Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
That's because my opinion doesn't determine morality. All it is...is an opinion.
|
Your opinion DOES determine morality. It determines YOUR morality. Unless you're ready to admit that you've been brainwashed into your particular faith, you CHOSE to adopt the moral code you have - because you could have chosen thousands, perhaps millions, of others.
Like I said in a different post, God always agrees with the opinion of the believer. God is really nothing more than personal opinion being projected outward from the believer in the form of something divine. It gives the illusion of false authority and the even more illusory idea that said personal opinion is infallable, unimpeachable, and *ahem* absolute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
And what if the consensus changes?
|
Then it changes. And it will change. Morality is fluid. It ALWAYS has been fluid ... which is why we no longer send children into coal mines to work or regard the word "leg" as profanity. It is why women can wear pants, why there are "age of consent" laws, why inter-racial marriages can take place, and why stores can be open on Sunday. Morality has always been and always will be fluid - not absolute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
So were the people right in their opinions of morlaity?
|
As long as they kept it a self-enforced morality that applied only to believers then I really don't care what they do. But their morality applied to everyone regardless of what one believed and that's what I take issue with. Do I think they were right? No, I don't ... and fortunately enough people also felt their morality was skewed which is why that morality has changed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
No....God really didn't. They created laws that went above what God had commanded.
|
But they still obtained their morality through consensus, though sometimes it was merely the consensus of the local clergy - and then morality was handed down to the people via the church. Whatever the case, though, their morality was reached through voluntary consensus. It should be remembered that no one ever takes power. They are given power. Those who voluntarily adhere to a moral code they did not themselves create are still choosing to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
God never did make those laws. That's what happens when we let opinions and consensus rule.
|
No, that's what happens when you let religion rule. As I've said before, there has never been a benevolent and free society under the yoke of religious belief. No theocratic government has ever ruled with a light hand. Ever.
Oh, and it is merely your opinion that that's what happens when we let opinions and consensus rule. Yet the fact remains that the USA has a secular government and our morality does come from consensus. Perhaps you would enjoy living in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan - or Colonial America - where the law comes from God, it is absolute, and the punishment for disobedience is harsh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
And it was a misguided human opinion that resulted in an incorrect morality. I'm just wondering how you think you have grounds to say they were wrong?
|
Ah, there it is ... the judgment I've been waiting for. I'm really not going to argue the point since you obviously believe your interpretation of morality is correct otherwise it wouldn't be 'your' moral code. But you don't have some sort of secret insight into the will of God that is lacking among those who have chosen a different moral code. You only think that is the case because, well, you're just defending the moral interpretation that you decided to pick. On another forum somewhere in cyberspace a similar discussion could be taking place, only the Christian in that discussion is saying,
"Well, those people, people like [Vizio], their morality is incorrect. They're misinterpreting what the Bible says. See, look at [some Bible verse] because that shows that my morality is the same morality God wants us to have."
And no doubt such a conversation has, or will, take place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Most Christians I've ever known agree with some basic tenets of morality as outlined in the Bible. I'm sorry, but I really don't see that to be an issue.
|
Everyone, even atheists, can agree that some aspects of the Bible do teach genuine wisdom. The issue is whether the Bible actually invented that wisdom and how to both interpret said wisdom and then how to apply it to modern life. Therein lies the chaotic mess of religious morality that is too vague and open to interpretation (except for the commands to kill people - boy if that isn't absolutely clear).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
My point is that no one on this board has been able to give me an objective standard of morality...yet they claim to have grounds to condemn God and a group of people that lived 3000-4000 years ago. I find that amazing.
|
The reason why no one on this board has been able to give you an objective standard of morality is because you're arguing against a strawman. Most of us here don't believe there IS such a thing as objective morality. If we don't believe it exists, how and why would we give you an example of it?
But, since we DO believe that morality is created through consensus - and since almost everyone the world over considers genocide to be immoral - God committing genocide is an immoral act. That is how we condemn. It's as simple as that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Do you realize that God invites us to petition him? He wants us to pray and ask for things, in addition to worshiping him?
|
Then why does it make you laugh when people question God? Or is it that you just don't like the controversial and rather sticky points that we question him about? Yeah, it's really too bad that God can't stick his head down here through a break in the clouds and tell us point blank if he thinks he has the right to kill and slaughter anyone, or however many he chooses, because he's God. Unless he does that, any assertion that God has the right to murder is ... wait for it, wait for it ... personal opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
My little lump of gray has been destroying any and every argument that you guys have brought on this thread regarding an objective sense of morality.
|
Tsk, tsk, Vizio. Self-declared victories are really lame - especially when the discussion isn't even over yet. Like I said, your harping on "objective" morality is irrelevant to us because we've said a dozen times that we don't believe there is such a thing.
