|
Post by KTJ on Jun 23, 2016 9:55:47 GMT 10
PROVE your imaginary god exists.
PROVE your bullshit book wasn't written by a bunch of primitive, uneducated savages who were experiencing delusions after taking various hallucinogenic substances.
|
|
|
Post by sonex on Jun 23, 2016 17:12:52 GMT 10
"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."
Albert Einstein
Indeed and although there are people who believe in God and Religion who follow these precepts, there are equally just as many with no belief in God and Religion who follow the same ones.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Jun 24, 2016 8:11:54 GMT 10
Amazing how anything that is wrong is never God's fault.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 10:02:35 GMT 10
Absolutely.
If God is the source of all created things, then His nature is the standard in which all things are measured. Ergo, 'Good' is the default setting, and evil is only an aberration in the universe.
Evil is the absence of Good, just as 'cold' is the absence of heat.
'Evil' is when something is contrary of our impression of what 'ought' to be. But what do we mean when we suggest this?
The fact we are able to make moral distinctions is more than sufficient evidence such a standard exists.
Sorry Ed, But... Confusion and faulty judgements about moral laws does not dispell them, any more than the existence of criminals dispells the existence of civil laws.
Some people just excel at silencing their conscience.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 10:18:45 GMT 10
Societys are proved wanting in providing reliable ethical standards.(eg: Nazi Germany)
There ARE corrupt societys; too many to name.
And your denial and hatred for God, doesn't make Him imaginary, Ed.
|
|
|
Post by sonex on Jun 26, 2016 10:35:33 GMT 10
"Moral laws" are set by society, not by some imaginary being. "Moral laws" vary between societies and change over time within societies.Yes I agree Yorick. Tribes set laws to protect the tribe and they vary between tribes. The difference between a servant and a slave is that a servant gets paid for his work and can leave if he wants to. A slave cannot leave and may be sold over and over again.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 10:36:45 GMT 10
"Moral laws" are set by society, not by some imaginary being. "Moral laws" vary between societies and change over time within societies.So you believe that anyone who stood up against their government were acting immorally? You don't think revolutionaries can ever be on the moral high ground? eg: (Robin Hood)
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 10:40:34 GMT 10
... your denial and hatred for God, doesn't make Him imaginary, Ed. Imaginary nonetheless. BTW ... "hatred" How can one "hate" something that does not exist? Yes... That's indeed a question you should seriously consider, Ed.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 10:52:35 GMT 10
I disagree.
We instinctively know dishonesty is always wrong, but sometimes we weigh it against greater evils. (Which is why we deem it okay to lie to save someone's life.)
That doesn't suddenly make lying right, it just means it's 'less wrong' than sending someone to their death.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 10:56:18 GMT 10
So you believe that anyone who stood up against their government were acting immorally? You don't think revolutionaries can ever be on the moral high ground? eg: (Robin Hood) Again, you make my argument for me ... Moral laws change because people change them. e.g. Interracial marriage. Same sex marriage. Age of consent. Polygamy. Sex before marriage / ("Living in sin") - LOL Public nudity. etc. All these concepts / rules vary between societies and change over time. Disagreements about a moral law isn't evidence that a standard doesn't exist; in the same way not knowing the answer to a difficult math question doesn't mean it doesn't have a solution.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 10:58:59 GMT 10
We've been over this stuff before ... In some societies, liars were venerated. Liars can be venerated; if their lie disrupts the progress of a greater evil. That doesn't make lying right; it only makes it necessary for a greater good to prevail.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:00:20 GMT 10
Disagreements about a moral law isn't evidence that a standard doesn't exist; in the same way not knowing the answer to a difficult math question doesn't mean it doesn't have a solution. Occam's ... the point is: "Standards" vary between societies and change over time within societies.You keep saying that, but you are failing to convince that this is the case.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:04:24 GMT 10
"greater good" is in the eye of the beholder. A thousand year Reich was seen as the "greater good" by millions of people in one society at one time. No. I think people understood that killing was STILL wrong, they just got caught up in their SOCIETYS idealism. You are furthering my point.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:06:19 GMT 10
That's cultural ethics, not morality. (Like: shaking hands vs. bowing.)
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:10:33 GMT 10
Proper translation is "Thou shall not murder", not all killing is considered murder.
Soldiers and Police are aware of this.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:14:51 GMT 10
Apples and Oranges. One is about helping Granny cross the street.
The other?
Whether or not you should push her into traffic.đĄ
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:16:23 GMT 10
Proper translation is "Thou shall not murder" , not all killing is considered murder. Soldiers and Police are aware of this. Are you seriously arguing that ordering the killing of all the men, women and children (except for the virgin girls) was not murder? How ridiculous. No, it wasn't. Murder is premeditated.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:19:02 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:24:31 GMT 10
No it was considered necessary; just as it is today.
Nothing has changed.
IncidentaÄșly, Bible cites "warmongering" as a sin.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:29:58 GMT 10
Conditions have changed.
Isrealites couldn't facilitate prisoners whilst wandering the desert for 40 years. Killing them was a mercy.
You need a better example.
|
|
|
Post by KTJ on Jun 26, 2016 11:32:48 GMT 10
Proper translation is "Thou shall not murder", not all killing is considered murder. Soldiers and Police are aware of this. BULLSHIT....I could produce a shitload of bibles (all different traslations/editions) which PLAINLY state âthou shalt not killâ. Including one which is in my bookcase (next to a copy of the koran - another bullshit religious book), which is a facsimile of the original King James Bible, written in the type of english which existed when the traslation was made. You religious shitheads change the words (and the meaning) of your bullshit book at will to whichever suits the bullshit you spout. Instead of defending the indefensible, you could more productively use your time by getting psychiatric help to deal with the imaginary god delusion inside your heads.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:37:03 GMT 10
Proper translation is "Thou shall not murder", not all killing is considered murder. Soldiers and Police are aware of this. BULLSHIT....I could produce a shitload of bibles (all different traslations/editions) which PLAINLY state âthou shalt not killâ. Including one which is in my bookcase (next to a copy of the koran - another bullshit religious book), which is a facsimile of the original King James Bible, written in the type of english which existed when the traslation was made. You religious shitheads change the words (and the meaning) of your bullshit book at will to whichever suits the bullshit you spout. Instead of defending the indefensible, you could more productively use your time by getting psychiatric help to deal with the imaginary god delusion inside your heads. Can you provide one written in the original hebrew, and have that word translated? ....'Cause that's how I had to learn it.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:42:31 GMT 10
Obviously it was murder. Whether or not "killing" or "murder" ... the point remains. Moses, having recently received the "rules" from god, then ordered the killing (murder) of all the men, women and children (excepts for the virgin girls) ... a fresh supply of sex-slaves for the troops and the mass murder of everyone else. Being scattered into the desert they had 2 options: They could let them go, which would set the Isrealites up for obvious retaliation... Or kill them all, and sleep well at night. They weren't organized, or fortified. They barely had shelter... Strategically speaking, which would you pick?
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jun 26, 2016 11:46:19 GMT 10
Dead people a murder doesn't necessarily make, Ed. Check your law books.
|
|
|
Post by KTJ on Jun 26, 2016 11:48:03 GMT 10
Can you provide one written in the original hebrew, and have that word translated? ....'Cause that's how I had to learn it. Can you provide PROOF that the delusion inside your head (ie....an imaginary god) actually exists?
|
|