rpavich Loc: West Virginia

There is no “massacre” in a world where you and I are only molecules in motion with no intrinsic value or purpose. Only the Christian worldview can make sense of this (or anything for that matter)


http://shanekastler.typepad.com/pastor_shanes_blog/2017/10/atheism-evolution-cannot-explain-evil-like-the-las-vegas-massacre.html

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

Only the Christian worldview?

Hmm Abraham, Moses, Job & Jacob appear to have understood their intrinsic value and purpose long before there were any Christians.

Regarding Atheists - looking at their record in the USA of opposing Christians - those who spend a lot of their time and money helping others:
I have been checking the internet for any Atheist organization that does anything to help in disaster relief or helping others. All I have found are articles about them attacking Christians, removing from public courts any copy of the Judaic laws that are the base of American Justice. In general attacking anyone who believes God is real.

Can anyone show how, by all their efforts, they are making the world a better place to live?

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Yes.



I didn't say "when Christians appeared" I said "the Christian worldview."

The Christian worldview is that the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob exists. That God has certain attributes and is the ONLY being who can ground a universal moral code.





You'll notice that I didn't say "Atheists cannot do good things" but DID say that they cannot provide the foundation for an ultimate, binding, universal moral code.


Did you bother to read the article in the link? Your comments don't reflect that.

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

I thought that they did. In any case I did read the link and from it is clear that Atheism can explain the nasty things that happen when there are no moral standards.

I stated 'atheist organizations' as a whole not individual atheists - that often turn out be be agnostics. The other point is that God provided the foundation of moral code - as recorded in the 'law of Moses' - long before there were any Christians to have a 'World View'.

One good thing provided for Christians - is the reduction of the over 600 laws that the Ten have grown into - to a single command John 13:34-35

This reduction had already been given in general terms by Jesus in Matthew 22:35-40 and these two were later inherently combined into one.

In the long run, what matters is our relationship with God and each other that counts.

Cheers,

stanRP

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

No..they cannot. They have no grounds to explain the existence of a universally binding moral code...it's impossible without an authoritative law giver....which they lack.



True; God is the only foundation for an ultimate morality however just because folks weren't called "Christians" until later makes no difference. The God of those Old Testament Israelites is the only true foundation.



What matters is what's true. If what we believe is just "wishful thinking" then we are sunk and we are no better than these atheists.

I do believe that you completely missed the point of the article. Maybe this explanation might make it clearer what's being said:

https://answersingenesis.org/world-religions/atheism/atheism-an-irrational-worldview/

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

Re: I thought that they did. In any case I did read the link and from it is clear that Atheism can explain the nasty things that happen when there are no moral standards.

And your reply:
re:No..they cannot. They have no grounds to explain the existence of a universally binding moral code...it's impossible without an authoritative law giver....which they lack.

Now you are playing with words. You appear to be postulating that nasty things are never the result of people who have no moral standards.

I think it is time to agree to disagree.

*********

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Again, i can tell from your comments the the argument went right over your head. Did you read the second article i linked to?

But as you said cut our losses and quit now.

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

I understand the argument. The fault is that while an atheist may not have a logical base for moral standards - there is an internal standard, that is often illogical, that a person can use to decide what is right or wrong. The Bible refers to this internal standard as Love (Agape - not sex Eros). This standard of 'Love' often results in a decision not based on logic. e.g. Laying down one's life for his friends (Jn 15:13). The late Greg Bahnsen gave some excellent lectures on "The Myth of Neutrality". In the external world of logic, there has to be a basis for making moral decisions. An Atheist claiming that there is no God has no logical base to counter any debate on the existence of God - yet they do have this 'internal standard' we call love (Agape). A person who rejects this internal standard is capable of the worst imaginable evil. The original point of this debate. At the same time - an atheist who who adopts and lives by this standard of love (Agape), even though it may be illogical, is fulfilling the "Worldview" of the whole Mosaic law. If you disagree with this - have a word with Jesus as this is His definition: In Matthew 22:35-40 A lawer asked Jesus for the basis of the Mosaic law. Jesus answer was 'Love (agape). A good question to ask is whether a person who keeps and lives by this original standard of love (Agape) yet rejects the need to keep the Mosaic law - is accepted by God.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Well...sort of. The whole point is that there is only one true ultimate standard which the atheist cannot supply.



No idea what you are talking about now, we aren't discussing love, but the grounding of an ultimate morality.



He certainly did.



Again...no idea where you are going with this. If you mean that all men have a conscience and know God exists...then we agree.




Actually no, it's not the original point.

The original point is that only the Christian worldview can supply the necessary preconditions for an ultimate moral code which makes sense of things like the las vegas shooting.



Actually again, false. The atheist cannot live in a way pleasing to God and most certainly cannot fulfill the mosaic law. The natural man cannot do what is pleasing to God...period. The natural man hates God.




Oh I'm familiar with that passage yet you have twisted it up to mean something that it doesn't mean.

The only folks accepted by God are those who are born again by His grace. Period.

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

stanRP wrote:
I understand the argument. The fault is that while an atheist may not have a logical base for moral standards - there is an internal standard, that is often illogical, that a person can use to decide what is right or wrong.


rpavich: Well...sort of. The whole point is that there is only one true ultimate standard which the atheist cannot supply.

stanRP Well - actually there is, but it is not a ‘written standard’. It is the standard that God used when He gave Moses the ten commandments. That standard is Love (Agape). Paul writes about this in Romans:

Romans 13:8-10 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

Jesus refers to this Love (Agape) standard throughout all the four gospels - and tells a lawer that it is the basis of the Mosaic law. Read the parable of the Sheep and the Goats - Matt 25:31-46 The basis of judgment was not the letter of the law - it was how they they kept this command to love.

Quote:
The Bible refers to this internal standard as Love (Agape - not sex Eros). This standard of 'Love' often results in a decision not based on logic. e.g. Laying down one's life for his friends (Jn 15:13).

rpavich: No idea what you are talking about now, we aren't discussing love, but the grounding of an ultimate morality.

stanRP: Jesus makes it quite clear that the grounding of ultimate morality - is love.


Quote:
The late Greg Bahnsen gave some excellent lectures on "The Myth of Neutrality". In the external world of logic, there has to be a basis for making moral decisions.


rpavich:He certainly did.

Quote:
An Atheist claiming that there is no God has no logical base to counter any debate on the existence of God - yet they do have this 'internal standard' we call love (Agape).

rpavich: Again...no idea where you are going with this. If you mean that all men have a conscience and know God exists...then we agree.


Quote:
A person who rejects this internal standard is capable of the worst imaginable evil. The original point of this debate.

stanRP Actually no, it's not the original point.

Quote:
The original point is that only the Christian worldview can supply the necessary preconditions for an ultimate moral code which makes sense of things like the las vegas shooting.

stanRP And the lack of love is behind things like the “las vegas shooting”



Quote:
At the same time - an atheist who who adopts and lives by this standard of love (Agape), even though it may be illogical, is fulfilling the "Worldview" of the whole Mosaic law.

rpavich: Actually again, false. The atheist cannot live in a way pleasing to God and most certainly cannot fulfill the mosaic law. The natural man cannot do what is pleasing to God...period. The natural man hates God.

stanRP Paul makes it clear that ANYONE who loves IS fulfilling the mosaic law. Romans 13:8-10 this applies to the Atheist or anyone else

Quote:
If you disagree with this - have a word with Jesus as this is His definition: In Matthew 22:35-40 A lawer asked Jesus for the basis of the Mosaic law. Jesus answer was 'Love (agape). A good question to ask is whether a person who keeps and lives by this original standard of love (Agape) yet rejects the need to keep the Mosaic law - is accepted by God **.

rpavich: Oh I'm familiar with that passage yet you have twisted it up to mean something that it doesn't mean.

stanRP When you understand the principle of Agape love - you will find that it has not been ’twisted’.

Lets get to something that we do agree on:

Quote: The only folks accepted by God are those who are born again by His grace. Period.

stanRP: The words “born again” are in the question Nicodemus asked Jesus in their debate. The common theme that he went to see Jesus at night because he was afraid - is totally wrong. Nicodemus was one of the leaders. At night was probably the only time to have a chat with Jesus. The question was part of the discussion on original sin. HOWEVER - these days is is commonly used to indicate a person who has become a Believer - a Christian. Being “Saved” is another.

Scripture makes it clear that no-one can make themselves acceptable to God by keeping the Mosaic or any other set of laws. God is the one who judges - not us. ** Having said that, scripture does make clear what God is looking for - and all through Scripture -Agape Love is what God is looking for is this Love (Agape). At the same time - doing ‘loving things’ to get on the good side of God - is NOT acceptable - even logically it does not meet the definition of Agape.

Read the first epistle of John. It goes into this in some detail.

NOTE: I replied to this using an external text editor: Pls forgive any format changes when copying it to here:

Cheers,

stanRP: