• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

For all the Christians on here.

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Malak said:
What you describe is law, not morality. They are not the same thing. Morality cannot be swayed by what is legal or socially acceptable. It needs to be a set standard. If it isn't, then it has no substance. Just because something is legal doesn't make it moral, nor does making something illegal suddenly make it immoral. They are two different things.
Click to expand...

law really has nothing to do with whether or not you personally feel it is right to murder or steal from someone.

Why do you choose to obfuscate with such simple concepts?

The logic here is quite simple, really. But when your argument has no foundation, it's time to start re-defining for your purpose, I suppose.
 
My favorite is the people with Jesus fish and the like on their car, driving 10-15mph under the speed limit with miles of open road in front of them.

Great, you found Jesus... but you can't find the damn accelerator under your right foot.
 
Malak said:
Actually you got your definitions mixed up. Ethics are culture-based, not morality. It is also ethical in some cultures to have sex with minors. Some people have even tried to make child porn legal in some countries.
Click to expand...

Morality is based the the population you are with. It doesn't matter what Christian values say is moral, if a culture isolated from us thinks sex with minors is required for the child to grow up healthy then it is one of their moral values.

It was once considered moral to be homosexual. It was common practice by many cultures. With the rise of some religions, it became immoral in many cultures. Now in america, that tide is changing and only some religious groups consider homosexuality immoral. Drinking was also once considered immoral in the USA and a law was passed to make it illegal. Now it is a right of passage for teens entering college. Premarital sex, rock music, etc.

Take this quote from a website for example.

"Society has gone from Hollywood and television driving the moral standard, to Hollywood and television trying to keep up with society as a whole. Mass media now merely reflects the condition of society."

"Driving the moral standard", if the standard was from god, then there would be nothing to drive. Things would be blindly either moral or immoral. It would be unchangeable. We would not be concerned with things corrupting our children's morals. We care about these things because morality is learned and taught. It is a social construct of right and wrong, nothing more.

There are many places to look for your morals, your religion can give you morals (some religions say it is immoral to suffer someone of another religion to live), society can give you morals, and experience/reason can give you morals.

It is obvious that a religion wants you think believe morals come from their god/gods. This allows us to keep a strict set of rules over many generations and keep the church in power. This however is insular and refuses to look at all the other cultures as being acceptable. This is why they did not have problems killing, raping, and pillaging in the name of god. These people were immoral in their eyes.

When the spanish went on a rampage in south america, they did it because of gold and morals. Are we to say the natives were knowingly immoral? They acted in the confines of their own culture, but the rules of their gods who defined their morality. They were moral.

Morality changes with the times. It has changed in the last 50 years. Ethics also changes, just a bit more slowly.
 
zinfamous said:
absolute BULL-FUCKING-SHIT.
Click to expand...

My history book says that is how it went down. Where's yours? And how can you possibly thing this couldn't have gone down like that anyway? The catholic church would murder you just for translating the bible, you think Jews with a history of conquering cities and murderering en masse wouldn't hesitate to kill a man that made them look bad? By Jews, I of course mean specific ones and not in general. Jesus was a Jew, all his disciples Jews, most followers were Jews. His coming a Jewish prophecy. Like I said. Cult.
 
Malak said:
My history book says that is how it went down. Where's yours? And how can you possibly thing this couldn't have gone down like that anyway? The catholic church would murder you just for translating the bible, you think Jews with a history of conquering cities and murderering en masse wouldn't hesitate to kill a man that made them look bad? By Jews, I of course mean specific ones and not in general. Jesus was a Jew, all his disciples Jews, most followers were Jews. His coming a Jewish prophecy. Like I said. Cult.
Click to expand...

What history book do you claim to use?
 
Well I damn sure have sinned, regularly. I can't go 30 seconds. I don't mind people making fun, I am just glad I have accepted the free fire insurance, 🙂. Its kinda like life insurance, you truly only need it once, lol.
 
Malak said:
My history book says that is how it went down. Where's yours? And how can you possibly thing this couldn't have gone down like that anyway? The catholic church would murder you just for translating the bible, you think Jews with a history of conquering cities and murderering en masse wouldn't hesitate to kill a man that made them look bad? By Jews, I of course mean specific ones and not in general. Jesus was a Jew, all his disciples Jews, most followers were Jews. His coming a Jewish prophecy. Like I said. Cult.
Click to expand...

high school history book, approved by the Texas board of Education, I assume?

You'll find few theologians working within the seminary these days that believe the tripe that Jesus was tried by the jews. It is, in fact, false.

You want to divorce Jesus from the fact that he was a citizen of the Roman empire, that his life and his laws as a jew were superseded by that of Rome. Again, he was simply one in a hundred rabbal-rousers claiming to be the same messiah. This was simply life in the outer provinces. The jews were not waiting for a man of peace, they were waiting for a messiah to bring justice by the sword. This is the Torah. Nothing he really said was an affront to them, as he simply didn't register. How could he possibly be a threat to them?

Claiming the role of Caeser--which is exactly what he did--was an absolute
insult, however. To be honest, he probably got off lucky.

This is history, the text is here, there is honestly nothing to dispute in terms of how the rebellion happened, who was in charge of the jewish community of the time, what happened after the temple was sacced and the jews were forced to flee. The dispute amongst jews, the Christians still being very much within the synagogue, at the time--is the reason for the gospels. The pharisees weren't even on the map when Jesus was around. Jesus annoyed Herod, absolutely. But the pharisees had absolutely no power within judaism at the time. They were the big kahunas ~70 years after the fact, though, when in exile, when the disciples started putting their story down.

Fuck, your history might as well have been adopted from the Chronicles of Zion.
 
zinfamous said:
You'll find few theologians working within the seminary these days that believe the tripe that Jesus was tried by the jews. It is, in fact, false.
Click to expand...

Odd, because I've never seen a theologian that didn't believe it. Don't start with this nonsense of "in fact" crap, when you have no facts at all. Generally that means you just want someone else to be wrong, without having any means of legitimately showing a case for why.

Feel free to prove it wrong, I don't even care! The who and why doesn't really matter.
 
when i posted this I just wanted to have a little fun. It was meant as a light hearted joke. I knew I was risking starting one of these threads but was hoping not to. Sigh oh well.
 
Last edited:
Malak said:
Odd, because I've never seen a theologian that didn't believe it. Don't start with this nonsense of "in fact" crap, when you have no facts at all. Generally that means you just want someone else to be wrong, without having any means of legitimately showing a case for why.

Feel free to prove it wrong, I don't even care! The who and why doesn't really matter.
Click to expand...

I find it humorous that you bitch about fact when you HAVE NONE to support that your god exists.
 
Locut0s said:
when i posted this I just wanted to have a little fun. It was meant as a light hearted joke. I knew I was risking starting one of these threads but was hoping not to. Sigh of well.
Click to expand...

you knew what you were doing, did you honestly believe a thread like this could ever become anything other than what it has?
 
erikistired said:
yeah, those aren't facts. might want to tone down the large font a bit there. otherwise you're just trolling. oh wait, haha.
Click to expand...

He continues to avoid the questions he knows he can't answer, yet still has the balls to call out other people for their lack of facts. I really don't care whether you two want to jump in, but I'd rather put zero effort into it with you, like I did by posting "logic and reason" than actually make an effort to continue malak's conversation with someone else (you two).
 
I think a more apt interpretation of the "died for our sins so we can get into heaven if we just believe in fairies," is "died because you suck and you'll wipe each other out before ascending to the heavens as a species."
 
erikistired said:
do you have facts he doesn't? not saying he does, just playing devil's advocate.
Click to expand...
You can say the same thing about the thousands and thousands of gods that have been believed in at some point, also an infinite number of possible gods nobody's ever thought of. Same goes for Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts/spirits, vampires, fairies, magic crystals, all kinds bs energies, psychics, divination, astrology, ESP, karma, magic, witchcraft etc..

Can you conclusively disprove any of them. If you believe in everything you can't disprove they are all just as valid propositions as the existance of the Abrahamic God.
 
mk said:
You can say the same thing about the thousands and thousands of gods that have been believed in at some point, also an infinite number of possible gods nobody's ever thought of. Same goes for Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts/spirits, vampires, fairies, magic crystals, all kinds bs energies, psychics, divination, astrology, ESP, karma, magic, witchcraft etc..

Can you conclusively disprove any of them. If you believe in everything you can't disprove they are all just as valid propositions as the existance of the Abrahamic God.
Click to expand...

But I'm not the one trying to disprove or prove anything. That's kind of the point.
 
What kind of a justice system is it where an innocent third party is brutally tortured and killed and you can have all your responsibilities for your actions absolved if you accept that the killing of Jesus was done in your name. Actually, it was done in your name anyway, you have no say in having a "human" sacrificed for you, only whether or not you accept it. As it happens this is also your only means of avoiding spending an eternity in Hell, a place where you'll end up if you choose no and a place that by most accounts isn't all that nice. Hell, eternity anywhere wouldn't be all that nice.

Is this really the best way to handle the fact that people sometimes behave badly and make poor choices. God had plenty of time to figure things out and this is the best that he could come up with?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top