Christians... riddle me this!

page: 31
13
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 


Stop being obtuse.


Excuse me? I asked you to confirm that my re-statement about your moral worldview is correct, and then just asked two questions to further clarify it. I'm not a mindreader, and I haven't seen you answer those questions before, so what's wrong with asking them?




posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


My 'personal' absolute morality is to not kill anyone for no reason. If someone comes up to me or anyone else with the intent to kill then of course I'm going to defend myself, and they have a right to defend themselves, but that's neither here nor there.

The morality that I personally abide by is absolute. Clear enough?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The morality that I personally abide by is absolute. Clear enough?


Sure, but you agree that there is no absolute and objective morality that applies to everyone at every time, right? You and I might have moral world views that we totally believe are valid and would support at all costs, but they can be different world views -- they don't have to be exactly the same. For example, you said that if someone attacked you, you would fight back, but, as a pacifist, I would not fight back. There is no judgement about whether one or the other of those is more "right", because there is no absolute morality to judge them by, so we are just left to say that your view of that issue is different than mine, and each of us believes themselves to be correct.

Is that a fair statement of your position?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


What I'm saying is that just because everyone doesn't abide by the absolute moral standard does not mean it doesn't exist. Yes, not everyone abides to the absolute moral standard. Universal means everyone, not everyone abides to it, so a universal absolute moral standard does not exist.

Aren't we arguing semantics here? I thought you said you didn't pay attention to semantics.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


So the 10 commandments do not appeal to god because he is god. How are they absolute if they do not appeal to god? You said the opposite earlier.


They do appeal to God. Meaning they rest on His authority.

You're confusing "appeal" with "APPLY".



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 


Okay, there is no such thing as a universal absolute morality, but my absolute morality is that you should not kill or hurt others, and I'm sure most people would agree with my personal absolute morality.


Don't appeal to numbers, that's a fallacy, and secondly what about cannibals? Furthermore something cannot be true for you and not true for others, that's called a "relativist fallacy". You simply cannot reason in that manner.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 


What I'm saying is that just because everyone doesn't abide by the absolute moral standard does not mean it doesn't exist. Yes, not everyone abides to the absolute moral standard. Universal means everyone, not everyone abides to it, so a universal absolute moral standard does not exist.

Aren't we arguing semantics here? I thought you said you didn't pay attention to semantics.


Actually, I said linguistics, but no, we don't have a semantic issue here, because you're back to saying that absolute morality exists, which makes me think that you might be misunderstanding the concept.

Morality is, essentially, the quality of goodness, or rightness. It isn't the application of goodness, as in the Ten Commandments, and it isn't the decision to be good, as in your earlier statement that you think that killing is always wrong. Morality is the underlying concept of goodness, which guides us in making decisions, or evaluating the actions of others. It is the quality that allows us to look at a law, such as "do not kill" and say "that is a moral law."

Absolute objective morality is a position which states that what is good and what is bad never changes, is never open to interpretation, and is as fundamental to existence as the laws of physics. Absolute morality requires some sort of unchanging source that conforms to the four criteria I listed earlier, otherwise it would not be absolute.

Subjective morality, on the other hand, is a position that states that morality is relative and variable, reflecting the views of whoever happens to be talking about it. Moral relativism, the belief that the morality of an action is based on the circumstances of it, is an example of subjective morality. Subjective morality doesn't really require a source, because it is reflective, not guiding.

I guess the easiest way to determine which of those two perspectives is yours is to consider your firm belief that it is wrong to kill -- did you decide that, was it taught to you, or is it just inherent to you? Or, alternately, if you were forced to kill someone in self defense, do you think that you'd be remorseful, or would your view be more of a "well, it was either him or me"?

Not easy questions, but philosophical ones rarely are.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Excuse me, I didn't specify enough I guess. There is a absolute moral CODE. Everyone doesn't follow this code, but that doesn't mean the code does not exist. The 10 commandments is this moral code, that's why I brought it up a couple of pages ago.

You have completely flipped the whole conversation on its head, stop derailing the discussion. Your tricks won't work on me, sorry.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


We're not talking about the morals of each individual person, we're talking about the scale on which morality is based, which your god gave to Moses on Mt. Sinai. Are you doubting god gave the 10 commandments for a reason?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


So the 10 commandments do not appeal to god because he is god. How are they absolute if they do not appeal to god? You said the opposite earlier.


They do appeal to God. Meaning they rest on His authority.

You're confusing "appeal" with "APPLY".


The code appeals to us, there is no need for us to be a middle man. You will disagree, but that's because of your bias.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 


Excuse me, I didn't specify enough I guess. There is a absolute moral CODE. Everyone doesn't follow this code, but that doesn't mean the code does not exist. The 10 commandments is this moral code, that's why I brought it up a couple of pages ago.

