The War on Religion

[PaulConventionWV]

No it is not. Not even remotely close. Science is fact.

Science can only deal with the observable phenomena in the natural world, although what is taught in the class goes way beyond just that. It goes into natural history, which science can't touch, and even tries to answer the questions of origions, where we came from, where the universe came from. These are questions that science cannot possibly answer.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Many pieces of Christianity have their roots in pagan rituals, myths and beliefs.

They have mixed somewhat with paganism, to a larger degree than I am comfortable with, but they do not have their roots there.

 

[1stAmendguy]

To address your last sentence, you must have an objective morality to compare my morality to in order to say my morality is "better" than anything. If you think morality is subjective, then you can't possibly say how good one morality is over another, unless you are using your own personal morality as an objective standard, in which case, you have an objective morality. It just so happens that that objective morality in that case would also be completely arbitrary.

Moral imagination is an inter-subjective process not objective and not subjective. It takes the middle path. Because consciousness is ever evolving into more complex stages we must adapt our to our more mature moral reasoning to create a new moral compass. Cognitive development > Self-development > Interpersonal development > Moral development. In fact, this is what Jesus did in the New Testament he pushed his own religion to newness by including the best of its past, and transcending the worst of its present.

Since your a Christian I recommend "Integral Christianity: The Spirit's Call to Evolve" by Paul Smith to get a better understanding of where I'm coming from.

 

[1stAmendguy]

Which god or God of the Bible and which testament?..The one that is timeless and so infinitely immense as to be beyond syntax and that Jesus referred to as His Father or the jealous tribal god of the wandering tribe who had the morals of a pathological criminal?

Rev9

Both but I was referring to the former Old Testament in particular but Jesus did say to keep the old laws. Would you lock your own kids in a basement and torture them? And don't use God ways are higher than ours, that is a cop-out.

 

[1stAmendguy]

"Moral imagination..." I like that. Jeffrey Dahmer had a moral imagination. It's really funny that you say morality cannot be prescribed when, by the very definition of it, morality is prescriptive. It is telling you how you should live. It wouldn't be very helpful if it was telling you how you or someone else (i.e. "society") lived. Morality cannot be dependent on one's own arbitrary definition or else it loses all meaning. Murderers and rapists could come up with reasons why, in their moral imagination, murder and rape were completely acceptable, and who would you be to tell them that they are wrong and you are right, just because you think your morality is superior? After all, this talk of a "moral imagination" kind of contradicts that.

The point of my post was that it doesn't matter what you think of my moral effectiveness in the world because my morality tells me how to live in accordance with others, and it just so happens that I found that morality in the Bible. Where did you find yours and why should everyone accept it? If nobody has to accept it, then how can we punish people for doing things that are immoral? Do we completely rid the world of any laws?

Also, one point: the Constitution has already borrowed heavily from Biblical law. The court system? Jury of your peers? That was in the Bible. If you don't have an objective morality (you decided to tack the word "dogmatic" on there), then how can you expect anyone to adhere to your moral principles? According to you, I should be able to, as my own free agent, imagine a morality in which I can shoot you and it would be totally fine.

Let's bring back slavery, let's kill every first born son, let's stone people it's biblical after all, etc. I told you consciousness evolves into higher stages over time and so does our morals.

 

[cstarace]

Wow. This whole argument has degenerated to the point of saying that the Universe as a single consciousness would dismiss the very idea that Planets exist.

Yeah, exactly. You know that line exists between stupid and crazy? These guys just blew right fucking past it. I woke up and read some of this shit and I'm absolutely astounded the lengths some of these people will go to compound their archaic drivel.

 

[tttppp]

I think you're missing the point. Science cannot possibly answer life's bigger questions. Science, in its practical form, is strictly limited to what we can observe, test, and repeat in the natural world. We can't know where we came from with science, and we cannot know if there is a God by using science. Science simply cannot answer those questions because they are beyond what we can know for certain by using our 5 senses.

I don't think religion is the problem. Sure, a lot of religious people are quite dogmatic, but so are the atheists, who don't think they have a religion when they do. To suggest that we should abandon religion is to suggest that we all become agnostics and never even try to approach the bigger questions. Also, the Bible doesn't need to change to fit science. Science already agrees with the Bible in so many ways, although I am aware I will get flamed for this opinion without consideration of the fact that the flaming sure to follow is a programmed response that they are blindly obeying.

Science can answer the question of how we got here, they just need to make that an objective.

By the way, I'm atheist or agnostic, and I approach the bigger questions as much as any religious person.

 

[phill4paul]

I think people confuse this war on religion with not always getting what they want.

QFE.

 

[Revolution9]

Both but I was referring to the former Old Testament in particular but Jesus did say to keep the old laws. Would you lock your own kids in a basement and torture them? And don't use God ways are higher than ours, that is a cop-out.

Someone better at bible study than I can knock down the keeping of old laws. i assumed the veil was rent in the Temple because the old laws had passed and the new law of love one another as I have loved you came to be The Law. Jehovah was a jealous tribal god and a criminal psychopath by definition. I do not follow anything of Yahweh so I would not do anything sociopathic or psychopathic because the jealous tribal egregore of a wandering tribe did say that he liked that shit..

God doesn't have ways. He IS. H=spirit e=energy I=self S=source.

Rev9

 

[KingNothing]

They have mixed somewhat with paganism, to a larger degree than I am comfortable with, but they do not have their roots there.

Dude, the story of Christ is basically an amalgamation of various pagan beliefs.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Let's bring back slavery, let's kill every first born son, let's stone people it's biblical after all, etc. I told you consciousness evolves into higher stages over time and so does our morals.

So, morality is objective? That seems to be what you're saying, considering you seem to think it exists outside of the human mind on its own. But where did this immaterial objective morality come from? Who or what decided that something was right or wrong? I really am not sure what you are saying. Morality is either objective or it is subjective.

Also, I'm not even going to respond to your flaming against the Bible, since it is clearly something you know nothing about.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Science can answer the question of how we got here, they just need to make that an objective.

By the way, I'm atheist or agnostic, and I approach the bigger questions as much as any religious person.

Okay, but you certainly can't approach it scientifically.

I don't think you get my point, though. Science cannot possibly answer the question of how we got here. Science, by definition, is limited to the natural realm. Otherwise, tell me how it does not commit the fallacy of induction and asserting the consequent. Science does not deal with history because we cannot possibly know all of the conditions throughout history in order to observe, test, and verify what we think happened.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Dude, the story of Christ is basically an amalgamation of various pagan beliefs.

No, it's not.

 

[Ender]

Dude, the story of Christ is basically an amalgamation of various pagan beliefs.

Dude, various pagan beliefs are basically an amalgamation of the story of Christ.

This story is everywhere- from the Egyptians to the Hindus to the Mayans.

 

[bolil]

There are questions science will never answer, because there are questions science cannot answer. Theories may abound, but in the end belief in a scientific hypotheses requires just as large a leap of faith as belief in a religion. Indeed, to my mind, there is little difference between science and religion as concerns the larger questions. How did it begin? How will it end? and most importantly: Why? You can answer these questions, just have some faith.

That being said, Nihilism can go to hell.

Just because you may never be able to conclusively prove your belief does not excuse you from holding one.

 

[KingNothing]

No, it's not.

Not sure if you're serious or not, because this is historical fact. There's no point even debating it. Just do a freaking Google search.

 

[KingNothing]

That being said, Nihilism can go to hell.

Just because you may never be able to conclusively prove your belief does not excuse you from holding one.

Meh, who cares?


see what I did there?

 

[1stAmendguy]

So, morality is objective? That seems to be what you're saying, considering you seem to think it exists outside of the human mind on its own. But where did this immaterial objective morality come from? Who or what decided that something was right or wrong? I really am not sure what you are saying. Morality is either objective or it is subjective.

Also, I'm not even going to respond to your flaming against the Bible, since it is clearly something you know nothing about.

No, a rationalist does indeed hold moral principles which are not dependent on context, but recognizes that these principles depend on intersubjective judgments, not received from some impersonal, 'objective' higher source like your divine command beliefs.

 

[KingNothing]

So, morality is objective? That seems to be what you're saying, considering you seem to think it exists outside of the human mind on its own. But where did this immaterial objective morality come from? Who or what decided that something was right or wrong? I really am not sure what you are saying. Morality is either objective or it is subjective.

Also, I'm not even going to respond to your flaming against the Bible, since it is clearly something you know nothing about.

I only like the Old Testament of the Bible. It's filled with more hilarious stupidity. The New Testament that you Jesus Freaks Out In the Streets subscribe to isn't nearly as ridiculous.

And as far as morality and objectivity vs subjectivity goes:

 

[asurfaholic]

Why do we even have these debates? There are those who will never believe, and those who do, with varying degrees of confidence. Whats the point in spending hours debating someone who will never change their mind?

There are those of us who have REALLY experienced God and KNOW that he in fact exists, despite all the people saying otherwise. The truth of what I know and have experienced will never be erased because some person on the internet told me its not so.

Then there are some who have not allowed God to speak to them, and have never experienced the grace and power of of God - and will never believe that a higher power exists. There even even those who just like to ridicule the faith that others believe, because it makes them feel all big and tough. Not saying thats all of them, but I don't go around belittling everyone who doesn't like greens. Just because you don't think they taste good, and I do, doesn't mean you are stupid.

So why not drop it, and focus on the reason we are all here - liberty and the revolution?