Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
You misunderstand me. The death of the baby was a direct effect of David’s sin.
Now you bring up the point that God, “stuck the child.” In no way does this imply that God’s striking causes the sickness of the child. That’s actually an assumption of yours you’re putting forth. Remember context? During this time, hild moratality rates aren’t as good as they are now. First born children don’t live as often as they do today. It’s quite possible that the child already had this sickness independent of God’s intervention.
Could God had prevented it? David prayed for it and fasted. God could have but decided not to because of David’s sin.
You actually see this language of God “striking” or doing many other things even wrestling with people. But if you know the classic definition of God, which is immaterial, you know that the Biblical authors were using anthropomorphic language to be able to describe to their readers something they might have a hard time understanding.
This is actually beside the point but might be good for you to know.
"You misunderstand me. The death of the baby was a direct effect of David’s sin."
No, I understood you perfectly, you're wrong. The death of the baby according to the bible was a choice that god made, based on his own anger he tortured it to death.
-----------------------------------------
"God, “stuck the child.” In no way does this imply that God’s striking causes the sickness of the child. "
That's too stupid a claim to deserve a response sorry, but here's the biblical text anyway.
Because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die. 12.14
The LORD struck the child that Uriah's wife bare unto David, and it was very sick. 12.15
If you want to delude yourself crack on, but I'm not letting you lie to me, the text is as unambiguous as the bibel gets, but if this is too much for you try the many many other times the bible claimed you perfectly merciful deity either committed murder, or demanded others commit murder.
------------------------------------------
Now either murder is not objectively wrong as your deity commits murder here, and of course elsewhere with such obvious regularity even on a global scale according to your bible, it makes your denial here all the more idiotic, or murder is objectively wrong, in which case your deity is a monster. Or there are no objective morals, and even by puny subjective human morality your deity is still a monster.
Or there is no deity, the bible is man made, the morality bronze age, and guess what....all cognitive dissonance disappears. Given the inability of any theists to demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity anyway it's a no brainer. Logically fallacious arguments to prop up insane semantics to justify the unjustifiable. At what point do you admit to yourself you're trying to square a round peg.
So to recap you can't claim objective morality forbids murder then try and justify it, hence this dog and pony show you've just put on to try and deny what is so obviously claimed in the bible that I am embarrassed for you.
@Sheldon
This simply demonstrates how much God hates sin. Apparently, this is the only way we evidence hungry creatures would likely be convinced.
When judging someone's worldview it is important to consider all of it. Is it inconsistent that a Muslim doesn't go to church? Or that a Jew doesn't say the takbeer? Therefore, step with me into a world where life is not a line segment between birth and death. Rather, it is a ray that starts at birth goes through a point called death and continues on forever. If you read the story a bit further, David remarks, "I will go to him." This appears to indicate that all babies go to heaven/paradise. How does 7 days of sickness compare to 100 years of unimaginable joy? How is time comparable with eternity?
You also assume that it is right for us to do anything God does, but that is not consistent with Christianity either. Yes, God can kill a child to show a point to his annointed King and ambassador to the earth. God loved Uriah, too. Do you think it would be more loving to allow David to do whatever he pleased?
All that aside I see the disconnect between our arguments, and it would be more profitable to get back on topic:
I argue for objective morality at the ontological level, "Isn't killing for the fun of it is wrong?"
You argue for subjective morality at the epistemological level, "Can we know if anything is wrong?"
Is that right?
@Jesus Follower: God loved Uriah, too.
So what did the baby do to Uriah?
Well. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. It's strange that you dismiss my interpretation while forcing your own on me. Here's something. Maybe there's a correct way to interpret this passage (as someone obviously wrote it). How do you know that your interpretation is correct? Either way, we could go down this road and reach nowhere. Let's just agree to disagree.
You do raise a point worth answering.
"Now either murder is not objectively wrong as your deity commits murder here, ..."
Murder is objectively wrong, as is stealing, and rape, etc. Now, why is it wrong? Let me give you this analogy. A father has many children, say 3. This, in my hope, will give you an understanding of how Christians view God, as revealed in the Bible.
To one, he gives a car, a big allowance, a late night curfew, etc.
