User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 93

  1. #51
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    I friggin hate this bullshit assertion - "If you don't believe in God then you have nothing to base your morals on".
    Completely agree.

    While not an atheist myself, I find it hard to believe that religious perspective necessarily commands a moralistic background. Or, that a/anti-thesim creates a basis for recklessness and antisocial behavior.

    Morality has nothing to do with religion. Quite the contrary. Adhering to a moral stance because one wishes to avoid "punishment" isn't adopting the position at all.

    Silly.

  2. #52
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    Completely agree.

    While not an atheist myself, I find it hard to believe that religious perspective necessarily commands a moralistic background. Or, that a/anti-thesim creates a basis for recklessness and antisocial behavior.

    Morality has nothing to do with religion. Quite the contrary. Adhering to a moral stance because one wishes to avoid "punishment" isn't adopting the position at all.

    Silly.
    Actually, morals, by definition, come from God and are taught through the church. (If you're being legalistic with the definition. Colloquially it has come to mean something on par with ethics.)
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  3. #53
    Nickle Iron Silicone Charmed Justice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    Actually, morals, by definition, come from God and are taught through the church. (If you're being legalistic with the definition. Colloquially it has come to mean something on par with ethics.)
    I guess I'm confused here. What do you mean?
    There is a thinking stuff from which all things are made, and which, in its original state, permeates, penetrates, and fills the interspaces of the universe.

  4. #54
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EnFpFer View Post
    I guess I'm confused here. What do you mean?
    I mean when people say that morals have nothing to do with religion, they're making a technical error, because the way we use the word in everyday conversation would suggest they're right, but when you research the word you'll find that morals by definition come from God and are taught through the church.

    It's just being picky though because when using the everyday definition of it I'd agree with Night.
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  5. #55
    Nickle Iron Silicone Charmed Justice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    I mean when people say that morals have nothing to do with religion, they're making a technical error, because the way we use the word in everyday conversation would suggest they're right, but when you research the word you'll find that morals by definition come from God and are taught through the church.
    Ok. So how does the way we use the word today differ from what you believe to be the definition that God gave it? What is the definition as you understand it?
    There is a thinking stuff from which all things are made, and which, in its original state, permeates, penetrates, and fills the interspaces of the universe.

  6. #56
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EnFpFer View Post
    Ok. So how does the way we use the word today differ from what you believe to be the definition that God gave it? What is the definition as you understand it?
    Well as a Christian I believe we're all created in the image of God, so I believe everyone, when being "moral" is doing it because they understand intuitively the "good/right" thing. (Lewis notes that when people get ticked when they are cut in line or whatever happened, they don't argue that they broke the rules, they argue that the other person wronged them, i.e. we all have the moral compass inside of us.)

    Basically the internal moral compass, IMO, is from God anyway, but in others' opinion, is biological (which I agree with too)/from their own self/whatever. What's the difference, really?
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  7. #57
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    Actually, morals, by definition, come from God and are taught through the church. (If you're being legalistic with the definition. Colloquially it has come to mean something on par with ethics.)
    I guess my rub is the notion that anything "coming from God" is, by definition, without meaning, as it is certainly instead divined from his "appointed" liaisons here.

    Morals stem from origin stories, and serve as a means to appreciate and respect life, in accordance with their respective religious organization. As each group has their own understanding of "God", there can be no universal "moral" code.

    To that end, morals are more evolutionary statements that encourage community than they are an infalliable ethology.

  8. #58
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    I guess my rub is the notion that anything "coming from God" is, by definition, without meaning, as it is certainly instead divined from his "appointed" liaisons here.
    Well, true. And that's where tracing the source ends... It's impossible to know how those liaisons arrived at their "divine knowledge." It's just a void.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  9. #59
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Well, true. And that's where tracing the source ends... It's impossible to know how those liaisons arrived at their "divine knowledge." It's just a void.
    Yep.

    Which leads some to conclude that many traditional moral nodes function as insular codes of self-service than as honest altruism.

  10. #60
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Yeah, eating babies is wrong. Unless God tells you to...

    And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat (Leviticus 26:29).
    And toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them (Deuteronomy 28:57).
    And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one the flesh of his friend (Jeremiah 19:9).
    As some of our apologists shout: CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!!!
    Those are all judgments or punishments; usually where they are being defeated by invadng armies whom God allows to come against them because of their own evil. So they are left desolate, and then end up commiting those heinous actions against themselves. It is not what God commands them to do!

    Misinterpretations like this are a major reason for a lot of confusion, both within Christianity, and in Bible vs atheism debates.
    Quote Originally Posted by Katsuni View Post
    The rules of religions are made by humans, they may claim to be 'inspired by god', but if god is absolute and objective, and smarter than us, and not prone to pitiful human emotional outbursts... then these laws cannot possibly be the work of god.

    That being said, I honestly believe that if there is a God, he's going to be *AT LEAST* as smart as I am, be *AT LEAST* as capable of understanding logical reasoning, and *AT LEAST* as loving as I am (probably alot more on all counts, infinite and all that... that and I'm not really that loving XD ).

    Therefore, by definition, if I can figure it out, God already has. If I can poke holes in religious argument, then God never held those views to begin with, if he did, he's even more flawed than I am, and therefore, why should I worship someone who is beneath me?


