Zone1 Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust

[Cougarbear]

Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240308
So you are saying, Saint Cougarbear, that God had a plan in 1790 wherein the highly educated intellectual souls of George Washington, a Freemason we all know and Thomas Paine the rabble rousing revolutionary pamphleteer who wrote The Age of Reason, and all the historic participants in the American Revolution were intended to restore, as you describe it, “The Church of Jesus Christ” whatever that is, to what?

Is the divinely inspired body of “The Church of Jesus Christ” as you recognize it, therefore responsible for the expansion beyond the original 13 colonies which required pushing the inhabitants off the land where the body of “The Church of Jesus Christ” needed to go to expand the Kingdom of God on earth?

nfbw 240308 Vahnbf00840 to cgrbr 240308 Sahnbf00839

You are having a brain fart and can't read or something? The founding fathers of our nation were inspired to write the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution in a way that gave us our unalienable rights to liberty and freedom of religion. Not to personally establish a religion themselves. But, in 1830, after much revelation, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was established as the restored Church with the fullness of the Gospel, doctrines and ordinances necessary for exaltation in the Kingdom of God.

 

[The Duke]

CS Lewis on his conversion to Christianity. He says in Mere Christianity:

But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea
of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was
bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself
in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water
animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was
nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too—
for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen
to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist—in other words,
that the whole of reality was senseless—I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality—namely my
idea of justice—was full of sense.​

Without God, there is no standard of right or wrong. He set the foundation for morality.

Anybody that claims it's anything else is just grasping at straws.

Man is inherently flawed and cannot be relied upon to judge right from wrong/good from evil without a guide.

Atheists still use God's standard of morality whether they admit it or not. There's only 1 standard.

 

[Cougarbear]

Without God, there is no standard of right or wrong. He set the foundation for morality.

Anybody that claims it's anything else is just grasping at straws.

Man is inherently flawed.

And we have seen wrong throughout history. The morals of Stalin, Hitler, Mao and countless others.

 

[The Duke]

And we have seen wrong throughout history. The morals of Stalin, Hitler, Mao and countless others.

They were atheists.

 

[Cougarbear]

They were atheists.

Yep. And as you said, their sense of morality fluctuated and sank to the lowest denominator of evil. But they thought they were being moral and good.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240307 {post•841} Cougarbear Mar’24 Sahnbf: The founding fathers of our nation were inspired to write the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution in a way that gave us our unalienable rights to liberty and freedom of religion. cgrbr 240307 Sahnbf00841


Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240309 {post•846}

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution did not give us our unalienable rights to liberty and freedom. We have these by virtue of being born.

Thomas Paine was not inspired by recognition that Jesus Christ was God incarnate.

Thomas Paine (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) For a man so frequently called an atheist, Paine shows a remarkable confidence in the divine order of the creation. The work that did most to damage his reputation in America, and which split his supporters in Britain, was his Age of Reason (1793/4),​

​

The Age of Reason is not an atheist tract, but a deist one. It combines scathing criticism of claims to authority for the Bible by religious authorities, with an expression of confidence in a divinely ordered world, revealed in nature through the exercise of reason​

​

​

Natural Rights & the Enlightenment The idea of natural rights is the concept used in philosophy and legal studies that a person has certain rights from birth and which, because they were not awarded by a particular state or legal authority, cannot be removed, that is, they are inalienable. Such rights may include the right to life, liberty, equality, property, justice, and happiness.​

​

​

​

​

Writing the Declaration of Independence​

Jean Leon Gerome Ferris (Public Domain)​

​

Collectively, natural rights may be referred to as natural law, a subject of particular interest to philosophers of the Enlightenment. Natural rights can be contrasted with legal rights, those rights awarded to a citizen by the legal system of the state in which they are born or live (for example, the right to vote). There is much debate as to exactly which rights may be considered natural rights and, indeed, if there are any such rights independent of a given legal system. The acceptance of natural rights has often led to the formal protection of certain universal rights – what have become known as 'human rights' since they apply to everyone everywhere – in formal documents ranging from the United States Bill of Rights (1791) to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). As S. Blackburn states:​

​

​

What Are Natural Rights?​

Natural rights have been a consideration of philosophers stretching from the thinkers in antiquity to modern human rights organisations. Enlightenment thinkers were primarily concerned with the question of just what system of government is best, the choices usually being rather few: democracy, limited/elitist democracy, or some form of monarchy. The debate of natural rights comes secondary to this discussion but is relevant to it since philosophers were obliged to consider the success of a particular political system by how well it protected citizen rights. Some thinkers suggested that because they believed citizens had natural rights independent of the state, then the government could be legitimately challenged, particularly if it was based on non-natural rights such as privilege. This idea was taken up by revolutionaries, for example during the French Revolution(1789-1799) and the American War of Independence (1775-1783), to legitimise their overthrow of existing governments and power regimes.​

 

[ding]

Saint Ding above speaks often as if he knows what was in the minds and hearts of what he calls our “Christian” founding generation.

Actually I just read what they wrote. No need for super powers.

 

[GreatestIam]

God rarely interferes with us as we have by our creator liberty and freedom to choose good or evil

Except in the rare times, as you say, when God breaks his own rules.

You are too stupid to see your own contradiction.

 

[GreatestIam]

Without God, there is no standard of right or wrong. He set the foundation for morality.

Anybody that claims it's anything else is just grasping at straws.

Man is inherently flawed and cannot be relied upon to judge right from wrong/good from evil without a guide.

Atheists still use God's standard of morality whether they admit it or not. There's only 1 standard.

So tell us why you adore a genocidal LGBTQ+ hating God?

Why does your God create what he tells you to hate? Your own Children

 

[GreatestIam]

They were atheists.

Atheists who used the Vatican Bank.

Whatever they were, they flew a Catholic cross.

Only liars like you forget that.

Hitler was just another inquisitor usung the Churches power.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Brass Tacks Bunker Hill Massachusetts Jun 17, 1775 Result: British Victory Est. Casualties: 1,532 American: 450 British: 1,054

Massachusetts and Connecticut soldiers—more of an armed mob than a military unit—gathered to defend a hill in Charlestown. Among the defenders were several enslaved and free African Americans as well. The violent clash of these forces on what is mistakenly known as “Bunker Hill” signaled that the colonial revolt would not be easily extinguished. Bunker Hill

farmer and tavern keeper Lt Gen Israel Putnam

Setting aside his prosperous life as a farmer and tavern keeper, Putnam raced to Cambridge, Massachusetts following the Battles of Lexington and Concord, and offered up his services to what would later become the Continental Army.

Putnam was paramount at the Battle of Bunker Hill in June of 1775. It was Putnam who organized and commanded the stout colonial defense at Breed’s Hill, and who also may have given the famous order of “Don’t fire until you see the whites of their eyes.”

Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240309 {post•847} ding Mar’24 Sahnbf: “Actually I just read what they wrote.” dvng 240309 Sahnbf00847 to nfbw 240308 Vahnbf00834


Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240309 {post•851}

Of all the human beings on the earth on June 17, 1775 there is only ONE unique dna laden soul who has a claim to being the first colonist to fire the first shot that day against a red coated human being standing on Breed’s Hill in Massachusetts. This man stood with 2400 others to his side and presumably behind him facing a highly trained professional army loyal to one of the most powerful empires known to man at the time.

We have Saint Ding in Sahnbf00847 telling this forum that he has read this man’s writings, whether illiterate or not, to know precisely what was in his heart mind and soul leading up to this battle where the King’s men representing the Old World Christian Order lost 1532 from their ranks and the farm boys and villagers serving under a farmer and tavern keeper Commander lost 450.

nfbw 240309 Vahnbf000851 to Sahnbf00847

 

[The Duke]

Atheists who used the Vatican Bank.

Whatever they were, they flew a Catholic cross.

Only liars like you forget that.

Hitler was just another inquisitor usung the Churches power.

I'm no liar, snakeboi. Your attempts to deceive will be seen through.

 

[GreatestIam]

I'm no liar, snakeboi. Your attempts to deceive will be seen through.

You are the deceiver who would hide the fact that Germany was greatly helped by Christianity during WWII.

You should be kissing the ass of the gay guy that broke the German codes and won us the war.

Go lie elsewhere.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Israel Putnam - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Israel Putnam did not fit the stereotype of the taciturn New Englander. He was a gregarious tavern-keeper, a very industrious farmer, and an aggressive soldier, always looking for an excuse to discipline his soldiers. His farm was one of the most productive in the area (he bought out his partner and paid off his mortgage after only two years).[56] In battle, he would lead from the front, not from behind.[57][58] After hours, he would lead his comrades in singing the popular drinking songs of the day.[59]

Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240309 {post•847} ding Mar’24 Sahnbf: “Actually I just read what they wrote.” dvng 240309 Sahnbf00847 to nfbw 240308 Vahnbf00834

What did General Putnam write with regard to his spiritual life Saint Ding?

 

[Cougarbear]

Except in the rare times, as you say, when God breaks his own rules.

You are too stupid to see your own contradiction.

He doesn’t have rules. The rules are for us, not him. He enters in to keep the Plan of Salvation on track. He has no commandments or laws to follow other than the natural order of things. When he changes wine into water he does so based on knowledge we don’t know yet. As an example, in vitro fertilization back 2000 years ago with Mary. The strange thing is that people today can’t figure out how Mary became pregnant without sex even though we have the knowledge now.

 

[The Duke]

You are the deceiver who would hide the fact that Germany was greatly helped by Christianity during WWII.

You should be kissing the ass of the gay guy that broke the German codes and won us the war.

Go lie elsewhere.

 

[Weatherman2020]

You are the deceiver who would hide the fact that Germany was greatly helped by Christianity during WWII.

You should be kissing the ass of the gay guy that broke the German codes and won us the war.

Go lie elsewhere.

What does God say about Jews?

Oh yeah. Those who bless Israel are themselves blessed.

So anyone attacking Jews for the sake that they are Jewish is not a Christian, they are just fake people inventing morality as they go along.
Like you.

 

[ding]

Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust

I agree.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240225 {post•824} NotfooledbyW Feb’24 Vahnbf: How do you know what was in the hearts and minds of the founding generation that came mostly from Europe? {post•824} nfbw 240225 Vahnbf00824 to {post•823} Sahnbf00823


Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240309 {post•847} ding Mar’24 Sahnbf: “Actually I just read what they wrote.” dvng 240309 Sahnbf00847 to nfbw 240308 Vahnbf00834

I agree.

Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust 240309 {post•859}

I’m glad you agree with yourself but you need to agree with this Saint Ding: you are a liar.

I don’t believe you’ve read everything that every participant in the founding generation wrote about their spirituality.

For example What did General Putnam write with regard to his spiritual life Saint Ding?

nfbw 240309 Vahnbf00859

 

[ding]

Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust

I agree.