You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
So you admit people need religion, yet you take issue with someone saying that people need Jesus? This seems somewhat contradictory imo.
I mean this is an issue that has been formulated many years ago and people still cannot provide a worthy answer other than religion. Essentially without God how can there be right and wrong? You either have to admit that there is a universal right and wrong, which leads to God, or you throw the whole thing away and deny the existence of any kind of good and evil, leading to nihilism.
I wasnt very clear. What I meant was that people need community and guidance. Religion is a great path for that in most cases.
you take issue with someone saying that people need Jesus?
yes, because I dont think Jesus is the only path to morality. Saying that someone needs jesus implies that jesus is the only answer. I take issue with that sentiment.
I mean this is an issue that has been formulated many years ago and people still cannot provide a worthy answer other than religion.
and neither can I once the collective grows beyond a certain point. Or outsiders to the group are introduced. The nature of human consciousness is also cursed with a desire for purpose and lacking any definitive answer to existential questions a deity is necessary for those individuals within the group who cannot cope with un-answered questions.
Essentially without God how can there be right and wrong?
Well that's just a stupid question and another thing I take a huge issue with in regards to religion. I do not belive in god and yet I still have a sense of right and wrong. You can make the claim that god taught my parents and they taught me therefore my morals are still a product of gods will. Sure.
Here is my thinking. A child does not need god to learn morals. a child needs a society with rules to learn morals. I believe with every fiber of my being that if the idea of God had never been invented a given civilization would still have a sense of right and wrong. It would probably be wrong to murder people for no reason. it would probably be wrong to steal. the very basics of human morality are not based in religion, religion is based in the very basics of human morality.
You either have to admit that there is a universal right and wrong
okay...
which leads to God,
no it does not. It leads to a human morality that some people attribute to a god or multiple gods. Can humans not have a sense of independent justice without a diety? Of course they can. If you raised a child without any concept of god and when they were old enough to have a sense of ownership over a thing, say a toy, and you one day walked up and smashed that toy in front of them would the child not feel bad? Maybe you would feel bad for making the child feel bad. Maybe you'd decide to make a rule where you don't smash other peoples stuff. Or maybe that child will grow up and make the rule themselves. You do not need a god to tell you that a thing is good or bad.
or you throw the whole thing away and deny the existence of any kind of good and evil,
This is a false dichotomy youve presented me. God or Nihilism are not the only options and this is why I take issue with statements like "you need jesus."
you might need jesus, personally. And thats fine. Other people can find purpose and morals in their own spirit and do not need a prophet to show them a path. If you need that guidance thats fine, I applaud you for finding a road that will most likely benefit you, your family, and your community instead of just falling into despair and nihilism.
But please do not tell your children or other people who ask that Nihilism or Jesus are their only options.
I am not a nihilist and I don't believe in god. I believe in the nature of people to work together and understand the needs of their peers.
But the key belief of the christian faith is that Jesus is the only salvation. To claim that religion is useful but you can't say that it's the only answer is basically telling people it's ok to be religious as long as you don't take your religious beliefs seriously. You are asking people to be inconsistent.
Well that's just a stupid question and another thing I take a huge issue with in regards to religion. I do not believe in god and yet I still have a sense of right and wrong.
This is missing the point a bit, no one is disputing whether people have a 'sense' of right of wrong, the question is how can right and wrong be justified without the presence of a superior being, or in other words, a god. How do you know what is right and what is wrong? Ok society tells you, fine. However how do you account for the fact that different societies have different conceptions of right and wrong? Whites are currently being ethnically cleansed in south africa, yet you cannot claim that this is wrong, as this is what the society tells blacks is ok. This example highlights the fact that if you leave right and wrong in the hands of man, i.e. society, people are going to have wildly differing conceptions of right and wrong, and no one will be able to justify their version of "right" over another's. This is why any world view without god leads to fragmentation, isolation, and eventually nihilism.
This is a false dichotomy youve presented me. God or Nihilism are not the only options
Not a false dichotomy, I admit it was somewhat incomplete however. God or Nihilism are not the only options, rather "God or Nihilism are the only logically coherent options" would be better. There are other options sure, but these options just aren't thought through completely.
And I won't be engaging my own children in a philosophy debate, they will be raised christian, which I thought would've been obvious at this point.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] salttypa ago
So you admit people need religion, yet you take issue with someone saying that people need Jesus? This seems somewhat contradictory imo.
I mean this is an issue that has been formulated many years ago and people still cannot provide a worthy answer other than religion. Essentially without God how can there be right and wrong? You either have to admit that there is a universal right and wrong, which leads to God, or you throw the whole thing away and deny the existence of any kind of good and evil, leading to nihilism.
[–] CapinBoredface ago
I wasnt very clear. What I meant was that people need community and guidance. Religion is a great path for that in most cases.
yes, because I dont think Jesus is the only path to morality. Saying that someone needs jesus implies that jesus is the only answer. I take issue with that sentiment.
and neither can I once the collective grows beyond a certain point. Or outsiders to the group are introduced. The nature of human consciousness is also cursed with a desire for purpose and lacking any definitive answer to existential questions a deity is necessary for those individuals within the group who cannot cope with un-answered questions.
Well that's just a stupid question and another thing I take a huge issue with in regards to religion. I do not belive in god and yet I still have a sense of right and wrong. You can make the claim that god taught my parents and they taught me therefore my morals are still a product of gods will. Sure.
Here is my thinking. A child does not need god to learn morals. a child needs a society with rules to learn morals. I believe with every fiber of my being that if the idea of God had never been invented a given civilization would still have a sense of right and wrong. It would probably be wrong to murder people for no reason. it would probably be wrong to steal. the very basics of human morality are not based in religion, religion is based in the very basics of human morality.
okay...
no it does not. It leads to a human morality that some people attribute to a god or multiple gods. Can humans not have a sense of independent justice without a diety? Of course they can. If you raised a child without any concept of god and when they were old enough to have a sense of ownership over a thing, say a toy, and you one day walked up and smashed that toy in front of them would the child not feel bad? Maybe you would feel bad for making the child feel bad. Maybe you'd decide to make a rule where you don't smash other peoples stuff. Or maybe that child will grow up and make the rule themselves. You do not need a god to tell you that a thing is good or bad.
This is a false dichotomy youve presented me. God or Nihilism are not the only options and this is why I take issue with statements like "you need jesus."
you might need jesus, personally. And thats fine. Other people can find purpose and morals in their own spirit and do not need a prophet to show them a path. If you need that guidance thats fine, I applaud you for finding a road that will most likely benefit you, your family, and your community instead of just falling into despair and nihilism.
But please do not tell your children or other people who ask that Nihilism or Jesus are their only options.
I am not a nihilist and I don't believe in god. I believe in the nature of people to work together and understand the needs of their peers.
[–] salttypa ago
But the key belief of the christian faith is that Jesus is the only salvation. To claim that religion is useful but you can't say that it's the only answer is basically telling people it's ok to be religious as long as you don't take your religious beliefs seriously. You are asking people to be inconsistent.
This is missing the point a bit, no one is disputing whether people have a 'sense' of right of wrong, the question is how can right and wrong be justified without the presence of a superior being, or in other words, a god. How do you know what is right and what is wrong? Ok society tells you, fine. However how do you account for the fact that different societies have different conceptions of right and wrong? Whites are currently being ethnically cleansed in south africa, yet you cannot claim that this is wrong, as this is what the society tells blacks is ok. This example highlights the fact that if you leave right and wrong in the hands of man, i.e. society, people are going to have wildly differing conceptions of right and wrong, and no one will be able to justify their version of "right" over another's. This is why any world view without god leads to fragmentation, isolation, and eventually nihilism.
Not a false dichotomy, I admit it was somewhat incomplete however. God or Nihilism are not the only options, rather "God or Nihilism are the only logically coherent options" would be better. There are other options sure, but these options just aren't thought through completely.
And I won't be engaging my own children in a philosophy debate, they will be raised christian, which I thought would've been obvious at this point.