    The bible, quaran, torah, etc, all depict this 'god' (note no capitals here; it's a term not the name in this case) as being emotionally insecure, cruel, arrogant, selfish, rude, bigoted, stupid, foolish, warlike, violent, sexually deviant, etc.

    Why, then, would anyone actually want to be a deitist if this is all they have to look up to for their peers? If this were a human, they would be a flawed, weak, insensitive, sorry excuse for a man, who would never go anywheres in the world, except perhaps as a tin pot dictator, and not even a particularly good one at that. Why do people desire to cling to this human expression of God? Obviously they're just anthropomorphizing him, trying to apply human attributes to something which's supposedly far beyond human, and the only reason they do this is for cultural reasons, to support their own positions and desires. To excuse their wars, their hate, their flaws.

    If God is, by definition, flawless, then the laws of god would be incomprehensible to humans, and they most assuredly would not match up even remotely with our own cultural beliefs and cultural morals. One can only assume that all religions are false, to gross extent.

    This is a large reason of why I consider myself a 'practicing agnostic', despite that it's an oxymoron. I am religious, but I refuse to accept this pathetic excuse of a man as being "perfect and pure", and abuse the name of God in such a manner.

    I figure there's a high probability that there's either some mechanical order to things, or a designing intelligence of sorts, it's hard to prove fully, but the evidence does lean towards suggesting such. That being said, however, I can't accept man's flawed belief of the nature of god(s).
    But you are holding God up to cultural morals and values in criticising the notion of Him being "emotionally insecure, cruel, arrogant, selfish", etc., and thus His ways ARE not matching up to ours.
    God IS above the comprehension, and I believe the reason He comes across that way to us, is because the only way He can relate to us in our limited state is in those ways we can understand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    The truth is now we all live in the same bubble. And if you press on one side of the bubble, someone is sure to press on the other side. It's like a meteor hitting the earth - there is the initial crater but on exactly the other side of the Earth, at the antipode, there is an almost equal blast.

    So if you want to make an effect on the other side of the bubble or the other side of the Earth, a good strategy is to take exactly the opposite view of the one you wish to promote. Then the literal minded will come back with the opposing view in the other side of the bubble.

    So in this way distance has been abolished. We all vibrate to the same sounds in our bubble. And we can set up vibrations on the other side of the bubble simply by vibrating in this side.

    And we can elaborate our vibrations into conversations.

    Unfortunately most of us only know how to read an author or be professionally entertained by a celebrity. We have yet learnt to converse.

    Fortunately this medium is not made for passive entertainment or for solitary reading. Like the telephone it demands participation. In this medium, like it or not, we are all participants.

    And all we need to do is to let go our passive, literate habits and participate in the noosphere.

    Unfortunately the God we worship today is the God of the Book, whereas the God of tomorrow is the God of the spoken word. Today we read God. Tomorrow we will hear God.

    Fortunately our deep past is full of the Voice of God, just as our deep future will thrill to the sound of the Voice.

    So atheism today is merely the hiatus between the Book and the Voice.
    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    I am seriously sober, so I hope no one thought I was debunking atheism. On the contrary, I see atheism as the segue between the Holy Book and the Voice of God.

    Atheism is simply a caesura, a little rest, between literate theism and aural theism. We all need a little rest sometimes particularly when we are making such a big change between the printed word and the spoken word.

    At the moment atheism is full of sound and fury to distract our attention from the operation that is being performed on us as we shed our literate skins and prick up our ears.

    We are being skinned alive while our ears are being opened to the noosphere. So naturally we need the distraction of atheism as an anaesthetic for the pain of change completely out of our control.

    But tomorrow, dear Berber, we shall wake up with a hangover to match your very own as we loose our minds and come to our senses.

    For atheism is merely a hiatus, a segue, a caesura. It is nothing to be afraid of. Why, when I belly up to the philosophy bar, the barmaid inquires, "What'll you 'ave love?". And I reply, "I'll have a segue on ice", or if I am in the mood I might have a hiatus or even a caesura. And the barmaid gives me a knowing look, and says, "There's nothing like a bit of atheism, love, to help the theism go down".

    - Too bloody right love.
    Interesting. where do you get that concept from? (And I know you always went by INFP. Could you really be an introverted iNtuitive (NJ) type or perhaps ISFP?)

    It's true that we are in a cycle, where organized religion held the power, but then grew corrupt, and is now losing it with passion. They at first tried to keep the Book from everyone so they could interpret it alone, the way they wanted to, and once the Book became widely available to everyone, then they all splintered into different groups as everyone interpreted it for themselves. A lot of others (including the long persecuted science industry) just threw out the whole thing and went with atheism or at least agnosticism.
    Of course, God once did speak directly to man, according to the revelation. I often wish it would go back that way again, because all anyone is doing with the Book is just bending it to fit their own purpose (usually material and ego benefit). And then that leads others to violently reject the Book!
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] What's the best way of deciding between INTJ and ENTJ?
    By Ezra in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 01-17-2011, 07:44 AM
  2. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 11-27-2008, 01:20 PM
  3. [MBTItm] SFs: What's the best way to persuade you?
    By rivercrow in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04-20-2008, 05:25 PM
  4. Ride the Rocket (The Better Way)
    By Mempy in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-22-2008, 03:06 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO