|
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
 Posted - 06/25/2013 : 11:27:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Convinced
This is not what the Bible says at all. It actually says the opposite. |
So the numerous "saved once, saved always" people are wrong in your view?
|
No. I believe in the perseverance of the saints. The bible says there are indicators of your faith. I never remember reading in the Bible of mass murder as a sign you are saved. |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
 |
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2013 : 11:41:04 [Permalink]
|
I appreciate Boron10's original post and questions, and Convinced's efforts at answering all of our questions. But it seems kinda pointless when the underlying assumption of the existence of God, the divinity of Jesus, and the authority and accuracy of the Bible are dubious at best.
Edit: Fixed iOS autocorrect, lol. |
| Edited by - ThorGoLucky on 06/25/2013 12:04:09 |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2013 : 11:42:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by ThorGoLucky
I appreciate Boron10's original post and questions, and Convicted's efforts at answering all of our questions. But it seems kinda pointless when the underlying assumption of the existence of God, the divinity of Jesus, and the authority and accuracy of the Bible are dubious at best. |
I, too, appreciate his patient efforts to answer our questions as clearly and honestly as possible.
Thank you!
edited to remove correction. Thor got it. |
| Edited by - Boron10 on 06/25/2013 12:05:59 |
|
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2013 : 12:43:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by ThorGoLucky
Your quaint ancient Jewish laws don't apply to me, especially the first "commandment" that is trumped by the US Constitution's first amendment. |
They are not my laws.
| Breaking your mostly-outmoded man-made laws is a badge of honor, except of course when it would be unethical. Our evolved capacity of empathy (don't do to others as you wouldn't want them to do to you) is a root of doing the right thing that predates all religions that still linger today. |
This is no good as a moral code. Some people like doing things to themselves others would not care for. Some people don't like being lied to and others don't care. I knew a guy once that thought it hilarious if he was given the finger while driving. We simply do not have the same moral code by ourselves.
Can you define the right thing? Is it up to each individual to decide that? |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
|
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2013 : 12:46:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Boron10
Originally posted by ThorGoLucky
I appreciate Boron10's original post and questions, and Convicted's efforts at answering all of our questions. But it seems kinda pointless when the underlying assumption of the existence of God, the divinity of Jesus, and the authority and accuracy of the Bible are dubious at best. |
I, too, appreciate his patient efforts to answer our questions as clearly and honestly as possible.
Thank you!
edited to remove correction. Thor got it.
|
I tried. Thanks for reading. |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2013 : 14:23:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Convinced
This is no good as a moral code. |
The Ethic of Reciprocity (EoR) is a single piece of a moral code, and not the entirety of anyone's morality. For example, the EoR is usually coupled with advice to not do what you're sure others don't want done to them, which would pretty much make all your counter-examples moot. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2013 : 14:32:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Convinced
This is no good as a moral code. |
The Ethic of Reciprocity (EoR) is a single piece of a moral code, and not the entirety of anyone's morality. For example, the EoR is usually coupled with advice to not do what you're sure others don't want done to them, which would pretty much make all your counter-examples moot.
|
But why do you think your idea of morality should be foisted on others? What do you tell someone that wants to do unto others as they would not want done to themselves? Why is this moral code wrong and your moral code right? |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2013 : 14:59:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Convinced
But why do you think your idea of morality should be foisted on others? |
You first.| What do you tell someone that wants to do unto others as they would not want done to themselves? |
That I think it's wrong and why.| Why is this moral code wrong and your moral code right? |
That's what I would explain. And since I'm not coming from a position in which I think my moral code is carved in stone, it's possible to have a discussion about it and maybe change my mind (or the other person's). The idea that an absentee God should be the sole arbiter of the correctness of moral decisions is very dangerous, especially when "his word" is interpreted in a thousand different ways every day.
How do you know that your version of Christian morality is correct? What do you tell an ultra-fundamentalist Muslim who thinks you should be put to death merely for believing that Jesus was divine? Why is his moral code wrong and yours right? His basis for morality is his faith in a different holy book than yours, after all, so why is your book superior to his? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2013 : 15:12:20 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Boron10
Originally posted by ThorGoLucky
I appreciate Boron10's original post and questions, and Convicted's efforts at answering all of our questions. But it seems kinda pointless when the underlying assumption of the existence of God, the divinity of Jesus, and the authority and accuracy of the Bible are dubious at best. |
I, too, appreciate his patient efforts to answer our questions as clearly and honestly as possible.
Thank you!
|
Good point to bring up Thor, Convicted has ran the gantlet. Thank you Convicted, for you efforts and persistence. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2013 : 12:52:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Convinced
Originally posted by ThorGoLucky
Your quaint ancient Jewish laws don't apply to me, especially the first "commandment" that is trumped by the US Constitution's first amendment. |
They are not my laws. |
You are claiming that those man-made laws from a tribe of ignorant savages have jurisdiction at this time and at my location a continent away. It's absurd.
