About Belief, Religion and God

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
841

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

Why should I be as moral?[/quote]

For the betterment of those around you.
[/quote]

Why should I give a damn about the people around me?

842

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

Why should I be as moral?[/quote]

For the betterment of those around you.
[/quote]

Why should I give a damn about the people around me?[/quote]

…you are part of a tribe; your family. That family is part of a bigger tribe; the city or town you live in. That town or city is part of an even bigger tribe; your province, state of country. Those around you, eventhough you are not related or involved with their lives, are part of the same tribe, and the tribe flourishes if all flourish…

843

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:
Life-like evolution in a test tube

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/3325/life-evolution-a-test-tube
[/quote]

Thank you for sharing. I read the article and have my own questions and concerns, but first off, what do you feel they have accomplished and what this means.

pat: What is your resultant assertion from posting this, or is thir merely informational?

[/quote]

…it shows us that life can form out of the basic building blocks. It doesn’t answer the question where life comes from, or how it is able to come to fruition, but perhaps… perhaps we can move past the …shortsighted idea of a 6 day creation…
[/quote]

Dude, you’re confusing me with someone else, I am not a creationist (in the traditional sense) and think the theory of evolution, though has some fringe weaknesses, is just fine. I believe the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, that life started in the oceans and moved on to land, etc.

844

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

Why should I be as moral?[/quote]

For the betterment of those around you.
[/quote]

Why should I give a damn about the people around me?[/quote]

…you are part of a tribe; your family. That family is part of a bigger tribe; the city or town you live in. That town or city is part of an even bigger tribe; your province, state of country. Those around you, eventhough you are not related or involved with their lives, are part of the same tribe, and the tribe flourishes if all flourish…
[/quote]
Via the communist manifesto.
As an atheist I would be kind to those I like, I would not give a damn about the people I don’t. I would be loyal to myself and would behave in a way that is beneficial to me. Helping others, especially the far off does me no good what so ever. I would seek my own pleasure to a point where it does not hurt those I love, but beyond that, I would not give a flip. What do I care if “the tribe” is doing ok? What tangible benefit is that to me?

845

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
What is easier, steal something or earn it? Work hard or have others do the work for you? Kill someone for their things or earn them yourself?

It isn’t like the world is getting better. Anyone can see that things have gotten much worse. You would think that if we were all evolving and becoming higher developed beings, that there would be less problems and not more. [/quote]

I’m sorry, but this is getting eerily close to sounding like fear of eternal punishment is what keeps you guys civil. Say it ain’t so!

[/quote]

Not that it’s shocking, but you’re wrong and you simply do not understand theism or religion at all.

846

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).

[/quote]

…i’ve discussed this on a number of threads, and with Pat, but it doesn’t sink in. In order to accept what you said here you’d have to accept evolution, and disregard the creation myth…[/quote]

What is easier, steal something or earn it? Work hard or have others do the work for you? Kill someone for their things or earn them yourself?

It isn’t like the world is getting better. Anyone can see that things have gotten much worse. You would think that if we were all evolving and becoming higher developed beings, that there would be less problems and not more. [/quote]

…things haven’t gotten worse, humans have always been humans. The only difference is that we’re 6,5 billion strong and everything is exaggerated beyond recognition…
[/quote]

That’s true. Humans have historically been dicks despite creed. 6 billion people does exaggerate this fact.

847

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:
Life-like evolution in a test tube

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/3325/life-evolution-a-test-tube
[/quote]

Thank you for sharing. I read the article and have my own questions and concerns, but first off, what do you feel they have accomplished and what this means.

pat: What is your resultant assertion from posting this, or is thir merely informational?

[/quote]

…it shows us that life can form out of the basic building blocks. It doesn’t answer the question where life comes from, or how it is able to come to fruition, but perhaps… perhaps we can move past the …shortsighted idea of a 6 day creation…
[/quote]

Dude, you’re confusing me with someone else, I am not a creationist (in the traditional sense) and think the theory of evolution, though has some fringe weaknesses, is just fine. I believe the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, that life started in the oceans and moved on to land, etc.[/quote]

…i wasn’t adressing you personally pat, i was speaking in general terms…

848

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Why should I give a damn about the people around me?[/quote]

…you are part of a tribe; your family. That family is part of a bigger tribe; the city or town you live in. That town or city is part of an even bigger tribe; your province, state of country. Those around you, eventhough you are not related or involved with their lives, are part of the same tribe, and the tribe flourishes if all flourish…
[/quote]
Via the communist manifesto.
As an atheist I would be kind to those I like, I would not give a damn about the people I don’t. I would be loyal to myself and would behave in a way that is beneficial to me. Helping others, especially the far off does me no good what so ever. I would seek my own pleasure to a point where it does not hurt those I love, but beyond that, I would not give a flip. What do I care if “the tribe” is doing ok? What tangible benefit is that to me?[/quote]

…if you feel that way pat, there’s nothing i can do about it. Please don’t make the mistake of superimposing what you’d do if your were an atheist on all atheists, because i for one don’t think that way. If being kind, generous, and offering a helping hand to a stranger depends on your religious beliefs than more power to them…

849

[quote]ephrem wrote:

…if you feel that way pat, there’s nothing i can do about it. Please don’t make the mistake of superimposing what you’d do if your were an atheist on all atheists, because i for one don’t think that way. If being kind, generous, and offering a helping hand to a stranger depends on your religious beliefs than more power to them…
[/quote]

I was speaking for myself only, of course. But what is you motivation and why?

850

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

…if you feel that way pat, there’s nothing i can do about it. Please don’t make the mistake of superimposing what you’d do if your were an atheist on all atheists, because i for one don’t think that way. If being kind, generous, and offering a helping hand to a stranger depends on your religious beliefs than more power to them…
[/quote]

I was speaking for myself only, of course. But what is you motivation and why?[/quote]

…because i’m not stressed and nothing pisses stressed people more off than being nice to them. That’s just part of it ofcourse (: It’s because i can, and i prefer the mental state of being nice and relaxed. And i’ve noticed that a kind demeanor has a positive influence on my direct surroundings. I’m hoping that there’s some kind of ripple effect, but if there isn’t it’s okay…

851

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

…if you feel that way pat, there’s nothing i can do about it. Please don’t make the mistake of superimposing what you’d do if your were an atheist on all atheists, because i for one don’t think that way. If being kind, generous, and offering a helping hand to a stranger depends on your religious beliefs than more power to them…
[/quote]

I was speaking for myself only, of course. But what is you motivation and why?[/quote]

…because i’m not stressed and nothing pisses stressed people more off than being nice to them. That’s just part of it ofcourse (: It’s because i can, and i prefer the mental state of being nice and relaxed. And i’ve noticed that a kind demeanor has a positive influence on my direct surroundings. I’m hoping that there’s some kind of ripple effect, but if there isn’t it’s okay…
[/quote]

Being nice certainly has a positive effect on those around you. Further there is peace in not causing or being part of problems.
As far as not being stressed is concerned, well your lucky, but it won’t last. Troubles will come to disturb your peace, you don’t have to ask for them or do anything to deserve them, they just come.
I am not saying that to bother you, our peace is very fragile. I just got a good reminder of that recently…Having had my peace and relative calm ripped out from under me, I realized how fragile it really is.

