Jesus was a liberal? & Thou Shalt Not Kill

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Spirit_Soul
Also, every one here is no better than the gay guy, or lesbian gil walking down the street.

In the sense that we are all sinners and fall short of God's standard, you are absolutely right.

 

[Spirit_Soul]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
In the sense that we are all sinners and fall short of God's standard, you are absolutely right.

Yep, actually I meant that we are all affected by the very notion of "Sin" and still are compelled to act helplessly according to our psychological conditioning.

In other words, Who here does not have sex for fun with their life partners?

The answer would be no one, but sex is actually a "sin" according to the orthodox rules of bible .

Same thing goes to the "Gays" and the "lesbians", they too are compelled by the same psychological make up.

So, the point is this : we want to believe that we are sinning, but in reality deep down we know that there does not exist a thing as a "sin" and we also know that the very act is independent to the notion of "sinning", we just label something 'sin' and something else as 'virtue' but an action by itself is independent of those two dualities. However, we are compelled to act in a way due to our make up, but strive to align our actions with the perceived notions but fail to do so, thus leading to suffering, depression and other psychological problems which are ofcourse prominent in our society today.

A perfect example would be having sex, it is a virtue in one part of the world (Asia) and a sin in another (Western Europe, middle ages).

Also, I am sorry if I have offended any one through a statement made by me earlier, but the intention was to make us realize that from the platform of equanmity there is no difference and if certain psychological make up is not hurting the society , then what is the problem in letting things just "be" as they are?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Spirit_Soul
In other words, Who here does not have sex for fun with their life partners?

Not me, the wifey doesn't like me anymore

 

[Spirit_Soul]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Not me, the wifey doesn't like me anymore

LOL

Dear Jimnyc,
This was a general statement. Please do not tell me that you never had sex with your wife, because cute babies just don't fall out of the 'sinless' sky. :cof:

 

[jimnyc]

Yes, we have before. I thought you were speaking of current situations.

I have sex with my favorite ladies all the time, thats if self gratification counts.

 

[janeeng]

hahaha, Sex, what's that???

 

[Spirit_Soul]

Yes, I was afraid of such replies and knew that you were going to post them but still I posted it.

Note to self: next time pick another example to say something.

 

[janeeng]

Sorry Spirit, but you should have known that replies would come with that one!

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Spirit_Soul
Yes, I was afraid of such replies and knew that you were going to post them but still I posted it.

Note to self: next time pick another example to say something.

Another example probably won't help, we have an incredible knack for finding humor in just about anything!

Now, if only that type of attitude would follow us all into the real world, this would be a much better place to live in.

 

[NightTrain]

I want to return to the part where we can watch a lesbian walk down the street.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by NightTrain
I want to return to the part where we can watch a lesbian walk down the street.

Happens daily in NYC! :wank:

 

[janeeng]

Excuse me, not just lesbians, there are man homo's walking hand in hand, that's a fact that I encountered right on the hood of my car waiting for you to come out of building JIM!

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Spirit_Soul
sex is actually a "sin" according to the orthodox rules of bible .

No, it is not. God created us to enjoy sex, but He also gave us the parameters within wihcih to enjoy it - namely marraige. Sex in marraige is not sinful in the least - in fact, Paul writes that it is each spouse's duty to the other.

So, the point is this : we want to believe that we are sinning, but in reality deep down we know that there does not exist a thing as a "sin" and we also know that the very act is independent to the notion of "sinning", we just label something 'sin' and something else as 'virtue' but an action by itself is independent of those two dualities. However, we are compelled to act in a way due to our make up, but strive to align our actions with the perceived notions but fail to do so, thus leading to suffering, depression and other psychological problems which are ofcourse prominent in our society today.
... what is the problem in letting things just "be" as they are?

The reality of sin is not just some random feeling that we get from this book or that teaching... it is a very real thing. There are certain actions that are sinful, and certain other actions that are not sinful. Now we may call those things sin, or bad, or harmful, or even evil, but I think those are only synonyms. What we have done, in effect, is transgress the law of God.
But this leads to the point I made (I think in this thread, maybe a different one), that God has chosen to forgive our sins through faith in Jesus.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
No, it is not. God created us to enjoy sex, but He also gave us the parameters within wihcih to enjoy it - namely marraige. Sex in marraige is not sinful in the least - in fact, Paul writes that it is each spouse's duty to the other.

Can someone please forward this pasage along to my wife and remind her of her duty?

 

[Jackass]

I will send it to yours if you send it to mine!! LOL

 

[Spirit_Soul]

I guess I was wrong. Still, sin is a perceived notion. What I think of sin is not what you may think of as sin.

For example, I do not eat animals and I think killing animals and eating them is sin. I also do not drink milk unless I have to, because the milk we drink is from slave cows and they are treated not like living beings but like inanimate objects useful to humans.

But many people don't think of it that way. People eat meat, drink alcohol , milk etc and don't think it is a sin to do so...

So, you get the point.

GOP JEFF: "There are certain actions that are sinful, and certain other actions that are not sinful. Now we may call those things sin, or bad, or harmful, or even evil, but I think those are only synonyms. What we have done, in effect, is transgress the law of God."


Also, about the "reality of sin", it only happens due to the kind of nurture you are given by the society. Your reality is based on the society.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Spirit_Soul
Still, sin is a perceived notion. What I think of sin is not what you may think of as sin... Also, about the "reality of sin", it only happens due to the kind of nurture you are given by the society. Your reality is based on the society.

Ahh... good ol' moral relativism!

While we may debate which set of morals are true/right/correct, moral absolutes do indeed exist.

In the case of individual moral relativism, you said that you consider eating meat to be a sin. So that's cool for you. But I eat red meat all the time, and, according to you, that's cool for me. Now if you avoided meat and milk because you just didn't like the taste, that's one thing. But to say that it's wrong to eat meat crosses over into the boundaries of being a moral.
So how far should one be able to stretch moral relativism? Can we say that it's OK for me to rape someone, or to steal from someone, because in my book, that's cool for me? Obviously not. Individuial moral relativism, as we can see by this example, is not viable.

What about cultural moral relativism? In other words, if the majority of the people in a society believe that a certain action is moral or immoral, then it becomes so.
The obvious case is Nazi Germany's systematic murder of Jews, communists, homosexuals, etc. Since the majority of Germans thought it was OK to purge the Jews form society, it must have been OK, right? Or should we bring up the slaughter of milions in Rwanda, where one tribe was overwhelmingly in favor of destroying the other? Or should slavery have reamined the law of the land, as a majority of British and Americans made money from slavery, and were in support of it? While democratic societies obviously change their laws from time to time, what is morally right or wrong cannot be determined by majority rule.

 

[Jackass]

Originally posted by Spirit_Soul
For example, I do not eat animals and I think killing animals and eating them is sin. I also do not drink milk unless I have to, because the milk we drink is from slave cows and they are treated not like living beings but like inanimate objects useful to humans.

A vegan!!! How come this doesnt surprise me?? MMMmmm nothing like a rare steak, with blood pooling in the bottom of the plate and a nice cold glass of milk from a slave cow!! No, not a regular cow...a slave cow's milk is much sweeter!!

 

[Dan]

This also brings up the argument of whether morals are instilled in us (many Christians believe that we are born knowing what is right and wrong), or whether we are taught by society what is right and wrong. Personally, I don't think we are born with any sense of morality.

 

[Bry]

Just to clarify the issue a bit, jeff, perhaps you could name a few of your moral absolutes? It's just a theory of mine, but it seems like what might constitute a moral absolute is found in a negative sense. For example: Hitler? Nope, that ain't it. With moral relativity, of course, it becomes impossible to condemn such things on moral grounds. And as you have stated before, you don't want to say "killing is wrong" because that would illiminate self-defense. Is genocide the only moral absolute we can agree upon? (Can we even agree upon that?) Then, from what you are saying, agreement is not necessary for a moral absolute. Where then would it come from?

My tendency is to reject the word "moral" from the very beginning. As I see it, we poor silly humans are stuck with evaluating things on a case by case basis, and for an atheist like myself, there is no easy way out. There were no prewritten rules (other than the limits of our biology), therefore, we just have to make them up as we go.