[Obdigore]

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 01:14 PM, said:

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 01:09 PM, said:

And what about those wars and murders sparked by fanatical followers of a Judeo-Christian or Muslim religion? It evidently had an adverse impact on their morals.

Although this thought had occured to me, I am not going to go after Bent with it, because I don't believe that he advocated said crusades or murders, although if I didn't know him, his whole 'If only everyone believed in God' thing would be somewhat scary.

I am much more interested, Bent, in why it seems that you think anyone that isn't religious cannot have morals, or why you think a religious persons' morals are stronger than a non-religious persons?

I'm not saying he advocated it. Merely pointing out that it isn't the virtues espoused by the religion that are the cause of morality in their followers, rather it is more likely the person theirself.

And the easy response is that the people who did such things obviously don't have a close personal connection with god, and are therefore not true believers.

It is easy drawing a line between true believers and people who use the religion for their own crazy ends after the fact.

[Illuyankas]

Bent, on Sep 3 2009, 07:04 PM, said:

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 01:59 PM, said:

So what you are saying, Bent, is that if you aren't religious you don't have any morals?

No, Im saying if you arent connected on a spiritual level with God, and thusly fearing His wrath, and consequence of punishment, humans are capable of anything. My belief in God is what keeps me from sleeping around on my wife and lots of other morally challenging things...Im not saying that they have no morals, just that my morals are a bit stronger because I fear an eternity in hell, whereas they fear nothing.

Just your belief in God? Nothing like you're actually a nice person, or you love your wife, or don't want to steal other people's possessions because of the many non-wrath reasons? just the fear of Hell? Dude, you don't seem to be a fuckwit, don't say things that make you out to be one.

[stone monkey]

Quote

It is easy drawing a line between true believers and people who use the religion for their own crazy ends after the fact.

Arguably no. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

And this would also imply that non-believers (or believers in other deities) aren't capable of behaving well. Which is also not the case.

This post has been edited by stone monkey: 03 September 2009 - 06:23 PM

[Bent]

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 02:08 PM, said:

Bent, on Sep 3 2009, 01:04 PM, said:

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 01:59 PM, said:

So what you are saying, Bent, is that if you aren't religious you don't have any morals?

No, Im saying if you arent connected on a spiritual level with God, and thusly fearing His wrath, and consequence of punishment, humans are capable of anything. My belief in God is what keeps me from sleeping around on my wife and lots of other morally challenging things...Im not saying that they have no morals, just that my morals are a bit stronger because I fear an eternity in hell, whereas they fear nothing.

I see, so you don't sleep around on your wife because you fear being tortured for eternity, whereas I don't sleep around on my girlfriend because...?

Do you really think that people who aren't religious don't care about others and harm people more often than those that do?

No I don't cheat on my wife out of fear of the consequences on this earth that I will recieve. Put simply I dont believe in coincidence, if I do something that I KNOW is wrong (smoking weed for me is an example, because this was a major issue with me when I was younger) I get punished. Maybe my car breaks down, maybe I lose a 100 dollar bill, maybe I get a kidney stone, etc. I have been saved, so there is nothing I can do, short of saying that I no longer believe in God that cannot be forgiven, however, when I mess up, I get spanked and told no, and then move on. My example was a small one based on my temptations, others temptatons, those of power or control, etc. those are the ones that cause wars etc. , for those, if they held true to their god based morals, they wouldn't seek to dominate and control. A rapist is the same, he seeks to dominate and control the raped, to have power over his victim gives him pleasure, he is godless. Priests and preachers who molest children, while wearing a mask of holiness, are godless. Its not really that complicated, I don't steal because I fear god will punish me, maybe I get caught and go to prison as a punishment, you don't steal because you dont want to get arrested. Same moral, different fear of the same punishment. Mine is stronger however, because I know god, since he is with me everywhere I go, will see it and spank me. You may risk it if there is no police officers around. I am really dumbing this down alot, so please dont take any of this as literal, but the basic principal is the same.

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 02:09 PM, said:

And what about those wars and murders sparked by fanatical followers of a Judeo-Christian or Muslim religion? It evidently had an adverse impact on their morals.

Holy wars are usually started by those seeking to dominate or destroy the opposition due to misguided beliefs. A verse in the bible or whatever says do this or do that, and its taken in a literal sense (snake handling or something like that) when the sole purpose of the bible is to have faith and to love. the rest is unimportant. When you dis-semble everything down to itts smallest factor, you sometimes miss the big picture (cant see the forrest through the trees ) I have been taught to love everyone, have faith in god and everything else will work itself out. So I do.

[Obdigore]

So Bent, I don't steal, I don't rape, I don't murder, but I am godless.

Does this mean that you think I will steal, rape, and murder at some point?

I don't steal because I don't think it is correct to take something from someone else. I don't rape because I don't think it is right to force someone to have sex with me. I don't murder because I don't think it is right to remove someone else's life without due process.

But somehow you think your aversion to these activites is greater than mine and that I am a rapist murderer thief just waiting to happen because I do not believe in your christian god?

[Bent]

stone monkey, on Sep 3 2009, 02:11 PM, said:

So all believers are paragons of moral virtue simply because they believe? I can't really see that one flying. There's far too much evidence to the contrary. I would argue that the thing that should keep someone from sleeping around on their spouse is that they love them and therefore don't want to hurt them by doing that. The fear of eternal punishment would be secondary to that... And if someone doesn't love their spouse, what on earth are they doing being married to them?

Fundamentaly you are right, however, I put God before anything. He joined me and her together, he brought her and me together as one, so if I cheated on her, I would be letting go down first, because he made her and me, and made it possible for us both to be together. I love her and wouldn't want to hurt her, but temptations sometimes outweigh the consequenses, and people slip. happens to christians and non-christians alike, but the fact that I let god down even after she had left, or forgiven me, still weighs heavily and I would still get spanked by God.

[Mutzy]

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 11:29 AM, said:

So Bent, I don't steal, I don't rape, I don't murder, but I am godless.

Does this mean that you think I will steal, rape, and murder at some point?

I don't steal because I don't think it is correct to take something from someone else. I don't rape because I don't think it is right to force someone to have sex with me. I don't murder because I don't think it is right to remove someone else's life without due process.

But somehow you think your aversion to these activites is greater than mine and that I am a rapist murderer thief just waiting to happen because I do not believe in your christian god?

He's saying you have the greater potential of being a thief/rapist, sense you hold only to your own reasoning. You may reason in the near future, that perhaps you like this girl, but she doesn't like you, and etc. etc. You rape her. This is not to say you will or even think of this, it is only an example.

[Bent]

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 01:09 PM, said:

And what about those wars and murders sparked by fanatical followers of a Judeo-Christian or Muslim religion? It evidently had an adverse impact on their morals.

Although this thought had occured to me, I am not going to go after Bent with it, because I don't believe that he advocated said crusades or murders, although if I didn't know him, his whole 'If only everyone believed in God' thing would be somewhat scary.

I am much more interested, Bent, in why it seems that you think anyone that isn't religious cannot have morals, or why you think a religious persons' morals are stronger than a non-religious persons?

Take God out of the equation for a minute Obi, if everyone loved everyone else and didn't judge or hate or any of that, the word would stop fighting, I advocate using God as a way to make that happen.

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 02:14 PM, said:

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 01:09 PM, said:

And what about those wars and murders sparked by fanatical followers of a Judeo-Christian or Muslim religion? It evidently had an adverse impact on their morals.

Although this thought had occured to me, I am not going to go after Bent with it, because I don't believe that he advocated said crusades or murders, although if I didn't know him, his whole 'If only everyone believed in God' thing would be somewhat scary.

I am much more interested, Bent, in why it seems that you think anyone that isn't religious cannot have morals, or why you think a religious persons' morals are stronger than a non-religious persons?

I'm not saying he advocated it. Merely pointing out that it isn't the virtues espoused by the religion that are the cause of morality in their followers, rather it is more likely the person theirself.

People are corrupt, its life, I believe that the devil is the corrupter. Therefore the person who does the worst things have been corrupted. its a fundamental belief, a personal one. By no means am I preaching here, and we are way off topic, does a non believer have no morals? Of course not. I am just saying that by being a believer, I have more incentive to follow my morals more closely.

[Obdigore]

Mutzy, on Sep 3 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 11:29 AM, said:

So Bent, I don't steal, I don't rape, I don't murder, but I am godless.

Does this mean that you think I will steal, rape, and murder at some point?

I don't steal because I don't think it is correct to take something from someone else. I don't rape because I don't think it is right to force someone to have sex with me. I don't murder because I don't think it is right to remove someone else's life without due process.

But somehow you think your aversion to these activites is greater than mine and that I am a rapist murderer thief just waiting to happen because I do not believe in your christian god?

He's saying you have the greater potential of being a thief/rapist, sense you hold only to your own reasoning. You may reason in the near future, that perhaps you like this girl, but she doesn't like you, and etc. etc. You rape her. This is not to say you will or even think of this, it is only an example.

And i say that you think 'god will forgive me' and so procede to do the same kind of rape.

The only judgement you can trust is yours, relying on someone else for punishing you if you do something wrong seems to me to show a possible weakness of character.

[Illuyankas]

You realise that God would be the one that does the corrupting? The devil can not possibly do anything without God allowing it to happen, that's exactly what omnipotent and omniscent mean. Also, living your life with the sword that is hell hanging over your head is hardly either a life worth living or a life with the choice you think it is.

[Mutzy]

You sure, because I live with that sword hanging over my head everyday, but I feel as happy as I can be. I'm feeling like I could've done something more, but who doesn't? You make it seem so horrible, when it is really not. As I said, earlier if I knew the why of Why God allows bad things to happen, then I wouldn't be here. Instead I would be preaching everywhere I can get to.

[Obdigore]

Bent, on Sep 3 2009, 01:38 PM, said:

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 01:09 PM, said:

And what about those wars and murders sparked by fanatical followers of a Judeo-Christian or Muslim religion? It evidently had an adverse impact on their morals.

Although this thought had occured to me, I am not going to go after Bent with it, because I don't believe that he advocated said crusades or murders, although if I didn't know him, his whole 'If only everyone believed in God' thing would be somewhat scary.

I am much more interested, Bent, in why it seems that you think anyone that isn't religious cannot have morals, or why you think a religious persons' morals are stronger than a non-religious persons?

Take God out of the equation for a minute Obi, if everyone loved everyone else and didn't judge or hate or any of that, the word would stop fighting, I advocate using God as a way to make that happen.

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 02:14 PM, said:

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on Sep 3 2009, 01:09 PM, said:

And what about those wars and murders sparked by fanatical followers of a Judeo-Christian or Muslim religion? It evidently had an adverse impact on their morals.

Although this thought had occured to me, I am not going to go after Bent with it, because I don't believe that he advocated said crusades or murders, although if I didn't know him, his whole 'If only everyone believed in God' thing would be somewhat scary.

I am much more interested, Bent, in why it seems that you think anyone that isn't religious cannot have morals, or why you think a religious persons' morals are stronger than a non-religious persons?

I'm not saying he advocated it. Merely pointing out that it isn't the virtues espoused by the religion that are the cause of morality in their followers, rather it is more likely the person theirself.

People are corrupt, its life, I believe that the devil is the corrupter. Therefore the person who does the worst things have been corrupted. its a fundamental belief, a personal one. By no means am I preaching here, and we are way off topic, does a non believer have no morals? Of course not. I am just saying that by being a believer, I have more incentive to follow my morals more closely.

And I am saying that you are strong enough to follow those morals without needing the proverbial fires of hell hanging over your head, and that the fact that you fear for some everlasting thought pattern and I don't in no way makes you less likely to go against your morals than me, especially when you believe that your god is all-forgiving, whereas I know my psyche is not.

I am now leaving the thread before I start saying quite inflammatory things.

[Bent]

Obdigore, on Sep 3 2009, 02:29 PM, said:

So Bent, I don't steal, I don't rape, I don't murder, but I am godless.

Does this mean that you think I will steal, rape, and murder at some point?

I don't steal because I don't think it is correct to take something from someone else. I don't rape because I don't think it is right to force someone to have sex with me. I don't murder because I don't think it is right to remove someone else's life without due process.

But somehow you think your aversion to these activites is greater than mine and that I am a rapist murderer thief just waiting to happen because I do not believe in your christian god?

No Obi.

Lets make an example

You and I both have the same computer, I have a complete manual on how to operate mine and you do not. Does that mean you cant turn your computer on and surf the web, no it doesnt, it means that I already know where the power switch is, and how to load the needed programs.

You however have to look for the power button, then you have to look for the operating system, figure out how to instal it and then learn how to surf the web. On e you do this, and are up to speed with me, we both get the same virus, I clean my system and continue on.

you keep it, because you cant figure out how to get rid of it, then we get another, I clean mine, you keep yours, this goes on until your syste crashes, mine runs fine for years.

My morals are based on my instruction manual. you have had to learn yours (and many people never do) you have a leg up, on the others, I have a leg up on you (IMO), and the end result is, that the only choice that ever mattered was I paid extra for a manual.

I am not being judgemental here, and realize thats what it sounds like, but its the only way to really get my beliefs across. I hate these threads.

[Bent]

ahh, but then there is the reward of heaven as well. So you are right Illy, to me its not a difficult choice. But it is still a choice. By the way, this holier than thou stuff sucks. I don't think I am better than any of you. I dont think I am more morally sound. I just feel that I have more piece of mind knowing that I will go to heaven, than you who think that there is nothing there when you die, nothing more to look forward to. I hate these threads, I can almost feel Obi cursing me for being a religious nut job, lol. Im not really, hell I dont even go to church. I just have a stron faith based belief, and like to share it.

[Tarcanus]

Quote

Lets make an example

You and I both have the same computer, I have a complete manual on how to operate mine and you do not. Does that mean you cant turn your computer on and surf the web, no it doesnt, it means that I already know where the power switch is, and how to load the needed programs.

You however have to look for the power button, then you have to look for the operating system, figure out how to instal it and then learn how to surf the web. On e you do this, and are up to speed with me, we both get the same virus, I clean my system and continue on.

you keep it, because you cant figure out how to get rid of it, then we get another, I clean mine, you keep yours, this goes on until your syste crashes, mine runs fine for years.

My morals are based on my instruction manual. you have had to learn yours (and many people never do) you have a leg up, on the others, I have a leg up on you (IMO), and the end result is, that the only choice that ever mattered was I paid extra for a manual.

Couple things, first off:

- great example

- I definitely respect your ability to defend your beliefs. Most people refuse to do so and wind up with the argument, "well, you're just wrong. I have faith and believe what I believe", and I think it's great that you're trying to get your thoughts across.



On to the discussion at hand:

Your example is a great way to describe your beliefs, but my problem with it stems from how you infer that you didn't have to learn your instruction manual because it's always been there, in your beliefs, while the other person had to struggle and learn everything and will not know answers when they need them.

My point would be that you had to have learned your instructions, too, at some point - whether it by going to church when younger, reading the bible, or speaking with other religious folk. The only difference between you with the instruction manual and me without it is that you have supreme confidence that there is a higher power out there that will supply you with answers when you need them and I fully believe myself capable of finding the answers for myself when I need them.

There's nothing wrong with that faith, it's just difficult for 'godless' people to wrap their minds around a lack of confidence in oneself to solve problems. I think it's great when other people can understand each others' beliefs even without agreeing, which is why I love these kinds of discussions - that striving toward understanding.

Personally, I feel like the bible is an excellent moral guide (for many things, but not all) and is the most in depth piece of literature the world has ever produced, despite being fiction. Hell, I mean I'm pantheistic, but still gained many of my morals by learning from people who hold more stock in the bible than I do, and I'm not even close to being a murderer or rapist.

