I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-09-2017, 11:21 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 11:13 AM)MarylinC Wrote:  
(25-09-2017 10:07 AM)Targaryen Wrote:  We're likely going to struggle with this still, we've made some progress. Not a lot, and less then I would like personally. and we'll certainly have those that scream about "how dare you mess with God's word>" "Or the Koran is God breathed" and thus cannot be touched. But I like to also be hopeful that with culture becoming far more inclusive, less hostile to essentially, anything that isn't a White Male Christian, that maybe that part of religion will improve.


There are many progressive christians who do their best but there are so many different opinions and different vested interests. Since christianity mainly centres around one book where none of the words can be rewritten it's no wonder that thousands of years later christians still can't agree about women's rights, abortion, contraception, gay rights and a miriad of other things.

As an atheist, I appreciate people who are peaceful, kind hearted and treat their fellow humans with respect so I think my moral standards aren't too bad and I didn't need to learn that from a 2,000 year old book.

I believe in natural science and that gods are man made idea and do not exist. I have no problem with religious individuals who are good hearted. In fact I feel for them and would not wish to hurt them. My problem lies with the concept of religion and how it works.

That's usually the case. but couldn't that be said about a lot of things, why would religion be free from it? *shrugs*

I, as a theist, a progressive one as you would list , don't think that somehow every atheist is flawed and needs to be corrected. That their morals are out of alignment, that type of horse shit. Frankly, I hate that about any religion or how people use it that way.

Religion has been used that way since time immemorial, but secularism to has it's own dark periods. I mean off the top of my head I could look at the French Revolution and how that Enlightened period kinda ran amok for a while. But I'm not advocating an either or or both thing here. I merely share my own view point. As distasteful as i'm sure it is, to most of you

But I did say I was weird already. Tongue

-If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.
-Archbishop Desmond Tutu
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Targaryen's post
25-09-2017, 11:30 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 11:21 AM)morondog Wrote:  Targaryen, do you believe in the literal truth of the Bible? Bits of it? All of it? And if you do, how does that sit with your subjective truth stuff that you're talking about? I mean, isn't the Bible claiming *objective* truth?

No, I don't believe that a written word by humans is inerrant nor is meant to be taken word for fucking word,literally. what I would consider spiritual truth, I take and run with. As for how it sits with the subjective truth, it for me, explains things to me in a way, that while it shouldn't perhaps on an objective level to most of you, does to me on that subjective level.

And sure, for a lot of other Theists, the bible is completely objective, has to be taken word for word, even passages that contradict,or an objective fact replaces 2500 year old text in some places has to be rejected. It never really did for me however, but again, that would speak to my subjectivity rather then a flat, objective viewpoint.

-If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.
-Archbishop Desmond Tutu
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2017, 11:39 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 10:43 AM)Targaryen Wrote:  Religious belief can really boil down to the subjective.

If you follow my train of thought, a religious belief is pretty much centered on the subjective, a mysterious subjective in fact. Philosophers search for deeper meaning of our lives, of the human experience all the time. For myself, that subjectiveness kept me searching for a deeper sense that there was more then just a very,transitory life that if you're lucky can last 100 years. i don't think subjectiveness can really be explained and it certainly doesn't produce tangible evidence to an observer. But that subjectiveness can lead you on interesting self-journeys.

What makes you think subjective experiences can be trusted at all? Why don't you think subjectivity can be objectively explained?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2017, 11:40 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 11:01 AM)Targaryen Wrote:  Help me out as much here. What is it about that subjectivism, that seems to either frighten or confuse you?
Nothing is 100% objective, so subjective vs objective is a little bit overdetermined. However, for purposes of this discussion it's a fair distinction to say that religion is generally about subjective personal experience and the secular tends to be more about substantiatable fact.

I would say though that my concerns about religion are less about subjectivity as such than about epistemology. Religion in my experience begins with conclusions and then looks for confirmation. I think that's bass-ackwards. I'd rather look at evidence -- all of it -- and then arrive at conclusions based on the evidence. And the corollary to this is, if there's no evidence or knowledge about a thing, then I prefer to admit ignorance for the present and seek further enlightenment. Religion tends to abhor a vacuum ... it hates uncertainty. Science certainly wants to know all that is knowable, but doesn't feel pressured to speculate in the absence of knowledge.

This is the main concern about religion, not that it isn't 100% objective (whatever that even is exactly) but that it asserts things without a requirement of substantiation. As someone who does not afford belief to the unsubstantiated, I can't get on board with it.

Some forms of religion (e.g. fundamentalism) I don't have respect for, and to some extent consider it a threat vector because of its active disparagement of "mere human wisdom" in favor of dogma, its sense of entitlement to try to impose its dogma on others, etc.

As for the subjective, I think it's interesting but has significant limitations and I do not trust it as a source of real insight, over against the potential for self-deception. But I am not "afraid" of it either. I've explored secular meditation, for example, and indulged the hobby of other family members at times of seeking out personal subjective experience or woo. But I do have strong distrust of it as the basis for personal insights or decisions, and I think with very good reason.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like mordant's post
25-09-2017, 11:40 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 11:30 AM)Targaryen Wrote:  No, I don't believe that a written word by humans is inerrant nor is meant to be taken word for fucking word,literally. what I would consider spiritual truth, I take and run with. As for how it sits with the subjective truth, it for me, explains things to me in a way, that while it shouldn't perhaps on an objective level to most of you, does to me on that subjective level.

And sure, for a lot of other Theists, the bible is completely objective, has to be taken word for word, even passages that contradict,or an objective fact replaces 2500 year old text in some places has to be rejected. It never really did for me however, but again, that would speak to my subjectivity rather then a flat, objective viewpoint.

I have no idea what you're saying here, it sounds like you're saying your Christian faith is merely a personal foible like wearing a Star Wars helmet wherever you go, and that you are perfectly aware of that?

How much of this Christianity gig do you actually believe is true? Is Jesus just a metaphor?

I realise this may seem intrusive, but you did come over here and seemed keen to share, so... share.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
25-09-2017, 11:48 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 08:26 AM)MarylinC Wrote:  Religious people use these books like rule books but rules cannot be static.
...

Although I concur with the rest of your post, my experience does not tally with the first part (above).

When running my Governance course I need to explain the difference between a 'framework' and a 'standard'. Essentially it's about degrees of compliance. One can comply with a standard (should, should not, shall, shall not) but only be compatible with a framework.

I often ask, "Is anyone religious?" and given that half the females are wearing the hijab, that usually gets a giggle.

Then I ask if they think the bible / quran is a standard or a framework. Over 90% say "framework" i.e. it's perceived as general guidebook not a rule book.

Now, I think they are wrong (particularly wrt the quran) but I'm happy that they don't follow the letter of the law (compliance) and it implies that they are Cultural Christians or Mocktail Muslims© because ... tradition.

This is where I hoped the OP was going hence my question about what he meant by "Core ideas, that is the Sunday School roster".

I think that would have been a useful conversation.

(23-09-2017 08:43 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  ^meh^ I tried being civil. He chose to engage with people who weren't.

So did I.

But you missed a stage. He did not engage with 'people'. He hadn't been here long enough for us to become 'people'. He was yet to subjectify us (a la Theory of Mind).

He engaged with (i.e. chose to select) content that triggered some inner angst. There's no way we had become people at this stage.

Some of the early replies could have been treated conceptually (not personally) e.g.:

(21-09-2017 05:10 PM)pablo Wrote:  I'm sure your slaves would agree with you.

Brilliant retort. Pretty much sums up in eight words the argument against his position and he could have replied with "Hi Pablo, I get what you mean but I was referring more to the essence of xyz and the modern interpretation of wxy".

And there were a couple of pages of replies where he could have continued with the theme of discussing the ideas but instead he picked out this post for his next reply:
(21-09-2017 09:00 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  ...
I believe you are a cherry-picking dishonest person
...

And bang! It's now personal.

Why he chose to do that and how instinctive or conscious it was, well that's between him and his ego / god, I guess.

Rolleyes

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like DLJ's post
25-09-2017, 11:48 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 11:21 AM)Targaryen Wrote:  Religion has been used that way since time immemorial, but secularism to has it's own dark periods. I mean off the top of my head I could look at the French Revolution and how that Enlightened period kinda ran amok for a while. But I'm not advocating an either or or both thing here. I merely share my own view point. As distasteful as i'm sure it is, to most of you

But I did say I was weird already. Tongue

Weird is fine, I wouldn't exactly call myself normal.

As for secularism, you will never get a perfect human society while you have 7 billion different opinions in the world but people have that ability of correcting themselves and their various flaws. That is why religion should never be allowed to impose it's 2,000 year old rules which cannot be changed on our modern day laws which can be updated whenever we see fit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes MarylinC's post
25-09-2017, 11:51 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 11:40 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(25-09-2017 11:30 AM)Targaryen Wrote:  No, I don't believe that a written word by humans is inerrant nor is meant to be taken word for fucking word,literally. what I would consider spiritual truth, I take and run with. As for how it sits with the subjective truth, it for me, explains things to me in a way, that while it shouldn't perhaps on an objective level to most of you, does to me on that subjective level.

And sure, for a lot of other Theists, the bible is completely objective, has to be taken word for word, even passages that contradict,or an objective fact replaces 2500 year old text in some places has to be rejected. It never really did for me however, but again, that would speak to my subjectivity rather then a flat, objective viewpoint.

I have no idea what you're saying here, it sounds like you're saying your Christian faith is merely a personal foible like wearing a Star Wars helmet wherever you go, and that you are perfectly aware of that?

