• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Theists, please tell me why you believe murder is wrong.

InChrist

Free4ever
The important thing, IMO, is for secular people like myself and (spiritual? I don't want to paste a label on you) people like yourself to figure out how to live together. I really don't care that you are a devout believer. I will go to bat for you if someone tries to take that away from you, but in that I expect you to also respect my decision not to believe what you believe (obviously I'm speaking of a few choice items). I wish we could agree on those things we share in common and then try to find compromise where possible in areas that we don't, but agree to keep our ideas in our homes and churches and only expect those things in public spaces that show no favor to a particular religion or non-religion.


One of the biggest problems I have with Christians (aware that not all Christians are the same, so I'm speaking for a particular subset, though reasonably large subset in the US) is that they believe it is their duty to use their influence (which can be substantial) to push their Christian ideals on others. In other words. People who hold Humanism as a foundation for moral ideas can find a lot in common with almost any denomination of Christian in the moral sphere. But when looking at something like, for instance, homosexuality, something that personally I couldn't fathom, but I think that homosexuality is perfectly normal and that consenting adults that want to engage in homosexual relationships should have the right to do so without discrimination. So just as I would stand up for Christians to practice their beliefs, I would stand up for homosexuals (and other flavors of non-heterosexuality that involves consenting adults) because I think they have that right. That said, I find myself supporting homosexuality against intolerant Christians who don't respect the rights of others they disagree with all while pretending to be persecuted.

Thoughts?
Thanks for your thoughts. I will get back to this and express mine when I have an opportunity. I’m on the road at the moment.
 

InChrist

Free4ever
The important thing, IMO, is for secular people like myself and (spiritual? I don't want to paste a label on you) people like yourself to figure out how to live together. I really don't care that you are a devout believer. I will go to bat for you if someone tries to take that away from you, but in that I expect you to also respect my decision not to believe what you believe (obviously I'm speaking of a few choice items). I wish we could agree on those things we share in common and then try to find compromise where possible in areas that we don't, but agree to keep our ideas in our homes and churches and only expect those things in public spaces that show no favor to a particular religion or non-religion.


One of the biggest problems I have with Christians (aware that not all Christians are the same, so I'm speaking for a particular subset, though reasonably large subset in the US) is that they believe it is their duty to use their influence (which can be substantial) to push their Christian ideals on others. In other words. People who hold Humanism as a foundation for moral ideas can find a lot in common with almost any denomination of Christian in the moral sphere. But when looking at something like, for instance, homosexuality, something that personally I couldn't fathom, but I think that homosexuality is perfectly normal and that consenting adults that want to engage in homosexual relationships should have the right to do so without discrimination. So just as I would stand up for Christians to practice their beliefs, I would stand up for homosexuals (and other flavors of non-heterosexuality that involves consenting adults) because I think they have that right. That said, I find myself supporting homosexuality against intolerant Christians who don't respect the rights of others they disagree with all while pretending to be persecuted.

Thoughts?
I don’t think there’s much in your post that I would disagree with. I don’t expect you or anyone to agree or comply with my beliefs and I believe each person should be treated respectfully whether I agree with their beliefs, opinions, or perspectives. I would also stand up for your freedoms and rights, as well as up for a homosexual person being abused or mis-treated by another, even a so-called Christian. I’ve had homosexual and lesbian friends over the years. From a biblical perspective I would consider that kind of relationship to be wrong, but I don’t expect them to think it’s wrong. As you said, consenting adults should have the right and freedom to their own lives without discrimination. The Bible does not say Christians are to judge those outside the faith (non-Christians), that is not our place. We are only to deal with those who claim to be Christians.

For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 1 Corinthians 5:12

What I am opposed to is militant behavior from any side; left/right, Christian/non-Christian, LGBQT/Straight that espouses disrespect, hate, violence or tries to shut down or cancel the beliefs or thoughts of others. I happen to think there are forces and/or those at work purposefully stirring up division. I’m getting kind of old now and I don’t remember ever seeing so much divisiveness between people. It seems that even individuals with different views and/or lifestyles used to get along better and be respectful to one another, in general, not always.

