If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
It also calls for respecting people,to fight against our material desires, to have a moral sense of principles in our dealings with people, stand by the weak, support the oppressed, to give charity and to have sympathy with people.
Not true, well, I dont agree.
The problem is that they have formed a God exactly like how they want it/him to be. Usually using "God" as their ammunition, to shoot everybody who disagrees down, in the name of ambition, which they claim that they get from the same God.
And usually not taking any consequences, and just blaiming it all on their God.
If any question has to be considered, it has to be
considered peacefully and democratically in the way
taught by the Buddha.
-- Nehru
The Buddha is not a property of Buddhists only. He is
the property of whole mankind. His teaching is common to
everybody. Every religion, which came into existence
after the Buddha, has borrowed many good ideas from the
Buddha.
-- A Muslim Scholar
The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion.
It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and
theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual,
it should be based on a religious sense arising from the
experience of all . things, natural and spiritual, as a
meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description.
-- Albert Einstein
It doesn't mean much to me because most Buddhist teachings are inherent human ideals...like you say, there's no need to have a religion to tell us what we already think.
I've seen this said time and time again. But the only results I've ever seen of a widespread, deliberate attempt to separate morals from God (in other words, implement atheism on a national scale) are Nazi Germany, the USSR, and China. So please, do show me how this works. I think it no coincidence that the most prosperous, most free countries in the world started with a Christian heritage.
See, it can't be done. Because what YOU say is your moral code is not necessarily what someone else will say. People have to be held to a higher standard than themselves. Take rape for example. I would assume that you believe rape is wrong. But what if the next person doesn't? Who are you - a mere person, just like them, with no concept of anything greater than yourself, to tell them what is right and wrong? You have made yourself the arbiter of right and wrong - you've created your own moral code. How can you say yours is any better than the next? You can't, since you've left yourself - a fallible human - as God. You decide what is right and wrong for yourself. You can't bring concepts of evil and sin into this, since you believe in atheism. It's very hard to bring even the concept of human dignity into your argument, since you believe that all life here is nothing but random chance. You might say since social consensus says rape is wrong, it is. But if social consenus were to change tomorrow, would rape suddenly become right? I'll leave you with this quote from Dostoevsky:
"If God does not exist, then everything is permissible."
Where then did the moral teachings of the bible come from, they were invented by humans, where did they get their morals, from themselves or from God? At some point there were no religions and morals have evolved from that point so where did the first person to act morally get his ideas?
So Christianity = prosperity, what about Japan? China was the most advanced nation in the world until a few centuries ago, don't talk bollocks.....
As for your assertion that morality must come from a higher source how is it then that Christian dogma has changed since the time of Christ, the way you live your lifeand your moral code is different to that of a mediaeval christian, how has that changed.....through human society.......
Fine then, but keep atheism to yourself, we don't want to become an entire nation of atheists! Of course, now you'll say that you shouldn't be silenced. And you would be right. So the only option left is to attack your beliefs. As for you knowing what's right and wrong, that's ultimately what atheism comes down to isn't it, you set yourself up as God.
I'd say that according to Christian theology, that is terribly wrong. The moral teachings in the Bible were not created by humans, they were handed down by God.
Where did the first person to act morally get his ideas? From the ultimate source of morality, God. Of course, not believing in God, you won't believe that either.
Bad example - Japan was reformed by America, a predominantly Christian nation, after WWII. Although Japan isn't a Christian nation today, it has benefitted from the ideas of the Christian nation that helped to rebuild it.
Most advanced? Scientifically, perhaps.
Was it almost one of the most free? Most democratic? Devoted to the idea of "all men are created equal"? These are all concepts that arose out of Christian ideas, esp. after the Reformation.
society does have an accepted code of morals as enshrined in the law, what about other religions? If they have different morals to you but they are handed down from their God who is right, because of this conflict atheism is the only way to establish a set of laws by which people live their lives.....
no I don't and I suppose its impossible to argue that point if you do believe it......
