Does theism lead to immoral behaviour?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

But, again, detractors of theism always point to the 'adherents' in order level their accusations. But, since when does anyone define a religious system based on the position of the interpreters?

Since always. A religion is defined by the beliefs and practices of its adherents.

Find in the Bible where Jesus endorsed any of the acts that you criticized.

Jesus gets up to some pretty wild stuff in the Bible, though I'd say he comes across more as mentally ill than actually evil, IMO.

... but don't think I didn't pick up on how you're trying to change the subject.

God is the author of morality - a concept incomprehensible to the secular realm. Therefore, provided that one does not lose their focus on God, theism will always lead to morality.

The evidence shows that this isn't the case. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

The evidence shows that this isn't the case. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

In my opinion, all you have to do is read the Bible (the Old Testament in particular) to see that a person should never derive their morality from it. For example, "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks" (Psalm 137:9), God's order to kill witches (Exodus 22:18), and God's order to wipe the Amalikites off the face of the earth (Exodus 17:8–13; 1 Samuel 15:2–3). According to the Bible, God told the Israelites, "Now go, attack the Amalekites, and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’" (I Samuel 15:3). That's not mentioning the biblical story about God committing global genocide by drowning humanity (aside from Noah and his family) in a worldwide flood because he is royally pi**ed off about how wicked mankind behaves. So he decides to kill off mankind and start over.

Furthermore, the Bible teaches that God is capable of hatred in addition to wrath and jealousy. Christians, in my opinion, deceive themselves by focusing entirely on his purported love and kindness while disregarding the other scriptures depicting his hatred, anger, wrath, and jealousy. And according to Genesis 6:6-7, God Almighty regretted creating not only mankind but also every animal, every creature that creeps on the ground, and the birds of the air.

The Bible contains several other verses that mention God's regrets in addition to creating humanity, all animals, and birds (1 Samuel 15:11; 2 Samuel 24:16; Jeremiah 42:10). The Bible also mentions God changing his mind about bringing disasters down on his own people as punishment for their transgressions against him (Jeremiah 26:13; 1 Chronicles 21:15; Joel 2:13). For the record, Jeremiah 26:13, 1 Chronicles 21:15, and Joel 2:13 coincide with Isaiah 45:7 (NIV), which states, "I form the light and create darkness; I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the Lord, do all these things." Also, the New King James Version uses the word "calamity," and the King James Version uses the word "evil" instead of "disaster" or "calamity." The KJV essentially states that God creates evil.

Speaking as a former Christian and survivor of childhood abuse, I see God as a narcissistic and abusive parent who only "loves" you when you do or say exactly what they want you to do. And you think that if you don't make them angry, they won't hurt you, but you're not completely sure because they have an extremely violent temper and are known to lash out in anger. So, if you disobey them and make them angry with you, then there will be hell to pay.

That isn't a relationship based on unconditional love, but rather one based on fear and mistrust. If God exists, then I don't believe that he is worthy of my respect and reverence, let alone my love and worship. I do believe, however, that he has earned my contempt. If God exists, then he can go to hell. He obviously doesn't think I'm worth his time, and I now don't think he's worth mine. I also see God as a sadistic and psychopathic monster who delights in inflicting pain and torturing people, as well as in causing total chaos and disasters in order to inflict pain and kill people. I don't see him as loving and just.

I reread the Bible without rose-colored glasses after leaving Christianity, and I no longer believe that anyone should take their understanding of morality (or love, mercy, and justice) from the Bible. In my opinion, the God of the Bible has a sadistic mentality of "Do as I say, not as I do," making him the most hypocritical (detestable and barbarous) figure known to mankind. And this article, "Violence in the Bible: Greatest Hits," has several other examples of violence in the Bible. Despite my criticism of the Bible and assertion that it should not be relied on for moral guidance, I believe that what the Bible says should be taken with a grain of salt. As far as I'm concerned, it has many contradictions in it (see links below), as well as a few stories of Jesus Christ that were copied and adapted from Greek mythology and other pagan religions by his most devout followers, as I explained in other posts, such as this one.

101 Clear Contradictions In The Bible

10 Christ-Like Figures that Predate Jesus

The Bible is Fiction: A Collection of Evidence

BibViz Project-Bible Contradictions, Misogyny, Violence, Inaccuracies interactively visualized

 

[DNB]

Since always. A religion is defined by the beliefs and practices of its adherents.

