Translate

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Arguing With Atheists

5. We're going to have to define what we mean by, "good without God." Most theologians (even hacks like me) might well say that a moral code need not be joined as one with religious doctrine. But philosophically, if God is the First Cause, the ground of all being, then I'd say you can't be good without God in another sense, because you wouldn't be at all without Him.

4. I would agree that the fact the Earth is "fitted" for life doesn't prove anything. But I can hardly blame the pious for saying, "That's good enough for me."

3. You'll have to forgive the political scientist here, but the nature of law and the basis for its authority is really important, and it's one time that I'm unashamed to make a "slippery slope" argument. If law emerges by consensus, (positivism) then the only basis for the achievement of that consensus is power. Yikes. Even if one's intentions appear benign, even you cannot be blind to the endgame.

2. If math isn't a real science, as you said last week, you can't use it to disprove theism. Just sayin.'

1. I find secular humanism kind of ironic, since the basis of all of humanism's talk of "rights" is the concept of "person", which originated within Judeo-Christianity.

No comments: