Morality Poll

[sophion]

This is impossible to discuss unless you have a grasp of the Catholic understanding of inspiration. How do you profess to know that God actually, literally, spoke these words to the author of Samuel? We do not believe the writers of scripture go into a trance and do “dictation” from God, like a secretary would.

Someone asked me for muder in the bible and i gave it.
Whether or not that is forgery as you allege is another matter.

 

[clem456]

Contraception…you allow the so called ‘natural method’ and not the artificial? thats just nuts. much in this world is artificial and you have no problem with them. its like telling someone “when you strangle someone make sure to use your hands, dont use a man-made iron cord!”. its the intent and result that matters, not the method!

You are comparing two situations that are not comparable.

 

[clem456]

Someone asked me for muder in the bible and i gave it.
Whether or not that is forgery as you allege is another matter.

I did not allege it was forgery. Please…
You are interpreting Scripture so as to condone murder. How can you interpret Scripture thus? On what or whose authority? Can you give some meat and potatoes backup for this?

 

[sophion]

Also, if it is truly only the intent and result that matters, and the means used never makes a difference then I assume you are perfectly fine with someone offing their older but perfectly healthy father for the sake of gaining the money they need to buy a house for themselves and their family. After all, the intent and result (to get the money neded to buy a house for their family) is a good thing, so clearly their action in this case was perfectly moral and legitimate.

in your example:

intent: ofing the father
means: you did not say how. is it natural (bare hands) or artificial (knife)?
result: gain money

no that is wrong from the beginning.​

now the ‘natural’ vs ‘artificial’ contraceptive…

natural
intent: to have itimacy, connection and sex
means: calendar method
desired result: fun and no baby

artificial
intent: to have itimacy, connection and sex
means: condoms
desired result: fun and no baby

why one and not the other. totally senseless

 

[clem456]

in your example:

intent: ofing the father
means: you did not say how. is it natural (bare hands) or artificial (knife)?
result: gain money

no that is wrong from the beginning.​

now the ‘natural’ vs ‘artificial’ contraceptive…

natural
intent: to have itimacy, connection and sex (NO, partial answer)
means: calendar method
desired result: fun and no baby (NO)

artificial
intent: to have itimacy, connection and sex
means: condoms
desired result: fun and no baby

why one and not the other. totally senseless

There are so many basic things about Catholicism you do not understand. I would suggest again that you do some basic reading (catechism) before throwing misconceptions around on numerous threads.

 

[sophion]

There are so many basic things about Catholicism you do not understand. I would suggest again that you do some basic reading (catechism) before throwing misconceptions around on numerous threads.

no and no? are you saying catholics think and feel differently about sex than everybody else? most of the people i know are catholics and i know for a fact why some of them follow the calendar method. its no different from why i use the withrawal method. to have fun without the consequence of having an unplanned child.same intent. same desired result. only differs on the means.

anyway we have dwelt too long on this issue. i have said my part and so i’ll move on.

 

[ManRay]

It seems that even on the theist side - people are falling in line with the thinking that you can achieve an absolute without religion. This is logically apparent. Stating that it’s not possible is in a way - stating an absolute. So if it is possible(which it is) - well…I guess I’m trying to understand the motives of religion, why it’s so important, and what difference does it really make in our lives outside of the subjective, and personal? Seriously - how would anyone know outside of being privy to personal information what you believed in? How do I know if someone got an abortion? How do I know if someone is gay, and why it is my business? Someone could tell me they are Catholic, and be less catholic than me. How many of you have described someone as a cafeteria catholic or a cradle…etc…etc…? It seems our world is wrecked, politically, and socially by a bunch of people who need to have some edge on judging people. The world isn’t horrible enough - we must add to it. The world isn’t beautiful enough. We must add to it. We have a whole demographic of people who won’t vote for Obama because the Democratic party will not presume to know what is best for people, and yet they will vote for Romney even though in 1994 he proclaimed that same stance (but now it’s different after all - he’s running for president as a republican!.) What is really the point or purpose? Romney is supposedly against abortion, but one of his children achieved pregnancy through In Vitro. He would call abortion murder - but would he really call his child a murderer? It seems that there is a real pandemonium of thought. in the world. A real dissonance in the way the human mind understands reality, and how it pertains to us.

 

[clem456]

no and no? are you saying catholics think and feel differently about sex than everybody else? most of the people i know are catholics and i know for a fact why some of them follow the calendar method. its no different from why i use the withrawal method. to have fun without the consequence of having an unplanned child.same intent. same desired result. only differs on the means.

anyway we have dwelt too long on this issue. i have said my part and so i’ll move on.

Might be a good idea for the present time.
Here’s some resources if you want to debate Catholics based on actual Church teaching:

Catechism of the Catholic Church:
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

And no, this does not begin to represent what Catholics believe about sexuality:

natural
intent: to have itimacy, connection and sex
means: calendar method
desired result: fun and no baby

Some reading applicable to the issue above:
Theology of the Body by John Paul 2
ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2tbind.htm (take your time with this one)

 

[sophion]

I did not allege it was forgery. Please…
You are interpreting Scripture so as to condone murder. How can you interpret Scripture thus? On what or whose authority? Can you give some meat and potatoes backup for this?

me, interpreting scripture???

my friend please tell me is there another meaning to “put to death men and women, children and infants” besides the “interpretation” that they were killed.

 

[sophion]

Any thing which is pleasing to God is good, anything which is contrary to God’s will is bad. As to what those things are, well that’s a big list.

Thats a BIIIIG problem! because the question is gonna be: WHICH GOD??? Allah? Jesus? Jehovah? Shiva? or some god according to some cult leader out there…

thats why absolute morality is impossible. there is no way we can agree from whom it should come from! even in your religious books and histories such things as murder, theft and rape are negotiable!

 

[ManRay]

me, interpreting scripture???

my friend please tell me is there another meaning to “put to death men and women, children and infants” besides the “interpretation” that they were killed.

Brother you will never win this argument. A theist has over 700,000 words to twist out of context in the bible. It’s too easy to state that it was allegorical, or metaphorical, or we are gods creation, and he no doubt has his “reasons”…There is probably a church father who wrote a book on how words only mean what you think they cannot possibly mean…very poetically. A theist is NEVER wrong on this. A theist will never admit to being confused by this. It would destroy there world view. Cognitive dissonance…the underlying malaise…catch it!

 

[clem456]

me, interpreting scripture???

my friend please tell me is there another meaning to “put to death men and women, children and infants” besides the “interpretation” that they were killed.

Who’s debating that people were killed?
You were the one divining that God condones murder based on your reading of the passage. You. No one else. What religion do you ascribe to that condones murder based on scripture?

 

[clem456]

Brother you will never win this argument. A theist has over 700,000 words to twist out of context in the bible. It’s too easy to state that it was allegorical, or metaphorical, or we are gods creation, and he no doubt has his “reasons”…There is probably a church father who wrote a book on how words only mean what you think they cannot possibly mean…very poetically. A theist is NEVER wrong on this. A theist will never admit to being confused by this. It would destroy there world view. Cognitive dissonance…the underlying malaise…catch it!

I have a very simple question for you. Have you ever related a story to someone?

 

[sophion]

Brother you will never win this argument. A theist has over 700,000 words to twist out of context in the bible. It’s too easy to state that it was allegorical, or metaphorical, or we are gods creation, and he no doubt has his “reasons”…There is probably a church father who wrote a book on how words only mean what you think they cannot possibly mean…very poetically. A theist is NEVER wrong on this. A theist will never admit to being confused by this. It would destroy there world view. Cognitive dissonance…the underlying malaise…catch it!

i was a devoted christian for many years. in my experience things like these do pile deep down somewhere. as long as there is life, there is hope. change is a constant fact of life.

 

[Robert_Caritas]

me, interpreting scripture???

my friend please tell me is there another meaning to “put to death men and women, children and infants” besides the “interpretation” that they were killed.

This paradox is due to a misunderstanding of what the absolute moral code consists in. Once we define it correctly, we shall see that there isn’t a contradiction between the commandment not to kill, and this Bible passage.

can you give us some examples of these “absolute moral codes”?
Thanks.

The only example that there is of a true absolute moral code is the Will of God. God’s will is absolute – it is the essence of Truth and Morals themselves. So effectively it is slightly misleading to speak of a code, which as the connotation of being set in stone and unshifting. God’s will is alive.

How is that absolute when the bible itself is full of murders in the name of God? This is obviously CONDITIONAL.

So the paradox is cleared up. God’s will was to kill these people, so it was good to do it. You are right that moral laws in the sense of texts and written rules are conditional – they are conditional on God’s will.

But we must remember that when God speaks directly to his people or through a prophet, it is a specific and spectacular situation. He also gave us these texts to understand his will, and when he wanted that understanding to evolve he gave us new texts and traditions. A human being, on his own authority, can never go against the laws of God. These texts are our lifelines to Truth and Goodness. It is not for nothing that Christians are sometimes called “people of the book!”

[On a side note: in case you do not know this, be careful with Old Testament laws as being representative of Christianity, for in the New Testament, Jesus-Christ modified many of them.]

 

[Lochias]

Brother you will never win this argument. A theist has over 700,000 words to twist out of context in the bible. It’s too easy to state that it was allegorical, or metaphorical, or we are gods creation, and he no doubt has his “reasons”…There is probably a church father who wrote a book on how words only mean what you think they cannot possibly mean…very poetically. A theist is NEVER wrong on this. A theist will never admit to being confused by this. It would destroy there world view. Cognitive dissonance…the underlying malaise…catch it!

Yup, ‘cause us dumb ol’ Catholics can’t read 'er pick up them…watchamacallum…sarcasms, er nothin’!!



An die-hard atheist, conversely, will never, ever be wrong, because to admit that he or she is wrong is to admit that his-or-her entire world view is hopelessly skewed 45 degrees off-kilter of the way things actually work. Can’t stand being wrong when the illusion of control is all you’ve got to cling to.

Care to fling senseless accusations and hyperbole around some more?

 

[ManRay]

I have a very simple question for you. Have you ever related a story to someone?

Of course I have, and if part of it ends up wrong, or misleads someone - I don’t then sidestep, and try to defend it with bunk logic. Ancient (and savage) people who related to this word of god didn’t sit around and hide behind exegesis, and any other swindle of thought. It took the “authoritative, and somewhat more brainy” individual to weave circles around the problems of logic. The bible never says anywhere that this is a giant piece of allegorical text that your puny brain will never understand (which is closer to the truth than anything)…and yet biblical authorities play this card ad nauseum. Look at kings 2 2:23…42 children were murdered by god because they made fun of someone. That is the basic reality of the text. And that is I’m sure how ancients understood it. But…no…now you will hear it explained in numerous ways - the children were possessed by Satan, Elisha was carrying gods message, and you just don’t make fun of that! Etc…etc…But basically - god just murdered children because the made fun of a bald dude.

 

[clem456]

Of course I have, and if part of it ends up wrong, or misleads someone - I don’t then sidestep, and try to defend it with bunk logic. Ancient (and savage) people who related to this word of god didn’t sit around and hide behind exegesis, and any other swindle of thought. It took the “authoritative, and somewhat more brainy” individual to weave circles around the problems of logic. The bible never says anywhere that this is a giant piece of allegorical text that your puny brain will never understand (which is closer to the truth than anything)…and yet biblical authorities play this card ad nauseum. Look at kings 2 2:23…42 children were murdered by god because they made fun of someone. That is the basic reality of the text. And that is I’m sure how ancients understood it. But…no…now you will hear it explained in numerous ways - the children were possessed by Satan, Elisha was carrying gods message, and you just don’t make fun of that! Etc…etc…But basically - god just murdered children because the made fun of a bald dude.

So then you are a great example of a fundamentalist. Life and words are set in stone evidently.
Yes.

 

[ManRay]

Yup, ‘cause us dumb ol’ Catholics can’t read 'er pick up them…watchamacallum…sarcasms, er nothin’!!



An die-hard atheist, conversely, will never, ever be wrong, because to admit that he or she is wrong is to admit that his-or-her entire world view is hopelessly skewed 45 degrees off-kilter of the way things actually work. Can’t stand being wrong when the illusion of control is all you’ve got to cling to.

Care to fling senseless accusations and hyperbole around some more?

It isn’t scarcasm. Its true. I don’t call myself an atheist. Theists call me an atheist because I don’t believe in their god. I’ve been wrong. Ive conceded points on this forum, and in “real life”…and I’ve never heard a theist on here ever concede one point…not one. Even in the face of VERY strong logic. Logical problems that have tested some of the greatest minds…but the average theist on here waves their hand…and bumbles around and calls it a home run. It’s like you guys think you have magical powers. It’s hilarious. I get banned, and warned, but the same guys who call me a misanthrope, or regardless of my education - misinformed, a 13 year old…etc…etc… are right back at it the next thread. I’m the one who doesn’t get what’s going on? Really? I’m the one hiding under an illusion of control? Really?

 

[ManRay]

So then you are a great example of a fundamentalist. Life and words are set in stone evidently.
Yes.

That makes no sense. But cool.