|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 13, 2012 17:20:59 GMT -5
And goober.... It was a hypothetical question. Though there are cannibalistic cultures around the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Wells on Jun 13, 2012 17:34:11 GMT -5
We DO have the freedom to vote but it's always for the "lesser of two evils".
|
|
|
|
Post by Al Maughan on Jun 13, 2012 20:34:37 GMT -5
Let's see, 10lbs of poop and 5lbs of poop. Gezzz, I'm sick of voting for poop!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 14, 2012 6:09:34 GMT -5
Haha me to!
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Wells on Jun 14, 2012 6:42:04 GMT -5
Last time the "majority" voted for a known Muslim. Maybe I'm wrong and the Koolaid drinkers (other than Muslim voters) THOUGHT he was Christian just because he said so. That's where history messes up between religions. So many fights proclaiming "in the name of", and it's so far off doctrine that it gives the said religion a bad rap. So, at that point, you'll need to go to original doctrine and see what is actually said
|
|
|
|
Post by kyledarby on Jun 16, 2012 2:36:02 GMT -5
My final word on the matter is you do not need God or religion to be moral. God did not write the rules of morality. Good and bad existed before God revealed the Law through Moses. Anyone that says otherwise is simply rejecting everything we know about history, science and anthropology. Really? I'm pretty sure the whole bible addresses morality. Further more right and wrong was first addressed in the garden of Eden. That is when sin and free will entered the World. |
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 16, 2012 3:49:08 GMT -5
No code of ethics has any worth except that it has a standard of morality in which you compare it to.
Gods holiness is the gold standard of morality. With out that to compare it to your code of ethics means nothing to anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Bluth on Jun 17, 2012 17:18:14 GMT -5
I promise you there are millions of people that don't believe in God yet lead a morally righteous life(but that is beside the point).
Assuming the story of Adam and Eve is literal, we still know there was a large gap in the timeline between them and the revelation of the Law. Where is there any record of God giving Adam and eve a moral code to live by? The only commandments he gave them were 1) to multiply and 2) not eat of the fruit. Later on we read of the wickedness of the children of men(Gen. 6). How did they know their actions were evil? When was God's law and moral code revealed to them? There isn't any record of it in the Bible until Moses. Why is it so hard to believe that we innately understand the essential differences between right and wrong? Was killing or stealing justified until God said it wasn't? When Cain killed Abel, did Cain already know he was doing something wrong? I'd say he did but it wasn't because God had told him it was wrong. Right and wrong can and do exist outside of God.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 17, 2012 19:55:10 GMT -5
Let's stay focused on your argument. You say morality can exist outside of faith and religion. Not outside of God.
Fact..
God either exists or doesn't exist... And that fact is not subject to your belief in him.
If he does exist..
Righteousness and the desire to live righteous stems from and is created by God. Who's is the gold standard of righteousness. That is, Regardless of ones acknowledgement of his existence or ones submission to him.
If he doesn't exist...
Then there is no standard in which to compare your righteousness to besides popular opinion which is neither relevant or solid.
Do you agree with this statement?
|
|
|
|
Post by kyledarby on Jun 18, 2012 2:26:09 GMT -5
First off in order to understand your thought process there are some important questions we must first identify. You have spoke of the LDS with some familiarity that could suggest you have a history with that church. Additionaly you have spoke of the muslim faith system. This leads me to believe you have studied multiple religions. The bottom line is that doesn't narrow down your belief system. It holds no value to debate God's principles with someone who doesn't accept God as their Lord and Savior. A non believer can interpret the bible with whatever worldly spin they want to put on it. The reality is though without believing it and pursuing it with an open mind you will have no more concept of it than an electrician does of baking.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Bluth on Jun 18, 2012 18:21:25 GMT -5
Let's stay focused on your argument. You say morality can exist outside of faith and religion. Not outside of God. Fact.. God either exists or doesn't exist... And that fact is not subject to your belief in him. If he does exist.. Righteousness and the desire to live righteous stems from and is created by God. Who's is the gold standard of righteousness. That is, Regardless of ones acknowledgement of his existence or ones submission to him. If he doesn't exist... Then there is no standard in which to compare your righteousness to besides popular opinion which is neither relevant or solid. Do you agree with this statement? If the Christian God, the God of the New and Old Testaments, does truly exist, how could you ever claim that He is the gold standard of righteousness? How is it that a vengeful, genocidal, infanticidal, xenophobic, jealous being is the gold standard of righteousness? And to your other point: The standards of morality that society creates are not irrelevant. Our society upholds our moral standards through legislature for the common good of the people. Every society has had some form of governance though which the laws of the land were enforced. Even the ancient American civilizations that had no concept of the Judeo-Christian God had moral laws by which they lived and governed. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Bluth on Jun 18, 2012 18:28:52 GMT -5
My final word on the matter is you do not need God or religion to be moral. God did not write the rules of morality. Good and bad existed before God revealed the Law through Moses. Anyone that says otherwise is simply rejecting everything we know about history, science and anthropology. Really? I'm pretty sure the whole bible addresses morality. Further more right and wrong was first addressed in the garden of Eden. That is when sin and free will entered the World. I never said that the Bible doesn't address morality. I said that morality predates the Bible and the story of God's interaction with the Israelites. And I don't have to believe in God to argue that we don't need him or the Bible to tell us what is right and wrong. There is nothing contradictory about that at all. I don't have to "narrow down" my belief system and put it in a little box that says "Christian" on it to validate what I know. I know that recorded history goes way back before the Biblical timeline for Adam and Eve. Before Adam and Eve, men and women lived moral lives without ever hearing God's law. That is why I can say that we don't need God's word in order to live a moral life. |
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 18, 2012 20:28:52 GMT -5
You defend Mormonism
You refer to the Quran as holy.
You insult the righteousness of God and say we don't need him.
You say man sufficiently dictates morality regardless the fact that sucking the brains out of unborn children is permissible.
Your position Is unclear. Your logic is non-existent. You should take your ball and go home. Your not winning this game.
|
|
|
|
Post by sethkardos on Jun 18, 2012 22:18:40 GMT -5
Michael, you can't argue with people that think their way is better than anyone else's (no matter what), they are right and anyone else who thinks or was raised different then them is wrong... Sorry buddy.
You have sound logic IF we look at it objectively, some people are unable/incapable or simple unwilling to do that.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Bluth on Jun 18, 2012 23:38:36 GMT -5
You defend Mormonism You refer to the Quran as holy. You insult the righteousness of God and say we don't need him. You say man sufficiently dictates morality regardless the fact that sucking the brains out of unborn children is permissible. Your position Is unclear. Your logic is non-existent. You should take your ball and go home. Your not winning this game. You're right Seth and I shouldn't try but I always do lol. Ryan, First off "logic" isn't the word you wanted. Reason would work better there. I defend Mormonism because maybe, just maybe it is better and deserves more credit than you give it. I defend Islam because for millions it is as sacred as whatever you call your faith. I defend the secular view because millions have found a way to be good beyond God. People are good and I believe in people irrespective of their religious affiliation. My point in all this is this: You do not have a monopoly on truth. You believe your way is the only way because you claim it is "Christ's way". Well let me yell you thst it is no more "Christ's way" than the other 800 Christian sects that claim the same thing. I believe in humanity. I believe in respecting all men and women and treating them equitably and with love. I accept the fact that I don't know all things and cannot know all things therefore I do not push my views on others. You think you KNOW that you have the Truth but you see, millions of people with different views than your own KNOW that they also have the Truth. That is the problem with the world today; everyone KNOWS they have the Truth. You are too ideologically driven to ever even consider to begin to look at something that threatens your way of thinking and that is not only bad for the country but for humanity as a whole. |
|