[Bent]

Tarcanus - I appreciate it, now, theres one discrepensy would discuss

Its not that I dont have the ability to find those answers, and I really dont think that the answers are answered for me. I just feel a warm satisfaction when I discover those answers, and I give that warm satisfaction a name. And when I get the wrong answer, I feel a sense of dread and sadness (some call it a conscience) I give that the same name, GOD. But again we are wayyyyy off topic. Topic is creation v. evolution

Someone explain to me how it is more feasible that I am a monkey and yet evolution stopped at a point, because there are no talking monkey? There back on topic.

[Tarcanus]

Quote

Someone explain to me how it is more feasible that I am a monkey and yet evolution stopped at a point, because there are no talking monkey? There back on topic.

Circumstances, most likely. Once our evolutionary branch split from the rest of the primate tree we moved into new locations in the world - thus forcing us to adapt or die. After that branching from the rest of the primate tree we gained the ability to adapt rapidly and so were able to figure out fire and clothes and better shelter - which led to more complicated things and ideas such as the sedentary lifestyle and from there farming, etc.

Our primate relatives, however, didn't leave their ancestral jungles and forests and so never had to adapt further beyond their means. Besides, evidence has started to show that chimpanzees can recognize many of the basic emotions as well as communicate with each other in their own 'language' that involves these emotions. They have also started using spears to hunt(they've even figured out to make them have sharp points). Give them another good chunk of time and I bet we'll see them gain even more intelligence.

It's not that monkeys all of a sudden turned into us, it's that we evolved from a different species of ape than the others primates that are still around.

[Mutzy]

Tarcanus, on Sep 3 2009, 01:09 PM, said:

Quote

Someone explain to me how it is more feasible that I am a monkey and yet evolution stopped at a point, because there are no talking monkey? There back on topic.

Circumstances, most likely. Once our evolutionary branch split from the rest of the primate tree we moved into new locations in the world - thus forcing us to adapt or die. After that branching from the rest of the primate tree we gained the ability to adapt rapidly and so were able to figure out fire and clothes and better shelter - which led to more complicated things and ideas such as the sedentary lifestyle and from there farming, etc.

Our primate relatives, however, didn't leave their ancestral jungles and forests and so never had to adapt further beyond their means. Besides, evidence has started to show that chimpanzees can recognize many of the basic emotions as well as communicate with each other in their own 'language' that involves these emotions. They have also started using spears to hunt(they've even figured out to make them have sharp points). Give them another good chunk of time and I bet we'll see them gain even more intelligence.

It's not that monkeys all of a sudden turned into us, it's that we evolved from a different species of ape than the others primates that are still around.

So we should be seeing a Planet of the Apes, in around a million of years or so?

[Cougar]

Please don't backhandedly call Bent a fuckwit Illy, we are going for a record level of civilised discussion in the religion forum let's not agravate the batdog.

I really don't know why we bother getting worked up with each other here:

Bent for instance is operating entirely from faith, beleives what he believes and has probably been indoctrinated to this way of thinking by life experience.

SM for example is going to hell sorry, feels compelled to seek explanations for everything and must have logical explanations for things and can not put any store in faith, presumably he too has arrived at this point through indoctrination as a result of his life experiences (that isn't to say he was raised irreligiously as I know that this is not true)

The point being that they are simply intractable arguments between two opinions which are not only diametrically opposed, but are incapable of using the same logic, basis for the discussion or even language.

[Illuyankas]

We could do, assuming we tailor a lethal virus to our specific DNA and then release it or something equally stupid. The important thing to realise is we did not come from monkeys, which is a stupid and ignorant view I keep seeing repeated everywhere; we and other primates all came from an ape-like ancestor millions of years ago.

@Cougar: I didn't call him a fuckwit, I said he was using a fuckwit's argument when he wasn't a fuckwit. I don't think he was even offended.

This post has been edited by Illuyankas: 03 September 2009 - 08:23 PM