Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Diotima · 07-30-2003, 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
Sorry, it's clear to me you do not understand the concept of moral relativism.

"Moral Relativism: a theory which claims that what is right or good is always relative to the particular circumstance and beliefs of a people (or person). There are no objective or absolute standards to appeal to when trying to decide what is right." Reference: Understanding Ethics: Noel Preston, Federation Press, 1996.

For example: Rape, murder, pedophilia, torture, bestiality, incest (insert biblical example here) are acceptable in another time and another place.

A rational person (such as myself) would say, no.. no it's not...

If Jesus said it then, than it applies to my standards, my morality, NOW! And if we accept that Jesus is a person who did exist and that we can accurately interpret from the Bible what he said (something I find silly) then I raise my middle finger and say screw you you immoral individual. Screw, you.

Sorry but I fail to see your point and I need your help

Are you pro or against moral relativism?

I took you for an atheist and I thought that atheists are avoiding judging other people's morality...

SpaceMonkey · 07-30-2003, 02:34 AM

Why is it so important that you categorise me? Do you need to know what I believe in order to defend your own ideas? Or should I say the ideas of the Bible?

If I must be pigeon-holed I guess I belong in the Agnostic category. Although I'm leaning toward the atheist side of the fence. At leat they think for themselves.

Atheist moral relativists? I think not.

You're the one saying we should ignore slavery because it occured in another time in another place.

I think that that's disgusting. What do the atheists think? I guess you'll have to ask them.

Diotima · 07-30-2003, 02:39 AM

You are right! Instead of asking whether you believe in moral relativism or not, I should have asked in what time zone you are and what have you been drinking...

I am not interested in what you believe and I am even less interested in categorizing you, I just made a comment to your original post that it's wrong to judge ancient texts out of their historical context.

You are entitled to criticize whatever you wish but you can't cut it off the historical environment that it was produced.

wade-w · 07-30-2003, 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Diotima
I am not interested in what you believe and I am even less interested in categorizing you, I just made a comment to your original post that it's wrong to judge ancient texts out of their historical context.

You are entitled to criticize whatever you wish but you can't cut it off the historical environment that it was produced.

In general, you are correct. However, in this case there is a legitimate reason for the criticism. Many (if not most) xians claim that there is an absolute morality, and that morality can be found in the Bible. That changes everything.

sakrilege · 07-30-2003, 03:33 AM

Sorry to return to the opening post but,

Quote:

Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
How does one explain this away in the context of faith? How can fundies respond to this?

The southern baptists were formed due to the slavery issue. From Religious Support for Slavery

Quote:

The Southern Baptists, and many others who supported slavery, used the
Bible to support their position. The following passages were widely used for that purpose:

1 Tim 6:1-2 - "Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their
masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may
not be defamed. Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful
on the ground that they are brethren; rather they must serve all the better
since those who benefit by their service are believers and beloved."

Titus 2:9-10 - "Bid slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give
satisfaction in every respect; they are not to be refractory, nor to pilfer,
but to show entire and true fidelity, so that in everything they may adorn
the doctrine of God our savior."

Eph 6:5 and Col. 3:22 - Servants, be obediant to them that are your
masters..."

Lev 25:45-46 - "Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn
among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you,
which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession....they
shall be your bondmen forever."

Exod 21:20-21 - "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the
slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be
punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his
property."

Pyrrho · 07-30-2003, 12:22 PM

Aside from "sakrilege's" listings of verses supporting slavery, there is more, supposedly the words of Jesus himself:

Quote:

King James Version
Matthew 5: 17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Revised Standard Version
Matthew 5: 17 "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. 18 For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. 19 Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

So, Jesus explicitly endorses all of the laws (including those supporting slavery) in the Old Testament. Truly, the Southern Baptists, in supporting slavery, were following the teachings of Jesus, as presented in the Bible, far better than the abolitionists.

Dr Rick · 07-30-2003, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Diotima
I thought that atheists are avoiding judging other people's morality...

It's the Christians that are supposed to do that: "Judge not lest ye be judged" and all; atheists are under no such necessary constraint and so are free to criticise putative divinities that fail to condemn atrocities such as slavery, regardless of the time period.

sophie · 07-30-2003, 01:46 PM

Dr. Rick, How would you criticise omniGOD?

Given omniGOD as capable of the combination of all possibilities.

sophie · 07-30-2003, 01:51 PM

I may propose that anyone who believed Jesus condoned slavery himself in his own words has no faith in the true omniGOD.

Pyrrho · 07-30-2003, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sophie
I may propose that anyone who believed Jesus condoned slavery himself in his own words has no faith in the true omniGOD.

If that is true, then no one who believes the Bible has faith in "the true omniGOD".

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

07-30-2003, 02:34 AM	#22
SpaceMonkey Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 37	Why is it so important that you categorise me? Do you need to know what I believe in order to defend your own ideas? Or should I say the ideas of the Bible? If I must be pigeon-holed I guess I belong in the Agnostic category. Although I'm leaning toward the atheist side of the fence. At leat they think for themselves. Atheist moral relativists? I think not. You're the one saying we should ignore slavery because it occured in another time in another place. I think that that's disgusting. What do the atheists think? I guess you'll have to ask them.

07-30-2003, 02:39 AM	#23
Diotima Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Europe Posts: 49	You are right! Instead of asking whether you believe in moral relativism or not, I should have asked in what time zone you are and what have you been drinking... I am not interested in what you believe and I am even less interested in categorizing you, I just made a comment to your original post that it's wrong to judge ancient texts out of their historical context. You are entitled to criticize whatever you wish but you can't cut it off the historical environment that it was produced.

07-30-2003, 01:46 PM	#28
sophie Veteran Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: On the road to extinction. . . Posts: 1,485	Dr. Rick, How would you criticise omniGOD? Given omniGOD as capable of the combination of all possibilities.

07-30-2003, 01:51 PM	#29
sophie Veteran Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: On the road to extinction. . . Posts: 1,485	I may propose that anyone who believed Jesus condoned slavery himself in his own words has no faith in the true omniGOD.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.