Atheistic morals

Snake_Six said:
So morals are reletive?

As for Judeism being the oldest religion...
God created the universe and then people.
When Adam and Eve sinned, God killed a sheep to cover their nakedness.
This was the start of Judeism, and as there wasn't anybody else on the Earth to start a new religion yet, it has to be the oldest.

While I realize you don't believe this, that doesn't stop it from being true.
There is plenty of proof for the Bible, people just refuse to see it.
Click to expand...

This is simply false.

Saying it is true does not make it true, no matter how hard you want it to be so. The bottom line is that Judaism is NOT the oldest religion on the planet.

There are plenty of facts to the contrary. Let me say that again. There are plenty of FACTS to the contrary. I am not the one telling you that you are wrong, history tells you that.

I could sit here and prove you wrong, but since you failed to address the rest of my post, I can only assume that it would do no good whatsoever. I will waste no more time on you or your ideas.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ChickenSoup said:
Why does society tell you what your morals are? (you said morals come from time, place, etc.) What makes those morals what they are, what decides that? when a trend in morals changes, suddenly Atheists follow THOSE morals? I don't think I'd like this idea of fluid morals...
Click to expand...

I've already explained the difference between Moral Relativism and Moral Absolutism, I'm not sure what more you want.

You are also missing a very large point.

You consider Christian morals to be absolute, perfect, unchanging. If this is the case, then please explain to me how Christian morality has changed through the years. Now wait, before you jump the gun and claim that they haven't changed.

We'll use slavery as an example. There was a time when Christianity condoned slavery, correct? Christians today no longer find it morally acceptable. Therefore, a moral change has taken place. How is this possible under a perfect, absolute moral system?

I suggest heading over to wikipedia and reading the articles on morality and ethics to solidify your foundation of understanding.
 
Dark Virtue said:
That's the PERFECT example of the difference between Moral Relativism and Absolutism.

Moral Relativism says that you treat others like you would want to be treated. If someone comes up and smashes your face in, he should expect to get the same in return.

Moral Absolutism, according to Christ, says you MUST turn the other cheek.
Click to expand...


Personally, I think you are missing the point as to why Jesus tells us to turn the other cheek. Secondly, the ideal that comes from Christ differs from the said "Golden Rule":

Dark Virtue said:
Morals begin and end with one simple creed: Treat others as you would have yourself treated. (Note that as I have proven several times, this Golden Rule was not invented or posed first by Christianity. It predates any writings of the Bible).
Click to expand...

And so, I agree with you. Its pretty common sense to do so. A few bad expriences in life will teach you this rather quickly. You obviously don't need God inorder to treat others the way you want to be treated:
Matthew 22:46-47
46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
Click to expand...
I see these verses frequently being proven everyday I wake up and go to work. Most of you could attest to this.

But, in my opinion, that is not what Jesus is saying. And thus the reason for the difference:
Matthew 22:36-40
26Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
Click to expand...

The Christian ideal of the "Golden Rule" is to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind". The Christian ideal of the "Silver Rule" is to "Love your neighbor as yourself".

The reason I believe that you miss understand why Jesus said to turn the other cheek, is because of the two bolded words in the preceding paragraph. Jesus wants us to Love one another. He does not want us to throw the first punch. So if someone does throw the first punch, He wants us to respond with Love.

If you read this passage in its context, it is more clear:

Matthew 5:38-47
38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
Click to expand...

I bold Love to purposefully emphasize it. Everything that God is about, the Word of God is about, and Jesus' ministry on earth was about, is Love. The probelm herein is sin. Sin keeps us from knowing His love. The Bible summed up into three words would be: God Loves You!
Matthew 22:40
"All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
Click to expand...
Typically, at this point, I would have a tonne of questions for Him and won't initially believe Him. "Ok, so He tells me He loves be, but why should I believe Him?". That is why the Bible consists of more then one page. Us humans are not that easily convinced.

This actually leads right into my own thread that I started, Emotion Vs Intellect, which is largely about Love and God's Love. Which I would appreciate everyone of your inputs! (I had to throw a little plug in there somewhere :) )
 
We'll use slavery as an example. There was a time when Christianity condoned slavery, correct? Christians today no longer find it morally acceptable. Therefore, a moral change has taken place. How is this possible under a perfect, absolute moral system?
Click to expand...

Refresh my memory, WHEN exactly did condone slavery?
 
