Attention moral relativists... (HOF thread)

[Zakath]

Originally posted by ClaypoolKid

Yes Zakath, I am aware of Martin Luther's anti-Semitism and I find it disturbing as well.

But you'll continue to support his religion?

But what I want to know is: Was it wrong for Luther and the common people to have this "rabid hatred" for the Jews?

IMO, yes. The Jews had done nothing to injure most Germans. There is no reason, other than bigotry and religious rabble rousing, for most Germans to hate Jews.

I find it puzzling that you deny the existence of absolute morality but yet you so eagerly point out the "evils" committed by people. (You used the word 'evils' in your previous post.)

I used the word, and defined it several times in previous posts as well.

I also see a conflict with how you criticize the "thinking of the common people" during the time of Luther yet you seem at ease with the present day democratic republican process.

Where is the conflict? I live in a democratic republic. In Luther's day there was little democratic process. Germany was ruled by a group of hereditary nobility.

If “the will of the people” is the “highest authority” then by what authority do you criticize the “rabid hatred’ of Jews during the time of Luther?

To ask such a question, you are obviously not as conversant with Luther's history as you implied. Luther not only hated the Jews when they refused to convert to his brand of Christianity, he petitioned the German princes to seize their property, burn their synagogues, and drive them with scourging, homeless and penniless from German soil.

The authority I appeal to is basic human dignity and care for the welfare of my fellow man.

Wasn’t oppression against Jews a part of “the will of the people” at that time?

Only after being stirred by zealots like Luther preaching divine sanction and blessings for those who would opress the Jews.

Is the will of the people really the highest authority?

In the context of a democratic republic, yes.

If 10 years from now our democratic republic re-legalizes slavery will you speak out against it? If so, what will you say?

Yes, I believe that slavery is wrong because it victimizes my fellow humans, causing them to be treated as chattel. I would speak against it, even though the governments and Christian churches have supported owning of slaves and the slave trade throughout centuries.

How about you ClaypoolKid? Would you oppose human slavery? If so, on what grounds?

What grounds would you have to criticize 'the will of the people' which is the 'highest authority' of the land? Your authority could not be higher than the highest authority.

Of course my authority cannot exceed that of the electorate. I am merely one of the people, but I have some rights (until some administration or other removes them in the interest of "national security" ) to speak my mind on subjects. No one is required to act on what I say or even to listen, but I have the right to speak...

That's the way it works in this country, at least at present.

 

[Pilgrimagain]

YOu appeal to basic human dignity but why is that the highest authority? Is it a gut feeling for you or is it just realative?

 

[Goose]

The authority I appeal to is basic human dignity and care for the welfare of my fellow man.

Ancient Indians thought it the dignified thing to do to where the human skin of a sacrificed virgin as a coat. I'm sure you don't. How would you figure out who is right or wrong?

 

[Zakath]

Probably the same way you would, goose. Through the lenses of the culture in which I was raised. In my culture such things are wrong. Aren't they in yours?

If you want to play "why and why not" games, how about getting your "mind of Christ" to answer a few simple moral questions for me?

• Christians in the dark ages used to torture and kill suspected witches. Do you consider that biblically-based practice wrong? If so, why?
  
  Ancient Christians used to "sell all that they had" and bring the proceeds to the church to be distributed by the elders. Do you follow such practices? If not, why not?
  
  Christians kept humans as slaves as recently as 150 years ago in the United States. They claimed biblical justification for doing so. Do you consider the practice of human slavery wrong? If so, why?
  
  Do you consider attempting to stop the practice of abortion by bombing an abortion clinic or threatening abortionists with physical harm or death wrong? If so why? If not, why not?

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by Zakath
Probably the same way you would, goose. Through the lenses of the culture in which I was raised. In my culture such things are wrong. Aren't they in yours?

No. Actually, my morals are totally different then my culture. My culture is pro-choice. They like to go out and party on Friday-Sunday. They like to have sex without marriage. They like to get divorced. They hate God. This is NOT how you get your morality Zakath. Are there things that are wrong, and things that are right Zakath?

If you want to play "why and why not" games, how about getting your "mind of Christ" to answer a few simple moral questions for me?

Christians in the dark ages used to torture and kill suspected witches. Do you consider that biblically-based practice wrong? If so, why?

Maybe they weren't really Christians. If you think everyone who calls themselves a Christian, is a Christian, think again Zakath. Do you think everyone who calls themselves an atheist, is really an atheist? You're not too bright are you. Use your brain.

Ancient Christians used to "sell all that they had" and bring the proceeds to the church to be distributed by the elders. Do you follow such practices? If not, why not?

I live under the dispensation of Grace, not works. You have a moot point here, since you don't know much about that. I thought you were a pastor? Why is your bible knowledge so poor?

Christians kept humans as slaves as recently as 150 years ago in the United States. They claimed biblical justification for doing so. Do you consider the practice of human slavery wrong? If so, why?

In the American sense of slavery, it was wrong. Capturing and selling and what not. But I don't see why indentured servitude(as in the bible) would be a bad thing.

Do you consider attempting to stop the practice of abortion by bombing an abortion clinic or threatening abortionists with physical harm or death wrong? If so why? If not, why not?

I've never thought that through enough. But I do know that there are less abortionists because they don't want to be bothered like that. I'm all for pro-life rallies. I'm not too hip about usurping God's authority outside of the government. It's the government's job to execute murderers.

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Goose
No. Actually, my morals are totally different then my culture. My culture is pro-choice. They like to go out and party on Friday-Sunday. They like to have sex without marriage. They like to get divorced. They hate God. This is NOT how you get your morality Zakath. Are there things that are wrong, and things that are right Zakath?

Oh really? Upon what do you base these morals that are totally different from society, goose?

If you think everyone who calls themselves a Christian, is a Christian, think again Zakath.(snipped meaningless ad hominem)

Actually, I wonder whether you would actually qualify. Just remember, "not every one who calls themselves a Christian..."

I live under the dispensation of Grace, not works. You have a moot point here... (snipped meaningless ad hominem)

No I have a valid point that you are dodging. Are you insinuating that the Christians in apostolic times did not live under this "dispensation of grace"? Why don't you try actually reading your bible and see if you can explain why they are different from you...

In the American sense of slavery, it was wrong. Capturing and selling and what not. But I don't see why indentured servitude(as in the bible) would be a bad thing.

You've only answered half the question... Indentured servitude is not the slavery at issue, that only applied biblically to Jews, not foreigners. Conquered peoples were captured, bought and sold, they were just plain slaves for life...

Why do you believe that biblical slavery is right?

I've never thought that through enough.

That's not surprising. It can lead you to some very uncomfortable positions.

But I do know that there are less abortionists because they don't want to be bothered like that.

And there are fewer interracial marriages in the south because they used to hang blacks. What's your point, that threatening people with mayhem and death is right because the end justifies the means?

I'm all for pro-life rallies. I'm not too hip about usurping God's authority outside of the government. It's the government's job to execute murderers.

But according to the government, abortionists who work in legally licensed facilities are not murderers. It's only you antiabortion types who tag them with that title.

Your attitude appears to be a cop out to avoid having to set yourself against the government. If churches ever actually acted on the convictions of their beliefs, they'd be shut down in a matter of weeks. They are too fat and protective of their property, plunder, and privilege to dare to upset the status quo.

You say your morals are different from society but I don't see it as being so. So show me that I am wrong here, goose. Show me that you are not just another relgious bigot, hiding behind their bible to criticize those they don't agree with but never taking action.

 

[Goose]

Isaiah 5:20 "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"

Originally posted by Zakath
Oh really? Upon what do you base these morals that are totally different from society, goose?

You really aren't very bright, are you. I'm a Christian. It would be a best to assume that I get my morals from biblical teaching and prayer. I thought you were a Christian once Zakath?

Actually, I wonder whether you would actually qualify. Just remember, "not every one who calls themselves a Christian..."

You wouldn't have any basis to judge, even if you thought this to be true.

