Secular Morality and Christian Ethics (2/2) Harry's Response

This is a collaboration response to MyIntellectualJourny on Secular Morality and Christian Ethics.
Part 1: Buruc's response.
Part 2: Bucklehairy's response.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• secular
• morality
• christian
• ethics
• cultural
• relativism
• my
• intellectual
• journy
• christianity
• god
• moral
• values
• virtues
• right
• wrong
• good
• evil
• apologetics

[humanistheart]

@Bucklehairy Still waiting for you to prove jesus qualified as a messiah. Let me guess, you checked the hebrew scripture and figured out there's zero case for jesus. Good for you, finally comming to yoru senses.

[humanistheart]

@Bucklehairy That's the best you have? Simply saying I'm wrong will not make it so.

The fact remains, I've shown that christianity is a religion without morals, and that jesus was a fictional ass.

[humanistheart]

@Bucklehairy Name 3 messianic prophecies jesus fulfilled. Even if you can argue you, unless you can show jesus actually brought world piece, that he ended the jewish diaspora, that he became the king of isreal, that he was the descendant of king david and actually existed, he wasn't the messiah.

[humanistheart]

@Bucklehairy You don't need to have empathy for a fictional monster.

[Bucklehairy]

How decent, sincere and reasonable of you to say that. You're saying empathy is your basis for morality? You seem to lack empathy when it comes to this. Thanks for the debate, anyway.

[Bucklehairy]

@humanistheart

So, in the end, you've relieved me of my duty. I don't need to show the irrationality of your beliefs, you've made yourself crystal clear.

[Bucklehairy]

You're not giving me any reason to believe that, other than just accepting your word on it, which, given your lack of authority on matters like these, seems to equal stupidity. I'll say it plain and simple: Read the Gospels and check the Messianic prophesies that Jesus fulfilled. If you value the truth more than your own opinion, I'm sure you'll change your mind.

[Bucklehairy]

(cont'd)

Science can be used for both good and evil, it doesn't deal with ethics, rather ethics is required to set limits for scientists. Also, even your assertion that my assertions need to be reasonable is by itself a philosophical matter, not a scientific one.

[Bucklehairy]

I'm actually planning to make a video about this, but I'd never thought I'd need to explain this to an atheist. Scientific knowledge limits itself to logical-empirical facts/data, irrespective of worldview or prejudice, and it doesn't tell us what is good or evil. During WWII, it wasn't a question of the scientific method whether a British scientist could condemn a fellow Nazi scientist for testing gas chambers etc. that's an ethical, philosophical, question, not a scientific one.

[humanistheart]

@Bucklehairy "It doesn't falsify the existence of objective moral values "

I take it you did not bother to look up the definition of objective. Your imaginary friend god doesn't qualify, not would he if he ever managed to exist. I've already explained that numerous times, and you've never been able to offer any sort of counter argument.

So why do you persist in saying it, since he clearly could not be an OBJECTIVE moral standard?