Thread: Church Vs. God.
View Single Post
Old 01-08-2013, 03:12 AM   #127
Longbongcilvaringz
.
 
Longbongcilvaringz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 23,544
Rep Power: 98
Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)Longbongcilvaringz Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Obey View Post
That passage meaning put God before everything?

And your saying the morals written thousands of years ago from the 10 commandments are stupid, and using them as a moral foundation in todays society would be blatantly stupid? Hello? We still use these today. If we used all of them imagine all the murders we'd save on cheating hoes, and hospitalising liars, and if we weren't jealous of others belongings, and all those killing themselves and others using Gods name in vain. Wouldn't life be more harmonic
These ideas of morality predate religion. Regardless, religion is not a bad early attempt at philosophy but all monotheistic religions have terribly flawed morality. You picked the ten commandments - a good illustrations of how flawed and outdated religious morality is.

Out of 10 infallible, unbreakable precepts, only 5 relate to morality.

6. You shall not murder.

7. You shall not commit adultery.

8. You shall not steal.

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

10. You shall not covet your neighbor's house.

And these have been improved upon greatly by even early philosophy. If only half of these commandments have any relevance to building a moral foundation, and all of these can easily being improved upon with a more nuanced response, what modern value do the commandments really have?

As much as no one here wants to admit it, modern civilisation outgrew religious morality many hundreds of years ago. The few morally sound passages of the bible that remain don't validate the rest of the text and don't validate applying them as an absolutist moral framework.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Face of the Golden Falcon View Post
I've read the Gospels a number of times with different perspectives at different times.

It was quite obviously God's plan (according to Christianity/Paulism/Constantinism) that Jesus be murdered though. Which makes God in part morally culpable for that murder. The fact that he could not take responsiblility for his own plan and relied on deciet and having others do it for him is detestable. According to Torah blasphemy is punishable by death. They were following the instructions of their God when they murdered Jesus. If God had appeared in a burning bush to the Jews and said this Jesus guy is my Son and in fact me at the same time do you think the Jews would have murdered Jesus?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Face of the Golden Falcon View Post
So God teaches the Jews that it is a blasphemy for a man to claim himself God then sends himself in human form claiming to be God and expects them to act different to which he had told them? They did exactly as they had been instructed even if it was immoral.

I don't know how God could kill himself, let alone raise himself from the dead (how can he be really dead if he can raise himself from it???). These are not questions for me to answer.
Co sign. The story of Jesus is morally awful and his teachings, as written in the bible, were meandering, inconsistent and at times horrific.

But then again Christianity is full of masochism, punishment and violence, which is a reflection of the time period in which the texts were written but also serves as a tool to bewilder and frighten poorly educated people into subscribing to it.
__________________





Longbongcilvaringz is offline   Reply With Quote