I don't particularly want to sin...

[loverofhumanity]

How does a fallible human, like yourself, know when some idea is moral or not? And if their subjective interpretation of the bible is morally reliable? Give us the objective test in reality that you use.​

Poor analogy since there is only one King of England. Believers in God? Billions of them. What is the test that one believer is right and others wrong? None. They all get to decide what their God says and commands. The question is: why aren't these religions putting more pressure on the believers to be moral, thoughtful, self-reflective, etc.? As it is Christianity and Islam allows their believers to believe anything they damn well please, and self-justify it, including murder.


Murder yes. But if you are waging war against God's enemies, then it is justified killing.

See how easy it is for a believer to evade moral concerns? Where's the God guiding these people? Why is it absent? If it allows anything then what purpose does it serve?

And I notice you had no objective test that I asked for above. You evading my request illustrates the huge flaw in Christian and Muslim religion. Anything goes. If you can get away with killing others, then it's moral. Of course that is secular law that is the guiding light, not any God.

The Quran only permits self defense if attacked which is universally accepted by all nations.

2:190 And fight for the cause of God against those who fight against you: but commit not the injustice of attacking them first: God loveth not such injustice.

“Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who did not fight you for your religion and did not drive you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal justly” [8] “It is only in regards to those who fought you for your religion, have driven you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allah forbids you to take them as allies. And whoever takes them as Allies, then those are the oppressors” [9] Holy Quran, Surat (Al Mumtahina) Ch (60), verses (8-9)

 

[SkepticThinker]

Wrong, they have been grounded in biblical rhetoric, very little fact and no logic in the real sense.

Plus a whole lot of unevidenced claims.

 

[osgart]

I think you need to expand this a little for me to better understand.

I agree that the facts of morality never changes (God never changes). I agree that the cause and effect of morality doesn't change since morality never changes and, as my scriptures says, "God is not mocked, whatever a man sows so shall he reap" (cause and effect)

But norms do change from generation to generation. Let's take marriage, for example. Some would hold to "a man and a woman" and another would say "who are you to tell me two of the same sex is not a marriage".

Who decides if that is just humanity shifting vs the constant "morality doesn't change"? Something changed... who is right?

Nature, and genetics decide who is homosexual, transgender, or else wise. If you take God out of the equation the causes and effects would still be the same. Universally, and generally speaking it's virtues and vices that everything boils down to.

Nature don't care about morality of humans. Children are born from bad relationships, the same as in loving marriages. If God was in charge of nature, then there would be no conception of babies from rape victims.

I don't see that nature cares about our morals. Nevertheless morality is a necessity of cause and effect among the living.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Do you have evidence that humans dictate morality? I ask since you said you see no evidence for the flip side so you should be having evidence to your hard claim.

Yes, I see all kinds of humans throughout our history attempting to encode morality into laws and rules in societies all across the globe.
I see us humans debating aspects of morality literally right now.

 

[lukethethird]

Yes, I see all kinds of humans throughout our history attempting to encode morality into laws and rules in societies all across the globe.
I see us humans debating aspects of morality literally right now.

I'm not.

 

[F1fan]

The Quran only permits self defense if attacked which is universally accepted by all nations.

2:190 And fight for the cause of God against those who fight against you: but commit not the injustice of attacking them first: God loveth not such injustice.

Right. So if you think your religion and God are being attacked by the West you can easily justify defense against them by waging jihad, and that allows the hijacking of 4 planes and flying them into buildings.

See how easy it is? When there is no actual God guiding believers they will interpret texts any way they damn well please.

Where's the absent God? If it writes these texts then it had better make God damned sure his people interpret it correctly, yes?

 

[Eyes to See]

Yet I gave you examples of how the Bible isn't making many Christians good people. Why is that? Why couldn't the Bible be more clear?

