On the contrary, it’s rooted in reason. I’ve cited the facts and have held your hand all the way to my conclusion and assessment. I expect you to brush it off, just as your god brushes off thousands of people in a tsunami, and with as much compunction (i.e., none at all).
Your conclusion and assessment is [sic] arbitrary.
If people would obey God there would be no problems. This is what you are desperately trying to evade.
Nide had written:
God is just because he deals with people accordingly.
So when Saddam Hussein dealt with his subjects ‘accordingly’, he was being ‘just’? I guess I don’t follow you. Wanna try again?
No, he was delusional.
This kind of thing happens over and over when trying to have a conversation with you, so much so that it’s apparently deliberate on your part. And along with it came the usual personal slander, such as when you also stated right after this: “Just like you are.” If you really think I’m deluded, Nide, why do you continue to come over to my blog? You only succeed in making a bigger fool of yourself each time you do post here. You know that, don’t you?
Are you speaking for yourself here? Paul considered himself a sinner (cf., e.g., Romans 3:7). I guess Paul didn’t want to ‘live after him’?
Living after God's character.
Well, first of all, if each individual was created by your god, your god created them as individuals. So it’s not really a matter of ‘letting’ them be individuals; he created them that way according to Christian myth.
No, he didn't. They chose otherwise.
But how does being an individual ‘lead to destruction’? You sound like Mao Tse Tung – he also hated individualism, and did everything he could to stamp it out. He was quite effective, since he used the muzzle of a gun to get what he wanted. How did Mao disobey the Christian god?
By not loving God and his neighbor.
I have to warn you, Nide, that I will keep your worldview’s premises in mind when trying to interpret what you say. I John 4:8 says that “God is love” and throughout the bible this “loving God” is characterized as perversely indifferent to human values. So when the bible has the Christian god commanding people to “love” their neighbor, it cannot mean what Objectivists mean by love, i.e., unflinching devotion to one’s values and the welfare of his family members and friends. We need to interpret such commands as Christianity understands them, not in the manner as non-Christian worldviews inform them. So you need to stop borrowing from my worldview, Nide. You say that Mao disobeyed the Christian god by not loving said god and his neighbor, but you have not established this, especially going by Christianity’s conception of ‘love’. So you have some unfinished homework here.
Mao set himself up to be a ‘god’. The problem is demons can't be God.
Christ dying on the cross is a matter of a father turning his back on his own child. That’s precisely what you are calling ‘love and mercy’. Your ‘love and mercy’ consists of willingly allowing one’s values be destroyed by the scum of the earth. To quote Rand: “That is precisely how the symbolism is used.”
No, to destroy what you call values.
Nide had written:
You're right it's not just that treasure should die for trash.
Of course I’m right. But that’s what my worldview teaches: that treasure should never be sacrificed for trash, that values should never be sacrificed for non-values. So when you concede the fact that I am right here, you are conceding the truth of my worldview’s morality.
Which is no morality at all.
Your right becuase deep down inside you really have Christian values.
It seems that you really don’t grasp any of this, and are just reacting without understanding anything that’s been explained to you.
Meanwhile you’ve said that my morality, which I’ve clearly stated is premised on an individual’s devotion to his values, “is no morality at all,” that Christ’s purpose was “to destroy what [I] call values,” and also condemned the individualism which such a morality requires in the context of interpersonal relationships is “satanic.”
So your claim that “deep down inside [I] really have Christian values” is completely untenable. To say this only indicates that you’re really not aware of what Christianity teaches.
”…grevious…”? What’s that? Your Christ is a fabrication, Nide, just like Harry Potter, Luke Skywalker, Superman and Buck Rogers. You continue to kick against the pricks without ever making any fruitful points for your position. It really is amusing to watch.
How do you know?
But I’m guessing you’ll dismiss all this with some one-liner.
Nide also said:
Your imagination doesn't count as evidence.
You clearly don’t know what you’re talking about. Yours is the worldview that puts faith in invisible magic beings, not mine.
Better than putting my faith in demons.
Some of it is. Some of it is inferential. But all of it is wholly consistent with reason as my worldview conceives of it. In other words, you’re not going to be able to find an internal inconsistency in my worldview. But keep trying. Knock yourself out.
I have found many.
<< For example, how you know and you don't know. >>
Nide had written:
You don't have an exhaustive understanding of what you call reality so therefore your claims are arbitrary.
Non sequitur. By the way, Nide, do you have an exhaustive understanding of what you call reality? Are you really omniscient? Can you tell me what I had for breakfast today? Or is actual existence not part of what you call reality?
No, but YHWH does.
You need to try something else, for this is a philosophical dead-end.
If I do foolish things, this will very likely happen. Indeed, when I tried to be a Christian, reality showed me the foolishness of my ways. My life has improved a thousand-fold since I learned this lesson.
It could be a satanic trick. watch out.
But on what basis? Your worldview opposes individualism and insists on complete indifference to values. So you must be suspending your worldview in order to borrow from mine to do this.
No we oppose satanic individualism which you hold to.
What you apparently don’t understand is the fact that the only alternative to individualism is some form of collectivism. There aren’t different kinds of individualism: either man has the right to exist for his own sake, or he doesn’t. Your worldview explicitly denies man just this right, as I have shown in my blog entry above, and it won’t change simply because you start inventing arbitrary subcategories for the concept.
Unfortunately you don’t show how valuing what I think (and know) is good for me ‘really leads to pain and suffering’, as you had claimed. Do you ever make good on your words, Nide? Or do you abandon what you say as easily as your god abandoned his only begotten son when he was nailed to the cross?
Not thinking God's thoughts after him.
Why not simply be honest about your humanity, the nature of your consciousness, and recognize that reason is the only faculty which meets man’s epistemological needs?
Then if you help your neighbor, you’re doing so because you value it, not because you’re commanded to. See the beauty of Objectivism?
No, I do it becuase God commanded it.
“objectivism” is useless.
Well, you’ll have to speak for yourself here. I’ve known many, many Christians who rejoice at Jesus’s pain and suffering on the cross. As they say, ‘His pain, our gain’. Sort of says it all, don’t you think?
No, I celebrate life.
According to reality, I’m getting a lot of what I do right. But according to folks like you, you will try not to admit when I’m right most of the time.
Because of your Christian values.
You really don’t know what your worldview teaches, do you, Nide?
Doing something to suit one’s own needs is hardly wrong in my worldview. When I need water, I go to the refrigerator and pour myself a glass of cold water. Thus I act to suit my own needs. So this is no objection. Really, your statement here appears to stem from personal resentment, probably for the fact that you can’t put even a tiny scratch in the iron siding of my logic.
Yea, I drink water too.
God control things in a way that the choices of men are free. it's amazing.
So you acknowledge then that, according to the Christian myth, the ultimate source of all evil, pain, suffering and wrongdoing is its god.
He allowed it. adam actuated it.
by Dawson Bethrick