A must read post for ALL atheists!

[Soma-Sight]

The source of morality is the Heart. The selfishness and evil acts conducted by many who claim to righteous and Holy and the Godly acts of many who claim NO religion demonstrate this......

 

[Relic]

.


Speaking of atheists..... :P


http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=17047

.

 

[Soma-Sight]

I think you miss the point of this post......

I am sure Quath of peace4all will get this one.......

 

[Quath]

Yeah. I get what Soma-Sight is saying, though I am sure many people will disagree with what he said.

Quath

 

[y not peace?]

well im not athiest but i can easly view from their perpective. Why do you think an atheist would care about what you just said?

not trying to be rude

 

[ThinkerMan]

Generally I agree with where you are going. Although, of course, saying "mind" instead of "heart" would probably be a clearer description.
:D

By having a divinely-inspired morality code (whether legitimately divine or not) gives someone the opportunity (or excuse) to ignore an internal morality they may or may not feel.

For example, those who executed the Inquisition, likely felt they were doing moral work. Did some of them regret or feel bad about what they did? Probably, but they felt they had not choice in the matter, since they believed it was God-ordained, and did those abhorrent acts anyway.

Reminds me of this quote Quath posted the other day. "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."
Steven Weinberg - Nobel Laureate

 

[Lyric's Dad]

I think you miss the point of this post......

I am sure Quath of peace4all will get this one.......

Are you trying to impress them?

 

[videocrafter]

Why do you think an atheist would care about what you just said?

Why would "anyone" care what Soma-Sight has to say about "anything"?

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Well, videocrafter, I care about what Soma has to say about things.

Perhaps you would do well to be concerned with opinions and viewpoints disparate from your own- else you will eventually become a narrow, rigid, ignorant fool. That is the fate of those who simply attack and never listen.

 

[New_Creation]

Why do you think an atheist would care about what you just said?

Why would "anyone" care what Soma-Sight has to say about "anything"?

:smt044

 

[peace4all]

as a fellow human you should always care about what your equals say.

:smt023

 

[matt]

The fool says in his heart there is no god. Psalm 14:1

 

[Quath]

The fool says in his heart there is no god. Psalm 14:1

Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. Psalm 137:9.

I would rather be a fool than be someone that delights in smashing babies against rocks.

Quath

 

[New_Creation]

The fool says in his heart there is no god. Psalm 14:1

Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. Psalm 137:9.

I would rather be a fool than be someone that delights in smashing babies against rocks.

Quath

Ya'know you must know nothing about Hebrew expressions... :smt075

 

[Karma2Grace]

The fool says in his heart there is no god. Psalm 14:1

Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. Psalm 137:9.

I would rather be a fool than be someone that delights in smashing babies against rocks.

Quath

Why and how do you think that smashing babies against the rock is wrong?

 

[Quath]

Why and how do you think that smashing babies against the rock is wrong?

That is a good question. It goes back to the secular version of morality in which there is neither good nor evil. There is just "might makes right", selfishness and charity. Selfishness and charity comes from our biological desires. By nature we are both.

So in an intellectual way, we know that power comes from might. However, the mighty can be brought down by a group of weaker people. But then who rules the band of weaker people? The mightiest? If so, he can be brought down by another group.

Eventually people realize some of this and work out an agreement based on the Golden Rule. Basically, you should treat others as if you were them. It is an agreement. Society works towards keeping this agreement through laws.

So I can say that smashing babies is wrong because I would not want my babies smashed against rocks. It violates the Golden Rule.

The Bible takes the position that morality is objective. So either smashing babies is good or evil. If it is evil, then the Bible promotes evil. If it is good, then you should accept people smashing your babies against rocks as good as well.

What typically happens is people try to justify their own beliefs without following through on the philosophy. Like "It is ok if I smash another person's baby because I know God's will. But it is not ok for them to smash my baby because they do not know God's will even though they claim they do."

