Evidence for God from Science

Audie wrote:What general rule might there be?

Always act in accordance with human nature.

Or, is in your view, everything to be taken case by case, and considered as to the balance of pro and con?

Yes and no. Everything is to be taken on a case by case basis, but it's not a pro v con thing. There are always going to be competing goods when trying to decide either a course of action or deciding how to assess the "goodness" or "badness" of a particular event (since such an assessment will always be relative to some other perspective). The grounding for the discussion/assessment isn't benefits or harms (although benefits and harms certainly help highlight appropriate issues for consideration) but rather, again, our common human nature.

All this assumes a type of ethical realism as opposed to anti-realism, but on the latter, most ethicists would agree that "good" and "bad" and all related words (good/evil/right/wrong/etc) are intrinsically meaningless anyway. Some are okay with that conclusion and work to flesh out the ideas in other ways. I'm not. I think that some things really are wrong--slavery, to use the easy example from American history--regardless of how many people they benefit. And, likewise, I believe "the common good" is more than just a utopian ideal but rather an actual reality, something that has real meaning. Others are, quite obviously, free to disagree.

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:

Audie wrote:

uh ok so what is the question?

Its in the subject heading.
I tried to not make it too complicated...

It isnt comoplicated, its vague.

Possibly it's vague.

But then so are alot of posts.

If you dont care to say what you mean by what is "behind" such things, that is fine.

Whatever your exact intent, I hope you know better than to take BW's prejudiced bit of cant as representative of anything other than his chosen view of people he does not know.

Hmmm

How can I be wrong on this Audie?

Because all is relative anyways? Isn't it, you and others stated this effect any times...on this forum...

Did I say something that upset you or struck a nerve? That was not my intent.

My true intent was to simply to show in as few words as possible what I have encountered over the years from secular humanist atheist types, just as I, myself, once was so many years ago.

Next...

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:As has been stated before, logically speaking, if what IS good or bad is relative or subjective then THERE BEING a good or bad is objective and absolute.
And, experience and reason and history and, well, pretty much anything you want, tells us that IS the case.
In short, while what is viewed/understood/thought of AS good or bad MAY be subjective but that there IS a good and bad, is not.

I'd certainly agree that there is good and bad.

Nor sure if anything is absolutely good or absolutely bad; perhaps.*
In general we have degrees of, shades of grey, unforeseen and unintended consequences,what is good for one side is bad for the other, and so on. "Road to hell paved with good intentions".

How do you see the relationship between "good and bad", and, "pain and suffering"?

*an example of something absolutely good of bad, or a moral absolute would be welcome here. Or maybe not so much an example, but a general rule that could be applied.

Torturing a baby or molestering one.

Is there a time when that could be considered good?

I was looking for a general rule, not specifics.

If btw, you agree with BW and think that I am such as he describes, we can quit now.

Again I was not describing you personally and in no way was attacking you. Why do you get so defensive - did I say something that struck a nerve? Not my intent...

So since you think I was doing wrong, then how could this be wrong if all is relative and there is no standard weights by which to judge good or bad?
-
-
-

Audie. wrote:

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:
Its in the subject heading. I tried to not make it too complicated...

It isnt comoplicated, its vague.

Possibly it's vague.

But then so are alot of posts.

If you dont care to say what you mean by what is "behind" such things, that is fine.

Whatever your exact intent, I hope you know better than to take BW's prejudiced bit of cant as representative of anything other than his chosen view of people he does not know.

Hmmm

How can I be wrong on this Audie?

"How could (you) be wrong". Couple of ways to take that, aren't there?

According to the philosophy of atheism/humanism there is no such thing as an objective standard of right or wrong. I used to think that way in order to be never wrong about anything.

Question: are you doing the same?

Audie. wrote:

Because all is relative anyways? Isn't it, you and others stated this effect any times...on this forum...

Your chosen interpretation x a touch of cant ...

How could it be wrong if there are really no objective standards?

Audie. wrote:

Did I say something that upset you or struck a nerve? That was not my intent

No, I suppose you just said what you think.

In general, "touch a nerve" seems to imply that one is getting a reaction because they got it correct.

I suppose I am more 'pre stressed" to use an engineering term in some regards. Matters of prejudice either toward Asians, which I do encounter, or toward atheists which I also encounter, I notice them and I dont care for it much.

