Deism: Why is it wrong?

[LPLawhead]

First of all LPLawhead, can you explain to me what you mean as “write and wrong”? I guess your God-given reason is failing you. I assume you mean “right and wrong”.

O.K. so one relies on oneself to determine what is right and what is wrong according to you. Great. The problem is that in the absence of any moral lodestar, each individual is free to decide and act upon what’s right, and what’s wrong using their own reasoning. So on what basis is your reason superior to Hitler’s sense of reason or Stalin’s? On what standard are you going to rely in claiming you are right and they were wrong. What? Hey, Stalin, this is LPLawhead and I am telling you that you are wrong because my sense of reason tells me so; so please stop killing all those millions of people. That argument is solid as ice. For all the “reasonable deists” sharing your Western view, Stalin could have equally found as many “reasonable scientific socialists” last century to make that contest a toss-up.

Reason has limitations as even philosophers such as Kant acknowledge.

Stalin, Lenin, Marx all believed they were following Reason and Scientific Dialectic Materialism in wiping off millions of people. They relied on “Marxist” reasoning. On what grounds LPLawhead would you hope to convince them that they were wrong. By your individual reasoning? Hmmm

If God is just the one who started the clock of creation, where does Morality come from? Morality is not the same thing as reason. And “popery”; do you mean potpourri?

Wow, you caught me in a typo. Let me now bow to your clearly more refined logic. I don’t see the world as an oyster to be shucked, I don’t see other humans as tools and pawns to be used for the furtherance of my own goals. Reason tells me that what goes around comes around. If I rape someone’s wife, clearly I am doing her harm, hurting her family, shaming myself and in the end making enemies. Reason dictates that one should abstain from such behavior on the basis that not only is it socially reprehensible but it will also ultimately hurt the rapist. Not to mention that rape, to me, is wrong and has been since before I knew anything of the Bible. What you are claiming is that anyone who doesn’t rely on holy writ for his moral compass is a potential mass murdering sociopath and while I don’t completely disagree that non theistic people are capable of such horrible actions MANY other horrible atrocities have been committed in the name of faith. You have no leg to stand on in that sense. By “popery” I mean pope tainted, made up BS catholic religiosity. Morality is founded from a combination of reason, logic and an innate moral compass that we all possess. Men like Stalin and Hitler are not unique in history, they are just rather recent. Sociopaths for whatever reason put their own reason on hold and rely on pure self interest but these types are the exception and not the rule. I’m not claiming to be perfect but I sure as hell don’t need a book to run my life and in terms of logic and reason, we need to go to more than one source of advice. Many minds are better than one.

 

[LPLawhead]

God of Nature, eh. Have you ever heard what God the Jacobins and Robespierre tried to establish a cult to in Revolutionary France. I’ll give you a hint if your history is weak. It was the Goddess of Reason, also sometimes amorphously known as the God of Nature. Is that the Deist God you had in mind because that is the Deist god most French Revolutionary Jacobins believed in. Guess what? Nature isn’t too good at listing what is right and what is wrong. Robespierre guillotined thousands of Frenchmen and women at the altar of Nature in a vicious bloodbath until his fellow deists guillotined him in the end.

What makes you believe the “true Creator, God of Nature” as you understand it is universally recognized as having a common moral standard. Why is your God of Nature superior to the French revolutionary’s God of Nature? I would very much like to know.

The God i’m talking about is not definable, the being to which I refer is whatever it was that created existence. I don’t claim to have special knowledge of his existence or any special instructions that have been revealed to me. I just know that what I see around me tells my rational mind that there is a creative force, a first cause, behind it. Whatever cult or sect man will fashion for himself is not for me. My experience of God is unique and I don’t need anyone to define it for me. Let law handle law, religion has no place informing law. Faith is just an excuse for not wanting to admit that you don’t know. I don’t know God’s purpose for creation, I just know that God exists and his creation is the evidence. All the other religious **** is garbage made up by men to control and/or influence other men.

 

[KyivAndrew]

If I rape someone’s wife, clearly I am doing her harm, hurting her family, shaming myself and in the end making enemies. Reason dictates that one should abstain from such behavior on the basis that not only is it socially reprehensible but it will also ultimately hurt the rapist.

Wow, that sounds so much better than a simple moral law written in our hearts that one is to love one’s neighbor as oneself and to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Your phraseology is much superior.

Why should reason care about “shaming myself” as you aver above. Reason cares not for emotions like shame because reason should be immune from emotions entering into judgments, n’est ce pas?

Do you not understand that what you may consider to be “unreasonable” may be considered to be acutely “reasonable” to the man next to you? Many philosophers have used reason to assert that every human has a “soul”. Other positivist philosophers, using reason, claim this idea is hogwash of there being a metaphysical realm of souls.

So based on your reasoning LP Lawhead, do you believe each human being has a soul, or not, or do you not know, in which case, if the last, obviously your reasoning has limits. Do we have souls?

 

[LPLawhead]

Wow, that sounds so much better than a simple moral law written in our hearts that one is to love one’s neighbor as oneself and to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Your phraseology is much superior.

Why should reason care about “shaming myself” as you aver above. Reason cares not for emotions like shame because reason should be immune from emotions entering into judgments, n’est ce pas?

Do you not understand that what you may consider to be “unreasonable” may be considered to be acutely “reasonable” to the man next to you? Many philosophers have used reason to assert that every human has a “soul”. Other positivist philosophers, using reason, claim this idea is hogwash of there being a metaphysical realm of souls.

So based on your reasoning LP Lawhead, do you believe each human being has a soul, or not, or do you not know, in which case, if the last, obviously your reasoning has limits. Do we have souls?

Reason takes in to account emotion, I don’t know who lied to you. Shame is harmful to a person because not only does it tax their own mind but sets them in low esteem amongst their peers. Reacting emotionally and without reason does happen but doesn’t mean that pure reason discounts emotion. Also, our experience isn’t limited to reason, it also encompasses emotion. I’m not saying that because I don’t believe the Bible (or any such man made book) to be the word of God. I don’t need a book to tell me it’s wrong to kill others. Treat others how you’d like to be treated didn’t need to be written to be understood. I don’t know if human beings have souls or not and I never claimed that my reason was unlimited. Are you claiming that your “Word of God” is without limit? I also am not claiming to be God if that’s what you are for some reason implying. To study something is not to understand it, just because it’s clear to me that the way to begin to understand something is to study it doesn’t mean that I claim to know everything. That’s a foolish assertion most often made by followers of revealed religions. To say that using our God given reason, logic, mind does not imply that we will get everything right every time we try, much of science is trial and error, many principles thought to be true at one time prove untrue at a later time. Men work out their moral codes, God does not speak it to them. The “moral compass” I refer to is that little voice that says “hey, this is a bad thing to do…” weather or not we listen. It’s not the voice of God, it’s the sound of our own reason and logic.

 

[KyivAndrew]

Reason tells me that what goes around comes around. Men like Stalin and Hitler are not unique in history, they are just rather recent. Sociopaths for whatever reason put their own reason on hold and rely on pure self interest but these types are the exception and not the rule. Many minds are better than one.

What comes around goes around? Stalin died peacefully in bed. Hmm

Sociopaths do not necessarily put their “reason” on hold as you claim but can be acting out of reason as they understand it, just as much as you act out of reason as you understand it. The Communists claimed much of the Western intelligentsia because they convincingly proclaimed they were creating a new society based purely on Reason! Some of the best minds joined that movement because their reason told them this to be true. The world famous historian Eric Hobsbawm still defends his communist past. Trotsky was no dummy either. They believed that in killing off “superstition” they could create a society guided by Scientific Socialism.

If you are going to make the argument that “many minds are better than one”, then I will tell you at one point last century there were many millions more who believed in Totalitarianism than in Western Liberal Democracy. If the argument as to what is right rests with how many minds agree to it then Totalitarianism may have won out last century.

You see, Christianity, far from being the ___ you claim it to be propagates belief in the Fall of Man; that we are imperfect and that Paradise cannot be created on earth for that would be to “immanentize the eschaton” as Eric Voegelin stated. But theorists who put all their chips on human reason wagered they could ignore such “superstitious concepts” as the Fall and create a perfect, reasonable society. They were wrong, and killed about 100 million people in proving it.

 

[LPLawhead]

What comes around goes around? Stalin died peacefully in bed. Hmm

Sociopaths do not necessarily put their “reason” on hold as you claim but can be acting out of reason as they understand it, just as much as you act out of reason as you understand it. The Communists claimed much of the Western intelligentsia because they convincingly proclaimed they were creating a new society based purely on Reason! Some of the best minds joined that movement because their reason told them this to be true. The world famous historian Eric Hobsbawm still defends his communist past. Trotsky was no dummy either. They believed that in killing off “superstition” they could create a society guided by Scientific Socialism.

If you are going to make the argument that “many minds are better than one”, then I will tell you at one point last century there were many millions more who believed in Totalitarianism than in Western Liberal Democracy. If the argument as to what is right rests with how many minds agree to it then Totalitarianism may have won out last century.

You see, Christianity, far from being the ___ you claim it to be propagates belief in the Fall of Man; that we are imperfect and that Paradise cannot be created on earth for that would be to “immanentize the eschaton” as Eric Voegelin stated. But theorists who put all their chips on human reason wagered they could ignore such “superstitious concepts” as the Fall and create a perfect, reasonable society. They were wrong, and killed about 100 million people in proving it.

Again with the mass killings in the name of reason, firstly look at your religion’s history. Now swallow your own pill. Movements in which millions of people are killed are never based on reason, they are based on ideology. When your ideology, political, religious, philosophical, informs you that millions will have to die for being wrong, clearly things are a bit askew. Also, just because a leader or warmonger or anyone else for that matter spouts off about a particular system of beliefs in order to rally support, odds are that that person holds a different ideology within then they espouse in public. Reason does lead men to varying conclusions, which is a beautiful thing, but it is by reason that we discover something even better than reason, TRUTH. I can’t by the whole flawed creation dogma, God in all his supposed perfection just decided to create a damaged creature and then focus all of his attention on the daily ins and outs of said creature’s life? Give me a break. The US Constitution says it best with the simple words “We hold these truths to be self evident…” Sure, you can choose to believe that which is contrary to reality but that doesn’t imply the use of reason, in fact it implies the opposite. We have what is called Rule of Law, a system of justice for the people and by the people. It is true that citizens have been lax in asserting control over the legal system as of late but the core of the Law is still useful. We are informed by a social agreement of right and wrong, beyond the need for a fictional God to tell us.

Also, there is recent strong evidence that shows that Stalin was in fact assassinated. He did not die peacefully in bed, where he was found, but later in a hospital. Check your facts.

 

[KyivAndrew]

Also, there is recent strong evidence that shows that Stalin was in fact assassinated. He did not die peacefully in bed, where he was found, but later in a hospital. Check your facts.

I do know my facts. In fact I can tell you off the top of my head right now who was around Stalin’s deathbed when he died: his daughter Svetlana, Beria, Khrushchev, Malenkov, Mototov. Guess whose wife was in prison at the time? Molotov’s. Guess who ran the secret police, the N.K.V.D. at the time? Lavrenti Beria, who has aroused suspicion as to being a culprit in killing Stalin. Stalin raised his arm slightly before he died, according to Svetlana, in a terrifying gesture as if he was cursing them all or hiding from something.

Would you like me to explain more on the make-up of Stalin’s Politburo in 1953 and how Khrushchev ultimately outfoxed Beria to command the Soviet Union. Would you like to know what role Zhukov and Brezhnev played in this? I’ll warn you I know this area of history quite well but this is not the subject of this thread so if you wish to start one on Stalin I will gladly join you.

 

[KyivAndrew]

We have what is called Rule of Law, a system of justice for the people and by the people. It is true that citizens have been lax in asserting control over the legal system as of late but the core of the Law is still useful. We are informed by a social agreement of right and wrong, beyond the need for a fictional God to tell us.

Guess what? I am familiar with the provenance of our legal system as well and the fact is that our present System of Laws was founded on the ultimate foundation of Christendom and the fact that it granted each person dignity before the law. It took a while yes to be equally applicable to all, but out of all the societies on earth, the Law as we understand it only came out of societies belonging to Christendom. It did not come out of the Mongol Khan’s Empire or the East but from Christianity. No matter how much Western Law has evolved, its basis is in Christianity.

In fact, the deist Thomas Jefferson believed the teachings of Jesus Christ to be the “purest” of all teachings of men and looked to Christ as inspiration in legislating, though he discounted Christ’s miracles. Go figure.

 

[KyivAndrew]

There never was a Jesus, he was a rendition of the Egyptian God, Horus, who predated him by thousands of years.

Guess what? Horus was a mythical figure in Egyptian mythology. And what else? Neither Horus, nor Osiris, not the Persian Mithras, nor any other pagan god ever propagated a system of Morality, which is what differentiates Moses and Jesus Christ from all these mythical pagan deities. The Jews were the founders of Ethical Monotheism. For all other ancient mythologies, ethics and morality never really entered into the equation or monotheism for that matter. Question: What morality did Horus propagate? Answer: None!!

But Jesus Christ came to earth with a message of Morality which makes Him absolutely incomparable to mythical figures like Horus. Let me ask you: is your source for this claim the comedian Bill Maher? That would be hilarious wouldn’t it if you are relying on a 2 cent comedian for your theology because you still haven’t provided me with one reputable source as I originally asked showing Jesus was a myth but I will present you with reputable historical studies as to the veracity of Jesus Christ.

For the historicity of Jesus, give a look at E.P. Sanders The Historical Figure of Jesus, the Anglican bishop Tom Wright’s works on the life and resurrection of Jesus ntwrightpage.com/, and for a rebuttal to the Jesus Seminar (who never claimed Jesus was myth) read Luke Timothy Johnson’s: The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels (1996). ISBN 0060641665, ISBN978-0060641665. Also John Meier’s multivolume A Marginal Jew amazon.com/Marginal-Jew-Rethinking-Historical-Problem/dp/0385264259

Why not do yourself a favor and give these books a read. Or have you personally studied something that is heftier than these books?

The fact is that we have the 4 Gospels written within the lifetime of witnesses to Jesus, and we even have St. Paul writing letters to Christians within 20 years of Jesus’ crucifixion. The Apostle Paul actually wrote to a church in Rome that had already been in existence before he even got there. Nero actually blamed the Christians for setting fire to Rome around 30 years after Christ’s crucifixion. Some Myth!!!?? Apparently thousands were willing to be slaughtered for this fairy tale in the first century rather than renounce it.

Again, have you studied anything reputable at all to make the astounding claim of Jesus as myth, or is this just something you feel is true?

 

[jam070406]

If I rape someone’s wife, clearly I am doing her harm, hurting her family, shaming myself and in the end making enemies. Reason dictates that one should abstain from such behavior on the basis that not only is it socially reprehensible but it will also ultimately hurt the rapist.

These are the same old, typical, tired strawman arguments. Of course when you pick a moral issue that is socially reprehensible like rape or mass murder, which most would find reprehensible, you can weasel your way out of the moral issues which hit more home to you. What about promiscuity, drunkeness, drugs, divorce and remarriage, contraception, abortion, cohabitation, excessive wealth, gluttony? What does your “reason” say about these issues?

And if you truly applied reason and intellectual honesty you would realize that it is the sins of individual people, due to their greed or lust for power, NOT the Catholic religion that commited bad acts. I get so sick of this tired old argument.

And, yeah, your rally cry for reason and hatred of religion sound exactly like the arguments atheists spew on these boards. Hate to break it to you. Go view a few for yourself.

 

[jam070406]

Btw, LPLawhead,
you never answered the question. Are you an ex-Catholic?

 

[Mersenne]

Deists are very selective about historic documents. They accept the testimony of Suetonius that Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon, but they reject the much more widely documented testimony of Moses (and others) about the Judeo-Christian faith. Why did Suetonius speak the truth, but Moses was a liar?

Because the story of Caesar’s life is supported by other evidence, and Moses’ story is contradicted by what we know about history from other sources. Besides, no one is basing their entire worldview around Caesar crossing the Rubicon, and Suetonius isn’t claim that Caesar had supernatural powers. People who do claim Caesar had supernatural powers we reject out of hand. You are actually the one being very selective, accepting the supernatural claims of Moses’ while rejecting, presumably, other supernatural claims throughout history.

It’s unbelievably silly that anyone could believe “thousands of years ago, a few people claimed to see magic, therefore it is true.” I have a hard time believing that any adult could think that.

