“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571778 Dec 10, 2012
BadBreathBruce wrote:
Besides, didn't all morality originate from religion in the first place??
The morals embodied in the Old Testament are the dicta of relatively brutal, cruel, patriarchal, authoritarian men of antiquity that established the institution of the priesthood to indoctrinate, terrorize, control and exploit other men. Rational ethics - meaning secular ethics - has been carving away at all of that ever since.

Our moral system is evolving, which is why the Old Testament god - the bellicose monster Jehovah - morphed into the New Testament god, the gentle Jesus, complete with a whole new and improved set of laws, including the Golden Rule.

We've made a lot of updates since Jesus time, and now consider much of his moral character inadequate. Nevertheless, Christians making the moral argument for god still talk about the existence of an absolute, objective morality, and that they have access to it. Go figure.

The latest version of ethics does away with the god altogether, and is embodied in the Affirmations of Humanism.

Christians are still busily assimilating secularists values, but always a few steps behind those that have left religion, and never acknowledging the secularist contribution to their belief set.

Instead, they continue to give all the credit to some allegedly perfect and timeless god which is obviously evolving as well.

But how would people ever reject stoning children to death once established into law and tradition, and sanctified by the imprimatur of a god, if not from men that simply rejected the ideas anyway? Jehovah never recanted it, did he? It was a freethinker that simply said "Nonsense," and most of the West eventually agreed.

Later, secularists told them to stop burning people, and later still, that it was wrong to own people as slaves or beat them if you did. The Christians seem to have assimilated all of that, although clearly none of it came from their bible.

Nevertheless, they still somehow credit the god and remain oblivious to the value of rational, compassionate ethics, and the part that it has played in reshaped their thinking.

Did you also fail to note that their bible is not their only source of ethics any more? Your comment implies that you did. Are you also a Christian?

So what standard are Christians using when cherry picking which of their 613 Commandments to ignore? Secularist values, of course. What else is there? Islam?

And today, we are teaching the Christian world even more moral refinements, such as that gay and atheist people are not immoral, that women are not subordinate to men, that a liberal education and critical thinking are better than authoritarian indoctrination and magical thinking, and that a stem cell is not a citizen.

We'll all be better off when the church shrinks enough to have its values supplanted by secularist ethics. We need the church out of the people shaping business. It does a poor job, and presently, it's simply in the way.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571779 Dec 10, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Her religion taught her that. It's a rather disgusting thing to think. My main point with her is not how horrible she was, but how the church influenced her life. How about the fraud of accepting millions of dollars intended to ease the suffering of the dying poor, and she forwarded them to perhaps the wealthiest treasury in the world, which kept the money. People trusted that woman.
This is in part why I am EXTREMELY skeptical of all Christian charities. There is virtually no oversight of them, and no will to provide any oversight - just the will to grant tax breaks based on their word.
Christian charities are by definition utterly inefficient. Secular charities out collect and outspend them by monumental numbers.

http://yashwata.info/2010/07/15/charity1/

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#571780 Dec 10, 2012
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>That always surprises me. They claim presentism, zeitgeist, and secret decoder interpretation as necessity for composition and elucidation of an allegedly perfect being, yet each interprets it to their own prejudice. Weird.
Yeah and your interpretation of Christians is of your own prejudice. Seems it does not accur to you apply your own standards to your own posts.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571781 Dec 10, 2012
Al Garcia wrote:
<quoted text>
To most Christians the only true words are the words that were told to them by their parents or Grandparents, read about in the Bible and verified by their pastors. Along comes someone and tells them that what they've heard, what they've known what they've cherished and who've they've cherished it from is not true? And in most of those cases IANS (maybe not in your case but in most others out there) they're told in a not so nice way that they've been lied to, or are crazy. And one wonders why we become hostile? It's the Equivalent of being told that your parents aren't your real parents, or the that person telling you this is for whatever reason attempting to maliciously lie to you and hurt you.
Of course a Christian is going to resist, get angry and respond with a defense that may be less than civil. They feel that... Know that... What they know is the truth and along comes this person telling them otherwise. We've been told that Satan will come along to do just that. And guess what?! There is a real fear of Satan and its easy to now see him in the flesh delivering the message that we were told would come.
It's really not difficult for me to see where the hostility comes from. Perhaps I don't personally fear Satan. Perhaps I've toyed with the idea that he may not exist. That may well be why I personally do not respond with hostility. But I cannot speak for all my Christian brethren on this but only my own. Perhaps my lack of fear of Satan will be my undoing at my end, but only time and God will tell.
Yet Christians try to claim that they are unwavering in that faith but change sects or schisms all the time.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#571782 Dec 10, 2012
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>There are fine examples of this all over Scandanavia and Western Europe..
will culture, morality, and scientific advance, survive the coming abrahamic war?
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571783 Dec 10, 2012
BadBreathBruce wrote:
<quoted text> I'm sorry, but I beg to differ.

