Freethought & Rationalism Archive

philechat · 04-20-2003, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by yguy
I don't think it's a good comparison. Preference for Debussy over Wagner or Sch�nberg is purely subjective, and frankly not very significant. That can't be said for the question of God and how we should relate to him. If the Judaeo-Christian paradigm is substantially correct, Christians would be irresponsible to acknowledge the validity of Hindu gods. Of course, self-righteous condemnation of other religions is at the very least a tactical error and arguably a sin; but one need not have that attitude to say that Hindu gods are satan in disguise, if that is the truth.

I would argue, however, that if the Christian God wants us to acknowledge him as the One True God (tm) then he should make a revelation such that every person from every culture is able to be convinced of such truth. Given the lack of evidence for him we should implicitly follow only our passions with regards to such beliefs, without condemning others as wrong or evil in any sense for their affiliation with other beliefs.

That is, given the amount of evidence existing in this world (that most cultures come up with their own gods because the evidence for the Christian God is not much stronger than the evidence for other gods) religious pluralism will be the most conducive to mutual understanding, IMHO.

yguy · 04-20-2003, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bree
Well, considering the fact that the majority of people here are atheists, I would venture that the "question of God and how we should relate to Him" isn't very significant, either.

If the consensus of this board is to be the determiner of its significance, I could hardly disagree.

Please define "truth" and how you would be 100% sure that what you believe IS the truth.

The truth is what is objectively real. My existence, for instance, is objectively real. I know it is true that I exist; and whatever verifies that for me verifies anything else I know to be true.

Bree · 04-20-2003, 03:03 PM

So basically whatever you think to be true, is true.

Do I understand you correctly?

yguy · 04-20-2003, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bree
So basically whatever you think to be true, is true.

Do I understand you correctly?

Nope. Whatever I KNOW to be true is true. I know that murder is wrong, for instance.

Bree · 04-20-2003, 03:11 PM

Why is murder wrong? Why is stealing wrong? Why is adultery wrong? Why is pride wrong? Why is Hinduism wrong?

You don't know these things are wrong. You just think they're wrong based on your own moral system, the social constructs of the society you live in, and your religious beliefs (whatever they may be). In order to know something is wrong, one must have demonstrable proof - i.e. the statement "the world is flat" is wrong because it has been demonstrated that it is, in fact, round.

DISCLAIMER: before any Christians fly off the handle and assume that this big, bag, moral-less atheist is saying that murder and stealing are right, please keep in mind that I'm trying to prove that we do not have demonstrable proof that these things are wrong - just because we lack that proof doesn't mean that they are right, either.

yguy · 04-20-2003, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bree
Why is murder wrong? Why is stealing wrong? Why is adultery wrong? Why is pride wrong? Why is Hinduism wrong?

You don't know these things are wrong.

First of all, I never said Hinduism was wrong. As for the rest, I most certainly do know they are wrong.

Quote:

You just think they're wrong based on your own moral system, the social constructs of the society you live in, and your religious beliefs (whatever they may be).

Nonsense. Nobody had to teach me that murder is wrong. Anybody with a conscience who ever thought a murderous thought knows it intuitively.

Quote:

DISCLAIMER: before any Christians fly off the handle and assume that this big, bag, moral-less atheist is saying that murder and stealing are right, please keep in mind that I'm trying to prove that we do not have demonstrable proof that these things are wrong - just because we lack that proof doesn't mean that they are right, either.

Groovy. That all proofs lead to unprovable assertions is hardly a new idea to me. Where do we disagree?

Bree · 04-20-2003, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by yguy
First of all, I never said Hinduism was wrong.

Pray tell what you meant by this statement:

Quote:

If the Judaeo-Christian paradigm is substantially correct, Christians would be irresponsible to acknowledge the validity of Hindu gods. Of course, self-righteous condemnation of other religions is at the very least a tactical error and arguably a sin; but one need not have that attitude to say that Hindu gods are satan in disguise, if that is the truth.

Forgive me, you just said the Hindu gods are Satan in disguise. My bad.

yguy · 04-20-2003, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bree
Forgive me, you just said the Hindu gods are Satan in disguise. My bad.

Did you miss, "...if that is the truth"?

Personally, I suspect it IS the truth, but I don't know it like I know murder is wrong. That's why I qualified it.

Bree · 04-20-2003, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by yguy
Did you miss, "...if that is the truth"?

<sigh>

Of course I did not miss "...if that is the truth" - that's why I posted my original question to you.

On second thought - nevermind

tk · 04-21-2003, 12:02 AM

In answer to the original question, I think it's because the texts of most East Asian religions don't contain phrases like "Thou shalt have no other god before me" or "Kill those who deny Islam". But that's just my guess.

I don't get what yguy means by "what one values little". What does it mean to "value" a belief? Is it to abide by it in a fundamentalist fashion? If so, is it a good thing to "value" a belief -- especially since the term "value" has positive connotations?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-20-2003, 03:03 PM	#13
Bree Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Twin Cities, USA Posts: 3,197	So basically whatever you think to be true, is true. Do I understand you correctly?

04-20-2003, 03:11 PM	#15
Bree Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Twin Cities, USA Posts: 3,197	Why is murder wrong? Why is stealing wrong? Why is adultery wrong? Why is pride wrong? Why is Hinduism wrong? You don't know these things are wrong. You just think they're wrong based on your own moral system, the social constructs of the society you live in, and your religious beliefs (whatever they may be). In order to know something is wrong, one must have demonstrable proof - i.e. the statement "the world is flat" is wrong because it has been demonstrated that it is, in fact, round. DISCLAIMER: before any Christians fly off the handle and assume that this big, bag, moral-less atheist is saying that murder and stealing are right, please keep in mind that I'm trying to prove that we do not have demonstrable proof that these things are wrong - just because we lack that proof doesn't mean that they are right, either.

04-21-2003, 12:02 AM	#20
tk Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 158	In answer to the original question, I think it's because the texts of most East Asian religions don't contain phrases like "Thou shalt have no other god before me" or "Kill those who deny Islam". But that's just my guess. I don't get what yguy means by "what one values little". What does it mean to "value" a belief? Is it to abide by it in a fundamentalist fashion? If so, is it a good thing to "value" a belief -- especially since the term "value" has positive connotations?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.