To the second, he gives a smaller allowance, no car, and an earlier curfew.
To the third, he gives no allowance, the child is not allowed to leave the house by himself.
Question: Which one does he love the most? Surprise! He actually loves all of them equally. The first could be in high school. The second one could be a 12 or 14 and a car could be harmful to him. The third could be a child or 6 and going outside alone is never a good idea for him.
To each one, depending on the stage of life they're in, their father will give them rules to follow. To the youngest one, more basic rules need to in place ("always hold my hand when crossing the street"). These rules can later be discarded by the child once they mature enough. To the older one, the rules like, "Always respect your elders" will always be in place even when they're out of the house.
Now, say the oldest one abuses the use of his car and does not follow the curfew rules being set forth. The father then has the right to take back anything he has given his children. He may choose to take back the car until he's learned his lesson. This wouldn't be morally problematic at all even if the father told his children, "Do not take things that belong to other people."
However, if it was the second child who took it upon himself to take away the car of his older brother, then the father does have the right to punish the second child. The idea being, the father has the authority to give and take as he pleases in his household. The children do not have this authority to take what has been given to others.
This is how Christians and (I believe Jews) view God. He's a father who gives but can take away what he has given if it starts to harm his children.
I think this is where the disconnect lies where you think God should play by the exact same rules he set for us to do, like how we expect lawmakers to follow the laws they promulgate. But the Christian view of God is not that of a senator or a congressman. It's one of a father.
JoC
"He's a father who gives but can take away what he has given if it starts to harm his children." and " But the Christian view of God is not that of a senator or a congressman. It's one of a father."
So its ok for a father to torture a baby for seven days after making him sick in the first place then kill him? That's what fathers do in your house?
Do you not see the contradictions here? You claim unsurpassing love but demonstrate in your books cruelty, jealousy, retribution beyond loving punishment. Punishing others for the sins of one.
Need I go on? Never mind the misogyny, torture and incest your 'father' condones and encourages. What compounds the cruelty is that, each and every time your ineffable 'father', could have either prevented , diverted or merely manifested himself to avoid the action that enraged him in the first place.
If I witnessed any father acting like that I would have the cops on him and he would never ever leave gaol.
Seriously? Were you having a lend? Practising satire?
"Well. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. "
No, not at all. You're simply ignoring what the text says. To suggest we're both interpreting it is simply untrue, as I have only quoted precisely what it says.
You're also contradicting your claim for objective morality by implying it needs to be subjectively interpreted by you to let your deity getaway with murder.
1) Your deity was angered over adultery.
2) It made threats.
3) It carried out its threats
4) it "struck" A new born baby.
5) The baby was 'very' I'll.
6) After 7 days of being very ill it died.
To suggest this then was anything other than murder of a new born baby is an absurd distortion of the text.
________________
"Murder is objectively wrong, as is stealing, and rape, etc."
Then explain why the bible claims your deity commits indiscriminate murder again and again? Is it an immoral deity, otherwise murder can't be objectively immoral?
There`s one problem with subjective morality; Who is to say if person number one is correct or person number two is correct if it comes down to subjectivity which is relativistic who`s point of decision do you accept. If the red light says don't drive and come to a complete stop while the person coming the opposite direction says I`ll think I`ll bypass this red light then we all know what`s going to happen. So I totally disagree once again with op post. I believe there is a moral compass to live my life by; And that is called objective. Call it A God as a moral lawgiver if you like .Deep down in our hearts and our consciences we know the difference between what we feel or think compared to how things realistically are. And how we should behave and reason.
"So I totally disagree once again with op post. I believe there is a moral compass to live my life by; And that is called objective. "
Yeah, you're wrong, again, and you don't know what subjective means, or morality.
@FIG
That would be a problem if that's how it worked, FIG, but it isn’t. Subjective morality isn't about the individual"s opinion, it's about the SOCIETY'S opinion. It's about consensus. To see how it works in practice, have a look st your society's laws. They were reached by consensus. Look at traffic lights. Why are they red, green and amber? Why aren't they pink, blue and white? There is no explanation for why red means stop and green means go instead of the other way around other than a subjective decision reached by consensus. If you agree traffic lights are a moral good, you agree subjective morality rules.
