From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 6 18:13:37 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E184A37B400 for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 18:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from directvinternet.com (dsl-65-185-140-165.telocity.com [65.185.140.165]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94C8A43E42 for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 18:13:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nwestfal@directvinternet.com) Received: from Tolstoy.home.lan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by directvinternet.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g871DNGd045027; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 18:13:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nwestfal@directvinternet.com) Received: from localhost (nwestfal@localhost) by Tolstoy.home.lan (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) with ESMTP id g871DNPe045024; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 18:13:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: Tolstoy.home.lan: nwestfal owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 18:13:23 -0700 (PDT) From: "Neal E. Westfall" X-X-Sender: nwestfal@Tolstoy.home.lan To: Giorgos Keramidas Cc: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? In-Reply-To: <20020907001514.GA15779@hades.hell.gr> Message-ID: <20020906174735.C44831-100000@Tolstoy.home.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On 2002-09-06 10:02 +0000, Neal E. Westfall wrote: > > The reason not all of the laws written in Leviticus are any longer > > applicable is that they had a theological purpose. > > That's so convenient, isn't it? It's also convenient to remove the rest of my reply to the question I was asked and quote me out of context, isn't it? > > What is *your* rationale for opposing slavery? I'll tell you mine. > > I am grateful to God for having mercy on me as a sinner. As such, I > > seek to glorify God by emulating His compassion that He had on me. > > Why do you need to have `God', or anything else that can take its > place in your systems of beliefs, to set an example? Can't you, as an > individual, a human being respect and value others without someone > showing you ``the way''? So let me get this straight. You think you are so self-righteous that you think you are not in need of an objective standard of right and wrong, and that you just naturally do what is right (right according to who?) in any given situation? How can you even define "respect" and "value others" without appealing to some objective standard that gives such lofty goals meaning? Without objective standards, you have no right to expect such respect from anyone. Fyodor Dostoevsky wrote, "If there is no God, all is permissable." Please refute. > > Do you suppose that God is *obligated* to have mercy on everyone? > > Yes. Why? If the govenor of Texas pardon's somebody on death row, is he obligated to pardon everybody on death row? > > > An obligation implies justice, not mercy. > > Of course, one of the attributes given to gods and goddesses in most > of the religions of the world (a few notable exceptions do exist, but > they are usually accused of anthropomorphism), is their inherent > tendency to be `just, and righteous to all'. Or, is a god or goddess > just and righteous only when it suits him/her, to ask for more > sacrifices/belief/whatever? How is any of this relevant to the discussion? Do you even understand what "justice" is? It is not the same thing as mercy. Justice means you get what you deserve, that is, punishment for your sins. Mercy means you get what you didn't deserve, e.g. forgiveness. Never pray for justice for yourself, you just might get it. 8-) Neal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message