No, it's not, ever. A radical and violent jihadist is not a muslim in the eyes of an Imam. Nor is a crusader a Christian, nor an inquisitionist, nor the Christian heretic persecutors.
The New Testament, and the New Testament alone, defines Christianity.
...we're not really having this discussion, are we?

... but don't think I didn't pick up on how you're trying to change the subject.

Glad to see that you're on the ball.

 

[Heyo]

No, it's not, ever. A radical and violent jihadist is not a muslim in the eyes of an Imam. Nor is a crusader a Christian, nor an inquisitionist, nor the Christian heretic persecutors.
The New Testament, and the New Testament alone, defines Christianity.

You should sue the NIFB churches and the WBC for false advertising. If that goes well, go for the RCC.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No, it's not, ever. A radical and violent jihadist is not a muslim in the eyes of an Imam. Nor is a crusader a Christian, nor an inquisitionist, nor the Christian heretic persecutors.
The New Testament, and the New Testament alone, defines Christianity.
...we're not really having this discussion, are we?

This argument sucks. It's basically just a glorified version of a "No True Scotsman" argument.

You cannot say that the bad consequences of religious beliefs, or that religious movements that produce violence, "aren't religion". The idea that "proper" religion is peaceful, harmless and benign is a relatively modern idea borne out by selective pressures imposed ON religious thought by a liberalising world. Throughout history, religious beliefs were just as likely to lead to war, discrimination, persecution, torture and rape as they were to lead to inner peace, humility, kindness and charity. Religious thought isn't defined solely by its positive traits or consequences, or the more liberal modern application of it.

A violent Jihadist and a humble, kind, Muslim teacher are both Muslims. They are just different interpretations of the same fundamental ideas, largely due to individual social contexts more than to innate doctrinal difference.

If you want to claim "The New Testament alone defines Christianity", that may be true for you, but there are many, MANY people out there who disagree vehemently. Are these people "disqualified" from being Christians because they happen to have a different perspective to you? Are you God? Are you alone capable of understanding and defining the "true" Christianity?

Part of what makes an idea religious is that it eschews our ability to make definitive, objective distinctions between correct and incorrect valuations of it - because the point is that these kinds of judgements cannot be made by us save for the influence of an external, supernatural source. We may be able to make the judgement "killing children is bad", but is that necessarily God's opinion?

We can't know. That's the point, and that's why faith is generally regarded as a necessary component of religious thought.

 

[ChristineM]

No, it's not, ever. A radical and violent jihadist is not a muslim in the eyes of an Imam. Nor is a crusader a Christian, nor an inquisitionist, nor the Christian heretic persecutors.
The New Testament, and the New Testament alone, defines Christianity.
...we're not really having this discussion, are we?

But apparently people who supposedly know the NT are Christians

Matthew 7:1-5
Luke 6:37-42

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, it's not, ever. A radical and violent jihadist is not a muslim in the eyes of an Imam. Nor is a crusader a Christian, nor an inquisitionist, nor the Christian heretic persecutors.
The New Testament, and the New Testament alone, defines Christianity.
...we're not really having this discussion, are we?

Glad to see that you're on the ball.

New Testament only? What about original sin and the ten commandments?

 

[ChristineM]

New Testament only? What about original sin and the ten commandments?

I find it so odd that the printers print 100% bible for Christians and 85% of it is a total waste of time.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, it's not, ever.

Nonsense... or are you suggesting that there's, say, a "correct" Hinduism or Norse Paganism that's endorsed by God?

A radical and violent jihadist is not a muslim in the eyes of an Imam. Nor is a crusader a Christian, nor an inquisitionist, nor the Christian heretic persecutors.

For any Muslim, we can find some other group of Muslims who says he isn't a Muslim.

For any Christian, we can find some other group of Christians who says he isn't a Christian.

The New Testament, and the New Testament alone, defines Christianity.

So you think the first-century early Christians weren't Christians?

Who do you think established the canon of the New Testament?

 

[DNB]

This argument sucks. It's basically just a glorified version of a "No True Scotsman" argument.

