Why is the world hostile to Christians?

[classical_hero]

Then what is true Christianity? People will rationalize their actions either way.

True Christianity is having a relationship with Jesus Christ. It is a simple as that.

 

[classical_hero]

Hmmn, I guess that came across as vitriolic. Sorry.

The 'lie' that I was told was: God cares and God intervenes and God answers prayer.

One of those three are false, because my prayers to ask why God allowed innocent people to suffer horribly were never answered. (ie, He didn't care enough to intervene and He didn't care enough to answer an honest question)

In addition, God (apparently) loves you and doubting Thomas enough to provide proof of His existence and Plan, but does not love me enough to give me my needed answers. (Needed, such that there was real confusion regarding my questions of the 'problem of Evil').

So, I was left with a choice:

- fight my feelings of resentment towards a God who doesn't answer desperate prayers, ie. try to forgive what I think to be a callous creator OR
- stop believing in God (and thus making any feelings of resentment towards Him illogical)

Since the God that the Christians describe is not actually logical (to me), I figured it was more healthy to not believe in God (and thus, releasing that negative emotion) than hate Him.

In other words, there's more proof (definite proof) that God doesn't exist (as describe by any Christian) than that He does. In addition, I realise that any human is fallible, so it is possible that any human authority on God is mistaken, so there is no reasonable authority to assume He exists despite my doubts.

For a good explanation, have a look at this. http://www.answersingenesis.org/radio/pdf/deathandsuffering.pdf

I have a question for you. Do you want a world without any consequences of action, because throught out hitory man has punished those who sould not have punished and many people get hurt as a result of other man's actions. Blaming God for all this is wrong when you should be blaming man. According to the Bible death is a result of sin and as a result you are seeing the result of sin whenever someone dies. That is a fact, but many people only blame God for bad things but never give him any glory when he has done plenty for people, but most have rejected what he has done. He gave his life for so that death is not a worry for us because there is now a better promise than what this world can ever offer. It really depends on you POV because if all you see is suffering, then you are mising out on the best part of what God is about.

 

[Meleager]

I also found this link very usefull about the same issue: http://www.doesgodexist.org/Phamplets/ProblemOfHumanSuffering.html

I particulary like the example, that if you jump off a bridge, you shouldn't bame God when you hit the bottom. Also, it is through suffering, that we become "refined by fire".

 

[classical_hero]

Thats what i mean. Most Christains are much farther from Jesus's teachings than Diests, Athiests, Thiests and Agnostics.

What exactly are Jesus's teachings then?

 

[classical_hero]

WWII-Hitlers hatred of the Jew's (he considered himself a chriatiain, btw)

Hitler was not a Christian, get your fact right, because he hated Christianity. That does not sound very Christian.

 

[shadow2k]

For a good explanation, have a look at this. http://www.answersingenesis.org/radio/pdf/deathandsuffering.pdf

It's unfortunate that this is in PDF form, so I'll do my best to reply...

First off, this type of rhetoric is the very reason that some are intolerant some religious followers, including Christianity.

It implies that Christians have superior morals because they follow the word of God, while no Atheist could ever conceive of what is truly good or bad. I understand that it's a necessity of your faith, but it's that type of superiority complex that leads to part of the problem. It's the perfect example.

Not to mention the comparison of Atheists to Hitler, only able to judge based on chemical processes in the brain (that God created, right?). Just more ignorance here.

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/unknown/hitler.html

Yeah, that's Hitler denouncing Atheism in 1933. Hitler was a Catholic. A follower of your God, which doesn't really surprise most people. It might surprise you though.

Article claims the Bible is historically accurate. Plenty of proof to show that it's not, especially Genesis. Whoever wrote that article is nothing more than a literalist with a Young-Earth PoV. Despite the heap of evidence that suggests otherwise, he chooses to believe a 2,000yr old book.

A perfect creator would have created a perfect world. He didn't. He ALLOWED Adam and Eve to sin to begin with, it's his fault for allowing it. He's able to see the future, seeing how he speaks through prophets, so he KNEW Adam and Eve would sin. Knew it. Allowed it. Wanted it.

The penalty for "our" (mankind's) sin is death. Yeah. If you'd like to worship one with such disdain for his subjects, please excuse me while I go laugh in the other room.

Now how all of mankind is held responsible for Adam and Eve, I'm not really sure. We all sin? How does an infant baby sin? But hey, since God is just lumping all humans into one pile with Adam and Eve, what's wrong with saying all Christians are (insert whatever insult you like)? God shows us it's correct to do this, to just generalize, use broad sweeping judgements, and not instead single out only the bad seeds. So the fundamentalist Christians that were bombing abortion clinics? Yeah, all Christians are just like that, and should be punished, according to God's example.

If God is giving us a taste of life without him...wait, what? Without him? I thought he was omnipresent? Anyway, back to the point. Without him. If he's not here, then how is he able to dish out our death penalty for mankind's sins? Hmmm... Or if he's "partially upholding us", could I get a percent on that? 73% God supported world? 43%? I need numbers here.

Then we get into specific Biblical stories. Job and his suffering, allowing us to see what God's really up to? I wouldn't really care for a God who randomly picks on some guy, causing him great pain and suffering (of a righteous man, right?) just to teach us some lesson. He's God, he can teach us in a way that doesn't include pain and suffering. He chooses not to. He sounds like a sadist to me.

Same with the Blind man example. If Jesus wanted to show us his power, he could have picked a million different ways. Moses parted the Red Sea, right? He didn't have God create a man to suffer for 40yrs just so he could cure him.

Senseless suffering is apparently not always God's doing, sometimes it's the actual sins of man causing it. I can accept that...well, except that God created the sinner to begin with. He created the evil. He allowed it. He's a sadist, I swear.

Look at the fact that it says we are all condemned to death. I don't know about you, but I don't really want to worship a God who decries we are all sinners at birth, and then sentences us to death. Would you live in a country like that? No? Yet, you base your life around that same principle. Amazing.

Suffering isn't needed to do any of the things Paul claimed. This is God we're talking about, right? God could choose any way he pleases to do anything. Yet, he continually chooses the most sadistic way possible to get through to man.

Then it goes on to tell us "God has already done everything you would want a loving God to do - and infinitely more!" Note the exclamation point, just to make sure you know how wonderful all your suffering has been. What kind of man believes that all the pain/suffering/death we see is everything he wants from a God...and infinitely more?!? These don't sound like intelligent people we're talking about here.

Adam's sin meant that we would spend eternity suffering and mean we are seperated from God. But that's only because God chose the punishment. Nobody forced God to decide how we should be punished. He just happened to choose death and sepearation, the most sadistic thing he could think of. He's got Freewill (we're in his image, right?) to choose the punishment, why is he forced to do anything?

Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission (of sins)? Loving, yeah. God is all powerful and could have chosen any means he wanted. Again, going the sadistic route with us. He chose to create us of flesh and blood, he knew the implications of that. Seeing how he's God though, again, what's forcing his hand as to how the remission of sin is gone about? Who exactly is forcing God's hand in all these various situations? I think he's just got a taste for blood, personally.

Then God sacrificed an animal to cover Adam and Eve's nakedness. Why? Why doesn't God just sprinkle his magical fairy dust and create a coat made of cotton for us? Nope, a "blood sacrifice was needed" to cover our sin. Cover it from whom? Sacrifice to who? God? Silliness. God could have just created some velvet jumpsuit for us had he wanted to, and even wiped their memories/knowledge from then had he wanted to. Nope, wanted to see blood (again).

Then it talks about the fact that we need to believe to be saved? Why? God makes the rules here. He DEMANDS you believe, or be punished. Sounds a lot like a dictator that really doesn't give a damn what you or I want. I'll choose a different God, or none at all instead, thanks.

Now if Jesus was God, he didn't need to be sacrificed for "our" sins. He could have just saved us right then and there. He's God, he makes the rules. Same thing if he was the son of God, God could have done whatever he wanted from wherever he happened to be at the time. Unless he's sacrificing his son to...His God?

But hey, all is not lost yet. God will come to finally save us. It may take thousands of years, but in God's eyes, it's just a blip in time. Let me ask you something. If I were to cause you pain and suffering in your life every day for 50+ years...what would you think of me when I decided to stop and be ever so loving to you? Reminds me of abused women who go back for more...not very bright.

God tells us he wants us to have a new body and dwell with him forever. Why does he wait? He can do that now. Unless someone else won't let him, but that's not possible. Only one God, God is all powerful.

And at the end of the article of course, some more nonsense. Our fault, blah, blah. God created us poorly. But he's supposed to be perfect...infallible. And we were created "in his image", even though man made the mistake of eating from the tree of knowledge. Apparently one of these things doesn't fit.

There is a contradiction of a loving God and evil being here. God even says he created evil, although later the scriputres contradict it. God doesn't have to rid the world of us to get rid of evil...he simply needs to rid mankind of evil. Yet, he's refused to do so through all of eternity. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for the day that he does.

 

[classical_hero]

I'm not hostile to christians! some of my best friends are christians honest: just so long as these guys keep their opinions to themselves and dont go pushing it in my face then I'm fine with them

How would you know someone is a Christian if they kept there opinions to themself? Everyone has opinions, so it seems that as long as they agree ithh you, it is fine, or else shut up.

 

[classical_hero]

One additional problem is that faithful people are less likely to interpret a voice in their head or a strong intuition as just a quirk of brain chemistry, and more likely to give it a supernatural source.

As well, the Bible can be interpreted many ways, often in contradictory ways ... and sometimes people will interpret the Bible according to a narrow view, and use that interpretation to justify hurting, harming, or hindering people (actual people).

Take the homosexuality debate. Verses were quoted to me to show that God did not like homosexual behaviour. I expanded the text (looked at more verses in the same chapter) to show that God merely despised non-Christians being homosexuals. However, I was deemed to be 'wrong' and maybe even deceptive (and thus, evil). My point was that they should work more on conversion, so that the union can be blessed, instead of condeming the union.

Anyway, the problem with the Bible is that it can be used to justify immoral behaviour, when the person was actually attempting to be moral. Often, people let themselves be immmoral (and justify it, or just recognize it), but it's when moral people are lead to immorality (despite their best efforts) that we run into a problem.

This post is very confusing. Can you give me examples of where it is allowing immoral behaviour?

That passages that talk about Homosexuality are as such. Leviticus 18 and 20 which are basically the same thing. Here are things that are also condemned in that pasage. Incest, sex with your neighbours, sacrifice of virgins, Homosexuality of course, Beastiality. Roman 1:18-31 name plenty of sins that God does not want us to be doing. Put into context, Homosexuality is just another sin in the eyes of God, but it does seem that those who do practice are generally more likely to have a hostile reception to the Bible as a result of there actions.

 

[CurtSibling]

Simple enough. Take me for instance, I'm a fairly young guy, have a normal job, wife and two kids. I have BBQ's, birthday parties, watch football and baseball, and drive an average joe car. Everything about me has middle America and average joe written all over it except one thing, I'm a Christian. That is a believer in Christ who tries with God's grace to live a life pleasing to Him and according to His will for me. So the question is "Why is the world hostile towards me?"

Your last lines sum it up.

Although you do not show too much of it, most people have a problem with
such overdone triumphalism. On the face of it, christians like to display a sort
of imagined moral superiority, that is both an illusion and annoys other folks.

Most humans from civilised climes are perfectly moral, we do not need some
person who is high of religion telling them they are bound for hell because of
their non-belief in a particular faith...

That is merely my view on it.

 

[CurtSibling]

How would you know someone is a Christian if they kept there opinions to themself? Everyone has opinions, so it seems that as long as they agree ithh you, it is fine, or else shut up.

We know that christians are seldom happy with mere 'opinions' - !
Respecting their illusions is only the first step - Then they want the you to praise their invisible friends too.

Seen this all too often.

That is why I am totally uninterested in hearing religious 'opinion'...

Because it is really just some priest or reverend's opinion.

 

[shadow2k]

Your last lines sum it up.

Although you do not show too much of it, most people have a problem with
such overdone triumphalism. On the face of it, christians like to display a sort
of imagined moral superiority, that is both an illusion and annoys other folks.

Most humans from civilised climes are perfectly moral, we do not need some
person who is high of religion telling them they are bound for hell because of
their non-belief in a particular faith...

That is merely my view on it.

The moral superiority is just a symptom of the cause. The heart of it comes down to God. And I'm not talking just Christians here, I'm talking about certain religious believers of many faiths. Not all, just some, and in my experience, these types are in the minority, but very vocal about their views.

They have everything laid out for them. And since it's the word of God, there is no use for debate about anything. God said it, it's laid out in black and white, and there is no gray. There's no need for discussion, God said it, and that's the end of it.

The moral superiority, among other things, is just a symptom of believing you are following the word of God. Nobody that disagrees with them will ever be right, because in essence, you are disagreeing with God.

 

[CurtSibling]

I guess that feeliing of 'moral rightness' is inherent in many human ideologies.

I am fully aware that I too, could be accused of such thinking...But at the
end of the day, I am not claiming divine authority - Just that of a free man...

And that is the big difference...!

 

[Sidhe]

How would you know someone is a Christian if they kept there opinions to themself? Everyone has opinions, so it seems that as long as they agree ithh you, it is fine, or else shut up.

OK sense of humour bypass, that is in reference to the bible wielding Gay bashers on this forum who procalim they are not anti gay because they're willing to be in the same room with them whilst denying them their rights with the other hand.

I have nothing against Christians whatsoever, in fact I admire anyone who can believe without doubt in God, I'm agnostic. I also have a good understanding of religion. Perhaps the too are mutally exclusive to me, being scientifically minded but I certainly would listen to a christians point of view, I would say though that being forced to listen to it on your doorstep is probably not the best way of spreading a message, although it bothers me little, some people find it intrusive.

I guess that feeliing of 'moral rightness' is inherent in many human ideologies.

I am fully aware that I too, could be accused of such thinking...But at the
end of the day, I am not claiming divine authority - Just that of a free man...

And that is the big difference...!

What bothers me most is that moral decency is evolutionary but the bible isn't, it's old and many of it's messages are good guides for human behaviour,but the people who pull 2000 year old laws out of it and try and justify it are saddening, this is not the message in the Bible, it is not the "word of God is unchanging and forever cast in stone?". These people sometimes give away there ability to change for the ability to be self righteous. It's a sad enditement of the way religion stifles morality and comes off looking like a backward immoral regressive past time for a small minority of so called Christians. Luckily the bulk of the church tries at least to move with the times, given that it's working with outdated reference material but at least it trys.

 

[classical_hero]

It's unfortunate that this is in PDF form, so I'll do my best to reply...

First off, this type of rhetoric is the very reason that some are intolerant some religious followers, including Christianity.

It implies that Christians have superior morals because they follow the word of God, while no Atheist could ever conceive of what is truly good or bad. I understand that it's a necessity of your faith, but it's that type of superiority complex that leads to part of the problem. It's the perfect example.

Basically all suffering is a direct or indirect result of sin. The Bible says that everyone is a sinner, me included. It is only by the Grace of God that I am what I am right now. I am not a superior person to abnyone, in fact the more I see myself, the worse it is whenever I compare myself

Not to mention the comparison of Atheists to Hitler, only able to judge based on chemical processes in the brain (that God created, right?). Just more ignorance here.

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/unknown/hitler.html

Yeah, that's Hitler denouncing Atheism in 1933. Hitler was a Catholic. A follower of your God, which doesn't really surprise most people. It might surprise you though.

It would not have surprised me that at one stage of his life, he was a Catholic but it is clear that when we was leader of Germany, (and that is the most important thing to remember when we are dealing with Hitler, because many of his earlier views we rejected and he became what he became., he was not a Christian since he rejected sometime later. Have a look at these two posts that I made earlier on in another thread. These posts show that Hitler was not a Christian when it mattered, when he was trying to take over the world. In fact many of his ideas have more to do with evolution than anything else. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=3565890&highlight=Hitler#post3565890 Also have a look two post leter by me, because these posts do put paid to the Idea that Hitler was a Christian

Article claims the Bible is historically accurate. Plenty of proof to show that it's not, especially Genesis. Whoever wrote that article is nothing more than a literalist with a Young-Earth PoV. Despite the heap of evidence that suggests otherwise, he chooses to believe a 2,000yr old book.