I’ve linked an article and would be interested in your thoughts on what happened to the person for expressing his thoughts.




Have a good night.
 
Last edited:

EconGuy

Active Member
I’ve linked an article and would be interested in your thoughts on what happened to the person for expressing his thoughts.

So what did Mr. Lawal say? Always best to go straight to the source:

1690207816544.png


Is there anything wrong with this? Sort of. Let me explain.

Well, let's start with the context. Mr. Lawal is a politician so the things he says and the context in which he says it in our important as he almost certainly represents people of different faiths and others of non-faith.

In a BBC article he said about the event Mr. Lawal said:

"I was appalled by some of the illegal activity I saw online at these events." Which he claimed involved nudity and he feared that children were being exposed.

First, let me be clear, running around in the streets naked (if that's indeed what happened), in most of the civilized world is illegal and most people, religious or not would agree that kind of behavior is unacceptable. So between you and I I doubt there is any disagreement about that.

But here's the problem I see. Why make a comment about "sin"? Why turn something that is a legal matter into a religious matter? Why quote scripture? Why not just stick to near universal ideas of public nudity being something that people agree is wrong?

Maybe Mr. Lawal is proud of his faith? Hmmmm?

Let's address pride.

Colloquially pride has more than one meaning, its a continuum. Self-confidence, and self-respect, feeling accomplished are all forms of pride. Telling your child you are proud of them or encouraging pride in themselves or their accomplishments isn't sin. But, like all things a little can be good and an abundance can be bad. While I wouldn't claim to be steeped in eastern philosophy, I think this tracks pretty well with the idea of balance, often visually represented by symbols like this:

1690212428698.png


A little pride is good, but it must be balanced with humility?


It's not unusual for people or groups that feel marginalized to express pride in their identity as a way to inoculate themselves for the shame that they have historically endured. Just as humility is the opposite of the kind of pride that Mr. Lawal is referencing, pride, to be proud and unapologetic is the opposite of shame.

And indeed Christians in the US have begun to claim their being marginalized and are increasingly expressing their own pride in their fidelity to God in response given the culture clash between people like Lawal, who, intended or not, judged people for being proud of who they are..

I can't imagine it would be hard for me to find examples of Christian pride here on the web.

That said, I acknowledge that in this time of social media ideas travel faster than brains can evaluate real issues. To make matters worse, there are people who find meaning and purpose in creating turmoil, controversy, anger. To bad we don't have a commandment for that...lol. Thou shalt not use social media to sow discord, anger, or misinformation.

Lol, I digress....

In the free world we don't have an answer to this problem. The provocateurs live in spaces that freedom provides. So Mr. Lawal isn't judged by who he is, or his history, but by a comment he may now regret, if for no other reason that it has been misinterpreted. I don't know Mr. Lawal or his public record. I think its possible the reaction to his comments are an overreaction, and even if they aren't because of other things he may have said in the past, I acknowledge that in the US there is some over-reaction to situations like this.
 
Last edited:

Rachel Rugelach

Shalom, y'all.
Staff member
Now, to be clear I know murder is wrong, but I'm curious the reason.

I also know they Bible says murder is wrong, but can someone tell me if that's the root of the reason that you (the theist) believe that it's wrong to murder?

-Cheers

I don't need the Bible to tell me that murder is wrong -- one can see the evidence of that for oneself in how well a civilized society functions and advances when we're not trying to kill each other. The biblical commandment against murder is there to reinforce the obvious. The wisdom of the Sages provides additional clarification: "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow." -- Hillel the Elder
 
Last edited:

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
A Christian once told me that it shouldn't be illegal to kill an atheist since they are godless. They didn't think secular governments had the right to protect atheists, but had no choice but to obey godless laws. Human rights are not for humans to decide, according to them as a human. This is a rare attitude, but I found it both funny and frightening.
Gotta love someone who believes you're going to go and burn in eternal Hell for not believing in an all loving God, but just can't handle you getting a few measly years of life first. Truly a peach.
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Now, to be clear I know murder is wrong, but I'm curious the reason.

I also know they Bible says murder is wrong, but can someone tell me if that's the root of the reason that you (the theist) believe that it's wrong to murder?

-Cheers
There is murder and there is killing. Both lead to death, but each has a different underlying motivation factor. Murder is more planned, while killing can happen in the heat of the moment; not planned.

The drunken driver may kill someone, but this was not planned so it is not murder. Who would want to go through all the grief with nothing to gain. The murderer thinks and plans his actions in advance. He may even be deceptive, so he can stay under the radar, catch the victim off guard, and also have a good chance to escape. This is a far worse evil, which is why it is taboo. The drunken driver is more connected to the whims of the gods; fate, while the murderer is trying to play god assuming power over life and death; willful determinism. That is disrespectful to God.

War is sort of in the gray area. When you are ordered to take the hill, you need to plan with the goal of neutralizing or killing the enemy. This is sort of like murder due to needed planning. However, war has rules of engagement such as uniforms and flags to determine the enemy. Both sides are aware, that that other side is out to get each other all the way to death. There is sort of a wash, in terms of planning, leading to the whim of the gods killing. Anyone can have a bullet with their name on it, find you.
 

Schwarzweg

Ullr, Nebet-Het,Wendigowak
There is murder and there is killing. Both lead to death, but each has a different underlying motivation factor. Murder is more planned, while killing can happen in the heat of the moment; not planned.

The drunken driver may kill someone, but this was not planned so it is not murder. Who would want to go through all the grief with nothing to gain. The murderer thinks and plans his actions in advance. He may even be deceptive, so he can stay under the radar, catch the victim off guard, and also have a good chance to escape. This is a far worse evil, which is why it is taboo. The drunken driver is more connected to the whims of the gods; fate, while the murderer is trying to play god assuming power over life and death; willful determinism. That is disrespectful to God.

War is sort of in the gray area. When you are ordered to take the hill, you need to plan with the goal of neutralizing or killing the enemy. This is sort of like murder due to needed planning. However, war has rules of engagement such as uniforms and flags to determine the enemy. Both sides are aware, that that other side is out to get each other all the way to death. There is sort of a wash, in terms of planning, leading to the whim of the gods killing. Anyone can have a bullet with their name on it, find you.
Morden ist Humbug aber
magisch tätig werden ? Da sag ich jetzt mal weiter nix zu .............................
Alles immer Endlosdiskussionen für nix und wieder nix
Liegt alles im eigenen Ermessen und eigenen Verantwortung und somit
erübrigt sich die Frage von selbst .................finde ich
LG
 

Rachel Rugelach

Shalom, y'all.
Staff member
Are you Christian?

No, I am not Christian. You can click on anyone's screen name here to find out their religion or world view. When taken to that person's profile, just click on the link that says "About." I see that you have indicated in your profile that you have no religion, so I think that maybe I understand your interest in this question?

I am Jewish and, while our holy scriptures are intrinsic to our faith, I believe that Judaism places a greater importance on our actions in this world -- not just our actions in relation to God but also our actions in relation to our fellow human beings.

When I say: "I don't need the Bible to tell me that murder is wrong," I'm not saying that the Bible and the mitzvot (commandments) given us are nonessential. I'm saying that the greater portion of what I have learned about treating others with kindness and decency has come from the examples shown by my community.

You may say, "Well, that's a Jewish community and y'all act that way because that's what the Bible (Torah) tells you to do." You would be right to a degree -- but I'm also inclined to say that we act that way because we know in our hearts and minds that we wouldn't have much of a community (or any community at all) if we went around killing each other. The Torah of course says not to do that -- but we're not refraining from killing each other only because of that. Additionally, we have a collection of recorded wisdom titled Pirkei Avot "Ethics of the Fathers" that has been passed down to us, teaching us that: "The world stands on three things: On Torah, on works, and on kindness to others."
 

PureX

Veteran Member

Theists, please tell me why you believe murder is wrong.​

That's easy. Everyone has their own unique gifts to share with the rest of us. And we all deserve the opportunity to give and receive them. It's why we're here. To deny one of us that is to deny all of us that. And no one has the right to be that selfish.
 

InChrist

Free4ever
So what did Mr. Lawal say? Always best to go straight to the source:

View attachment 79849

Is there anything wrong with this? Sort of. Let me explain.

Well, let's start with the context. Mr. Lawal is a politician so the things he says and the context in which he says it in our important as he almost certainly represents people of different faiths and others of non-faith.

In a BBC article he said about the event Mr. Lawal said:

"I was appalled by some of the illegal activity I saw online at these events." Which he claimed involved nudity and he feared that children were being exposed.

First, let me be clear, running around in the streets naked (if that's indeed what happened), in most of the civilized world is illegal and most people, religious or not would agree that kind of behavior is unacceptable. So between you and I I doubt there is any disagreement about that.

But here's the problem I see. Why make a comment about "sin"? Why turn something that is a legal matter into a religious matter? Why quote scripture? Why not just stick to near universal ideas of public nudity being something that people agree is wrong?

Maybe Mr. Lawal is proud of his faith? Hmmmm?

Let's address pride.

Colloquially pride has more than one meaning, its a continuum. Self-confidence, and self-respect, feeling accomplished are all forms of pride. Telling your child you are proud of them or encouraging pride in themselves or their accomplishments isn't sin. But, like all things a little can be good and an abundance can be bad. While I wouldn't claim to be steeped in eastern philosophy, I think this tracks pretty well with the idea of balance, often visually represented by symbols like this:

View attachment 79858

A little pride is good, but it must be balanced with humility?


It's not unusual for people or groups that feel marginalized to express pride in their identity as a way to inoculate themselves for the shame that they have historically endured. Just as humility is the opposite of the kind of pride that Mr. Lawal is referencing, pride, to be proud and unapologetic is the opposite of shame.

And indeed Christians in the US have begun to claim their being marginalized and are increasingly expressing their own pride in their fidelity to God in response given the culture clash between people like Lawal, who, intended or not, judged people for being proud of who they are..

I can't imagine it would be hard for me to find examples of Christian pride here on the web.

That said, I acknowledge that in this time of social media ideas travel faster than brains can evaluate real issues. To make matters worse, there are people who find meaning and purpose in creating turmoil, controversy, anger. To bad we don't have a commandment for that...lol. Thou shalt not use social media to sow discord, anger, or misinformation.

Lol, I digress....

In the free world we don't have an answer to this problem. The provocateurs live in spaces that freedom provides. So Mr. Lawal isn't judged by who he is, or his history, but by a comment he may now regret, if for no other reason that it has been misinterpreted. I don't know Mr. Lawal or his public record. I think its possible the reaction to his comments are an overreaction, and even if they aren't because of other things he may have said in the past, I acknowledge that in the US there is some over-reaction to situations like this.
Again, thanks for your sharing your perspectives and insights. Again, I appreciate and agree with most of what you’ve said. Maybe he shouldn’t have taken the religious direction and used the word “sin”, but focused on the legal aspect. From what I understand, although public nudity is illegal, it’s often ignored by the police at certain events, Pride events being one. Either way, I just think it’s a bit alarming that one’s life, career, or whatever can be destroyed over a tweet or expressing their views, religious or otherwise. Really anyone could be vulnerable at any time depending on whatever the current political/social climate may be, if freedom to speak becomes so dangerous.
The exceptions, I think would be tweets or public calls for violence or harm toward others or predators targeting kids. Hopefully, these type of comments would also warrant legal action.
 

InChrist

Free4ever

Theists, please tell me why you believe murder is wrong.​

That's easy. Everyone has their own unique gifts to share with the rest of us. And we all deserve the opportunity to give and receive them. It's why we're here. To deny one of us that is to deny all of us that. And no one has the right to be that selfish.
I agree. It’s sad that so much selfishness has occurred throughout human history.
 

Rachel Rugelach

Shalom, y'all.
Staff member
Oh. Would you please tell me the correct pronounciation of יהוה?

Of course, we Jews shouldn't attempt to pronounce this name. For usage by non-Jews, I would think that the International Phonetic Alphabet would give this as the correct pronunciation: /ˈjɑː(h)weɪ/

The IPA pronunciation for "Rachel Rugelach" is: /ˈɹeɪt͡ʃəl/ /ˈruːɡələx/-- which I think looks crazy cool. :cool:

I think that attempting a pronunciation for "dybmh" might break the IPA. :eek: :)
 

EconGuy

Active Member
There is murder and there is killing. Both lead to death, but each has a different underlying motivation factor. Murder is more planned, while killing can happen in the heat of the moment; not planned.
Sure, which is why explicitly used the word murder.
The drunken driver may kill someone, but this was not planned so it is not murder.
Sure, and we have other terms like manslaughter and gross negligence that speak to intent and culpability, but both lack intent.
The drunken driver is more connected to the whims of the gods; fate
This sound like you are trying to intuit your feeling on this.
murderer is trying to play god assuming power over life and death; willful determinism. That is disrespectful to God.
No the murderer has intent and a motive. Rarely is it related to "playing god".

What is disrespectful to god is saying that god said or wants something usually that a person really wants for themselves but claims that their desires are actually what god wants. That's disrespectful to god. If using the "lords name in vein" means anything, this is it.

War is contextual, some are justified, others are not. I don't think you can paint with a broad brush here.
 

EconGuy

Active Member
so I think that maybe I understand your interest in this question?
I'm confused you pose this as a question? What do you think my intent is?
When I say: "I don't need the Bible to tell me that murder is wrong," I'm not saying that the Bible and the mitzvot (commandments) given us are nonessential. I'm saying that the greater portion of what I have learned about treating others with kindness and decency has come from the examples shown by my community.
Certainly a vast improvement on most interpretations of Christianity.

When I say: "I don't need the Bible to tell me that murder is wrong," I'm not saying that the Bible and the mitzvot (commandments) given us are nonessential. I'm saying that the greater portion of what I have learned about treating others with kindness and decency has come from the examples shown by my community.
So then, be experience, right?

Now, my question to you, as a Jew, is, do you believe that your faith (Judaism) is necessary to have moral knowledge. Or that, one can espouse a moral philosophy based solely in reason for others to follow without faith?
You may say, "Well, that's a Jewish community and y'all act that way because that's what the Bible (Torah) tells you to do." You would be right to a degree -- but I'm also inclined to say that we act that way because we know in our hearts and minds that we wouldn't have much of a community (or any community at all) if we went around killing each other.
100% agree, yet there are those that have faith who would claim without god, that in fact no one would have any reason not to go around killing each other. Can I assume that you'd agree with me that's absurd?

The Torah of course says not to do that -- but we're not refraining from killing each other only because of that. Additionally, we have a collection of recorded wisdom titled Pirkei Avot "Ethics of the Fathers" that has been passed down to us, teaching us that: "The world stands on three things: On Torah, on works, and on kindness to others."

I said this to InChrist and I'll tell you the same thing, I could care less how you and I come to agree on what is right and wrong as long as we can establish a few ground rules (unwanted harm or suffering are bad and happiness and well-being are good) and appeal to evidence and experience to work out moral problems. That's not to say there is a perfect morality or an answer to every question, but just because doctors cant heal every patient doesn't mean we don't go to doctors.

It would be great if Jews, Christians and Atheists (and other religions and forms of spirituality) could meet and discuss what they have in common and work on how to resolve those things that are sticking points.
 
