Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is man inherently good or inherently evil?
Phat
Member
Posts: 18348
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 103 of 271 (144396)
09-24-2004 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by Phat
09-24-2004 8:38 AM


Re: Holy Book or book full of holes?
After reading my previous post, I was about to edit out my frustrations...but I'll just leave it as is. I DO like to debate/discuss things with you, Rrhain but you can bring out the frustrations in me with some of your attitudes...to wit:
Rrhain writes:
Did I or did I not just get finished saying that...(fill in blank)
and
Rrhain writes:
(*blink!*)
...followed by
Rrhain writes:
What do you think god is doing as he "judgeth according to every man's work"? ...What else can it possibly mean?
Are you telling me that you know what God means? and yet you say that your opinions about god are irrelevant? You CAN be frustrating at times!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Phat, posted 09-24-2004 8:38 AM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Rrhain, posted 09-25-2004 2:08 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18348
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 112 of 271 (145898)
09-30-2004 3:59 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by Rrhain
09-23-2004 3:15 AM


Of course, which God are we talking about?
I say to Rrhain:
Of course, which God are we talking about?
Whereupon he responds:
Rrhain writes:
Sorry, but that's my question to you.
You didn't really think the god that truly exists was the Christian one, did you?
I know that the Christian one is the one that exists. My question to you is mean't to challenge your god concept or lack thereof. You can't claim to be atheist and then just "make up" a god concept without being challenged to answer the question of where your concept came from. My God has been written about, discussed, and experienced by many people throughout History. Even if this in and of itself does not prove my God to you, it explains His origin through humanity. So what about your "god"? Did you make him up to put me in check?
--------------------------
Charles Knight writes:
I think being a christian is morally wrong.
For the sake of discussion, why do you think this, Charles?
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 09-30-2004 03:01 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Rrhain, posted 09-23-2004 3:15 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by CK, posted 09-30-2004 5:37 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 130 by Rrhain, posted 10-07-2004 2:56 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18348
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 114 of 271 (146470)
10-01-2004 11:32 AM


Parables 101--Is God Fair?
Getting back to our topic of whether man is inherently good or evil, I thought I would post a parable and ask for comments. Don't try to intellectualize it or look up commentaries on it. I just want you all to tell me what you think,ok? Here is the parable:
NIVMatt 20:1-15 writes:
"For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire men to work in his vineyard. He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard. "About the third hour he went out and saw others standing in the marketplace doing nothing. He told them, 'You also go and work in my vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.' So they went. "He went out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour and did the same thing. About the eleventh hour he went out and found still others standing around. He asked them, 'Why have you been standing here all day long doing nothing?'"'Because no one has hired us,' they answered. "He said to them,'You also go and work in my vineyard.'
"When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, 'Call the workers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first.' "The workers who were hired about the eleventh hour came and each received a denarius. So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a denarius.
When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner.'These men who were hired last worked only one hour,' they said, 'and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.' "But he answered one of them, 'Friend, I am not being unfair to you. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? Take your pay and go. I want to give the man who was hired last the same as I gave you. Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?'
How many of you agree with the workers who were hired first? When I first read this, I did! It would be like being at a job for fifteen years and having a new hire come in with no more knowledge and make the same wage that you make!
What does this parable mean to you?
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 10-01-2004 10:35 AM

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by jar, posted 10-01-2004 11:39 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 116 by crashfrog, posted 10-01-2004 11:41 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18348
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 117 of 271 (146496)
10-01-2004 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by crashfrog
10-01-2004 11:41 AM


Parables 101--Is God Fair?
Crashfrog, why was the employer unfair?
1)To those whom he said would receive "what is right" he paid them the same as everyone else. The ones who complained were the first hired ones who agreed to work for a denarius. The ones hired mid day who were to be paid "what is right" were also paid a denarius.The wage was agreed upon initially and the only reason for the first ones complaining was because of what everyone else got--not because they were underpaid but, in their own thinking, because they were under respected. In this case, however, the employer never lied. The ones wh were told that they would receive what is right did not complain. Obviously, the last ones who worked for an hour did not complain. The issue is between the employer and the first guys hired. So what is the justification for judging the employer?
It would be the same if you, Crashfrog, were working as a senior desk clerk at a large Hotel. After years of experience, you made a decent wage of $16.00 an hour. This wage was acceptable for you--you considered it a fair wage. One day, the Hotel hires two new clerks with no experience. The Hotel decides to pay them $16.00 an hour.
What is your beef?
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 10-01-2004 12:56 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by crashfrog, posted 10-01-2004 11:41 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by crashfrog, posted 10-01-2004 4:31 PM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18348
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 119 of 271 (146588)
10-01-2004 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by crashfrog
10-01-2004 4:31 PM


Crashfrog, your situation was unfair ONLY in that you were promised a raise which you never received. The new hire, presumeably, was hired with that raise instead. That is unfair. In the case of our parable, however, the ones who were paid "what is right" were hired mid day and were paid as much as the ones hired at the start of the day and the ones hired at the end of the day. Note:
  • Everyone received the same wage.
  • The complaints came from the ones hired first. They did NOT have any extra work to do, however, and were being paid as much as was ever promised to them.
    If you had agreed to work for $8.25 an hour and were never promised a raise, then had a new trainee come in and make $8.25 also, you might still resent having to train them, but would the resentment be any less? Your situation was unfair only because you did not receive what was promised and someone else did. You were being paid by the hour, however.
    What if you worked at the rate of $100.00 a day. You gladly signed the papers for this opportunity. You started at 8 a.m. Another employee starts at 10:00 a.m. Still another starts at 3 p.m. On payday, you happen to see their checks. They also receive $100.00 a day! The rate that you were pleased to accept initially seemed fair then, but is now unfair when compared to other people. WHY?
    1) They do less work. Well, I work at Safeway. If some new guy was hired and made twice as much as me, what do I care? Am I in control of the company money?
    2) They effectively make more per hour. (see #1)
    3) You feel as if you are not shown respect. Yet you are still being paid what you once thought was fair. Comments?

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 118 by crashfrog, posted 10-01-2004 4:31 PM crashfrog has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 120 by crashfrog, posted 10-01-2004 6:17 PM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 121 of 271 (146610)
    10-01-2004 6:53 PM
    Reply to: Message 120 by crashfrog
    10-01-2004 6:17 PM


    Looking at it another way....
    Lets look at it another way. Lets say that you and I and Jar, for instance, are all on unemployment and are nearly broke. Economic times are hard and there are scant few jobs in America. One day, perchance, we each see an ad in the paper for Copper Mountain ski resort in Colorado. The resort promises that it needs workers and that the time of need is December, January, and February. The ad promises that each worker hired will receive $5000.00 after the ski season. What an opportunity! Everyone hired will make $5000.00! We all pack up to go. Jar gets there December 2nd. I get there December 28th. You can't make it until January 25th. Nonetheless, we all work hard while there, and on March 1st, we are all handed checks. Happily, we all go home. Later, we happen to be talking on a chat board and discover that each of us received $5000.00. Is this fair?
    Consider:
  • Each of us was virtually broke. Each of us was given an opportunity. Each of us received the pay that was promised.
  • Each of us was paid by the good graces of the employer and not on how long or how hard we worked. What if you worked harder than Jar and I even if you got there later? In any event, our "works" did not matter. We were each paid what was promised. Fair or Unfair?

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 120 by crashfrog, posted 10-01-2004 6:17 PM crashfrog has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 122 by crashfrog, posted 10-01-2004 6:59 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 123 of 271 (146693)
    10-02-2004 3:08 AM
    Reply to: Message 120 by crashfrog
    10-01-2004 6:17 PM


    Crashfrog, you have not thought this one over! First of all, you use an erroneus example:
    Suppose you and your black friend go to the store. You see a sign that says "bananas, $1 a bunch for white people, $10 a bunch for black people."
    Not a good comparison. Say that you go to the store at 9 a.m. and see a sign that says "fill out our survey and receive free bunch of Bananas. Later, your friend comes in and sees another sign that says "thanks for coming in. Have a free bunch of Bananas.Are you mad that you had to fill out a survey and your friend did not? Seriously, your entire concept of fairness is in comparison with other people. You know what the parable is about. I know you are atheist, but lets assume that God is real. Lets assume that He is good, and that being taken to Heaven or to a better level is the best thing that any human could hope for. Now...there are three people.
  • The first person is a devoted believer. Very devout. He is involved in a lot of volunteer work to help the less fortunate in society. He tries very hard to be pure minded and well respected. He is good to all types of people without favoritism. One day, God comes to him and says to come to Heaven.
  • The next person is not as good. He has done a few major sins in his life. He likes to pick up women and get drunk once in awhile. He knows about God, but he has ignored God for much of his life. He has gotten better in his old age, however. One day God comes to him and says to come to Heaven.
  • The last guy is a total atheist. He has some concept of morality, and he is as good or better to people than the other two who are believers. He has spent much of his life laughing about religion and attempting to disprove God. He lives life well, however, and seeing no need for god, he never feels a loss. One day, God appears to him.
    Confronted with the obvious reality, the atheist still looks away, prefering the safety of his own wisdom. God still says to come to Heaven.
    The first group are appalled. They ask God, "Why are you giving that ungrateful loser a break?" God says "What of it? Are you mad because you worked so hard to get to Heaven while this atheist has done nothing?? Is it not up to me to ask him in?"
    OK, Crashfrog---Fair or Unfair?
    --------------------------------------------------------------

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 120 by crashfrog, posted 10-01-2004 6:17 PM crashfrog has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 125 by crashfrog, posted 10-06-2004 6:34 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 124 of 271 (147876)
    10-06-2004 5:23 PM
    Reply to: Message 105 by Rrhain
    09-25-2004 2:08 AM


    Re: Holy Book or book full of holes?
    This was a good answer, so I thought I'd show you the link:
    Bible Contradictions and Answers
    Check out the whole series of questions answered and tell me what you think.....>>Cheers. Phatboy

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 105 by Rrhain, posted 09-25-2004 2:08 AM Rrhain has not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 170 of 271 (153363)
    10-27-2004 11:05 AM
    Reply to: Message 169 by ramoss
    10-27-2004 10:59 AM


    Secular evidence? So you are suggesting that the story was another of many ancient myths constructed by people with ulterior motives? Of course, this feelgood answer makes the modern day humanist feel much better about the future of a society who has only its own collective wisdom to worship. As long as Christians exist on the planet who feel strongly that the story was true, you intellectual humanists will just have to worship your own wisdom while we worship our God.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 169 by ramoss, posted 10-27-2004 10:59 AM ramoss has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 175 by Rrhain, posted 10-30-2004 12:47 AM Phat has replied
     Message 201 by ramoss, posted 10-31-2004 9:27 PM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 177 of 271 (154366)
    10-30-2004 3:29 AM
    Reply to: Message 175 by Rrhain
    10-30-2004 12:47 AM


    Rrhain writes:
    Wishing makes it so?
    Many of the most monumental decisions in battles, politics, and education have been based largely upon intutive thought. Intuition was a hallmark of general George Patton. There is a difference between fanciful wishes and deep seated intuitions.
    are you serious?
    *blink*
    Yes, I am.
    This message has been edited by Phatboy, 10-30-2004 02:30 AM

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 175 by Rrhain, posted 10-30-2004 12:47 AM Rrhain has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 178 by Rrhain, posted 10-30-2004 4:27 AM Phat has not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 182 of 271 (154417)
    10-30-2004 12:27 PM
    Reply to: Message 175 by Rrhain
    10-30-2004 12:47 AM


    Rrhain writes:
    This Jesus character is nothing more than a warmed-over version of a whole host of other saviors including Mithras, Osiris, and Dionysus. Since there is absolutely no record of Jesus existing outside of the religious works that have a vested interest in claiming that he did, on what basis can we truly make that claim?
    The claim? That Jesus exists "in" His followers. The Spirit of God is not a mere I.P.U. fancy dreamed up by desperate losers.
    University of Pennsylvania criminologist Byron Johnson examined forty religion-delinquency studies, including his own. His conclusion: "Most delinquent acts were committed by juveniles who had low levels of religious commitment. Those juveniles whose religiosity levels were in the middle to high levels committed very few delinquent acts." Even when controlling for other factors, such as socioeconomic level, neighborhood, and peer influences, kids who went to church rarely were delinquent.
    So we know that "feeling better" about oneself improves morality. Is this caused by our own internal perception? Some think so. However,
    A half dozen national surveys also reveal that faith is linked to volunteerism. In one Gallup survey, charitable and social service volunteering was reported by 28 percent of those who rated religion "not very important" in their lives and by 50 percent of those who rated it "very important."
    So it is not only an internal attribute.
    People who think godliness unrelated to goodliness might also want to consider: Who most often adopts children? Who sponsors the nation's food pantries and soup kitchens? Who first took medicine into the Third World and opened hospitals? Who sheltered orphans? Who spread literacy and established schools and universities? And who led movements to abolish the slave trade, end apartheid, and establish civil rights?
    Let no one be smug. Cruelty and compassion, mischief and morality, are exhibited by people of all faiths and none. Many are good without God and many believers go to sleep each night behind bars. Yet the accumulating evidence indicates that faith often tethers self-interest and nurtures character. Godliness and goodliness are more than typographically linked.
    Published in Sightings, from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School, 2001.
    Faith is more than wishful thinking.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 175 by Rrhain, posted 10-30-2004 12:47 AM Rrhain has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 186 by Rrhain, posted 10-31-2004 1:17 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 187 of 271 (154560)
    10-31-2004 1:58 AM
    Reply to: Message 186 by Rrhain
    10-31-2004 1:17 AM


    Rrhain writes:
    The religious are more likely to commit crimes and do evil than the atheist.
    Interesting statistic. Where did you find it? Not that I don't believe you, Rrhain. You are annoying at times yet you DO have a good mind.
    You can get will through lots of places, but faith is not the only nor the best source.
    So what would be the best source, in your opinion?
    This message has been edited by Phatboy, 10-31-2004 02:00 AM

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 186 by Rrhain, posted 10-31-2004 1:17 AM Rrhain has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 195 by Rrhain, posted 10-31-2004 2:45 PM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 193 of 271 (154596)
    10-31-2004 11:28 AM
    Reply to: Message 191 by riVeRraT
    10-31-2004 7:46 AM


    Rat is having a Rrhainy day...
    Out of sequence? How about 10th row, 32nd digit. Rat, you really are not helping anyone by showing your frustration with Rrhain. I will admit that he does like to challenge philosophical assumptions for no other reason than to prove that they are indeed assumptions. You have to realize, however, that your human rant proves the point of this topic. Man is inherently evil, and even a Christian who supposedly knows Jesus---as I believe that you do---has to deal with their own human issues of pride. As for you, Rrhain, I hold nothing against you. You are a great asset to budding Christian apologists everywhere. We often take our faith for granted and assume that everyone else sees the same light that we see. All that you guys see, however, is a moth trapped by a flame. Would you listen to a talking moth inviting you to share the light with them? Now...unless any of us has a new angle, I suggest that we allow this topic a rest. Oh wait...one more angle.
    To Rrhain: Do you think that humans are basically and inherently "good"? What is the source of our standard?
    This message has been edited by Phatboy, 10-31-2004 11:33 AM

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 191 by riVeRraT, posted 10-31-2004 7:46 AM riVeRraT has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 199 by Rrhain, posted 10-31-2004 3:37 PM Phat has not replied
     Message 208 by riVeRraT, posted 10-31-2004 11:51 PM Phat has not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 196 of 271 (154612)
    10-31-2004 2:48 PM
    Reply to: Message 195 by Rrhain
    10-31-2004 2:45 PM


    I'm guessing that you would get "will" through information.
    Faith is a quest for knowledge. Is that how you think?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 195 by Rrhain, posted 10-31-2004 2:45 PM Rrhain has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 200 by Rrhain, posted 10-31-2004 3:39 PM Phat has not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18348
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 206 of 271 (154686)
    10-31-2004 9:49 PM
    Reply to: Message 201 by ramoss
    10-31-2004 9:27 PM


    ramoss writes:
    What objective evidence do you have that it is anything other than a myth?
    Well for one thing, I am unconvinced that the serious work and studies of several great Biblical apologists who have done their homework can be dismissed or disproven so easily or entirely. The work of Josh McDowell, while mocked and challenged halfheartedly on the net, is quite concise and provable. Another great apologist is a former professor of law at Harvard. I forget his namde but I believe it is Greenleaf. To summize, I have seen and read the books of evidence for Biblical authenticity and Historical verification of the Resurrection and they look quite solid to me.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 201 by ramoss, posted 10-31-2004 9:27 PM ramoss has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 207 by lfen, posted 10-31-2004 10:32 PM Phat has not replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024