Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity

@reasoning logic,

Could you explain the concept by referencing people who actually make up society today? There's not a lot of cannibals and slaveowners about right now.

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

I have confronted my immorality a few times. I decided that evolution theory confirms it as respectable and if God set evolution in motion He must approve of it as well.

What's best for mankind, it seems to me, is that it becomes extinct as quickly as possible.

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

What slave master would want to hear how it is immoral for him to have thousands of acres that slavery has allowed him to posses? or what slave master would want to hear how it would be moral for him to free his slaves?

Quote:

John Henry Newton (July 24, 1725 – December 21, 1807) was a British sailor and Anglican clergyman. Starting his career at sea, at a young age, he became involved with the slave trade for a few years. After experiencing a religious conversion, he became a minister, hymn-writer, and later a prominent supporter of the abolition of slavery. He was the author of many hymns, including "Amazing Grace" and "Glorious Things of Thee are Spoken."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Newton

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

The thing about such songs as "Glorious Things of Thee are Spoken" is that it helps us to raise our sights even if there is no Thee. A sleight of mind which is worthwhile. So far at least.

Without them we have only the higher primates to guide us or previous forms of mankind. I would personally choose the former but not if "Glorious Things of Thee are Spoken." is available.

1 Reply

@spendius,

It's probably not an example that RL welcomes.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Quote:

Starting his career at sea, at a young age, he became involved with the slave trade for a few years.

Still, he did not renounce the slave trade until later in his life. After his return to England in 1750, he made three further voyages as captain of the slave-trading ships Duke of Argyle (1750) and African (1752–1753 and 1753–1754). He only gave up seafaring and his active slave-trading activities in 1754, after suffering a severe stroke, but continued to invest his savings in Manesty's slaving operations."[6] ten years later On 29 April 1764 Newton received deacon's orders, and finally became a priest on June 17.

This man may have been serious but I do have to question his behavior as a christian.
Is it truly possible for someone to read what Jesus had said in the new testament and still invest your savings into Manesty's slaving operations?
"I think that it is possible, just as we are able to behave the way we do and still call ourselves Christians. "Imagine that, "sociopathic christian"! That is what he was, was it not?

How much money did he have to make before he felt comfortable enough to start denouncing slavery?

In 1788, 34 years after he had retired from the slave trade, Newton broke a long silence on the subject with the publication of a forceful pamphlet "Thoughts Upon the Slave Trade", in which he described the horrific conditions of the slave ships during the Middle Passage, and apologized for "a confession, which ... comes too late ... It will always be a subject of humiliating reflection to me, that I was once an active instrument in a business at which my heart now shudders." A copy of the pamphlet was sent to every MP, and sold so well that it swiftly required reprinting.[9]

I do think he is correct in saying that he had "a confession, which ... comes too late

I am not trying to put this man down but rather point out how crazy we all can be and still claim that we are moral.

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

I'm very pleased that I inspired you to learn a bit of History. Well done for all that research, it gives a far fuller picture of the man.

Did you do the research out of genuine intellectual curiosity, or did you just want to prove a point?

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Quote:

Did you do the research out of genuine intellectual curiosity, or did you just want to prove a point?

I always do it for both.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

There is no point to prove rl. It's all passe and water that has long since turned the millwheel.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

This man may have been serious but I do have to question his behavior as a christian.

Why just question the Christian aspect?

Quote:

The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.

L. P. Hartley.

Everything about him is questionable.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

There is no point to prove rl. It's all passe and water that has long since turned the millwheel.

It seems to me that there will always be this same point to prove or get other people to at least consider and this point is, "that what might seem to be normal or moral may very well be rankism.
I think that it may even be possible for us to over reach in our desires to teach morality the way that you "Spendius" try to control sexual relations or the way some Muslim men may think that it is absolutely necessary for women to be covered.

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

A sociopathic type of society is a subjective view of mine that I come to when I analyze our society. We all see things from different points of view. A cannibal may think that being a cannibal is completely normal just as a slave master may think the same.

What slave master would want to hear how it is immoral for him to have thousands of acres that slavery has allowed him to posses? or what slave master would want to hear how it would be moral for him to free his slaves?

If any of what I have questioned may hold some sort of truth, then what would be the likely hood of you being willing and unbiased when confronting your own immorality?

All, that I want to know, is do you believe, you do this as well? And act this way?

So that it is either a logically consistent argument or not...

If you do, why would you think your view, is a sociopathic one, just because it is from a different perspective than others?

To me, that is what makes humans so great, Is that everyone has their own perspective...

I do not believe that makes us sociopathic, but rather the same, but different...

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Sorry, I had to re-post, as my last one got timed out, and I added more to my last post...

Quote:

A sociopathic type of society is a subjective view of mine that I come to when I analyze our society. We all see things from different points of view. A cannibal may think that being a cannibal is completely normal just as a slave master may think the same.

What slave master would want to hear how it is immoral for him to have thousands of acres that slavery has allowed him to posses? or what slave master would want to hear how it would be moral for him to free his slaves?

If any of what I have questioned may hold some sort of truth, then what would be the likely hood of you being willing and unbiased when confronting your own immorality?

All, that I want to know, is do you believe, you do this as well? And act this way?

So that, it is either a logically consistent argument or not...

If you do, why would you think your view, is a sociopathic one, just because it is from a different perspective than others?

To me, that is what makes humans so great, Is that everyone has their own perspective...

I do not believe that makes us sociopathic, but rather the same, but different...

The reason, it seems sociopathic, is because others believe by looking from the outside in, that another is being sociopathic, or immoral, not at all to do with that individual...And their actual perspective...

In other words, by you, trying to look at our society, and see if things seem to be sociopathic or not, you are directly or indirectly contributing to the sociopathic (your words, not mine), or immoral way of looking at things from the outside in...

So, there really is no, non-sociopathic way to do it...Either, you decide to tell what you believe to others is moral, or immoral, or you keep it to yourself...

Sociopathic, and immoral, and moral, will always continue, and it will always be from the others who are judging it, as to what, how, and why it is in fact moral, immoral, sociopathic, or not....

That is just another reason why Jesus' ethics judge not, be not judged is a good thing...

Because in the end, It makes no difference, if a person wants to be immoral, they are going to do so...And when we are acting moral, they may believe we are being immoral...So who is in fact right? You can answer neither, or both...

It will always be in the eye of the beholder, as to what in fact moral, and immoral actually are...

I do not see how there is any hope with atheism then, as this will never change...

And if you believe it will, or can, please explain how you think it could?

With a God, he seems to have already understood this thing would happen...

And hence, why he is the ultimate judge...

So what is the purpose, from an atheistic perspective, to even attempt to talk about, discuss, or alter others views of morality then? And them trying to alter yours?

0 Replies

This is directed at ANY atheist...

Logic said:

Quote:

A sociopathic type of society is a subjective view of mine that I come to when I analyze our society. We all see things from different points of view. A cannibal may think that being a cannibal is completely normal just as a slave master may think the same.

What slave master would want to hear how it is immoral for him to have thousands of acres that slavery has allowed him to posses? or what slave master would want to hear how it would be moral for him to free his slaves?

If any of what I have questioned may hold some sort of truth, then what would be the likely hood of you being willing and unbiased when confronting your own immorality?

If what you said has any truth to it, and you do not believe that religion is correct, and there are no Gods...

What do you "base" your views of morality on? And what makes you "think" your views of morality are moral?

Why is someone else immoral?

What makes you "think" that they are??

Can you "prove it"?

I see it, as basing it upon, things that were written thousands of years ago, which most, seem to be relevant, today...Like most of what Jesus had to say...

If you do not base your morality upon any kind of religion...

Nor, anything from the past...Such as religion...

What makes you "think" you are being moral at all?

And what makes you "think" others are not being moral by giving their perspectives of morality?

Who, ultimately decides, who is the moral one, and who is ultimately, the immoral one?

So, who is, ultimately, right here?

Where do we go from there?

How do we advance past this?

Will it ever change?

How so??

It seems to me, from an atheistic perspective, no one is right, and no one is wrong...

Nothing will change...

As no one has the dominant control to "decide" what is moral and immoral...

To teach others, what they should be doing, and what they should, abstain from doing...

As it is all a Gut feeling, In which anyone could be right, and anyone could be wrong...

Because it is all in the eye of the beholder, as to what is in fact moral, about what they say...

Or what is immoral about it...

Unless, you listen to some sort of scripture about ethics and morality, and base it upon it...

Which, I believe, atheists do...

That shows, that even if they "think" a God is not real, or irrelevant...

He plays a very important part of everyone's lives...

So why would you "think" he is not real?

Believers and non-believers seem to use these scriptures to back their morality?? No??

If you do not, what do you base it upon?

And what makes you "think" your views of morality are right?

What makes you "think" others should/will listen to you??

And finally, How do you plan on spreading your views of morality, so that others can learn, if you do not embrace any type of belief system, and are a lack of belief??

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

I think that it may even be possible for us to over reach in our desires to teach morality the way that you "Spendius" try to control sexual relations or the way some Muslim men may think that it is absolutely necessary for women to be covered.

I do not try to control sexual relations. I make an argument that sexual relations are conducted in a certain agreed way. If you were better educated you would know that Spendius (I am spendius) bought and sold women as his profession. I am perfectly willing to listen to arguments that sexual relations are conducted in other ways.

Why don't you suggest some?

I imagine that the majority of atheists think that women should be covered in public places. I presume you agree.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

To me, that is what makes humans so great, Is that everyone has their own perspective...

I do not believe that makes us sociopathic, but rather the same, but different...

That's meaningless Spade.

0 Replies

Isn't the abduction and transportation of women to auctions in far away places simply a scientific method of avoiding endogamy and the problems of in-breeding?

I think you should avoid using science to justify your wandering subjectivities until you learn some science.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

What do you "base" your views of morality on?

On my understandings that come from studying moral philosophy, "same place that "some" of those who wrote the bible got theirs.

Quote:

And what makes you "think" your views of morality are moral?

My views on morality are much better than what they use to be, it is like playing a video game the more you study it the better you understand it. Do I have a perfect understanding of morality no because our understandings will always increase.

Quote:

Why is someone else immoral?

What makes you "think" that they are??

Can you "prove it"?

Are you being serious?

I do apologize for the graphic example but I do want to make this as clear as I can. If ten men gang raped your own mother would you still need to ask these questions about them?

Maybe you were meaning something along a different line of thought.
If you ever need to question something about being moral or not, what I would recommend you doing is breaking it down to a very simple level.
It has been said long ago to love your neighbor as yourself but I would like to take it a step farther and say love your neighbor as you would love your own mother.
If you are truly serious about understanding morality then try this simple exercise.

If there is ever anything you question to be moral or immoral, think of a world were just you and your mother live. "Is there anything that we do in society to one another that you would not do onto your own mother? and no I am not talking about sex.

4 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Ah ah!! A chink of light.

Quote:

If ten men gang raped your own mother would you still need to ask these questions about them?

What difference does it being his mother make to the morality. And who are you to judge what she would think about it anyway? Ten is a bit lurid though I must admit. Wouldn't three have made your point just as good?

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

You know nothing, nothing, about the people who wrote the Bible.

Your need to rubbish it for personal reasons has distorted all your perceptions.

1 Reply

Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know