Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: If Everything was Determined by Physical Laws Morality Would be an Illusion

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    190
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    9

    Default If Everything was Determined by Physical Laws Morality Would be an Illusion

    Dinesh D'Souza said, "If everything was determined by physical laws morality would be an illusion, but morality is a fact in the world as real as any other. It is as real as this watch in front of me. If there are human beings without morality and we don't have philosophical disputations with them, we put them in straight-jackets and carry them away. They are sociopaths."


    In atheism, anyone who doesn't agree with you is a sociopath and should be carried away, tortured and killed.

    Morality mitigates against self-interest.


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    254
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    If Jesus didn't really die on the cross then grace would not come for forgiveness of sins and our having died on the cross with Christ for power over sin and self by the Holy Spirit applying the cross to our lives. It would be just illusory and ineffective, and as Paul said we Christians the most despicable people on the earth. But if it is true and we do appropriate God's will and pleasure, life and power by the Holy Spirit, then we have eternal blessings and won't go to Hell with atheists.

    In a natural world it can't help be the case that we are born sick from the sins of the first Adam. If God is going to create a natural world then it follows we must all be born into sin, but praise God He provides sufficient grace all to receive His redemptive solution.

    You are responsible for receiving the atonement of Christ otherwise personal responsibility means nothing, for you could reject God without consequences. He created you to accept Him, so by not accepting His solution, you reap the consequences.

    All sin leads to death and the second death which is Hell, so your personal responsibility is if you don't want to go to Hell and if you do want to be with God and the Lamb in the New City then you will need to receive the atoning sacrifice that only God could pay for. This is humility to accept this fact of reality.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    254
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Adamic man has only been around 6000 years ago, that is man with a spirit of God-consciousness fully developed and with a soul and spirit that will never cease to exist so that when we die later we shall be resurrected. Pre-Adamic men when they died would simply cease to exist. About 6000 years ago God breathed in the breath of life directly creating man's spirit and when the spirit made contact with the body the soul life was formed so man became a living soul with a spirit and a body. Amen.

    The killing that went on before 6000 years ago was indeed sinful as fallen angels and demons corrupted not only earth's earliest ages (e.g. with dinosaurs), but in the restoration (Gen. 1.2) summed up by the six literal days, animals and pre-endemic men killed one another in sin, but God was able to move past this and create a man in His image about 6000 years ago using the body of pre-Adamic man so when God breathed in the breath of life man became a sinless, perfectly created man in His image, placing him in the Garden of Eden. This Garden of Eden was a safe place in the world protected from the outside sin in the world.

    God has written the law upon all our hearts and give us all a spirit of God consciousness. We all possess a spirit of intuition, communion and conscience; also, we all possess a soul of mind, will and emotion.

    Christopher Hitchens said "We are encoded and programmed." As far as I know anything encoded and programmed needs an Encoder and Programmer. He also said,
    "What we risk if we take the supernatural route is the idea of the unchangeable, unalterable authority, one apparently benign, one apparently wicked, both of them eternal, both of them unchanging and unchangeable, and ourselves as their play things, and their objects, and their raw material. This is the idea of the totalitarian. This is the idea of where tyranny begins with the eternal unchanging tyrannical authority where we must guess by our poor powers to guess what is wanted of us, and to spend our lives on our knees. I say the beginning of emancipation is to repudiate this antique serfdom and all the contemptible and often laughable superstitions that requires for its maintenance."
    I wouldn't say Satan's decision to eternally reject God is unalterable, for at any time he could repent, but alas, he does not and will not.

    I don't think God considers us as play things, but He made us in His image fearfully. How are we raw material when God creates us out of Himself?

    Satan hostile to God responds just as Christopher does, "This is...totalitarian." Well, you wouldn't exist if God didn't create you the most beautiful angel Lucifer and men.

    Why do we need to guess? Jesus proved He is God by His resurrection and even if you never heard of the Bible, you could still take that common grace God gave you to know that by observing the mountains and stars that God created all things. You would know that an infinite regress is impossible because you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so. And you would know that that which does not exist can't create anything, so the universe can't come from nothing. Therefore, nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, and this is whom we call God. Not any God though, but the One True God of the Bible since only Jesus proved He is God.

    What is superstitious then is to think the universe always existed or started up from nothing. How silly! How funny! What a funny way to reject God.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    254
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Christopher uses an unethical tactic of making noise in the background with slight offhanded comments and shuffling papers and talking to the moderator while D'Souza is speaking for only 5 minutes. But I forgot, Christopher is an atheist so that behavior is perfectly acceptable.



    When did Christopher get cancer?
    Because D'Souza totally destroyed Hitchens and perhaps that's why you see so many cattle calls by Christopher in the background while Dinesh is speaking.

    A June 2006 profile on Hitchens by NPR stated: "Hitchens is known for his love of cigarettes and alcohol — and his prodigious literary output." However in early 2008 he gave up smoking, undergoing an epiphany in Madison, Wisconsin. His brother Peter later wrote of his surprise at this decision.

    It was while writing his self-indulgent memoir Hitch-22 that he resumed smoking cigarettes and continued until his cancer diagnosis. Hitchens admits to drinking heavily; in 2003 he wrote that his daily intake of alcohol was enough "to kill or stun the average mule", noting that many great writers "did some of their finest work when blotto, smashed, polluted, shitfaced, squiffy, whiffled, and three sheets to the wind". Just ask the question, would Jesus do that? I guess what you consider inspired would not be inspired material by a Christian.

    Who is the mule exactly? I think God's mercy was upon Hitchens from not having cancer when Hitchens stopped his prolific and gluttonous acquiescence to sin, but when Hitchens resumed his waywardness, cancer is a very reasonable consequence to Hitchens destroying his own body which God says to treat as a temple like the temple in the old testament. The Holy of Holies represents our spirit, the Holy Place our soul and the outer court our body.

    Does Hitchens still reject the existence of sin even after all this? Delusion is a terrible thing. There is very little mention of sin in his writing if any really. One atheist once said, that when society did away with the notion of sin it inevitably crumbles.

    Personally, what I liked about this debate was watching Christopher's face in background cringe and suffer immeasurably listening to the very strong points made by D'Souza.

    For 100,000 years there was savage man. Then about 4000 years ago it was as if some transcendent being leaned into the world by breathing a message [monotheism] or soul into man, and suddenly savage man became biblical man.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    254
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Hitchens says with the advent of religion came the idea people were born into privilege and rights not bestowed to the rest of human kind, but of course that's not what Christianity teaches, for God is no respecter of persons, He shows no partiality (Acts 10.34).

    Hitler believed in natural selection of atheism and said the perfect race is the Aryan race so Hitchen's claim backfires on him, thus possessing a doublestandard. What is not acceptable for religion is acceptable for atheists.

    God has every right to enter in His creation through a particular nation which was Israel for they were enslaved for 430 years, that's why God chose them. He is not going to bring in the Messiah from the ruling atheists of the north or the east and the Christopher Hitchens' of antiquity. God forbid.

    Is it a valid argument because there is so much evil religion in the world that all religion is false? Contrariwise, is it true because there is so much good in the world even from atheists that not all atheism is false?



    Christopher asks in this video why a baby in one religion is privileged over a baby of another religion. To which I would reply, who says they are? In a natural world, babies are born under parents in all kinds of religions, but as the word of God teaches, God is not going to judge that child as he grows up who has not reached the age of accountability, but it is incumbent upon that child when he reaches the age of accountability whatever it may be (depending on the person) to reject false religion and accept the One True God and true religion: in the spirit of helping unwed mothers and fatherless children as the Bible defines religion.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    254
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Perhaps the most important point in this debate was in video 8 when D'Souza showed the difference between Christianity and all other religions was God Himself enter His creation in Christ, since Jesus is the 2nd Person of the Trinity.

    All Christopher Hitchens could say in comparison with Muhammad was that both Muhammad and Jesus were in the same direction, whatever that means.

    But of course, that is a faulty comparison since Jesus being God is infinitely greater than Muhammad.

    So the chasm of of the human level and what we ought to be according to God's will differs with Christianity because God comes down to us to bridge the gap whereas other religions require men to bridge the gap and build a ladder to heaven. Muhammad as a messenger is still man trying to get to God when in reality no man could ever do so.

    Do you see? I know for a fact Christopher's sin did not just produce his cancer but will bring him to his forthcoming death and the second death which is Hell, because Christopher will never give his life to Christ by accepting Him as being a historical figure, God in the flesh, died for the sins of the world, resurrected the third day, ascended 40 days later, and gave the Holy Spirit to indwell regenerated believers on the 50th day at Pentecost.

    I know this with every fiber of my being.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    285
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Hitchens claims the way of science is it can be falsifiable but is not the case for Christianity. I disagree. You can easily disprove Christianity if it is false by simply finding a naturalistic explanation for the origin of the disciples' beliefs who claimed to have seen Jesus alive from the dead in various group settings. Swoon theory, fraud theory and hallucination theory fail to meet the data that almost all scholars concede, namely, people don't willingly die for what they know is a lie, Jesus wouldn't look like a risen Messiah all beat up, and group hallucinations are impossible.

    Very good point by D'Souza when he said, science doesn't ask why there is universe, it only tries to answer how there is a universe. Whereas religion asks both questions.

    Hitchens said if God is just, what do you have to worry about? Well, if you want to be eternally separated from God, should there not be consequences? Is God anymore than a "celestial dictatorship" (Hitchen's phrase) than an adult having a child? If you mock the one you have to mock the other, but to mock the parent-child relationship is morally bankrupt. Mocking God is even worse. The sin of bearing false witness is so bad God places it right up there next to other grevious sins.

    Christopher said church attendance has declined. Well that may be in the west but not in the east. Moreover, 1 in 3 people call themselves Christians today which is amazing if you think about for a religion that according to Hitchens that is not true. I can understand with maybe only 8% of society being atheist and it not being false, but not 33%. All the denominations were prophesied in God's word as being the last church age in this Laodicean church period of differing opinions we find ourselves now.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Church of
    Sherwood Park
    Posts
    3,241
    Blog Entries
    20
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    If God wanted to enter creation and did which religion would He pick?

    Christopher Hitchens knows God exists but does not submit himself to Jesus because it would restrict his life of booze and smoke and other transgressions that he knows all too well he would need to give up because the Holy Spirit would convict his conscience daily, and he knows that would be too painful to continue in those acts. But remaining an unregenerate, his conscience doesn't convict him as much in doing those things he knows are wrong.

    What is Hell? The place that Christopher will go to where he continues to find it for eternity MORE painful to relent and repent and receive Christ than to continue in his delusion? thus remaining in that state of eternal separation from God.

    How sad and pathetic.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Morality and Atheism
    By Faithful in forum Atheist/Agnostic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-15-2014, 02:06 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-19-2011, 11:40 AM
  3. The Word of God is Just an Illusion to Calvinists
    By Churchwork in forum Totally Depraved
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-25-2008, 12:56 AM
  4. My Laws in Their Hearts
    By Finestwheat in forum 66 Books-God's Word
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-06-2008, 01:38 PM
  5. Can Morality Save Us?
    By Faithful in forum Sabbatarians
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-27-2008, 01:29 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •