On Rules

324 posts / 0 new
Last post
Witness1625's picture
Does Batman exist outside of

Does Batman exist outside of time, or does Batman exist inside of time?

Nyarlathotep's picture
Well obviously batman exists

Well obviously batman exists outside of time when we need him to for our arguments (so he can be immune to the laws of physics), and he exists inside time when we need him to for our arguments (so he can act); just like god.

Witness1625's picture
So Batman is subservient to

So Batman is subservient to you?

Nyarlathotep's picture
let me be clear: Batman has

let me be clear: Batman has what ever characteristic I need him to have to defend the current argument I'm making. This might even be in contradiction with characteristics I needed him to have in a previous argument. JUST LIKE GOD.

Witness1625's picture
"This might even be in

"This might even be in contradiction with characteristics I needed him to have in a previous argument. JUST LIKE GOD."
No, not just like God, God doesn't change. Which is why Laws of logic don't change.

cmallen's picture
"So Batman is subservient to

"So Batman is subservient to you?"

Yes! You're getting it! Batman is subservient in the way God is subservient. We may assign him the title of higher power, but he is a part of our own psyche. That's why we get so peeved when others refuse to believe in him. Batman's judgement over who is good or evil is really my judgement over who is good or evil. It's just nice to think that this judgement is coming from a higher authority.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Yes it is no accident that

Yes it is no accident that batman and I agree on everything...

Witness1625's picture
Granted, I disagree.

Granted, I disagree.
You see, if Batman is subservient to you, then laws of logic are subservient to you, then all we really have is your opinion and my opinion.
However, if you are subservient to God, then His laws of logic are not subservient to you, and we really do have something besides your subjective truth and my subjective truth.

Johnny Moronic's picture
Yes, Batman is good and evil.

Yes, Batman is good and evil. Yes, Batman exists both in, and outside of time.
And Batman's Magical Book of Magic is Magical.
Prepare for the Bat Rapture. You'll see.

Witness1625's picture
So if Batman is good and evil

So if Batman is good and evil, He cannot be the standard for morality. He is contradicting himself and therefore cannot be the source of the Law of Non-contradiction.
Henceforth, logic in undermined.

Nyarlathotep's picture
no no no. He is good and evil

no no no. He is good and evil when our arguments need him to be. He is all good when our arguments require that. He is the source of good and evil when our arguments need that. He is beyond good and evil when we need that. He is the judge of good and evil when we need that. Just like god.

Travis Hedglin's picture
Please define evil without

Please define evil without resorting to actions or examples of actions, define evil in reference to what it actually is.

Witness1625's picture
Absence of Goodness, and

Absence of Goodness, and Rebellion against it.

Travis Hedglin's picture
Oh, great, you decided to

Oh, great, you decided to define evil by using its antonym without bothering to define it.

Witness1625's picture
God is good and the standard

God is good and the standard for goodness.

Travis Hedglin's picture
That doesn't help. By that

That doesn't help. By that definition evil came to be the moment your god made something besides itself.

Witness1625's picture
Except that what God made

Except that what God made might not be ascent from Him, or be rebelling against Him.

Travis Hedglin's picture
You seem to have missed the

You seem to have missed the entire point. You defined good as god, so anything that isn't god also isn't good, by your own definition. I think you will need to get a different definition of good before you start trying to make a moral argument, or you simply won't make any sense.

Johnny Moronic's picture
Batman is the standard of

Batman is the standard of morality. You mentioned contradiction as a disqualifier for moral authority. Therefore your own god is eliminated from the list of possible sources of morality, as he has contradicted himself no less than 493 times in two books. (That is as of last count, but we're still finding new ones.) So I am afraid you are now out of luck with the abrahamic god. By your own rule, he could not possibly be the source of moral authority. You should really try Batman. I asserted it earlier and without the slightest bit of irony: Batman is vastly morally superior to the abrahamic god. And he is MUCH less self-contradictory. Just give Batman a try. I think you'll like it.

CyberLN's picture
And let us not forget that

And let us not forget that Batman has a way kewler car than gawd.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Johnny Moronic - "Prepare for

Johnny Moronic - "Prepare for the Bat Rapture. You'll see."

Now wait just a minute there buddy! I know in that one movie it seemed like he said that, but if you go back to the original screenplay it is obvious that he was speaking figuratively of a rapture to Alfred, not an literal rapture. Most Batmanian scholars agree with me!

Johnny Moronic's picture
I concur Nyarlathotep. I was

I concur Nyarlathotep. I was just using biblical-type phrases because I thought it might help Ms. God Is Good Is Good Is God And My Magic Book Is Magical understand us better. It's just the way people like that talk. I figured maybe a little figurative threatening would help her to see the Bat Signal more clearly. Some people nee to be scared into believing in Batman. Her last two entries are precious beyond measure. The crazy is beginning to leak out around the edges.

Travis Paskiewicz's picture
Witness1615... you spent a

Witness1615... you spent a good amount of time arguing that our rules and morals are... relative I suppose would be the best term. And that your God's morals and rules are absolute. However the problem I see with your case is that...

The Bibles one and only absolute truth, is that it was written by men. The stories that are contained therein are quite... miraculous. However, the proof of God in these stories is that he showed himself through his miracles. Miracles that clearly break awawy from the norm... to the point of breaking the laws of physics. Indeed what we consider universal laws. Which would indeed prove that there is a cognitive, supernatural force... that desires for us to know and obey it's commands.

But... here's where you are failing and why in a nut shell. The Bible is self-corroborating. Outside of the stories in the bible, there is no proof for the miracles described. And by extension of a lack of proof for miracles, there is a lack of proof for your god.

If however, we acknowledge the more likely scenario that the bible is merely a man-made work of fuction... then the morals and ideas contained therein are... the relativistic morals you are now arguing against.

In summary, because you can't produce any evidence for the miracles that prove your god exists, and because your all powerful god does not personally show up or perform new miracles to corroborate the Bible, we should naturally assume do to lack of evidence... That the bible was a man-made work of fiction. And the ideas you are now adhering to as resolute, are in fact just the same relativistic morals of an older culture and group of men.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.