I guess you hit a nerve in about the same way that calling me a chink would.

No offense on my part intended and never would call anyone that…

As for prejudice against atheist, NO, I am not that way either.

Please do not confuse debate and re-term debate as prejudice -- okay?

Audie. wrote:

My true intent was to simply to show in as few words as possible what I have encountered over the years from secular humanist atheist types, just as I, myself, once was so many years ago.

Curious, did you start out in a religious family, develop doubts, then go back to it?

Regardless, your mode of expression carried a whole lot more message than just an efficient presentation of your chosen interpretation of what you encounter. I started reading it and my reaction was along the lines of, here we go again, this stuff... (spelled with a t and an i}

Again, there are different debate styles. If it carried a message to you, then that is the art of debate in presenting the case by the impact of objective truth by various means. Just basic debate skills...

As for being born into a religious family, No, into a Christian one which I rejected at an early age due to life events, tragedies, deaths, and the bullies of media and education…. yes - but rejected for the reasons cited.

You see Audie, life is full of cr-p that happens in order to keep a person from finding what life is really about.

Has that happened to you too?

Audie wrote:Perhaps if I said that "all Christians..." and proceeded along similar line you'd get the idea.

That is a debate style which would have me respond to it another way and so forth and so on.

Again life events and the agents of bullies such as media and education hurt folks. Historically and empirically Atheism/humanism has hurt more than helped folks when it takes over Governments and state policy. Individual atheist are often nice folks while others are elitist snobs with streaks of doing nice things once in a while.

You can say the same thing about some Christian folks too, as truth is truth. Fact is, the majority of Christians do not fit that narrative at all but the bullies in media, education, reporting only on hypocrite’s stains what we really are like.

Might surprise you. With that, meeting pleasant nice atheist does not surprise me in the least. Likewise, you can say the same things too and with that, this portion of debate has ended. Let us not confuse debate style with prejudice though.

One question that puzzles me: Are you prejudice against God?

Audie wrote:

So since you think I was doing wrong, then how could this be wrong if all is relative and there is no standard weights by which to judge good or bad?

You said you used to think like or as an atheist or whatever is that odious term, "secular humanist", so it seems as if you (feel that you) know exactly how an atheist thinks and can speak for same.

I would not know if you've read / been told all the things I have, on the subject of how atheists are without a moral compass and the whole dreary litany that goes along with it.

Maybe you are not expressing a complete buy-in; perhaps "cant" is not an appropriate word for me to have used.

People can be prejudice against God and as a former atheist bent with humanism I defended that prejudice in various ways. I even used the counter – I am not prejudice against God just folks who believe in god or gods to skirt around the truth that I was.

I use a point of reference someone once used on me – not that atheist can’t be true to their own morality - but rather the point is that humanist centric-morality has no actual point for this reason: if after one dies all people simply cease to exist. Therefore the sole role of humanity is simply sex and either intimidating or seducing one to have sex just to keep the programmed Human DNA strain alive, etc... How such intimidation hurt others and mixed up or ruin their lives is not considered in the equation.

People indeed do create his or her own morality to justify what is right in his or her eyes. Often these come in conflict with another’s moral code.

In this article link example, we can agree this is wrong – evil

Yazidi Girl Exposes ISIS Rape Hellhole

While Isis types justify that this is morally right for them and good to do…

How can atheists say this Isis behavior is wrong unless they have a majority opinion to make into a law in order to stop it?

Morality based upon the majority opinion of public opinion, which by the way sways with the wind at the drop of the hat, is not a gold standard for determining right and wrong.

What is right for one may not be right for another. Lawyers use this logic to get proven criminals off the hook. It is taught in schools and on the media. It is used to take rights away from others by using the – I offended card without regard that they themselves are offending too.

Offending is not the golden rule to determine right or wrong - it creates confusion and conflict others can exploit for political gain i.e. dictatorial control

For me not to mention this point due to someone being offended and terming this as prejudice is not a wise course to take in order to skirt around the bottom line issue that all that humanism or atheism offers in reality does not matter since all die into non-existence and the universe will someday implode or the Sun goes super nova or a killer asteroid or comet hits the earth.

What is the point anyways?

There is no hope, no future, no reason... no point to life at all. That is the bottom line atheist humanism offers... rather dreary and depressing and by no means realistic either.

You and I are creatures of great intelligence and this earth as well as ourselves are here not by accident. if one think it is like that then during life this gnawing question indeed gnaws away at us - why are we here? -

That gnawing question gnawed on me for a while. I obfuscated it with the best of effort but it always returned, until I became Born Again... This world is not my home, I just passing through...

Audie wrote: IF you are actually asking a serious question and would like to hear my views, I am up for a discussion.

Im eating lunch at my desk, tho, and need to sign off and get to work.

Later…

And yes, if you would like I would like to hear your views if you so choose.

Blessings

Audie,

Would you mind adding the other poster(s) to your quotes in your post. It looks like the whole conversation was just you and me. And so it looks like I'm saying things I'm not. Thanks

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Sounds like these people have been listening to the Serpent again and believed the same lie.
Genesis 3:4-5

Yes, people in their vanity always like to think it is those others with the itching ears, listening to and spreading falsehoods, never themselves.

"Satan", should he actually exist, is no doubt quite good at that encourageing sort of deception. And vanity, it is said, is his favourite vice.

But of course, I'm just one of those atheists so what I say does not count.

It seems to me that people have believed the same lie Satan used in the garden which you will be as God and they live their life like that,doing and believing according to their own set of principles that defy doing things God's way.Sure atheists don't believe in Satan yet overlook the evidence of his influence in our world. I could give examples of things that let's me know Satan is really a copy-cat and copies everything God does,its just a counterfeit to what God says and offers,it's just copying what God offers,but I won't for now. Quick example though God offers us eternal life and yet Satan through his influence in our world also offers eternal life with scientists declaring that in the future we will not die- eternal life being offered.It's a counterfeit and lie to what God truly offers mankind.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Sounds like these people have been listening to the Serpent again and believed the same lie.
Genesis 3:4-5

Yes, people in their vanity always like to think it is those others with the itching ears, listening to and spreading falsehoods, never themselves.

"Satan", should he actually exist, is no doubt quite good at that encourageing sort of deception. And vanity, it is said, is his favourite vice.

But of course, I'm just one of those atheists so what I say does not count.

It seems to me that people have believed the same lie Satan used in the garden which you will be as God and they live their life like that,doing and believing according to their own set of principles that defy doing things God's way.Sure atheists don't believe in Satan yet overlook the evidence of his influence in our world. I could give examples of things that let's me know Satan is really a copy-cat and copies everything God does,its just a counterfeit to what God says and offers,it's just copying what God offers,but I won't for now. Quick example though God offers us eternal life and yet Satan through his influence in our world also offers eternal life with scientists declaring that in the future we will not die- eternal life being offered.It's a counterfeit and lie to what God truly offers mankind.

As your post is completely non responsive, the evidence points to
your not having a clue what I was talking about.

Nessa wrote:Audie,

Would you mind adding the other poster(s) to your quotes in your post. It looks like the whole conversation was just you and me. And so it looks like I'm saying things I'm not. Thanks

Sorry Ness, I was using a tiny tablet that is ill suited to this purpose.

Whoops Audie, I accidentally selected the edit button instead of quote button a couple of frames above, however, your responses are inculded, so the readers can actually follow: here is the post again.

Audie. wrote:

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:
Its in the subject heading. I tried to not make it too complicated...

It isnt comoplicated, its vague.

Possibly it's vague.

But then so are alot of posts.

If you dont care to say what you mean by what is "behind" such things, that is fine.

Whatever your exact intent, I hope you know better than to take BW's prejudiced bit of cant as representative of anything other than his chosen view of people he does not know.

Hmmm

How can I be wrong on this Audie?

"How could (you) be wrong". Couple of ways to take that, aren't there?

According to the philosophy of atheism/humanism there is no such thing as an objective standard of right or wrong. I used to think that way in order to be never wrong about anything.

Question: are you doing the same?

Audie. wrote:

Because all is relative anyways? Isn't it, you and others stated this effect any times...on this forum...

Your chosen interpretation x a touch of cant ...

How could it be wrong if there are really no objective standards?

Audie. wrote:

Did I say something that upset you or struck a nerve? That was not my intent

No, I suppose you just said what you think.

