Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Violence is Inherent in Atheist Politics

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Progressive hero Ta-Nehisi Coates (an atheist) is conflicted about whether to bring on the guillotines.  From a recent interview with Vox:

When he tries to describe the events that would erase America’s wealth gap, that would see the end of white supremacy, his thoughts flicker to the French Revolution, to the executions and the terror. ‘It’s very easy for me to see myself being contemporary with processes that might make for an equal world, more equality, and maybe the complete abolition of race as a construct, and being horrified by the process, maybe even attacking the process. I think these things don’t tend to happen peacefully.’

Materialist ideas have entailments, including (1) God does not exist; (2) good and evil do not exist as objective transcendent ontological categories; (3) God, who does not exist, cannot endow men with inalienable rights; and (4) men are not image bearers of a non-existent God; they are jumped up hairless apes.

If there is no good and evil and no God-endowed rights, by what standard does the progressive define the eponymous “progress” they claim to want to achieve?  Certainly, there is no transcendent standard.  The answer is that progressives want what that want.  Theirs is a political philosophy bound by nothing and defined by their unbounded will to power.

Coates rejects the ideas of the Declaration of Independence.  A non-existent God does not endow men with the right to life and liberty.  Jumped up hairless apes have no inherent rights.  So why not lop their heads off if they get in the way of Ta-Nehisi Coates’ pursuit of the greater good – i.e., Ta-Nehisi Coates’ idiosyncratic take on economic and racial justice.  After all, as every tyrant from Robespierre to Pol Pot knew, you’ve got to crack a few eggs if you’re going to make an omelet.

Comments
Seversky, just at random, the Flying Spaghetti Monster parody simply exposes how ignorant the objectors are concerning the nature of being. An entity made up from such components will be composite thus necessarily contingent. God is a necessary being, and so the FSM parody is a case of preening on ignorance. KFkairosfocus
October 17, 2017
October
10
Oct
17
17
2017
11:56 AM
11
11
56
AM
PDT
Seversky:
Atheism is the thorn in the side of unquestioning and uncritical belief.
No, atheism is the side of unquestioning and uncritical belief.ET
October 17, 2017
October
10
Oct
17
17
2017
06:32 AM
6
06
32
AM
PDT
Dean_from_Ohio @ 149
Seversky @ 139,
It seems that atheists are suffering rather more of that kind of discrimination than religious groups. Fine examples of “kindness, selflessness and self-sacrifice”.
Your example is revealing. Selecting Michaelangelo’s The Creation (from the Sistine Chapel), the atheist group replaces God with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, creates a large poster for its booth display at a freshman fair at a university in the U.K., is told they cannot attend, and you call it discrimination.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a mild parody or satirical comment on conventional religion, nothing more. Far worse has been said about Christianity, for example, by leading atheists. Yet the response from the university was more like that of North Korea reacting to a perceived insult to the Dear Leader. If it had occurred in the US there would have been immediate objections and even legal action on the grounds that it was a violation of First Amendment rights. Unfortunately, the US Constitution does not apply in the UK. The European Convention on Human Rights, however, does and Article 10 offers similar guarantees to the First Amendment. Unfortunately, Her Majesty's subjects seem to be less aware of their statutory rights than they should be
This is revealing for two reasons. First, it illustrates the derivative and parasitical nature of modern atheism. It does not build anything; it only tears down. It adds nothing of value; it only sucks the precious life out of its host while transmitting moral poison to the host’s conscience. Second, it shows that atheism’s inherent role in society is reactionary. It runs up to Christianity, kicks it in the shins (because it can’t kick God in the shins directly), runs away giggling, and protests “unfair!” when it has to sit on the penalty bench for the remainder of recess.
Although there can be any number of atheist philosophies or ideologies, atheism itself is simply is simply the view that there is no reason to believe that gods exist. It does not derive from anything, it does not parasite on anything. All atheists have done is deny the core claim of Christianity, for example, that God exists. For that, they have been reviled, oppressed and even killed by believers who should know better throughout history.