A perfect creator would have created a perfect world. He didn't. He ALLOWED Adam and Eve to sin to begin with, it's his fault for allowing it. He's able to see the future, seeing how he speaks through prophets, so he KNEW Adam and Eve would sin. Knew it. Allowed it. Wanted it.

If you were to look at the creation account you will see that it was a perfect environment. After the sixth day God called everything "very good", so that means that everything God had wanted was there and that there was nothing wrong with it. Sin and death was not what God wants fr us, he was to have a relationship like when they had in the garden before they sinned. Since God di now about this happening, he had a plan to get rid of sin and that happened when Jesus died on the Cross. Sin now has no hold on those who trust in Christ because now we are free to do other things beside sin, because no matter how "good" a person is, ultimately there will be some overriding desire that is behind that good that is not a good reason to do that.

Both Creationist and Evolutionists have the same evidence, it is the interpretation of the evidence that is in question. There are many Scientists, both living and dead that believed in Creation, so it is not cut and dry as you might think.[/QUOTE]

The penalty for "our" (mankind's) sin is death. Yeah. If you'd like to worship one with such disdain for his subjects, please excuse me while I go laugh in the other room.

Now how all of mankind is held responsible for Adam and Eve, I'm not really sure. We all sin? How does an infant baby sin? But hey, since God is just lumping all humans into one pile with Adam and Eve, what's wrong with saying all Christians are (insert whatever insult you like)? God shows us it's correct to do this, to just generalize, use broad sweeping judgements, and not instead single out only the bad seeds. So the fundamentalist Christians that were bombing abortion clinics? Yeah, all Christians are just like that, and should be punished, according to God's example.

You must remember those who were bombing those abortion clinics are not Christian at all, because the Bible is outright against murder, considering that we believe that abortion is murder, so it would be hypocritical for us to be bombing clinics. Those were done by people how were madmen and there is nowhere in the Bible that tells people to kill others just because they kill others, because it is for the government to decide such things not and individual.

We are all sinners because we all come from Adam. Adam's sin is being continued in his family line and since every human is from Adam, we are sinful, even before we commit our own sins, because we would not commit any sins if we were holy to start off.

If God is giving us a taste of life without him...wait, what? Without him? I thought he was omnipresent? Anyway, back to the point. Without him. If he's not here, then how is he able to dish out our death penalty for mankind's sins? Hmmm... Or if he's "partially upholding us", could I get a percent on that? 73% God supported world? 43%? I need numbers here.

What are you saying here, because it seems to be jus jibberish here? This part does not make any sense.

Then we get into specific Biblical stories. Job and his suffering, allowing us to see what God's really up to? I wouldn't really care for a God who randomly picks on some guy, causing him great pain and suffering (of a righteous man, right?) just to teach us some lesson. He's God, he can teach us in a way that doesn't include pain and suffering. He chooses not to. He sounds like a sadist to me.

Same with the Blind man example. If Jesus wanted to show us his power, he could have picked a million different ways. Moses parted the Red Sea, right? He didn't have God create a man to suffer for 40yrs just so he could cure him.

You are missing the point behind these. With Job, God allowed testing to see if Job would be faithful like God believed that he would be, but Satan thought that he would be able to cause him to suffer so much that he would curse God for it, but God knew Job's heart and knew that he would stay faithful, so God allowed Satan to test upto anything less than his death. This shows that God was still in control of the situation, because Satan said that God had a hedge around Job and that he wanted it to be removed so he could attack him. God will only allow things that you are able to bear and these will show your character up and that is how God helps people to grow from the People they once were. Jesus himslef suffered for our sins so he knows exactly what it is like to be human, so we can go to God and he will know what it is like to have such and such a problem, because, he too suffered from temptation, without sinning. Remember that if all our life was just sunshine (ie, with out suffering), then we would be living in a desert, because the trials and tribulations that we go through are what builds up our Character. It is often during times of trouble that yo can see those you can really depend upon. We must not always see suffering as a bad thing because there can be side benefits to it.

There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.Senseless suffering is apparently not always God's doing, sometimes it's the actual sins of man causing it. I can accept that...well, except that God created the sinner to begin with. He created the evil. He allowed it. He's a sadist, I swear.

Look at the fact that it says we are all condemned to death. I don't know about you, but I don't really want to worship a God who decries we are all sinners at birth, and then sentences us to death. Would you live in a country like that? No? Yet, you base your life around that same principle. Amazing.

Suffering isn't needed to do any of the things Paul claimed. This is God we're talking about, right? God could choose any way he pleases to do anything. Yet, he continually chooses the most sadistic way possible to get through to man.

Then it goes on to tell us "God has already done everything you would want a loving God to do - and infinitely more!" Note the exclamation point, just to make sure you know how wonderful all your suffering has been. What kind of man believes that all the pain/suffering/death we see is everything he wants from a God...and infinitely more?!? These don't sound like intelligent people we're talking about here.

Adam's sin meant that we would spend eternity suffering and mean we are seperated from God. But that's only because God chose the punishment. Nobody forced God to decide how we should be punished. He just happened to choose death and sepearation, the most sadistic thing he could think of. He's got Freewill (we're in his image, right?) to choose the punishment, why is he forced to do anything?

Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission (of sins)? Loving, yeah. God is all powerful and could have chosen any means he wanted. Again, going the sadistic route with us. He chose to create us of flesh and blood, he knew the implications of that. Seeing how he's God though, again, what's forcing his hand as to how the remission of sin is gone about? Who exactly is forcing God's hand in all these various situations? I think he's just got a taste for blood, personally.

Then God sacrificed an animal to cover Adam and Eve's nakedness. Why? Why doesn't God just sprinkle his magical fairy dust and create a coat made of cotton for us? Nope, a "blood sacrifice was needed" to cover our sin. Cover it from whom? Sacrifice to who? God? Silliness. God could have just created some velvet jumpsuit for us had he wanted to, and even wiped their memories/knowledge from then had he wanted to. Nope, wanted to see blood (again).

Then it talks about the fact that we need to believe to be saved? Why? God makes the rules here. He DEMANDS you believe, or be punished. Sounds a lot like a dictator that really doesn't give a damn what you or I want. I'll choose a different God, or none at all instead, thanks.

Now if Jesus was God, he didn't need to be sacrificed for "our" sins. He could have just saved us right then and there. He's God, he makes the rules. Same thing if he was the son of God, God could have done whatever he wanted from wherever he happened to be at the time. Unless he's sacrificing his son to...His God?

But hey, all is not lost yet. God will come to finally save us. It may take thousands of years, but in God's eyes, it's just a blip in time. Let me ask you something. If I were to cause you pain and suffering in your life every day for 50+ years...what would you think of me when I decided to stop and be ever so loving to you? Reminds me of abused women who go back for more...not very bright.

God tells us he wants us to have a new body and dwell with him forever. Why does he wait? He can do that now. Unless someone else won't let him, but that's not possible. Only one God, God is all powerful.

And at the end of the article of course, some more nonsense. Our fault, blah, blah. God created us poorly. But he's supposed to be perfect...infallible. And we were created "in his image", even though man made the mistake of eating from the tree of knowledge. Apparently one of these things doesn't fit.

There is a contradiction of a loving God and evil being here. God even says he created evil, although later the scriputres contradict it. God doesn't have to rid the world of us to get rid of evil...he simply needs to rid mankind of evil. Yet, he's refused to do so through all of eternity. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for the day that he does.

I have answered some these other parts in previous answers. One thing you are missing out is the fact that only someone who was God would be a suitable sacrifice because the sacrifice had to be able to pay the penalty.

 

[Sidhe]

See now that's the good stuff in the bible I was talking about. Job is a very clever and insightful message to it's followers, a story who's depths are quite revealing.

As Nietchze himself said that which does not kill us makes us stronger. And without suffering then what of joy? Trite but true. Living in a paradise with no real understanding and everything on a plate is probably no way for humanity to evolve. I think the bible shows God saw this early on.

 

[classical_hero]

What bothers me most is that moral decency is evolutionary but the bible isn't, it's old and many of it's messages are good guides for human behaviour,but the people who pull 2000 year old laws out of it and try and justify it are saddening, this is not the message in the Bible, it is not the "word of God is unchanging and forever cast in stone?". These people sometimes give away there ability to change for the ability to be self righteous. It's a sad enditement of the way religion stifles morality and comes off looking like a backward immoral regressive past time for a small minority of so called Christians. Luckily the bulk of the church tries at least to move with the times, given that it's working with outdated reference material but at least it trys.

The problem with Evolutionary morals is that they are so changing and that many horrors have been committed as a result. Eugenics is a result of Evolutionary morals and we know the result of that, being in, Nazism and Racism.

Nazism was about creating a pure race but removing all sub standard races, such as Jews, Blacks, just about anyone who was not Nazi, White, Blonde Blue Eyes. That is a real mystery as to how Hitler was even part of this group, considering he did not really fit this superior race. Basically it is just an advanced form of Racism.

Racism. Here is a quote from a hiighly rated figure in Evolutionary circles.

Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude
following the acceptance of evolutionary theory.'

Even Evolutionists accept that the theory increased the Level of racism.

So trying to say that modern morals ae better is actually sayig that man being the absolute authority, then just about anything can be seen as desirable. Often in most cases that man's views have generally been pointe out as being flatly wrong often immoral, once we get better infomation out, so relying on us to be the moral guide is not a good option.

 

[Kyriakos]

So trying to say that modern morals ae better is actually sayig that man being the absolute authority, then just about anything can be seen as desirable. Often in most cases that man's views have generally been pointe out as being flatly wrong often immoral, once we get better infomation out, so relying on us to be the moral guide is not a good option.

So you are not relying in yourself, but relying on your imagination, which in your view is something other than yourself. However everything you think is yours, and you inevitably realise the views of others in your own ways too. Your understanding of religious dogma is also yours, as is your impression of the notion of a god. In reality everything in your thought is yours, you just factionise internally and trick yourself into believing that now, in some strange yet real way, you have found something other than you.
Any person can come up with a religious belief, the only thing it takes is careless thinking; the mental gaps create themselves and one can always view them as spiritual/divine/whatever. Realise that what you sense/think of/view as a god/divine, has absolutely nothing at all to do with what any other christian does. Your faith is just an individual belief and nothing more, much like the invidual beliefs one has about politics.

 

[Sidhe]

The problem with Evolutionary morals is that they are so changing and that many horrors have been committed as a result. Eugenics is a result of Evolutionary morals and we know the result of that, being in, Nazism and Racism.

Nazism was about creating a pure race but removing all sub standard races, such as Jews, Blacks, just about anyone who was not Nazi, White, Blonde Blue Eyes. That is a real mystery as to how Hitler was even part of this group, considering he did not really fit this superior race. Basically it is just an advanced form of Racism.

Racism. Here is a quote from a hiighly rated figure in Evolutionary circles. Even Evolutionists accept that the theory increased the Level of racism.

So trying to say that modern morals ae better is actually sayig that man being the absolute authority, then just about anything can be seen as desirable. Often in most cases that man's views have generally been pointe out as being flatly wrong often immoral, once we get better infomation out, so relying on us to be the moral guide is not a good option.

Not necesarily better but without changing morals how do we tell which is beneficial and which is nonsense within dynamic societies?

Some atrocities happen regardless of moral compass, hitler was certainly not interested in the moral majority. Some people are just nasty pieces of work regardless of social taboo or moral compass.

I think you know I meant evolutionary in a non Darwinian sense if you see what I mean.

 

[CurtSibling]

The main problem is that people have misconcepted the bible as a rule book...When it is anything but.

The bible is a guidline against oppression - Not a user manual to create it.

.

 

[classical_hero]

The main problem is that people have misconcepted the bible as a rule book...When it is anything but.

The bible is a guidline against oppression - Not a user manual to create it.

.

So the Ten Commandments are not talking about rules then?