As for you destroying every argument we've brought forth, well ... unless there is some independent panel of unbiased judges reading these debates that I don't know about, that's not for you to decide.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Not one person has come up with a reason that we can judge anyone else, or any other culture. The best I've seen is "Duh....if it feels good, do it!". The problem, of course, is that it does not address what someone like Hitler did.
|
First of all, YOU have yet to make a case why the 4 billion non-Christians in the world should subscribe to your Christian-themed morality. Why should I, as an atheist, accept absolute rules and laws from a God I don't even believe exists? You can't even prove that God is actually real or that the Bible is at all true. And we have no reason to accept a book written by a messianic cult leader 2,000 years ago as the supreme, objective moral code applicable to all of humanity. We just don't.
Secondly, the world decided that what Hitler did was wrong - and we even put the Nazi ring leaders on trial to codify their wrong-doing and set a precedent to draw upon in the future. WE decided as a collective species - all by ourselves - that imprisoning, enslaving, and mass-murdering innocent people was wrong.
You want some rock-solid guarantee, some immovable law that will ensure that depraved acts like the Holocaust will never happen again. Well ... sorry, but there isn't one. Morality exists via consensus and yes that consensus could change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
The only time in recorded history that God has ever commanded someone to do that was Abraham. Why would I think for a second that he'd do it again? With Abraham he was foreshadowing the sacrifice of Christ. Christ has come, gave his life, and has let. Why would he do it again?
|
First, no where in the Bible does it say Abraham was sacrificing Isaac to foreshadow the the sacrifice of Christ. That's just made up stuff. That was just a random test of Abraham's faith - because gods liked to do things like that back then. During the Bronze Age, that's how people expected a god to behave. Satan's silly little bet with God that led to Job's subsequent torture is just another such example.
Secondly, are you really going to deny that God told Joshua to kill, kill, kill, and kill some more? That God gave land belonging to other people to the Israelites and told them to go conquer them - and not absorb them, assimilate them, imprison them, or relocate them. No, no ... Joshua and the Israelites had to KILL them. All of them. So how can you claim that the only time God has commanded someone to kill was Abraham in regards to Isaac?
And that story reminds me ... when God told Moses to speak to the rock to bring water forth for his people. But instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck the rock. And because of that tiny little screw-up, God forced Moses to gaze upon the land his people would conquer, but doomed him to die there on the mountain, forbidden to ever set foot there.
That just shows to me the kind of capricious and petty little being God actually was. After all that Moses had done for 40 years keeping the tribe of Israel alive and spiritually coherent, God simply tosses him aside for such a trivial, menial, banal little mistake. What a ... eh, never mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Do you think they really need religion to go killing people? Stalin, Pol Pot, etc, etc.....they all did just fine with no god.
|
Is religion necessary? No, not really. But if you want to whip up the population into a frenzy and get ordinarily good people to commit unspeakable atrocities, religion is your best bet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Evil crazies are evil crazies with or without a god as a scapegoat.
|
True ... but evil crazies get good and sane people to do their dirty work by using religion. That has almost always been the case throughout history. Now, today, the majority of governments are secular, and whether through causation or correlation, we are living in what most historians agree is the most peaceful time in human history. How ironic it is, then, that the only major nation truly involved in war-making is America, the so-called "Christian" nation. Otherwise, nearly all of the violence taking place now apart from basic criminality, is in the Middle East and Africa - over religion. (The Ukraine situation is an aberration).
ISIS, for instance, is so convinced of its "right-ness" that it boldly commits acts of atrocity and makes no attempt at hiding their hideous acts. They do just the opposite and send us videos showing these people being beheaded. The Nazis, on the other hand, who did NOT have religion on their side, had to keep the Holocaust as secret as possible. They even spoofed the Red Cross by setting up a fake camp and filled it with healthy-looking Jews (then gassed them all later so they couldn't let the truth slip). Even late in the war, the Nazis took care to keep the Holocaust "under wraps" because they didn't believe the German people would accept it. If the Nazis had had religion, they wouldn't have kept it secret; they would have proudly proclaimed their intent - which only goes to show me that religion, more so than nationalism or adoration of a leader, can get people to do some rather crummy things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
They had direct commands from the prophets. They watched God work in the desert. They saw the walls of Jericho fall. They saw miraculous things happen.
|
And still they worshiped a golden calf. Apparently miracles didn't matter a whole lot to those people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
But if "Christians" of today were to follow a cult leader and do violence? They deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law. As I said -- with or without God, there are nut jobs out there that can and will do violence.
|
That I don't dispute. The real frightening prospect, however, is when a nutjob is paired up with fundamentalist religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
And that is worse than doing anything because secular society tells you it's good? Do you realize how many babies a year die in abortions? Have you seen the devaluation of life? Of people actually calling for "post-birth abortions"?
|
Christians are fixated on abortions because it's really all you have to work with. And yes, defending the slaughter of an entire culture of people is worse than defending abortions. A clump of cells cannot be compared to a living, breathing child all too aware of his or her impending death, watching the sword or the spear questing for their flesh. And who knows how long they had to writhe around on the ground waiting until they bled out?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Or people suggesting euthanasia is appropriate?
|
You're damn straight I'll suggest euthanasia is appropriate. I'll do more than merely suggest it. I'll say that laws against it is nothing less than state-sanctioned torture. Those who are against it may as well buy a package of knives, some piano wire, thumb screws, a car battery and a waterboard and go to town on someone.
