Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christianity is Morally Bankrupt
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 31 of 652 (694190)
03-22-2013 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Tangle
03-22-2013 6:25 AM


Re: On original sin
You found a myth that explained it in a Grimm's Story way. You didn't find the explanation.
Oh but I did find the explanation, and it explains just about everything.
The problem you have is that you needed an explanation other than the real and obvious one, which is that we're descended from animals that have to fight other animals for their survival. So we have many of those attributes.
We are beginning to find our way out of our upbringing through our intellect and our secular institutions. We no longer have need for mythology to provide the reasons why we are what we are. So we can finally do something about it.
What a bunch of pontificating bombast.
Funny how you think you can assert your view as if it were unassailable truth, and expand on it with your evolutionized mythos as if that adds anything to the assertion, just the usual fantasy belief system blah blah blah but somehow it gets a pass as if it really meant something.
Well I can assert mine too, and mine IS unassailable truth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Tangle, posted 03-22-2013 6:25 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Tangle, posted 03-23-2013 4:15 AM Faith has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 32 of 652 (694192)
03-22-2013 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Faith
03-21-2013 8:40 PM


Re: On original sin
I got a sense of the concept of Original Sin sometime during the period when I was becoming a believer, back in the 80s, and far from Coyote's take on it for me it was like a brilliant light went on that illuminated this dark world. I felt that finally I had an explanation for the evils in this world that otherwise have no explanation. To my mind the doctrine is essential and precious for that reason. It takes a chaotic world in which people do horrible things to each other and makes it understandable.
Unlike you, I do not consider myself or my species to have been born evil, nor do I consider that we require the intercession of a shaman to cure this inherent (but nonexistent) evilness.
But I can see why shamans would want to promote this doctrine, as it empowers them and puts grits on the table.
"Do what I say or you'll be forever damned. But for a small fee..."
Bah!

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Faith, posted 03-21-2013 8:40 PM Faith has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


(1)
Message 33 of 652 (694198)
03-22-2013 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by GrimSqueaker
03-22-2013 7:25 AM


Re: Depends on the bylaws of the Chapter of Club Christian
grim writes:
I'm not an anti theist due to my own intellectual integrity BUT I would lean very heavily in that direction, as such I am 99.999999% that all the goodness and kindness (which is the vibe I'm getting from u) in you, begins and ends in u - the existence of a higher power would lessens that, and believe in one does yourself a disservice. Whatever you achieve in life you do so by the Grace of Jar and you should be damn proud of that. Any obstacle you over come or problem you squash, Grace of Jar again.
You and I are diametrically opposites. I am 99.9999% sure that God exists, and I would never dare to be proud of my own intellect and integrity. Additionally, your denial of Jesus in the flesh as Gods Son is an antichrist spirit, and dare I say that this is the entire reason for your topic. Humans are bankrupt insofar as our ability to do anything good within us...apart from God. Indeed, we owe our very lives to Him. I have seen evidence of a supernatural reality, and I can only warn you of your inner humanistic pride regarding your own efforts. This belief will fail.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-22-2013 7:25 AM GrimSqueaker has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-23-2013 1:22 AM Phat has replied

  
GrimSqueaker
Member (Idle past 3688 days)
Posts: 137
From: Ireland
Joined: 03-15-2013


Message 34 of 652 (694204)
03-23-2013 1:14 AM


Hmmmmm upon rereading that post wasn't my best work - but I suppose I'm having a little trouble wording my objections to you position.
Let me try again, I'm gonna break this down
From what I see you give some credit to a supernatural being for the good in ur life
For each interest group that recieves credit for anything after the first group reduces the amount of credit attributed to each group, as opposed to a soul group recording 100% of the credit (I'm having trouble with the wording of this, I hope this is clear)
From all the evidence it suggests there are no supernatural beings
Any credit for the actions of humans attributed to supernatural beings assistance is wasted
This is unfortunate on a personal scale and traffic when applied to human endeavours on a more global scale
**************^^^*****^*^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Really hope this is clear, I'm finding this hard to write down

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by jar, posted 03-23-2013 10:50 AM GrimSqueaker has not replied

  
GrimSqueaker
Member (Idle past 3688 days)
Posts: 137
From: Ireland
Joined: 03-15-2013


Message 35 of 652 (694205)
03-23-2013 1:22 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Phat
03-22-2013 11:08 PM


