[randilover]

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

That's because you are being purposefully obtuse. What part of agree to disagree don't you understand?

It was the part where you said you have sufficiently explained your self. See my next point.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

I am arguing there is no universal arbitrary definition of good based on a relgious belief system. I am arguing there is a methodology to determine what is good and bad that can be applied universally.

Sure it can, but based on what? That is my point. You can’t have a methodology in a vacuum. It can’t start from nothing. It has to have something it can point to as the starting point. I’m arguing for conscience based on man and what we know of him. It’s not based on a belief system, it’s based on what you and I (and others) know to be true based on what we appeal to when we talk about right and wrong. As far as moral law is concerned, I haven’t even brought up a belief system. I’m making the point that people as a whole stick to a moral law, therefore there must be a moral law giver. I haven’t come close to the Christian God when I talk about that.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Will every society/culture come to the same conclusion following the same methodology on all of the details? Probably not, but that does not justify a society from attempting to wipe out a minority.

Yes, it does. There’s not much you can say differently about it, if they believed that is right, what are you going to say to them? What greater form of morality are you going to appeal to? If you just say yours because it’s better, you have to explain what you mean by better, but to do so you are lining yours and there’s up against a larger standard. Who’s standard is that?

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Are you being serious here? Are the "aryan" truly a superior race to the Jews? Were the Aryans really the master race of the world? Were the Jews really the cause of all of the problems in 1930s Germanic society?

No, no, and no, but I can explain why. I was making the point that you cannot, based on what you are telling me about no absolute moral law. I quoted Chesterton before, the problem with believing in God is not that you are believing in nothing, but that you will wind up believing in anything. You have no logical argument as to why they were wrong and you were right.

Hitler based his belief on Neitchze’s superman. He believed that Germany was superior because there they were, poised to take up that cause of superiority (over all other races, not just Jews), smarter and more technologically advanced than any other country or society on earth. Nature proves the strong survive, nature shuns equality, and therefore he could too. The problem was that, as Lewis said, he created men without chests. All physical strength, no heart.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

I can explain it and I have. You refuse to acknowledge it as a logical explanation because it does not fit your own narrow world view.

Don’t get mean about it. Let’s take a step back and tone things done here. My point is I don’t think you have explained why you should live your way and not any other way. That’s what I keep hitting on.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

That argument fails when it is noted there are a multitude of other peaceful, successful, "good" by any measure (other than the religion the hold to) societies that are not Christian. As the same evidence you just gave credence for proving Christianity proves the validity of their various religions.

Yes, but I’d never just offer than in and of itself as the reason why. It’s corroborative evidence, so to speak.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Explain the history of Evangelicallism, and the conversionism movement more specifically, then.

Is there something you are thinking of specifically? I’m not sure where we’d be going with this one (other than off on a tangent). Billy Graham never preached a crusade saying you should act a certain way. Passover came before the law was given. Redemption is always put before change in behavior.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

If God really exists, why would I have a vested interest in ignoring him? I lose out on the whole eternal life thing? So why would I want to do that? Life would be so much easier for me if I just believed. All my decisions would be easier. And I could live my life knowing when I died I'd just be going to heaven. What a load off my mind that would be. Tell me what I have to gain by ignoring God?

I actually said that above. Simply put, if there is no God, I can do what I want. I have no accountability. Man makes up his own rules. In the garden, the devil tempted Eve by stating, "God did not say…" He went on to say God doesn’t want you to do it because he knows you’ll be just like him if you do; in essence, be your own god. It’s been downhill ever since. It’s a pride thing. Man wants to be autonomous, on his own. Make his own rules, do what he wants. Problem is he find himself out there with no starting point, nothing to call home base.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

The problem is I will not blinding accept something I find to be utterly rediculous. If this was any other topic of conversation, you would agree with me (not on the utterly rediculous part). If I wanted you to believe something only on the evidence that I was convinced of it, you would laugh in my face.

I’m not asking you to. I’ve never talked about "blindly" accepting something. I’m just trying to make the point that there is a rationality to it, it’s not like you check your brain at the door to a church. It’s a misconception that faith and rationality are in conflict with each other. (On a side note, having it be ridiculous or not isn’t really an issue, one of the arguments for Christianity is that is it is quite conceivably one of the most ridiculous things ever thought of, proving the point a man wouldn't have come up with it.)

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Here's the difference between you and I. My philisophical view of the world is not dependant on what others think. It does not convince me just for you to say some smart guy said something.

Me either, but I was proving my assertion that it is not a rational hang up to believe in a god. There are completely rational people who do, and people who were atheistic and then through reasoning came to believe in a god.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Deism is actually a philosophy I don't have much of a problem with. I know you won't like the source, but the first line of description from the Wikipedia site is "Historical and modern Deism is defined by the view that

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

reason, rather than revelation or tradition, should be the basis of belief in God." That sounds good to me. Erasing the reliance of revalation and tradition reduces most of the issues I have with modern Christianity.

I’d agree with the revelation part, but not the tradition part. Jesus saved his harshest words for the traditionalists. They were the ones who crucified him, so you are in good company. As for the revelation part, I’m not sure what to say to that. That’s where you are, then so be it, I can respect that as a position. Would you explain why that is a hang up for you? Man to man I mean. I won’t attack you for it or anything. Just like to hear what you have to say.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Besides, if I had to label myself, I'd label myself agnostic vs. atheistic, only because I am convinces I will never be able to determine if there is a God in my lifetime, and quite honestly, it is not all that important for me to do so.

I totally 100% agree with you that belief is dependant on faith. That is a much easier answer for me to swallow than page after page of trying to convince me that science is on your side as well.

I don’t think science is antagonistic to my side either. But again, I wanted to make the point that it’s not irrational to believe in a god. I just think the Christian one is right because of how it answers the questions and longings that I have.

See, I’ve said before that it is not a place or mental state or behavior, it’s a relationship. I could not scientifically prove to you my wife. I could show you a birth certificate, a driver’s license, pictures of our wedding (man, did she look beautiful), etc. But that still wouldn’t prove to you she exists. But I could then talk to you about how much she means to me, how after I met her, she changed my life. How I love her qualities, like her driving pursuit of honesty and transparency, how great of a mother she is, her beauty, etc. We’d be a little closer, but you’d still have the potential to doubt. There’d have to be a point where you’d have to either say, "Look, I really believe your wife exists, can I meet her" or, "I believe she really could exist, but if so I’m not interested in meeting her." Faith is like that. I have some driver’s licenses, birth certificates, so to speak, and I am telling you that I have met that person and how beautiful his character is. But at some point there is a place where all that doesn’t matter because you’ll need to do the relating to, or at least let the evidence stand that that person could be there.

Now, we can both go separate ways, I don’t look down on you, or consider you less of a person or anything (except when I beat you next season in SAC’D), but that is the nature of it. Yes it is faith, but that says a lot more than just blindly leaping.

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

First off, near death and death bed are far from the same thing. Near death experiences are a totally different ball of wax. I don't know how many people you have been in contact with on their death bed. I have been in contact with only a few that I knew personally, and a number more in a brief stint as a volunteer in an "old folks home" as we used to call them. None of them would I look to for any philisophical insight.

Yeah, I bet. But just thinking, are you saying you have a clearer view of life right now, or will it be better when it has been lived out and you can see where you went wrong, where all the blind spots were you were unaware of? How actions from when you were younger hurt others, etc.?

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Is that really the best you can come up with?

No, but this seems like a distant tangent and these posts are long enough.