Who are happier -- Christians or Atheists?

Quote: Mosca

Wait just one second. You CANNOT on one hand make the argument that there is a Christian God, and on the other hand equate that God's moral power with that of reason. Because if you do so, then you agree with the position of those who are arguing against you. The whole point of reasoning that one does the right thing because it is the right thing to do, that is the essence of godlessness.

There is no right thing to do without something that is universal and above us. Think of the famous line from The Brothers Karamazov, "If God does not exist, everything is permissible." Without God, or something like God to ground the definition of what is right, your statement is nonsensical. How can one do the right thing because it is the right thing when what I really mean is that it is the subjective right thing for me at this moment? The essence of godlessness is to make impossible any judgment of right or wrong in a true, real, or meaningful sense. This is why atheism makes impossible a moral code rather than establishing one.

Quote: FrGamble

All moral codes have been based on a belief in God or some higher power than ourselves. Be that Zeus, Reason, the Logos, or the Trinity.

You have morally equated your God and Trinity with reason. Either you have conceded or you do not understand reason.

I have to side with Mosca on this (surprise!)

Quote: FrGamble

There is no right thing to do without something that is universal and above us.

That's true, except for the "above us" part. Morality is not, and should not be, imposed as a diktat from authority without rhyme or reason.

And yet a fictional character, or a mythical character if you prefer, is not a universal anything.

Quote:

Think of the famous line from The Brothers Karamazov, "If God does not exist, everything is permissible."

More opinions from fictional characters? (I think that was low of me).

Quote:

Without God, or something like God to ground the definition of what is right, your statement is nonsensical.

Without a standard of value you cannot ground the definition of what's right.

God is a terrible standard of value. An ultimate authority who does not explain, but simply imposes his will by force or threat of force (flood, pillars of salt, wanton destruction of stone towers, the earth swallowing the infidel, etc.) And that would be if God were real, which he's not. It's like basing a moral code on Gilgamesh, Seth, Isis, Zeus(*), or even Spiderman.

Quote:

This is why atheism makes impossible a moral code rather than establishing one.

Wow, I'm laughing so hard I'm expecting someone from the next office to call over and ask what the f**** is going on!


(*) It just occurred to me Jehovah, being a deity of ancient times, is as quarrelsome as his other mythic contemporaries. But being also an only god, he has to make his quarrels with humanity rather than with other deities better able to fend for themselves.

Quote: Mosca

You have morally equated your God and Trinity with reason. Either you have conceded or you do not understand reason.

I guess I have. Reason is right thinking or logic. It is using our given intellect to discover the truth. God is the Truth and the way to reach Him is through using our reason/logic. Jesus is the incarnate Word of God. In Greek He is the Logos, from which we get the word Logic. Jesus is the way we come to truth, He is reason incarnate. "I am the way, the truth, and the life"

Where my argument is sloppy is in my list of higher powers. I was just trying to make a more general point that one needs a universal truth in which to ground morality I was not equating Zeus to the Trinity. I'm glad you have latched onto my inclusion of reason because it is important to make clear that Christianity is not anti-reason, but rather the worship of reason who leads us to truth.

Quote: FrGamble

Reason is right thinking or logic.

Wow(*)! That's so wrong I don't know where to begin.

Reason is logically thought. Not "right" thought. When I hear things like that, I sense Mr. Blair stirring in his grave.

Quote:

God is the Truth and the way to reach Him is through using our reason/logic.

Logical thinking has a weakness: it requires true premises.

If, say, I tried to reason thus:

Dead people resurrect often
Jesus was a dead man
Therefore Jesus resurrected.

I'd be guilty of starting off with one wrong premise. Dead people don't resurrect. Ever.

It's worse when you start off with a conclusion, because then you don't reason, you rationalize. that is, you build up arguments to make your conclusion seem true.

(*) When a woman says "wow," the argument is over. Retreat and pick another battle later (which you will also lose)

Quote: Nareed

That's true, except for the "above us" part.

I'm glad you recognize the need for universal truths.

Quote:

Morality is not, and should not be, imposed as a diktat from authority without rhyme or reason.

That's true. Reason is not a dictator.

Quote:

More opinions from fictional characters? (I think that was low of me).

I thought you would appreciate the lessons learned from good literature.

Quote:

Without a standard of value you cannot ground the definition of what's right.

God is a terrible standard of value. An ultimate authority who does not explain, but simply imposes his will by force or threat of force (flood, pillars of salt, wanton destruction of stone towers, the earth swallowing the infidel, etc.)

The law of gravity is no dictator imposing its will upon those who reject it and jump from a bridge. Nor does it enforce its law with threat or fear. Murder, rape, robbery, disrespect, etc. lead to very real and tragic consequences. You reap what you so. This moral law is the ultimate authority and is very real and true, just like God.

Quote: Nareed

I'd be guilty of starting off with one wrong premise. Dead people don't resurrect. Ever.

Even if it was true, I'm not sure what he was
trying to prove by doing it. It seems like a
rather cheap trick, one that any logical person
at the time would explain by saying he was
never really dead, or someone died in his
place. Nobody would jump right to the
conclusion that he rose from the dead, that
would be too far fetched to be even considered.

Yet we're supposed to believe that everywhere
he went people just bought his story and were
'amazed'. No, the amazing part would be that
he was believed at all. Even today, when we
could have verifiable proof that someone died,
if they came back to life we would think it a
fluke, not a divine event.

Quote: FrGamble

The law of gravity is no dictator imposing its will upon those who reject it and jump from a bridge.

The law of gravity is a mathematical abstraction of the force of gravity. The force of gravity is NOT a sentient entity, nor a volitional entity. Non-sentient, non-volitional entities are amoral.

Quote: Nareed

Logical thinking has a weakness: it requires true premises.

If, say, I tried to reason thus:

Dead people resurrect often
Jesus was a dead man
Therefore Jesus resurrected.

I'd be guilty of starting off with one wrong premise. Dead people don't resurrect. Ever.

It's worse when you start off with a conclusion, because then you don't reason, you rationalize. that is, you build up arguments to make your conclusion seem true.

(*) When a woman says "wow," the argument is over. Retreat and pick another battle later (which you will also lose)

Wow! That is a good straw man argument. "Dead people resurrect often", I don't know who said that? It is as untrue and illogical as saying, "Dead people don't resurrect. Ever." You are the one starting with an untrue premise. I am also not starting off with a conclusion. I start with the empty tomb, the inability of anyone to produce evidence that Jesus was indeed still dead, the conviction of the Apostles and disciples, their eyewitness accounts, the spread of the faith in the midst of persecution, etc. All these things lead to the logical conclusion that Jesus indeed has Risen! Alleluia!

You are the only one starting with a conclusion: Dead people don't resurrect. Ever. What lead you to that conclusion? What are your true premises in the case of Jesus that would lead you to not hold Him as an exception? I think I sense Mr. Blair stirring as well, maybe he will rise from the dead and help you to see the problem with your logical thinking.

Quote: FrGamble

All these things lead to the logical conclusion that Jesus indeed has Risen!

But that's not a logical conclusion, why do
you think it is. It's as logical as seeing a
person I know in the store, then later
seeing him mowing his lawn, and
thinking he must have teleported from
the store to his house because I don't know
how he got there. That's not logical at
all. Just like assuming Jesus rose from
the dead isn't logical.