 

[LPLawhead]

Sorry for the delay guys, I had things to do other than be on here. Firstly, I didn’t realize I had been asked but no I’m not an ex-catholic. Secondly, amazing! You were capable of listing for me the close personal details of Stalin’s death bed. Why then did you first say he “died peacefully in his bed?” Stick to one story please. Thirdly, the Egyptians and other pre-christian races DID have moral systems, Look at the egyptian book of the dead which pretty much had the original version of the ten commandments in it. No I didn’t get my info from Religulous, as stated before there are many resources available for that kind of information and yes while Jefferson did believe that the teachings of Jesus were good, he also said

“Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.”

“What about promiscuity, drunkeness, drugs, divorce and remarriage, contraception, abortion, cohabitation, excessive wealth, gluttony?”

Promiscuity? Well, if your a slut you lose the esteem of your friends and family, it doesn’t mean you’re evil or sinful, you just have self esteem issues. Drunkenness, lol, explain to me why Jesus turned perfectly good drinking water in to wine. Anyway, drunkenness (i assume you mean heavy alcohol abuse) is extremely damaging to a person’s body and mind and can be detrimental to social status, also impairs judgment leading in unreasonable and illogical behavior. Drugs? Drugs are fun unless you get too heavy on them, then again you can destroy your body/mind/respect with them, best in moderation. Divorce and remarriage? Well, what the hell do you care? I don’t think the church has any thing to say on the personal affairs between men and women and cohabitation also fits in here, it has nothing to do with morality. Excessive wealth? Most people who are excessively wealthy got to be that way at the extreme detriment of others. They turn themselves into objects of hate by treating others in such a way. The obvious wrongness to the general population of a man or group of men to take control financially and ultimately physically of others is clear. Before you start spouting off about Totalitarianism or Kings or any thing of the like, consider that at earlier times in human history, most men did not have any other concept to compare it to. It’s like saying that I have no business calling the earth round because 500 years ago people knew for a fact it was flat. Gluttony? Ha, doesn’t take a long stroll to show the obvious effects of gluttony. Didn’t need a Bible to inform me on that one either.

“And if you truly applied reason and intellectual honesty you would realize that it is the sins of individual people, due to their greed or lust for power, NOT the Catholic religion that commited bad acts. I get so sick of this tired old argument.”

And if you applied YOUR reason and intellectual honesty you’d realize that saying the Catholic Church is responsible for all the atrocities commited in her name is the exact same as saying that it was the fault of the anti-religious and non-christian that millions were massacred. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

As to the rule of law. are you really suggesting that prior to Jesus and the creation of the Christian church there were never a set of moral laws? Wow, history is not on your side with that one. Some of these codes of law may be strange to us now in some ways, but you have to remember that they were heavily influenced by religious quacks of their time. Back when Government wasn’t protected from usurpation by the Church.

Did I miss anything? Lemme know.

Also, for the last time. I’m not an atheist. Atheists don’t believe that there is a God of any kind, by definition. Call me an atheist until you’re blue in the face, it won’t change the fact that I’m not one.

Oh one more thing, forgot about contraceptives. GREAT invention. Finally all the sex you want without all those irritating extra kids. Look, I have three kids. I don’t need to be producing more, if I want to take something or have my girl take something that allows us to have unprotected sex with no babies later down the road, that’s my business. Every sperm is sacred… If God had wanted us to have a baby every time we had sex he wouldn’t have given us the mind to invent contraceptives.

 

[LPLawhead]

Guess what? Horus was a mythical figure in Egyptian mythology. And what else? Neither Horus, nor Osiris, not the Persian Mithras, nor any other pagan god ever propagated a system of Morality, which is what differentiates Moses and Jesus Christ from all these mythical pagan deities. The Jews were the founders of Ethical Monotheism. For all other ancient mythologies, ethics and morality never really entered into the equation or monotheism for that matter. Question: What morality did Horus propagate? Answer: None!!

But Jesus Christ came to earth with a message of Morality which makes Him absolutely incomparable to mythical figures like Horus. Let me ask you: is your source for this claim the comedian Bill Maher? That would be hilarious wouldn’t it if you are relying on a 2 cent comedian for your theology because you still haven’t provided me with one reputable source as I originally asked showing Jesus was a myth but I will present you with reputable historical studies as to the veracity of Jesus Christ.

For the historicity of Jesus, give a look at E.P. Sanders The Historical Figure of Jesus, the Anglican bishop Tom Wright’s works on the life and resurrection of Jesus ntwrightpage.com/, and for a rebuttal to the Jesus Seminar (who never claimed Jesus was myth) read Luke Timothy Johnson’s: The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels (1996). ISBN 0060641665, ISBN978-0060641665. Also John Meier’s multivolume A Marginal Jew amazon.com/Marginal-Jew-Rethinking-Historical-Problem/dp/0385264259

Why not do yourself a favor and give these books a read. Or have you personally studied something that is heftier than these books?

The fact is that we have the 4 Gospels written within the lifetime of witnesses to Jesus, and we even have St. Paul writing letters to Christians within 20 years of Jesus’ crucifixion. The Apostle Paul actually wrote to a church in Rome that had already been in existence before he even got there. Nero actually blamed the Christians for setting fire to Rome around 30 years after Christ’s crucifixion. Some Myth!!!?? Apparently thousands were willing to be slaughtered for this fairy tale in the first century rather than renounce it.

Again, have you studied anything reputable at all to make the astounding claim of Jesus as myth, or is this just something you feel is true?

We have four accounts that differ somewhat of people who heard secondhand that within a few decades of the time they started writing Jesus walked around and did all these wonderous things. Wow! Well that one can be closed. Did I ever say that Christians didn’t exist? That would be a bit irrational on my part considering I’m in here with you. Thousands of people have been willing to die for Islam, does that mean that Islam is the one true way? Just because people are fool enough to martyr themselves over their ideals doesn’t make them right. You know, I have spent a lot of time trying to find proof that Jesus was a real man and pretty much all of the “evidence” I’ve seen is extremely circumstantial. Oh Jesus is real because we found the grave of Pontius Pilate! Wow, it couldn’t be that the authors of the Bible used well known people of their time as part of their story. That would be silly.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

“Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.”

I understand your frustration with the replies in this thread, I am just as disappointed. Deism is not properly understood by most of the posters here. What they don’t “get” is that Deists are convinced that there isn’t any reasonable foundation to revealed religion.

But for the fourth time, I will repeat; there is a very strong case for the rationality of revealed religion. If you are an attorney, or studying to be one, or just interested in law, then you will fully grasp the importance of arguments from probability when demonstrative evidence is lacking. A trial lawyer must often, if not always rely on arguments from probability. If you consider those types of arguments rational and reliable, then you must give Joseph Butler’s book a read; “The Analogy of Religion.” If you are not convinced by his arguments, you will at least see that those people who do believe in a revealed religion are not at all irrational in that belief, but in fact VERY rational.

 

[jam070406]

Promiscuity? Well, if your a slut you lose the esteem of your friends and family, it doesn’t mean you’re evil or sinful, you just have self esteem issues. Drunkenness, lol, explain to me why Jesus turned perfectly good drinking water in to wine. Anyway, drunkenness (i assume you mean heavy alcohol abuse) is extremely damaging to a person’s body and mind and can be detrimental to social status, also impairs judgment leading in unreasonable and illogical behavior. Drugs? Drugs are fun unless you get too heavy on them, then again you can destroy your body/mind/respect with them, best in moderation. Divorce and remarriage? Well, what the hell do you care? I don’t think the church has any thing to say on the personal affairs between men and women and cohabitation also fits in here, it has nothing to do with morality. Excessive wealth? Most people who are excessively wealthy got to be that way at the extreme detriment of others. They turn themselves into objects of hate by treating others in such a way. The obvious wrongness to the general population of a man or group of men to take control financially and ultimately physically of others is clear. Before you start spouting off about Totalitarianism or Kings or any thing of the like, consider that at earlier times in human history, most men did not have any other concept to compare it to. It’s like saying that I have no business calling the earth round because 500 years ago people knew for a fact it was flat. Gluttony? Ha, doesn’t take a long stroll to show the obvious effects of gluttony. Didn’t need a Bible to inform me on that one either.

Thanks for showing us what’s wrong with Deism, no absolute truth. Moral relativism.

And if you applied YOUR reason and intellectual honesty you’d realize that saying the Catholic Church is responsible for all the atrocities commited in her name is the exact same as saying that it was the fault of the anti-religious and non-christian that millions were massacred. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

You’re the one that claimed the Catholic Church massacred millions. The onus is on you to prove it. Otherwise it’s just more display of baseless, anti-Catholic lies and bigotry.

As to the rule of law. are you really suggesting that prior to Jesus and the creation of the Christian church there were never a set of moral laws? Wow, history is not on your side with that one. Some of these codes of law may be strange to us now in some ways, but you have to remember that they were heavily influenced by religious quacks of their time. Back when Government wasn’t protected from usurpation by the Church.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jesus commanded us to love God above all else and one another, and our enemies. And He said if you truly loved Him (God) you would keep His commandments.
He demostrated how true love is sacrificing yourself for others, even to the point of laying down your life. Please show us where these Truths were revealed prior to Jesus.

Also, for the last time. I’m not an atheist. Atheists don’t believe that there is a God of any kind, by definition. Call me an atheist until you’re blue in the face, it won’t change the fact that I’m not one.

Nobody said you were an atheist, rather, they’ve stated your logic is akin to atheism. You’re walking a thin line. There’s even an atheist in this thread that has been rallying on your side.

Oh one more thing, forgot about contraceptives. GREAT invention. Finally all the sex you want without all those irritating extra kids. Look, I have three kids. I don’t need to be producing more, if I want to take something or have my girl take something that allows us to have unprotected sex with no babies later down the road, that’s my business. Every sperm is sacred… If God had wanted us to have a baby every time we had sex he wouldn’t have given us the mind to invent contraceptives.

More moral relativism. Again, thanks for displaying to us why Deism is a faulty belief system.

 

[LPLawhead]

Moral Relativism, is that the term for morals with which you don’t agree? Why do we need to control every aspect of people’s lives? All you REALLY need is “Love thy neighbor as thyself”. If you love someone you won’t kill them, steal from them, sleep with their significant other, lie about them, etc. This is not a principle unique to Christianity in any way shape or form. Divorce, cohabitation, contraceptives, these are all secondary things, these are all issues of personal control. What right have you got to say that the church is the only one who can sanctify a marriage? Why should people refuse birth control if they are responsible about it? This isn’t a matter of morality it’s a matter of tradition. I could say that the way you see things is Moral Relativism, your view on certain topics is clearly subjective. Let me ask, do you drink alcohol at all? I know many Catholics do, but if wine is ok in the site of your God, why aren’t other drugs? Why does God approve red wine and not marijuana? Why did God create psychotropic drugs to begin with? Why did God give us sexual pleasure if we’re meant to have sex only for procreation? WHY WHY WHY? The idea of relying on logic and reason instead of revealed prophecy isn’t about knowing all the facts, it’s about realizing that we don’t know all the facts. The best way to discover the truth of anything is rational study. There are many things you’d be surprised at how much we can agree on. The lack of morals in this nation (and the world) is disturbing. I’m the kind of parent that won’t send their child to school in a mini skirt and a halter top no matter how popular that style of dress may be. I am an honest person, I give often more than I can afford to. I look out for others, weather I know them or not. I’d stop and ask a person if they were ok if I saw that they looked upset. I don’t need the Bible to teach me how to be a decent citizen, morality is not based solely on revealed religion, philosophy has had much more to do with it. If you strip out all of the myths from Christianity you have, for the most part in the New Testament, a pretty good set of ideas. Not the word of God on paper, but some pretty good ideas. Nothing new though.

Book of the Dead: “I have done away sin for thee and not acted fraudulently or deceitfully. I have not belittled God. I have not inflicted pain or caused another to weep. I have not murdered or given such an order. I have not used false balances or scales. I have not purloined (held back) the offerings to the gods. I have not stolen. I have not uttered lies or curses.”

Exodus 20:7-16: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain…Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery…Thou shalt not bear false witness against they neighbor…” 6,7

As to the Catholic Church, is there any denial of the part it played in the Crusades? How about the Spanish Inquisition? How about the practice of hanging Native Americans in groups of 13 in honor of the Christ and his followers? All of this is documented, indisputable fact. Not saying that Jesus did it, I am saying that men did it in his name.

 

[jam070406]

Moral Relativism, is that the term for morals with which you don’t agree? Why do we need to control every aspect of people’s lives? All you REALLY need is “Love thy neighbor as thyself”. If you love someone you won’t kill them, steal from them, sleep with their significant other, lie about them, etc. This is not a principle unique to Christianity in any way shape or form. Divorce, cohabitation, contraceptives, these are all secondary things, these are all issues of personal control. What right have you got to say that the church is the only one who can sanctify a marriage? Why should people refuse birth control if they are responsible about it? This isn’t a matter of morality it’s a matter of tradition. I could say that the way you see things is Moral Relativism, your view on certain topics is clearly subjective. Let me ask, do you drink alcohol at all? I know many Catholics do, but if wine is ok in the site of your God, why aren’t other drugs? Why does God approve red wine and not marijuana? Why did God create psychotropic drugs to begin with? Why did God give us sexual pleasure if we’re meant to have sex only for procreation? WHY WHY WHY? The idea of relying on logic and reason instead of revealed prophecy isn’t about knowing all the facts, it’s about realizing that we don’t know all the facts. The best way to discover the truth of anything is rational study. There are many things you’d be surprised at how much we can agree on. The lack of morals in this nation (and the world) is disturbing. I’m the kind of parent that won’t send their child to school in a mini skirt and a halter top no matter how popular that style of dress may be. I am an honest person, I give often more than I can afford to. I look out for others, weather I know them or not. I’d stop and ask a person if they were ok if I saw that they looked upset. I don’t need the Bible to teach me how to be a decent citizen, morality is not based solely on revealed religion, philosophy has had much more to do with it. If you strip out all of the myths from Christianity you have, for the most part in the New Testament, a pretty good set of ideas. Not the word of God on paper, but some pretty good ideas. Nothing new though…

Moral relativism means you pick and choose your own morality. Rather then the Truth revealed by God through Jesus Christ and the Church He established. Btw, Catholics don’t rely on the bible alone.

Book of the Dead: “I have done away sin for thee and not acted fraudulently or deceitfully. I have not belittled God. I have not inflicted pain or caused another to weep. I have not murdered or given such an order. I have not used false balances or scales. I have not purloined (held back) the offerings to the gods. I have not stolen. I have not uttered lies or curses.”

Exodus 20:7-16: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain…Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery…Thou shalt not bear false witness against they neighbor…” 6,7

Catholics believe and have believed that pagans had bits and pieces of Truth. That’s one of the ways missonaries were able to convert pagans, by pointing to some of the nuggets of Truth in their beliefs as a way to revealing the fullness of Truth in the gospel message as revealed by Jesus Christ. There is an example of this with St. Paul and the Greeks that worshipped their unknown god.

As to the Catholic Church, is there any denial of the part it played in the Crusades? How about the Spanish Inquisition? How about the practice of hanging Native Americans in groups of 13 in honor of the Christ and his followers? All of this is documented, indisputable fact. Not saying that Jesus did it, I am saying that men did it in his name.

The crusades were to free the Holy land and to stop the Muslims from taking over Europe, after they had pillaged villages, destroyed Churches and desecrated the Holy land. It was in defense. True, some got out of hand, but keep in mind these were people not far removed from being barbarians themselves. And the Pope did not approve of their actions when they took it upon themselves to abandon the mission and serve their own means.
It wasn’t the fallacy of Crusaders trying to convert people by the sword.
And… perhaps you should stop and think of the Catholics today that have been killed in Iraq, just for being Catholic, or the thousand upon thousands displaced from their homes by Muslims. Innocent Catholic men, women and children. You don’t think that’s bad, eh? Well why is so hard to fathom such a scenario happening 800 yrs ago and Catholic Kings sending armies to try and stop it?

The Spanish Inquistion dealt with baptized Catholics. People had a trial. There were traitors that were trying to subvert the Faith. It was the STATE that put people to death anyway, NOT the Church. I’ve heard the numbers of deaths estimated at about 4000 to 5000 people over approx. 200 yrs. There were 3000 that were killed in one day by terrorist in the Trade towers. And not even comparible to the 6 million Christians starved to death in the Ukraine by the Communists.

The Indian thing you mentioned, I’ve never heard of. I know that some of the French Catholics and Indians made friends. Because the Monks were kind to them. That’s why the French and Indians fought side by side in the French Indian War against the British.

 

[Mersenne]

Moral relativism means you pick and choose your own morality. Rather then the Truth revealed by God through Jesus Christ and the Church He established. Btw, Catholics don’t rely on the bible alone.

false dichotomy

 

[jam070406]

false dichotomy

Nope.