Quath

 

[videocrafter]

Puts a whole new light on "Head Banging" doesn't it? :o

 

[Karma2Grace]

That is a good question. It goes back to the secular version of morality in which there is neither good nor evil. There is just "might makes right", selfishness and charity. Selfishness and charity comes from our biological desires. By nature we are both.

So in an intellectual way, we know that power comes from might. However, the mighty can be brought down by a group of weaker people. But then who rules the band of weaker people? The mightiest? If so, he can be brought down by another group. Eventually people realize some of this and work out an agreement based on the Golden Rule.

I think you are confused! , What you mean by Golden Rules is it not Objective Morals?

Basically, you should treat others as if you were them. It is an agreement. Society works towards keeping this agreement through laws.
So I can say that smashing babies is wrong because I would not want my babies smashed against rocks. It violates the Golden Rule.

How narrow minded you are! , I cannot tolerate people so narrow minded and objecting to smash babies because they don’t want that to be happen to their kids!!

Aren’t you call a Christian as narrow minded when they oppose “Homosexuals†or “Abortion†We Christians doing for the same reason, We don’t want our child to embrace this evil culture .

If there is no objective morals then everything are relative, we have to accept Osama’s and Timothy McVeigh’s with a smile can you?

By the way it is Not Golden Rule 'Gods' rule :

The Bible takes the position that morality is objective. So either smashing babies is good or evil. If it is evil, then the Bible promotes evil. If it is good, then you should accept people smashing your babies against rocks as good as well.

Quath, I think you are reading bible with pre conceived ideas, you portrait the verse as it was saying "you can smash others babies on the rock!" God never asked man to take the judgment on their won (some time He uses man to do the judgment)

Read one verse above the particular verse you have quoted

Psalms 137:8 “O daughter of Babylon, you devastated one, How blessed will be the one who repays you with the recompense with which you have repaid usâ€Â

Here it is NOT talking about a baby but a wicked race, David is prophesizing the Judgment on wicked Babylon (as comparing nation with a woman)

What typically happens is people try to justify their own beliefs without following through on the philosophy. Like "It is ok if I smash another person's baby because I know God's will. But it is not ok for them to smash my baby because they do not know God's will even though they claim they do."

I think it is a meaningless passage as you have misinterpreted the verse. Rather I would point out that an Atheist or New Ager can smash others baby (It can be moral to him as there are no objective morals and everything is relative) and live with out consequences
Quath

 

[Quath]

I think you are confused! , What you mean by Golden Rules is it not Objective Morals?

It is not objective in that it is brought about as a compromise, not as divine inspiration. Or in other words, purely selfish people would derive this as the best way to compromise on getting alone.

How narrow minded you are! , I cannot tolerate people so narrow minded and objecting to smash babies because they don’t want that to be happen to their kids!!

What do you mean by this? Is it sacrasm?

Aren’t you call a Christian as narrow minded when they oppose “Homosexuals†or “Abortion†We Christians doing for the same reason, We don’t want our child to embrace this evil culture .

For homosexuality, you object because some book or some priest told you it was evil. You can not derive evilness objectively. Abortion could be argued secularly by arguing about the rights of the unborn.

If there is no objective morals then everything are relative, we have to accept Osama’s and Timothy McVeigh’s with a smile can you?

You don't have to accept anything. Society punishes them because they broke society's rules. Osama is seen as good in his culture and bad in ours. So "might makes right" is currently deciding his fate.

By the way it is Not Golden Rule 'Gods' rule :

Every society comes up with this and expresses it slightly differently. Check out Religious Tolerance for a list of the various types of "Golden Rules."

Quath, I think you are reading bible with pre conceived ideas, you portrait the verse as it was saying "you can smash others babies on the rock!" God never asked man to take the judgment on their won (some time He uses man to do the judgment)

Read one verse above the particular verse you have quoted

Psalms 137:8 “O daughter of Babylon, you devastated one, How blessed will be the one who repays you with the recompense with which you have repaid usâ€Â

Here it is NOT talking about a baby but a wicked race, David is prophesizing the Judgment on wicked Babylon (as comparing nation with a woman)

I am reading it as some people are delighted in smashing some babies against the rocks. Do you disagree with that?