Eusebius, Ælian, Eugenius, Olympius, Bithynicus, Gregory, Philetus, Pappus, Eulalius, Hypatius, Proæresius, Basil and Bassus,148 assembled in the holy Synod at Gangra, to our most honoured lords and fellow-ministers in Armenia wish health in the Lord.

Forasmuch as the most Holy Synod of Bishops, assembled on account of certain necessary matters of ecclesiastical business in the Church at Gangra, on inquiring also into the matters which concern Eustathius, found that many things had been unlawfully done by these very men who are partisans of Eustathius, it was compelled to make definitions, which it has hastened to make known to all, for the removal of whatever has by him been done amiss. For, from their utter abhorrence of marriage, and from their adoption of the proposition that no one living in a state of marriage has any hope towards God, many misguided married women have forsaken their husbands, and husbands their wives: then, afterwards, not being able to contain, they have fallen into adultery; and so, through such a principle as this, have come to shame. They were found, moreover, fomenting separations from the houses of God and of the Church; treating the Church and its members with disdain, and establishing separate meetings and assemblies, and different doctrines and other things in opposition to the Churches and those things which are done in the Church; wearing strange apparel, to the destruction of the common custom of dress; making distributions, among themselves and their adherents as saints, of the first-fruits of the Church, which have, from the first, been given to the Church; slaves also leaving their masters, and, on account of their own strange apparel, acting insolently towards their masters; women, too, disregarding decent custom, and, instead of womanly apparel, wearing men’s clothes, thinking to be justified because of these; while many of them, under a pretext of piety, cut off the growth of hair, which is natural to woman; [and these persons were found] fasting on the Lord’s Day, despising the sacredness of that free day, but disdaining and eating on the fasts appointed in the Church; and certain of them abhor the eating of flesh; neither do they tolerate prayers in the houses of married persons, but, on the contrary, despise such prayers when they are made, and often refuse to partake when Oblations are offered in the houses of married persons; contemning married presbyters, and refusing to touch their ministrations; condemning the services in honour of the Martyrs149 and those who gather or minister therein, and the rich also who do not alienate all their wealth, as having nothing to hope from God; and many other things that no one could recount. For every one of them, when he forsook the canon of the Church, adopted laws that tended as it were to isolation; for neither was there any common judgment among all of them; but whatever any one conceived, that he propounded, to the scandal of the Church, and to his own destruction.

Wherefore, the Holy Synod present in Gangra was compelled, on these accounts, to condemn them, and to set forth definitions declaring them to be cast out of the Church; but that, if they should repent and anathematize every one of these false doctrines, then they should be capable of restoration. And therefore the Holy Synod has particularly set forth everything which they ought to anathematize before they are received. And if any one will not submit to the said decrees, he shall be anathematized as a heretic, and excommunicated, and cast out of the Church; and it will behove the bishops to observe a like rule in respect of all who may be found with them.
Click to expand...

Basically, the interesting part of this is that anyone encouraging a slave to leave his master on religious grounds is to be declared anathema and cast out of the church. I guess stoning, burning and cutting up with oyster shells is optional.
 
Razi, this thread is about Moral Relativism, not just about the Golden Rule.

Please stay on track. If you'd like to discuss the Golden Rule, please start a different thread.

Razi_Alaster said:
Personally, I think you are missing the point as to why Jesus tells us to turn the other cheek. Secondly, the ideal that comes from Christ differs from the said "Golden Rule":



And so, I agree with you. Its pretty common sense to do so. A few bad expriences in life will teach you this rather quickly. You obviously don't need God inorder to treat others the way you want to be treated:

I see these verses frequently being proven everyday I wake up and go to work. Most of you could attest to this.

But, in my opinion, that is not what Jesus is saying. And thus the reason for the difference:


The Christian ideal of the "Golden Rule" is to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind". The Christian ideal of the "Silver Rule" is to "Love your neighbor as yourself".

The reason I believe that you miss understand why Jesus said to turn the other cheek, is because of the two bolded words in the preceding paragraph. Jesus wants us to Love one another. He does not want us to throw the first punch. So if someone does throw the first punch, He wants us to respond with Love.

If you read this passage in its context, it is more clear:



I bold Love to purposefully emphasize it. Everything that God is about, the Word of God is about, and Jesus' ministry on earth was about, is Love. The probelm herein is sin. Sin keeps us from knowing His love. The Bible summed up into three words would be: God Loves You!

Typically, at this point, I would have a tonne of questions for Him and won't initially believe Him. "Ok, so He tells me He loves be, but why should I believe Him?". That is why the Bible consists of more then one page. Us humans are not that easily convinced.

This actually leads right into my own thread that I started, Emotion Vs Intellect, which is largely about Love and God's Love. Which I would appreciate everyone of your inputs! (I had to throw a little plug in there somewhere :) )
Click to expand...
 
ChickenSoup said:
Refresh my memory, WHEN exactly did condone slavery?
Click to expand...

Is it really that hard?

I suggest you review the definition of condone before travelling any further down this road.

Condone: : to pardon or overlook voluntarily; especially : to treat as if trivial, harmless, or of no importance <condone corruption in politics.

Would you mind showing me where, in the Bible, God or Jesus condemns slavery?
 
Sorry DV. :(

Was not my intent. I actually did think my post had a lot of value pertaining to Morals. If you can't see it. I will say no more. My apologies.
 
I'm reading you Darth.

DV, no matter what "proof" or "facts" you come up with, the real bottom line is that the Bible is true. All the so-called "proof" you support yourself with is bushwah. Plain and simple.
Also, what do you do if your morals conflict with someone else's? You have no grounds to say they're wrong.


On the slavery note, I think that there is a Biblical system for slavery, but it is a punishment-for-crimes type system.
 
Well Snake, if you choose to believe based on faith then the best we can manage is a draw. Nobody should be able to tell you that your faith is misplaced - so long as you're intellectually honest enough to admit that is all it is - your faith. A man would be well advised to tread lightly around the beliefs of others if faith is the sum of his argument.

If, though, you want facts, history and science with your faith then you are totally up a certain creek without a needed implement. And all the proof and logic under the sun will line up neatly to point the way back to reason - should you choose to travel that road.
 
Dark Virtue said:
Is it really that hard?

I suggest you review the definition of condone before travelling any further down this road.

Condone: : to pardon or overlook voluntarily; especially : to treat as if trivial, harmless, or of no importance <condone corruption in politics.

Would you mind showing me where, in the Bible, God or Jesus condemns slavery?
Click to expand...

Would you mind showing me where, in the Bible, God or Jesus allows slavery?
 
Razi_Alaster said:
Sorry DV. :(

Was not my intent. I actually did think my post had a lot of value pertaining to Morals. If you can't see it. I will say no more. My apologies.
Click to expand...

No prob. While it definately has merit, the topic of the Golden Rule in and of itself, is better served in a separate thread.
 
Snake_Six said:
I'm reading you Darth.

DV, no matter what "proof" or "facts" you come up with, the real bottom line is that the Bible is true. All the so-called "proof" you support yourself with is bushwah. Plain and simple.
Also, what do you do if your morals conflict with someone else's? You have no grounds to say they're wrong.
Click to expand...

Would you mind actually explaining why you are putting proof and facts in quotes? What is bushwah about proof, evidence and reason?

If you don't have proof, evidence or reason to believe in God, then you are belief in something without proof unreasonable.

Please don't ask me any further questions regarding morality until you address the points in my previous post.

On the slavery note, I think that there is a Biblical system for slavery, but it is a punishment-for-crimes type system.
Click to expand...

You THINK or you KNOW?
 
ChickenSoup said:
Would you mind showing me where, in the Bible, God or Jesus allows slavery?
Click to expand...

Is there a reason you won't answer my question?

If you won't answer mine, why should I bother answering yours?
 
Lev. 25:39-55 covers the buying and selling of slaves.

Also, there is a HUGE amount of evidence for the Bible and the existance of God. I just don't know what a lot of it is (I'm searching tho').
I'm not up Crap Creek, I'm traveling down the River of Truth and I don't need a paddle as the current is pushing me.
All the proof and logic does point back to reason. And reason says that there is a god.

Anyhoo...
 
Snake_Six said:
Lev. 25:39-55 covers the buying and selling of slaves.

Also, there is a HUGE amount of evidence for the Bible and the existance of God. I just don't know what a lot of it is (I'm searching tho').
I'm not up Crap Creek, I'm traveling down the River of Truth and I don't need a paddle as the current is pushing me.
All the proof and logic does point back to reason. And reason says that there is a god.

Anyhoo...
Click to expand...

Jibber jabber.

You're typing a lot, but you're not saying anything.

Where is this HUGE amount of evidence for God? If it was so HUGE, why are you having to work so hard to find it?

What led YOU to believe in God's existence? Was it evidence? Or do you chalk it all up to faith? If that's so, then you simply WANT God to exist. You can't have it both ways. Do you believe on Faith or you believe because of evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top