No I have a valid point that you are dodging. Are you insinuating that the Christians in apostolic times did not live under this "dispensation of grace"? Why don't you try actually reading your bible and see if you can explain why they are different from you...

Peter and Paul taught different Gospels. Everyone knows this, Zakath.

Gal 2:7 "But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;"

Peter's disciples were waiting for Jesus to return very soon. But Jesus didn't. So, they starved and were poor. Paul's disciples actually had to help support them.

I'd suggest you stay away from questioning the Bible, as you have a hard enough time discerning right from wrong.

You've only answered half the question... Indentured servitude is not the slavery at issue, that only applied biblically to Jews, not foreigners. Conquered peoples were captured, bought and sold, they were just plain slaves for life...

God doesn't care if you're Jew or foreigner. He cares about right and wrong, Zakath. Something your discernment lacks.

Why do you believe that biblical slavery is right?

I'm not sure, but I would assume that the servant didn't have enough to pay what he was in debt for. Therefore, he loaned himself. The servant had to be released after 7 years.

And there are fewer interracial marriages in the south because they used to hang blacks. What's your point, that threatening people with mayhem and death is right because the end justifies the means?

It's ok to use fear and wrath, as long as what you're up against is evil. Something you have no say in, Zakath, because you lack discernment and the wisdom to see what is right and wrong.

But according to the government, abortionists who work in legally licensed facilities are not murderers. It's only you antiabortion types who tag them with that title.

What a hypocrite you are Zakath. You go around telling me I'm wrong, with absolutelty no basis(that you can admit to) for your claims. You say that your morality is defines by society. So when society says that slavery is right, say in the Sudan, you would have to agree that it is right. But here in the US, it is abolished. Yet a couple paragraphs ago, you attack me having a biblical view of slavery! On what grounds!?!?! You hypocrite!

Your attitude appears to be a cop out to avoid having to set yourself against the government. If churches ever actually acted on the convictions of their beliefs, they'd be shut down in a matter of weeks. They are too fat and protective of their property, plunder, and privilege to dare to upset the status quo.

God gave churches and government different authority, Zakath. Something you wouldn't understand.

You say your morals are different from society but I don't see it as being so. So show me that I am wrong here, goose. Show me that you are not just another relgious bigot, hiding behind their bible to criticize those they don't agree with but never taking action.

Show me you're not some kind of hypocrite! YOu're evil! You would call sweet things bitter, and bitter things sweet, as long as society defined them for you, you fool! You're a tool of society! How does it feel, Zakath!?!?

Isaiah 5:20 "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Goose
(snipped first ad hominem) I'm a Christian. It would be a best to assume that I get my morals from biblical teaching and prayer.

I'm an atheist, not a mind reader. Everytime I assume something about you religionists, it turns out to be untrue sometime down the road...

You claim to be a Christian. But you do not attend any local church on a regular basis. By your own statement, you're some kind of 22 year old "lone ranger" who is so full of pride in his allegedly superior knowledge that he doesn't even need fellowship with an organized church. How do I know what kinds of twisted interpretations your spinning yourself out of whatever Bible translation happens to be your favorite this year.

You wouldn't have any basis to judge, even if you thought this to be true.
Peter and Paul taught different Gospels. Everyone knows this, Zakath. <snipped open view sermonette...>

So everyone knows this, eh? Now that's enlightening. Perhaps you should tell the folks that have been arguing about it over in the Dispensationalism forum since last October! Unfortunately, Paul didn't think there were separate gospels. Different audiences, but one gospel, and that anything else was false doctrine..."But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! " Gal 1:8

Peter and Paul preached the same gospel but to different audiences.

I'd suggest you stay away from questioning the Bible, as you have a hard enough time discerning right from wrong.

So we humans are to seek but not question, eh goose? Questioning appears to be dangerous for people like you. You react very poorly when someone poses a few...

God doesn't care if you're Jew or foreigner. He cares about right and wrong, Zakath.

No, actually your god cares about that, goose. The problem is, it's difficult to put 20 Christians in a room and come up with a consistent idea of just what is right or wrong in many real-life circumstances.

I'm not sure...<snipped goose's ignorance>

For someone who claims not to know what he's talking about, you sure have a lot to say.

It's ok to use fear and wrath, as long as what you're up against is evil. Something you have no say in, Zakath, because you lack discernment and the wisdom to see what is right and wrong.

So you believe it is morally right to burn or bomb abortion clinics? To threaten abortionists? To threaten clinic workers? To kill abortionists and clinic staff? Where do you draw the line?

"For God did not give us a spirit of fear..."

What a hypocrite you are Zakath. You go around telling me I'm wrong, with absolutelty no basis(that you can admit to) for your claims.

No I'm not a hypocrite, goose. I'm an atheist. You're the hypcrite, claiming to be able to tell me right from wrong by reading the mind of your deity, while writing "I'm not sure", and "I haven't thought about that"...

You say that your morality is defines by society. So when society says that slavery is right, say in the Sudan, you would have to agree that it is right.

But I'm not Sudanese, goose. I'm an American.

But here in the US, it is abolished. Yet a couple paragraphs ago, you attack me having a biblical view of slavery! On what grounds!?!?!

Because you claim to be a bible believing Christian. Or have you changed your mind again...

You really aren't very bright ... What a hypocrite you are ... hypocrite!...YOu're evil!...you fool!... you wouldn't understand ...You're a tool...<snipped the rest of goose's rant>

Goose, there are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

You are so double-minded and conflicted about what you claim to believe, that you cannot even carry on a coherent discussion without resorting to name calling...

If you can't even keep your temper on a silly little web site like this one, you appear to need further study and maturity before you try apologetics...

 

[cirisme]

You claim to be a Christian. But you do not attend any local church on a regular basis.

Chapter and verse, please, where it says that to be a Christian you must regularly attend oganized churches. The concept we have of church today is much different than that of the Bible's.

The problem is, it's difficult to put 20 "Christians" in a room and come up with a consistent idea of just what is right or wrong in many real-life circumstances.

Pathetic, really.

So you believe it is morally right to burn or bomb abortion clinics? To threaten abortionists? To threaten clinic workers? To kill abortionists and clinic staff? Where do you draw the line?

I believe in submitting to authority.

No I'm not a hypocrite, goose. I'm an atheist.

Reminds me when Gore said, "I'm not the problem. I'm a democrat."

But I'm not Sudanese, goose. I'm an American.

Well, duh! But you believe that morals are relative to each society, don't you? The Sudanese society says slavery is just fine, the American society says it is horrible. Which society is right, ours or theirs?

 

[Eireann]

originally posted by goose
You really aren't very bright, are you. I'm a Christian. It would be a best to assume that I get my morals from biblical teaching and prayer. I thought you were a Christian once Zakath?

You might assume that it would be best to assume that, because it is a comfortable position for you, but it is much more likely that your morals are informed by that particular culture or society -- the culture of Christians who share your belief and interpretation. Culture can mean many things. The culture you described in an earlier post is more of a macroculture, but you belong to more cultures than just that one. The people who follow the same religion as you form another culture, another society, and that is where many of your morals stem from. Think about it -- you said that you are a relatively new Christian, I believe? The morals that you have now -- did you suddenly adopt all of them only when you became a Christian and started reading the Bible and praying, or did you, as I suspect, hold a good number of them even before? How much contact did you have with Christians -- friends, family, acquaintances -- before you claimed the title yourself? Would it be too much of a stretch to guess that you probably picked up a lot of your moral values from those people even before you yourself claimed to be one of them?

 

[Eireann]

Originally posted by cirisme
Well, duh! But you believe that morals are relative to each society, don't you? The Sudanese society says slavery is just fine, the American society says it is horrible. Which society is right, ours or theirs?