If you disagree, then you must head the universal laws of Allah from the Koran. Your argument is the same as from the Muslim extremists that seek a worldwide caliphate.
| Breaking your mostly-outmoded man-made laws is a badge of honor, except of course when it would be unethical. Our evolved capacity of empathy (don't do to others as you wouldn't want them to do to you) is a root of doing the right thing that predates all religions that still linger today. |
This is no good as a moral code. Some people like doing things to themselves others would not care for. Some people don't like being lied to and others don't care. I knew a guy once that thought it hilarious if he was given the finger while driving. We simply do not have the same moral code by ourselves.
Can you define the right thing? Is it up to each individual to decide that?
|
I said to not do things to others that you would not do to yourselves. The men that wrote the equivalent passages in the Bible changed it to do things to others as you would have them do to you. I agree with you that the Biblical version is no good.
To answer your question, the right thing is basically the path of least harm, and taking into account practicalities and a reasonable amount of selfishness. Like I cannot be expected to donate to every excellent and well-meaning charity that comes knocking. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2013 : 00:55:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I'm not mistaken because I didn't suggest that. I am saying that discussing the morality of something which may or may not be truthful is pointless compared to discussing whether it is true or not. |
How many times have I pointed out why I think the Bible in general is not credible? It's not credible because it contradicts the available evidence, and because it contradicts itself. We're apparently done with that conversation, because nobody has stepped up to provide supporting evidence or argument that the Bible is true, and only one person has offered their own faith as justification.
So now we've moved on to the "god is a moral monster" portion of the discussion, and you're just annoyed because you're late, again. 
Please, if you wish to go back and provide objective evidence or logical argument in favor of the Bible, go right ahead. I would be ecstatic to see some!
|
You don't seem to understand that if you are done with the first conversation the followup is rendered moot. |
 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2013 : 05:01:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
You don't seem to understand that if you are done with the first conversation the followup is rendered moot. |
Only, it seems, for people unable to argue from a hypothetical. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2013 : 08:43:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Convinced
This is no good as a moral code. |
The Ethic of Reciprocity (EoR) is a single piece of a moral code, and not the entirety of anyone's morality. For example, the EoR is usually coupled with advice to not do what you're sure others don't want done to them, which would pretty much make all your counter-examples moot.
|
I understand your moral code. Can a person have a contradictory moral code to yours and still be right? |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
|
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2013 : 09:09:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Convinced
But why do you think your idea of morality should be foisted on others? |
You first. |
I don't think my moral code should be forced on people but I do think the bible is the truth.
| Why is this moral code wrong and your moral code right? |
That's what I would explain. And since I'm not coming from a position in which I think my moral code is carved in stone, it's possible to have a discussion about it and maybe change my mind (or the other person's). The idea that an absentee God should be the sole arbiter of the correctness of moral decisions is very dangerous, especially when "his word" is interpreted in a thousand different ways every day. |
One cannot get a thousand different correct interpretations if the words are read with their defined meanings and context. Can you agree that whoever you believe the author to be they had an idea that they were trying to convey?
How do you know that your version of Christian morality is correct? What do you tell an ultra-fundamentalist Muslim who thinks you should be put to death merely for believing that Jesus was divine? Why is his moral code wrong and yours right? His basis for morality is his faith in a different holy book than yours, after all, so why is your book superior to his?
|
One reason would be that the bible describes a god that forgives sin justly. A punishment for a crime is given but the lawbreaker is forgiven as well. The Quran and the Hadith describe a god that forgives sin arbitrarily and without justice. Look up the story of the man that committed 99 murders in the Muslim Hadith. A judge that lets a murderer go without punishment is not a moral judge, why would god be any more moral if he did the same thing? |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
|
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2013 : 09:13:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by ThorGoLucky
Originally posted by Convinced
Originally posted by ThorGoLucky
Your quaint ancient Jewish laws don't apply to me, especially the first "commandment" that is trumped by the US Constitution's first amendment. |
They are not my laws. |
You are claiming that those man-made laws from a tribe of ignorant savages have jurisdiction at this time and at my location a continent away. It's absurd.
If you disagree, then you must head the universal laws of Allah from the Koran. Your argument is the same as from the Muslim extremists that seek a worldwide caliphate. |
Except that the Muslin god and the christian god are contradictory. You cannot believe both gods exist.
| To answer your question, the right thing is basically the path of least harm, and taking into account practicalities and a reasonable amount of selfishness. Like I cannot be expected to donate to every excellent and well-meaning charity that comes knocking. |
Why is the "least harm" the "right thing"? |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
|
|
 |
|
Questions For a Christian
