An atheist who is not so keen on God

I'm afraid That's too off topic. I think we've discussed the subject before though.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

I'm afraid That's too off topic. I think we've discussed the subject before though.

---

Good call, sorry about that admins.

mike the wiz responds to me:

quote:

---

He's saying that they do it unwittingly for God.

---

You've still conflated love and god without justification. It's a circular argument to define god as love and therefore define love as god.If an atheist does something for a reason other than god, then he cannot be doing it for god, even unwittingly. To do something for someone requires intention and atheists do not do anything with any intention directed toward god.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

jar responds to me:

quote:

---

I said yes. I was speaking from my personal point of view, which happens to be Christianity.

---

And I am asking you to justify that position. So far, all you've done is give circular arguments.Stop beating around the bush and come out with it already.

quote:

---

is there any difference in value between an act of kindness or courtesy when performed by a Christian or an Atheist when the only reason for performing the act was that it was the right thing to do?

---

Depends. What do you mean by "the right thing to do"? For Christians, that all too often is equivalent to "for god." Therefore, an atheist and a Christian doing the same thing, even though they both think it is "the right thing to do" are doing something for different reasons.

quote:

---

So let me ask you, that same question. Do they have different values?

---

What do you mean by "values"? Again, Christian concepts of "values" tend to reduce themselves to "for god." Therefore, it is clear that atheists cannot be doing things for the same reasons as Christians.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Phatboy responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

And if I don't or can't prove it, does that mean that you have joined our circle for the moment?

---

​

Huh?

---

Um, scripture isn't going to help. I literaly did not understand how what you said related to what I said. Can you rephrase? How does your inability to do something relate to my stance on a position? Wouldn't it require me doing or not being able to do something?Now, it would be nice if you could mention what it is that is distinct and separate from god.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

jar writes:

quote:

---

I am speaking of the value of the action. I think this may also be part of the miscommunication between Rrhain and myself.

---

No, Phatboy had it right on: You are arguing from a position that unjustifiably defines love as god. The mere existence of atheists proves that not to be so. Love is not god. Not to an atheist.Therefore, since "love" means something very different for a Christian compared to an atheist, would it not be the case that doing something "out of love" means something very different to a Christian compared to an atheist?Can you talk about values without bringing god into it?

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Doing good things. Stopping to help a turtle cross the road. Helping someone reach a package on the top shelf. Asking if you can help someone load their groceries. Doesn't matter. If you had read what I've said in this thread I have never addressed the reasons that the individual did something. It is totally immaterial to the thread. Interesting, but again simply points out that you have not read what I've posted in the thread.What I have been talking of is what value GOD places on the action. My point is that it is immaterial what the individual's motive was. GOD will value the good acts of an atheist equally if not greater than those of a believer.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar writes:

quote:

---

The question I asked was whether or not, when actually presented with irrefutable evidence, the actual presence of GOD, the Atheist would abandon the scientific method or accept the evidence.

---

But that makes no sense! Scientific method necessarily requires the acceptance of evidence. You're asking a logical paradox. If he abandons the scientific method, he would refuse to accept the evidence literally staring him in the face. If he's going approach it scientifically, he has to accept the evidence.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Of course. Very perceptive of you.That is exactly the point I made.I'm proud of you. You're more perceptive than I thought.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jjburklo writes:

quote:

---

This is precisely why an acts based salvation cannot work among other reasons.

---

This is, of course, in direct contradiction to what Jesus said. Salvation is through works. Who are you going to believe? Jesus/Peter or Paul?

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Nope. Never said that. With every post it becomes increasingly obvious that you haven't read the thread. Could well be. But it's also totally irrelevant.What I have been talking about is GOD's perception of the act.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Depends. What do you mean by "the right thing to do"?

---

​

Doing good things.

---

Why are they good?

quote:

---

Stopping to help a turtle cross the road. Helping someone reach a package on the top shelf. Asking if you can help someone load their groceries.

---

Why are such things good? You haven't defined what "the right thing to do is." You've just given examples without explanation.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Therefore, an atheist and a Christian doing the same thing, even though they both think it is "the right thing to do" are doing something for different reasons.

---

​

Doesn't matter.

---

Says who?

quote:

---

If you had read what I've said in this thread I have never addressed the reasons that the individual did something. It is totally immaterial to the thread.

---

Incorrect. It is the very heart. One cannot comprehend what "the right thing to do" is without defining the reasons for doing them. That's what makes them "right."

quote:

---

What I have been talking of is what value GOD places on the action.

---

Since there is no god for the atheist, what on earth does this have to do with anything?

quote:

---

My point is that it is immaterial what the individual's motive was. GOD will value the good acts of an atheist equally if not greater than those of a believer.

---

That's fine and good, but it isn't what Brian was getting at. As he said: But you can't show love FOR god without god. That's what "for" means. It requires an object. If there is no object, then you aren't doing it "for" anything.In essence, it is co-opting atheism as just a sad, childish way of living. "They know not what they do."How insulting.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

jar responds to me:

quote:

---

That is exactly the point I made.

---

Your point was that you were illogical?Stop being cute.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Okay, this has gone on long enough. You are tiring and I find talking to you ever bit as pointless as discussions with whatever or WILLOWTREE.Have a good evening.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

You are arguing from a position that unjustifiably defines love as god.

---

​

Nope. Never said that.

---

Yes, you did: If you can't remember your own words....

quote:

---

With every post it becomes increasingly obvious that you haven't read the thread.

---

(*chuckle*)This from someone who admits to having said the very thing he claims he didn't say.Of course, you also claim that your point was illogical and yet you're still sticking by it.

quote:

---

What I have been talking about is GOD's perception of the act.

---

God doesn't understand the concept of doing something for a reason?What do you think the word "for" means?

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!