The status of women also increased during Alexander’s Greece, as can be seen in the more egalitarian ways of Helenism.

Otherwise, a well-written post.

Thanks for responding…did you read my previous response (September 4) or do you simply choose not to discuss certain topics. I’ll certainly respond directly to your points but a debate in a two way street.

“A great gulf fixed” is simply a way out. Listen, we both have access to the same knowledge, facts, and statistics (and our discussion should reflect that) so this “Gulf” is in your head if anyplace. Let’s put this gulf aside and get to the bottom of what you’re saying. You state that our debate is of an “Either/Or” nature regarding God’s existence. Perhaps I can give you a quick refresher on The Scientific Method before continuing: First, ask a question. Then form a hypothesis with specific predictions that are quantitatively testable. Next test these predictions. Finally analyze the results and make statements of verifiability regarding your original hypothesis. If you remember, hypotheses ARE NOT proven, they are falsified. That’s why gravitational theory is still a theory: it works in most settings from the very small to the very large and has been tested and retested and only at the quantum level has it been falsified. With this in mind, let’s look at god: What quantifiable hypotheses might you put forth that wouldn’t PROVE the existence of god (remember science doesn’t prove, it looks at probability), but wouldn’t falsify the idea of there being a god? Please, answer! I don’t know. What I do know, is that with all of our knowledge of how the Earth, universe, life, chemicals, environment, and technology function, no such hypothesis has been put forward and so, there is no such (even negative) evidence that god exists! Of course, you could cite the shear complexity of life and the universe, but if you had read my previous responses you would understand that these, too, can be readily explained through physical and evolutionary theory.

Next, you obviously do not understand the premise of Intelligent Design, though you argue for it being taught…oops. Intelligent Design proponents are arguing that I.D. IS A SCIENCE. If this is the case then they should have quantifiable and replicable theories that have been tested and retested and follow the scientific method outlined previously. This is NOT creationism and if you think there is an overlap between them then you misunderstand one or both of these philosophies. Either you believe that I.D. can be scientific (in which case you likely believe in an Old Earth and universe but believe there is a guiding “intelligent” hand in its creation) or you believe in Creationism and likely believe in a Young Earth and universe and that explanations concerning this creation deal with faith and NOT the scientific method. So which are you?

Next, you talk about “evil” in the world and the “evil force” that pins this bad nature on mankind. I’m sorry to break it to you, but the entire idea of “evil” is a man-made notion and not a universal one at that. What I mean is that moral standards vary from culture to culture and even within culture (even within, yes, our “superior” western, judeo-christian culture that is so precious and perfect to you). The human body is a complex organism and with billions of us there is tremendous variation in how we function: whether that be hormonal, genetic, environmental or a combination of these factors. Of course there are going to be tremendously sad things that happen based on poor judgment or extreme thought, but that applies to everyone including western culture (don’t forget what Christianity can do whether it be the Inquisition, Nazi Germany or the American KKK). If you want to call this evil, please do and rightfully so based on our cultural upbringing, but to blame it blindly on a “malfeasant” force is assuming a tremendous amount about the nature of the universe. You take it one step further, however…the world can (most likely) agree that genocide is a bad thing and no one wants this to happen, but to claim “evil” exists because abortion is legalized is insulting and I cannot tolerate the tone in which you express your opinion. If I had any doubt you were male before this, your statement absolutely confirms it. I’m sure you would knock the Russian and Chinese experiments with Communism as being “evil” because they take the rights of the people away (something we judeo-christians value so dearly). Communism removes the right of people to their income, to their choice in work, to the number of children they can have, to what they can worship and how. This is “evil,” right? So where do you get off telling women not only what they can and cannot do to their body, but that some choices are Evil? Double standards, misunderstanding and naivete… It would be interesting to see you sit down with a young woman who has been a victim of a violent sex crime and tell her she is evil for wanting to abort the pregnancy…

So atheists are capable of doing good acts because we were brought up in a Judeo-Christian culture, is that right? I hate to break it to you, but there are atheists all over the world and you know what, we’re damn good people on the whole. I’ll be happy to share my personal philosophy with you: people (all of humanity) are perfectly capable of acting with kindness, compassion and sympathy to all other people without belief in any god. This is the basic tenant of Humanism and I fully agree. I agree with Sartre in the existential ideal of responsibility for one’s actions in terms of a greater good: each of our daily decisions should represent decisions we would want anyone else in a similar position to make. We don’t need the promise of eternal salvation (or damnation) to persuade (or scare) us into making decisions based on a road map laid out in a 2000 year old book that doesn’t apply to the world in which we live…we need people to act like people and be just based on the cultural paradigms in which they live. Furthermore, we need cultures to recognize and embrace other cultures and not shame them for their differences.

If this philosophy sounds “evil” to you, I’m sorry. Now that I’ve answered your points, I would appreciate it if you respond with more clarity to my previous questions regarding your opinions about evolutionary theory and cultural relativism.

Cheers (not god-related),

P.E.T

I was particularly interested in you statement in Para.2 to the effect that you “sense the world is moving toward a more progressive view of life where people are not bound by the past . . .”

Does being un-bound by the past mean that all Tradition is to be discard merely becaused it is “past”?

Also, I am not sure precisely what a “progressive view of life” means – and does it not matter what “their own religious affiliation” advocates?

It seems to me that there is considerable confusiion in the mind of the general population about how one is to “behave” in this life. Is there such a thing as Right Behavior and Wrong? – which is not the same as Legality and Illegality. For example, it is Legal for a woman to abort (kill) her unborn child, but is it Right? Those with a progressive view of life generally say Yes, and often their religious affiliafions (if such exisf) are Liberal and anti-authoritarian. As one teenager put it, “Ain’t nobody ‘goin to tell me I can’t have no sex.”, which perfectly captures a certain individalistic but anarchic mind-set.

My criticism of Islam, which disturbed you, reflects its present-day aggressive posture as well as its anti-Wstern and anti-Christian history. Let it not be forgotten that Islamic armies were stopped within a few miles of Paris by Charles the Hammer in AD-732. All of Western history would have been different if Charles had failed. Christian history is not without blemish, but Christianity has provided the well-spring of our Civilization.

The point may also be made that children of atheistic and agnostic parents may be “morally decent”, but even they are being raised in a Christian garden, so to speak. Paul Tillich talked about our Culture being like cut flowers – they still have their bloom, but they are dying. We are on a slippery slope.

I have just finished reading “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Western Civilization” by Anthony Esolen. You might merely dip into it, but the last chapter is well-wrth reading.

Again, thanks for your comments.

JohnColet

In my opinion, we ae dealing wih a question of Eiher/Or, to use Kierkegaard’s term. Either God exits or He does not. If the former is true, it would seem to infer that He is an Intelligent Designer.

Perhaps this laps over into the dreaded Creationism. I trust that I understand something of the natue of the Spirit of this Age. A friend of mine talks about the “sea change” that is taking place – a movement away from a Judeo-Christian world-view toward Who knows What? Inasmuch as human behavior is influenced by what Paul Tillich called our Ultimate Concerns, we ought to be worried about what human behavior will be like in a generation or so as our Ultimate Concerns transmogrify. Of course, there is the presence of the much-denigrated Religous Right, and there is Islam on the hoizon. Human beings are contingent, and know it; “Every chicken on the roost is chicken hangng on”. Religions will survive.

If the Medieval period was an Age of Faith, the Renaissance and, later, the Enlightenment, effectively dethroned God and placed Human Reason in His place, which suggesfs that we have declared ourselves to be “god-like”, the individual final authority on everything. God as even been declared “dead” by a noted philosopher.

Few believe in the existence of Satan, the Devil, but how do we explain the obvious Evil we read and hear about every day? The Supreme Court has gone so far as to approve a moher’s Constitutional right to exterminate the child in her womb is she wants to. It is euphemistically called the Right to Choose – usualy to kill. This is no only contrary to orthodox Christian teaching, but contrary to Human Nature, particlarly on the feminine side.

By the way, I don’t believe in the Devil as a funny-looking fellow with horns. But isn’t there a Power or Force at work in the world which is objectively Malfeasant, some kind of functioning Unclean Spirit? How are horrific crimes, even against children, to be understood? What foulness gets into us, and takes over?

But if there Malfeasance, there is a Solution. Mother Teresa’s Sisters of Charity, taking seriously the spirit and teachings of the Christian Faith, have offered to take and care for any unwanted new or about-to-be-born children. “Don’t abort, give it to us.” Of course, atheists and agnostics also perform acts of love, growing up as they do, in a Judeo-Chsifrtian-influenced society. And, being made in the image of God, we participate in His love.

You obviously think seriously about these matters. Perhaps you will be willing to spell out your own basic assumptions and general philosophy. If not, Goodbye (which derives from “God be with you”).

John Colet

Hoping for an intelligent discussion,

P.E.T.

P.E.T.

I appreciate you comments on my article.

With regard to your Point No. 1, I agree that there is a difference between Philosophy and Science. The former has to do with people thinking from Down to Up, so to speak – it is notional. Science, on the other hand, deals with things that can be touched, weighed, and otherwise manipulated. I.D. does not fit purely scientific categories, that is, people using scientific methodology cannot prove or disprove the existence of God or “an undetermined source” any more than one can “prove” that a wife loves her husband. There is no “scientific basis” for it; trust is involved, or faith. Everyone has “faith” in something or someone.

Second, I don’t for a minute believe that “each and every culture on this planet is equal in every respect”. Alexandr Solzenhitsyn’s writings come to mind. In a fallen world (oops), no society is without flaws, and as Lord Action put it, Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Life in the USA is to be preferred to life in, say, Iran. As someone put it, We may not be the best, but we‘re better than the rest -at least, somewhat.

Third, I take “willy-nilly” to mean whether one wishes it or not, without a directed purpose. Evolution possibly was willy-nilly, a tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing, as the Bard wrote – OR there was an Intelligence directing it.

Best regards, John Colet Society

I suppose it depends on “what we see around us.” I my case, I see the existence of a designer, a.k.a God, but it can’t be proved “scientifically”. Nor can its opposite. We all live by Faith – but in Who or What?

Best regards,
JohnColet

What is clear is that there has been some breakdown in the moral fabric of our society and the more formal traditions many Christian societies espouse have become more easily questioned and even ignored by youth. But what I also sense is that the world is moving toward a more progressive view of life where people are not bound by the past but are able to live while still maintaining a sense of respect and pride for their own religious affiliations.

Certain social ills such as teen pregnancy, STDs, youth violence are not all the cause of the removal of Christian education from the schools… Let’s not forget about the numerous sexual health education programs established in schools across the nation. There are a number of issues that go into the analysis of social ills and their perpetuation, religion is a small part of it.

I find it a bit disturbing that you would criticize the widespread acceptance of the Muslim faith. Are the principles and values of the Islamic world not up to par with those of the Christian standard? It’s sounds to me that the crusades continue through our language these days.

What is important is that our children are raised with a sense of morality and integrity. And I know many families who have been able to accomplish this without forcing their children to attend church every sunday and read the bible.

Don’t get me wrong, i understand your concern. But the dogmatic christain model is not the only key to a morally decent life.

Hope this clarifies.

Cheers,

P.E.T.