You have completely flipped the whole conversation on its head, stop derailing the discussion. Your tricks won't work on me, sorry.


What tricks? I was accused of putting words in your mouth, so I'm just being careful to not confuse what you are saying.

As I said earlier, the Ten Commandments are not morality, they are the application of morality, as law. This article might help explain it better: Law and Morality. And the Ten Commandments aren't absolute, either -- as Paul notes in the Bible, we had morality before we had the law (see Romans 5).

So we're back to square one, as regards you settling on absolute or subjective morality, and if absolute, what the source of it might be.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by DelayedChristmas
 


The part about the accident makes so much sense. God killed and injured others all so you could make it to work. That is a miracle!..... in your eyes, but in the eyes of the families that lost those loved ones in the crash, it is a tragedy.

Obviously if you believe god saved you, then he sacrificed those other peoples lives. How is that considered to be a miracle again? It's not, it's called chance. Why didn't god make those in the crash wake up 10 minutes later? What makes you think you are so important that god decided saved you, but not them?

You are looking through a very narrow window while ignoring everything else you do not want to see.
edit on 31-7-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)


I will give a personal response, specifically to the looking through a narrow window comment.


The part about the accident makes so much sense. God killed and injured others all so you could make it to work. That is a miracle!..... in your eyes, but in the eyes of the families that lost those loved ones in the crash, it is a tragedy.


Your forgetting one main point that I discreetly talk about: You and I do not know all the variables in this equation.

I do not look at death as a tragedy anymore. It sucks to deal with at that present moment, but I know that God does everything out of love, and the death of the body isn't such a fretful topic. Every life and death was planned, each soul's purpose has been accomplished either before they were physically born, during their life or posthumously. Death of the flesh is just a momentary milestone for the eternal soul.


Obviously if you believe god saved you, then he sacrificed those other peoples lives. How is that considered to be a miracle again? It's not, it's called chance. Why didn't god make those in the crash wake up 10 minutes later? What makes you think you are so important that god decided saved you, but not them?


Why didn't God make those in the crash wake up 10 minutes later? Hypothetically, it was their time to go, their soul has done all what was needed for them to do. I didn't know why my mom was supposed to die of breast cancer when I was 7 years old, but after a little growing up, I realized it was just her time to go. When my mother passed, I was angry with Father. I would always have that burning hatred in my heart, but Father turned that burning hatred, into burning passion, although right now, its barely an ember, sad to say, but truthful.



You are looking through a very narrow window while ignoring everything else you do not want to see.


I find this assumption very ironic.

Do you know what happened to the families of the people that died?
Do you know if they recovered?
Can you speak for the lessons they've learned, if any, from the deaths of their loved ones?
Do you know how those deaths impacted others?
I don't, and I don't think you do either.

However, my faith tells me everything happens for the good; We just need the darkness to appreciate the light sometimes.


edit on 8-8-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


I'm sorry, it seems I have been confused. I was using the word 'absolute' and was really meaning to say perfect. That mix-up is my fault, I apologize.

Do you disagree that there is a perfect moral code through which someone can attain perfect morality? The 10 commandments are this perfect moral code in biblical terms. Some follow this code, others don't. If you deny it exists, you are delusional.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


We're not talking about the morals of each individual person, we're talking about the scale on which morality is based, which your god gave to Moses on Mt. Sinai. Are you doubting god gave the 10 commandments for a reason?


Not at all. And in a round about way we are talking about the morals of each person because God has "hardwired" His moral code into all of us. It's called a " moral conscious". Everyone knows subconsciously that murder is wrong. That stealing and lying are wrong. And like I said, in order for that aforementioned moral code to be applicable to all men it must appeal to (rest upon/be given from) an authority higher than man.

And that would be an "absolute" moral code.. it applies to all people, at all times, in all situations and conditions.

edit on 8-8-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


So the 10 commandments do not appeal to god because he is god. How are they absolute if they do not appeal to god? You said the opposite earlier.


They do appeal to God. Meaning they rest on His authority.

You're confusing "appeal" with "APPLY".


The code appeals to us, there is no need for us to be a middle man. You will disagree, but that's because of your bias.


No, I will disagree on philosophical grounds and not theological grounds. Our moral code cannot appeal to us because then it would not apply to all men at all times. That's "relativism". And relativism is self-refuting, it violates the law of non-contradiction. Furthermore, never deny what someone says merely because of that person's bias.. that's called a "circumstantial ad hominem".

edit on 8-8-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I'm sorry, it seems I have been confused. I was using the word 'absolute' and was really meaning to say perfect. That mix-up is my fault, I apologize.


No worries, that's what all the questions are for, making sure that we're both on the same page.


Do you disagree that there is a perfect moral code through which someone can attain perfect morality? The 10 commandments are this perfect moral code in biblical terms.


That's an interesting question, and I would have to say yes and no. Yes, there could be such a code, but no, I don't think that anyone can achieve perfect morality (which would mean that they were the ultimate "good", all the time.)

The Ten Commandments definitely are not that perfect moral code -- they are too detailed, and too few, to contain teaching that provides comprehensive coverage of all issues. There is, for example, nothing about slavery, treating people equitably, or being charitable, though I think we could all agree that these are significant moral issues.

However, the Bible does include what I think is perfect moral code, Christ's two commandments:


Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:34-40 NIV)


Why is this superior? Because if you follow these two commands, you can't break any of the Ten Commandments, or a whole bunch of other stuff. It is a simple faith, but it is very difficult to achieve, impossible, some say.

---

So, can we set the concept of a moral code aside and get back to the basis of moral codes? Do you believe that absolute morality exists? Or is it merely subjective?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   


That's an interesting question, and I would have to say yes and no. Yes, there could be such a code, but no, I don't think that anyone can achieve perfect morality (which would mean that they were the ultimate "good", all the time.)


Jesus obtained perfect morality and was possibly born with it. To say that someone cannot attain perfect morality is going against what you believe Jesus was.

We all can achieve perfect morality just as Jesus did, that's part of the path to enlightenment. I do not disobey any of the 10 commandments, I cannot prove this but it is true.

The thing holding everyone back from perfect morality is our materialism. We are born into this materialistic world and we are afraid to leave it because it is all we've ever known.



The Ten Commandments definitely are not that perfect moral code -- they are too detailed, and too few, to contain teaching that provides comprehensive coverage of all issues. There is, for example, nothing about slavery, treating people equitably, or being charitable, though I think we could all agree that these are significant moral issues.


Of course they're not perfect, that story was fabricated by man, it is a metaphor for morality itself. It is only a few of the more relevant morals.



However, the Bible does include what I think is perfect moral code, Christ's two commandments:


Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:34-40 NIV)


Jesus attained enlightenment, and was quite possibly born with it. It's possible he was a savant, someone who was born enlightened. I follow those two commandments perfectly if you narrow it down that far.



Why is this superior? Because if you follow these two commands, you can't break any of the Ten Commandments, or a whole bunch of other stuff. It is a simple faith, but it is very difficult to achieve, impossible, some say.


I understand this concept. Again, see Jesus.



So, can we set the concept of a moral code aside and get back to the basis of moral codes? Do you believe that absolute morality exists? Or is it merely subjective?


I agree with it being subjective when looking through such a narrow window like individualism.
edit on 8-8-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 8-8-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Morality is part of the spirit, or wholey (holy) spirit. The spirit is everyones souls combined, the thing which our consciousness stems from. Do you remember the lake analogy I made in another thread?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Your forgetting one main point that I discreetly talk about: You and I do not know all the variables in this equation.

I do not look at death as a tragedy anymore. It sucks to deal with at that present moment, but I know that God does everything out of love, and the death of the body isn't such a fretful topic. Every life and death was planned, each soul's purpose has been accomplished either before they were physically born, during their life or posthumously. Death of the flesh is just a momentary milestone for the eternal soul.


I feel the same as you about death, I do not fear it because I know where I'm going after this life, it's a fresh start and much better than the the Christian view in my opinion. I do not want to be what I am now forever, that seems a bit boring in my opinion.


Why didn't God make those in the crash wake up 10 minutes later? Hypothetically, it was their time to go, their soul has done all what was needed for them to do. I didn't know why my mom was supposed to die of breast cancer when I was 7 years old, but after a little growing up, I realized it was just her time to go. When my mother passed, I was angry with Father. I would always have that burning hatred in my heart, but Father turned that burning hatred, into burning passion, although right now, its barely an ember, sad to say, but truthful.


I lost my grandfather 5 years ago in October from cancer, then my dad 2 years ago next month, and I'm mostly likely lose my other grandfather soon. I wasn't sad for them, I know they're in a better place. I was sad for the fact that I would never see them again.

The pain never truly goes away because everytime I think of either, I get that feeling of sadness.



I find this assumption very ironic.

Do you know what happened to the families of the people that died?
Do you know if they recovered?
Can you speak for the lessons they've learned, if any, from the deaths of their loved ones?
Do you know how those deaths impacted others?
I don't, and I don't think you do either.

However, my faith tells me everything happens for the good; We just need the darkness to appreciate the light sometimes.


Yes, because I have been through it, it is not an easy thing no matter which way you put it, and yes we get through it, but like I said, the pain never goes away.

My brain tells me that everything is by chance, not someone directing our lives because that interferes with free-will.
edit on 8-8-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I am not disbelieving you just on that, I disbelieve you because I don't agree with what you say. I am just pointing out that you are already biased on the issue. Am I wrong for pointing that out?





new topics
top topics
 
13
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join