Jesus?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-04-2011, 02:04 AM
RE: Jesus?
So, has anyone here watched Nation Geo documentary Rivals of Jesus? It's part 2 of 3-part series The Secret Bible. Find it somewhere, i had it on my youtube channel, but it has been removed for my country, so I can't find it anymore. If somebody has torrent link, I would appreciate it.

The documentary explains a lot about the time when Jesus was supposed to live. And you can actually see the real historical people who were probably the basics for Jesus character.

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2011, 12:37 PM
RE: Jesus?
There is no absolute morality and no concrete right and wrong. Nature follows one very simple set of rules 1) exist and survive 2) reproduce 3) provide some measure of support to help your offspring survive and reproduce (this could be in the form of producing a lot of offspring, like some fish, or producing few offspring and supporting them, like most mammals). The point of the Golden Rule is to maximize your survival and the survival of those around you, most commonly family but not always. This ensures that your genes (in this case your genes are shared within your family unit, whether they are offspring, siblings, etc) are passed on to the next generation. These are pretty much the basic rules for natural selection. I simply thought outlining it as the Golden Rule would make it a little more straightforward but I guess that only confused things further.

How about this as a counter question: If absolute morality exists, then does it come from the bible? If so, then explain the morals help by peoples before the bible's existence and how groups of humans that exist today outside of christian societies make moral choices. When I thought about these questions it made it apparent to me that the morals we have are self-imposed on our societies, as laws and rules, and are ultimately the product of our basic natural tendencies to survive that have been defined in human terms. An example would be defining murder. It is necessary to protect yourself in order to survive but not necessary for you to kill another human out of spite/anger/frustration or any other situation that poses no direct threat to your survival or the survival of your family. Basically, some people own guns for protection of themselves and their family from home invasions. You do not go out and kill someone on the street who looked at you funny but if they pose a serious threat to you or your family then you must take action. I think this decision making process is ingrained in us all through evolution and not taught to us via some book.

Obviously a counter to this could be laws and rules that are not fundamentally ingrained in us. Like speeding. We are not born knowing that speeding in a car is bad, whereas I believe we are born knowing that killing humans is bad. In this case we are advanced enough as a society to employ laws that protect everyone, ergo traffic laws that reduce automobile fatalities. Is it immoral to speed? Maybe. Is it immoral to kill? Maybe (self defense vs. murder).

Kind of a long response but perhaps a little more thorough since my last posts were apparently confusing.

Evolve

Smartass
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/James_Beard2
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2011, 03:41 PM
RE: Jesus?
@TheBeardedDude As the Bible says, God's law is ingrained in all of us. What many would call a concience. As you said, people are born knowing to some extent what is right and wrong. We can either embrace these tendencies or go against them. The more we go against them, the more we lose site of what is right or wrong and the harder it becomes to know for certain that something really is moral or not. I understand your perspective, but I greatly disagree with what it implies. (frm that perspective) We're supposed to fight for ourselves and by being the strongest we foreward the evolution of mankind. Only by eliminating the weak will we increace our chances of ultimate survival.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2011, 05:38 PM
RE: Jesus?
(09-04-2011 03:41 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  We're supposed to fight for ourselves and by being the strongest we foreward the evolution of mankind.

Corrction: We are not trying to forward the evolution of mankind, we are trying to ensure the continuance of the species. That's called instinct. Evolution is not something our instincts (or the instincts of any living creature) are inclined to push forward.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2011, 09:27 PM
RE: Jesus?
To me Jesus is just a character in a work of fiction. The work of fiction just happens to say "Everything in this book is 100% true and anyone who doesn't believe it is a fool. Mocking this book will result in you being burned forever!!!!"

And people bought it.. I guess because it's been around since before we knew anything about the world and ourselves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2011, 12:02 PM
RE: Jesus?
(09-04-2011 05:38 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Corrction: We are not trying to forward the evolution of mankind, we are trying to ensure the continuance of the species. That's called instinct. Evolution is not something our instincts (or the instincts of any living creature) are inclined to push forward.

Well either way, my point stands.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2011, 07:10 PM
RE: Jesus?
(09-04-2011 03:41 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  The more we go against them, the more we lose site of what is right or wrong and the harder it becomes to know for certain that something really is moral or not. I understand your perspective, but I greatly disagree with what it implies. (frm that perspective) We're supposed to fight for ourselves and by being the strongest we foreward the evolution of mankind. Only by eliminating the weak will we increace our chances of ultimate survival.
(10-04-2011 12:02 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  
(09-04-2011 05:38 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Corrction: We are not trying to forward the evolution of mankind, we are trying to ensure the continuance of the species. That's called instinct. Evolution is not something our instincts (or the instincts of any living creature) are inclined to push forward.
Well either way, my point stands.

Ok, basically this is standard stuff that comes up in a creationist
"Evilution means you have no morals" forum
Part of survival of the fittest also entails altruism and mutual cooperation.



I'm sorry if "survival of the fittest" seems cold and harsh and hurts your feelings. The available evidence shows this is how nature operates. Your feelings have nothing to do with observable reality. There are plenty of species that mutually cooperate for the benefit of others. For example most ants never reproduce but they still work for the benefit of the colony.
A species that can prioritize species survival over individual survival is fitter for survival than a species that can't. The human genome as a whole evolves and it's not always about the genome of a single individual.

I'll really be interested to watch the mental acrobatics involved as you explain this away with your creationist framework:


So did God do this just to fuck with our heads once we have the technology to see all these interactions within nature?
What does god have against the Caterpillar?
Why create a Caterpillar if God needs to create parasites to destroy the Caterpillar? Huh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DeepThought's post
10-04-2011, 08:20 PM
RE: Jesus?
(09-04-2011 03:41 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  God's law is ingrained in all of us. What many would call a concience. As you said, people are born knowing to some extent what is right and wrong.

Babies show no signs of conscious deliberation in their actions. Your opinions of right and wrong come in during the same time you really start comprehending the world around you. Also people in different areas of the world have vastly different ideas of right and wrong and it is in their conscience. Your conscience is like a part of your brain where the common patterns of events are stored. Most people have a sense of right and wrong but that does not mean they are born with it.

And plenty of people fail to have this "ingrained" sense. We may call them crazy but they still are a strong point of disproof.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: