Philosophy with Cap'n Coconuts

[HylianDev]

So first off i want to say that my posts weren't written as well as they could've been and I was being kind of arrogant. My bad. I want this so be a constructive discussion.

To address your points directed to me:

Could not the same have been said of Socrates? You know, corrupter of the youth, bringer forth of strange gods, general philosophical gadfly and bogeyman of Ancient Greece.

Or perhaps I'm not here just to "make other ideas look bad", but to actually evaluate ideas and their implications, and I decided to critique naturalism first.

I didn't mean it was insulting in that you shouldn't ever criticize naturalism. I want to be right and I want my ideas to get better, so I want people to criticize it. I more meant it was insulting in that the answers to a lot of your criticisms seem intuitive to me, and I figured they'd probably seem intuitive to most people, which I guess was an incorrect assumption.

Is this a roundabout way of calling me "biased"?

I wouldn't say it's a roundabout way of calling you biased, it was more of a way of pointing out that your argument wasn't great, which might imply that you're biased, or that your argument was just flawed.

I have my own presuppositions and biases, yes. So does everyone else. That has no bearing whatsoever on the truth or falsehood of anything I have said.

This isn't really relevant. Even if I did say that just to call you biased, this isn't much of an answer to the criticism. This would really only be an answer if I directly called you biased and said nothing to criticize your argument.

I certainly care, and Bigpotato certainly cares, and I contend that you should.

Besides that, I don't think I implied that naturalism was false because it was too depressing.

Why do you care how depressing the truth is? This seems strongly anti-truth to me. The way I see your worldview is that you start with the assumption that God is real, and then you live a mostly naturalist life believing mostly naturalist things until you see something that doesn't line up and then you criticize that for contradicting your beliefs. On paper, that sounds like a pretty dishonest worldview. The fact that you'd criticize a worldview because it seems depressing to you doesn't exactly help you look any more honest. Also I think it's best to actually live in a worldview before you criticize how depressing it might be. I used to be a young earth creationist evangelical, and a lot of people's offhanded remarks about that worldview don't make sense to me because they don't get it and don't try very hard to.

Not to mention that I would much rather live in the world as I see it -- where everything makes sense and then you die -- than a world where almost everybody who has ever lived of all time burns in hell for all eternity. That isn't just a depressing worldview; it's much worse than ceasing to exist after a while.

My meaning in life is defined by my closeness with God, and yours is defined by living apart from God. How are these the same thing? Are they not the opposite?

Maybe we just have different definitions of "meaning". What is yours? My definition is more like "I want to find something that seems fulfilling and then go after it". Basically, that verse from Ecclesiastes 9.

Also to call my life defined by living apart from God seems like a very biased way to put it. That's assuming that you're right, first of all; secondly it's assuming that the specific God you believe in is the real one, or at least some other God who would consider my life to be apart from them; and thirdly, that's definitely not the only way you can define my life. I don't just make sure that I'm apart from God at all times and that's it.

Does my apparent hypocrisy change whether or not what I said is true? Absolutely not. How faithfully I follow God's commandments have no bearing on whether or not they should be followed. Even the Apostle Paul, as faithful as he was, struggled with his own sinful nature.

Anyway, MFGG is not a thing I use to make my life "meaningful". Fangaming is nothing more than a hobby to me. You have assumed it is something more. Or, perhaps, you are interpreting my meaning in life by your beliefs--wait, weren't you just criticizing me for applying my beliefs to other worldviews?

I wasn't trying to point out hypocritical actions, but rather hypocritical beliefs. Maybe I missed the mark on that one, but you seem to be really driving home the whole "fear God and obey his commandments" thing from Ecclesiastes, but Ecclesiastes is pretty far removed from the teachings of the New Testament. Yeah that's still part of it, but there's much more important stuff going on in the NT. Faith, for instance, which is opposite reason, which is what we're all dealing in here.

Also, we have different definitions of meaning; I wouldn't say I'm judging your worldview by mine, I'd say our definitions were different.

You see, your responses to me thus far aren't really all that reasonable. You are arguing with your emotions and with personal attacks.

I really doubt you have the intellectual or moral high ground you seem to think you do.

I'm not really claiming moral high ground here, and I also don't see why I'm being emotional for saying that you're criticizing naturalism badly. You're saying "if you believe in morality you have to believe in the supernatural because morality comes from the supernatural"; that is bad arguing. I told you that I define morality differently than you do. I had a whole big write-up on morality that you didn't criticize at all.

So this event, which you call a genocide (emotionally loaded, like everything else in your post) was because they had caused the people of Israel to fall away to sin! This is not kiling them based on their nationality, genetics, or even religion. This would not have happened if Midian had left the Israelites alone.

Let me get a definition or two:

"genocide: the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group."
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/genocide

"genocide: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genocide

"genocide: the intentional killing of all of the people of a nation, religion, or racial group"
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dict...h/genocide

They intentionally killed all of the Midianites (except the little girls). That's genocide. There doesn't need to be any specific motivation. I was not dishonest in using that word.

Also, you're just saying "they had GOOD REASON for the genocide!" You're basically applying Divine Command theory it seems to me.

There's no framework in the Bible for when a genocide is acceptable. Basically how it seems to work is: murder is wrong, until God tells you to do it. If God hasn't told you to do it, it's wrong.

So basically, whatever God has to say is, by definition, good to you. If your definition of good and moral is "God said so" then judging my morality with your definition of morality is definitely not a good idea.

Yes, they spared the little girls. In the custody of Israelites, they would learn the law of Moses. Many of them would even be married to Israelites. But child sex trafficking? Perhaps I have gone partly blind from seeing such an audacious accusation, but I don't see that in the text!

Yeah I definitely misspoke; trafficking is not the word I should've used. I meant to use the word "slavery". I think this is an accurate word.

(this line sounds really arrogant but I just can't seem to find a good way to word it. I really did misspeak, I really did mean to say "slavery", I really do think kidnapping little girls and killing their families and then marrying them is slavery)

If you look for pedophilia specifically? Probably not.

If you look for illicit sex, of which pedophilia is a subset? Absolutely.

"pedophilia: sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object; specifically : a psychiatric disorder in which an adult has sexual fantasies about or engages in sexual acts with a prepubescent child"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pedophilia

"pedophilia: sexual desire in an adult for a child."
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/pedophilia

There's nothing there about it having to be premarital sex, so it's not necessarily against God's law. Pedophilia is alright by Biblical standards. Though I would assume that if the US were to right now vote to legalize adults marrying children, you'd probably be against it, despite what the Bible says. Because your morality mostly comes from your society, not the Bible.

Is that explicitly in the scriptures somewhere, is it your interpretation, or is it someone else's?

Pedophilia is encouraged when God told the Israelites to keep the little girls for themselves. That was a command from the mouth of God.

If you don't believe in free will, then why were you acting as if you do?

You were offended that I expressed my thoughts in a certain way. It doesn't make sense to be offended at me if I couldn't willfully insult you, nor does it make sense if I didn't have the will to make ideas look bad. You are contradicting your words with your actions.

Have you ever actually read into any arguments against free will?

I don't believe in "free will". That doesn't mean I don't believe in "will".

Clearly there are things I want to do. Clearly, the only control that I have over my will is built-in.

I'll actually let Paul take this one away for me:

Romans 7
15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[a] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

And here's some more for good measure:

1 Corinthians 12:3
Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit.

John 6:44
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.

Acts 13:48
When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.

John 10
24 The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”
25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father's name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.

Romans 9
10 Not only that, but Rebekah's children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”[d] 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”[e]
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[f]
16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?'”[h] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

Free will doesn't exist in real life or in the Bible. The argument over free will is really hard and complicated, but basically here's one more little point: people who believe in free will are operating under the assumption that everything except the human consciousness is under the laws of the universe. I do not operate under that assumption.

Though from my impressions, it not that it denies the afterlife so much as it has no idea what the afterlife is. The last verse of Ecclesiastes says that "God shall bring every work into judgment", which doesn't seem very sensible thing to do if there's nothing left of us after death to reward or punish.

I actually answered this criticism in an earlier post:

You might say "why bother keeping God's commandments if there isn't an afterlife?" Well, Ecclesiastes is widely believed to have been written by Solomon, who is also believed to have written Proverbs. Let's take a look there, chapter 1:

10 My son, if sinful men entice you,
do not give in to them.
11 If they say, “Come along with us;
let's lie in wait for innocent blood,
let's ambush some harmless soul;
12 let's swallow them alive, like the grave,
and whole, like those who go down to the pit;
13 we will get all sorts of valuable things
and fill our houses with plunder;
14 cast lots with us;
we will all share the loot”—
15 my son, do not go along with them,
do not set foot on their paths;
16 for their feet rush into evil,
they are swift to shed blood.
17 How useless to spread a net
where every bird can see it!
18 These men lie in wait for their own blood;
they ambush only themselves!
19 Such are the paths of all who go after ill-gotten gain;
it takes away the life of those who get it.

Basically, read all of Proverbs 1. The author is saying, "don't get caught up in evil, or bad things will happen to you". You'll die, or get hurt, or get in trouble.

The whole "really bad things happen to bad people" theme repeats in Proverbs.

Proverbs 7
18 Come, let's drink deeply of love till morning;
let's enjoy ourselves with love!
19 My husband is not at home;
he has gone on a long journey.
20 He took his purse filled with money
and will not be home till full moon.”
21 With persuasive words she led him astray;
she seduced him with her smooth talk.
22 All at once he followed her
like an ox going to the slaughter,
like a deer[a] stepping into a noose[b]
23 till an arrow pierces his liver,
like a bird darting into a snare,
little knowing it will cost him his life.