Re: Tom Pearson wrote (was Debate)

Stephen Jones (sejones@ibm.net)
Wed, 17 Dec 97 23:06:20 +0800

Tom & Burgy

On Sun, 14 Dec 1997 17:16:11 -0600 (CST), Tom Pearson wrote:

>At 06:46 AM 12/15/97 +0800, Stephen Jones wrote:

SJ>>If I were convinced that there was no God, the logical thing for
>>me to to do would be to screw everyone as much as I could
>>(including lying, stealing and cheating), but all the while
>>pretending to be a nice guy so they couldn't retaliate. That would
>>maximise my advantage while minimising my disadvantage.

TP>Steve, As one who prefers to lurk and learn, I don't often post
>to this list. But now you've smoked me out. It appears you
>consider God as a Being primarily good for functioning as an ethical
>terrorist -- that you would not bother with moral conduct unless God
>were there to threaten reprisals against you.

No. The points is that there would be no such thing as moral conduct
if there was no God. I bother with moral conduct because I believe
there *is* a God and such conduct is *right*. But if there was no
God, nothing would be right-except maximising my survival.

TP>I may have misunderstood your intentions, but this position makes
>a mockery both of orthodox Christianity and of ethics. It may
>resemble some sort of Moral Re-armament, but it shares nothing with
>the Gospel.

You have indeed misunderstood. The point is that *if there were no
God*, there would be *no* orthodox Christianity and ethics! In that
case the Ten Commandments would have been something Moses made up to
con the Israelites into following him (he would be doing just what I
said I would do). And Jesus would have been deluded (if not worse).
This in fact precisely what atheist say that orthodox Christianity
is.

TP>If I have , I apologize. If I have not, I am sorry to hear that
>the American heresy of treating the Christian faith as a program for
>moral development has also infected Australia.

You have indeed misconstrued my position-apology accepted. But I
doubt if this is a peculiarly American heresy-Moral Re-Armament was a
big thing in Australia in the 1960's.

On Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:34:18 -0700, John W. Burgeson wrote:

JW>As one who has "known" Stephen for some time (on the LISTSERVs of
>course), I would not think his latest post would characterize him at all
>this way (nor do I think you do -- you are just making a point. I hope.)

Thanks Burgy.

JW>There are other explanations (better ones) than the one you chose
>-- I'll let Stephen speak to those.

Agreed. See above.

JW>But you make a reasonable point, of course, if not about Stephen. How is
>one to behave if he is a convinced atheist or agnostic, as, I assume,
>Gouild, Dawkins, Julian Huxley (was) and Sagan (was)? Since I was one --
>once -- myself, I think I can speak to that situation. I did not behave
>as Stephen described -- but I did not behave either as a Christian ought
>to do. To the extent I avoided lying & cheating and all that stuff it
>was -- largely -- a pragmtic decision -- at one time I "cleverly" avoided
>the payment of sales tax to the State of Ohio and felt no particular
>guilt or remorse for so doing -- it was too easy to do and 0 chance of
>being caught! (Two years later, having become a Christian, I made
>restitution -- it was simply not possible to ignore! But that is another
>story!)

I did not claim that atheists/agnostics are unethical. Just that
their belief system gives them no reason to be. Your attitude in
avoiding sales tax without guilt confirms my point. You were
consistently living by the 11th commandment - "Thou shall not get
caught"!

JW>But, by and large, I behaved ethically, as I assume the above
>mentioned people do. For that seems to be the best (pragmatic) way
>to go through life. That was taught as part of my professional
>education (physics) and it made good sense.

Again, this just confirms my point, ie. if there is no God, then the
way to go through life is a *pragmatic* one. Look after number 1
as far as you can without upsetting others.

JW>That was over 30 years ago -- if I were to meet my 29 year old
>self, I wonder if we'd have much in common anymore!

Same here, but with the proviso that I wonder if I would still be
alive!

JW>Stephen -- welcome back! Three months! My goodness. You must have
>been everywhere!

Thanks for the welcome back Burgy. I actually first posted an "I'm
back" message, restating my Mediate Creation position, but it doesn't
seem to have been reflected. I will repost it if no one seems to
have seen it. I went to the USA, Ireland, UK and Singapore. Did a
"Darwin crawl" through the San Francisco Academy of Sciences (saw the
misleading "Hard Facts Wall"), and the New York and London Museums of
Natural History (saw archaeoteryx, skull 1470, etc). Had my photo
taken with Darwin's statue at Shrewsbury and even visited the Darwin
Shopping Centre (I kid you not!). Unfortunately I did not visit
Darwin's house at Downe as it is closed until mid-1998. Bought dozens
of Creation/Evolution secondhand books.

Season's Greetings

Steve

-------------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejones@ibm.net |
| 3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Steve.Jones@health.wa.gov.au |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 8 9448 7439 (These are |
| Perth, West Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
-------------------------------------------------------------------