Zone1 Without God Who Or What Decides What Moral Law Is?

[Meriweather]

I pity the religious who have no morality outside of their fear of God

It is not fear of God that promotes morality among people of faith. If morality is stronger among people of faith, it is generated by love of God, which leads to love of God's Law. Some see it more as love of God's law leads to love of God. When non-believers love moral law, they have taken the first steps towards love of God.

 

[rightwinger]

It is not fear of God that promotes morality among people of faith. If morality is stronger among people of faith, it is generated by love of God, which leads to love of God's Law. Some see it more as love of God's law leads to love of God. When non-believers love moral law, they have taken the first steps towards love of God.

If you disobey, you will go to HELL

That is fear of God

 

[alang1216]

No. Not of course. That’s dumb.

Do you want to retract or explain:

So we as a society could determine that it was moral to own slaves? And that would make it moral?

 

[alang1216]

If your not seeing it is a choice you're making then it's good that we all can make choices. If you're asking for info that I have for making the connection then you could consider that Jesus insisted (Matthew 5:17) that his intention was to fulfill the law and not abrogate it. Also consider the difference between the form of the law (various details and traditions on what working on the sabath meant) and the substance (a heartfelt reverence).

I was speaking about fundamental morals, as per the OP. As I recall, Jesus is quoted as saying love your neighbor as yourself (or words to that effect). Is that moral code the same one that commanded the Israelites to exterminate every living thing in Jericho?

Is there a chance you'd be interested in how I understand this? If you would then you might be able to help fill out the parts of reality that I'm missing.

I'd be very interested in hearing since you seem to have a brain in your head (not always the case on USMB). BTW, if you're really ChatGPT, please don't tell me.

 

[Meriweather]

If you disobey, you will go to HELL

That is fear of God

Keep in mind I am Catholic. Catholic teaching on hell is that God sends no one to hell, which is defined as eternal separation from God. People choose a closer existence with God or an existence separate from God.

While it is not formal teaching, some Catholic Saints who had visions of hell noted it was not a place that God built, but rather a place turned over to Satan who made of it a terrible place people of faith dread. Again, not formal Catholic teaching, simply stories told by Catholic Saints who say they were given such visions.

Further, the etymology of "Fear of the Lord" is not synonymous with 'afraid' but more synonymous with 'awe'. It is that awe that draws us to Him. It does not make us afraid of Him.

All this being said, deliberate disobedience is certainly a turning away from and rejecting God. It is choosing separation. If we are not interested in God and His ways in this life, it is doubtful we would be interested in Him and His ways for an eternity. What say you?

 

[expat_panama]

I was speaking about fundamental morals, as per the OP. As I recall, Jesus is quoted as saying love your neighbor as yourself (or words to that effect). Is that moral code the same one that commanded the Israelites to exterminate every living thing in Jericho?

Interesting you refer back to Joshua versus Jesus, and they're both the same name --Jesus being the Greek version of the Hebrew name Joshua.

There's a lot of controversy over the sacking of Jericho and I'd suggest we agree that pacifism is a bad idea. I'll never forget the historian who wrote that Pacifica has killed more people than her ugly sister Bellica, the idea that pacifists end up bringing about more wars than soldiers do. Beyond that, we should also agree that there's more emphasis on obeying a command of Moses & Jesus than that of Joshua. The first two were preaching in generalities while the last had to deal w/ messy stuff in real life.

I'd be very interested in hearing since you seem to have a brain in your head (not always the case on USMB). BTW, if you're really ChatGPT, please don't tell me.

lol!!! I had to look that up, it turns out that my wife is writing articles for a monthly bulletin w/ an AI bot.

My thinking is that Reality and God are words that in my experience are interchangeable, and it's to that end that not only have I no quarrel w/ atheists but I see that there's a lot to be learned there. Besides the fact that you and I both have a deep respect for reality, I'd bet that we'd both agree that reality is good and that we like reality and that neither of us would ever want to be at war w/ reality.

Where we might diverge is how I feel I must dedicate my life to reality and all that's true and real. Furthermore, I sense a bond and deep sense of well-being w/ reality, that the real world is good and I can see more good things happening than bad things.

We together?

 

[Meriweather]

Beyond that, we should also agree that there's more emphasis on obeying a command of Moses & Jesus than that of Joshua. The first two were preaching in generalities while the last had to deal w/ messy stuff in real life.

Yes, but with this we should also note that Joshua was more or less dealing with relations between nations. Moses--and Jesus in particular--were talking more about personal relationships with other individuals (including the poor at our gates).

 

[alang1216]

Interesting you refer back to Joshua versus Jesus, and they're both the same name --Jesus being the Greek version of the Hebrew name Joshua.

There's a lot of controversy over the sacking of Jericho and I'd suggest we agree that pacifism is a bad idea. I'll never forget the historian who wrote that Pacifica has killed more people than her ugly sister Bellica, the idea that pacifists end up bringing about more wars than soldiers do. Beyond that, we should also agree that there's more emphasis on obeying a command of Moses & Jesus than that of Joshua. The first two were preaching in generalities while the last had to deal w/ messy stuff in real life.

The OT clearly makes the claim God commanded Joshua, same as He did Moses. Whatever happened at Jericho, the OT says it was Gods will.

lol!!! I had to look that up, it turns out that my wife is writing articles for a monthly bulletin w/ an AI bot.

My thinking is that Reality and God are words that in my experience are interchangeable, and it's to that end that not only have I no quarrel w/ atheists but I see that there's a lot to be learned there. Besides the fact that you and I both have a deep respect for reality, I'd bet that we'd both agree that reality is good and that we like reality and that neither of us would ever want to be at war w/ reality.

Fact.

Where we might diverge is how I feel I must dedicate my life to reality and all that's true and real. Furthermore, I sense a bond and deep sense of well-being w/ reality, that the real world is good and I can see more good things happening than bad things.

We together?

I'm optimistic but I have no other world to compare ours to. Is this the best of all worlds, the worst, or somewhere in the middle? Whatever it is, it is certainly not the world I'd have designed if I were to build one from scratch.

 

[playtime]

I’ve never believed that morality has to be premised on a religious belief.

some of the most ethical, moral people i know are atheists.

 

[expat_panama]

Yes, but with this we should also note that Joshua was more or less dealing with relations between nations. Moses--and Jesus in particular--were talking more about personal relationships with other individuals (including the poor at our gates).

It goes on and on. Another consideration wss to think of all the lives that were SAVED by having no more protracted seiges.

 

[expat_panama]

The OT clearly makes the claim God commanded Joshua, same as He did Moses. Whatever happened at Jericho, the OT says it was Gods will.

Interesting, give me a bit to look that up...

Fact.


I'm optimistic but I have no other world to compare ours to. Is this the best of all worlds, the worst, or somewhere in the middle? Whatever it is, it is certainly not the world I'd have designed if I were to build one from scratch.

Otoh that entire line of thinking is a bit silly in view of the fact u did NOT build the universe fom scratch, that plus the problem of coming up with the scrstch to build from in the first place.

You got me wondering, though just what is it that you're SURE you'd want changed, things that ur POSITIVE wouldn't make things worse. You're not trying to have a world w/o death or pain are u?

 

[alang1216]

You got me wondering, though just what is it that you're SURE you'd want changed, things that ur POSITIVE wouldn't make things worse. You're not trying to have a world w/o death or pain are u?

So why are we here? Is it to enjoy ourselves or is it to be tested for the next life?

If it is to enjoy ourselves, a world w/o pain would be nice since pain would have no reason to be.

If it is to be tested, it would be nice is everyone got the same starting position. Not really fair to have a foot race where some have a head start because their parents are rich and successful and some have a handicap because they have a birth defect. Disease, earthquakes, tornados, etc., just seem an unnecessary wildcard.

 

[expat_panama]

So why are we here? Is it to enjoy ourselves or is it to be tested for the next life?

If it is to enjoy ourselves, a world w/o pain would be nice since pain would have no reason to be.

If it is to be tested, it would be nice is everyone got the same starting position. Not really fair to have a foot race where some have a head start because their parents are rich and successful and some have a handicap because they have a birth defect. Disease, earthquakes, tornados, etc., just seem an unnecessary wildcard.

OK, sounds like you're backing off from that "not the world I'd have designed" thing. Smart move. Let's face it, that whole line of thinking is pretty silly.

So where we are is "why are we here?", a profoundly religious/philosophical question that folks have been tossing back and forth for thousands of years. When u said "to enjoy ourselves" the official name is hedonism and the arguments over how we function are endless.

thought experiment.

Suppose some doctor came up w/ a procedure for removing the brain of a healthy person and hooking up cables to the brains pleasure sensors that would give the individual an endless orgasm. Infinite guaranteed endless pleasure. For ever. Personally this isn't what I'd want, but if ur interested this may become available in 5 or 10 years.

My preference is for being in touch w/ reality, for better or worse.

 

[alang1216]

OK, sounds like you're backing off from that "not the world I'd have designed" thing. Smart move. Let's face it, that whole line of thinking is pretty silly.

No backtracking on my part. The world I'd design would have no randomness in the form of earthquakes, disease, storms, meteors, etc. We have complete control over our lives, for good or bad.

So where we are is "why are we here?", a profoundly religious/philosophical question that folks have been tossing back and forth for thousands of years. When u said "to enjoy ourselves" the official name is hedonism and the arguments over how we function are endless.

thought experiment.

Suppose some doctor came up w/ a procedure for removing the brain of a healthy person and hooking up cables to the brains pleasure sensors that would give the individual an endless orgasm. Infinite guaranteed endless pleasure. For ever. Personally this isn't what I'd want, but if ur interested this may become available in 5 or 10 years.

My preference is for being in touch w/ reality, for better or worse.

If you asked me my favorite food or music, I could tell you, but it would be terrible if that were all I could eat or listen to.

 

[BreezeWood]

Keep in mind I am Catholic. Catholic teaching on hell is that God sends no one to hell, which is defined as eternal separation from God. People choose a closer existence with God or an existence separate from God.

While it is not formal teaching, some Catholic Saints who had visions of hell noted it was not a place that God built, but rather a place turned over to Satan who made of it a terrible place people of faith dread. Again, not formal Catholic teaching, simply stories told by Catholic Saints who say they were given such visions.

Further, the etymology of "Fear of the Lord" is not synonymous with 'afraid' but more synonymous with 'awe'. It is that awe that draws us to Him. It does not make us afraid of Him.

All this being said, deliberate disobedience is certainly a turning away from and rejecting God. It is choosing separation. If we are not interested in God and His ways in this life, it is doubtful we would be interested in Him and His ways for an eternity. What say you?

If we are not interested in God and His ways in this life, it is doubtful we would be interested in Him and His ways for an eternity. What say you?

not in god but an interest in life, liberation theology, self determination destined from the heavens were the events of the 1st century by those that were persecuted and victimized by both the prevailing religion and gov't - that coalition turned the tide in their favor, religions of servitude and have prevailed ever since.

 

[expat_panama]

No backtracking on my part. The world I'd design would have no randomness in the form of earthquakes, disease, storms, meteors, etc. We have complete control over our lives, for good or bad.

Believe it or not, this is pretty hard for me to grasp and translate into anything like real life. It's virtually impossible to get as many as 3 people to agree to what TV show to watch and somehow everyone's going to agree on earthquakes, disease, meteors, etc.? What I see that we're talking about here is a HUGE reduction in individual personalities. imho that's not good.

If you asked me my favorite food or music, I could tell you, but it would be terrible if that were all I could eat or listen to.

We're not communicating. You must be familiar w/ drugs like heroin that turn on the human brain's pleasure centers. Many who have that happen forsake everything to maintain that, they give up sex, eating, EVERYTHING just to keep the heroin hit going.

this is not, definitely NOT a matte of food or music.

 

[saveliberty]

Aren’t people capable of determining right or wrong on their own?

Oh they can determine it just fine. Note sliding scale of determination in every civil society to date. Only God can free you from sin.

 

[Crick]

if there is a god, then there is evil as well.

What makes you think that?

 

[playtime]

What makes you think that?

do you have your concept of 'evil' is? i know it when i see it. the very 1st thing i think of is jeffery dahmer. & hitler. they go waaaaaaaay beyond sociopathic. & evil has to have an origin.

 

[alang1216]

Believe it or not, this is pretty hard for me to grasp and translate into anything like real life. It's virtually impossible to get as many as 3 people to agree to what TV show to watch and somehow everyone's going to agree on earthquakes, disease, meteors, etc.? What I see that we're talking about here is a HUGE reduction in individual personalities. imho that's not good.

Do you really think a majority of people are in favor of earthquakes, disease, meteors, etc.?

We're not communicating. You must be familiar w/ drugs like heroin that turn on the human brain's pleasure centers. Many who have that happen forsake everything to maintain that, they give up sex, eating, EVERYTHING just to keep the heroin hit going.

this is not, definitely NOT a matte of food or music.

I'm sure there are people like that, though I don't know any. Everyone I know that drinks, drinks responsibly and doesn't let it take over their lives.