is a good) to WHAT something is ( what is good).
PaulSacramento wrote:
Because your materialistic view demands it.
Or do you see certain things as objective?
Yes. I see certain things as objective.
K
Such as?
Things that can be demonstrated.
K
Demonstrated in what way?, to whom?
1+1=2 can be demonstrated as true using mathematics.
Cyanide is poisonous to Humans. This can be demonstrated by studying the effects Cyanide has on the human body.
These are examples of claims that can be demonstrated as Objectively true.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote:When we get into these discussions ( objective/subjective) we always hit that wall of you not knowing the difference between THAT something IS ( that there is a good) to WHAT something is ( what is good).
No, the wall is you confusing my disagreements, with me not knowing the difference between THAT something IS (Ontology) vs WHAT something is (Epistemology)
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Nessa wrote:
I am not pro capital punishment put I do believe in having to pay for your crimes. Killing the murderer is not going to bring back the loved one. And if its all about fairness then we are in the wrong world.
I’m not so much interested as to whether or not you are pro capital punishment, but rather if Gods laws are. Since Gods laws are objective they should obvious for all to see. And since Gods value on human life is objective, if scripture does support capital punishment, then the point when the cost of a crime a person commits exceeds the value of their life should be as easy to determine as 1+1=2. If so then what crimes are worthy of capital punishment.
However if Gods laws are NOT pro capital punishment, than what about all those other people who read the same scriptures you read yet DO believe in capital punishment? Do they just ignore Gods laws? Do they know the laws but choose to work against God? Are these just dishonest Christians?
Ken
Nicki wrote:I think it could be said that a person's value to God is infinite - so the cost of their crime could never exceed the value of their life.
So the value of a serial killers life, is never exceeded by the combined value of lives of all of his victims?
I don't think it's as mathematically calculable as that.
So what do you mean when you say value? If it isn't how much you love the person or care about them, what does value mean?
Nicki wrote: Not every issue is addressed in black and white in the Bible, but based on the Old Testament I think it can be said that capital punishment is not necessarily wrong.
So though you don't agree with capital punishment, you don't think the Bible condemn it. Fair enough; I can understand that position.
To you love is just a feeling, right?
How can you place value on a life just by a mere feeling?
Kenny wrote:
I’m not so much interested as to whether or not you are pro capital punishment, but rather if Gods laws are. Since Gods laws are objective they should obvious for all to see. And since Gods value on human life is objective, if scripture does support capital punishment, then the point when the cost of a crime a person commits exceeds the value of their life should be as easy to determine as 1+1=2. If so then what crimes are worthy of capital punishment.
However if Gods laws are NOT pro capital punishment, than what about all those other people who read the same scriptures you read yet DO believe in capital punishment? Do they just ignore Gods laws? Do they know the laws but choose to work against God? Are these just dishonest Christians?
Ken
Nicki wrote:I think it could be said that a person's value to God is infinite - so the cost of their crime could never exceed the value of their life.
So the value of a serial killers life, is never exceeded by the combined value of lives of all of his victims?
I don't think it's as mathematically calculable as that.
So what do you mean when you say value? If it isn't how much you love the person or care about them, what does value mean?
Nicki wrote: Not every issue is addressed in black and white in the Bible, but based on the Old Testament I think it can be said that capital punishment is not necessarily wrong.
So though you don't agree with capital punishment, you don't think the Bible condemn it. Fair enough; I can understand that position.
Nessa wrote: To you love is just a feeling, right?
An emotional feeling; yes.
Nessa wrote: How can you place value on a life just by a mere feeling?
What other way is there?
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Kenny wrote:
I’m not so much interested as to whether or not you are pro capital punishment, but rather if Gods laws are. Since Gods laws are objective they should obvious for all to see. And since Gods value on human life is objective, if scripture does support capital punishment, then the point when the cost of a crime a person commits exceeds the value of their life should be as easy to determine as 1+1=2. If so then what crimes are worthy of capital punishment.
However if Gods laws are NOT pro capital punishment, than what about all those other people who read the same scriptures you read yet DO believe in capital punishment? Do they just ignore Gods laws? Do they know the laws but choose to work against God? Are these just dishonest Christians?
Ken
Nicki wrote:I think it could be said that a person's value to God is infinite - so the cost of their crime could never exceed the value of their life.
So the value of a serial killers life, is never exceeded by the combined value of lives of all of his victims?
I don't think it's as mathematically calculable as that.
So what do you mean when you say value? If it isn't how much you love the person or care about them, what does value mean?
Nicki wrote: Not every issue is addressed in black and white in the Bible, but based on the Old Testament I think it can be said that capital punishment is not necessarily wrong.
So though you don't agree with capital punishment, you don't think the Bible condemn it. Fair enough; I can understand that position.
Nessa wrote: To you love is just a feeling, right?
An emotional feeling; yes.
Nessa wrote: How can you place value on a life just by a mere feeling?
What other way is there?
