Tercel

I agree with you. But in making this assertion you are recognising the existence an objective moral standard. And in doing so you are, as I see it, proving God.

Isn't it good we've advanced beyond believing everything in the bible?

It's possible to get any amount of morality you like from the Bible:
-------
"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another."
"Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves."
"Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law."
"You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature rather, serve one another in love."
"Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love."
"And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds."
"Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart."
"Finally, all of you, live in harmony with one another; be sympathetic, love as brothers, be compassionate and humble."
"This is the message you heard from the beginning: We should love one another."
"And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us."
"Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God."
"Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another."
"No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us."
"And now, dear lady, I am not writing you a new command but one we have had from the beginning. I ask that we love one another."
"love your neighbor as yourself"
"'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
"To love God with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices."
"The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself.""
"The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself.""
"If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself" you are doing right."
"Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is–his good, pleasing and perfect will."
"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other."
"You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds; and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.
Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body. "In your anger do not sin": Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry, and do not give the devil a foothold. He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need.
Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you."
"Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you."
"in purity, understanding, patience and kindness; in the Holy Spirit and in sincere love; in truthful speech and in the power of God; with weapons of righteousness in the right hand and in the left"
"For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth)"
"make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love."
-------

"What is more harmful than any vice?--Practical sympathy for the botched and weak--Christianity..." -Nietzsche.

Filth, indeed...
Leaving evangelicalism's all good (evangelicals have a tendency to get on my nerves unless taken in small doses), so come and be a liberal!

Do you think it is necessarily right to judge a system by it's less enlightened followers?
If large numbers of the supposed followers of Christianity have largely ignored its message, then who is there to blame but them?

The Bible is but one source of morals. As Paul says: God has written his moral commands in the hearts of all.

NumberTenOx

Thanks Tercel. Unfortunately, I have to. How many times has my mind recoiled from the horror, the insane downward spiral of staring at the naked void (and why is it always at 2 am)?

I have concluded that for me, it is a matter of faith. I know that there is no God. I know that there is no absolute morality. It is my intense desire to know the answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything, but I don't expect to ever find it. Mankind's rational, measured march towards this answer is the greatest journey there will ever be.

Peace on your journey,
Ox

Tercel

Yet meaningless even so. In a few hundred billion years there will be nothing left of mankind but cosmic space-dust flying through the cold dark void. Mankind's greatest achievements, all reduced to absurd dust. Here today, gone tommorrow - the life of man.

<strong>Ozymandias</strong>
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert ... Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works ye mighty and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
-- Percy Bysshe Shelley

Will we even leave as much as that behind?

NumberTenOx

Scary, isn't it? Welcome to the existential crisis. It's worth a wallow in that sentiment for awhile, then crawl out of the hole and go on. I do it all the time.

And you know what? I have no trouble enjoying life, being (ahem, relatively) moral, finding meaning in my children's smiles, working for the common good, having fun with selfish hobbies. We are all wired the same way, we just explain it differently.

But again, experiencing the pain and dispair of the lack of an eternal father figure, doesn't mean that he exists.

Technos

Dear Tercel

While we're still on the morality issue, I'd like to take the chance to say this: I (and most atheist) do not enjoy being punched in the face, stabbed, stolen from, cheated on, lied to ect ect ect. I am (and most atheist are) not so foolish as to consider myself (themselves) special in such a way that doing such things to others is either wise, or safe, or necessary. I am (as many atheist are) pro-progressive, and able to recognize my own mortality as well as the mortality of others. In a society without basic moral rules and laws, be they simply generally accepted or imposed, little progress is made, the economy suffers or collapses, each human has increased chances of becoming injured, sick, or dying, and little technological progress is made.

The human species is, by nature, a social species. We are highly adaptive, most of our behavior is learned, and we owe our very survival to our technology and intellectual ingenuity, thus if we reverted to a state of anarchy as an entire species our chances of surviving the next big virus outbreak or major natural disaster would be worse than that of other animals. We are unfit to survive without some forms of technology not the least of which includes agricultural and medical technology.

We are also vengeful animals, though many hide it. If one of our own is killed, it is in our nature to seek revenge, especially if we lose a mate or child. If damage is inflicted upon us, it provides a powerful motive to react by damaging that which caused us pain and harm, and the less educated we are the more irrational and violent we become, a powerful reason for us to have moral systems and government. Morality is a form of self preservation, it allows us to survive and succeed as a species, and prevents us from "stepping on the wrong toes" as individuals. Face it, if I find out that you raped my wife I'm going to attempt to kill you if provided with a good opportunity, and chances are you'd do the same. As technology increases it becomes increasingly difficult to get away with crimes such as murder and the legal system makes it difficult to get away with inflicting serious damage upon another individual, these are deterrents put in place in order to preserve society. My overall point is that morality is an adaptive advantage that evolved as we evolved, and some form of morality exist in most, if not all, intelligent social animals. So tercel, I've provided you with logical grounds for morality that does not involve some supernatural space creator, care to tell me why Atheist don't have grounds for the development of morality?


