morality...a peaceful discussion. (souls, zealous, atheist, bible)

[more excellent way]

There was a thread here called "Morality-who decides?", but that thread got out of hand because the aetheists were putting the younger christians to shame by being peaceful and truly dedicated to knowing and speaking truth only. Now don't get me wrong, I have Christian beliefs and have been "Christian" for 22 years, but I am a human being first (I do not define myself as "a" christian [book] (I am not partisan and do not conform to TEXT/COMMANDS/SIN/LAW/FAITH) or resent other people for being different or having different beliefs, attitudes, etc. The VERY FIRST reason I love God is because He made THE PEOPLE.

LOVE (respect for humanity) is what makes a Christian (the SPIRIT).

So, let's try to have another discussion about morality, but this time, hopefully, my Christian brothers can exhibit behavior that will actually glorify the creator.

"christianity" (the PRACTICE and common portrayal of 'Godlove') is not 'the creator Himself', nor did 'the book' die on the cross (the creator/origin is very often misrepresented by the behavior and attitudes of "christians"...as has been shown). The creator is actually a cosmic reality and offers us "wise counsel" in scripture (good advice) about how to live peacefully and be a just person (noble/good character) and to 'speak in no uncertain terms' (be zealous for/and speak only objective truth).

God is PRACTICAL, He is not "moral" ("morality" is only man's invention,...like 'etiquette', table manners, dress codes, etc.)

If you've ever seen baby turtles born on an island, 200 or more eggs may be hatched by the mother, but only a dozen will actually live to reach the [relative] safety of the water. It makes no difference TO GOD how many die (there is much more life where that came from, HE IS THE ORIGIN of it all). God has no need of "MORALITY", He is ABOVE what is called "morality", He is PERFECTION, the 'life giver'/provider/origin. So if God wants to let life be destroyed, what's that to Him?...(there's alot more "life" where that came from, He can easily replace it with just a thought).

It's we (humanity) who 'whine' about and PLAY the 'MORAL game' (EVEN THOUGH human history is filled with WAR, torture, hatred/resentment, cheating/betrayal, etc.).

Satan doesn't cause evil (he can only encourage/TEMPT), it is HUMANITY who CAUSES evil by imagining the 'moral' JUSTIFICATION of it's own desires (such as the ridicule, mockery and beratement found in the previous thread,...you know, the one about "MORALITY",...what IRONY!!).

.................GOD IS NOT "MORAL" (He has no need of "MORAL").

My aetheist 'fellow human beings'/brothers (you were also made in the image of the creator,...AND YOU STAYED THAT WAY) have not just provided me with 'food for thought', but have helped me clarify in my mind the folly/foolishness of HUMAN nature (the "MORAL" race that is "CIVILIZED"??!!). Hopefully, my "Brotherhood of God" fellow human beings can also learn to be peaceful and behave in such a manner that will glorify the creator.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by more excellent way

Hopefully, my "Brotherhood of God" fellow human beings can also learn to be peaceful and behave in such a manner that will glorify the creator.

I don't think that atheists see the need to be peaceful just to glorify a creator.
But I agree that Christians should love God 1st and love their neighbour as much as they love themselves. They should love God 1st so they won't be tempted to listen to their ego, but unless they also treat their neighbours as they themselves would like to be treated, only loving God could become egocentric.
Many serial killers only love God (read: their own desire) above all else, but they do not love themselves because they are not social beings. Serial killers often are incapable to be emphatic which bars them from being 'normal' social human beings.

[more excellent way]

Aetheists don't have a God to be good for, but our goodness should not be done for God, anyway. Neither should our goodness should be done because the bible 'orders' us to be good,...our goodness should not be by compulsion at all, it should be of our own FREEWILL/conscience (Philemon verse 14 in the RSV).

Probably the worst of the traditional teachings about Christianity is that we are taught that GOD/bible is the reason we should be good and hospitable to people.

We should be "good" and hospitable/friendly because we WANT to be (freewill conscience), that way, we will also have a spirit of GODLINESS (God's spirit).

It seems obvious that very few people/Christians have ever noticed Philemon verse 14 and can only see COMMANDS (but the 'sin laws' were abolished, Ephesians 2:15) and replaced with the perfect law (James 1:25 and 2:12).

Modern Christianity is simply trying to obey a book.

Aetheists don't have a NEED to be peaceful, they have the DESIRE (natural tendency, God is no respecter of persons/personalities, He only has regard for a person's true nature).

Verbally accepting (confessing) Jesus as savior is still necessary, but I've noticed that their behavior is usually Godly in nature.

[more excellent way]

We are not 'regular' animals (or animals at all), we are/can choose to be SOULS (made in the image of the creator).

Only a living, breathing SOUL can learn LOVE (respect of humanity, human rights, the Godly concept of love is misunderstood as 'lovey dovey').

Traditional Christianity has taught simple partisan INDOCTRINATION according to a BOOK (no real SOUL).

It is the same with Communism, democrat/republican and such....INDOCTRINATION (no real soul). In that way, I agree that indoctrination re-education cannot change a person (in their soul).


God's name FOREVER is "I am who I am" (Exodus 3:14).

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by Frenchman

Trying to re-educate a social animal (human) is like trying to re-educate a 100% gay man. It can't work. It's genetics. We are animals not computers.

And yet young animals learn from their parents.
The difference between humanity and other animals is that humanity has the written word.
Because of the written word people tend to believe that laws are unchangeable and / or should be permanent, which simply is untrue.
Everything is susceptible to change, so laws which were created for a specific event in a certain space and time should be changed if the conditions are changed.
There is no such thing as forever or permanent, therefore absolute truths are an illusion.


Originally Posted by more excellent way

We are not 'regular' animals (or animals at all), we are/can choose to be SOULS (made in the image of the creator).

Here we go again, because a book says that humans are created in the image of God we automatically believe that we are the pinnacle of nature, just because we are raised to believe this?
The effect of this indoctrination has caused a rift between humanity and nature; we believe ourselves to be so special that we are willing to sacrifice nature to fulfil our egotistical desire.
When will humanity admit that he needs his natural surroundings?

Only the truth will set us free.

[llowllevellowll]

My opinions:

Religion can help humans become better, more moral people.

Many humans, however, may not need religion to do so.

That isn't to say they are superior, it's just to say that religion isn't where they derive their motivation to BE moral.

Which is also fine, because as far as anthropology and history are concerned, morality predates religion.

For myself, I derive no interest in religion, but I don't dismiss the idea of a deity.

I wish everyone good luck in being moral people!

[more excellent way]

The word "religion" (just like most words) can and does have multiple meanings (however a person CHOOSES to define it,...the human way of speaking is subjective, based on each person's bias). The only true meaning of a word will be OBJECTIVE (unbiased) and ABSOLUTE.

OBJECTIVEly, H2O is "water",...no matter what anyone CHOOSES to call it (different languages cannot truly DEFINE water as ROCK, etc.). Absolutely/objectively, water is water (no matter how temperature changes it to another state), not only NOW, but ALWAYS/forever (the concept of time).

You said...
"There is no such thing as forever"

All throughout HISTORY, each person has died (they did not live FOREVER).

If your objection to the concept of "forever" is that you don't want to admit to 'afterlife that can only be obtained by present deeds' (God's afterlife is not based on "deeds", but decent BEHAVIOR), then it is your pre-conceived notion of associating the two as being relevant to each other that will always/forever keep you from admitting the concept of "FOREVER" (self-annhialating denial logic).

Example-- the reasoning refers to itself (I'll forever deny that "forever" exists), but denies itself.


An afterlife (can be a good one, or it can be a bad one) WILL exist (as we/humanity knows/understands, this is "FOREVER").

If you goal is simply to object to what you THINK and were told about God, then it is actually pointless to try to reason anything that is concerned with a Godly lifestyle, a REFERENCE POINT must be agreed upon in order for genuine communication of ideas (whether the reference point be FOREVER, BEGINNING, ORIGIN, or whatever).

How could there NOT be "forever"?

What is going to be the reference point for this discussion?

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by more excellent way

How could there NOT be "forever"?

Forever as in the ego is not forever although it lives in the illusion that it is forever.
The ego never stays the same, it changes throughout life, but no one will truly notice this process of (gradual) change. So even though the ego changes (has always changed) we still call me me, even though the me now is not the same as the me 10 years ago, nor will the me now be the same as 10 years in the future.
To the ego there is only now.

[more excellent way]

Agreed, a child's ego will change as they grow/mature, it will not stay the same forever. When a child is 5 years old, they will experience the "now" of that particular time. When they grow to a teenager, they will experience a different "now". As an adult, they will experience a "now" every day and every moment/reality, but reality is not an illusion (we perceive each reality SUBJECTIVELY, but it is not really imaginary).

"Reality is illusory" (Descartes??) is a philosophical attempt to understand the mind/SELF, but reality cannot actually be an illusion because, if it was, we both could not INTERact/discuss anything. In other words, AT THIS VERY MOMENT, my reality depends on having someone to DISCUSS 'with'.

Ego changes because the "now" reality changes.

It is the HUMAN BEING who experiences and perceives reality as being subjective, but there is also a true unseen reality that is OBJECTIVE and unchanging (we can't SEE/perceive it,...so called "super"/SUPRA-natural, beyond visible reality). This is what is called "GOD". Generically (non partisan), the creator is a cosmic reality (I'm not talking any of that partisan mumbo jumbo, the creator/BEGINNING is REAL and ALWAYS/forever.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by more excellent way

This is what is called "GOD". Generically (non partisan), the creator is a cosmic reality (I'm not talking any of that partisan mumbo jumbo, the creator/BEGINNING is REAL and ALWAYS/forever.

So you agree with me that our ego and God could be the same, or at least cannot exists without each other?
Like darkness cannot exist without light?
I mean, the I cannot exist without a them.
So Jesus' philosophy that I = them is like 'destroying' the (individual) ego?