Morality exists without your God.

[Save_Ferris]

You can be moral without the Bible, but even from a secular stance the Bible has some good philosophical ideas.

 

[Berzerker]

morality aint based on what "god" says, its based on "universal" sentiments

that doesn't mean a majority or minority opinion wrt morality is valid, just that we do have a logical foundation upon which to define morality and a means to discern what is or is not moral

 

[Synobun]

You can be moral without the Bible, but even from a secular stance the Bible has some good philosophical ideas.

Keyword some.

 

[History_Buff]

You can be moral without the Bible, but even from a secular stance the Bible has some good philosophical ideas.

And just as many terrible ideas.

While it has it's merits, the good ideas in the Bible tend not to be new good ideas.

 

[Flying Pig]

I think for the most part, you can do far worse than living your life as if there was a man called Jesus, who preached the things he did - yes, some of the things in the Bible are hideously outdated, the product of their time or of their authors, but the overall message of compassion, humility and striving to make the world a better place for others is a very sound one. The beauty of that of course is that you don't have to believe in God, or the afterlife, or anything like that for it to suit you.

 

[Synobun]

I think for the most part, you can do far worse than living your life as if there was a man called Jesus, who preached the things he did - yes, some of the things in the Bible are hideously outdated, the product of their time or of their authors, but the overall message of compassion, humility and striving to make the world a better place for others is a very sound one. The beauty of that of course is that you don't have to believe in God, or the afterlife, or anything like that for it to suit you.

Or, to others, Jesus is a chump that manipulated the gullible masses, cashed in on it, then got caught by the Romans and got crucified, alongside hundreds of other convicted criminals.

There are two sides to that coin.

 

[Dachs]

Or, to others, Jesus is a chump that manipulated the gullible masses, cashed in on it, then got caught by the Romans and got crucified, alongside hundreds of other convicted criminals.

There are two sides to that coin.

That sort of presumes that there was cash to be had, no?

 

[Synobun]

That sort of presumes that there was cash to be had, no?

2. Profit handsomely, as in When the stock price went up, we really cashed in. This phrase often is extended to cash in on, meaning to take advantage of. [Early 1900s]

 

[Dachs]

2. Profit handsomely, as in When the stock price went up, we really cashed in. This phrase often is extended to cash in on, meaning to take advantage of. [Early 1900s]

Again, doesn't answer my question. Your move.

 

[Synobun]

Again, doesn't answer my question. Your move.

Don't see your point. At all. You deliberately butchered an obvious phrase to somehow go "Gotcha!" Not entirely sure what you are expecting me to respond with.

 

[Dachs]

Don't see your point. At all. You deliberately butchered an obvious phrase to somehow go "Gotcha!" Not entirely sure what you are expecting me to respond with.

That wasn't a "gotcha", it was me telling you that I completely understood your original response and that said original response didn't deflect the criticism whatsoever. To restate things without your painfully inadequate jargon and/or slang: how did the man who eventually became known as Jesus benefit significantly by being an itinerant religious figure and faith healer compared to the significantly more profitable family business of carpenter?

 

[Flying Pig]

Or, to others, Jesus is a chump that manipulated the gullible masses, cashed in on it, then got caught by the Romans and got crucified, alongside hundreds of other convicted criminals.

There are two sides to that coin.

Even so, his message is still - broadly - a good one. It doesn't matter who said it, or even if it's a fictional character putting it forward: I don't think we need the carrot of paradise or the stick of eternal punishment as incentives to try to live well.

 

[Synobun]

That wasn't a "gotcha", it was me telling you that I completely understood your original response and that said original response didn't deflect the criticism whatsoever. To restate things without your painfully inadequate jargon and/or slang: how did the man who eventually became known as Jesus benefit significantly by being an itinerant religious figure and faith healer compared to the significantly more profitable family business of carpenter?

Believe in the word of reason, not the word of man. All "facts" about Jesus are circumstantial and based on reconstruction methods. He could have been either of the two types of people, and in the end, it shouldn't matter.

Following someone blindly by their word is a recipe for disaster.

edit@Flying Pig: I agree.

 

[Murky]

Morality can exist without religion but can religion exist without morality or some cultural idea of accepted standards, which are then use to create the rules of the religion? So then aren't the ideas of morality the result not of divine will but of what was culturally acceptable at the time of the religion's founding? So if you were to start fresh today and create a new religion what moral standards would be included to be upheld by the devout followers?

 

[Dachs]

Believe in the word of reason, not the word of man. All "facts" about Jesus are circumstantial and based on reconstruction methods. He could have been either of the two types of people, and in the end, it shouldn't matter.

Following someone blindly by their word is a recipe for disaster.

So you've decided on the "Jesus was imaginary" route then? My, my, Canada's setting new records in awful education these days.

 

[Algeroth]

tldr

Is this another atpg thread where he attack caricature he made up using boringly long posts with unbearable smugness, or is here something worth discussing?

 

[Dachs]

tldr

Is this another atpg thread where he attack caricature he made up using boringly long posts with unbearable smugness, or is here something worth discussing?

Nope! But I did manage to troll sill hard enough to get him to start a chamber pot thread.

 

[Synobun]

So you've decided on the "Jesus was imaginary" route then? My, my, Canada's setting new records in awful education these days.

Nah, he's a real guy. Never claimed he was fake. But the details of his life are contested. Have been since reconstruction's been a thing.

Since I don't feel like typing out a long in depth explanation, I will simply cop out and link you this.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

Enjoy the read.

 

[Murky]

So you've decided on the "Jesus was imaginary" route then? My, my, Canada's setting new records in awful education these days.

The accounts in the Bible of the miraculous involving Jesus aren't backed up with other historical evidence. I think we have to accept that the Jesus of the new testament is more myth than man. It's possible that a man named 'Jesus' existed around the time the fable was invented, but that doesn't make him what the Christian myths state as fact.

 

[Save_Ferris]

And just as many terrible ideas.

While it has it's merits, the good ideas in the Bible tend not to be new good ideas.

Yes, but think about how it helped spread those ideas throughout much of the world.