PS: On a side note, I hold that our mortality makes this life all the more meaningful. I can not agree with your "if it doesn't last forever it's meaningless" argument, but we create our own meaning no? Besides, who knows what the future holds? We are the first species on the planet to touch the moon, and soon to be the first to touch mars, and technology is still rather new to us as a species.

[ June 02, 2002: Message edited by: Technos ]</p>

HRG

"Objective", as I see it, is the opposite of "subjective": i.e. not depending on the opinion, nature, commands etc. of a specific (postulated or actually existing) being.

IOW, theistic moral systems are extremely subjective. They single out an entity (whether it exists or not is secondary for this point) and declare morality to consist of the opinion or commands of that being.

Regards,
HRG.

Vorkosigan

I agree with you. But in making this assertion you are recognising the existence an objective moral standard. And in doing so you are, as I see it, proving God.

If you argue that objective morality -- whatever that is -- requires a transcendant standard, there are plenty of nontheistic transcendent ideas that would serve. You're not any closer to your particular Deity.

In any case, as numerous atheist objectivists can attest, there's no conflict between atheism and objectivism, at least for some.

Vorkosigan

enigma555

Whether or not YOU believe that moral standards do not vary from person to person or culture to culture is irrelevant. They do.

I, as well as a very large percentage of the world, believe that strapping explosives to your body and detonating yourself in a supermarket to prove a political point is wrong. Many of the Palestinians as well as a large percentage of the Arab world (and others!) believe that doing so is perfectly acceptable. They have went through their religious texts to find the passages that say they can.

I believe that racism and racial terror is wrong. The KKK and other white supremacy groups use the very same Bible you read to say that it is not only acceptable, but it is their right.

Many Hindus are vegetarians. They believe that not only is killing wrong, but killing animals is as well. Their religious texts tell them so.

Not all Hindus believe that, however. Those that do not believe that vegetarianism is necessary have a different take on the same texts.

Many people (Christians and others) believe that putting a termanally ill patient who is in tremendous, constant pain to sleep is wrong. The Christians of those quote the Bible where it says "Thou shalt not kill".

Others believe that it is cruel to keep the patient in perpetual agony with no hope of recovery. According to them, "Thou shalt not kill" does not apply in that case.

I could go on. There is no coherency in relativism, but it is an accurate representation of reality, because there is no coherency in religion

Saying that religion is the only way to have morals and that the moral code provided in religious texts is absolute is incorrect in the extreme.

Regardless of which religious texts you follow, at least 60% of the people on the planet think you aren't reading the "True" texts. Not only that, but there are large percentages of those that do follow your texts who disagree on your take of them.

The only way that you can get absolutes from religious texts is if you are a fundamentalist that believes that not only are you correct, but you're so correct that everyone else is wrong (which is something that my moral code tells me is not only wrong, but evil in the extreme)

You say that objectivism requires God. I gotta ask: which God?

[ June 02, 2002: Message edited by: enigma555 ]</p>

enigma555

Yet each and every one of those has been "justified" by your Bible at one point in history or another. How was it that the Bible provides an absolute moral code, now?

[ June 02, 2002: Message edited by: enigma555 ]</p>

emur

Originally posted by emur:
"Is torturing small children right or wrong? Is slavery right or wrong? Is forcing atheists on pain of death to declare belief in God right or wrong?"
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tercel: "I agree with you. But in making this assertion you are recognising the existence an objective moral standard. And in doing so you are, as I see it, proving God."

No I am not. For an objective moral standard to prove God, there would have to be only one set of clear, unambigious, non-contradictory standards for all of us. And that doesn't exist.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
emur: "One may be able to get an objective morality from the god of the bible, but it's not a morality worthy of service to humanity."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tercel: "It's possible to get any amount of morality you like from the Bible:
-------
"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another."
"Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves...""
-------

I have no problem with most of those verses. Love for others sums up my morality quite well. However, selecting certain loving verses from the bible does not argue for an objective morality.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
emur: "The objective morality of so many of the followers of the god of the bible that I have been in contact with contains rigidity, pride, arrogance, hypocrisy, doctrine over human need, image over compassion, law over grace...well you get the point."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tercel: "Do you think it is necessarily right to judge a system by it's less enlightened followers?
If large numbers of the supposed followers of Christianity have largely ignored its message, then who is there to blame but them?"

Yes indeed! The system's large numbers show the faults and weaknesses of the system. The system, by virtue of its contents, attracts and condones those bad behaviors. And in some cases, encourages them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
emur: "You want objective morality? Please don't get it from the bible. It will not do any of us any good!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tercel: "The Bible is but one source of morals. As Paul says: God has written his moral commands in the hearts of all."

Thanks for making my point. The "hearts" of all do not contain the same moral commands. Just consider Christianity alone. For some, holiness (as they interpret it) is ahead of all else, and as a result people are treated as less important than doctrine. For others, grace is at the pinnacle, and so people are treated more important than doctrine.
This is but one of many examples I could give to show that within Christianity itself there is no set of objective moral standards.
Using objective morality to try to prove God actually indicates the opposite, since reality shows that there is no objective morality.

Mel