Brilliant

Morality & Religion

Morality is doing what is right, regardless what we are told.

Religious dogma is doing what we are told, no matter what is right.

This kind of sums up the morality debate nicely. Doubt there's a religious person out there that would understand this.

Best Commercials in the last 2-3 Years

Of the Pale Blue Dot

I've posted this text before but I felt this was even better so I posted it again.

Daddy wants a new computer

So my buddy at work built a new pc and gave me an itch to build one as well. I can't afford it but if I was going to build one here's what I'd build.

Product Description

Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 ST3750330AS 750GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Hard Drive - OEM Item #: N82E16822148298

POWERCOLOR AX4870 1GBD5 Radeon HD 4870 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready Video Card - Retail Item #: N82E16814131148

CORSAIR CMPSU-520HX 520W ATX12V v2.2 and EPS12V 2.91 SLI Certified CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Modular Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power Supply - Retail Item #: N82E16817139001

G.SKILL 8GB (4 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1100 (PC2 8800) Quad Kit Desktop Memory Model F2-8800CL5Q-8GBPI - Retail Item #: N82E16820231195

GIGABYTE GA-X48-DS5 LGA 775 Intel X48 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail Item #: N82E16813128332

Intel Pentium E5200 Wolfdale 2.5GHz LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor Model BX80571E5200 - Retail Item #: N82E16819116072

Microsoft Windows Vista Business SP1 32-bit for System Builders DVD - OEM Item #: N82E16832116475

LifeWay has some questions

So I saw that LifeWay had some questions for atheists that I thought I'd take a shot at answering.

1. Creation
      The overwhelming consensus of science is that the entire cosmos (including space and time) came into existence at a finite point in the past.  All of our observations, equations, and physical laws testify to a point of origin for this universe.
      In light of the troubling evidence for a beginning, and that we may not even be able to find a natural cause in principle, what explanation is given to the questions, "Why is there something rather than nothing?" and "Where did it all come from?"

Science can't answer either of the questions posed with any kind of certainty for the same reasons that science could not tell the earth was round a few hundred years ago, it's an evolving discipline that updates itself every day with new information from experiments and discoveries.

   2. Order
      The past several decades have added profoundly to our knowledge of chemistry, physics, and cosmology.  It has become increasingly clear that we live in a universe finely tuned for the support of complex life.  This fact is so universally acknowledged that even secular scientists have coined the term "Anthropic Principle" to describe it.
      How is it that we live in such an exquisitely fine-tuned universe?  Even assuming that the universe could have popped out of nothingness, why should it have been such an orderly and hospitable one?  Is there a scientific, testable answer for this question that does not simply appeal to imagination?

The universe it what it is, and perceptions of order or chaos do not mean much since we are still pretty ignorant in our knowledge of the universe and how it works. This is a question that in and of itself may be wrong or right but we are too ignorant to even ask correctly.

3. Abiogenesis
      The problem of abiogenesis (the origin of the first lifeform) is one of the thorniest and most intractable issues in chemistry.  Our increasing knowledge of microbiology and earth history has only added to the complexity of what needs to be explained.  The simplest life is equivalent to modern bacteria, which is loaded with complex activity, information, and molecular "machines."  The fossil record does not give evidence that there was a "prebiotic soup," or that there were any biological precursors to the first organisms, or that the atmosphere was the ideal mix to yield the necessary molecules, or that there was the expected long period of time between when the Earth could support life and when it actually appeared.  Evolutionists regularly segregate the abiogenesis problem from the issue of evolution because (1) it is a challenge they'd rather not be saddled with, or (2) it is the most logical point for possible divine intervention.  However, for the atheist there is no escaping this issue; they are obliged to seek out some purely natural explanation.

      What hope for an explanation do you have?  Are you satisfied to have problems like this that are unanswered, or even unanswerable?



Someday we may have a concrete answer for how life on earth started but I don't think it will be in my lifetime.  My satisfaction has no influence on whether or not this question is answerable. Sure I'd like to know everything about everything but not only is that unrealistic it would rob me of the journey of discovery that is in my opinion one reason for existence.

      In telling the tale of life on earth science writers often unconsciously use the word "miracle" for the appearance of the first organisms.
      What kind of evidence is needed before we are to actually accept that something like this really is a miracle?

I'm not sure how much would be needed, but even a small amount of evidence would be a good start. As of right now there is no documented evidence of any miracles ever that I know of, but feel free to show me some if I'm wrong. Also if there is evidence then it would not be a miracle now would it. I mean if there if evidence then there's an explanation and if there's and explanation then it's not a miracle.

4. Transcendent Principles
      Logic and mathematics are abstract principles that have been discovered rather than invented.  We cannot do science, communicate, or navigate this world without them.  They appear to stand outside of nature to describe and measure it.  As Albert Einstein said, "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible."
      What is the source of math and logic?  The existence of this remarkably fine-tuned universe aside, how is it that we have these "languages of reality" to so elegantly describe and interact with it?

This is a really dumb question. Many people from different cultures agree that the sky is blue and that fact is "Transcendent"  as well but it doesn't require an explanation. If I were to try give an explanation however I would say that  humans evolved to explain their world and since we all live our lives in much the same way in much the same place all our experiences are to some degree "Transcendent".

5. Morality
      Another transcendent entity that is a problem for atheism is morality.  With no divine author or judge there is no reason to think that there should be any moral laws that we are obliged to recognize and keep, except for self-serving reasons.  And yet, morality aligns with our deepest intuitions: we expect others to recognize it; we urge our kids to exercise it; therapists get rich repairing the effects of its abuse; we judge criminals insane if they do not recognize it; and all cultures affirm it in common principle if not in individual application.
      Do you deny objective morality; that the difference between Mother Teresa and Hitler is not just a matter of preference, like chocolate vs. vanilla ice cream?  If not, then how do you ground morality; how do you explain where it came from and why we ought to be moral tomorrow?



There is no such thing as objective morality, and yes I would say that the only difference between Hitler and Mother T, is societal preference.  That being said both of those people lived in societies with a set of morals and both of them are judged using those morals.  Using societies morals Hitler was evil and Mother T was less so (Some people might argue this point).  Also morality does not "morality aligns with our deepest intuitions" it is subject to change by place time and society as anyone can see by examining the different cultures of the present and past.

The whole continent of North America appears to be destined by Divine Providence to be peopled by one nation, speaking one language, professing one general system of religious and political principles, and accustomed to one general tenor of social usages and customs. For the common happiness of them all, for their peace and prosperity, I believe it is indispensable that they should be associated in one federal Union.
-- John Quincy Adams

The idea of Manifest Destiny led early Americans participate even more so in the destruction of the Native Americans.  The number of Native Americans that were killed (some estimates are as high as 100 million dead) is staggering compared to any other war, genocide, crusade. Almost all early Americans and European settlers that participated in these murders were Christians, so where was your "deep intuition" of morality then?  Morality is relative depending on culture, timing and current circumstances, and mankind has proven this millions of times over the course of our existence.
  
Skeptics often bring up the "problem of evil" as evidence against God, i.e., if there is a good and all-powerful God, then why is there evil in the world.
      Do you think that this is a valid objection?  If so, are you admitting that there is evil in the world?  What is "evil," and do you not admit its opposite: "good?" 

     The problem of evil objection only makes sense if such things as good and evil are objectively real, not just preference statements.

Religious people assert that there is a god. Religious people also assert that there is objective good and evil.  As a result of these assertions when arguing with a religious person an atheist will often use this question to try and get the religious person to explain the inconsistency of their faith.  This is not a question for atheists to answer because as you correctly pointed out many of us don't believe in objective morality, nor do any of us believe in god.