Last edited:

EconGuy

Active Member
Maybe he shouldn’t have taken the religious direction and used the word “sin”, but focused on the legal aspect.
In the Church, sure, in public office, no.
although public nudity is illegal, it’s often ignored by the police at certain events, Pride events being one.
The issue for me isn't that adults want to run around nude, but that others shouldn't have to endure it, especially kids in public spaces.
Either way, I just think it’s a bit alarming that one’s life, career, or whatever can be destroyed over a tweet or expressing their views, religious or otherwise.
100% agree, I think it's the combination of the level of polarization driven by people who want power and the internet is the tool of choice.

People make mistakes or can just have contrary opinions. Society writ large (Christians and non-Christians have less tolerance than ever. Civil discourse is hard to come by (this conversation being a glorious exception, thank you BTW).

But let's say you and I, the devout believer and the non-believer decided to team up and talk about the things we have in common and try to view social and moral problems though discourse rather than discord. Perhaps you conceding that public social discourse needs to be driven less by espousing your personal fidelity to god and more by obvious experiences. And me, I concede that religions the world over have had enormous social benefit and the world we find ourselves in today has largely been shaped by that force.

We'd both be attacked by people who share our ideas. Not everyone mind you, I think we could find a TON of support, but the loud voice of opposition would suck all the air out of any room we tried to sit in. It's so much easier to tell me

If there is a SIN. THAT IS IT.

Again, appreciate the conversation.

"Any fool can destroy, but to see and understand is for the truly wise." - Albert Schweitzer
 

Rachel Rugelach

Shalom, y'all.
Staff member
I'm confused you pose this as a question? What do you think my intent is?
I'm guessing that, as a moral individual with no religion, you are looking for theists who also don't need only the Bible to tell them that murder is wrong?

Now, my question to you, as a Jew, is, do you believe that your faith (Judaism) is necessary to have moral knowledge. Or that, one can espouse a moral philosophy based solely in reason for others to follow without faith?
I do believe that "one can espouse a moral philosophy based solely in reason for others to follow without faith." I know people who do so.

100% agree, yet there are those that have faith who would claim without god, that in fact no one would have any reason not to go around killing each other. Can I assume that you'd agree with me that's absurd?

Yes. I can think of LOTS of reasons not to go around killing people. I'd be wary of anyone who can think of only one reason not to go around killing people.

I said this to InChrist and I'll tell you the same thing, I could care less how you and I come to agree on what is right and wrong as long as we can establish a few ground rules (unwanted harm or suffering are bad and happiness and well-being are good) and appeal to evidence and experience to work out moral problems. That's not to say there is a perfect morality or an answer to every question, but just because doctors cant heal every patient doesn't mean we don't go to doctors.

I believe the establishment of "a few ground rules" for all to follow is why we have civil laws, or laws of the land. Judaism instructs Jews to follow the laws of the land where we live, in addition to following Judaic law.

It would be great if Jews, Christians and Atheists (and other religions and forms of spirituality) could meet and discuss what they have in common and work on how to resolve those things that are sticking points.

And this is why we have ReligiousForums.com. :heart: :)
 
Last edited:

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
Now, to be clear I know murder is wrong, but I'm curious the reason.

I also know they Bible says murder is wrong, but can someone tell me if that's the root of the reason that you (the theist) believe that it's wrong to murder?

-Cheers

Because in the long run, for most people murder feels bad man.
 

vulcanlogician

Well-Known Member
Now, to be clear I know murder is wrong, but I'm curious the reason.

I also know they Bible says murder is wrong, but can someone tell me if that's the root of the reason that you (the theist) believe that it's wrong to murder?

Murder is wrong for reasons. All you have to do is ask what those reasons are, and most atheists can provide them.

1) Life is a wonderful and beautiful thing (in many if not most cases).

2) Destroying a wonderful and beautiful thing makes the world worse.

3) Making the world worse is bad.

4) Doing bad things is morally wrong.

5) Therefore, the taking of a life, in most cases, is morally wrong.
 
Top