Re: Depends on the bylaws of the Chapter of Club Christian
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - can u present any for the god hypothesis? U say ur 99.999999% sure, u must have some damn good stuff.
O. Razor is gonna say that natural explainations are more likely to be true than supernatural ones - I pointed out in a different thread that historically supernatural explanations always fall down compared to natural ones;
Germ Theory VS Demonic Possession
Electricity VS Thor
Cosmology VS a tiny orbiting sun
Etc etc - it goes on and on through out all of human understanding, why would we ever expect a supernatural explanation to win out?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Phat, posted 03-22-2013 11:08 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Phat, posted 03-23-2013 3:54 AM GrimSqueaker has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 36 of 652 (694211)
03-23-2013 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by GrimSqueaker
03-23-2013 1:22 AM


Confirmation Bias works both ways
1) I have heard extraordinary evidence of demonic possession/oppression in that I clearly heard several differnet voices at once come out of a guy...in my own living room. There was quite simply no other valid explanations as to why this occurred and two others also witnessed this event.
why would we ever expect a supernatural explanation to win out?
You wouldn't, because your bias leans the other way to begin with. You have said yourself you don't want any sort of supernatural entity to trump your human reasoning anyway. You are, in fact, proud of your ability to rationalize and explain without resorting to any need to surrender. Thus, I never would expect you to accept any claim...valid or otherwise
In fact, I would assert that human understanding by majority tries to disprove rather than prove God. We simply by nature would prefer to be our own gods.
Answer me this, though. Is it logical for the sum of intelligence located on a virtual dust speck among one of many hundreds of billions of galaxies to defiantly limit its collective belief on human wisdom alone? Sounds a bit pompous and defiant to me.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-23-2013 1:22 AM GrimSqueaker has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-23-2013 5:38 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 41 by Omnivorous, posted 03-23-2013 8:31 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 37 of 652 (694214)
03-23-2013 4:13 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Coyote
03-21-2013 8:17 PM


Re: On original sin
Chuck Colson writes:
Christians can not support Rand’s philosophy and Christ’s teachings. The choice is simple: Ayn Rand or Jesus Christ. We must choose one and forsake the other.

My Take: Christianity and Ayn Rand's philosophy are 2 distinct religions

Rand's philosophy is far from "proven" except in the singlularly philosphical point that people are self-centered and that erality is independent of consciousness. Her precept that the greatest moral good is your own selfish happiness is childish and reflects the maturity level of a teenager and we see how this idea has become the moral center of American society already and look at the disasterous results. We have hundreds of millions of people seeking nothing but their own happiness and hurting others in the process. We have a society of happy people (happiness is temporary and fleeting) who are miserable and "in need" of drugs to keep them from violence, depression and suicide. Moral objectivism is a failure and we all see it.
AMEN to that!
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Coyote, posted 03-21-2013 8:17 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 38 of 652 (694215)
03-23-2013 4:15 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Faith
03-22-2013 9:35 PM


Re: On original sin
Faith writes:
Funny how you think you can assert your view as if it were unassailable truth, and expand on it with your evolutionized mythos as if that adds anything to the assertion, just the usual fantasy belief system blah blah blah but somehow it gets a pass as if it really meant something.
It isn't my view, I'm not inventing this, I'm simply reminding you of everyday facts that you prefer to ignore or deny. It's just a biolgical fact that we are descended from anscestors that had to fight for their survival and it's a historical fact that human society has become more civilised as it has developed more and better institutions and technologies.
You can ignore these facts and choose to believe instead in the childish mythology of stone age desert tribes if you like, but it doesn't change a single fact.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Faith, posted 03-22-2013 9:35 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Faith, posted 03-23-2013 10:39 AM Tangle has replied

  
GrimSqueaker
Member (Idle past 3688 days)
Posts: 137
From: Ireland
Joined: 03-15-2013


Message 39 of 652 (694221)
03-23-2013 5:38 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Phat
03-23-2013 3:54 AM


Re: Confirmation Bias works both ways
Technically a personal experience is NOT qualifiable as evidence, I'm a realistic guy if I am presented evidence I will submit - I only came to atheism by accident, I began as a Christian and over my teen years I became a goddess worshiper and a magick practitioner (who still revered Jesus). I have seen and made incredible things happen, I summoned spiriits, communed with the dead and witnessed cast spells taking effect. After researching my experiences and trying to understand them I discovered wonderful things about psychology, science and history but nothing in the way of supernatural materials. Further more I'm a semi professional magician now (check out Grim Squeaker on YouTube!) and that has deepened my understanding of how easy the human mind and personal experience is too fool.
Or simply my bias was toward supernatural when I began my research and I found it wanting and I reject ur demonic possession story as evidence (it itself would require e ordinary evidence - and I would question your knowledge of psychology), what else ya got?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Phat, posted 03-23-2013 3:54 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by purpledawn, posted 03-23-2013 8:25 AM GrimSqueaker has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 40 of 652 (694224)
03-23-2013 8:25 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by GrimSqueaker
03-23-2013 5:38 AM