Ken
Love is primarly a choice.
What if you find yourself hating your spouse oneday but love them the next?
Nicki wrote:I think it could be said that a person's value to God is infinite - so the cost of their crime could never exceed the value of their life.
So the value of a serial killers life, is never exceeded by the combined value of lives of all of his victims?
I don't think it's as mathematically calculable as that.
So what do you mean when you say value? If it isn't how much you love the person or care about them, what does value mean?
Things have value apart from people's feelings, don't they? The value of money for example? To me if God says something has value it just does.
Nicki wrote: Not every issue is addressed in black and white in the Bible, but based on the Old Testament I think it can be said that capital punishment is not necessarily wrong.
So though you don't agree with capital punishment, you don't think the Bible condemn it. Fair enough; I can understand that position.
Nessa said she wasn't pro capital punishment - as with a lot of things I'm a bit of a fence-sitter. Some people have to be more decisive than me and make decisions about these things, I suppose!
So the value of a serial killers life, is never exceeded by the combined value of lives of all of his victims?
I don't think it's as mathematically calculable as that.
So what do you mean when you say value? If it isn't how much you love the person or care about them, what does value mean?
Nicki wrote: Not every issue is addressed in black and white in the Bible, but based on the Old Testament I think it can be said that capital punishment is not necessarily wrong.
So though you don't agree with capital punishment, you don't think the Bible condemn it. Fair enough; I can understand that position.
Nessa wrote: To you love is just a feeling, right?
An emotional feeling; yes.
Nessa wrote: How can you place value on a life just by a mere feeling?
What other way is there?
Ken
Love is primarly a choice.
What if you find yourself hating your spouse oneday but love them the next?
Does their value temporarily decrease?
Their value only temporarily decrease with me. Their value in the eyes of everyone else remains the same.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Nicki wrote:I think it could be said that a person's value to God is infinite - so the cost of their crime could never exceed the value of their life.
So the value of a serial killers life, is never exceeded by the combined value of lives of all of his victims?
I don't think it's as mathematically calculable as that.
So what do you mean when you say value? If it isn't how much you love the person or care about them, what does value mean?
Nicki wrote: Things have value apart from people's feelings, don't they? The value of money for example?
The value of money is different; that is objective. $2.00 will always be worth $2.00 no matter how I feel about it. With people, its a bit more subjective and based on how you feel
Nicki wrote:To me if God says something has value it just does.
Makes perfect sense to me with you being theist and all. With me being Atheist and all, does it make sense to you that something has value to me only if I say it does?
Nicki wrote: Not every issue is addressed in black and white in the Bible, but based on the Old Testament I think it can be said that capital punishment is not necessarily wrong.
So though you don't agree with capital punishment, you don't think the Bible condemn it. Fair enough; I can understand that position.
Nicki wrote: Nessa said she wasn't pro capital punishment - as with a lot of things I'm a bit of a fence-sitter. Some people have to be more decisive than me and make decisions about these things, I suppose!
Yeah I do understand theists don't agree on the details of morality.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote:When we get into these discussions ( objective/subjective) we always hit that wall of you not knowing the difference between THAT something IS ( that there is a good) to WHAT something is ( what is good).
No, the wall is you confusing my disagreements, with me not knowing the difference between THAT something IS (Ontology) vs WHAT something is (Epistemology)
Ken
So, 1+1 = 2 even if there was no one around to count or anything to count?
PaulSacramento wrote:When we get into these discussions ( objective/subjective) we always hit that wall of you not knowing the difference between THAT something IS ( that there is a good) to WHAT something is ( what is good).
No, the wall is you confusing my disagreements, with me not knowing the difference between THAT something IS (Ontology) vs WHAT something is (Epistemology)
Ken
So, 1+1 = 2 even if there was no one around to count or anything to count?
Yes.
K
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote:When we get into these discussions ( objective/subjective) we always hit that wall of you not knowing the difference between THAT something IS ( that there is a good) to WHAT something is ( what is good).
No, the wall is you confusing my disagreements, with me not knowing the difference between THAT something IS (Ontology) vs WHAT something is (Epistemology)
Ken
So, 1+1 = 2 even if there was no one around to count or anything to count?
Yes.
K
Really? because on the last thread we had this discussion you disagreed.
Something about math ( like forms and such) only existing because they were invented by man.
PaulSacramento wrote:When we get into these discussions ( objective/subjective) we always hit that wall of you not knowing the difference between THAT something IS ( that there is a good) to WHAT something is ( what is good).
No, the wall is you confusing my disagreements, with me not knowing the difference between THAT something IS (Ontology) vs WHAT something is (Epistemology)
Ken
So, 1+1 = 2 even if there was no one around to count or anything to count?
Yes.
K
Really? because on the last thread we had this discussion you disagreed.
Something about math ( like forms and such) only existing because they were invented by man.
The system of Arithmetic works whether someone is around to use it or not. But if mankind never existed, the system would not have been invented.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
