Creation "science" and a Bible-based morality

[excreationist]

From Ken Ham's "The Genesis Solution" - Two Castles - the opposition is attacking the literalist Creationist view while the church is attacking the issues like pornography and homosexuality or attacking each other....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=1509s

In "The Genesis Solution" Ken Ham says that the Bible (and a literal Genesis) is the foundation for wearing clothes and being against homosexuality (God didn't make "Adam and Steve"). It says that evolution justifies racist views, divorce, abortion, and relativistic morality.

So promoting Creationism can have moral reasons so that you have a strong foundation when trying to promote Biblical values like being against homosexuality, and men being the spiritual head of the family. So that gives Christians more reasons to support Creation science....

Though of course modern day slavery is still wrong - or it is ok under certain circumstances in Bible times....
https://answersingenesis.org/kids/bible-questions/kids-feedback-does-the-bible-promote-slavery/
https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/doesnt-the-bible-support-slavery/

Updated pictures:
https://answersingenesis.org/apologetics/maturing-the-message/

About clothing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=1010s

"What did God do? He gave them coats - the first blood sacrifices are covering for their sin - beautiful picture of something to come wasn't it?"​

 

[Harry Bosch]

From Ken Ham's "The Genesis Solution" - Two Castles - the opposition is attacking the literalist Creationist view while the church is attacking the issues like pornography and homosexuality or attacking each other....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=1509s

In "The Genesis Solution" Ken Ham says that the Bible (and a literal Genesis) is the foundation for wearing clothes and being against homosexuality (God didn't make "Adam and Steve"). It says that evolution justifies racist views, divorce, abortion, and relativistic morality.

So promoting Creationism can have moral reasons so that you have a strong foundation when trying to promote Biblical values like being against homosexuality, and men being the spiritual head of the family. So that gives Christians more reasons to support Creation science....

Though of course modern day slavery is still wrong - or it is ok under certain circumstances in Bible times....
https://answersingenesis.org/kids/bible-questions/kids-feedback-does-the-bible-promote-slavery/
https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/doesnt-the-bible-support-slavery/

Updated pictures:
https://answersingenesis.org/apologetics/maturing-the-message/

About clothing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=1010s

"What did God do? He gave them coats - the first blood sacrifices are covering for their sin - beautiful picture of something to come wasn't it?"​

What does it mean to "be against homosexuality"? There are gay people. How do I "go against" them? What should I attack? That they are what they are? It's bizarre. Sorry, but I'm not going to go against anyone. I'm so glad that I don't have to live a life according to an ancient flawed Jewish handbook in order to appease an invisible god who won't show himself.

 

[DBT]

Bible morality appears to be an oxymoron.

 

[ideologyhunter]

If polling about Christianity in the US is accurate, the folks in the castle on the right reached their high water mark in the 1980s. That doesn't mean their zeal, lack of coherence, or delusions are lessening. Expect that, as they feel more benighted, they'll be even nuttier, very much like their overlapping brotherhood of Trump's angry old white folks.

 

[James Brown]

Religion and morality have as much to do with each other and eyesight and eye color.

 

[excreationist]

What does it mean to "be against homosexuality"? There are gay people. How do I "go against" them? What should I attack?

Ken Ham thinks homosexuality is immoral in a similar way that people often think paedophilia is, especially if the person acts on their desires. Going against it would involve speaking out against it and discouraging it. In more recent versions of the picture this has become "gay marriage" and this would involve fighting the laws, chuches, etc.

 

[excreationist]

Religion and morality have as much to do with each other and eyesight and eye color.

What about the ten commandments, etc? Morality based on "God's word" theoretically has an absolute foundation while "anything goes" if you base it on man's opinions.

 

[James Brown]

Religion and morality have as much to do with each other and eyesight and eye color.

What about the ten commandments, etc?

The Ten Commandments are a good and original set of laws. Unfortunately, the Commandments that are good are not original, and the Commandments that are original are not good.

Morality based on "God's word" theoretically has an absolute foundation while "anything goes" if you base it on man's opinions.

Even if we assume for the sake of argument that A) God exists, and that B) he's deeply concerned about the morality of humans, and thus C) there is such a thing as "Objective Morality", there is no way that we Subjective humans can ever know what it is.

Yes, certain people have said that God wants us to do such-and-such, and never to do so-and-so. But there's no reliable way for us to know that these are actually the thoughts and desires of God. What do we do when other people say that God actually desires something completely different?

All we can do is use the tools that we have available (or if you insist, the tools that God gave us) to determine how to maximize human well-being. Tools like Reason, and Empathy, and Evidence-Based Thinking.

That "religious people" have found that certain behaviors are more desirous than others does not mean that Faith or Religion provides some special insights unavailable to the rest of us. All cultures will prohibit murder for as long as the majority of citizens object to being murdered.

C.S. Lewis was fond of arguing that most people agree on basic rules of decency and fair play, and that is evidence that God exists. Well, arguing that God exists because most people are moral is like arguing that Cupid exists because most people fall in love.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Morality is always man-made and group-made and is the rebuttal, by man, of 'anything goes'. It is the social contract, imperfect as that is and imperfectly followed, as it obviously is. One guy washed up on a deserted island? No need for a moral code. A second person washes up? A code will exist before they know it, whether it's explicitly stated or not. Morality = the rules of group living. Requires no gods, priests, angels, devils, sons of gods, et al. If they intrude on the picture, it's pure pixie dust.

 

[excreationist]

The Ten Commandments are a good and original set of laws. Unfortunately, the Commandments that are good are not original, and the Commandments that are original are not good.

Ken Ham might say that the ten commandments should be followed because they are from God, and whether they are seen by sinful humans as "good" or original is irrelevant.

Even if we assume for the sake of argument that A) God exists, and that B) he's deeply concerned about the morality of humans, and thus C) there is such a thing as "Objective Morality", there is no way that we Subjective humans can ever know what it is.

Based on the Bible and Genesis, Ken Ham would think it is pretty clear that the Bible speaks against pornography (lust), homosexuality, divorce, euthanasia, abortion, public nudity and revealing clothing, etc.

Yes, certain people have said that God wants us to do such-and-such, and never to do so-and-so. But there's no reliable way for us to know that these are actually the thoughts and desires of God. What do we do when other people say that God actually desires something completely different?

Well Christians disagree a lot but they try to do the best they can to understand "God's word"...

 

[excreationist]

Morality is always man-made and group-made and is the rebuttal, by man, of 'anything goes'. It is the social contract, imperfect as that is and imperfectly followed, as it obviously is. One guy washed up on a deserted island? No need for a moral code. A second person washes up? A code will exist before they know it, whether it's explicitly stated or not. Morality = the rules of group living. Requires no gods, priests, angels, devils, sons of gods, et al. If they intrude on the picture, it's pure pixie dust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=70s

If you believe in creation what does that mean? Doesn't it mean there's a creator? The creator owns you, he sets the rules. It means we are to be in total submission to him. He is the absolute authority. He sets what's right and what's wrong. He has a right to do that because he owns us, because he created us. On the other hand if you believe you're a product of chance random processes who owns you? You do. Who sets the rules? You do. Who decides what's right and what's wrong? You do.​

Also:
https://youtu.be/KQg30zvvEgI?t=30

Ken: You want to write your own rules about life?
Student: Yes
Ken: Can I write my own rules about life?
Student: Sure sir, everyone can write their own rules
Ken: All right well one of my rules is going to be types like you are dangerous - if I find enough to agree with me we're going to eliminate you from society
Student: You can't do that sir
Ken: Why not?
Student: It's not right
Ken: Why isn't it right?
Student: It's wrong
Ken: Why is it wrong?
Student: It's not right​

Though in this case Ken's opponent wasn't very good at justifying their morality....

 

[Eldarion Lathria]

Bible morality isn't morality, and creation science isn't science.

Eldarion Lathria

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Religion and morality have as much to do with each other and eyesight and eye color.

What about the ten commandments, etc? Morality based on "God's word" theoretically has an absolute foundation while "anything goes" if you base it on man's opinions.

The "absolute foundation" is a belief, like believing I'm superior to you. It's dopey juvenalia.

Hambone doesn't really have a god. If he did he wouldn't be jumping through so many hoops. He must be a lot like Joseph Smith. The Hammer could just show us his god, he doesn't even have a fake god. He's a Taliban born in the wrong place so he can't fulfill his dreams.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Religion and morality have as much to do with each other and eyesight and eye color.

What about the ten commandments, etc? Morality based on "God's word" theoretically has an absolute foundation while "anything goes" if you base it on man's opinions.

Do you really think that morality without god is based on "anything goes"?

 

[ideologyhunter]

Ken Ham is not a scholar, not much of an ethicist, and he's truly on the fringe as an extreme Biblical literalist. He has set up, on huge patches of asphalt, two monuments to fairy tales. His morality accepts genocide from a pissed-off god who hasn't yet created the Love God alias. As some standup comedian once quipped, The Flintstones is a documentary to people like Ken.
Do you really want to suggest a god of genocide and chattel slavery as an avatar of morality?

 

[Elixir]

Morality is always man-made and group-made and is the rebuttal, by man, of 'anything goes'. It is the social contract, imperfect as that is and imperfectly followed, as it obviously is. One guy washed up on a deserted island? No need for a moral code. A second person washes up? A code will exist before they know it, whether it's explicitly stated or not. Morality = the rules of group living. Requires no gods, priests, angels, devils, sons of gods, et al. If they intrude on the picture, it's pure pixie dust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=70s

If you believe in creation what does that mean? Doesn't it mean there's a creator? The creator owns you, he sets the rules. It means we are to be in total submission to him. He is the absolute authority. He sets what's right and what's wrong. He has a right to do that because he owns us, because he created us. On the other hand if you believe you're a product of chance random processes who owns you? You do. Who sets the rules? You do. Who decides what's right and what's wrong? You do.​

Also:
https://youtu.be/KQg30zvvEgI?t=30

Ken: You want to write your own rules about life?
Student: Yes
Ken: Can I write my own rules about life?
Student: Sure sir, everyone can write their own rules
Ken: All right well one of my rules is going to be types like you are dangerous - if I find enough to agree with me we're going to eliminate you from society
Student: You can't do that sir
Ken: Why not?
Student: It's not right
Ken: Why isn't it right?
Student: It's wrong
Ken: Why is it wrong?
Student: It's not right​

Though in this case Ken's opponent wasn't very good at justifying their morality....

How about this:

"FUCK YOU KEN!"

Does that help? Because it's as well founded, logical and applicable to human endeavor and divine morality as anything Hammie can pull out of the bible or his ass.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Morality is always man-made and group-made and is the rebuttal, by man, of 'anything goes'. It is the social contract, imperfect as that is and imperfectly followed, as it obviously is. One guy washed up on a deserted island? No need for a moral code. A second person washes up? A code will exist before they know it, whether it's explicitly stated or not. Morality = the rules of group living. Requires no gods, priests, angels, devils, sons of gods, et al. If they intrude on the picture, it's pure pixie dust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQg30zvvEgI&t=70s

If you believe in creation what does that mean? Doesn't it mean there's a creator? The creator owns you, he sets the rules. It means we are to be in total submission to him. He is the absolute authority. He sets what's right and what's wrong. He has a right to do that because he owns us, because he created us. On the other hand if you believe you're a product of chance random processes who owns you? You do. Who sets the rules? You do. Who decides what's right and what's wrong? You do.​

Also:
https://youtu.be/KQg30zvvEgI?t=30

Ken: You want to write your own rules about life?
Student: Yes
Ken: Can I write my own rules about life?
Student: Sure sir, everyone can write their own rules
Ken: All right well one of my rules is going to be types like you are dangerous - if I find enough to agree with me we're going to eliminate you from society
Student: You can't do that sir
Ken: Why not?
Student: It's not right
Ken: Why isn't it right?
Student: It's wrong
Ken: Why is it wrong?
Student: It's not right​

Though in this case Ken's opponent wasn't very good at justifying their morality....

Odd how the world literally has established hundreds of legal codes that delve deeply into what is and isn’t allowed, several setups for determining guilt, and many different ways of applying sentences.

All well in excess of whatever the bible instructed. The idea it can’t happen when it has happened repeatedly is laughable. And because it isn’t absolute, it can adapt and change.

 

[excreationist]

Do you really think that morality without god is based on "anything goes"?

Well Ken Ham was saying that if enough people agreed that the student should be killed then that could be a moral thing to do....

It is difficult to imagine a scenario where every type of killing is acceptable but I think that is theoretically possible.

"Anything goes" would at least involve things like homosexuality, pornography, divorce, racism, etc.

 

[excreationist]

.....he's truly on the fringe as an extreme Biblical literalist.....

It could be worse - he could have been a Flat Earther - it seems like there isn't a single Bible verse that conflicts with the idea of a flat earth but many that conflict with a globe.

Do you really want to suggest a god of genocide and chattel slavery as an avatar of morality?

I think it's a test to see if the believer truly believes that God is the basis of morality or not.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

.....he's truly on the fringe as an extreme Biblical literalist.....

It could be worse - he could have been a Flat Earther - it seems like there isn't a single Bible verse that conflicts with the idea of a flat earth but many that conflict with a globe.

Do you really want to suggest a god of genocide and chattel slavery as an avatar of morality?

I think it's a test to see if the believer truly believes that God is the basis of morality or not.

So, abuse by god is just a moral test?