1. I believe we are morally bankrupt almost to the point of no return.

2. Besides, didn't all morality originate from religion in the first place?? Sorry for raining on your parade, karl44!!
1. Speak for yourself.

2. No, religion pretended to be the source of morality. It fills the coffers. There are innumerable examples throughout history of religions being dragged kicking and screaming forward by the secular world. For example, it wasn't until the Constitution that Christians stopped killing Christians just for differing in their sect. It wasn't until the end of WWII that Christians stopped killing Jews.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571784 Dec 10, 2012
BadBreathBruce wrote:
<quoted text> And yet, people SHOULD have changed much - MORALLY - over the centuries, for the BETTER. Why has it gone pear-shaped?? Surely: PHYSICAL Evolution + MENTAL Evolution = MORAL Evolution. It's got me stumped.
They have, especially in modern societies where religion has become a museum piece.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571785 Dec 10, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
But there you go.
A theory cannot be proven.
So what is the value of supporting evidence if it does not prove the theory correct?
You're still doing the equivocation fallacy. Stop it.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571786 Dec 10, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
I actually did listen to it before I posted it. You are not the individual described in the latter part of the video.
You are the one described in the first part... the one about an atheist being someone who is angry at God...
And, another fallacy. It is impossible to be mad at something that has not been demonstrated to exist. That is childish and ridiculous. Are you mad at leprechauns and unicorns? After all, you would admit they have not been proven to exist, no?

How does a person in 2012 still hold onto such ridiculous concepts as anger at the imaginary?
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571787 Dec 10, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I am the Evil-lotion character.
That quote does contain terms which allude to "belief in"; but my questions regarding "religious beliefs", I maid no mention about "believing in" anything; so I fail to see why you are differentiating believing in from believing that, in the context.
"I don't trust the sincerity or the motives of posters who come back wearing new identities" either.
But since the value of a person's questions and responses has nothing to do with what name they are posting under; just get with it or get lost.
Weird.

Evolution has nothing to do with belief. Evolution is not a philosophy, moral code, or a belief system. Evolution is just a process by which change occurs in nature. The process of evolution was deduced by interpretation of evidence that holds up to empirical scrutiny. Evolution is like many other natural processes which are deduced by interpretation of evidence. A couple of other processes we have deduced from evidence found in the natural world are erosion and eutrophication.

Evolution has no moral bias, any more than erosion or eutrophication do. Evolution is an explanation of a process which takes nothing into account but the physical evidence and only that evidence which holds up to careful scrutiny. The process by which scientific theories are arrived at and supported has much in common with crime scene investigation. Data surrounding the thing being investigated is collected and examined as scientists compare it to other known quantities and try to puzzle out how the event happened. Any evidence which doesn't hold up to rigorous empirical investigation is discarded.

To make a claim that it has anything to do with belief is the height of dishonesty.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571788 Dec 10, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I am the Evil-lotion character.

But since the value of a person's questions and responses has nothing to do with what name they are posting under; just get with it or get lost.
Angry Christian is angry. Why are you angry at unicorns?
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571789 Dec 10, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you obsessed with the supernatural? You seem to be suffering from a God delusion of some sort. By "natural intelligence", I mean intelligence that arose naturally.
I desire to understand why you find it hard to appreciate that if natural intelligence exists, that intelligence may have designed and/or be guiding the development of the natural world.
Why couldn't natural intelligence cause the formation of the universe by intelligently designing; even by evolution in as much as it is a process that can be used to create intelligently?
Bwahahahaha. A delusion Christian is asking why someone else is obsessed with the supernatural. Irony alert!
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571790 Dec 10, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you sure that I am the one who hates women here?
Where is the contradiction?
If you understood the Bible you would know that there are various people speaking in the Bible, each having their own conception of what God is or relying on different attributes.
The differences in perspectives or characterisations of God are due to the differences in the subjectiveness of the perceptions of the various men, regarding the nature of God.
Hence there is no contradiction in God in the Bible, but there may be contradiction about God in the Bible.
What I have said about me being a God is not contradicting anything. You are making a baseless claim.
Do you even understand the style of writing that is used to compose the Bible?
DUNCE!
Your god is a terrible communicator, then, in addition to being a bloodthirsty loon.