In general, "touch a nerve" seems to imply that one is getting a reaction because they got it correct.

I suppose I am more 'pre stressed" to use an engineering term in some regards. Matters of prejudice either toward Asians, which I do encounter, or toward atheists which I also encounter, I notice them and I dont care for it much.

I guess you hit a nerve in about the same way that calling me a chink would.

No offense on my part intended and never would call anyone that…

As for prejudice against atheist, NO, I am not that way either.

Please do not confuse debate and re-term debate as prejudice -- okay?

Audie. wrote:

My true intent was to simply to show in as few words as possible what I have encountered over the years from secular humanist atheist types, just as I, myself, once was so many years ago.

Curious, did you start out in a religious family, develop doubts, then go back to it?

Regardless, your mode of expression carried a whole lot more message than just an efficient presentation of your chosen interpretation of what you encounter. I started reading it and my reaction was along the lines of, here we go again, this stuff... (spelled with a t and an i}

Again, there are different debate styles. If it carried a message to you, then that is the art of debate in presenting the case by the impact of objective truth by various means. Just basic debate skills...

As for being born into a religious family, No, into a Christian one which I rejected at an early age due to life events, tragedies, deaths, and the bullies of media and education…. yes - but rejected for the reasons cited.

You see Audie, life is full of cr-p that happens in order to keep a person from finding what life is really about.

Has that happened to you too?

Audie wrote:Perhaps if I said that "all Christians..." and proceeded along similar line you'd get the idea.

That is a debate style which would have me respond to it another way and so forth and so on.

Again life events and the agents of bullies such as media and education hurt folks. Historically and empirically Atheism/humanism has hurt more than helped folks when it takes over Governments and state policy. Individual atheist are often nice folks while others are elitist snobs with streaks of doing nice things once in a while.

You can say the same thing about some Christian folks too, as truth is truth. Fact is, the majority of Christians do not fit that narrative at all but the bullies in media, education, reporting only on hypocrite’s stains what we really are like.

Might surprise you. With that, meeting pleasant nice atheist does not surprise me in the least. Likewise, you can say the same things too and with that, this portion of debate has ended. Let us not confuse debate style with prejudice though.

One question that puzzles me: Are you prejudice against God?

Audie wrote:

So since you think I was doing wrong, then how could this be wrong if all is relative and there is no standard weights by which to judge good or bad?

You said you used to think like or as an atheist or whatever is that odious term, "secular humanist", so it seems as if you (feel that you) know exactly how an atheist thinks and can speak for same.

I would not know if you've read / been told all the things I have, on the subject of how atheists are without a moral compass and the whole dreary litany that goes along with it.

Maybe you are not expressing a complete buy-in; perhaps "cant" is not an appropriate word for me to have used.

People can be prejudice against God and as a former atheist bent with humanism I defended that prejudice in various ways. I even used the counter – I am not prejudice against God just folks who believe in god or gods to skirt around the truth that I was.

I use a point of reference someone once used on me – not that atheist can’t be true to their own morality - but rather the point is that humanist centric-morality has no actual point for this reason: if after one dies all people simply cease to exist. Therefore the sole role of humanity is simply sex and either intimidating or seducing one to have sex just to keep the programmed Human DNA strain alive, etc... How such intimidation hurt others and mixed up or ruin their lives is not considered in the equation.

People indeed do create his or her own morality to justify what is right in his or her eyes. Often these come in conflict with another’s moral code.

In this article link example, we can agree this is wrong – evil

Yazidi Girl Exposes ISIS Rape Hellhole

While Isis types justify that this is morally right for them and good to do…

How can atheists say this Isis behavior is wrong unless they have a majority opinion to make into a law in order to stop it?

Morality based upon the majority opinion of public opinion, which by the way sways with the wind at the drop of the hat, is not a gold standard for determining right and wrong.

What is right for one may not be right for another. Lawyers use this logic to get proven criminals off the hook. It is taught in schools and on the media. It is used to take rights away from others by using the – I offended card without regard that they themselves are offending too.

Offending is not the golden rule to determine right or wrong - it creates confusion and conflict others can exploit for political gain i.e. dictatorial control

For me not to mention this point due to someone being offended and terming this as prejudice is not a wise course to take in order to skirt around the bottom line issue that all that humanism or atheism offers in reality does not matter since all die into non-existence and the universe will someday implode or the Sun goes super nova or a killer asteroid or comet hits the earth.

What is the point anyways?

There is no hope, no future, no reason... no point to life at all. That is the bottom line atheist humanism offers... rather dreary and depressing and by no means realistic either.

You and I are creatures of great intelligence and this earth as well as ourselves are here not by accident. if one think it is like that then during life this gnawing question indeed gnaws away at us - why are we here? -

That gnawing question gnawed on me for a while. I obfuscated it with the best of effort but it always returned, until I became Born Again... This world is not my home, I just passing through...

Audie wrote: IF you are actually asking a serious question and would like to hear my views, I am up for a discussion.

Im eating lunch at my desk, tho, and need to sign off and get to work.

Later…

And yes, if you would like I would like to hear your views if you so choose.

Blessings

B. W. wrote:

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:
Its in the subject heading.
I tried to not make it too complicated...

It isnt comoplicated, its vague.

Possibly it's vague.

But then so are alot of posts.

If you dont care to say what you mean by what is "behind" such things, that is fine.

Whatever your exact intent, I hope you know better than to take BW's prejudiced bit of cant as representative of anything other than his chosen view of people he does not know.

Hmmm

How can I be wrong on this Audie?

Because all is relative anyways? Isn't it, you and others stated this effect any times...on this forum...

Did I say something that upset you or struck a nerve? That was not my intent.

My true intent was to simply to show in as few words as possible what I have encountered over the years from secular humanist atheist types, just as I, myself, once was so many years ago.

Next...

Audie wrote:

Nessa wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:As has been stated before, logically speaking, if what IS good or bad is relative or subjective then THERE BEING a good or bad is objective and absolute.
And, experience and reason and history and, well, pretty much anything you want, tells us that IS the case.
In short, while what is viewed/understood/thought of AS good or bad MAY be subjective but that there IS a good and bad, is not.

I'd certainly agree that there is good and bad.

Nor sure if anything is absolutely good or absolutely bad; perhaps.*
In general we have degrees of, shades of grey, unforeseen and unintended consequences,what is good for one side is bad for the other, and so on. "Road to hell paved with good intentions".

How do you see the relationship between "good and bad", and, "pain and suffering"?

*an example of something absolutely good of bad, or a moral absolute would be welcome here. Or maybe not so much an example, but a general rule that could be applied.

Torturing a baby or molestering one.

Is there a time when that could be considered good?

I was looking for a general rule, not specifics.

If btw, you agree with BW and think that I am such as he describes, we can quit now.

Again I was not describing you personally and in no way was attacking you. Why do you get so defensive - did I say something that struck a nerve? Not my intent...

So since you think I was doing wrong, then how could this be wrong if all is relative and there is no standard weights by which to judge good or bad?
-
-
-

I will respond here rather than to subsequent post.

Firs:, No, on the "never can be wrong". I learn things by being wrong. If anyone here is doing "can't be wrong" it is our friends who think their bible reading and philosophy give them access to unassailable truth.

Prejudice against God. No. I asked abour your childhood exposure to religion as you srike me as one who was never and knows not what it actually means to be atheist. "Give us a child till he is 3, he will be a Catholic for life". (apocryphal or not the concept is real).

For me to be prejudiced against Batboy, Thos, Bigfoot, or the Fountain of Youth is equally nonsensical.

Whatever or however others think, that is me.

You talk of "no actual point". Flip it around. Why must anyone concoct a god in order to find meaning in life? YOUR chosen god may be real, but then all others imagined as giving meaning to life are illusory; I think they all are.

Other living things seem to find some sort of point in living; many are really quite insistent on it!
We have those same qualitiss, bred into us by ever so many generations that survived to have offspring, because of will to live.

We like to think, for pretty good reason that there is more to us than to a wombat. So we have
more reasons. I'd really like to live to see grandchildren. Who quits readingva book, coz there is
a thousand years from now, what difference will it make if the butler did it?

Why bother to exist, you ask? Why be the best you can if it is just ashes to ashes?

Do you address this question: "Why bother to play a Beethoven concerto, the last note fades, and it is gone."


Let me know how that works out to being different for a Buddhist, Moslem Christian, or atheist,
if you see a difference.

"Sole role is sex etc" seems such an odd thing for you to even think of.

"Create own religion"

Isnt that what people (the creative ones at least) have been doing, many thousands of times over
world wide and through time?

It isnt what atheists do. Again, I see how younever learned how an actual atheist thinks. The difference in our cultural backgrounds in profound, you will no more really get it about how atheism
is than you can step into a woman's shoes, be she Chinese or any other.

Ethics and morality were the objects of many a lesson or discussion for me, growing up.
As jac pointed out, it is about human nature. You dont need a god to discern these things

I've a deep cultural tradition to draw from, and the guidance of a most remarable woman, my Mom.

And, I've a brain as you graciously pointed out.

You cant just read a recipe book and then live a moral life. You have to think. Mom walked away fro a considerable fortune and position of power because her etical standards could not let her take part in
what that entailed. That is not following the herd, relying on others to say what is right.

Be it noted that atheists are under represented in American prisons-so they say. Note that religious justification has led to countless atrocities, with good religiousfolk looking to their compadres left right and behind, then book in hand, committing, yes, atrocities.

We all need to think for ourselves; you seem curiously opposed to doing that.

"Right for me, not for you". What is the pilot of a fighter plane to think or do?

Sometimes right and wrong does all depend.

Now, you asked if something happened that I dont see what life is really all about?

I dont think I understand rhe question. I am no dewey- eyed dreamer. I survived a shattering experience, an ordeal such as few ever survive. I blame nobody and nothing for it. The guy is a sicko,
but he didnt choose such an ugly life. I didnt decide anything about "god" as a result, I asked no god to help me during or since.

What does your question mean?

Bottom line-"No hope, no reason, ..."

I stood on a balcony high above the street in Hong Kong, and thought long about
stepping off. Only so much misrey can one take, but I chose to take a little more, a great deal more.

So no, I guess you are simply wrong on that no reason or hope thing. It is a bit of a mantra that
the religious use. Why? I can think of a possible reason or two. Uncouple it from there actually being a god, if you can, and then try answering.

Plz excuse the poor typing and organization. Im a a Starbux just off Wall St or maybe this is wall st.
Writing with rablet amid a lot of commotion, waiting for my date.

Hope this makes sense, looking farward to your pov on the above.

T

Edit: your moral compas was in good order as an "atheist", in far better shape than that of the
ostensibly / nominally Christian racists all about, . How would you explain that? Id be intrrested in your thoughts.

Here is a little more about me Audie,

I grew up as a kid the 1960's and teens during the 1970's. Grew up 10 miles south of Washington DC. These times were the height of the civil rights movement and political leftist protest and Vietnam protest. I know racism all too well. What people think racism is today, is not racism of true racism. I drank out of the colored only water fountains as a little boy in the early 1960's cause there was no line there. I recall the looks.

The hate of that era could actually be felt in the air as parts of Washington DC burned and looted during the civil rights protest. I recall seeing a neighbor who had a fish pond we kids like to check out seeing their yard filled with layers of trash along with Nazi symbols and bad language spray painted on the walls. My friend and I grab some trash bags and began cleaning up the yard, these were nice folks, Jewish. As we picked up the trash a truck full of KKK types drove by threatening us and calling us Jew Lovers. The home owners cracked open their front door and told us to go as it was not safe. We stayed anyways picking up trash while the smoke from DC hung in the air.

As part of the civil rights movement, I was bused to a primarily all black JR High school and there was severally beaten resulting in a concussion because of being white. I know racism, especially that minority racism as all to real too. So please never think or call or try playing a race card against me. During High School things calmed down and since I grew up in a divers area, we all got along. I even went to the the areas where those that beat me up lived as we became friends, we earned each other respect.

During that time,these events along with the political leftist stuff popular at he time is why then I launched into full blown militant atheistic humanism. Bullies of race and leftist junk forced fed us in school only helped to create hate of what I termed then as plastic land ie existing social order as enemy with Christianity as target number one to be destroyed by all means possible. Then there were deaths in the family and others that added to it as well as other life stealing things too is why I became so militant atheistic back then. I argued with Christians and mocked their views with success except for a few whom I could not counter no matter what I projected.