Have you ever been in severe pain, Vizio? And has a doctor ever told you that the pain will NEVER go away, and while pain meds will keep it at bay for a little while, eventually they won't work any more? At that point, you'll just have to lay there as debilitated as someone in a coma - only every second, every last tick of the clock, will be agonizing, excrutiating torture. And it will NEVER go away - and hell, you might only be 30 or 40 years old, meaning you'll have to endure that torture for another half-century. And because you live in a country that only begrudgingly allows government benefits to those who can't work - assuming you even win the fight to obtain those benefits - you'll have to arrange some way to be taken care of. Not an easy task if you don't have a big family with an even bigger heart. Meanwhile, you, the person in pain, is laying there between gasps KNOWING that your existence is wiping out your family. There goes everyone's life savings. There goes the kids' college fund. There goes the retirement accounts. And it's all because of YOU.
To ask, nay, DEMAND that people endure such an abysmal existence just to satisfy your religious convictions - which the person in pain may not even share - has to be one of the most flagrantly selfish and thoughless things any human being can legally do.
And that is an intensely personal issue for me because I could easily end up homeless and in pain - pain all the time, like I am right this minute. How about I come and live with you when my mother is too old to take care of me. You can buy me food, pay whatever Medicaid doesn't cover, run errands for me, and even make sure that my entertainment needs are met - given that I can't exactly go for walks or go dancing. How 'bout that ... in exchange for the right to decide for myself if I want to go on living?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Do you think the Caananites would have treated the Israelites any differently? Do you think that worshiping false gods and sacrificing babies was a good thing?
|
I have no idea how the Canannites would have treated the Israelis - not that it matters. If the Israelites hadn't invaded Canaan, it never would have been an issue.
Of course the Israelites lost any moral high ground they might have had by simply murdering the babies instead of sacrificing them (much less rescuing them). And gee whiz, false gods. I dunnae ... Hindus worship false gods (at least according to your beliefs) so should the majority of Indians be put to death? Perhaps half a dozen nukes in strategic spots will do the trick. Now you're beginning to see why I compared your morality to ISIS ... because now you are openly advocating the slaughter of people merely for being of a different faith. I knew if I kept poking, it would start to come out sooner or later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Why would I? I'm not that arrogant. I have no idea why God did it the way he did it. I do know that by keeping the Israelite nation pure he kept the line of the Messiah alive and he brought the savior into the world, saving billions from hell. But to someone who only thinks in the here and now....that's not important to you.
|
If you were omnipotent, you'd have the same powers as God. It has nothing whatsoever to do with arrogance. It has to do with whether you think you could have come up with a better solution and, let's face the facts here, a truly omnipotent God COULD have found a better solution. There just isn't any excuse for wholesale slaughter when you can literally do anything and everything with nothing but force of will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Do you think you're any less of a robot? Do you not realize that you're a slave to your passions and desires much more so than any Christian?
|
I'm sure you would love to think that - but it's simply not true. My passions and desires are free to change and aren't handed to me by some being who sits around all day scribbling on a clipboard all the good and bad things that I do. I'm not shackled by an ancient book - shackled to such a degree that I have to make all of reality fit between its covers even to the point of denying incontrovertible scientific evidence. I'm not forced to rationalize atrocities that even you know aren't moral and I don't have to worry about appeasing a perpetually angry god who has his hand on the button that sends me to hell.
I find it liberating in the extreme to see religion for what it is - a vestigial throwback to a time when humanity knew nothing about the natural world. Humans put a face on nature - just like we put faces on toys for children - so that the unknown seemed a little less frightening. We gave these "faces" personalities that were always very human-like (because humanity was the only intelligence we know of) and we started pleading with these forces of nature in the hopes of avoiding disaster. But when disaster happened, the personalities and the faces of nature that we now call "gods" were angry. But why? So rituals were designed to keep the gods happy - but disasters still happened. That's when the rules started appearing. Don't do this and the sea god won't cause a storm, don't do that and the sky god won't cause a tornado, and if you perform this ritual, the fertility god will bless you with a healthy baby.
And on and on this thinking went, growing in sophistication and complexity until we have the religions of today - but all it is, all it ever was - was humanity trying to bargain with nature. Knowing that, understanding that, gives me the freedom to do my own thinking, to grant my own purpose, and to chart my own destiny. Wheee!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Do you not realize that you serve a different god...but a god nonetheless? That you require faith to live your life? But you place your faith in something other than God?
|
Perhaps if you lived on the fringes of society the way that I do, disenfranchised, culturally isolated, and with a lot of time to see the world from a completely different point of view, you would get a better sense of why I disagree with your above statement. I still must have a modicum of trust but I have very little faith. Trust is based on evidence; faith is not.
Take care, Vizio. I hope I'm not ticking you off too much.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
