A Question of Christian Theology (1 Viewer)

[Tully B.]

You say that our ethics are derived from God - CORRECT - the issue then is that we brought SIN into the world - thats why we choose to do bad.

I did not say that we derive our ethics from god - I said that you people say that we do.

We were created without sin, but then we brought sin into the world...? That means that God created us to bring sin in the world - this is the only logical conclusion. Even if all God did was allow us to bring sin into the world, then he is nevertheless culpable.

Derivitives mean nothing if you've come so far from the begining that no-one actually knows what the begining was anymore.

This makes no sense.

Also, we are essentially bad people. How interesting that you only ever have to teach a child to do good - rather than bad, that comes so natural to them as the grow.

Like I said, I'm not sure of my opinion on this topic, but I would not conclude that we are evil from such a silly example as children needing to be told what not to do.
And, as I said, if we are "essentially bad people", then it is God's fault. He's omnipotent, we aren't. Join the dots.

 

[Teclis]

There is nothing about either selfishness or sexual desire that is necessarily immoral. As for violence I don't think we can all agree that it is a tendency inherent in humans (that claim is particularly questionable as it applies to women). Religious adherents always seem to assume the worse about human morality separate from a supernatural force to provide an incentive to behave, which certainly says a lot about the kind of people they would be if they didn't have a spiritual babysitter keeping them in line.

I believe that it is the strictly religious who are truly lacking a foundation for morality. Taking a set of predetermined rules and accepting them as absolute, as opposed to a pragmatic, evidence-based approach to morality, is a very limited and potentially dangerous way of structuring your views.

Are you telling me that the deeds that sexual desire and selfishness lead too aren't immoral. Rape, paedophilia, subjugation of women, theft, war over land and resources, the gap between rich and poor... need I go on?

And why women aren't as violent, they do commit violent acts. Such as murder...

Even If there wasn't religion, I still think you would have to look at human nature and see that while we have a capacity for immense good, If we are not told that things are wrong, our default position is "it feels good, therefore I'll do it"...

Sadly "religion" has a lot to answer for in terms of Morality. Any true Christian hates religion... It was the religous people who killed Jesus. Jesus went to the Prostitues, the tax collectors (traitors who stole from their fellow citizens to fund their oppressors), the broken people and said "You're sinners..." and they said "Yea I am... save me"
Then he went to the religious people... The ones who had it all together, who followed all the rules and said "You're sinners..." and they said "fuck you... why would you eat and talk with THOSE people! We don't have sex outside of marriage, we don't steal, we don't kill people... So we don't like you very much... so we're gunna kill you"

Religion vs. Redemption is one of the biggest problems in the Christian church. Religion is making a list of rules... "you have to do these 10 things to get into Heaven".. Redemption is Jesus saying on the cross "It is finished"... and it's all been done for us... so yea.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that there is a direct quote in the Deuteronomy telling people to stone gays, and one in Leviticus about eye-gouging... I'll look it up in my NIV later.

People can indeed be selfish, violent and horny. But they can also be the polar opposite of those things (except horny). Whose to say that humans are inherently good or evil, since we can clearly see that they have tendencies to be both?

I'm not sure of my opinion on this topic, but Christianity seems to be contradictory on the topic of human nature. They say that humans are evil, but then claim that we derive our modern ethics from God, which suggests that we are inherently good as well (since God has given us morals).

Yea I know there are direct quotes in Deuteronomy and Leviticus. My point being that Jesus' sacrifice being the event that made attempting to follow the law unneccesary. The Laws themselves were impossible to follow. How can you love your neighbour as yourself if you kill him for wearing clothes of different weave... They are impossible... and that is the point. No one is good enough for Gods law...

I don't think humans are inherently evil OR good. I think we have a tendency to do what makes us feel good. Whether good or bad...

Christians believe that humans are sinful... not evil. Hitler was evil... people who create and distribute child pornography are evil. Humans are capable of this... but that's not what we are. We just aren't perfect... and yea... I can't be stuffed thinking about wording it all anymore... dinnertime

 

[dieburndie]

Are you telling me that the deeds that sexual desire and selfishness lead too aren't immoral. Rape, paedophilia, subjugation of women, theft, war over land and resources, the gap between rich and poor... need I go on?

I said they aren't necessarily immoral, meaning sexual desire and selfishness are entirely compatible with a moral position. They are also compatible with immoral acts, as in the examples you mentioned.

And why women aren't as violent, they do commit violent acts. Such as murder...

An extremely small minority frequently display violent tendencies. Do you honestly believe that the remainder are merely suppressing their violent urges?

Even If there wasn't religion, I still think you would have to look at human nature and see that while we have a capacity for immense good, If we are not told that things are wrong, our default position is "it feels good, therefore I'll do it"...

To an extent that's true, but it is an oversimplification. Humans are capable of empathy, and acting upon hedonistic desires can be easily be limited to what doesn't cause harm to others.

Sadly "religion" has a lot to answer for in terms of Morality. Any true Christian hates religion... It was the religous people who killed Jesus. Jesus went to the Prostitues, the tax collectors (traitors who stole from their fellow citizens to fund their oppressors), the broken people and said "You're sinners..." and they said "Yea I am... save me"
Then he went to the religious people... The ones who had it all together, who followed all the rules and said "You're sinners..." and they said "fuck you... why would you eat and talk with THOSE people! We don't have sex outside of marriage, we don't steal, we don't kill people... So we don't like you very much... so we're gunna kill you"

Religion vs. Redemption is one of the biggest problems in the Christian church. Religion is making a list of rules... "you have to do these 10 things to get into Heaven".. Redemption is Jesus saying on the cross "It is finished"... and it's all

What you've said here is mostly incoherent, and almost entirely irrelevant to the overall argument.

 

[pman]

op=two things, how can we even imagine the internal workings of gods mind and what would you do if someone you loved beyong all reason spent their entire lifetime rejecting you, i imagine you'd be pretty cut, my sugestion is that instead of asking bosers, ask a priest or pastor'
edit:teclis, christianity os a religion too

 

[Tully B.]

Are you telling me that the deeds that sexual desire and selfishness lead too aren't immoral. Rape, paedophilia, subjugation of women, theft, war over land and resources, the gap between rich and poor... need I go on?

The first 3 "deeds" you've named aren't condemned much in the bible...

Yea I know there are direct quotes in Deuteronomy and Leviticus. My point being that Jesus' sacrifice being the event that made attempting to follow the law unneccesary. The Laws themselves were impossible to follow. How can you love your neighbour as yourself if you kill him for wearing clothes of different weave... They are impossible... and that is the point. No one is good enough for Gods law...

No one is good enough for God's laws? We're not "good enough" for stoning gays and doing various, terrible things to women for acts/thoughts of lust? No, sir, it is not the case that we are not good enough for these so-called "God's laws". We are too good for them.

 

[trickx]

There is an excuse I hear constantly, that you cannot judge a religion by the acts of believers on the fringes of its beliefs. Most notably those who commit acts of violence on the commands of divine orders. Throughout the Old Testament, God has ordered many acts of violence - such as genocide. Is God at the fringe of his own religion?

Edit: The best modern theologian has to be Alister McGrath. Look up all his books. Learnt more from him in a month than a life time of sunday church sittings. And I don't think my first question on page 7 was addressed all that well ... I hope a Christian with a good understanding of evolution can answer it directly.

 

[Teclis]

The first 3 "deeds" you've named aren't condemned much in the bible...




No one is good enough for God's laws? We're not "good enough" for stoning gays and doing various, terrible things to women for acts/thoughts of lust? No, sir, it is not the case that we are not good enough for these so-called "God's laws". We are too good for them.

Well the first deed falls under Adultery and loving ones neighbour as oneself... Paedophilia as well. Paul about the sexually immoral practices in places like Corinth of daughters sleeping with fathers and sons sleeping with mothers...

Subjugation of women also falls under the commandment on loving ones neighbour. And in Ephesians Paul is pretty clear on how a man should treat his wife "as Christ loves the Church". Seeing as before a woman was married she was usually under her fathers care as a child, there isn't much contextual scope for dealing with single women.

Your second paragraph didn't make sense in context. I think you misunderstand the Historical context of the laws you're talking about... as well as the context of the passages they originate from... maybe you should look those up and do some reading on the topic.

 

[xeuyrawp]

i imagine you'd be pretty cut, my sugestion is that instead of asking bosers, ask a priest or pastor'

No I really wouldn't. The majority of those people that you'd find have no clue.

 

[Iron]

Your arrogance is boundless and astonishing Pwar.

 

[Planck]

You have got it all wrong - (and right at the same time)

Yes, God is a loving God - AND he is also a jealous and vengeful God.

And considering that we're talking on the basis that there is a God, would you not surely follow a God that could strike you down and send you to a horrible torturous place if you didn't beleive in him - scary thought huh?

Pascal's wager is retarded and it is despicable to think there is some kind of cosmic being who is fucking with us for the lulz.

That's a state of fascism I will have no part in and I would gladly suffer to know that I had not kowtowed to a pathetic bully.

 

[Planck]

Dude - wana not live forever when you can - are you spaz?

Who wants to end their life? If you could spend the rest of it forever with the people you love, y not?

Eternal life sounds silly because of what you believe life on earth to be - what if it was better after you die?

Then it means your life is effectively worthless. Living for all of eternity means everything you do is effectively without meaning. There's no real purpose to your existence than itself.

I, for one, find the concept of eternal life to be terrifying, utterly terrifying. You simply cannot ever die. It's inhuman and it is sickening.

 

[Planck]

No I really wouldn't. The majority of those people that you'd find have no clue.

Particularly Pastors. I mean, for fuck's sake I'm probably a qualified Pastor.

For no reason.

 

[Planck]

You say that our ethics are derived from God - CORRECT - the issue then is that we brought SIN into the world - thats why we choose to do bad. Derivitives mean nothing if you've come so far from the begining that no-one actually knows what the begining was anymore.

Why can't god just forgive sin, etc etc? Set up to fail, blah blah.

Our ethics come as a side effect of evolution. A nice one, nonetheless.

Also, we are essentially bad people. How interesting that you only ever have to teach a child to do good - rather than bad, that comes so natural to them as the grow.

Define 'bad'. This is ignorance and arrogance in the extreme.

 

[ComingUpForAir]

Our ethics come as a side effect of evolution.

no mate, more than just a 'side-effect', 'ethics' derive themselfs directly from random mutation and natural selection.

 

[Planck]

no mate, more than just a 'side-effect', 'ethics' derive themselfs directly from random mutation and natural selection.

As in the fact that we have them in the modern age is a side-effect of it

I defer to Kwayera on this point

 

[copkiller]

Then it means your life is effectively worthless. Living for all of eternity means everything you do is effectively without meaning. There's no real purpose to your existence than itself.

I, for one, find the concept of eternal life to be terrifying, utterly terrifying. You simply cannot ever die. It's inhuman and it is sickening.

You are imagining eternal life to be similar to life on earth now.

The eternity you would experience in heaven is beyond anything you could imagine. You just have to trust that maybe some things are bigger and more amazing than anything your tiny brain can comprehend right now.

 

[ComingUpForAir]

The eternity you would experience in heaven is beyond anything you could imagine. You just have to trust that maybe some things are bigger and more amazing than anything your tiny brain can comprehend right now.

Those of us who are not credulous, by definition, do not 'trust' such incoherant wishful thinking.
Obviously your a cluttered and disturbed individual, but by what right do you make such a statement?oh wait, let me guess, you can't tell us because the invisible sadist sky daddy came down and whispered it to you alone

 

[copkiller]

Those of us who are not credulous, by definition, do not 'trust' such incoherant wishful thinking.
Obviously your a cluttered and disturbed individual, but by what right do you make such a statement?oh wait, let me guess, you can't tell us because the invisible sadist sky daddy came down and whispered it to you alone

Oh wait, you don't need anyone to tell you anything because you already know it all.

Nice work. I have faith in a higher power than myself. I believe logic and science are important but they can't explain anything. It is you who credulously puts all your faith in these false gods which you believe can explain everything, and it is you who dismisses as stupid anything which doesn't fit your narrow view of the "correct" way to explain everything in the universe.

 

[Planck]

You are imagining eternal life to be similar to life on earth now.

The eternity you would experience in heaven is beyond anything you could imagine. You just have to trust that maybe some things are bigger and more amazing than anything your tiny brain can comprehend right now.

Well, I don't. Evidence seems to work fairly well.

 

[copkiller]

Evidence seems to work fairly well.

Yeah, except at answering the most important questions that human beings have always struggled to answer.