You are basically arguing it is ok to smash some babies against the rocks (such as babies of wicked people). Is that what you believe?

I think it is a meaningless passage as you have misinterpreted the verse. Rather I would point out that an Atheist or New Ager can smash others baby (It can be moral to him as there are no objective morals and everything is relative) and live with out consequences

Ummm. So can a Christian. Just kill a baby and pray for forgiveness. Voila! No consequence!

Quath

 

[Karma2Grace]

It is not objective in that it is brought about as a compromise, not as divine inspiration. Or in other words, purely selfish people would derive this as the best way to compromise on getting alone.

If there are no objective morals then how would you objectively say "killing" is wrong?

How narrow minded you are! , I cannot tolerate people so narrow minded and objecting to smash babies because they don’t want that to be happen to their kids!!

What do you mean by this? Is it sarcasm?

Absolutely Not !, You oppose smashing baby is wrong because you don't want some one to smash you baby, I am opposing Homosexuals and Abortionists because I don't want my kid to be the victim of them . Why you are calling me narrow minded?

For homosexuality, you object because some book or some priest told you it was evil. You can not derive evilness objectively. Abortion could be argued secularly by arguing about the rights of the unborn.

It is too childish response, I am not objecting Homosexuality because the bible calling it as evil, According to my 'golden rule' homosexuality is wrong (same as killing is wrong for you), IT JUST WRONG that's it!

As per Darwin it is NOT wrong you can kill as long as you have power to kill , If the victim is fittest then let him survive or let him die , It just a matter of “survival for the fittest†not every one need to survive , Evolution welcomes the death of weak !

I expect the Christians will be mass murdered (as predicted in bible) because they are ‘unfit’ to this world, they always utter nonsense statements like “Christ is the only Wayâ€Â

If there is no objective morals then everything are relative, we have to accept Osama’s and Timothy McVeigh’s with a smile can you?

You don't have to accept anything. Society punishes them because they broke society's rules. Osama is seen as good in his culture and bad in ours. So "might makes right" is currently deciding his fate.

I do see homosexual and abortion are bad cultures so can I punish you for that? As you are punishing Osama for killing (it is good as per his culture)

As per your theory “Might makes right†if a might like “Stalinâ€Â, mass killing people is right?



Quath you cannot escape from Objective Morals, if there are no objective morals then the human race will be barbaric!! By taking the objective morals out of the equation you guys promoting people to live like animals (self rules)

Currently in America 'any thing is accepted' EXCEPT claiming exclusivity, If I say "Jesus is the only way" or “Adultery is wrong “ then I will be branded as Prejudice and narrow minded

Quath, I think you are reading bible with pre conceived ideas, you portrait the verse as it was saying "you can smash others babies on the rock!" God never asked man to take the judgment on their won (some time He uses man to do the judgment)

Read one verse above the particular verse you have quoted

Psalms 137:8 “O daughter of Babylon, you devastated one, How blessed will be the one who repays you with the recompense with which you have repaid usâ€Â

Here it is NOT talking about a baby but a wicked race, David is prophesizing the Judgment on wicked Babylon (as comparing nation with a woman)

I am reading it as some people are delighted in smashing some babies against the rocks. Do you disagree with that?

Repeating the same lie will not make a truth, as I pointed out , the Kingdom of Babylon is compared with a Women, So the babies referred by this verse is Evil doers living in Babylon

You are basically arguing it is ok to smash some babies against the rocks (such as babies of wicked people). Is that what you believe?

I am not sure whether you have a problem understanding or pretend to be not under standing, it never reads "babies of wicked people" it compares women with kingdom and babies with wicked people.