How much of this Christianity gig do you actually believe is true? Is Jesus just a metaphor?

I realise this may seem intrusive, but you did come over here and seemed keen to share, so... share.

If you wish to call it a Star Wars helmet, can it be Boba Fett's Tongue

I wouldn't call myself a Christian if I didn't personally believe it. Jesus to me isn't some metaphor, that for me, he did do the what you'd call superhuman or mythical things ascribed to him. And yes, I'm well aware of how that sounds to you. but for me, yeah, it could be seen as a fairy tale or a dangerous superstition but for me was, if the Divine is rel, that the stories are based on some crazy facts, then it makes perfect sense,to a Theist that a Divine would give up his life for our own tendency at times, and history can prove this, that humankind is a always bound to make mistakes. Or to use the Christian term, sin.

And no, it's not intrusive. I mean, I did say off the bat I was coming out of a different mindset then most of you. I just know that my theology, or you'd call it mumbo-jumbo, makes no sense to you all.

-If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.
-Archbishop Desmond Tutu
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Targaryen's post
25-09-2017, 11:59 AM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 11:51 AM)Targaryen Wrote:  
(25-09-2017 11:40 AM)morondog Wrote:  I have no idea what you're saying here, it sounds like you're saying your Christian faith is merely a personal foible like wearing a Star Wars helmet wherever you go, and that you are perfectly aware of that?

How much of this Christianity gig do you actually believe is true? Is Jesus just a metaphor?

I realise this may seem intrusive, but you did come over here and seemed keen to share, so... share.

If you wish to call it a Star Wars helmet, can it be Boba Fett's Tongue

I wouldn't call myself a Christian if I didn't personally believe it. Jesus to me isn't some metaphor, that for me, he did do the what you'd call superhuman or mythical things ascribed to him. And yes, I'm well aware of how that sounds to you. but for me, yeah, it could be seen as a fairy tale or a dangerous superstition but for me was, if the Divine is rel, that the stories are based on some crazy facts, then it makes perfect sense,to a Theist that a Divine would give up his life for our own tendency at times, and history can prove this, that humankind is a always bound to make mistakes. Or to use the Christian term, sin.

And no, it's not intrusive. I mean, I did say off the bat I was coming out of a different mindset then most of you. I just know that my theology, or you'd call it mumbo-jumbo, makes no sense to you all.

But what I'm not understanding is... do you think your religion applies anywhere outside your own head? You say Jesus is real, but you've also said that you don't necessarily believe scripture written by man and that you're aware that you are operating on some sort of subjective belief rather than a belief that can be confirmed with evidence. I don't get how that works, so yeah, you're right, your theology / logic makes zero sense to me. What about the alternate hypothesis that your entire religion which you are following is man made and made up as a tool of social control?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2017, 12:07 PM
RE: I believe the Bible teaches correct morals (mostly)...
(25-09-2017 10:43 AM)Targaryen Wrote:  
(25-09-2017 10:31 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Seriously, what about religion is valuable that can't be replaced with secular alternatives?

Maybe more direct to the point, I'm assuming you believe in some kind of personal god that interacts with the world so the question is.... why believe that?

Secular teaching is all well and good, and I don't think I'm saying otherwise. However, since I am a Theist, the best way I can explain it is simply that the subjective world doesn't replace the objective world. Religious belief can really boil down to the subjective. I mean, I can look at a flower objectively and classify it "Flower, this variety" but if I smell it, that smell can bring back memories, which is a subjective experience, unless we all somehow share the same memories. those memories can send you into other memories and if it was say a pleasant experience, you could be seeking to have more experience with that flower, to go back to my rather poor analogy.

I'm not entirely certain I understand how you are using the terms but I don't see any difference from a secular viewpoint regarding subjective experiences. The memories and associations brought on by sights and smells can be pleasant and sought out while still not needing any supernatural component.

Quote:If you follow my train of thought, a religious belief is pretty much centered on the subjective, a mysterious subjective in fact.

Why does it have to be a mystery to be of value?

Quote:Philosophers search for deeper meaning of our lives, of the human experience all the time. For myself, that subjectiveness kept me searching for a deeper sense that there was more then just a very,transitory life that if you're lucky can last 100 years.

From my perspective that sounds like you are looking for a reason to believe what you wish was true and, not finding any demonstrable reason, you decide to practice a form of self-deception. I would like there to be more than a brief life but the evidence doesn't support that idea and, in many ways, that makes this brief existence much more precious and increases my desire to make it as pleasurable as possible for myself and those I care about.

Quote:i don't think subjectiveness can really be explained and it certainly doesn't produce tangible evidence to an observer. But that subjectiveness can lead you on interesting self-journeys.

I haven't heard anything that explains why you believe in a god or anything supernatural.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: