The Petra Zone

I think my points are further clarified if we read a little longer: "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearin...

Read the words again: "When Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts..." (Romans 2:14-15) If someone who does not believe (which goes for Ge...

According to your quote Gentiles can act as a law unto themselves. Law implies obligation. Thus they can have obligation contrary to what you have claimed. This text contradicts your own points. Furthermore it seems to point to human nature as a source of ethics. It is certainly not incompatible wit...

The fact that you compare natural laws with moral law shows a basic misunderstanding. Ethics is conserned with the ought while science is concerned with the is. The first takes an interpretation that is not Scientific. That is why you cannot compare.

So it is not right because it is right but because it is written in our heart? You have claimed an atheist cannot have moral obligation. Now you seem to say he can but cannot account for it. You have made moral understanding and obligation dependent on the existence of God. If it is dependent on him...

Dear Mountain Man I would like to ask you some questions concerning some of your statements. You wrote: "The fact that man has such an inherent and overwhelming sense of moral obligation is a compelling argument for the existence of God simply because there's no accounting for it in an atheistic uni...

I do agree with quite many of your points. However the change brought about by the internet does not compare to any other changes with regard to to moving from vinyl to cd's and then back again. The younger generation does not see any point in "owning" the music. For what reason if you can still hea...

You raise some very interesting points, fiendik. First I don't completely agree with your following claim: "However, I should point out that the difference between those "known for Christianity" and those "known for philosophy" is much more basic than it sounds; one is beginning with the assumption ...

I believe the progress (though it is not necessarily good by all means) is irreversible. I don't believe we will be returning to bying records again. It is beyond the control of the industry (at least during the current conditions). The musicians and the record labels may want to make certain agreem...

Until proven wrong. And then you need to talk about the case.

You are holding on to a wrong understanding of moral accountability. So, once more, moral accountability exist independently of whether there are consequences or not. It is based on the fact that there are ethical values that exist and are having a truth value independently of whether anyone acts ac...

It is not a fundamental ignorance of theistic morality. It is a different version and one that is based on very thoughtful consideration. The logic fails you when you talk about moral obligation. You wrote "You can not have an obligation without someone or something to hold you accountable, and the ...

I am taking about Europe too, so most of what you say is unbalanced. You have held oppinions on Sweden and Germany. So it is ok for you to have an oppinion on other countries but not the other way around? Have you seen the conditions in which refugees live? Or die? Have you seen or lived under the c...

Calling the words of one of the most important philosophers a load of nonsence is perhaps taking it a bit too far. You are free to disagree but that is something different. Leibniz was a Christian so your description on how Christians define "good" is only partly correct since other Christians have ...

If atheism is true then what does it really matter, in the end, if a man lives selfishly or selflessly when there is no ultimate judgment for his actions? I think it is quite a lot more complicated than that. At first what you suggest may seem convincing, but if you take it just one step further in...