Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-12-2016, 12:22 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 12:14 PM)Impulse Wrote:  
(16-12-2016 11:58 AM)Bzltyr Wrote:  No, I do not follow the 10 commandments because I am not under that law as no other Christians are under that law. They are good laws but they have no power over me. You obviously do not know the reasons for the law.

Oh look, it seems you don't know the reasons yourself. From your own KJV:

Quote:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
(Matthew 19:16-19)

And, in case you think you now only have to follow those commandments, here's another not mentioned above:

Quote:And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. (Luke 4:8)

Yeah, those are cool citations given to Jews. Now, lets see what has been said to Christians.
Romans 10:4, which says: "Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes
"Know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified" (Galatians 2:16).
Rom 6:14
For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.
Just a sampling.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 12:24 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Why are you quoting Paul the Antichrist? That can't possibly end well.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 12:26 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Since I am not a spineless dodger....

The Doctrine of Hell
The doctrine of hell is unethical no matter how you interpret it. At the most basic level, the doctrine is simple: Bad people go to hell. Some theologians claim that we are all predestined for hell and only affiliation with christ can save a person. They also claim that christ will only save those who avoid sins. There are others who point out that failure to adhere to the commandments means that the sinner will be "least in heaven". All that is required is to believe in jeebus.

In any case, it all boils down to eternal suffering for mortal crimes. Mortal crimes that can be as simple as not believing in jeebus.

So a mortal life is what, 80 years on average? Balance that against eternity. No real comparison is there? So the actions of a time span that is immeasurably small will determine your future.

What about the belief part? What happens to unbaptized babies? Burning in hell. Sorry grieving parents.
Those who die without hearing about jeebus? Burning in hell.
What about good people who happen to believe differently? Ghandhi? Burning in hell.

The concept of an Omni- god who created you knowing in advance that you would sin
The omni's: Omniscient, Omnipotent and Omnibenevolent. This presents some problems if you think about it. If god is omniscient, he knows everything: past, present, future. So god knew in advance that all of the people burning in hell were going to burn. And he created them anyway. Dafuq? Why would you create something that you knew you were going to torture eternally? Sadism? That sort of refutes the ominbenevolent part, doesn't it?

The best part is Omnipotent. What sin, what harm could a person do to a god? A perfect being. A being so powerful so great that it created the entire universe. And a person can cause that being pain? How does this make sense?

The Doctrine of Original Sin
If your dad murders a man are you accountable for that crime? What about your grandfather? Great-grandfather? You get the idea. One human is not accountable for the crimes of another.

Echoing above, an omniscient god would have known that adam and eve were going to sin in advance. So knew they would sin, he put the tree there, he allowed the snake into the garden and... This makes sense?

Vicarious Redemption
This is probably the most offensive. Pick your favorite mass-murderer. Stalin? Hitler? Mao? Whichever. Right before they die, at the last instant, the person realizes their mistakes. They truly repent and ask jeebus for forgiveness.

They get into heaven. You on the other hand, hold a grudge since you were wronged by the dictator. Family killed, lands stolen, tortured & maimed, scarred for life. Doesn't matter. The dictator who did it is feasting in heaven. Jeebus died for the sins of the dictator.

Guess where you go?

One person CAN NOT ATONE for the sins of another. It is called scapegoating. It's an ancient concept that was practiced by multiple cultures. Mention scapegoating and everyone agrees that it doesn't work. Mention jeebus on the other hand...

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
16-12-2016, 12:27 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 12:21 PM)Astreja Wrote:  
(16-12-2016 11:09 AM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Remember, it is not part of a Christian's moral code to lie. It is ingrained in the atheist to lie because there are no repercussions...

I hereby declare you to be a false Christian, then, because you are lying about how atheists perceive truth. I am predisposed to speak the truth rather than lie, for a number of sensible, non-supernatural reasons.
  • I never have to worry about keeping My story straight, because it remains consistently in line with known facts of a situation.
  • I value truth for its own sake, independent of any external consequences, and therefore being punished for lying is not really much of a disincentive.
  • Life is substantially easier to deal with when one faces unpleasant things head-on rather than hoping that things are not the way they appear to be. Truth, and the courage to act upon it, are the most powerful weapons one has when trying to live a coherent and authentic life.
Compare this to Christianity. In particular I'd like to point out the absurdity of the "don't even think bad things, or it's a sin" nonsense. What is this, if not lying to oneself and denying one's true feelings on a matter?