No, Japan was already one of the most prosperous nations in the world prior to WW2
an idea deriving from the ancient Greeks and first put into practise by the French revolution?
I doubt it very much, I believe that societies morals are bets shown in the codes of law and those laws are now very different to that of any other era. I would hazard to suggest that a "true" christian from several centuries ago would be disgusted by the behaviour of most of todays so called "christians"......
I think this statement is a little too generalized. When I think of the U.S. for instance, I feel it was more free before Europeans came along and tried to enslave the natives, enslaved Africans, and burned heretics. It seems to me the most prosperous and free countries are the ones that allow freedom of religion. I feel politics has played a larger part on freedom than Christianity.
I don't need to. I'm not trying to please everyone else. The only reason I follow laws I don't believe in is so I don't get punished. How can one leave themself as God if you don't believe in God. I'm just living as an individual who can decide ultimatlly what I percieve as right and wrong. I'm actually agnostic, but believe in Karma. For every action there is a reaction and therefore through my own actions I determine my own fate. People have the ability to formulate a pretty good idea of what's right and wrong it whether or not they choose to follow it.
What's so weird about it? I've already told you what happens to entirely atheistic nations: they become capable of the worst atrocities known to man. I think I can safely say that the number of killings committed in the name of religion pales in comparison to the number of killings committed in the name of atheism.
No, because of this conflict, you should change the other person's point of view. As you try to do with atheism. Atheism is just as much of a religion as any other.
Atheism as a framework to develop laws doesn't work. See above.
In Western countries at least, law was conceived from Christian doctrine.
Societies are founded on religions. I can't think of any (save for USSR and Nazi Germany) that haven't been. But this guy does a much better job of expounding on that fact than I can:
http://www.townhall.com/hall_of_fame/kirk/kirk404.html
Again - was Japan one of the most free? What I said originally was that the most propserous, free nations in the world have a Christian heritage.
An idea deriving from God, not from the ancient Greeks. The Greeks may have been fortunate enough to learn of it through God's grace (in fact, Augustine finds that the Platonists had some ideas about God that are quite similar to the Christian concept). But this idea ultimately comes from God, and has been best implemented in those countries which have a history of Christianity.
Bah!! The French? Pardon me, but the exact quote is found in the US Declaration of Independence was written in 1776. And do keep in mind that France's Revolution was followed by mass killing - I don't think they had such a good handle on it as you'd like to think.
So name me some examples then. You think a medieval Christian would be at odds with the concept of "hate the sin, love the sinner" ? And above all, "love God with all your heart, soul, and mind" ?
You have yet to provide me with an atheistic moral code. I'd like to see it.
It seems to me that the countries which first codified this "freedom of religion" are the ones with Christian backgrounds. What came first - Christianity, or the US Constitution?
ahhhh, the conversion ethic, I assume you think all other religions are false then?
I think you will be hard pressed to find any athheists that actively attempt to convert them to their way, atheism is not a religion but it could be described as a system of belief but only the way that it rejects other systems of belief.....
I would say that most of the MPS in parliament are not actively religious so are their laws worthless?
that is from that website, the guys a loony, tell me jonno what are your views on homosexuality, or single parents or contaception or abortion or Jews or Muslims.....?
So you have given up on the Christ=prosperity argument have you? Tell me if Christianity results in freedom why for the most of christian history have people lived under tyrannical authoritarian monarchies?
Clearly I can't disprove your ideas on the existence of God so I can't argue that point suffice to see you demean your arguments if you will resort to such a lame argument.....
I think for example that a medieaval christian would unquestioningly support the death penalty, would you?
You can't "see" it but I assure you I live my life by one.....
So are you saying freedom of religion was ultimately derived from Christianity?
So the first country to guarantee freedom of religion was Christian. Other countries copied us. So what?
There've been many horribly intolerant Christian countries too.
You can't prove that Christianity created the basis for freedom of religion.
In other words:
"Without God, everything becomes permissible."
To a point, I will concede that other religions have found a glimpse of the truth. I think the truth is best found in Christianity. But the point is moot - you believe in atheism - your religion - and all others are false.
What are you talking about? What are you trying to do now, if not convert me from my point of view to your own?? Atheism IS a religion - or can you tell me exactly what happens after death, with absolute proof? No, you take that on faith, just as I do.
Not at all. But, many of the laws that have been enacted (laws on abortion for example) are not just worthless, they are wrong. Plain and simple.
So the man is a loony because he has concepts different from your own? Such tolerance and diversity in your moral framework.
Homosexuality? Wrong. Wouldn't outlaw it, but it is still wrong.
Contraception? Nothing wrong with that...
I'm not a Catholic.
Jews and Muslims? I think they're both wrong. But so do you.
??? Not sure what you're talking about.
What I said was that the most prosperous and FREE (can I not emphasize that point enough for you????)
Your presupposition is that God doesn't exist, so of course it's a "lame argument". On ther other hand, your arguments are equally lame to me because of my presupposition that God does exist.
I don't think that a medieval Christian would necessarily support the death penalty actually. It's a grey area, and while I personally support the death penalty, its not a major issue to me if others don't. I don't think a country has to have a law allowing it, although I support it.
Come on. This is a lame argument if there ever was one. You are the one saying that atheism is the truth and that life should be lived in this way. You should be able to tell me how.
I think it did, and that a true understanding of Christianity (in my mind, the Protestant viewpoint) sets the basis
for this freedom. I guess I can't prove this beyond a doubt, but I think its more than coincidence.
Forgiveness doesn't exclude the Christian concept of justice. A person sentenced to death has committed the ultimate crime. This is not to say we shouldn't forgive him. But we also have a duty to see justice done. Your conception of forgiveness would let anyone off for any crime - "Forget about it, we'll forgive you and you won't suffer any consequences as the result of your actions."
Why is homosexuality wrong?
And stop putting words in my mouth I do not think Jews or Muslims are wrong I can see faults in Judaism and Islam but not the indivduals themselves....
Morality can exist outside of Christianity. I don't like the implication that somehow if you aren't Christian you have no morals.
Are you inactions innately immoral? Sorry, don't see what you're trying to get at.
Now let's get to the real main point. You keep saying you live within your own moral framework. Let's see just what kind of moral framework atheism provides. Remember that this should be universally applicable, and should have some reason behind its thinking, because your viewpoint is right and you want others to adopt it - otherwise you wouldn't be defending it, correct?
You don't think they're wrong? But they believe in God and many other concepts that you regard as false. So how can you say you don't think they're wrong? Are you saying you believe in Yaweh or Allah but not Jesus, and at the same time, you believe in no gods at all (other than yourself) because you are an atheist?
Sorry, no such implication was intended. I agree - you do not have to be a Christian to live a moral life. However, Christianity is the best way to live a life in accordance with true morality. This is why I regard atheism as more dangerous than other religious beliefs. Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc, all have a moral framework upon which their beliefs are based - they submit to something higher than themselves. Atheists do not. Atheists regard themselves as the arbiters of right and wrong - the individual, in effect, becomes God. So if everyone was to become an atheist tommorrow, we would have some 6 billion gods, each with their own version of right and wrong. And who would you be to challenge another's conception of morality?
If what you're saying about Buddhism is true, then it appears that Buddhism makes no real effort to understand the deeper questions in life - who we are, where are we going, why are we here - as such, it completely fails as a religious/philosophical position for me.
Religion and philosophy are not supposed to take the stance of focusing exclusively on the present. That's what everyday living is for. As for your last comment, it could be said that men are blind in spite of all the evidence for God being around them - our very existence is the proof you're looking for.