852

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

…if you feel that way pat, there’s nothing i can do about it. Please don’t make the mistake of superimposing what you’d do if your were an atheist on all atheists, because i for one don’t think that way. If being kind, generous, and offering a helping hand to a stranger depends on your religious beliefs than more power to them…
[/quote]

I was speaking for myself only, of course. But what is you motivation and why?[/quote]

…because i’m not stressed and nothing pisses stressed people more off than being nice to them. That’s just part of it ofcourse (: It’s because i can, and i prefer the mental state of being nice and relaxed. And i’ve noticed that a kind demeanor has a positive influence on my direct surroundings. I’m hoping that there’s some kind of ripple effect, but if there isn’t it’s okay…
[/quote]

Being nice certainly has a positive effect on those around you. Further there is peace in not causing or being part of problems.
As far as not being stressed is concerned, well your lucky, but it won’t last. Troubles will come to disturb your peace, you don’t have to ask for them or do anything to deserve them, they just come.
I am not saying that to bother you, our peace is very fragile. I just got a good reminder of that recently…Having had my peace and relative calm ripped out from under me, I realized how fragile it really is.[/quote]

…i’m sorry to hear that pat, but it comes with the territory, doesn’t it? Shit just happens, and there’s nothing you can do about it. You just go on living inspite of the stresses of life, and make the best of it. I wish you well…

853

I find that many atheists/agnostics tend to oversimplify moral behaviour. In the bible, it goes much deeper than simply not murdering/stealing.

Also, many underestimate the effects that a “Christian” society has had on them as a nation. I say Christian in inverted commas because although most were “converted”, they were not converted by heart. When Britain was still pagan, many things in their way of life would be shocking to the average modern Westerner (e.g. animal acts, sexual conduct etc). And yet, some here claim that this is ONLY their natural inkling that causes them to be “moral” (that is, that without an organized understanding, A.K.A. religion, they’d be the same)? I say it’s moreso environment…and many atheists “forget” what changes the national Christian conversion had on morals.

854

[quote]its_just_me wrote:
I find that many atheists/agnostics tend to oversimplify moral behaviour. In the bible, it goes much deeper than simply not murdering/stealing.

Also, many underestimate the effects that a “Christian” society has had on them as a nation. I say Christian in inverted commas because although most were “converted”, they were not converted by heart. When Britain was still pagan, many things in their way of life would be shocking to the average modern Westerner (e.g. animal acts, sexual conduct etc). And yet, some here claim that this is ONLY their natural inkling that causes them to be “moral” (that is, that without an organized understanding, A.K.A. religion, they’d be the same)? I say it’s moreso environment…and many atheists “forget” what changes the national Christian conversion had on morals.[/quote]

…converting peoples to christianity was often a brutal affair. I honestly think that you’d be better off argueing christian morals from a personal point of view because the institutionalized version of christian morality is devoid of it…

855

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]its_just_me wrote:
I find that many atheists/agnostics tend to oversimplify moral behaviour. In the bible, it goes much deeper than simply not murdering/stealing.

Also, many underestimate the effects that a “Christian” society has had on them as a nation. I say Christian in inverted commas because although most were “converted”, they were not converted by heart. When Britain was still pagan, many things in their way of life would be shocking to the average modern Westerner (e.g. animal acts, sexual conduct etc). And yet, some here claim that this is ONLY their natural inkling that causes them to be “moral” (that is, that without an organized understanding, A.K.A. religion, they’d be the same)? I say it’s moreso environment…and many atheists “forget” what changes the national Christian conversion had on morals.[/quote]

…converting peoples to christianity was often a brutal affair. I honestly think that you’d be better off argueing christian morals from a personal point of view because the institutionalized version of christian morality is devoid of it… [/quote]

I agree to some degree (the hypocrisy/tyranny), but when you’re talking about stuff such as sex before marriage, only having one wife etc, these are pretty standard “rules” brought to the West by institutionalised Christianity. Yet, someone like yourself may say that they would not “cheat” on their wives because of their own humane principles…but these are principles that have been instilled on society in the West (not necessarily something that comes naturally to mankind).

856

[quote]its_just_me wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]its_just_me wrote:
I find that many atheists/agnostics tend to oversimplify moral behaviour. In the bible, it goes much deeper than simply not murdering/stealing.

Also, many underestimate the effects that a “Christian” society has had on them as a nation. I say Christian in inverted commas because although most were “converted”, they were not converted by heart. When Britain was still pagan, many things in their way of life would be shocking to the average modern Westerner (e.g. animal acts, sexual conduct etc). And yet, some here claim that this is ONLY their natural inkling that causes them to be “moral” (that is, that without an organized understanding, A.K.A. religion, they’d be the same)? I say it’s moreso environment…and many atheists “forget” what changes the national Christian conversion had on morals.[/quote]

…converting peoples to christianity was often a brutal affair. I honestly think that you’d be better off argueing christian morals from a personal point of view because the institutionalized version of christian morality is devoid of it… [/quote]

I agree to some degree (the hypocrisy/tyranny), but when you’re talking about stuff such as sex before marriage, only having one wife etc, these are pretty standard “rules” brought to the West by institutionalised Christianity. Yet, someone like yourself may say that they would not “cheat” on their wives because of their own humane principles…but these are principles that have been instilled on society in the West (not necessarily something that comes naturally to mankind).[/quote]

…i love your last remark. It’s obvious to me that, in light of all the child abuse cases within the Catholic Church, that going against something that not necessarily comes naturally to mankind isn’t always a good idea. Just sayin’…

857

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]its_just_me wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]its_just_me wrote:
I find that many atheists/agnostics tend to oversimplify moral behaviour. In the bible, it goes much deeper than simply not murdering/stealing.

Also, many underestimate the effects that a “Christian” society has had on them as a nation. I say Christian in inverted commas because although most were “converted”, they were not converted by heart. When Britain was still pagan, many things in their way of life would be shocking to the average modern Westerner (e.g. animal acts, sexual conduct etc). And yet, some here claim that this is ONLY their natural inkling that causes them to be “moral” (that is, that without an organized understanding, A.K.A. religion, they’d be the same)? I say it’s moreso environment…and many atheists “forget” what changes the national Christian conversion had on morals.[/quote]

…converting peoples to christianity was often a brutal affair. I honestly think that you’d be better off argueing christian morals from a personal point of view because the institutionalized version of christian morality is devoid of it… [/quote]

I agree to some degree (the hypocrisy/tyranny), but when you’re talking about stuff such as sex before marriage, only having one wife etc, these are pretty standard “rules” brought to the West by institutionalised Christianity. Yet, someone like yourself may say that they would not “cheat” on their wives because of their own humane principles…but these are principles that have been instilled on society in the West (not necessarily something that comes naturally to mankind).[/quote]

…i love your last remark. It’s obvious to me that, in light of all the child abuse cases within the Catholic Church, that going against something that not necessarily comes naturally to mankind isn’t always a good idea. Just sayin’…[/quote]

Sorry, I don’t follow - I said that some things comes naturally to us, but other things we sometimes need guidance/rules?

In the case of peodophilia, most peodophiles say that these feelings are “natural” to them. So, going by my argument, you would have to fight these horrible perverse desires…not just go along with them. What those priests did, was wrong in the eyes of the average person AND Christianity.

858

Ahhhh, I get what you mean now…it’s like you’re saying that abstinence lead those priests to abuse the children?

859

That’s a long story, but in some respect, you’re right (apart from that doesn’t excuse their despicable behaviour).

However, I don’t believe the bible prohibits marriage for the priest, that’s something that was “invented” shall we say, or misinterpreted/taken the wrong way.

860

[quote]its_just_me wrote:
That’s a long story, but in some respect, you’re right (apart from that doesn’t excuse their despicable behaviour).

However, I don’t believe the bible prohibits marriage for the priest, that’s something that was “invented” shall we say, or misinterpreted/taken the wrong way.[/quote]

…but surely you agree that much of what is taught, and has been taught, as christian morality is not directly dependant on ones own interpretation of the bible? IOW, the Church tells you what christian morality is; you can’t really separate the bible from the Church because the Church has [had] the biggest [historical] impact on society…