By the way, this is Biblical interpretation 2.37x10 to the umpteenth power interpretation of the Bible on Topix alone.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571791 Dec 10, 2012
Al Garcia wrote:
To most Christians the only true words are the words that were told to them by their parents or Grandparents, read about in the Bible and verified by their pastors. Along comes someone and tells them that what they've heard, what they've known what they've cherished and who've they've cherished it from is not true?
Yes, I understand. That of course is what I was alluding to when I wrote, "I guess I understand. We attack what is most cherished to them."

Yes, I see that as well. How do you say that nicely?
Al Garcia wrote:
And in most of those cases IANS (maybe not in your case but in most others out there) they're told in a not so nice way that they've been lied to, or are crazy. And one wonders why we become hostile? It's the Equivalent of being told that your parents aren't your real parents, or the that person telling you this is for whatever reason attempting to maliciously lie to you and hurt you.
Agreed.
Al Garcia wrote:
Of course a Christian is going to resist, get angry and respond with a defense that may be less than civil.
Again, I understand. I don't see it changing.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571792 Dec 10, 2012
Al Garcia wrote:
They feel that... Know that... What they know is the truth and along comes this person telling them otherwise. We've been told that Satan will come along to do just that. And guess what?! There is a real fear of Satan and its easy to now see him in the flesh delivering the message that we were told would come.
I know. I used to be a Christian. It's a great little set of predictions and teachings - you will be despised by others for what you tell them, but that will be the Devil talking. And you will have doubt, but ignore those, too - that's also the Devil.
Al Garcia wrote:
It's really not difficult for me to see where the hostility comes from. Perhaps I don't personally fear Satan. Perhaps I've toyed with the idea that he may not exist. That may well be why I personally do not respond with hostility. But I cannot speak for all my Christian brethren on this but only my own. Perhaps my lack of fear of Satan will be my undoing at my end, but only time and God will tell.
Thanks for that, Al.

And kudos to you for learning to keep it impersonal, as you just did. Never once did you try to psychoanalyze my need to escape accountability, nor refer to any imaginary feuding with a god that I only claim to believe doesn't exist, nor salivate over my future horror and suffering. I pretty much put all of those people in the same pile, and it's a pretty big pile. You more or less stand alone among Christians here. Nettie and Fossil Bob are pretty good Christians, too, but I don't see much of either.

That's really what my post was about - what a shame that it has to be that way so often.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571793 Dec 10, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Well said.
Me, too. I'm also agnostic. I don't really see how anything else is possible at this point. How could you know either way?
I'm also an atheist because, like you, I'm not buying any of the dogma. Nor the mythology, nor the superstitions, nor the magical thinking. I don't believe any of it, so I'm not involved in any religions or any forms of worship. Why would I be.
That makes me an atheist. An agnostic atheist. If I'm not an atheist - if somebody as aggressively anti-theistic as I am doesn't count as an atheist because - then the word is useless.
I wouldn't be surprised if you're also an atheist. You don't seem to believe in a god either.
I am a gnostic atheist to Biblegod. It has been proven demonstrably false. As far as any other gods, cultural conditioning is only what has led us to any gods in the first place so I teeter towards gnostic atheism in that regard, as well. As no gods have ever been demonstrated and have no effect on the natural world, the knowledge of them is ultimately immaterial.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571794 Dec 10, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Gotta love those people who wear gold crosses or other such jewelry, wear funny hats, strange clothing, horrible haircuts, stick fish and "I-Heart-Jesus" stickers on their cars - and then tell me to keep my atheism to myself.
I once saw a car littered with pro-life stickers driving in such an unsafe manner that it took out four cars a 4 miles up the road after it passed. It is supposed to mean more than zygotes.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571795 Dec 10, 2012
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>It's a POE, you moron. Probably, HFY.
By definition, a Poe is indistinguishable. Not recognizing one does not make one a moron.

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#571796 Dec 10, 2012
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>Angry Christian is angry. Why are you angry at unicorns?
I'm sure they're angry at unicorns because they're fabulously gay!
http://fashionindie.lookbooks.netdna-cdn.com/...
Huh

Dallas, TX

#571797 Dec 10, 2012
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
will culture, morality, and scientific advance, survive the coming abrahamic war?
It's impossible to predict. Maybe it will prevent it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 3 min confrinting with ... 542,082
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 6 min Pegasus 259,197
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 6 min EdmondWA 95,439
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 13 min Eagle 12 227,400
AthensDesigns.Co 45 min iwstilo 2
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 50 min RFD 3,053
Gay massages Abu Dhabi 1 hr shameer sham 10
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr mike 600,993
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 2 hr Chlo-chan 149
•••
Enter and win $5000

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••