   6. Meaning
      In the atheist worldview we are products of time, chance, and blind forces - there is no objective meaning and value to our human existence.  Yet our deepest longing is for our lives to count for something.  We intuitively know that humans have rights and dignity.
      Does life really have no point other than what you pretend for your own sake?  Will you say, like atheist philosopher Albert Camus, that the only serious question is "suicide?"  What values and purpose will you instill in your children?  Will you be honest with them, or will you borrow ideas from some non-atheistic belief system so as not to disappoint?

Life is what you make of it.  I will not lie to my children and as a result there wont be room for disappointment.  My life will be mostly meaningless to the world as was every other life, the only mark anyone can leave on this earth is their offspring.  Even the great ruler's and religious leader's lives will not have a significant impact on this earth or this species.  Currently it is estimated that Homo Sapiens have been around for 200,000 years, can you imagine how many rulers lived died and killed in the first 190,000 years before known history?  Can you think of any that will be remembered by our species if it is still around in another 200,000 years? This is a good follow up as well to this question: (Link)

7. The Mind
      In the world of atheism, where there is no soul or transcendent "self," humans are simply biological machines, and our minds are just computers made out of meat.  With this in view there is really no room for something like freewill, since we are all just operating according to our "programming" and our environmental influences.  And there are great difficulties in conceding that chemistry can produce something as abstract as "consciousness," or at least anything qualitatively different from what we ourselves might ultimately produce using computer technology.
      Are you prepared to accept the idea that no one is really morally responsible for their bad behavior and, conversely, that virtuous behavior is not commendable?  

Morality is a societal influence and as a result those of us in society are responsible for violating morality when we do so. Society does commend virtuous behavior which is why it is commendable, not because any action is inherently virtuous.  Virtuous behavior is not commendable for any other reason.  There have been many cultures that thought it was virtuous to offer up yourself or your children to be sacrificed to the gods, and they are no more right or wrong about what virtious means that you are.


In what way will you seek to convince me that I am really not a conscious and self-aware being; that it is just a complex biochemical illusion?  

You make many assumptions about the beliefs of atheists with this question and as a result I find it odd to try and answer.  I would not try to convince you of anything.  I will respond with an equally absurd question, how can you prove to me that anyone exists?


Can you accept that computer programs may one day be just as much "persons" as you, yourself?

Absolutely.

8. Supernatural Experiences
      Every known time and culture is rich with stories of near death experiences, ghosts, angels, demons, prophetic dreams and visions, and miraculous healings.  While some of these are certainly spurious or not well documented, others have reasonable experimental support.  In addition to this, humans seem to be incurably religious; the idea of God and the spiritual is deeply entrenched in the human psyche, if not in its actual experience.
      What are we to make of all this?  If man is simply an adapted biological organism, then how is it that we did not manage to adapt to our natural environment in this area - why are we not "naturalists" rather than theists?  Can't any of this be a hint toward reality, or must we think that the bulk of humanity flirts with insanity?

Insanity is defined by society so no most of humanity is not clinically insane. Atheists don't believe in a deity, that does not mean that they don't believe in the supernatural or in things they can't explain or can't understand.   Personally I do think that most people are brainwashed at a young age to buy into their culture/faith etc and as a result are mildly insane, this brainwashing leaves them more capable of jumping to absurd conclusions about experiences and calling them spiritual.


The longer that I've been outside of religion and away from their brainwashing the more I'm in awe of our absurd it is. I don't believe in most so called supernatural or spiritual experiences, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. 

   9. Case for Christ
      The case for the Jesus of Scripture is extremely compelling.  There is good evidence that the New Testament was written in the generation of the Apostles.  We have thousands of copies of these documents in their source language, some of which go back inside of 100 years after Jesus' death.  There is no evidence of significant corruption in the known manuscripts.  There is no motivation and evidence for fraud among the apostles and church fathers - most died martyr's deaths.  The trend of archaeology is toward validation, not denial, of what it is possible to confirm in Scripture.  Even non-biblical manuscripts support various key details of Christian theology.
      The burden of proof is generally on the one seeking to deny historical records.
      What alternative explanation do you offer to the New Testament documentation and the tradition of the church, and what support do you have for your theory?


"The burden of proof is generally on the one seeking to deny historical records."


Where is your proof to deny Islam, Buddhism, or Islam?

Is it because of the miracles that you doubt the Scriptures?  

That's one of many reasons, not to mention the fact that the writers of the new testament never met a man named Jesus nor did they witness any of the so called miracles. Those are just a few quick and easy reasons.

If Jesus really were God in the flesh, how would you expect Him to confirm that fact?

There's a lot of ways that the God of Christianity could try to confirm that fact.  The better question is would I follow the God of Christianity if he did prove himself to me? The god of Christianity is evil and that fact is proven throughout the bible, so no if he arrived here today and told me to follow him I would most likly stand against him until he could prove to me that he did in fact deserve my allegiance.


10. Rational Faith
      Christians are often accused of being simple-minded, superstitious, or irrational.
      Is it so unreasonable for us to believe that the universe had a beginning because it actually was created;

Yes, belief in anything to the denial of everything else without evidence for the belief is unreasonable.

the laws of physics are so fine-tuned because it had a designer;

That is not only a debatable point that you've stated as fact, it's also subject to our perception of reality and our own ignorance related to how the universe works.

people are preoccupied with good and evil because they are real things;

I disagree and gave my reasons earlier.

we long for purpose and meaning because they exist to be had; 

We all answer this differently and yes purpose and meaning do exist for me but they are different than the purpose and meaning that your beliefs inflict on you.

life from non-life really is miraculous; 

That depends on what you mean by miracle. Seems to me that it's a good puzzle but not required to be the work of the supernatural.

consciousness and freewill seem real because they are; 

From what we can tell they are "real", I don't disagree.

people are incurably religious because there is actually something real in religion; 

The fact that I'm an atheist proves your last statement wrong, as I was "cured" of my religion and so using your logic there isn't anything real in religion.

and the historical case for Jesus is so tenacious because it is actually true?

Just because a story is good doesn't make it true, santa clause get's tracked on radar every year thousands of people claim to have seen him and kids all over the world believe in him, why doesn't the tenacity of this story make a case for it's truth?

If there really is no meaning or purpose to life, no objective good or evil, and the existence of "truth" itself is open to debate, by what standard will you condemn the beliefs of Christians?

By the same standard that I hold my own beliefs and the same standard I use to condem the beliefs of Islam, Judisim, and all other fairy tails.

Forgive Rick Warren

Indeed. Let’s give credit where credit is due and blame where blame is due. Rick Warren has flaws, and those deserve condemnation. His excuses are wearing thin and his views on homosexuality are harmful. But he is also doing good works, and let’s not forget those.

(Link)

Why on earth should we ignore his flaws? We don't ignore the flaws in anyone just because they do a nice thing here and there.

In the public eye, for the most part, people are defined by their flaws. Bill Clinton was a good president but you know what comes to mind when someone says his name, that's right his flaws, not the good he did or the laws he passed, but his inability to keep his fly zipped.

This is also true from a moral standpoint, we don't allow a child molester to escape prison just because he/she donates to a lot of good charities, or does some other good stuff to negate all their evil actions.

In the end I say fuck rick warren and anyone else that spreads that much bigotry and hate.  Sure he feeds people in Africa, but he also tells them not to wear condoms and participates, if only by supporting his man Martin Ssempa, in condom burning parties, publishing the names of Homosexuals in corperate and local newspapers, and lobbying for criminal penalties to imprison homosexuals. (Link)

the United Nations’ special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, told the New York Times their activism is “resulting in great damage and undoubtedly will cause significant numbers of infections which should never have occurred.” (Link)