Jason Gastrich wrote:

David D. wrote:

Jason Gastrich wrote:

David D. wrote:

Jason Gastrich wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 06:18:22 GMT, "Jason Gastrich"

Unbelievers can curse like they're in a bar room
brawl and nobody says a word.

Because we don't claim the moral high ground - you do.

Post the link where I say: "I claim the moral high ground" or
anything to th at effect.

On the contrary, you claim the moral high ground and I claim
sinfulness. You claim there is no such thing as sin! I claim
that I'm a sinner saved by God's grace. And you can find many
links that repeat this claim of mine.

Jason, you wrote the words below:
Some atheists are good people and some are not. However, being
good isn't good enough to the source of objective morality. He
has given us His laws and requirements and He desires our
repentance and trust.

The atheist cannot point to any non-human source of objective
morality. Therefore, their morality must be based on the
subjective opinion of the human or humans in their society.
End quote

That certainly sounds like the moral high ground. Are you saying
that only gods can be objective?

I thought my point was clear. If it wasn't, then I'll restate it.

God holds the moral high ground. He alone is perfect, holy, and
just.

I understand your rationale but by saying only God is objective that
implies that only followers of God know of morals and hence they
have the moral high ground.

Theoretically, an atheist could follow God's laws better than a
Christian. Following God's laws isn't a way to get saved, though.

I understand this although presumably an atheist would not see the
need to be saved.

I suppose the phrase "moral high ground" should be defined.
Nonetheless, I think the one who claims to be without sin thinks
they are awfully moral. Ironically, it is the Christian who admits
their sin and the atheist who does not.

Again this comes down to law vs sin. Atheists can't sin against God
if they don't recognise God so commandments 1-4 are irrelevant.
There are secular equivalents to commandments 5-10 so I presume that
the atheist, while not admitting to 'sin' necessarily, would admit to
wrong doing.

This is why I was wondering about the secular law vs sin. Clearly an
atheist can 'sin' they just don't recognise the terminology. They
would commit crimes or do wrong.

Generally, Christians are far more concerned with obeying God's laws
and admitting their sins to Him than unbelievers are.

This goes without saying and by definition.
<snip>
David

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 21:34:12 GMT, "Jason Gastrich"
<usenetspam1@yahoo.com> said in alt.atheism:

Generally, Christians are far more concerned with obeying God's laws

Rather than actually holding to a real morality, making Christians
less moral than atheists. (Obeying someone else, god or not, isn't
being moral, it's being obedient.)

The people who follow God's laws enjoy more success, happiness, and
blessings.

Than whom, and in what circumstance?

I know a lot of Moslems who are more successful and happier than many
righteous Christians, so your statement isn't universally true.

This is usually seen directly in the Christian's life.

Only by Christians - who have to SOMETHING to justify what their
belief costs them. Non-Christians don't see Christians as being more
successful and happier - as a rule - than non-Christians.

As far as "blessings", there's no such thing. Actually the concept is
total nonsense. Were those who survived the tsunami "blessed"? That
would make those who died "cursed". And I can't believe that someone
in the 21st century would still believe in "death by curse". Or maybe
you're just an anachronism.

I'm not sure what Dan thinks about secular laws. He doesn't believe
in sin, though.

Anyone who doesn't believe in sin is a fool - it exists. It's a
concept held by Christians. Non-Christians just don't believe that
the concept applies outside Christianity.

But you probably can't understand the difference, since "outside
Christianity" is meaningless to you.

[snip]

Jason Gastrich wrote:

On the contrary, atheists do not admit their sins to
God. Many atheists (like Dan Barker, for instance)
say there is no such thing as sin.

Now, besides God, who really claims to have the
moral high ground? I say it is the atheist who
claims they have no sin (or that sin does not exist)
and it is not the Christian who admits their
sinfulness.

David D. wrote:

Sin is by definition a religious concept but that
does not mean there are not analogous checks and
balances for an atheist. I am not familiar with Dan
Barkers position. Does he ever mention breaking
secular laws as being an alternative to, or equivalent
of, sins?

Jason Gastrich wrote:

I'm not sure what Dan thinks about secular laws. He
doesn't believe in sin, though.

DB: What do you mean sin? What is sin?

JG: Well, sin [you see] can mean different things to different

but sin is basically violating God's laws. Or, for argument's sake,

could call sin, you know, murder, rape, bestiality, and we can name a
few sins just to say, ok these are things that are wrong.

DB: It's in, it's the Ten Commandments. Honor the Sabbath day to keep
it holy. The Sabbath days is part of the Ten Commandments that almost
every Christian church views as core to Christian theology.

JG: Ok, I believe it is important to take off a day during the week

rest, but interestingly that is the one commandment that was not
repeated in the New Testament. Did you know that?

DB: There are actions that some human beings, who are not completely
healthy, might commit that cause unnecessary harm. And so we have
systems of justice, and we might call them crimes, and which we have

prison system to protect ourselves. But to call it sin is to strike

the core of what it means to be a human being, and it is a deep

to humanity. There's no such thing as sin, and we don't need

DB: I don't define sin. I throw the word out. We don't even need it.

do have a ... We can as secular human beings can describe morality

ethics based on what our human needs are, and not have to make it

kind of a religious thing. In fact, millions of good Americans live
really good, charitable, happy, meaningful lives without without this
concept of sin and salvation. But they are good people because they
respect humanity, and other life on this planet, by trying to avoid
unnecessary harm. Calling it a sin makes into something above our
experience. It makes it something non-human, and therefore very
dangerous.

JG: Don't you think that it makes things kind of subjective if we

have a non-subjective authority, a supernatural authority from

our time-space dimension?

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 20:09:58 GMT, "Jason Gastrich"
<usenetspam1@yahoo.com> said in alt.atheism:

Al Klein wrote:

I plonk almost anyone who resorts to the Christian threat.

Did Davey know this before you plonked him?

If he had read the alt.atheism FAQ (if he hasn't, he shouldn't post to
alt.atheism) he would have known to not post the threat.

I've been
dead, so I know the person is merely blowing smoke and has nothing
interesting to say.

I don't think you're an authority on the afterlife.

Much more one than you are, though.

However, I'd be happy
to hear about this experience of yours. What happened?

Nothing that a Christian could relate to.

Chistians are always policing themselves

*****. Post the sites "policing" Fred Phelps. Post links to
posts in alt.atheism "policing" Christians who violate the
alt.atheism FAQ.

I don't know Fred Phelps. I also don't know if Christians police
themselves in alt.atheism. These are merely two examples, though.

You claimed some relevant policing. There is none. You can't show
any. So you lied.

In my life experience with Christians, they police themselves all
the time.

Not relevant.

and trying to behave in a righteous
manner. Of course, this involves the words we speak. It's too bad
that the non-Christians in this newsgroup have no sense of this.

It's too bad that Christians posting to alt.atheism don't either.

My parents would tell me that I can always find someone doing worse
than me and set the bar very low, but why? Is this what you're
trying to do? Find someone who you think is worse than you, so you
don't have to do right?

I ALWAYS do right. I may not always do what you consider right but,
then, I consider Christianity to be immoral, so why would I do what a
Christian considers right unless it was something that I also
considered right?

Unbelievers can curse like they're in a bar room brawl and nobody
says a word.

Because we don't claim the moral high ground - you do.

Post the link where I say: "I claim the moral high ground" or
anything to th at effect.

Christianity makes the claim. You aren't, as highly as you might
think of yourself, Christianity.

On the contrary, you claim the moral high ground

All I claim is to not believe in any gods. Beyond that you know
nothing about me.

You claim there is no such thing as sin!

No, I claim that sin is a construct of your religion and, as such, it
has nothing to do with me.

And you can find many links that repeat this claim of mine.

Argumentum ad numeram?

It's too bad you killfiled Davey, Al. He cared about you and was
enjoying your conversation.

No. If he did he would have taken the trouble to understand that I
don't want his religious *****. He didn't, so he doesn't.

I think you are expecting him to read your mind.

Not my mind, just the FAQ. Or just see than I'm an atheist.

I don't think he ever knew
about your "automatic plonking response" to what he said.

And I should care why?

It's also too bad you support a person like Mark Bilbo
over a person like Davey.

Why? Mark is sane. Mark is interesting.

I didn't know the atheist blinders also involved personal
relationships.

Since I'm only atheistic about one more god than you are, you should
be careful what you say about atheists. You are one.

Once again, I don't think you're any authority on the afterlife.

But, having been there, I know A LOT MORE about it than you do, since
you know absolutely nothing about it. (And your ideas about it are
TOTALLY wrong.)

If you are, then write a book about it and let the world read it.

Sorry, but my ego's nowhere near as huge as yours is.

The scriptures don't give any indication that those that are dead,
then come back to life have a heavenly experience.

And I should care what a bunch of goat herders said a few thousand
years ago because?

You still try to talk to an atheist from a theistic viewpoint, and you
still don't realize how silly that is. And you still claim to be
intelligent enough to have actually *earned* an advanced degree? How
much money did you spend to "earn" it?

I'll be happy to hear you elaborate on your experience.

Trust me - you wouldn't. You're Christian. Be afraid.

Jason Gastrich wrote:

Larry Mundinger wrote:

He will be replying to a comment Bush made something like; "Only
people of faith can be considered to hold a public office"

Check local listings.

When will this be on TV?

Does someone have a citation for this alleged Bush quote? He

probably said

something like, "Only people of faith DO hold public office."

Do atheists purposely avoid the political arena? Hmmm. Maybe they

prefer

usenet.

Any moral person would avoid politics as it is an avenue of marketing
and rhetoric. To accuse atheists of avoiding politics is to accuse
atheists of having morals. And I am sure that they would not object to
that.

Jason Gastrich wrote:

Larry Mundinger wrote:

He will be replying to a comment Bush made something like; "Only
people of faith can be considered to hold a public office"

Check local listings.

When will this be on TV?

Does someone have a citation for this alleged Bush quote? He

probably said

something like, "Only people of faith DO hold public office."

Do atheists purposely avoid the political arena? Hmmm. Maybe they

prefer

usenet.

Governor Ventura would say no.

Jason Gastrich wrote:

Larry Mundinger wrote:

He will be replying to a comment Bush made something like; "Only
people of faith can be considered to hold a public office"

Check local listings.

When will this be on TV?

Does someone have a citation for this alleged Bush quote? He
probably said something like, "Only people of faith DO hold public
office."

Do atheists purposely avoid the political arena? Hmmm. Maybe they
prefer usenet.

Governor Ventura would say no.