http://www.atheists.org/Atheism/cohen.html
The above link was posted in another thread and provides an argument that values such as honesty, truthfulness and loyalty were not provided through divine intervention in the form of revelations from gods, but were in fact a result of social interactions amongst groups tribes and then nations.
I started this thread as it appears davewhite found many holes in the argument and chose to be challenged on his claims. I hope we can attack it paragraph by paragraph to see exactly if such holes exist.
Of course, it is a thread like any other for all to participate.
Here is the opening paragraph:
"Christianity is what is called a "revealed" religion. That is, God himself revealed that religion to man. In other religions man sought God -- some god -- and eventually found him, or thought he did. In the case of Christianity God sought man and revealed himself to him. The revelation, judging by after events, was not very well done, for although a book made its appearance that was said to have been dictated or inspired by God so that man might know his will, yet ever since mankind has been in some doubt as to what God meant when he said it. Evidently God's way of making himself known by a revelation is not above criticism. There seems a want of sense in giving man a revelation he could not understand. It is like lecturing in Greek to an audience that understands nothing but Dutch."
I couldn't agree more and have probably stated that myself on many occassions. In fact, I submitted that a message from god would have to be not only crystal clear, but also revealed to all equally and unequivocally. That is certainly not the case as is attested in the multitudes of religion and their diametrically opposed messages.
There ya go, Dave. Have at 'er.
The above link was posted in another thread and provides an argument that values such as honesty, truthfulness and loyalty were not provided through divine intervention in the form of revelations from gods, but were in fact a result of social interactions amongst groups tribes and then nations.
I started this thread as it appears davewhite found many holes in the argument and chose to be challenged on his claims. I hope we can attack it paragraph by paragraph to see exactly if such holes exist.
Of course, it is a thread like any other for all to participate.
Here is the opening paragraph:
"Christianity is what is called a "revealed" religion. That is, God himself revealed that religion to man. In other religions man sought God -- some god -- and eventually found him, or thought he did. In the case of Christianity God sought man and revealed himself to him. The revelation, judging by after events, was not very well done, for although a book made its appearance that was said to have been dictated or inspired by God so that man might know his will, yet ever since mankind has been in some doubt as to what God meant when he said it. Evidently God's way of making himself known by a revelation is not above criticism. There seems a want of sense in giving man a revelation he could not understand. It is like lecturing in Greek to an audience that understands nothing but Dutch."
I couldn't agree more and have probably stated that myself on many occassions. In fact, I submitted that a message from god would have to be not only crystal clear, but also revealed to all equally and unequivocally. That is certainly not the case as is attested in the multitudes of religion and their diametrically opposed messages.
There ya go, Dave. Have at 'er.