Atheism is the boll weevil of our society, ruining the crop of cotton in entire states. Yet it munches away undisturbed, producing spiritual nakedness and squalor through society and reacting with indignation when pulled from a plant just trying to grow, be healthy and bear its fruit.
Or maybe it makes believers uncomfortable because it draws attention to the lack of evidence, inconsistencies and contradictions in their faith which they would prefer to ignore. They would rather just recite "the pleasant poetry of Genesis" rather than confront the moral and logical problems the accounts actually present.
Atheism is the banality of weevil.
Atheism is the thorn in the side of unquestioning and uncritical belief.Seversky
October 16, 2017
October
10
Oct
16
16
2017
08:17 PM
8
08
17
PM
PDT
Lest anyone think our secular society is better than paganism, here is a good comparison. http://shoebat.com/2017/10/13/massive-crowd-cheers-on-as-pagans-kidnap-woman-and-her-son-they-make-the-son-rape-his-mother-then-they-slice-their-heads-off-and-drink-their-blood The acts we do are just as horrific, abortion in particular, but we hide them so we can avoid the unpleasant visuals.EricMH
October 16, 2017
October
10
Oct
16
16
2017
05:11 PM
5
05
11
PM
PDT
@ 207 Dean_from_Ohio Thanks for sharing your thoughts... I agree, that some or many things will never be revealed to us... However, I still believe there is a reasonable answer to this issue...I once thought I had a logical explanation to it, but I must have been dreaming about it... :-) Regarding Thess 2 : 1-15 you gave me another thing to think about...not that I have time for that now... lol I've looked it up and that some translations refer to the wicked one or the man of lawlessness, which may very well refer to Satan...or his followers, or both... Ideas?J-Mac
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
01:39 PM
1
01
39
PM
PDT
VJL @193 "Look, if God wants us to have free will then he just needs to leave us get on with things. If he’s likely to step in at some point and say: no, no, no this is not what I wanted then he’s not committed to free will. Then we’re just his experimental puppets. And if God is ‘out-of-time’ then he knew what was going to happen before hand. It just doesn’t make sense to me. Sorry. I agree. I think that was initially the idea that the universe, the earth and mankind would run its course... Unfortunately, things went wrong with Adam and Eve's rebellion...It needed to be fixed... Regarding God's knowing or not knowing, look at my conversation thread with daveS...I think we both explained it to some degree... I'm sorry that you are disappointed...J-Mac
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
07:27 AM
7
07
27
AM
PDT
daveS @203 "I agree; so presumably He did not know everything in advance. However, surely in that case He would have been aware of the possibility that things could go south, which is eventually what happened. Is it not reckless to create a population that could spiral out of control so spectacularly? We expect a shepherd to take care of his flock. This is the "risk" you take when you give your creatures free will...There is always a possibility things would go wrong...but not beyond repair with God... it seems :-) It doesn't look reckless if one knows a bit about quantum mechanics and especially quantum information conservation...To repair "the damage", all God has to is to bring the arrangement of subparticles to where they were before the damage; i.e. resurrect someone with the body and mind from before the damage... Maybe in some circles that sort of theology flies, but not in the (Protestant) churches I’ve attended. I'm not sure... I was raised as Catholic and my whole family worshiped John Paul II. When he began to allude to the possibility that hell may not be literal, many in my family began to doubt his state of mind... Since we had a bunch of priests in the family, I challenge one of them on the issue... Surprisingly, he was very open to the idea of the non-literal hell, and even went further that God's love wouldn't allow human souls to be tormented for eternity... Many in my family were shocked, but as you can imagine, I was relieved... My whole view of God pretty much changed, when I realized the eternal place of torments didn't exist... I also asked the priest about Adam and Eve's rebellion but particularly Satan's. He knew a lot about that and we had a long, long conversations about many related subjects back then by mail, as there was no emails yet ;-). However, we got stuck on one issue: Was Satan suicidal or naive when he rebelled against God? Satan must have known very well that there is penalty for the rebellion and yet, he decided to go ahead...Why? He knew the command given to Adam and Even that rebellion meant death. Was it different for angels? I doubt that very much... So far, no one has been able to come up with the satisfactory explaination... I have spoken to many, many knowledgeable people including many scholars, bible versed and the majority of christian evangelists... I recently even emailed a world-renowned geneticist who apparently is well acquainted with the bible, but no response either... :-( Any ideas? Anybody?J-Mac
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
07:07 AM
7
07
07
AM
PDT
F/N: Ironically, as this exchange unfolds, headlines have been dominated by a case of exactly the sort of powerful man with a defective conscience in action that I spoke to in 66 above. This case directly shows the corruption of entertainment media elites, and by how they went along with suppression of exposure the news media elites also. The network then extends into the political class and gives pause to those who were so busily dismissing concerns on similar corruption across those classes. We are looking at the need for reformation, for critical mass to undergird such, and for a world roots level grounding for ethics, duties, rights, truthfulness when it is inconvenient and more. The distraction of trying to project strawman caricatures of those who point to the contributions to genuine reform by the Judaeo- Christian tradition and the pretence that listing out sins and atrocities of Christendom silences such contributions, is little more than enabling behaviour. KFkairosfocus
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
06:09 AM
6
06
09
AM
PDT
J-Mac,
Good point, but remember that God gave everyone free will ... If He had known, or chosen to know, everything in advance, then He would have been guilty of all the consequences of His knowing it ahead of “time" ...
I agree; so presumably He did not know everything in advance. However, surely in that case He would have been aware of the possibility that things could go south, which is eventually what happened. Is it not reckless to create a population that could spiral out of control so spectacularly? We expect a shepherd to take care of his flock.
If you are referring here to the teaching of hell, then I can assure you that Christianity is leaning toward non-literal hell, without physical suffering ... at least that’s what Pope JP II initiated ...
:-o Maybe in some circles that sort of theology flies, but not in the (Protestant) churches I've attended.daveS
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
06:07 AM
6
06
07
AM
PDT
PPS: The inconvenient alternative -- from 66 above -- that all this is working to sidetrack attention from:
in this contest, “Religions” is far too broad a term, leading to promotion of what boils down to little more than prejudice and an easy excuse for broad-brush anti-Christian bigotry that is further fed by a one-sided litany against the foundations of our civilisation. I think a safer focus would be that power is addictive, attracts those whose moral compass is deficient, and that power elites can often hire ruthless violent or manipulative henchmen. Multiply by the notorious madness of the mob, and we have a much better warranted and actionable explanation of much that has gone wrong. Bring to bear the spiral of silencing when evil dominates in a society and you can see how marches of ruinous folly and especially murderous folly come about. That holds whether a society is “religious” or “secular humanist,” or even “post modern,” so evils and follies need little explanation in history, it is reformation and the softening of hearts that opens a critical mass to move towards the right, good, protective etc that need explanation . . . and the role of the Judaeo-Christian tradition in that is well documented though too often suppressed and denied in our day. Then, to address reform, bring to bear the question of what grounds duty, OUGHT. Post Hume’s guillotine, this can only be found at world-root level; we need an IS that inherently and inextricably bridges to and grounds OUGHT. The only serious candidate — yes, I point to comparative difficulties analysis at world roots level — is the inherently good creator God, a necessary and maximally great being, worthy of loyalty and the responsible, reasonable service of doing the good in accord with our evident nature. That’s a start-point: rights thus duties inhere in our nature as responsible, rational, morally governed creatures. Where your right to life entails our duty of care to respect and protect that life. Also, even our reasoning is guided by a felt sense of duty to the right, true, just, fair, warrant etc, or else it becomes the servant of deceit and en-darkenment under false colours of enlightenment. And, much more.
Sadly, the above thread shows first steps of exactly the patterns and dynamics I warned against in 66.kairosfocus
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
04:23 AM
4
04
23
AM
PDT
JVL, I pointed to a very specific false and misleading claim you have made which you doubled down on. You have now proceeded to try to distract by appealing to a half-truth. Any responsible person would recognise from 66 above, much less what I have linked long since and excerpted last night, that this from you at 186 is utterly false: "The Christian ‘Church’ has clearly done some good things for humanity but it has also done/sponsored/supported some pretty hideous things. I don’t think it’s fair or honest or accurate to portray it as a purely positive influence on the history of mankind." I have never made such a nonsensical portrayal, I have indicated its opposite, and to pretend that pointing out that which no one disputes -- that there are sins of Christendom and the church (and before that sins that led to Israel's judgement) -- as though it corrects me is further deceit. In short, you are not acting as a participant in a serious discussion but are resorting to the techniques of agit-prop. I suggest you should seriously re-think, and ponder what you are enabling. KF PS: When your opinion is in disregard to truth you know or should know (per duties of responsible discussion) and is used to mischaracterise others and circumstances -- even in the teeth of correction, it is wrong; it is deceit by neglect at minimum. It is a wrong that caricatures, stereotypes, scapegoats and denigrates others. It should be retracted and apologied for. Then amends should be made.kairosfocus
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
04:14 AM
4
04
14
AM
PDT
KF - added later And down that slippery slope of strawmannising, scapegoating, polarising and demonising lies incitement to the exact sort of violence that the OP warns against. Stop it, now. Apologise to the blog, then do better. You want me to apologise for my opinion? You really don't know me at all if you think I'm trying to incite violence. In fact I'm taking a stand against it. Surely any reasonable person would be abhorred by some of the atrocities sanctioned by the Catholic Church during the Albigensian Crusade. I don't understand what you are angry about. I just want the whole story to be told. You can edit out that phrase I typed ('I don't think it's fair . . . ') if if bothers you that much. I'm not really bothered.JVL
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
03:21 AM
3
03
21
AM
PDT
KF - doubling down, to further project a destructive misrepresentation put up in the teeth of duties of care to truth, fairness and more. A misrepresentation of historical events? Maybe but . . . the information is freely available and people can check it out for themselves. You obviously did not read what I linked or even what I put up in 66 with any care, twisting me into a handy strawman target to push into the scapegoated category. Why are you taking this all so personally? I don't consider your comments about what you perceive to be my position personally. I just disagree with you, that's all. I called you on it above, you tried to pretend you did nothing wrong. I put up the highlighted words in which you lied about me. I lied about you? Really? I just offered my opinion. In fact I pointed out that what I was saying was not contradicting what your were saying. I just felt that it was worth considering some historical events. Obviously, in my opinion. Your next move: but it’s just my opinion. FYI, you do not have a right to misrepresent another person by speaking with disregard to truth about them, especially in order to caricature them to win an argument. I don't think I did that. I didn't mention anything personal. It's fair to disagree with you isn't it? Worse, the wider context is that you are enabling a destructive radical secularist evolutionary materialist agenda that because it has no answer to the IS-OUGHT gap, has sought to smear ethical theism in our civilisation, the better to advance might and manipulation make “right,” “truth,” “justice,” etc. Good heavens! I just felt that it was fair to mention some historical events which, in my opinion, provide a fuller picture of the effect the Christian faith has had. I'm not promoting anything especially not might and manipulation. I'm not going to take your interpretations of my actions personally because clearly you don't know me at all. In short, exactly the amorality- and nihilism- driven, domineering factions Plato warned against 2350+ years ago. Repeat: no, you have no right to put forth and double down on an “opinion” that is in disregard of truth and sets out to caricature and smear another Well, how is anyone supposed to disagree with you without you perceiving it as a threat? Maybe we should just leave it. The other readers can make up their own minds as to whether or not I did anything wrong.JVL
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
02:57 AM
2
02
57
AM
PDT
JVL, doubling down, to further project a destructive misrepresentation put up in the teeth of duties of care to truth, fairness and more. You obviously did not read what I linked or even what I put up in 66 with any care, twisting me into a handy strawman target to push into the scapegoated category. I called you on it above, you tried to pretend you did nothing wrong. I put up the highlighted words in which you lied about me. Your next move: but it's just my opinion. FYI, you do not have a right to misrepresent another person by speaking with disregard to truth about them, especially in order to caricature them to win an argument. Worse, the wider context is that you are enabling a destructive radical secularist evolutionary materialist agenda that because it has no answer to the IS-OUGHT gap, has sought to smear ethical theism in our civilisation, the better to advance might and manipulation make "right," "truth," "justice," etc. In short, exactly the amorality- and nihilism- driven, domineering factions Plato warned against 2350+ years ago. Repeat: no, you have no right to put forth and double down on an "opinion" that is in disregard of truth and sets out to caricature and smear another. And down that slippery slope of strawmannising, scapegoating, polarising and demonising lies incitement to the exact sort of violence that the OP warns against. Stop it, now. Apologise to the blog, then do better. KFkairosfocus
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
02:34 AM
2
02
34
AM
PDT
KF How is offering my opinion lying? I mentioned some historical events in line with the theme of violence. I offered my opinion as to what those events say about Christianity. We disagree. It happens.JVL
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
01:43 AM
1
01
43
AM
PDT
JVL, bland denial will not save your credibility. KF PS: Just in case some will not follow the thread, JVL, 186 . . . and the "concession" that the Christian Faith/Christendom has done some good, in this context is little more than a dismissive distraction while the rhetorical knife is slipped in:
I don’t think you really get my point so I shall attempt to be more clear . . . The Christian ‘Church’ has clearly done some good things for humanity but it has also done/sponsored/supported some pretty hideous things. I don’t think it’s fair or honest or accurate to portray it as a purely positive influence on the history of mankind. Just like all human constructs it has its good and bad points.
kairosfocus
October 15, 2017
October
10
Oct
15
15
2017
01:33 AM
1
01
33
AM
PDT
ET - Intelligent Design offers the only testable model. And evolution by means of Intelligent Design is exemplified in genetic algorithms. So the question is- what is the alternative to Intelligent Design? But what do you mean by Intelligent Design specifically? It is an on going thing or was there a one-off intervention? Those two variations would have much different testable predictions don't you think? It's hard for me to say since I haven't tried to create a design hypothesis. I'm just asking what your design hypothesis is.JVL
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
11:06 PM
11
11
06
PM
PDT
KF - stop lying by misrepresenting and projecting — speaking in disregard to truth in hope of profiting by what you say or suggest being taken as true. I don't think I've lied at all. I've merely brought up some historical events which, I think, show that the Christian Church (as a collective whole) is a fallible, man-made and man-directed institution which has done some good and has done some bad. You covered some of the good things, I brought up some bad things. At no point have I ever claimed or implied sinless perfection or even a lot less for the Christian church or — more relevant to what I have spoken to — Christendom. Well, then what are you complaining about? Look, the subject of the thread was about violence and I thought it was fair to bring up some cases of violence promoted and supported and carried out by Christians.JVL
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
11:03 PM
11
11
03
PM
PDT
J-Mac - There is a difference between being all knowing and allowing the events to unfold due to free will… Can you see the difference? Look, if God wants us to have free will then he just needs to leave us get on with things. If he's likely to step in at some point and say: no, no, no this is not what I wanted then he's not committed to free will. Then we're just his experimental puppets. And if God is 'out-of-time' then he knew what was going to happen before hand. It just doesn't make sense to me. Sorry.JVL
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
10:56 PM
10
10
56
PM
PDT
JVL:
Well, I have asked for your alternative
Intelligent Design offers the only testable model. And evolution by means of Intelligent Design is exemplified in genetic algorithms. So the question is- what is the alternative to Intelligent Design?ET
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
04:34 PM
4
04
34
PM
PDT
F/N: BTW, I suspect a fairer reading of what happened in the taking of Jerusalem in the first crusade -- which recall was a counter-offensive to what had happened esp after the defeats of Byzantium c 1070,and in the context of mass slaughter, kidnapping and enslavement of pilgrims, continuing 400 years of Jihad expansionism -- is the ill-disciplined behaviour of armies of that era. IIRC, they displeased their own commanders who had offered refuge to at least some of the slaughtered. Again, see my comment at 66 above on the wider context. Observe that an atrocity from 1,000 years ago is trotted out as a capital example, while say the objections the Hindus of India would have to the Jihad are forgotten, and the democides of over 100 millions by secularist regimes in the past century hardly come up for mention. As for the ongoing holocaust of the unborn, cumulatively 800+ millions and mounting up at a further million per week by Guttmacher and UN figures, that is enabled not seen as something to be addressed for what it is. It is that imbalance and that scapegoating and targetting of Christians (who happen to be the most persecuted group in the world today, with martyrdoms across the past century dwarfing the previous 19 taken together . . . ) that are so revealing of the underlying utterly hostile mindset. KFkairosfocus
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
04:32 PM
4
04
32
PM
PDT
JVL, stop lying by misrepresenting and projecting -- speaking in disregard to truth in hope of profiting by what you say or suggest being taken as true. At no point have I ever claimed or implied sinless perfection or even a lot less for the Christian church or -- more relevant to what I have spoken to -- Christendom. Had you bothered to read from my linked course page (not to mention things above) you would have seen this from Bernard Lewis, from his essay on the roots of muslim rage:
. . . The accusations are familiar. We of the West are accused of sexism, racism, and imperialism, institutionalized in patriarchy and slavery, tyranny and exploitation. To these charges, and to others as heinous, we have no option but to plead guilty -- not as Americans, nor yet as Westerners, but simply as human beings, as members of the human race. In none of these sins are we the only sinners, and in some of them we are very far from being the worst. The treatment of women in the Western world, and more generally in Christendom, has always been unequal and often oppressive, but even at its worst it was rather better than the rule of polygamy and concubinage that has otherwise been the almost universal lot of womankind on this planet . . . . In having practiced sexism, racism, and imperialism, the West was merely following the common practice of mankind through the millennia of recorded history. Where it is distinct from all other civilizations is in having recognized, named, and tried, not entirely without success, to remedy these historic diseases. And that is surely a matter for congratulation, not condemnation. We do not hold Western medical science in general, or Dr. Parkinson and Dr. Alzheimer in particular, responsible for the diseases they diagnosed and to which they gave their names.
And long before you got to that, this is how the introduction begins:
INTRODUCTION: Let us begin with a premise that will bear repetition below (and should be borne carefully in mind in all the discussion that follows): PREMISE I: on abundant evidence and good reason; as individuals, and as a race, we face a common challenge that we are all finite, fallible, morally fallen and too often ill-willed. We may term this: the moral hazard of being human. Thus, the pivotal issue we all face is repentance, renewal and reformation, a process in which we should seek to help one another. This is the context of four key NT teachings . . . . In short, (i) we should humbly recognise our own struggles, and seek to help one another in making moral-spiritual progress in light of the wisdom and teachings embedded in the Scriptures. This, from earliest childhood on, humbly recognising that all of us will struggle and stumble in this area. At the same time, (ii) we should carry our own load of growth and purification as much as we can. But also, (iii) we should recognise that there is a certain type of devilish hoggishness that will resist and ferociously retaliate against correction. Sometimes, (iv) such hoggishness will even present itself in religious or otherwise respectable garb, but the underlying hoggishness will soon enough be apparent if there is an attempt at correction. As a result, (v) a culture influenced by the scriptures will always be an Iron and Clay mixture of progress and resistance to progress. So, (vi) the tensions inevitably lead to drearily repeated conflict; too often, marked by "sawdust in your eye/ plank in mine"one upmanship games. Consequently, sadly and to our shame, (vii) this pattern explains much about the history of that civilisation that for many centuries was known as Christendom, and is now usually styled Western Civilisation. It is therefore unsurprising to see that (viii) it is now quite common for Bible-believing evangelical Christians who stand up in public or online to be presented with "shut up! . . . " rhetoric based on reciting long litanies of the real and imagined sins of Christendom and/or out of context clippings from especially the OT. Where as well, (ix) the NT is not immune to this sort of angry, demonising out of context misreading . . .
