18 Jan 17
Originally posted by chaney3http://humanevents.com/2014/12/02/you-can-kill-but-not-murder-the-case-for-the-ten-commandments/
The 10 Commandments suggest you should not kill.
Yet, in this thread you have said you would kill, in self defense. A court of law may find you not guilty, but what about God?
You have already dismissed this 'absolute'.
Even though you have a 'law giver', you will still disobey?
I think you will find it is actually 'murder' and not 'kill'.
18 Jan 17
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkDo you not realize that Hitler could have used this logic to be perfectly okay with the 'final solution'?
http://humanevents.com/2014/12/02/you-can-kill-but-not-murder-the-case-for-the-ten-commandments/
I think you will find it is actually 'murder' and not 'kill'.
And you, will condemn gay people and rapists, but defend your right to 'kill' if justified.
It all comes down to personal interpretation in the end, and not the 'law giver'.
18 Jan 17
Originally posted by FMFSounds like that to you because you've made an art of ignoring the elephant in the room.
This doesn't make sense, josephw. It sounds like something you've just blurted out rather than a genuine attempt to engage someone whose beliefs are different from yours.
Your belief system of morality is self generated based on your own perceptions, experiences and man's knowledge void of any so-called supernatural phenomena, as you put it, and you'll fill the pages of these forums with your tripe about your opinions derailing anything said that contradicts them.
God ordained the moral law, not man. You invalidate and ignor that at every turn. It's an obstacle that you can't face since your rejection of God's Truth so long ago.
A reprobate mind is hard to penetrate. If not impossible.
18 Jan 17
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI didn't dodge the question. I answered it point blank and I offered you an explanation too. If you don't understand this, then maybe it is merely an upshot of you not agreeing with the stance I take.
I asked you a yes/no question. So is your answer no?
18 Jan 17
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkYou once claimed that 'someone getting angry with their brother' was equally as evil as someone murdering 6,000,000 Jews. Is the "the act" of homosexuality, in your view, equally as evil as murdering 6,000,000 Jews?
I believe the act is evil as in sinful.
18 Jan 17
Originally posted by chaney3Do you not believe in moral absolutes? Do you think rape can be justified?
Do you not realize that Hitler could have used this logic to be perfectly okay with the 'final solution'?
And you, will condemn gay people and rapists, but defend your right to 'kill' if justified.
It all comes down to personal interpretation in the end, and not the 'law giver'.
18 Jan 17
Originally posted by FMFI think all sin results in separation from God, I don't know whether one sin is worse than another but I could be wrong.
You once claimed that 'someone getting angry with their brother' was equally as evil as someone murdering 6,000,000 Jews. Is the "the act" of homosexuality, in your view, equally as evil as murdering 6,000,000 Jews?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28791
18 Jan 17
1 edit
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkSigh.
So you don't believe it is always wrong to rape someone?
In the society I grew up in, it is always wrong to rape somebody, and i of course believe that personally. There may however develop somewhere a society that views things differently.- Generally speaking, most societies tend to converge on the really basic stuff, murder and stealing is wrong etc, but this may not always be the case.
For want of a better example, eating dog meat is not morally acceptable in most societies, but one couldn't say it was a moral absolute as there exist a few countries where eating dog meat is perfectly acceptable.
And just so we don't go round in circles; I 'don't believe' in a moral law giver, I believe man develops his own system of right and wrong and that this may indeed vary from society to society. (And I'm fine with that) and indeed may change over time within one society. - I would even link morality to the evolution of our species and how cooperation was mutually beneficial to our survival.
Edit - And please don't bump me when i'm not even logged in to the site.
18 Jan 17
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeFirstly if another society views things differently would you say they are wrong? And if society determines what is right and wrong, then are the morals derived from society obligatory to all members of society?
Sigh.
In the society I grew up in, it is always wrong to rape somebody, and i of course believe that personally. There may however develop somewhere a society that views things differently.- Generally speaking, most societies tend to converge on the really basic stuff, murder and stealing is wrong etc, but this may not always be the case.
For w ...[text shortened]... ial to our survival.
Edit - And please don't bump me when i'm not even logged in to the site.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28791
18 Jan 17
Originally posted by josephwHumans are not moral islands Joe. We don't generate individual morality out of thin air. Morality is the outcome of society, upbringing, education etc.- Moral law is not ordained, it is socially and culturally developed.
Sounds like that to you because you've made an art of ignoring the elephant in the room.
[b]Your belief system of morality is self generated based on your own perceptions, experiences and man's knowledge void of any so-called supernatural phenomena, as you put it, and you'll fill the pages of these forums with your tripe ab ...[text shortened]... jection of God's Truth so long ago.
A reprobate mind is hard to penetrate. If not impossible.[/b]
The real elephant in the room is the belief that man would have no morality if God is taken out of the equation. (A belief I find degrades the moral development of man).