Here are dozens of examples out of millions of how the Bible has made the world a better place, and made people better people:

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/categories/VODIntExpTransformations

I Put Down My Rifle a woman in the military in Canada relates how the Bible changed her life:

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODIntExpTransformations/docid-502016525_1_VIDEO

Former Enemies Who Became Friends relates how the Bible changed a former gangleader's life, and united people who once hated each other:

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODIntExpTransformations/pub-jwb_201701_4_VIDEO

My Gang Was My Religion - Deals with the life transformation of a former gang member and how the Bible transformed his life for the better. I personally know Fernando he lives in Rosarita, here in Mexico. Before the pandemic we would go to Baja California, usually every December for our assemblies where he lives. A very nice person.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODIntExpTransformations/pub-jwb_201703_3_VIDEO

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The Quran only permits self defense if attacked which is universally accepted by all nations.

2:190 And fight for the cause of God against those who fight against you: but commit not the injustice of attacking them first: God loveth not such injustice.

Every islamic terrorist who plans / is part of attacks on western targets (the US, France,...) say exactly that: that these attacks are not aggressions but rather responses to those countries attacking "islam" and muslims in the middle east.

None of these people consider the US or western secular democracies in general to be "innocent".

And when you ask them why they attack the innocent civilians because "they aren't the ones dropping the bombs", then the reply is that they consider those civilians guilty, because the countries are democracies and it's the people who vote the leaders into office who then order the bombings.

It sounds like you are completely unaware of how these people justify their violence.

“Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who did not fight you for your religion and did not drive you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal justly” [8] “It is only in regards to those who fought you for your religion, have driven you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allah forbids you to take them as allies.

You mean like how the US and others have helped the israeli zionists to drive palestinian muslims from their homes?
Again, it's like you have no clue about how these people justify their violence.

And whoever takes them as Allies, then those are the oppressors” [9] Holy Quran, Surat (Al Mumtahina) Ch (60), verses (8-9)

In other words, all allies of Israel are oppressors.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But norms do change from generation to generation. Let's take marriage, for example. Some would hold to "a man and a woman" and another would say "who are you to tell me two of the same sex is not a marriage".

What defines a "marriage" is a matter of social contract. It has no moral implications.

 

[Kenny]

I am not sure how the fact that we change our minds means that it is not us who decides.

Nor would the existence of a god change that fact

Double sword there... so let's get it in context. We are talking about the difference between man and God. In my faith, God does not fluctuate in His morality.

The fact that man does change their minds simply means that today's immorality can become tomorrows morality (as we have seen) and, thus, in light of the thread, can anything be permitted.

Ask a mobster if it is all right to commit murder

Or, see if in some countries it is alright to have a child for your wife.

The religious - fluctuate - on their interpretation of their sacred texts from generation to generation. All of you do. If I were to pull devout individuals of your religious line out of history from the beginning of each century back to the year 500 CE and stuck you all in a room, I doubt that all 15 of you would come out alive. I am sure that half of you would come out bloody.

Ciao

That just supports my position.. man changes things but God does not fluctuate.

 

[Kenny]

Nature, and genetics decide who is homosexual, transgender, or else wise. If you take God out of the equation the causes and effects would still be the same. Universally, and generally speaking it's virtues and vices that everything boils down to.

I disagree.

 

[Kenny]

What defines a "marriage" is a matter of social contract. It has no moral implications.

As defined by man, which changes the parameters. God's doesn't although He gives mankind the freedom to do as they please.

 

[ppp]

Double sword there... so let's get it in context. We are talking about the difference between man and God. In my faith, God does not fluctuate in His morality.

And I am saying that for the purposes of determining what is moral it doesn't matter whether there is a god or not. All that you have is your sacred text and humans interpreting that text. And even among the people of your religion, who are just as devout as you are, there is significant and honest and pious disagreement in interpretation. You all think that interpretation to which your adhere is inspired by God. You all think that there is divine guidance in your lives. You all think that your faith is the product of revelation. You all think that asserting your faith is a salient response.

I will point it out again, unless your religion is less than two generations old, you do not even fully agree with your religious ancestors.

And who knows? One of you might be correct. It might even be you. But it doesn't matter. Because for the purposes of determining what is moral, you have no way to demonstrate that you are correct.

 

[Kenny]

And I am saying that for the purposes of determining what is moral it doesn't matter whether there is a god or not.

that is true... in the natural sense. However, God may have a differing viewpoint when one meets Him face to face. (whether you believe that there is a God or not, IMV, it will still happen)

All that you have is your sacred text and humans interpreting that text. And even among the people of your religion, who are just as devout as you are, there is significant and honest and pious disagreement in interpretation. You all think that interpretation to which your adhere is inspired by God. You all think that there is divine guidance in your lives. You all think that your faith is the product of revelation. You all think that asserting your faith is a salient response.

And all you have is your personal opinion. So? You are just proving my point.

So we adhere to (and all agree in our faith) that you don't commit murder, you don't have other gods, you honor your mother and your father, you don't covet what isn't your et al.

I'm not sure which interpretation you think we disagree on.

And who knows? One of you might be correct. It might even be you. But it doesn't matter. Because for the purposes of determining what is moral, you have no way to demonstrate that you are correct.

Which, again, proves my point. You don't either but God is still constant.

So.... we will agree to disagree and live our lives accordingly.

 

[ppp]

that is true... in the natural sense.

In any sense. If there is a god, you have no way to determine whether you have it right, or whether you are one of the deluded religionists who honestly and earnestly believes whatever..

And all you have is your personal opinion. So? You are just proving my point.

And your interpretation on what God wants is one of those personal opinions.

So we adhere to (and all agree in our faith) that you don't commit murder, you don't have other gods, you honor your mother and your father, you don't covet what isn't your et al.

If you are just going to acerbic and snotty...

I'm not sure which interpretation you think we disagree on.

That God, as depicted in the Bible is moral, maybe?

So.... we will agree to disagree and live our lives accordingly.

As long as your actions do not attempt to compel others to adhere to your religious beliefs through legal statute, social policy, intimidation or force. Sure!

 

[Sheldon]

You can do whatever you want, anytime. There are consequences both on Earth and beyond.

There is no objective evidence that we may suffer consequences beyond our physical lives.

 

[Sheldon]

osgart said: ↑
Nature, and genetics decide who is homosexual, transgender, or else wise. If you take God out of the equation the causes and effects would still be the same. Universally, and generally speaking it's virtues and vices that everything boils down to.

I disagree.

Nonetheless as Pierre-Simon Laplace once pointed out to Napoleon, no deity is necessary for our understanding of the universe. When that changes, please do post the evidence.

 

[Sheldon]

As defined by man, which changes the parameters. God's doesn't although He gives mankind the freedom to do as they please.

I disagree.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Right. So if you think your religion and God are being attacked by the West you can easily justify defense against them by waging jihad, and that allows the hijacking of 4 planes and flying them into buildings.

See how easy it is? When there is no actual God guiding believers they will interpret texts any way they damn well please.

Where's the absent God? If it writes these texts then it had better make God damned sure his people interpret it correctly, yes?

If a country is attacked it has the right of self defense. But if an individual is mistreated then the law in the Quran is to return good for evil.

Muslims are a peaceful people. Terrorists disobey their own Holy Book. Let’s take the seige of Jerusalem where pregnant women and babies were slaughtered then afterwards the Christians sung the praises of Jesus. Jesus had nothing to do with that slaughter. He clearly said to love one’s enemies yet Christians ignored His teachings and slaughtered innocent people. That is not Christ’s fault.

It’s very clear in the Quran not to kill. If criminals want to kill they will but they do so without God’s approval.

 

[ppp]

It’s very clear in the Quran not to kill.

Obviously, it's not clear.