Morally Bankrupt
Fortunately on the religious side of this forum, scientific evidence is not required. Reasoned argumentation is and any support available for that argumentation.
I don't really see that you have supported the idea that Christianity has lost all sense of right and wrong.
From Message 1.
quote:
1 - Devine atonement for Sin is a moral loop hole.
If a person does wrong the proper path to righting that wrong is to make recompense to the individual who has been wronged and/or society, prayer and other wishful thinking are moot in comparison to this
Divine atonement isn't about righting the wrong that was done. Making amends is taught within Christianity.
quote:
2 - Heaven and Hell are Unjust.
All human lifes have a very limited scope for both the good and the ill that they can do, no person can ever rack up enough "Karma" either good or bad to justify an eternity of anything. Eternal reward seem dubious and eternal torture down right barbaric
Christianity can't send anyone to heaven or hell. That's God's choice. This really doesn't reflect on whether Christianity has lost all sense of right and wrong.
quote:
3 - Vicarious Redemption.
The crucifixion of Jesus for the atonement of sins is immoral, no person should ever be able to take moral responsibility for another. Certainly one can help someone else shoulder a burden in many ways but no one can take away someone else's responsibility for their actions. This central tenant strikes at the very idea of personal morality
That happened over 2000 years ago and wasn't done by Christians. Not really a point for your argument about Christianity. As pointed out above, atonement doesn't take away anyone's responsibility for their own actions.
quote:
4 - Freedom of Choice.
To expect everyone to fall in under a system whether they want to or not, to leave them no option to opt out is tyrannical and down right abusive. If you were born into a community or joined one who's rules you did not agree with you would be able to leave (although it could be difficult, think of the Berlin Wall for example) - Christianity offers no such claus
Morality deals with right and wrong behavior in day to day living. People can stop being Christians or become Christians. Even within the club they can be as active or inactive as they choose. If they don't like that particular group they can change to another one.
quote:
5 - Original Sin and Sins of the Father.
Personal responsibility and morality mean little to nothing in a culture where the vilification for crimes can be passed from one generation to the next.
Sins of the father gone before Christianity formed.
Ezekiel 18:20
The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.
The Original Sin Doctrine issue is more about explaining why man is not perfect. Basically blaming the inclination to sin on Adam.
Irenaeus believed that Adam's sin had grave consequences for humanity, that it is the source of human sinfulness, mortality and enslavement to sin, and that all human beings participate in his sin and share his guilt.[9]
This doesn't really show that Christianity has lost all sense of right and wrong.
quote:
6 - Thought Crimes.
Due to the mythic properties of the Christian god he is aware of what your thinking and judges you on it. This is a psychologically damaging and again grossly immoral standing as thoughts should never be subject to such critic, indeed in the case of Intrusive Thoughts (a common symptom of many psychological illnesses including stress and depression) particularly harmful and unfair as a person may be suffering from their own thoughts anyway and would require compassion and understanding not feelings of guilt and shame, which they probably are already feeling
Again, you're talking about God and making an assumption. Christianity isn't judging one's thoughts.
So how has Christianity actually lost all sense of right and wrong?
Universal Moral Code

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-23-2013 5:38 AM GrimSqueaker has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-23-2013 10:17 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3977
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


(3)
Message 41 of 652 (694225)
03-23-2013 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Phat
03-23-2013 3:54 AM


Re: Confirmation Bias works both ways
Phat writes:
Answer me this, though. Is it logical for the sum of intelligence located on a virtual dust speck among one of many hundreds of billions of galaxies to defiantly limit its collective belief on human wisdom alone? Sounds a bit pompous and defiant to me.
It is preeminently logical to draw that conclusion.
Logic and science yielded the knowledge of "many hundreds of billions of galaxies."
To consider the millennia of failed religious claims--and the failure of religion to reveal anything true about the natural world--and to then conclude supernatural explanations are empty ones, is not an example of bias: it is a logical, evidence-based conclusion.
It is far more pompous to believe without one shred of evidence that an omnipotent being created and monitors this "dust speck" of ours because we're so special. What could be more smug than that?
I conclude that only our own intelligence can explore and explain the universe; you conclude our intelligence should be supplanted by beliefs derived from ancient texts that recommend blood sacrifice, slavery and infanticide.
To support your conclusion, you essentially make the creationist argument that science is a faith like any other faith, its adherents and practitioners blinded by a priori beliefs.
Do you truly believe that?

