Parting Shot: The Full-Figured Amanda Waller Now Skinny in DC Comics Relaunch WTF - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Parting Shot: The Full-Figured Amanda Waller Now Skinny in DC Comics Relaunch - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Parting Shot: The Full-Figured Amanda Waller Now Skinny in DC Comics Relaunch WTF - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Monday, September 12, 2011
Objective Morality
I'll take it you can't demonstrate that morals exist objectively.
But, you should make sure you differentiate between a "moral fact" as in "something that exists objectively, metaphysically in the absence of any consciousnesses" and "moral fact" as in "something we all (mostly) agree to". Good luck (chuckle...)
The problem is that we need to define terms. I would argue that there is no morality in the absence of any consciousness. When Christian theists say morality is objective, that is not what we mean. Objective Morality is independent of the human consciousness. It is objective with respect to those who live under it. It is true no matter the opinion of those living under it. As long as those who live under it decide what is right and wrong, then you have question as to what is right or wrong and who has the right to determine that. A "moral fact" dependent solely on what we agree on means nothing because we can't all agree - and never will. How do you know you are right and those you disagree with are wrong?
Without an objective standard, how do you know tell? Anderson is trying the old Atheist tactic to get out of the force of the moral argument for the existence of God by arguing that a morality that God is not subjected to is no absolute standard and morality without a consciousness is a logical contradiction. However this argument is truly silly. In order for morality to be objective for human being it merely has to be true independently of us. That morality is the standard by which we will be judged against by our maker whether or not we agree to be judged by that standard. That morality is based on God's character and by which He says. If we base morality on what most of us agree on then it's only relative with respect to one another.
Often times attempt to define morality apart from God lead to basing it one of four ideas or utilitarianism or some combination of them:
a. Beneficience
b. Non-Maleficience
c. Respect for Autonomy
d. Justice.
The problem is that even the most ardent skeptic admits his or her own finitude and being prone to making mistakes. Given this inescapable conclusion, why would anyone think they know what is best for any given person in any given situation? Or how would we know what justice is when often times we are merely blinded by our own self-interest? The "respect for autonomy" part really amuses me because where does it end and what does it mean? Does it end when one person's autonomy is misused to hurt others? Who decides when that is? What happens when you disagree?
It is an example of extreme hubris to think that just because we can't think of any reason why God would allow reality to work out as it has that there isn't a reason. That is arguing in the gaps of your ignorance. God is not subjected to Morality. How can you be limited by what you have decreed? There is no dilemma. here. IF there is a God then Morality is grounded in his consciousness. Without God, there is no consciousness in which to explain what Morality is or where it comes from. All we have is our own predilections and preferences without God. And who's to say yours are better than mine when we disagree? The fact that we will disagree on some points is a given.
Here is the bottom line: when I, as a Christian theist, argue that there exists a objective morality, based on God, I am not saying that God is limited or subjected to that standard. This is not saying that God can or does anything against that standard. God follows those standards because they are based on who God is. Anytime it seems like God has commanded anything that goes against that standard, one of two things is true: either we didn't understand the command or we don't understand the standard as well as we like to pretend we do. In addition, we need to keep in mind that the Bible is God's revelation of that standard. And looking into it there is more than enough about that standard that I would not have come up with on my own. And neither would you. I will discuss this more in an upcoming post about a study that suggests that when people think they are following God's commands, they are really only doing what they want to do.
A Defense of Antony Flew’s “There is a God” from his Own Letters | Athanatos Christian Apologetics Ministry
A Defense of Antony Flew’s “There is a God” from his Own Letters | Athanatos Christian Apologetics Ministry
Do Minorities Receive More College Scholarships? - Education - GOOD
Kantrowitz crunched data (PDF) from both the 2003-04 and 2007-08 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, which showed that white students are 40 percent more likely to win private scholarships than non-white students. And Kantrowitz finds several college-specific scholarships only for white students, like UCLA's 66-year-old Werner Scott Scholarship, worth $4,000, which is "restricted to Caucasian students from Hawaii who are not of Polynesian blood."
Duh? If minority obtained more scholarships than white students, wouldn't it mean that there will be less white students in American universities than "minorities"? I would think so. However it's not. Strange. Read the whole article at the following link.
Do Minorities Receive More College Scholarships? - Education - GOOD
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Calvinistic Cartoons: Calvinists - You Should Love This!
Calvinistic Cartoons: Calvinists - You Should Love This!
John MacArthur Predicts Reversal of the Reformed Revival « Reformed Baptist Fellowship
What Are You Groping For?
What Are You Groping For
Faithful Thinkers: Video: God is Not The Source of Evil
I do not agree completely, but I've got to admit Geisler's and Ankerberg's answer does fit what a lot of people believe. The problem is that I don't think the Bible supports the answer. I think what it comes down is that God has allowed things to happen, things that we don't like and things that are also against his character, however God allowed it for reasons that are not clear to us now. Loving God means trusting Him even when we don't understand what he is doing now.
Faithful Thinkers: Video: God is Not The Source of Evil
Divine Commands Post 9/11 | MandM
Divine Commands Post 9/11 | MandM
Animators Help Families Retell the Stories of Loved Ones Lost in 9/11 - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
StoryCorps is an independent nonprofit whose mission is to provide Americans of all backgrounds and beliefs with the opportunity to record, share, and preserve the stories of our lives. Since 2003, StoryCorps has collected and archived more than 30,000 interviews from more than 60,000 participants. Each conversation is recorded on a free CD to share, and is preserved at the American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress. StoryCorps is one of the largest oral history projects of its kind, and millions listen to our weekly broadcasts on NPR’s Morning Edition and on our Listen pages.
StoryCorps has taken some of those stories and animated them. Comics Alliance has posted 3 of them and I will post 2 of them here. You can see many of them on YouTube.
When Richie Pecorella met Karen Juday, she captured his heart and changed his life. They were engaged and living together in Brooklyn when Karen was killed in the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, where she worked as an administrative assistant. Here, Richie remembers Karen, his love and inspiration.
Directed by: The Rauch Brothers
Art Direction: The Rauch Brothers & Bill Wray
Animation: Tim Rauch
Producers: Mike Rauch, Lizzie Jacobs & Isaac Kestenbaum
On the morning of September 11th, Michael Trinidad called his ex-wife, Monique Ferrer, from the 103rd floor of the World Trade Center's North Tower to say goodbye. In the wake of his death, Monique tells the story of Michael's lasting legacy—the family they built together.
Directed by: The Rauch Brothers
Art Direction: Bill Wray
Producers: Lizzie Jacobs & Mike Rauch
Animation: Tim Rauch
Audio Produced by: Michael Garofalo
Animators Help Families Retell the Stories of Loved Ones Lost in 9/11 - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
I'm Glad We Didn't Have Facebook or Twitter on 9/11 - Technology - GOOD
That’s the real problem with attempting to make sense of 9/11 using social media: The former requires deep thought while the latter feeds on immediacy. Ten years and millions of articles after 9/11, we’re still trying to come to terms with what happened that day. We’re still sifting through the debris and our collective emotions in order to find whatever it is we lost, or to explain why things are the way they are now. I have a hard time believing 9/11 tweets or Facebook updates would have changed any of that for the better. And by now they’d be forgotten anyway, buried under 10 years of more shouting into the abyss.
Check out the whole article.
I'm Glad We Didn't Have Facebook or Twitter on 9/11 - Technology - GOOD
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Resources on the Problem of Evil - Apologetics 315
Resources on the Problem of Evil - Apologetics 315
Friday, September 9, 2011
Teacher's iPad Experiment Shows Possibilities for Classroom Technology - Education - GOOD
Teacher's iPad Experiment Shows Possibilities for Classroom Technology - Education - GOOD
President Obama: Pass This Jobs Bill (The Damn Is Implied) - The Snob Blog - Danielle Belton's The Black Snob
President Obama: Pass This *Damn* Jobs Bill (The Damn Is Implied) - The Snob Blog - Danielle Belton's The Black Snob
Obama to Congress: “Pass This Jobs Bill!”
Do Something! Obama's Five Main Proposals for Fixing the Jobs Crisis
Thursday, September 8, 2011
African Entrepreneurs Are Making Ghana Into a Tech Startup Hub - Technology - GOOD
Step aside, Silicon Valley and Bangalore. A group of aspiring web entrepreneurs in Ghana are looking to turn Accra into the newest startup hub. The nonprofit World Wide Web Foundation is working with local developers through a training program called Mobile Web Ghana to give participants the business and technology skills they need to leverage ideas into successful mobile web companies.I sure hope this works out. It's about time
African Entrepreneurs Are Making Ghana Into a Tech Startup Hub - Technology - GOOD
Comics Fans React Angrily To Batman's Reboot... In 1987 - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Chris Sims has written an amazing article that puts the recent protestations against the new DC reboot by pointing out that there were plenty of hate letters written against Batman: Year One. Ironically, today that storyline is considered one of the best comic book stories...ever! The article even reprints some of those letters. The story has affected each and every Batman (and influenced the genre) story since. Back then, few people thought that it would ever be adapted into high quality movie due out in a few weeks. Take a look.
Comics Fans React Angrily To Batman's Reboot... In 1987 - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Brazilians Protesting Political Corruption Don 'V for Vendetta' Guy Fawkes Masks - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
"Hello Comics Alliance, let me share with you some news from Brazil. Yesterday we celebrated our Independence Day and we had a lot of street protests against corruption. The Activists wore masks of Guy Fawkes, like the character V, from the legendary Alan Moore's graphic novel. These protests came out on the main newspapers in Brazil and we believe that the world should know that we are fighting for a better country... We would be grateful if you could show the world our actions."
Brazilians Protesting Political Corruption Don 'V for Vendetta' Guy Fawkes Masks - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Slavery in the Bible: Articles & Audio - Apologetics 315
Slavery in the Bible: Articles & Audio - Apologetics 315
FacePalm of the Day #121 - Debunking Christianity: Objective Morality vs. Christianity, by Non-Stamp Collector
John Loftus has posted the following new video from YouTuber Nonstampcollector regarding Christianity and objective morality. He takes an interesting Atheist viewpoint on the debate. His conclusions are fully warranting a FacePalm but his starting premise has several important points. Here's the video.Nonstampcollector starts out making it clear that he doesn't agree with the Moral arguments for the existence of God, but he also clearly puts his finger on the problem atheists have with defeating Dr William Lane Craig. As long as one can demonstrate the rationality of believing that a god(s) exist, atheism by definition is on shaky ground. Dr Craig usually keeps his debates right there putting his opponents on the defensive and trying to disprove the Bible to show that the God of Christianity does not exist - which is usually not the topic of the debate. It's undeniable and gives Dr. Craig the option of not defending the Bible because his arguments are not dependent on it. Unfortunately, this means that Dr Craig can only argue for general theism and his savvy opponents like Christopher Hitchens are able to point this out. Most of his opponents don't seem able to press him on that, but there have been a few Christians and Atheists alike whom have pointed this out.
Nonstampcollector, to his credit and Dr Sam Harris' detriment, also points this out. Even if you grant the premises that Dr. Craig enumerated in Nonstampcollector's video (and I do), you can't just whiz-bam-come-up-with the God of the Bible. You still have to explain how the Bible reveals God's character and ultimate moral law-giver. Dr Harris, during his debate with Dr Craig, unsuccessfully tries to raise this objection given his skill in interpreting the Bible but Dr Craig did not go for it because it was out of bounds of the debate. Nonstampcollector and atheists who are sophisticated enough to make such objections try to paint theists who don't defend the validity of Bible as not doing so because the Bible is undefendable. I think that this is where the Facepalm comes in.
One of Nonstampcollector's objections is that it's wrong to tell unbelievers that without God they don't know what is moral and what isn't. However I think we need to ask "What does objective morality mean?" Here is the definition I will be using: Objective Morality is a thought or action that is correct or wrong irregardless of what people think or feel about it. Nonstampcollector presents several scriptures and then quotes Dr Craig that God's commandments must reflect his character and that they must be "holy" and "Loving". Nonstampcollector thinks that we can just ignore the "holy" part because it means nothing outside of made-up religion. But before we go on, we have to define what these terms mean. I'm not content with just ignoring what "holy". Given that "holy" means nothing to an atheist, let me help him out. Holy means pure, just, perfect, set apart, and special. It speaks to a standard of perfection that cannot coexist with impurity. Also "Love" is not milk-toast, touchy, feel-ly, emotional lip service our society gives lip service to. No. "Love" is the courage to decide to do what's best for others despite it being inconvenient. It's giving what is needed not just what is desired. Without the holiness of God, the love has no foundation or context. It's because of Love that the standard of holiness is set and upheld. Without that, none of the Bible makes sense.
Rather than respond to each of the scriptures that Nonstampcollector raises, I'm just going to generally respond to his overall argument. Do the scriptures that he raised illustrate objective moral values that we should embrace as ethical today? YES! Whenever, most Christians point out that application of those ethics is dependent on circumstances the objection is raised that it makes Biblical morality relativistic. Not at all. Why should everyone of the laws binding on an Israelite living 4000 years ago be binding on me today in the same way? Do all the traffic laws apply to me when I am a pedestrian as when I am driving in my car? No. If anyone would like to discuss specific scriptures and ask how they apply to us today, I'd be happy to but for now let's get to the meat of the argument. I already hear the objection: When it comes to the Bible the stakes are much higher because those who disobey are going to hell if Christians are right! The Bible is really clear, no one can keep the law perfectly and without Jesus Christ you are going to hell no matter which commandments you fail to keep or succeed in keeping. That is where Holy and loving comes in. Sin must be punished. Good works don't save you. Jesus saved us so that we can perform good works. Yes, atheists do good things but that's not apart from God on their own. Credit goes to God for all the good we do. Honestly, deep down, we all know we do more bad than good, according to the standards set in the Bible. Why should you get away with that? The only way we can escape that is set up our own standard for morality. That is what Sam Harris and Nonstampcollector and all people do if you don't submit yourself to God.
I was listening to what Nonstampcollector probably isn't even aware what he's saying. I hear it all the time from everyone: "I'm not really that bad. I haven't done anything worthy of being sent to hell for. There are other people far more deserving of hell than I." Most Americans would agree that Osama Bin Laden deserves to go to hell. They think Anders Behring Breivik should burn there too. And they just know that men who piloted the planes into the World Trade towers and the Pentagon ten years ago. They also think rapist and child molesters are so evil they couldn't possibly go anywhere else. And we just know Hitler's got a spot there if such a place exist. In my mind this begs a question: why? Why do they deserve to go hell and you don't? I know what some people would say: "I'm a good person. I try to help others and I haven't killed anyone." Here's the problem with the Bible: It says that if you lust after another person, its no different than having done the act. If you bad-mouthed someone, it's no better than having killed them. In short the Bible very clearly tells us that none of are less deserving of hell than anyone else.
Nonstampcollector has a problem with many of the punishments given in the Bible for what he thinks are minor infraction or not wrong in the first place. This demonstrates that without God we wouldn't know what is right and wrong. I agree that pre-marital sex does not seem like it should be considered a capital offense, but the fact that it was to God in Ancient Israel shows me how wrong I am and how bad the offense is. Witchcraft is the same. There are many other examples. Is being a false prophet really that bad - deserving death? Yes! Just because we don't understand or agree that an act is immoral or evil does not matter. Is something right or wrong just because God said so? Yup. Yes, that's right. I said it. Equating actions throughout time and epochs is dangerous and misses key points. For example, is it wrong to kill a man who is doing nothing to harm you? Yes, that is murder. Is it wrong to kill a man who trying to kill you? No. Morality is objective but again application of those values are not.
Here is why the video deserves a Facepalm: Nonstampcollector fails to understand the standards by which he judges whether or not the God of the Bible is moral. He doesn't know what "Holy and loving" are and none of us do apart from God revealing it to us in relationship with Him. If anyone has specific scriptures they would like to discuss, even the ones that Nonstampcollector raised, to see why they are loving, I'd be happy to discuss it. The only way to be in right relationship with our creator who's character is the basis of objective moral value is through the one sent to redeem us from sin and death - Jesus Christ - and then you can make the leap from bald theism to personally knowing the one who exists.
Debunking Christianity: Objective Morality vs. Christianity, by Non-Stamp Collector
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)