OT Yes, God does speak to me (and others)

[Monster]

I mentioned earlier in this thread that it is helpful to understand our relationship with God by comparing it to a grown child?s relationship with their parents. God/parents give upbringing, training, advice based on what is healthy for the recipient. We and the now-adult child have the right/ability to decide for ourselves what we want to do, BUT we do not have the right to do as we wish as it concerns the kingdom of God/the parents? house and those contained therein. For instance, you have children still living at home and your grown child may choose to do something against your advice such as drive while drunk, snort coke, participate in home break-ins, to which you would put rules in place by replying ?Not with my car,? ?Not in my house,? ?Not in my neighborhood.? If he continually disregarded your wishes you might eventually reach the point of calling the police if your other children are put in danger by the elder?s actions.

​

​

I just realized that I forgot to address this part. Yikes, do you have children?

I don't care how old my son is. Whether he's still 6, or if he's 16, 26, 36...or 96. If he wants to do drugs, DWI, steal, or commit any kind of crime, he's going to hear something that contains the phrase, "You can't do that." I'm not going to say "not in my house", "not in my neighborhood", or "not with my car". It's going to be, "Don't do it!"

Any parent that would do otherwise should be ashamed of themselves.​

 

[GoBlueInAtlanta]

Wow, you are beyond the point of ignorant.

Dude, the 10 commandments include things like, "thou shalt not kill", "thou shalt not steal", and "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's possessions". It does not lay out rules for killing, stealing, or sleeping with your neighbor's hot wife. The bible makes no mention of "thou shalt not own another person". It specifically tells you who you can buy, how to buy, how to treat. You're using the same argument that I always hear. This is supposed to be God's word and for Him to lay out rules for slavery, but never condemning it, you should be ashamed as a Christian.

And Atheism isn't synonymous with morality? Yeah, and God sending an army in to slaughter an entire village, killing unborn babies, children, men, women, that is moral? The bible and the Q'uran are both full of immoral people, acts, and ideas.

You know where I get mine? I get mine from knowing that killing, stealing, cheating, lying, and looking down on people are wrong. I would never want any of those things to happen to me, so why should i do them to other people? OH, and I learned this before I knew anything about God or the bible.

You don't need the bible or any other religion to be a moral person. If that was the case, this world would be a lot worse off. Sure, there are bad atheists that are despicable people, but it's the same with Christians. You can dispute that if you want to, but you'll just make yourself look even worse.

Your inability to read, reason through what you just read, then arrive at a cogent conclusion is truly astounding!

Since you can't see the VERY OBVIOUS point of the entire post I will lay it out for you:

MAN meant EVIL toward his fellow man. GOD turned that intent of evil into PROVISION for those who would have been TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF.

You say, "You don't need the bible or any other religion to be a moral person," shortly after you wrote, "You know where I get mine? I get mine from knowing that killing, stealing, cheating, lying, and looking down on people are wrong." WHICH COMES DIRECTLY FROM THE BIBLE!!! So you use Biblical standards then attempt to distance yourself from it.

You are so confused you don't know which way is up.

You can't tell the difference between what PEOPLE THINK and what the BIBLE SAYS. You can't tell the difference between what the CATHOLIC CHURCH BELIEVES and what the BIBLE SAYS. Heck, you don't even know what YOU BELIEVE.

In this very thread you have contradicted yourself multiple times. You present rebuttals that show no forethought or consistency. You simply spit out the first thing that comes to mind that seems to oppose what I've written. I've not pointed them out so as not to embarrass you, but let's look at just a few -

In an attempt to discredit the Biblical account of the flood you pointed out that every major civilization has a flood story (which only points to a global flood), then later you try to argue that it was only a local flood. Next, in an attempt to salvage these incongruent thoughts, you'll attempt to come up with a theory to combine the two that there were 1000's of local floods which all covered the mountaintops, which is scientifically impossible.

At the beginning of this thread you said that you had no problem with God, but you hated the Bible. Now, however, you say God is evil and is even more evil than satan. Well...at least you're being honest with yourself and others at this point. Your stance is the same as every atheist I've ever encountered - "There is no God and I hate him!"

 

[GoBlueInAtlanta]

I just realized that I forgot to address this part. Yikes, do you have children?

I don't care how old my son is. Whether he's still 6, or if he's 16, 26, 36...or 96. If he wants to do drugs, DWI, steal, or commit any kind of crime, he's going to hear something that contains the phrase, "You can't do that." I'm not going to say "not in my house", "not in my neighborhood", or "not with my car". It's going to be, "Don't do it!"

Any parent that would do otherwise should be ashamed of themselves.

You're kidding, right? You ACTUALLY think that that isn't EXACTLY what I was saying???????

To any normal person, the statement, "your grown child may choose to do something against your advice such as drive while drunk, snort coke, participate in home break-ins" would mean that you raised them with the knowledge that these things are unacceptable!!!

C'mon man, that was the weakest straw man I've ever seen.

I just realized that I forgot to address the Atheist/Morality issue. I can't believe that I have to inform you of your own belief system. First you said you knew the Bible, which is not true. Now you say you're an atheist, but it is obvious that I have to tell you what Atheism believes. From two "heros of the (un)faith" -

?to have lost God means madness; and when mankind will discover that it has lost God, universal madness will break out.?​

? Friedrich Nietzsche, quote in ?Sin and Madness?​

​

​

?We have not been able to show that reason requires the moral point of view, or that all really rational persons should not be individual egoists or classical amoralists. Reason doesn?t decide here. The picture I have painted for you is not a pleasant one. Reflection on it depresses me? Pure practical reason, even with a good knowledge of the facts, will not take you to morality.?1

- Kai Nielsen (1926 ? Present)

1[FONT=&quot] Kai Nielsen, ?Why Should I Be Moral?? American Philosophical Quarterly 21 (1984), p. 90.[/FONT]​

Now tell me that Nietzsche and Nielsen are jokes in the atheist community and therefore are not to be believed.

Dude, you haven't a leg to stand on.

I told MC long ago that I don't waste time on those who have resolved themselves to misunderstand me. I've reached that point with you. You have no desire to find the truth.

I will continue to pray blessings on you and your family.

 

[Michchamp]

Nietzsche's feelings on morality were much more complicated and nuanced than the quote you cherry-picked.

You can't really tease out what "atheism believes" based on a representative of the group like you can with a particular religion/church, since there is no real organizational atheism, and no official spokesman/reverand/pope/iman/rabbi/etc. like there is in regards to organized religions.

I haven't read all of this thread, but christianity surely has no exclusive claim on "morality," despite what some of its adherents believe

 

[Monster]

Your inability to read, reason through what you just read, then arrive at a cogent conclusion is truly astounding!

Since you can't see the VERY OBVIOUS point of the entire post I will lay it out for you:

MAN meant EVIL toward his fellow man. GOD turned that intent of evil into PROVISION for those who would have been TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF.

You say, "You don't need the bible or any other religion to be a moral person," shortly after you wrote, "You know where I get mine? I get mine from knowing that killing, stealing, cheating, lying, and looking down on people are wrong." WHICH COMES DIRECTLY FROM THE BIBLE!!! So you use Biblical standards then attempt to distance yourself from it.

You are so confused you don't know which way is up.

You can't tell the difference between what PEOPLE THINK and what the BIBLE SAYS. You can't tell the difference between what the CATHOLIC CHURCH BELIEVES and what the BIBLE SAYS. Heck, you don't even know what YOU BELIEVE.

In this very thread you have contradicted yourself multiple times. You present rebuttals that show no forethought or consistency. You simply spit out the first thing that comes to mind that seems to oppose what I've written. I've not pointed them out so as not to embarrass you, but let's look at just a few -

In an attempt to discredit the Biblical account of the flood you pointed out that every major civilization has a flood story (which only points to a global flood), then later you try to argue that it was only a local flood. Next, in an attempt to salvage these incongruent thoughts, you'll attempt to come up with a theory to combine the two that there were 1000's of local floods which all covered the mountaintops, which is scientifically impossible.

At the beginning of this thread you said that you had no problem with God, but you hated the Bible. Now, however, you say God is evil and is even more evil than satan. Well...at least you're being honest with yourself and others at this point. Your stance is the same as every atheist I've ever encountered - "There is no God and I hate him!"

Ugh, you really don't understand, do you? I get exactly what you meant. You meant that man committed evil anyway, so God made these rules that are in the bible to make sure that those who are "enslaved" are not mistreated too much.

You do realize that man murdered, cheated, and stole back in those days, right? The bible specifically FORBIDS those things. God doesn't throw up his hands and say, "Well, they're gonna do it anyway. I guess I'll just give them rules to follow when doing these things. That should work!" No! He tells you specifically how to buy and trade your slaves.

Exodus 21:20-21 - "Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property."

If you were writing a book about how to conduct yourself, wouldn't "not enslaving another human" be in that somewhere? You wouldn't give instructions on slave ownership. You'd say, "Don't enslave" - well...I hope you would.

Just because the bible says that it's not right to kill, that doesn't mean those concepts originally come from the bible. What do you think happened before the bible? Did everyone just run around killing and stealing from each other? No.

Sure, it happened, but people understood it was wrong to do those things. What about people in countries where atheists are the majority? Are they all morally corrupt? What about people who have never read a page of your bible?

I don't get where you people get the idea that the bible is the origin of morality and the only way we know not to do bad things. It's absolutely insane.

I don't know what I believe? How the Hell do you know what I believe? I believe that your God is as real as the one eyed flying purple people eater. I believe that your book and your God have a ton of holes that are somehow invisible to your eyes. I believe that it is possible that a god(s) may exist, but he/she/it has not made itself known to us. I think it's unlikely, but possible.

I didn't contradict myself at all. What I said is that some have speculated that the so called world flood was localized to that specific region (not a bunch of local floods). I don't believe that's true, but it makes more sense than a global flood. And it's funny that you said it's scientifically impossible. Jesus' miracles were all scientifically impossible.

Other religions having a flood story is not proof of a past global flood. Many religions also have stories about witches and fire breathing dragons, but that's not proof. The only thing it proves is that religion is copycat and stories get passed on and changed to be more convenient.

I have no problem with A GOD and I have no problem with people that believe in God. I have a problem with people that use God and the bible as an excuse to look down on other people or use it to make laws. Perhaps I worded it funny or maybe I just didn't want to offend anyone.

I only hate your God because of what is in his book and the things he condones and does in his book. I have a great life and wouldn't complain one bit. Nothing has happened to me to make me angry with your god. So, I guess you're wrong again. You know what they say happens when you ASSUME.

Oh...and for the record, not all atheists believe the same thing. We have no religion. We're not an organized group that exchanges ideas. Don't lump us all together. It's obvious some of the other people in this thread are atheists as well, but I"m sure most of them have very little in common with my beliefs.

 

[Monster]

Nietzsche's feelings on morality were much more complicated and nuanced than the quote you cherry-picked.

You can't really tease out what "atheism believes" based on a representative of the group like you can with a particular religion/church, since there is no real organizational atheism, and no official spokesman/reverand/pope/iman/rabbi/etc. like there is in regards to organized religions.

I haven't read all of this thread, but christianity surely has no exclusive claim on "morality," despite what some of its adherents believe

Just saw this. Thank you. Now I don't have to respond to his post.

 

[mhughes0021]

i actually find much less ethics and morality IN religion. Death, wars, jihad, assraping kids, paying money gets you out of purgatory faster,???!!!!!....i could go on and on and on. Even the pope hates the catholic church now lol....he says so weekly.

 

[mhughes0021]

Ugh, you really don't understand, do you? I get exactly what you meant. You meant that man committed evil anyway, so God made these rules that are in the bible to make sure that those who are "enslaved" are not mistreated too much.

You do realize that man murdered, cheated, and stole back in those days, right? The bible specifically FORBIDS those things. God doesn't throw up his hands and say, "Well, they're gonna do it anyway. I guess I'll just give them rules to follow when doing these things. That should work!" No! He tells you specifically how to buy and trade your slaves.

Exodus 21:20-21 - "Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property."

If you were writing a book about how to conduct yourself, wouldn't "not enslaving another human" be in that somewhere? You wouldn't give instructions on slave ownership. You'd say, "Don't enslave" - well...I hope you would.

Just because the bible says that it's not right to kill, that doesn't mean those concepts originally come from the bible. What do you think happened before the bible? Did everyone just run around killing and stealing from each other? No.

Sure, it happened, but people understood it was wrong to do those things. What about people in countries where atheists are the majority? Are they all morally corrupt? What about people who have never read a page of your bible?

I don't get where you people get the idea that the bible is the origin of morality and the only way we know not to do bad things. It's absolutely insane.

I don't know what I believe? How the Hell do you know what I believe? I believe that your God is as real as the one eyed flying purple people eater. I believe that your book and your God have a ton of holes that are somehow invisible to your eyes. I believe that it is possible that a god(s) may exist, but he/she/it has not made itself known to us. I think it's unlikely, but possible.

I didn't contradict myself at all. What I said is that some have speculated that the so called world flood was localized to that specific region (not a bunch of local floods). I don't believe that's true, but it makes more sense than a global flood. And it's funny that you said it's scientifically impossible. Jesus' miracles were all scientifically impossible.

Other religions having a flood story is not proof of a past global flood. Many religions also have stories about witches and fire breathing dragons, but that's not proof. The only thing it proves is that religion is copycat and stories get passed on and changed to be more convenient.

I have no problem with A GOD and I have no problem with people that believe in God. I have a problem with people that use God and the bible as an excuse to look down on other people or use it to make laws. Perhaps I worded it funny or maybe I just didn't want to offend anyone.

I only hate your God because of what is in his book and the things he condones and does in his book. I have a great life and wouldn't complain one bit. Nothing has happened to me to make me angry with your god. So, I guess you're wrong again. You know what they say happens when you ASSUME.

Oh...and for the record, not all atheists believe the same thing. We have no religion. We're not an organized group that exchanges ideas. Don't lump us all together. It's obvious some of the other people in this thread are atheists as well, but I"m sure most of them have very little in common with my beliefs.

I want a "God loves slaves" bumper sticker!

 

[Michchamp]

i actually find much less ethics and morality IN religion. Death, wars, jihad, assraping kids, paying money gets you out of purgatory faster,???!!!!!....i could go on and on and on. Even the pope hates the catholic church now lol....he says so weekly.

I do agree to some extent.

my underlying premise: regardless of whether you believe in God or not, people who think more deeply about life, and the world around them tend to be more "moral," if you define morality in a "treat others the way you want to be treated" kinda way.

and as a percentage, there are more "deep thinkers" among atheists than believers, because most people on earth are born into some religion. so it's only those willing to think about it, analyze it, question it, that become atheists in the first place. so by definition... yeah.

Note: I am not saying that there are no deep-thinking Christians, or that deep-thinkers who are Christian will not also be moral. I am not saying all atheists are moral or deep thinkers.

 

[Thumb]

Morality is about knowing right from wrong, and choosing to do right. I am an atheist and I make the choice on behalf of myself, not on behalf of some religious text or the worry I might end up in hell.

Questioning some else's morality based on their belief's or lack thereof is hypocrisy at it's finest.

When I get up in the morning, I know I'm going to be a good person that day not because someone told me I should, or I read that I should in some book, but because I consciously choose to be. The same can not be said for the man who gets up knowing he will do wrong, but excuses it because he knows god promised to forgive him of his sins. Our prisons are filled with deeply religious people.

 

[KAWDUP]

The entire premise of religion is based on fear and control. When I was a kid I wanted to do good cause I was afraid that god would be upset if I did something bad. Now i have a mexican wife....so I don't need to be afraid of what jesus or god think anymore.

Control cause they think ppl would freak out if they knew that once they die they are just food for bugs in the ground....it gives those silly people that think your soul floats away something to hope for.

Really? the entire premise is based on fear and control? I, of course, beg to differ. I am not scared of eternal damnation, nor do I feel like I am being controlled. You continue to neglect Free Will in most of your posts.

On top of that, morality is generally considered a moving target by many different groups. E.g. slavery is no longer acceptable as moral behavior, but it certainly was at one time. Is there a meta- right and wrong to morality, that to be considered moral, you must follow whether you are an atheist or a Catholic?

Maybe, but I find it kind of funny that the absolutes that you stated you follow concerning your own morality such as for killing and stealing are also Judeo/Christian ideas from the 10 Commandments themselves. I'm sure that is just a coincidence, right?

 

[byco42]

Morality is about knowing right from wrong, and choosing to do right. I am an atheist and I make the choice on behalf of myself, not on behalf of some religious text or the worry I might end up in hell.

Questioning some else's morality based on their belief's or lack thereof is hypocrisy at it's finest.

When I get up in the morning, I know I'm going to be a good person that day not because someone told me I should, or I read that I should in some book, but because I consciously choose to be. The same can not be said for the man who gets up knowing he will do wrong, but excuses it because he knows god promised to forgive him of his sins. Our prisons are filled with deeply religious people.

The important assumption here is that the concepts of right and wrong originate from ourselves. If that's the case, we can change them whenever we want, for better or worse, with all the unintended consequences, and we do. And the natural outcome of that is the maelstrom of tragedy our world is continuously engulfed in. I don't start with the concept that "I'm a good person," but rather with the concept that "I'm a broken person" and it makes all the difference in my outlook.

 

[Michchamp]

The important assumption here is that the concepts of right and wrong originate from ourselves. If that's the case, we can change them whenever we want, for better or worse, with all the unintended consequences, and we do. And the natural outcome of that is the maelstrom of tragedy our world is continuously engulfed in. I don't start with the concept that "I'm a good person," but rather with the concept that "I'm a broken person" and it makes all the difference in my outlook.

In Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, after much logical exercise, he reached the "categorical imperative" of moral behavior, which came down to refusing to use others as a means to your own ends.

Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson gave a similar definition for a man's rights when he said your right to act is limited when and where it begins to affect the rights of others.

I think those are pretty strong foundations for morals. neither principle is as malleable as you imply, though neither are "natural" in anyway... or written on stone by "god" as the case may be. and both conflict with the existing state of nature, namely "eat or be eaten."

 

[Monster]

Really? the entire premise is based on fear and control? I, of course, beg to differ. I am not scared of eternal damnation, nor do I feel like I am being controlled. You continue to neglect Free Will in most of your posts.

On top of that, morality is generally considered a moving target by many different groups. E.g. slavery is no longer acceptable as moral behavior, but it certainly was at one time. Is there a meta- right and wrong to morality, that to be considered moral, you must follow whether you are an atheist or a Catholic?

Maybe, but I find it kind of funny that the absolutes that you stated you follow concerning your own morality such as for killing and stealing are also Judeo/Christian ideas from the 10 Commandments themselves. I'm sure that is just a coincidence, right?

You do realize that people had these morals much further back than the ten coomandments, right? In fact, many older religions talk about the same morals as the bible. I'm sure that is just a coincidence, right? The bible is not the origin of morality.

 

[Thumb]

The important assumption here is that the concepts of right and wrong originate from ourselves. If that's the case, we can change them whenever we want, for better or worse, with all the unintended consequences, and we do. And the natural outcome of that is the maelstrom of tragedy our world is continuously engulfed in. I don't start with the concept that "I'm a good person," but rather with the concept that "I'm a broken person" and it makes all the difference in my outlook.

Which really brings it back to the biblical notion that you are imperfect and can never be free from sin. I have shed that weight; the idea that I have something to repent for or live up to, and the fulfillment of that is being able to accept my actions/self on my own terms without obligations, and it's very rewarding.

 

[KAWDUP]

You do realize that people had these morals much further back than the ten coomandments, right? In fact, many older religions talk about the same morals as the bible. I'm sure that is just a coincidence, right? The bible is not the origin of morality.

Of course I realize that they existed much earlier than that. The origin of secular morality very rarely comes from something during a specific period in history. Influences are everywhere and cultural. But mercy killing, killing for infidelity, and a number of other immoral things where part of moral behavior in some of those cultures also.

What I was saying was that, outside of the commandments based solely on a belief in God, the ones governing human behavior are pretty much universally observed in the Western Hemisphere, regardless of religion. It is not just a coincidence that they are a main part of the Judeo/Christian commandments from the bible.

I know, next you will telling me about brain washing, and how we have no Free Will again. Pretty circular, wouldn't you say?

 

[Monster]

Of course I realize that they existed much earlier than that. The origin of secular morality very rarely comes from something during a specific period in history. Influences are everywhere and cultural. But mercy killing, killing for infidelity, and a number of other immoral things where part of moral behavior in some of those cultures also.

What I was saying was that, outside of the commandments based solely on a belief in God, the ones governing human behavior are pretty much universally observed in the Western Hemisphere, regardless of religion. It is not just a coincidence that they are a main part of the Judeo/Christian commandments from the bible.

I know, next you will telling me about brain washing, and how we have no Free Will again. Pretty circular, wouldn't you say?

Perhaps that's because most of the western hemisphere is made up of christians? Maybe I am wrong, but I think nearly every country in the west follows the bible. What you said is all too obvious and I doubt anyone would deny it. SO, no...there will be no circular argument. But, for entertainment's sake and because you said it, you are brainwashed.

All I was pointing out is that nobody needs to know about the bible in order to have these morals. The bible isn't the origin of morality and therefore the idea that an atheist has the same morals as you've learned from the bible isn't a very strange coincidence.

 

[Michchamp]

... It is not just a coincidence that they are a main part of the Judeo/Christian commandments from the bible.

...

meh. most people don't "keep holy the sabbath" as that was understood to mean at the time. And hell... christians/jews take the Lord's name in vain all the goddamn time!

to the extent there are similarities between the 10 commandments and modern morality/values, it's mainly because most of the commandments more or less dovetailed with what is understood to be a civilized society.

not killing, stealing, bearing false witness (lying), etc. .. cavemen had those figured out. maybe even without much of a language. a simple grunt and dirty look would be enough to show what was and was not acceptable.

no god/stone tablets/burning bushes needed.

 

[KAWDUP]

You do realize that people had these morals much further back than the ten coomandments, right? In fact, many older religions talk about the same morals as the bible. I'm sure that is just a coincidence, right? The bible is not the origin of morality.

No its not, but the 10 Commandments are, which was my point. The fact that we have such strong laws against killing, and that it is so ingrained in our society as a big part of our morality, would indicate a pretty high value placed on human life. Is it something high-valued for you?

Seems like there are large numbers of groups and religions throughout history and even today that have no problem with it. What makes them wrong and you right? I hope you understand that question is in the context of general moral right and wrong - not that you personally are "correct" or "incorrect".

 

[KAWDUP]

meh. most people don't "keep holy the sabbath" as that was understood to mean at the time. And hell... christians/jews take the Lord's name in vain all the goddamn time!

to the extent there are similarities between the 10 commandments and modern morality/values, it's mainly because most of the commandments more or less dovetailed with what is understood to be a civilized society.

not killing, stealing, bearing false witness (lying), etc. .. cavemen had those figured out. maybe even without much of a language. a simple grunt and dirty look would be enough to show what was and was not acceptable.

no god/stone tablets/burning bushes needed.

Actually no that isn't right - civilized society has been a moving target too. Seems like some pretty specific moral judgments that are more than just coincidence.