You cannot say that the bad consequences of religious beliefs, or that religious movements that produce violence, "aren't religion". The idea that "proper" religion is peaceful, harmless and benign is a relatively modern idea borne out by selective pressures imposed ON religious thought by a liberalising world. Throughout history, religious beliefs were just as likely to lead to war, discrimination, persecution, torture and rape as they were to lead to inner peace, humility, kindness and charity. Religious thought isn't defined solely by its positive traits or consequences, or the more liberal modern application of it.

A violent Jihadist and a humble, kind, Muslim teacher are both Muslims. They are just different interpretations of the same fundamental ideas, largely due to individual social contexts more than to innate doctrinal difference.

If you want to claim "The New Testament alone defines Christianity", that may be true for you, but there are many, MANY people out there who disagree vehemently. Are these people "disqualified" from being Christians because they happen to have a different perspective to you? Are you God? Are you alone capable of understanding and defining the "true" Christianity?

Part of what makes an idea religious is that it eschews our ability to make definitive, objective distinctions between correct and incorrect valuations of it - because the point is that these kinds of judgements cannot be made by us save for the influence of an external, supernatural source. We may be able to make the judgement "killing children is bad", but is that necessarily God's opinion?

We can't know. That's the point, and that's why faith is generally regarded as a necessary component of religious thought.

I'm sorry, you are not entitled to say that something 'sucks' with such irrational argumentation.
Only Jesus defines what Christianity is, only Mohammed defines what Islam is, only Buddha defines what Buddhism is, obviously.
The adherents do not, for their interpretation, indoctrination, ulterior motives may be entirely flawed, obviously.
What in the world are you talking about?

 

[DNB]

But apparently people who supposedly know the NT are Christians

Matthew 7:1-5
Luke 6:37-42

You better believe it - and I will judge everyone accordingly - for a bad tree does not produce good fruit.

...you're not really trying to play the 'do not judge' card with me, are you?
If you're going to quote Scripture, wouldn't it more prudent to understand what you're quoting - keep it in context?
Lesson: Jesus meant do not judge self-righteously or hypocritically, and the significance ends right there.
For, we are to judge everything and everyone otherwise. Know right from wrong, and know who's a trouble-maker and who isn't. Discern false prophets and spirits, elect capable men as leaders and reject the incompetent or immature ones. Be wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

I Corinthians 6:2-3

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm sorry, you are not entitled to say that something 'sucks' with such irrational argumentation.

I agree with @ImmortalFlame - your argument sucks.

Only Jesus defines what Christianity is, only Mohammed defines what Islam is, only Buddha defines what Buddhism is, obviously.

So you think that every religion's purported founder is real? Wild.

Do you think that only the aliens define what Raëlism is?

The adherents do not, for their interpretation, indoctrination, ulterior motives may be entirely flawed, obviously.

Theistic religion that you consider "entirely flawed" is still theistic religion and very much part of what "theism" means.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You better believe it - and I will judge everyone accordingly - for a bad tree does not produce good fruit.

And here you are, dropping bad fruit all through this thread.

 

[DNB]

New Testament only? What about original sin and the ten commandments?

Jesus Christ defines Christianity, obviously.

 

[DNB]

So you think the first-century early Christians weren't Christians?

Who do you think established the canon of the New Testament?

Mohammed defines Islam, Buddha Buddhism, Confucius Confucianism, and Jesus Christ Christianity, obviously.

 

[DNB]

I agree with @ImmortalFlame - your argument sucks.



So you think that every religion's purported founder is real? Wild.

Do you think that only the aliens define what Raëlism is?



Theistic religion that you consider "entirely flawed" is still theistic religion and very much part of what "theism" means.

What's a 'subway stalinist'?

 

[DNB]

And here you are, dropping bad fruit all through this thread.

So, in totality, you are a penguin subway stalinist, but to a greater degree a penguin?
Are there penguins in Russia, or are we talking about a different Stalin?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Mohammed defines Islam, Buddha Buddhism, Confucius Confucianism, and Jesus Christ Christianity, obviously.

You think Jesus decided what would and wouldn't be in the New Testament?

...despite having been dead for roughly a century before the books that would make up the New Testament were even written down, and more like two centuries before the decision would be made about which books were in and which were out?

That's... quite the trick. Is he still available for proofreading? I have some reports that could use a going-over.

 

[DNB]

In my opinion, all you have to do is read the Bible (the Old Testament in particular) to see that a person should never derive their morality from it. For example, "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks" (Psalm 137:9), God's order to kill witches (Exodus 22:18), and God's order to wipe the Amalikites off the face of the earth (Exodus 17:8–13; 1 Samuel 15:2–3). According to the Bible, God told the Israelites, "Now go, attack the Amalekites, and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’" (I Samuel 15:3). That's not mentioning the biblical story about God committing global genocide by drowning humanity (aside from Noah and his family) in a worldwide flood because he is royally pi**ed off about how wicked mankind behaves. So he decides to kill off mankind and start over.

Furthermore, the Bible teaches that God is capable of hatred in addition to wrath and jealousy. Christians, in my opinion, deceive themselves by focusing entirely on his purported love and kindness while disregarding the other scriptures depicting his hatred, anger, wrath, and jealousy. And according to Genesis 6:6-7, God Almighty regretted creating not only mankind but also every animal, every creature that creeps on the ground, and the birds of the air.

The Bible contains several other verses that mention God's regrets in addition to creating humanity, all animals, and birds (1 Samuel 15:11; 2 Samuel 24:16; Jeremiah 42:10). The Bible also mentions God changing his mind about bringing disasters down on his own people as punishment for their transgressions against him (Jeremiah 26:13; 1 Chronicles 21:15; Joel 2:13). For the record, Jeremiah 26:13, 1 Chronicles 21:15, and Joel 2:13 coincide with Isaiah 45:7 (NIV), which states, "I form the light and create darkness; I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the Lord, do all these things." Also, the New King James Version uses the word "calamity," and the King James Version uses the word "evil" instead of "disaster" or "calamity." The KJV essentially states that God creates evil.

Speaking as a former Christian and survivor of childhood abuse, I see God as a narcissistic and abusive parent who only "loves" you when you do or say exactly what they want you to do. And you think that if you don't make them angry, they won't hurt you, but you're not completely sure because they have an extremely violent temper and are known to lash out in anger. So, if you disobey them and make them angry with you, then there will be hell to pay.

That isn't a relationship based on unconditional love, but rather one based on fear and mistrust. If God exists, then I don't believe that he is worthy of my respect and reverence, let alone my love and worship. I do believe, however, that he has earned my contempt. If God exists, then he can go to hell. He obviously doesn't think I'm worth his time, and I now don't think he's worth mine. I also see God as a sadistic and psychopathic monster who delights in inflicting pain and torturing people, as well as in causing total chaos and disasters in order to inflict pain and kill people. I don't see him as loving and just.

I reread the Bible without rose-colored glasses after leaving Christianity, and I no longer believe that anyone should take their understanding of morality (or love, mercy, and justice) from the Bible. In my opinion, the God of the Bible has a sadistic mentality of "Do as I say, not as I do," making him the most hypocritical (detestable and barbarous) figure known to mankind. And this article, "Violence in the Bible: Greatest Hits," has several other examples of violence in the Bible. Despite my criticism of the Bible and assertion that it should not be relied on for moral guidance, I believe that what the Bible says should be taken with a grain of salt. As far as I'm concerned, it has many contradictions in it (see links below), as well as a few stories of Jesus Christ that were copied and adapted from Greek mythology and other pagan religions by his most devout followers, as I explained in other posts, such as this one.

101 Clear Contradictions In The Bible

10 Christ-Like Figures that Predate Jesus

The Bible is Fiction: A Collection of Evidence

BibViz Project-Bible Contradictions, Misogyny, Violence, Inaccuracies interactively visualized

Did you ever read the part about the Pharisee and the tax collector in the synagogue - one believes that he's righteous, the other too ashamed to look up to heaven, and the latter was justified in God's eyes.

You are surprised that God destroyed the world - what reasonable and insightful person would ever think that humans don't deserve that?
Words cannot express the sorrow that I feel for your abuse, but this is indicative, in countless forms, of mankind.
I, personally, can't believe that God hasn't struck me down a thousands times over, the selfish and ruthless way that I've lived my life, never thanking Him or paying head to His precepts of 'love one another'. That's all that He's asked of us. Anyone that was punished in the Bible was for that reason, their obscene wickedness, and you see how long God waited to exact retribution.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What's a 'subway stalinist'?

Over the years, I've found that when someone brings up the user title or other profile info in a debate here, it's because they've run out of relevant things to say to support their failing argument.