The other day I wrote something along these lines. I had some second thoughts but posted it anyway even though I thought I might be stretching it a little. I have to thank AB for coming to my rescue, because after reading what he posted I feel 100% confidant in what I wrote:
@ Nyarlathotep; There are and were a lot of people who live to the objective rule. It`s this particular culture world wide that is festering disobedience. I live in this culture but I try not to do what this culture dictates currently. You see shootings in our nations schools you see promiscuity world wide, you see a lot of disrespect drug overdoses on pain killers. Last year over 60,000 people died here in the USA. due to drug overdoses. I t is the me generation we have lost kindliness and dignity and respect for one another. I see it on this Forum how a few individuals use profanity and mock me and the God that I espouse to. And not one word from the moderators to the people who post here say anything about it. In fact by they staying silent on the matter only shows there deformity .There is absolutely nothing wrong to adhere to a moral law giver GOD. in fact it is clean living .The saints did it and other great men and women have also.
Can we have a 1000 disagree button please?
I just felt several million brain cells give up in utter depression at this post.
(spelling edited)
We've been very clear with you that profanity is not against the rules, damnit!
"We've been very clear with you that profanity is not against the rules, damnit!"
How about Billy's appalling grammar, and execrable spelling? Surely you could have a rule that he has to run a spellchecker, or must we see him endlessly confuse their, there and they're, your and you're, site and cite etc etc.. I'd also suggest he is taken to task when he posts overt racism or homophobia, just a prod to let him know he's being a bigoted religious douche. Since his"objective morality" doesn't seem to forbid bigotry racism and homophobia.
@faith in god...we have lost kindliness and dignity and respect for one another.
This idea that society used to be better, kinder, and more law-abiding is a myth. In 19th century Britain, lots of people died from drug overdoses. You could buy opium (in the form of laudanum) at the local apothecary. They also sold cocaine cough lozenges.
Syphilis and other STDs were rampant and incurable. Upstanding Victorian gentlemen thought nothing of having sex with prostitutes and then going home to have sex with their wives. Isabella Beeton, author of Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management, was a victim of that nasty habit. Her first child was born with syphilis and died in infancy.
In this generation, I think we have greater respect for people who were treated atrociously in Victorian times, including women, children, different ethnicities, gay people, and the mentally ill. We're more tolerant, more aware, more determined to do the right thing than ever before.
So where do you get off peddling this pessimistic god-swill about everyone sliding down to hell because of their disobedience to the contrary laws of an iron age sky fairy?
@FIG Re: Profanity
Dammit, FIG, I'm with you! It's a fucking shame you should have to put up with such bullshit. Some of these assholes on here need to learn some fucking manners. They obviously do not care that there are some sensitive pussies on here who are easily offended by offensive language such as shit, damn, hell, fuck, motherfucker, fucktard, asshole, twat, and dingleberry. (Just to name a few.) If I were you, I would file some sort of formal complaint to the proper authorities. You don't have to take that kind of shit off anybody.
Absolutely fucking right TM. Any fucktardly resomorph with any kind of spermilacious ovarian tendencies seems to be able to to back door Charlie their way into a polite conversation. Fuck them I say. Let's keep our virgins pure and our little altar boys holy.
@Old Man
Oh how I wish I could click your Agree button multiple times right now! LMFAO!!! (I'm about to pee myself laughing so hard right now.)
“ I see it on this Forum how a few individuals use profanity and mock me and the God that I espouse to. And not one word from the moderators to the people who post here say anything about it. In fact by they staying silent on the matter only shows there deformity .”
I’m deformed?
"You see shootings in our nations schools you see promiscuity world wide"
Could you reference the biblical passage that forbids shooting please? Also do you think shooting people and promiscuity is some kind of equivalence of immorality? Lastly if you're troubled by murder why does your deity commit murder in the bible all the time, and encourage humans to do the same? If murder is morally wrong why did your deity's plan involve torture and murder for vicarious redemption?
If objective morality existed, religion would be especially meaningless.
The Judean-Christian religion would still need someone to pray to The slogan Jesus is the reason for the season makes it perfectly clear that it is only JESUS; The rest comes with it Objective morality is an attribute of the Judean-Christian faith It sprang out of it We have people following objective morality today, But to say that religion would be meaningless is stretching things somewhat. Even though there are those who believe and practice objective morality there is a dire need for CHRIST After all he did redeem us and offer us salvation from his death on the cross. .So there is a good enough reasons to have the Judean-Christian faith.
* Yawn* Any originality at all? Any time?
I'd settle for him punctuating properly, and learning when a capital letter is required, and when it is not.
Do you think unruly children should be stoned to death at the edge of town?
@faith in God follower
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/6-reasons-objective-mo...
If morality is objective, then faith has no value even for the superstitious.
@Sheldon
Thank you for the article link and the introduction to the blog. I'll be reading more of it :-D
@FIGF
Sorry you feel that way. However, I know for a fact that morality IS subjective. Look at the lower animals. Some of them have better morals than most of you Absolutists.
Here are some memes I have collected over my many decades. Some of them I created myself. Foremost, my definition of ABSOLUTIST: Any of an absolutism religion, specifically the Abrhamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), due to their absolute beliefs.
The True Absolutist definition of IMMORALITY: Thoughts and actions that are not to the Absolutist majority’s private liking.
- RMF Runyan
Christianity Destroys Moral Accountability
Romans 10:9–13
That if you shalt confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. For with the heart man believes unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture says, "Whosoever believes on him shall not be ashamed." For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For who so ever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
All this tells me is that I can be as evil, wicked, mean, and nasty as much as I want, and can still go to heaven.
- RMF Runyan
The ONLY ultimate message of ALL Christendom (emphasis theirs): You are condemned to hell forever. Unless you do as we say. This is the ultimate message preachers in the churches I was forced to attend always used to terrorize us children into becoming saved.
- RMF Runyan
And I ask what in 7734 is so damned moral about this form of teaching children? This is actually the immoral act of "psychological terrorism."
All persons predisposed to an Absolutist belief system are persistantly incapable of differentiating what is moral from what they wish to be moral.
- RMF Runyan (I think Richard Dawkins later said the same in The God Delusion?)
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion.
- Steven Weinberg
In other words, Dr. Weinberg is also saying that morality is subjective and from us lowly and sinful humans.
If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed.
- Albert Einstein
Morality is doing right, no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told, no matter what is right.
- H. L. Mencken
It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled.
- Mark Twain
And this is another tactic used by you immoral Absolutists.
The fact that we humans ended slavery shows that our morals come from within us and not from God. In fact, many religions endorse slavery. However, we, the human race, collectively decided slavery is not moral, and we ended it. No God needed. No religion needed.
– Vik Sharma
As said, our abolishment of slavery proves that us lowly and sinful humans have greater mores than god.
If God is cool with rape, incest, mass murder, sexism, slavery, ethnic cleansing, and genital mutilation, then why do we even need a Satan?
- something I read on the WWW
How is that for godly objective morality?
Even if it were true that we need God to be moral, it does not make God’s existence more likely, merely more desirable. Especially with [Absolutists], people cannot tell the difference.
Richard Dawkins
All moral precepts, while not necessarily constructed by reason, should be defensible by reason. Not religion.
Robert Hinde
On the Final Summation on Absolutist Morality:
So, your Absolutist religions has murdered, raped, tortured, abused, coerced, pillaged, oppressed, persecuted, extorted, lied, sacrificed, tormented, harassed, rampaged, terrorized, mutilated genitalia, enslaved, ravaged, swindled, exploited, insulted, endangered, molested and raped children, threatened, corrupted, plundered, and committed ethnic and genocidal cleansing in the name of God for centuries around the world to spread such a theological message.
But I am the one who is going to Hell for NOT believing in this nonsense?
- from about three memes I saw on the WWW, RMF Runyan
Believe me. If we were to use god's objective and absolute mores as an example for living, the human species would have annihilated itself long ago.
Again, I've spewed enough...
rmfr
@Arakish
But you spew so damn well. Outstanding! I especially like...
Morality is doing right, no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told, no matter what is right.
- H. L. Mencken
Pages