Zone1 Religion is not needed if a "golden rule" is valued

ViewFromAbove

Gold Member
May 6, 2019
612
269
178
There are MANY religions, and most are thousands of years old when few were able to read, and even fewer understood scientific knowledge about the universe that is evident today.
Which religion is best? Why would you choose a religion when its leaders don't understand natural, scientific reality?

Empathy and a golden rule is all one needs to be "ethical".
 
There are MANY religions, and most are thousands of years old when few were able to read, and even fewer understood scientific knowledge about the universe that is evident today.
Religion is more philosophy of behavior than science. Specifically, what religious philosophy seems off to you?
 
Love God with all your heart, mind and soul is the first commandment. Without that, you can't get people to follow the second commandment, love your neighbor as yourself.
I respectfully disagree. I know Christians who do not treat other people very well at all. And there are many non-Christians who are ethical, moral and empathetic to others.
 
There are MANY religions, and most are thousands of years old when few were able to read, and even fewer understood scientific knowledge about the universe that is evident today.
Which religion is best? Why would you choose a religion when its leaders don't understand natural, scientific reality?

Empathy and a golden rule is all one needs to be "ethical".
Thinking that the human race will adhere to the Golden Rule is absurd

In case you had not noticed, the man who gave us the Golden Rule was nailed to a cross.

Humanity needs saved, and only God can do the saving.

Clearly, the history of man should show you that man, left to his own devices, will destroy himself.
 
There are MANY religions, and most are thousands of years old when few were able to read, and even fewer understood scientific knowledge about the universe that is evident today.
Which religion is best? Why would you choose a religion when its leaders don't understand natural, scientific reality?

Empathy and a golden rule is all one needs to be "ethical".
I like the post, I agree that empathy is all that is needed to be 'ethical', in some sense. Reason is needed too, but I think the source is empathy, not just reason. At the very least, it is good that it seems we (believers and non-believers) agree on what is 'ethical', and that the golden rule is crucial to being ethical. Whether we are believers in God or not, whether Christian or not, I think that is a good middle ground to have.

If anything, the fact that we HAVE such a middle ground at all leads me to believe there IS indeed a God, and that God ensured people (believers and nonbelievers) could feel empathy, so these simple ethical guidelines could one day be something we agreed on. Now that's mostly to do with my own personal experience and faith, but I wanted to share. Also, religious leaders come in many flavors. I don't follow any living one, but not all of them are/were ignorant of the way the natural world works, not all of them reject science.
 
I respectfully disagree. I know Christians who do not treat other people very well at all. And there are many non-Christians who are ethical, moral and empathetic to others.
It all depends on the day and the circumstances, which is why Jesus's advice not to judge is so wise. If there is a difference between Christians and non-Christians, I wonder if that difference is simply a bond between the individual and Jesus. Does one take time to consult with Christ, whereas the other consults his/her own mind and heart? Christians are taught that God's law is written on the hearts and minds of all. That being true, we shouldn't see that much difference between people of faith and others.
 

Forum List

Back
Top