Doug Shaver

Two thousand years of Western history strongly suggests the contrary.

TedM

My love for her also makes me feel pain and sadness. It would be easier in some ways to do things I'd get immediate pleasure from rather than make the sacrifice. But, I agree that it does make me feel good to help her, which it could be argued is the 'easier' approach in the long run emotionally...Since being 'truly altruistic' requires not having any emotion, one has to be careful that they don't conclude that caring behavior is dishonorable because it is self-motivated when the end goal is to benefit the other person. That's why I referred to the 'narrow' definition of altruism--it's too narrow and meaningless if you remove all emotion from it. I feel it cheapens 'helping behaviors' to say that no 'true' altruism exists.


Many Catholics believe that salvation is tentative depending on your sin status, and that the time in purgatory is in direct proportion to the severity of your sins after your conversion. In such a case the threat of purgative is a deterrent. Some Protestants have a similar belief regarding the day of judgment and their position in heaven. There is a strong belief for many in the importance of living 'right' while on earth, as 'proof' of your sincerity as a Christian--to others and perhaps to God...if your life doesn't change then you were never a 'true' Christian, and could go to hell. Of course there are others that believe Jesus died for ALL, and that almost everyone will get to heaven, whether they believe or not--but that's a different issue.

TedM

Belief in authority of the Bible can cause people to listen to that voice even if they don't think there is a threat of punishment. The 'should' can come from love or a sense of justice or another reason not related to punishment.

aa5874

But, this "voice" is really irrelevant to the actual existence of a man called Jesus.

People who can hear voices in their head or "heart" may have some other problem.

When Gods were ROCKS people also had a conscience and probably had moral and ethical standards to match their beliefs .

The NT clearly contains threat of eternal damnation and people who believe the NT is true are held HOSTAGE to their belief.

The NT as it were is just another ransom note from an ANONYMOUS person.

Do what I say or BE DAMNED.

Mr 16:16 - People who are JESUS BELIEVERS are scared to death to even think Jesus was fake.

What will happen if they were wrong? They be DAMNED.

These JESUS BELIEVERS fail to understand that they may still be DAMNED if they believe in the WRONG GOD.

There may be other Gods out there that want to punish Jesus believers forever too.

gurugeorge

I doubt it's going to convince anybody who isn't already convinced. As I said, the "sports" who are out on a conscience-less limb can only be molded by human threat of punishment (because they're usually rational - just without a conscience). But they're very rare.

It is my observation that the directionality of causality is the other way - people are caused to behave immorally (by circumstances, by bad upbringing - and indeed sometimes by religion), whereas, left alone, most people are good (apart from those without the "moral gene").

It may seem a paradoxical thing to say, but it's actually moral training that makes people immoral. The paradox disappears when one puts it more accurately (although still somewhat exaggeratedly ): SLAVE TRAINING makes people immoral. And most cultures have trained people to be good slaves of the ruling class (whatever it may be), and that slave training has masqueraded as moral training.

Thankfully, the training doesn't always take.

Yeah but then the God thing is an unnecessary shuffle.

TedM

Sorry--didn't mean for it to sound so simple. I think it could be that simple for some, but for most they have a stronger sense of ethics from their upbringing that reduces the likelihood of them being easily replaced or changed by teachings of a religion.

I do think that for most people their early environment greatly influences ethical principles toward others and toward themselves. But, I think there are other influencing factors that for some can be very strong, including--friends, media, and yes religious teaching. And I also still think there is an element of choice involved with adopting ethics in ones behavior: People can choose to practice ethics or not. And this choice is dependent on their beliefs: Not religious beliefs but their beliefs about the ethical principle: is it 'good', is it beneficial to me, etc.. And, those beliefs are flexible throughout life, as new circumstances can influence them. OTOH there may also be some who don't have that predisposition who still practice ethics (out of fear of damnation, for ex) that they may not really 'feel' or embrace.

Building on the above, beyond the initial anger I think can be a permanent change in ethical behavior--by choice. It may well be though that most people will continue to treat others in much the same way because the strongest ethical influence is from upbringing.

Not sure I'd disagree, but I think people can continue to be influenced throughout their lives although the likelihood of significant change decreases as one ages in the absence of trauma. Trauma I think can strongly influence one's ethical practices. One form of trauma is the loss of one's faith. Even when change is significant though, there may always be a ''voice in the head' that stems from upbringing.

Joan of Bark

This may end up as a simple semantic argument.


Ah, yes, purgatory ... that strange beast for which there's virtually no Biblical support. Did the Catholics of the Middle Ages believe in it? No doubt many did (what with prayers for the dead, and all), but the fact that so many Catholics did so many horrible things implies otherwise. If belief in the Christian God, hell, and purgatory really had some kind of damping effect on human sin, then a Europe that was almost entirely Christian should have been a lot nicer place.

But anyway, we're way off topic.