Summer late June 1980 I drank bad water, contracted cholera because of it, my body went into shock and I died. I was revived a bit later on after a neighbor found me. Amazing thing about this Audie is when you take your last breath, instead of nothingness, I became more alive than I am now or even you or anyone. It was like awakening from midst a dream into the realist reality milliseconds after my last breath. It is from that experience and being allowed to come back to this plain old world how I had militant atheism kicked out of me. Jesus sure got my attention!

Back to racism and other things:

Looking back, I am now amazed when I visit areas of the south now. All races share eating in the same restaurants. In the south in the 1960's the Democrats prevented this from happening. By 2007, racism was dying. The KKK types were as rare as hens teeth. The only place racism existed was in the minority projects/ghettos/inner city areas control by democrats who force feed a voting block fear that whitey is out to get you so vote democrat for this free stuff.

Obama's church he went to for 20 years was a black racist church of the norm for those housing areas confining minorities in voting districts and exploit for votes and push forth a New Marxist agenda. Much of the cop killing today is a result of their words of racism bearing fruit as well as the white privilege crap (which by the way is racist). The majority of racist today are in the BLM group and BP movements all designed and fostered by democrats to exploit social conflict theroy to the full all in order to bring chaos needed to destroy and transform America into a Marxist style of Government. They need a downtrodden class to do so and made one for this purpose. That is racist in and of itself to keep people entrapped on welfare and inner cities by frightening them with race baited lies just for votes and army. It is sickening.

You can rightly say, I literally grew up fighting racism and was beaten severally for it, ridiculed, threatened too. I am a realist concerning race as all people have a right to achieve their dreams and hopes. Like M L King said, which speech I watched at the time, his: Judged by the content of character and not the color of skin... I fought for that and now seeing it destroyed by the propaganda being taught in schools and colleges today. Your generation, Audie, with its high education is being played a fool by social justice Marxist who do not care one real iota about race but rather only turning the USA into something like Mao's China and Stalin's Russia.

I went to college too. My major - Social Work - emphases Criminal Justice. Upper level Social work classes taught community organizing and undoubtedly Marxist - albeit New Marxism. Even in those classes I experience leftist Christian religious bigotry on an unbelievable scale. All Christians in one upper level class were asked to stand up and come to the front of the class, then there the professor mocked us, and had the class force laugh at us too. Several of the girls standing left crying and in mortal fear and a few dropped out.

I reported this to the powers that be and watched the compliant brushed into the the trash can. I approached the Professor too and voiced complaint an experienced him saying I can doing nothing about it. I stayed in the class and earned an high 'A' as dissenter because I defended against their propaganda when no one else would even try.

I had in another class an assignment by lottery to do a report of a Diad System concerning how husband and wife interacted. I had to prepare this with slides, visual aids, during a 10 minute class presentation. Before that, the System Theory class Proff made it known that there was absolutely no difference between men and women at all. I could not do that after being married for several years. There is a difference in way men think and women think. I used humor in the presentation and had the class roaring with laughter at the truth.

However, I was mocked at the end of the presentation by the proff and he went off on the class too that there were no differences between men and women. He currently at that time was on his third marriage - so go figure. I failed the presentation which was the majority of the grade for the year. That is the only class I got a C in due to prejudiced of a leftist Proff. The others I encounter, I at least earned their respect by surpassing and disproving there propaganda and earns all A s.

My last final was a Blue Book examine in another class. The question was to present and explanation why their are no moral absolutes. I looked at the question. And wrote one short paragraph: If one were to jump butt naked from a plane at 15000 feet above the middle of the Pacific ocean, when you hit the water, one will be absolutely dead. Therefore, absolutes do indeed exist and if exist so do moral absolutes.

I then got up and handed it in while we the class spent the next 50 minuted slaving away regurgitation that such absolutes do not exist. I received something like a 110 percent on the test which is an A + Took me less that 8 minutes to do. The professor comments were - 'You made your case, excellent!'

Under threat of loss of grades and degree I learned to make my stand against all sorts of prejudices and racist propaganda. So with that, please understand that I would not use racism toward you.

I despise racism on all levels as it is evil and since it is evil due to what it produces (deceased police now, breakdown of rule of law and order, enslavement for votes, keeps hate and greed alive, feeds off fears) then there are moral absolutes exposed as real that are needed to combat racism realistically viva by exposure to its lies and propaganda.