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Phat, posted 03-23-2013 3:54 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Phat, posted 03-23-2013 11:14 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
GrimSqueaker
Member (Idle past 3688 days)
Posts: 137
From: Ireland
Joined: 03-15-2013


Message 42 of 652 (694228)
03-23-2013 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by purpledawn
03-23-2013 8:25 AM


Re: Morally Bankrupt
If I get u right what your saying is (well partially that some of my assumptions r wrong and maybe I can tackle that later but - )
quote:
Don't blame Christians for what their God does
That's a bit silly. A God is a construct of the people within a certain belief system, even if a god was a real think the people who choose to worship him are responsible fpr their choice in worshipping it and condone it ie. If I worship a serpentheadedgod that demands blood sacrifice one can assume I condone blood sacrifice
Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed broken(misspelled) quote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by purpledawn, posted 03-23-2013 8:25 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by purpledawn, posted 03-23-2013 1:27 PM GrimSqueaker has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 43 of 652 (694229)
03-23-2013 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Tangle
03-23-2013 4:15 AM


Re: On original sin
It isn't my view, I'm not inventing this, I'm simply reminding you of everyday facts that you prefer to ignore or deny. It's just a biolgical fact that we are descended from anscestors that had to fight for their survival and it's a historical fact that human society has become more civilised as it has developed more and better institutions and technologies.
You can ignore these facts and choose to believe instead in the childish mythology of stone age desert tribes if you like, but it doesn't change a single fact.
The biological facts you claim are not facts and the historical facts have nothing to do with the discussion.
This is what you said:
The problem you have is that you needed an explanation other than the real and obvious one, which is that we're descended from animals that have to fight other animals for their survival. So we have many of those attributes.
We are beginning to find our way out of our upbringing through our intellect and our secular institutions. We no longer have need for mythology to provide the reasons why we are what we are. So we can finally do something about it.
As I said, this is nothing but pontificating bombast, fanciful stuff made up out of thin air, the usual evolutionist fairy tale, given as the usual counter to the Christian claim about original sin.
Sad if you can't recognize that this is a fanciful tale even less interesting than the Grimms would have written.
However, who cares. Original Sin is my explanation for the phenomena under discussion. You are welcome to your own, stupid and ugly though it is.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Tangle, posted 03-23-2013 4:15 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Tangle, posted 03-23-2013 10:56 AM Faith has replied
 Message 47 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-23-2013 11:07 AM Faith has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 44 of 652 (694230)
03-23-2013 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by GrimSqueaker
03-23-2013 1:14 AM


From what I see you give some credit to a supernatural being for the good in ur life
I am assuming you meant this as a reply to my Message 18. If not then just disregard what follows.
I believe that all that is, seen and unseen was created by GOD and so I am grateful for my very existence. Yes, I do give credit to GOD for the good in my life but that has nothing to do with the content of Message 18.
The part that you objected to in Message 29 was:
jar writes:
"As to having saved myself? Nonsense. There is no way I can save myself. If I am saved it will only be through the Grace of GOD."
That sentence refers to a judgement of my behavior after I have died.
I understand that I am fully responsible for my behavior.
I find the concept of "Original Sin" just a weak and pitiful attempt to avoid responsibility. It's easily marketed.
I find the concept of Jesus death as payment for sins trivializes and diminishes Jesus and that it's just another easy out way to avoid taking responsibility. It's easily marketed.
To assume in addition that Jesus death only pays for the sins of some sycophant cult makes GOD really look imbecilic, dimwitted, doltish, pitiful and evil.
But I am also honest enough to know that I have not lived up to either my full potential or to the charge I have been given.
If there is an afterlife and a judgement, I know that I failed overall. When judged, the verdict will be just that; I have not done all I should have done and did things I should not have done.
If I am forgiven though can only be by the Grace of GOD.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-23-2013 1:14 AM GrimSqueaker has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(2)
Message 45 of 652 (694231)
03-23-2013 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Faith
03-23-2013 10:39 AM


Re: On original sin
Faith writes:
However, who cares. Original Sin is my explanation for the phenomena under discussion. You are welcome to your own, stupid and ugly though it is.
That's the most interesting thing about Christians, the more fundamental their beliefs, the less Christian they behave.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Faith, posted 03-23-2013 10:39 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 03-23-2013 11:02 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024