I think you're either misunderstanding or oversimplifying the relativist position. We don't say that you can't claim something is right or wrong. We say that you can't judge something as "absolutely" right or wrong. What we consider wrong is defined by the culture(s) and society(ies) that we live in, so if we live in a society that considers slavery wrong, naturally we are going to consider it wrong in any circumstance. But that is not the same as saying that it is absolutely wrong. Calling something "absolutely wrong" requires being able to justify a source of that absolute. That comes back to the same problem of being able to prove the existence of that source (i.e. God, etc.).

"Wrong" and "absolutely wrong" may be quantitatively the same, but they are qualitatively different.

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by cirisme
Chapter and verse, please, where it says that to be a Christian you must regularly attend oganized churches. The concept we have of church today is much different than that of the Bible's.

Paul felt strongly enough about "lone rangers" to speak out against it... "Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another--and all the more as you see the Day approaching. " Heb. 10:25

IIRC, Agustine was the one who summarized it with his "apart from the Church there is no salvation."

Wouldn't you expect the concept to evolve after twenty centuries?

I believe in submitting to authority.

The point of the question is when does allegedly divine authority supercede civil authority?

Well, duh! But you believe that morals are relative to each society, don't you? The Sudanese society says slavery is just fine, the American society says it is horrible. Which society is right, ours or theirs?

Why must either one be more right or wrong than the other? Slavery is wrong and unacceptable for Americans and acceptable for Sudanese. One hundred and fifty, or so, years ago, we would have been in agreement while the Southern Baptists were thundering biblical support of slavery from their pulpits. Were the baptists wrong all those years? Who's to say...

Prostitution is acceptabe for Nevadans and wrong for Californians, who's right?

Abortion is right in the United States and wrong in Iran; whose society is right, the Muslims of Iran or the allegedly "Christian" nation of the U.S.?

Comparative social morality provides some interesting conundrums...

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by Zakath
You claim to be a Christian. But you do not attend any local church on a regular basis. By your own statement, you're some kind of 22 year old "lone ranger" who is so full of pride in his allegedly superior knowledge that he doesn't even need fellowship with an organized church.

I'm still settling in South Bend, and I might be moving, whenever this temp job ends. I don't have a church here.

How do I know what kinds of twisted interpretations your spinning yourself out of whatever Bible translation happens to be your favorite this year.

Well, being an atheist, you wouldn't ever know absolutely, since it takes a spirit of discernment to discern spiritual matters.

So everyone knows this, eh? Now that's enlightening. Perhaps you should tell the folks that have been arguing about it over in the Dispensationalism forum since last October! Unfortunately, Paul didn't think there were separate gospels. Different audiences, but one gospel, and that anything else was false doctrine..."But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! " Gal 1:8

There were different gospels but only one Gospel, which was the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And Jesus Christ preached the Gospel of the Kingdom. Different messages to different people, with the same goal. A vessel for honor and a vessel for dishonor.

So we humans are to seek but not question, eh goose? Questioning appears to be dangerous for people like you. You react very poorly when someone poses a few...

I don't react well with people who deny God. don't know where you atheists come up with your "holier than thou" stuff, where you think you're better or smarter than others. Some of the best minds in the world are christians, as well as famous scientists.

No, actually your god cares about that, goose. The problem is, it's difficult to put 20 Christians in a room and come up with a consistent idea of just what is right or wrong in many real-life circumstances.

Real life circumstances? Like what? Deciding to have an abortion or not? Usually, everyday choices aren't questions of morality, personally. For a good Christian, it's usually common sense. For a relativist, they go on their feelings and evolutionary philosophy of "the strongest wins and therefore sets the morality".

For someone who claims not to know what he's talking about, you sure have a lot to say.

Maybe because I try to be honest with myself.

So you believe it is morally right to burn or bomb abortion clinics? To threaten abortionists? To threaten clinic workers? To kill abortionists and clinic staff? Where do you draw the line?

I don't do these things, nor have a thought about doing them. I'd suggest you read Romans 13.

"For God did not give us a spirit of fear..."

Amen!
Rom 13:3 "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:"

No I'm not a hypocrite, goose. I'm an atheist. You're the hypcrite, claiming to be able to tell me right from wrong by reading the mind of your deity, while writing "I'm not sure", and "I haven't thought about that"...

You don't even know what the Mind of Christ means! LOL Yet you call me a hypocrite. "Survival of the Fittest", yet you use abortion clinic bombings as an argument. "I'm my own moral authority" is what relativists preach, yet they don't respect anyone elses but they're own.

But I'm not Sudanese, goose. I'm an American.

I know! But what if you moved over there. Does it become morally right to have boy slaves all of the sudden? Would this take effect when you got on the plane, off the plane, cross time zones, etc???

Goose, there are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Are you making a personal statement directed toward you?

You are so double-minded and conflicted about what you claim to believe, that you cannot even carry on a coherent discussion without resorting to name calling...

I have yet to see any logical proof for this. Your proof seems to be your own interpretations and quotes of mine taken out of meaning and context.

If you can't even keep your temper on a silly little web site like this one, you appear to need further study and maturity before you try apologetics...

Temper! LOL You spit on my best friend's grave and then try to use His morality as your own. One day, you're gonna pay, eternally.

 

[Dana Scully]

Goose,

In the words of Benjamin Martin, "Aim small, miss small." Don’t let Zakath throw too many arguments at you at once. Find one great point, stick to it, ignore the others.

You can do it!
Dana

 

[Eireann]

Originally posted by Dana Scully
Goose,

In the words of Benjamin Martin, "Aim small, miss small." Don’t let Zakath throw too many arguments at you at once. Find one great point, stick to it, ignore the others.

You can do it!
Dana

Ha! I knew the X-Files was real! Can I have your autograph?

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by Dana Scully
Goose,

In the words of Benjamin Martin, "Aim small, miss small." Don’t let Zakath throw too many arguments at you at once. Find one great point, stick to it, ignore the others.

You can do it!
Dana

Awesome! I love that movie! I gotchya But he's so wrong! It's like hitting the broadside of a barn! :up:

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by Eireann

You might assume that it would be best to assume that, because it is a comfortable position for you, but it is much more likely that your morals are informed by that particular culture or society -- the culture of Christians who share your belief and interpretation...

I agree with you Eirann. Culture helps tremendously. But culture isn't what DEFINES our morality. It can just help us, or hurt us in our growth.

Some cultures are better than others. Some cultures have a better standard of living and promote life better. Some are just better. It's this standard, this ruler, that is absolute.

Relativists don't believe in that measuring stick. They can't. It's self-refuting to say that there is a non-physical measuring stick of morality, yet also have culture define morality.

 

[Zakath]

All people, relativists and absolutists, use their own measuring stick. There's significant variation in the measuring stick used by Christians of differing backgrounds. Just check the amounts of discussion of various topics going on here at TOL.

If there wasn't significant variation, sites like this one wouldn't have much traffic.

 

[Goose]

Christians have the mind of Christ, and therefore are able to discern and discuss amongst themselves, letting the Holy Spirit make the decision. Relativists do what is right in there own mind.

Isa 65:2 "I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way [that was] not good, after their own thoughts;"

Christians as a whole, listen to a higher authority. Relativists don't, by definition. Their authority is society, which is self-refuting. Our authority is the Holy Spirit.

 

[Zakath]

Congratulations, goose. This is almost looking like a real discussion!

Your post prompted a few questions...

Originally posted by Goose
Christians have the mind of Christ, and therefore are able to discern and discuss amongst themselves, letting the Holy Spirit make the decision. Relativists do what is right in there own mind.

Are you also saying that Christians decide things on majority vote?

Do you believe that Christians should make their decisions solely by consensus or by vote?

How do the Christians determine that some alien entity is making the decision for them and not just their own subconscious minds?

In the Bible, even the NT, followers of YHWH used random chance to discern the will of their deity. How does this fit in with your discussion process?

Christians as a whole, listen to a higher authority. Relativists don't, by definition. Their authority is society, which is self-refuting. Our authority is the Holy Spirit.

As a whole, indicates that there are some who do not do so. How does "the whole" determine who those "someones" are who are not listening?

How can the "the whole" be certain that the "someones" aren't correct and the majority are wrong?