And what is it with Christians bearing false witness against non-believers, pretending that they can read our minds so that they can accuse us of nonsensical things and puff themselves up?

No, Bzltyr, your "Christian morality" is stinking pig crap and your own words are the evidence.

I already explained that my comment about atheist lying was tongue-in-cheek and meant to highlight prejudice.
The "don't even think" "nonsense" is a higher level of morality than anything humanism can claim.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 12:29 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Baldy - I CHALLENGE YOU TO DEFEND THEM.

Start a new thread and I am all over it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 12:30 PM (This post was last modified: 16-12-2016 12:34 PM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 12:17 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  A conservative Christian Judge is not qualified to judge Behe. Post peer reviews that discount Behe. Not a Judge.

It's. In. The. Transcript.

They brought out the peer-reviewed papers that "discount Behe", after Behe made his usual claims on the stand, and the Judge not only accepted them into evidence as an Exhibit, he referenced them in his Opinion. Repeatedly.

(16-12-2016 12:17 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Please stop intimating that I am lying. I read Collins and I read the Kitzmiller transcript. Please believe me and stop that crap. I am not going to lie here. I may be found to have misspoken - just like the Cow to Whale thing. You are correct it is the Hippo - just misrememebering not lying. I have not looked or discussed this for a while.

Fine. I will stop calling you a liar. I simply cannot grasp, as someone who understands this material, how you could have read those items and failed to grasp the material, at least on a layperson's level.

Once you have read about how we know DNA is handed down in a population, from generation to generation, and how the genetic markers in the inactive sections of DNA (not impacted by Natural Selection but merely copied) show us that two populations are genetically related in the same way we can know if someone is from a royal lineage or if they're really the daddy in a paternity test... or really the criminal in a rape or murder trial... I just can't see how it can be denied.

There are literally dozens of different, independent DNA points which each could (and do) prove humans are descended from the same "grandparent" population as chimpanzees, and that they are our evolutionary cousins.

So if you tell us that evolution is "darwinism" (Darwin only proposed Natural Selection, not evolution, and though many of his ideas and conjectures turned out to be well-founded, he was wrong about other things... he is far from scripture, when it comes to evolutionary biology) and that it is baseless, I can only conclude that you either do not know the above information (meaning you haven't read Collins or any other book like it... I just like to recommend Collins because he's an evangelical) or you have failed to grasp some very basic concepts.

In the latter case, it may be due to cognitive dissonance prohibiting you from understanding anything which would cause you to revise your entire worldview (this is not uncommon) or because you simply did not grasp the material.

I'm more willing to call you dishonest, or dissonant, than stupid. Forgive me.

[Edited to expand a sentence that didn't parse correctly.]

"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
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
16-12-2016, 12:30 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Gotta start my day. I will return. Hopefully with new threads to look at.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 12:30 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 12:22 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Yeah, those are cool citations given to Jews. Now, lets see what has been said to Christians.
Romans 10:4, which says: "Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes
"Know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified" (Galatians 2:16).
Rom 6:14
For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.
Just a sampling.
You do realize that Jesus never spoke to any Christians, right? It was impossible for Jesus to speak to Christians because Christians didn't yet exist. But that doesn't make his words any less relevant for Christians no matter how arbitrarily some Christians like yourself might prefer to dismiss them.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 12:33 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 12:12 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  
(16-12-2016 11:19 AM)adey67 Wrote:  So one microbiologist speaks and you take him and make a blanket statement about microbiology proving evolution is wrong without confirming if its the general consensus of microbiologists I'm no scientist or scholar but I'm not a total moron please do not insult me, perhaps you see me as a soft touch because I am honest enough to admit my lack of knowledge in certain areas but your confabulation wont work on me mister.... Largely very disappointed right now.

Science does not work on "general consensus."

What the hell does that even mean ? Help me here guys am I going totally mad ? Shocking
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2016, 12:40 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(16-12-2016 12:33 PM)adey67 Wrote:  
(16-12-2016 12:12 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Science does not work on "general consensus."

What the hell does that even mean ? Help me here guys am I going totally mad ? Shocking

I think he is saying one person can still be right despite the general consensus to the contrary.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: