Wafflle, I'd be interested in knowing exactly which "innocents" were the brutally killed ones you're talking about, which modern churches have ignored it and why exactly you seek to blame He who is without blame. I believe I know why, but would be interested in hearing it from you. Thanks in advance for your citation and I look forward to exploring it further with you on a more appropriate forum if you choose to do so.
Need suggestions: How to challenge your mind only using your mind ?!
Sort:
Joshua and Exodus have some nasty ones. Joshua killed the men of Ai, and then killed the women and children. In Exodus God kills the first born, lots of kids, yay for God. But lots of places in the old testament. If your daughter is raped, then stone her to death. E.g. Deuteronomy 22:20-21. There are lots of these.
Although I'm willing to agree to disagree on this. I was raised Christian and spent 6 years in a Baptist school. I've heard plenty of double speak and BS. There are certainly reasonable believers too, but they ignore these verses and aren't running around killing their children Leviticus 20:9.
If a voice in your head said to kill your child (or any child) I hope you wouldn't do it, or at least I'd hope you'd have reservations. Of course the Bible gives an example with Abraham that you should obey without question even in this case. But why would you hesitate (or not do it at all I hope). Because your morality isn't coming from a book or voice you hear in your head, it's from inside of you.
Jan 22, 2014
0
#84
TheGrobe wrote:
Amartalon, your objection was that it was not rational or objective. You go on to say subjectivity is a possibility, but in that first paragraph you've presupposed your conclusion -- that a morality not rooted in rational objectivity must be in some way flawed.
By the way, have a look around at the state of the world today and the root of much of the conflict and tell me again that morality is not subjective.
I'm not making a conclusion one way or the other. I'm saying that if morality is subjective - created by human beings - then there is no reason it cannot be altered by humans, or why any one person's moral standards are superior to anyone elses. In this case a serial killer is no more or less moral than a normal person, they just live by a different moral code than other people.
The alternative is that morality is objective, defined by something beyond human control, and therefore upholding certain moral standards - such as it is wrong to kill another human being - as absolute makes sense.
Both of these positions are logical and I never said one way or the other which is true. What is illogical (and therefore untrue) is saying on the one hand that morality is a human invention, and on the other that moral standards have inherent value.
Compose limericks in your head, any subject ... make it harder by demanding from yourself that the limerick has a good punch line, and that the rhythm and rhymes are all 100% correct. For instance:
If waiting to fly to the equator
And all the planes leave that much later,
Just go to the bar
And order a jar
And a waiter will then serve the waiter.
(Yes I know, line 1 has one syllable too many; if I was waiting 5 hours for a flight I'd get it perfect! 
)
Jan 23, 2014
0
#86
waffllemaster wrote:
Joshua and Exodus have some nasty ones. Joshua killed the men of Ai, and then killed the women and children. In Exodus God kills the first born, lots of kids, yay for God. But lots of places in the old testament. If your daughter is raped, then stone her to death. E.g. Deuteronomy 22:20-21. There are lots of these.
Although I'm willing to agree to disagree on this. I was raised Christian and spent 6 years in a Baptist school. I've heard plenty of double speak and BS. There are certainly reasonable believers too, but they ignore these verses and aren't running around killing their children Leviticus 20:9.
If a voice in your head said to kill your child (or any child) I hope you wouldn't do it, or at least I'd hope you'd have reservations. Of course the Bible gives an example with Abraham that you should obey without question even in this case. But why would you hesitate (or not do it at all I hope). Because your morality isn't coming from a book or voice you hear in your head, it's from inside of you.
I know exactly what you're talking about and thank you for citing those examples. My initial contribution to this discussion became much too lengthy for a forum post, so upon the suggestion of LuftWaffles, I converted it into the form of a blog post and posted it there.
Here is the link:
http://www.chess.com/blog/learningthemoves/on-the-promise-of-new-life
Jan 23, 2014
0
#87
LuftWaffles wrote:
Start a blog.
That is a great idea.
Here is a link to my response in the form of a blog post that can be accessed here by those who wish to read it and/or further discuss this topic in a blog style setting...
http://www.chess.com/blog/learningthemoves/on-the-promise-of-new-life
How did this thread turn into this?
