Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-12-2016, 08:43 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(15-12-2016 08:30 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Not a problem. This is not my first rodeo.

Christian morality is so far above human morality they are not even in the same realm.

Christian morality states that if you even think you should do good and do not then you have sinned. Try to find a moral code that is higher.

Add the commandment: Thou shalt own no slaves.
Add the commandment: Thou shalt not commit rape.


Bingo. You lose.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
15-12-2016, 08:46 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(15-12-2016 08:30 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Not a problem. This is not my first rodeo.

Christian morality is so far above human morality they are not even in the same realm.

Christian morality states that if you even think you should do good and do not then you have sinned. Try to find a moral code that is higher.

Sin doesn't exist. There. My moral code is already higher.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Wanderer's post
15-12-2016, 08:46 PM (This post was last modified: 15-12-2016 09:29 PM by Fatbaldhobbit.)
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(15-12-2016 08:43 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Not true. The Bible exists. That is the basis for Christian morality and the source for all discourse concerning morality. I believe it was inspired by God but that is besides the point.

The bible contains the rules for slavery.
The bible condones rape.
The bible condone genocide.

Have you actually read the bible?

ETA2: Ok. Took the incest off. My bad.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2016, 08:51 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(15-12-2016 08:46 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(15-12-2016 08:43 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Not true. The Bible exists. That is the basis for Christian morality and the source for all discourse concerning morality. I believe it was inspired by God but that is besides the point.

The bible contains the rules for slavery.
The bible condones rape.
The bible condones incest.
The bible condone genocide.

Have you actually read the bible?

I agree with that list with the exception of condoning incest. It mentions incest, but that's not the same thing. In fact, there are quite a few of the Levitical laws specifically outlawing most forms of incest.

Not trying to jerk your chain, Hobbit, but if we're going to criticize the Bible, we should do so on legitimate grounds.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2016, 08:53 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Validity is a good term. Consistency is an important factor in validity. How can a set of morals have validity when from one day to the next or from one culture to another the "rules" change.

Christian morality has not change for two thousand years.

I murder wrong? Some places - others places not so much. There is a tribe in Africa where just about every year one member of the tribe is murdered. Without that murder the tribe would fail due to over population. Murder works for them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2016, 08:54 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(15-12-2016 08:51 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Not trying to jerk your chain, Hobbit, but if we're going to criticize the Bible, we should do so on legitimate grounds.

Please. Jump on any mistakes. Thumbsup

The basis for my comment was Lot. Lot had incestuous relations with his daughters and was considered a righteous man.

Also, Abraham and Sarah were half siblings.

Does that work?

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2016, 08:57 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(15-12-2016 08:53 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Christian morality has not change for two thousand years.

So we can have slaves?

Do you realize the ramifications of what you are saying?



(15-12-2016 08:53 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I murder wrong? Some places - others places not so much. There is a tribe in Africa where just about every year one member of the tribe is murdered. Without that murder the tribe would fail due to over population. Murder works for them.

God orders a lot of murders in the bible. Must have worked pretty good for him too.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2016, 09:02 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(15-12-2016 08:46 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(15-12-2016 08:43 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Not true. The Bible exists. That is the basis for Christian morality and the source for all discourse concerning morality. I believe it was inspired by God but that is besides the point.

The bible contains the rules for slavery.
The bible condones rape.
The bible condones incest.
The bible condone genocide.

Have you actually read the bible?

Yes, there are rules for slavery - slavery was bond servants. The Bible recognizes that it exists and addresses that fact. It states rules for Jews on how to treat their bond-servants. Not slavery for the Jews but a way to pay off debts. That is why you see that after 7 years debts are cancelled.

Does not condone rape. I read the website posted earlier about rape and the Bible recognizes that rape exist but does not condone it.

Incest - -NOT

Genocide. Old Testament.

Are we talking Christian morality or Jewish law?

Christianity started roughly 2016 years ago.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2016, 09:07 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(15-12-2016 08:54 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(15-12-2016 08:51 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Not trying to jerk your chain, Hobbit, but if we're going to criticize the Bible, we should do so on legitimate grounds.

Please. Jump on any mistakes. Thumbsup

The basis for my comment was Lot. Lot had incestuous relations with his daughters and was considered a righteous man.

Also, Abraham and Sarah were half siblings.

Does that work?

The story of Lot and his daughters was a backhanded slur at the Moabites and the Ammonites, two "rival" peoples for Judean control of the southern Levant, essentially calling them the bastard children of incest from a properly-religious (pure) people, the Israelites. Essentially, the Jews of the time were deeply racist against anyone who wasn't them, and that's just one of the ways of expressing it. In any case, because the daughters in the tale got their father drunk, and he knew not when they came in and when they arose, then he was blameless for the act, while they were guilty. That can't be called "condoning" incest; rather, the story uses the perversity of incest to insult two neighboring nations of the Judeans.

As for Abram and Sarai, there's some debate over that. If you go directly by Genesis, then yes he married the daughter of his own father (by another woman), but Talmudic tradition has it that she was actually the daughter of his father's brother... not much better, but definitely better than half-sister. It's likely, I think, that the compilers of the Genesis we have today were working from various scraps of scripture they'd taken into captivity in Babylon with them, and confused Abram/Abraham's frequent uses of "she is my sister", when asked about his beautiful companion by the Pharaoh, with her actually being his sister. Nevertheless, I wouldn't say this is "condoning" incest in the sense that it clearly condones the other items on your list, and would still not call this a fair use of the term when criticizing the Bible.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2016, 09:10 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
I've heard the indentured servant apologetic before Bzltyr and I'm sure everyone else here has unfortunately that doesn't wash as far as I can see its just an attempt to make the distasteful more palatable. Is there any specific evidence it was indentured servitude and not slavery?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: