PluckyCanuck: Jimmy K.

Most men aren't LEADING. But we like to pretend we are. Men love to signal virtue with all kinds of false fronts. I've listed some below⬇️⬇️ But it's often an act. If you're honest, you'll see your tendencies in one of these. Which one are you? Which one is your husband? 1/

@NJasper19 @argueswithyou @paulogia0 @DrKingsleyAyi Either way, saying "I don't like the way things are" isn't an argument against God. It's simply a statement that you think you know better than God. Which is your prerogative. Though I'd call it foolish.

@NJasper19 @argueswithyou @paulogia0 @DrKingsleyAyi Dogs can't be Hitlers. But neither can their be Martin Luther King Jrs. You want a world without Hitlers. Fine. But then you need to realize what you're asking for. It's a vanilla world. It's animal kingdom, and no more. It's a world without Love, or self-sacrifice, or joy.

“God maintains a delicate balance between keeping His existence sufficiently evident so that people will know He’s there and yet hiding His presence enough so that people who want to choose to ignore Him can. This way, their choice of destiny is really free.” -JP Moreland

@and_furiouser @ImWatson91 Sure. But that would require belief in the game. Atheists don't believe in the game. They believe everyone makes up their own game. Why complain that someone is playing by different rules, then? No game is better or worse than any other. It's all Calvinball.

Through reason and empathy, not divine rules. We know these acts cause harm, which clashes with our instincts to avoid suffering and promote wellbeing. Morality comes from experience, cooperation and ideas like human dignity and happiness - stuff that makes sense for people living together. No god needed for that.

@tyromper @TheeJoelLopez Yep. Sure does. Also, here's a great example of a guy just deciding to lead. Good illustration for your course. Men have GOT to take the lead. It doesn't work, otherwise, because we're too damned stubborn. But when we do... it's beautiful. huffpost.com/entry/how-i-sa…

@CanuckPlucky @TheeJoelLopez That hits hard!

If you KEEP SCORE in a relationship or marriage.... You'll BOTH LOSE. I was recently on a call with a husband & he told me, "I HAVE DONE THE DISHES THREE NIGHTS IN A ROW & NOT GOTTEN ONE THANK-YOU?! I am done trying......" Here was my response & something ALL HUSBANDS can GROW from: *BOOKMARK THIS.

@and_furiouser @ImWatson91 So morality itself is, essentially, lining one's actions up to God's nature/character. That's why morality (contrary to popular belief) is never a set of rules or adherence to them. It is ultimately a heart state that is in keeping with the nature of God. Like Lewis says:

@and_furiouser @ImWatson91 Both, neither. 😁 God is the bar, the standard, against which "goodness" is defined. "Goodness" means something that reflects the nature of God. Many things reflect God in one way, but not in others. The more something reflects God's nature, the more "good" it is.

@tyromper @TheeJoelLopez At one point in my marriage I read the parable of the ungrateful debtor. The One who was forgiven much, but refused to forgive. "You evil servant!" The King says... And I realized: shit, that's me. Keeping score is not the way. And holy crap, is my marriage ever better!

@TheeJoelLopez Exactly! Think if Jesus said that to us.

@Wildcat_Ogata @ToddShaffer @ImWatson91 You can believe in something without being able to prove (in the sense you mean) that it's true. We can, for instance, claim that an objective morality is the best explanation for mankind's unique, and relatively consistent, moral system, and believe in God for that reason.

@ToddShaffer @ImWatson91 @CanuckPlucky Point being; even a god isn't a sufficient source to claim an objective morality. You'd have to prove one exists, and that you are correct in what it's values actually are. Neither thing has been done, so you have no good reason to claim an objective morality exists at all

@ImWatson91 @ToddShaffer A higher body count than what? Ideology and power? Lol, nope. According to the Encyclopedia of Wars, out of all 1,763 known/recorded historical conflicts, 121, or 6.87%, had religion as their primary cause. Most conflict (and killing) is economical. Always has been.

@ToddShaffer Nazis and Stalin killed for ideology and power, not atheism. Religion’s got a higher body count and “ends justify means” isn’t atheist-specific. No data shows atheist societies are deadliest—totalitarianism and war tech explain 20th-century carnage. We don't have suicide bombers.

@ImWatson91 @realmichigander Only if his point is that knowledge of/belief in the fact of objective morality actually makes one more moral. Does it? Is anyone here claiming that?

@realmichigander The rape gangs were Muslim aka religious. Your point is moot.

@ImWatson91 @and_furiouser The claim isn't that Christians, or theists, are "more moral". If anything, Christianity appeals to the broken. The claim is simply that morality is man-made, unless something other than man... well, made it. And if man-made, then it's not real, apart from our preferences.

@and_furiouser I just point to the Catholic pedo priest scandal and the fact Muhammad raped a nine year old girl. They've got some nerve claiming to be more moral due to their gods. Pedophila and rape is rampant in religion, as were burning people alive and stoning them to death.