You owe this blog an apology for deceitful rhetorical practice. What I did do above is captured in key part at 66, which is conveniently buried under a lot of further questionable commentary, much of it of tangential nature at best:
in this contest, “Religions” is far too broad a term, leading to promotion of what boils down to little more than prejudice and an easy excuse for broad-brush anti-Christian bigotry that is further fed by a one-sided litany against the foundations of our civilisation. I think a safer focus would be that power is addictive, attracts those whose moral compass is deficient, and that power elites can often hire ruthless violent or manipulative henchmen. Multiply by the notorious madness of the mob, and we have a much better warranted and actionable explanation of much that has gone wrong. Bring to bear the spiral of silencing when evil dominates in a society and you can see how marches of ruinous folly and especially murderous folly come about. That holds whether a society is “religious” or “secular humanist,” or even “post modern,” so evils and follies need little explanation in history, it is reformation and the softening of hearts that opens a critical mass to move towards the right, good, protective etc that need explanation . . . and the role of the Judaeo-Christian tradition in that is well documented though too often suppressed and denied in our day. Then, to address reform, bring to bear the question of what grounds duty, OUGHT. Post Hume’s guillotine, this can only be found at world-root level; we need an IS that inherently and inextricably bridges to and grounds OUGHT. The only serious candidate — yes, I point to comparative difficulties analysis at world roots level — is the inherently good creator God, a necessary and maximally great being, worthy of loyalty and the responsible, reasonable service of doing the good in accord with our evident nature. That’s a start-point: rights thus duties inhere in our nature as responsible, rational, morally governed creatures. Where your right to life entails our duty of care to respect and protect that life. Also, even our reasoning is guided by a felt sense of duty to the right, true, just, fair, warrant etc, or else it becomes the servant of deceit and en-darkenment under false colours of enlightenment. And, much more.
It is high time that a more responsible view of the roots of modern liberty and democracy was taken by secularists in all sorts of contexts. A more sober assessment of the critical moral failure of evolutionary materialist secularism and its fellow travellers starting with the IS-OUGHT gap would also help a lot. Plato knew this 2350 years ago, as was pointed out. KFkairosfocus
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
03:17 PM
3
03
17
PM
PDT
@188 "...I’m an all knowing..." Who said that? Not me... There is a difference between being all knowing and allowing the events to unfold due to free will... Can you see the difference?J-Mac
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
02:11 PM
2
02
11
PM
PDT
J-Mac - Imagine YOU ARE in charge and you watch the earth from outside of time…Generation, after generation goes on, and nothing good grows out of the children…if they survive at all, because their parents have sacrificed some of their children to blood thirsty gods… What would you do? Let me see .. . . I'm an all knowing, all powerful, loving creator. And I feel that some of my created beings are being quite naughty. And they are raising their kids to be naughty as well. So, I could punish the parents and save the kids who are not at fault. I could let them all wallow in nastiness until they learn the wickedness of their ways. I could go an create a new planet and try again (wondering what I had done wrong). Oh wait, I know! I will kill thousands if not millions of them, even the children, because it all didn't go according to my preconceived idea (a bit confusing since I'm outside of time) of what was right. I gave them free will and they didn't do what I wanted! And I won't just snuff them out quickly and painlessly; I'll make them suffer through a great flood which will also destroy all the arable land and forests. And I will leave only a very few people to populate the entire planet again. Even though, as an omniscient being, I know full well that less that ten individuals is not enough genetic variation to ensure a viable population. So God is vindictive when beings he gave free will to don't behave the way he wanted? Is that really the message?JVL