Shall I start preaching about my Lord and Savior, so that you may be embraced in the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Yes, exactly, most reasonable people say people don't have to follow those things anymore because of Jesus (or they give some other reason). Even though in Matthew 5:17-18 Jesus specifically says he didn't abolish the old law. But why would people take that very verse to say we can effectively ignore those barbaric teachings? Because we know with common sense it's immortal. In fact I can assure you that if the book of Matthew never existed people would not be running around killing their children and stoning rape victims to death. In fact atheists and other religions don't do those things either. The only people doing those things would be those who read the Bible literally, but they're obviously psychopaths.
Reasonable people, Christian or otherwise, talk about things like love, respect, empathy, and helping the least of the community. The poor, the sick, children, etc.
Jan 23, 2014
0
#90
waffllemaster wrote:
Yes, exactly, most reasonable people say people don't have to follow those things anymore because of Jesus (or they give some other reason). Even though in Matthew 5:17-18 Jesus specifically says he didn't abolish the old law. But why would people take that very verse to say we can effectively ignore those barbaric teachings? Because we know with common sense it's immortal. In fact I can assure you that if the book of Matthew never existed people would not be running around killing their children and stoning rape victims to death. In fact atheists and other religions don't do those things either. The only people doing those things would be those who read the Bible literally, but they're obviously psychopaths.
Reasonable people, Christian or otherwise, talk about things like love, respect, empathy, and helping the least of the community. The poor, the sick, children, etc.
Well, this is where we may have to agree to disagree as you say, because the law he mentions he came to fulfill in Matthew is distinct from the rules and regulations that were required as customs and indeed annulled.
The ten commandments didn't say to run around killing children. In fact, one of the commandments is Thou shall not kill.
So those customs and regulations that were given as a way to govern the people in those times are not the same law that Christ is referring to in Matthew.
You can tell the moderators are asleep
Nice way to turn it into something on topic LuftWaffles.
ote · #53 learningthemoves
Idrinkyourhealth wrote:
learningthemoves wrote:
I would tame the invisible tornadoes until they were nothing more than symmetrical glasses of orange juice sitting side by side in my mind, using only my mind to do so.
..hhahha, fortunately I am not that crazy (who knows..)
Is it really that crazy?
If you look at it closer, you'll see it is someone creating order out of chaos and producing good fruit in the face of natural disasters.
Is it really that crazy or do you just doubt the health benefits of vitamin C?
I hope you weren't just absconding and leaving the infamous "who" as your scapegoat.
(With your username, I must say I had thought better of you. Frown)
I think i didn' t understand your first suggestion, and using a google translater i got really confused ...i thought u were joking or... didn't take it seriously lol
Thx all for the suggestions:) but only few could get what i was trying to say.. specially like ideas like the anagrams, memorizing, number games and the rhymes... but still wondering if there is some kind of standart(with rules and a goal) game which was invented to play only with the mind,,,
Well. You can always play blindfold chess with yourself... Other than that, no suggestions here.
Aaaaand no idea how could this end in a religious conversation.."':;;;:;,"^LoL':;-:'--:'"';;*'^
Go talk to someone. Repeat until interested.
Calculate prime numbers.
Go talk to that blondie.
Solitaire games:
Double numbers. 1, 2, 4, 8... 1024, 2048... 32768, 65536... etc.
"7-up": 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7up, 8, 9... "7up" for every number that contains 7 (e.g. 17) or is a multiple of 7 (e.g. 14.)
Masochistic 7-up: Same as above, but include numbers whose digital roots satisfy the above. (e.g. 16, since 1+6=7; also 149, since 1+4+9=14.) Also state in how many ways the number qualifies. (7 - "7up 3 ways", 167 "7up 2 ways") If that's not bad enough, announce squares and cubes as such. (1 square cube, 2, 3, 4 square, 5, 6, 7up, 8 cube, 9 square etc...)
Say-and-see sequence: 1, 11, 21, 1211, 111221, etc... try starting with different numbers too.
Play some sort of counting game, play blindfold chess against yourself, think about philosophy, or try to make deductions about people or things in a Sherlock Holmes style.
I find this to be a sad, cynical statement. My morality comes from within, and from my ability to put myself in other's shoes. I don't need to consult some external authority because there are no better answers out there than those I already have. We are all capable of this.
Yep, and apparently our morality has progressed beyond what ancient books can tell us. E.g. even modern churches ignore those parts in which brutal killing of innocents is no problem to the "Lord."