Have a nice day Audie...
-
-
-

BW, I in no remote way intended to suggest you had expressed any racism.
I am truly sorry if you got that impression.

My date is waiting for me to finish bye.

T

The difference is wanting to know we are right about what happens when we die. Whenever God is brought up atheists simply bring up other god's that millions of other people believe in. It is like we cannot really tell which is the true God or not. Then people who believe in God, their sin is brought up as though it is an excuse to not believe in God because they can be just as evil as a person who does not believe in God and so it doesn't really matter in the end if I'm right or not when I die.It is like only they know about the atrocities done in the name of God,when we do.

We have not ignored history and you are the only ones who knows about it but I refuse to be wrong just because there are hypocrites in the world. We are warned about it,too and can see it clearly. It makes us sick to our stomachs,but it does not effect my choice,unless I let it.

The fact is just like with anything else we determine truth based on evidence,it does not matter what topic it is and it applies even when other god's are brought up and what happens when we die.There is no excuse to live ones life ignoring the consequences of being wrong when they die. It does not matter if they are Christian,Muslim,Buddhist,Hindu,atheists,etc If we die and are wrong? It matters. How long you live in this life will be but a speck of time if there is eternity when we die and where we end up or not when we die. To shrug this off and take it lightly is a very intellectually dishonest way to live. We can know the truth and all it takes is a willingness to search for it,instead of being in limbo like atheists/humanists do because even if they think about God,they are clueless when it comes to religion.It is not an excuse at all.

What happens when you die is the most important choice a person can makes,so present your evidence if you believe we just die and that's it,if you believe in karma/reincarnation,heaven/hell,33 virgins,etc and let's see who has the most convincing evidence.Let's make sure we get it right.

abelcainsbrother wrote:The difference is wanting to know we are right about what happens when we die. Whenever God is brought up atheists simply bring up other god's that millions of other people believe in. It is like we cannot really tell which is the true God or not. Then people who believe in God, their sin is brought up as though it is an excuse to not believe in God because they can be just as evil as a person who does not believe in God and so it doesn't really matter in the end if I'm right or not when I die.It is like only they know about the atrocities done in the name of God,when we do.

We have not ignored history and you are the only ones who knows about it but I refuse to be wrong just because there are hypocrites in the world. We are warned about it,too and can see it clearly. It makes us sick to our stomachs,but it does not effect my choice,unless I let it.

The fact is just like with anything else we determine truth based on evidence,it does not matter what topic it is and it applies even when other god's are brought up and what happens when we die.There is no excuse to live ones life ignoring the consequences of being wrong when they die. It does not matter if they are Christian,Muslim,Buddhist,Hindu,atheists,etc If we die and are wrong? It matters. How long you live in this life will be but a speck of time if there is eternity when we die and where we end up or not when we die. To shrug this off and take it lightly is a very intellectually dishonest way to live. We can know the truth and all it takes is a willingness to search for it,instead of being in limbo like atheists/humanists do because even if they think about God,they are clueless when it comes to religion.It is not an excuse at all.

What happens when you die is the most important choice a person can makes,so present your evidence if you believe we just die and that's it,if you believe in karma/reincarnation,heaven/hell,33 virgins,etc and let's see who has the most convincing evidence.Let's make sure we get it right.

Just say, "pascal's wager".

As for the rest-

Some actually do apply intellectual honesty, seek what is real and true, and go where evidence takes
them. Such a person has the capacity to see their errors when they make them rather than making up stupid excuses not to face facts .

An excellent example of deny facts and evidence is the phony "explanations" made up on the fly, to pretend polar ice was "stuck down" during the "flood".

A fine one you are to try to preach about "no excuse", "excuse not to believe", "willing to search", "based on evidence" and get this, "hypocrires".

Dont go criticizing others for their imagined flaws, then get all pious how you never "attack" anyone.

Doing it indirectly is just cowardice. Try facing your own flaws, you may have no time to invent
ones in others.

Back to the topic...

Q: What is "behind" suffering?

A: A really big hemorrhoid.

RickD wrote:Back to the topic...

Q: What is "behind" suffering?

A: A really big hemorrhoid.

You get the final word.