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
01:38 PM
1
01
38
PM
PDT
KF- when Christians has strong influence on law making and coyurt rooms, teh unborn were protected. I rather suspect that among the killings perpetrated by the Crusaders when retaking Jerusalem there were some unborn that were killed. I also suspect that that was the case when the Cathers were mindlessly slaughtered and when the Jews were blatantly persecuted in Europe. The ideology does not dictate practice. yes, there are many who profess the Christian faith who are personally caught up in the horror, they are ill instructed, lack proper support and are participating in wrong. Yes but many of the atrocities that I am referring to were sanctioned and supported by the Catholic Church!! It was proscribed behaviour!JVL
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
01:26 PM
1
01
26
PM
PDT
KF - you will recall that Magna Carta went back and forth several times until it was established. You have — yet again — played the half-truths game on a tangent, demonstrating the pattern of problems. I don't think you really get my point so I shall attempt to be more clear . . . The Christian 'Church' has clearly done some good things for humanity but it has also done/sponsored/supported some pretty hideous things. I don't think it's fair or honest or accurate to portray it as a purely positive influence on the history of mankind. Just like all human constructs it has its good and bad points. The point I highlighted is not the silly strawman claim that Christendom’s history is sinless and error free and struggle free. But you said some of the factual events I posted were akin to falsehoods. And the question is, were you being calculatedly deceitful above, or just utterly ignorant of Magna Carta’s importance and history then failing to do proper due diligence before posting a handy Wikipedia talking point? My point was that the church (as it was at the time) couldn't even agree on what was a positive development. The Archbishop of Canterbury helped construct Magna Carta and the Pope annulled it. Yes, from 700+BC and beyond, the Judaeo-Christian tradition was clearly upholding justice and challenging oppression. But that just isn't true!! You are ignoring historical events where the church was instrumental in opposing universal justice and supporting oppression. I am not talking about ideology, I'm talking about actual practice. That is the reason why when we see the sort of one-sided litany and scapegoating that are so common today, that tells us a lot about the secularists and their agendas, JVL. I am asking you to acknowledge all the events. I am asking you not to be one-sided.JVL
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
01:21 PM
1
01
21
PM
PDT
ET - I don’t care how old it is it still stands. You cannot account for either subunit via unguided evolution. You don’t even know how to test the claim unguided evolution didit. Well, I have asked for your alternative. Why don't you post it? And time will tell if Jonas is right or not. So far not one of the dire predictions of the alarmists has come true. I'm not interested in the alarmists. But the science does interest me.JVL
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
01:11 PM
1
01
11
PM
PDT
J-Mac, projection, and likely the crooked yardstick as standard of straight and right length problem. KFkairosfocus
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
11:15 AM
11
11
15
AM
PDT
You are delusional KF... I know I'm not going to get a straight answer from you, so I'm not going to waste my time...I'm going for a bike ride... Bye bye!J-Mac
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
10:59 AM
10
10
59
AM
PDT
J-Mac, do you see the used correctly and consistently -- vs what happens realistically with mostly young people and the like who are taking risks they should not be -- issue, and are you aware that there is a significant failure rate issue? KF PS Since you want to play at SS ticklers, I note that suicide once successful is obviously irreversible, that insistently assigning the convicting promptings of the Spirit to the devil blocks the means of being led to repentance, that many will naturally pray for their country men in a war [and will almost certainly be confused given the dominance of agit prop in wars . . . but again see the White Rose martyrs], and so forth. All increasingly tangential and closely tied to the scapegoat the Christians agendas.kairosfocus
October 14, 2017
October
10
Oct
14
14
2017
10:26 AM
10
10
26
AM
PDT
1 2 3 7

Leave a Reply