What do you believe and why do you believe it?
- Thread starter Spectrox
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Christianity did not invent good morality or the Golden Rule. Christianity is a Hellenic-Jewish hydrid religion.
It could be argued that basic assumptions around situational ethics are arbitrary. E.g the assumptions that life is preferable to death, pleasure is preferable to pain, health is preferable to disease, freedom is preferable to incarceration, etc. Once we have agreed on those bedrock assumptions, then we can begin to make a scientific assessment of what constitutes mental and physical wellbeing. The secular social sciences have been doing this for years and very often getting good results with proper safeguards. There is an objective optimum wellbeing that can be measured.
When a teenager that we care for does something outrageous, do Christians consult Leviticus about stoning them to death or consult the New Testament about not casting the first stone? Or do they talk to them appropriately, using secular morality, and try to get them to modify their behaviour through reasoned argument and a positive, caring intention and by appealing to their better nature? They usually do the latter because it comes from an understanding about what it is to live in a co-operative society.
I think you are being wilfully ignorant here. In theory, professional social scientists could ask the people in their care to rate their happiness and health on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being miserable and sad, 10 being extremely healthy and happy). If they get lots of low scores that indicates they are miserable and sad and this violates the Wellbeing Standard of maximum wellbeing. So then we would need to decide how to massively increase those scores to make the people feel better. Did Slave Masters from Biblical times ask their slaves about their wellbeing when they were beating them? Perhaps they should have done.
Not so. There is an objective truth to be discovered about wellbeing. Instinctively, most of us know this. Good parents know this and try to pass it on their children. What kind of society do you want to live in?
Reality is the way the Universe works – best understood by a scientific method.
Truth is reality accurately described using language.
How do you even begin to demonstrate that assertion?
It could be argued that basic assumptions around situational ethics are arbitrary. E.g the assumptions that life is preferable to death, pleasure is preferable to pain, health is preferable to disease, freedom is preferable to incarceration, etc. Once we have agreed on those bedrock assumptions, then we can begin to make a scientific assessment of what constitutes mental and physical wellbeing. The secular social sciences have been doing this for years and very often getting good results with proper safeguards. There is an objective optimum wellbeing that can be measured.
When a teenager that we care for does something outrageous, do Christians consult Leviticus about stoning them to death or consult the New Testament about not casting the first stone? Or do they talk to them appropriately, using secular morality, and try to get them to modify their behaviour through reasoned argument and a positive, caring intention and by appealing to their better nature? They usually do the latter because it comes from an understanding about what it is to live in a co-operative society.
I think you are being wilfully ignorant here. In theory, professional social scientists could ask the people in their care to rate their happiness and health on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being miserable and sad, 10 being extremely healthy and happy). If they get lots of low scores that indicates they are miserable and sad and this violates the Wellbeing Standard of maximum wellbeing. So then we would need to decide how to massively increase those scores to make the people feel better. Did Slave Masters from Biblical times ask their slaves about their wellbeing when they were beating them? Perhaps they should have done.
Not so. There is an objective truth to be discovered about wellbeing. Instinctively, most of us know this. Good parents know this and try to pass it on their children. What kind of society do you want to live in?
Reality is the way the Universe works – best understood by a scientific method.
Truth is reality accurately described using language.
How do you even begin to demonstrate that assertion?
Science does not conclusively prove anything. It does not make absolute truth pronouncements. Although it does demand a peer-reviewed response with evidence if you want to challenge an accepted Theory. So if you think science is all wrong, then you would need to produce your evidence and put it up for scrutiny in the academic arena. Would you be willing to do that?
You have several premises wrong here.
First, joy is NOT the same thing as happiness. What you describe is happiness by the very fact that it comes and goes. It is fleeting and momentary. JOY, is a permanent underlying wellness, that never leaves a Christian. Yes, Christians can be saddened, and even depressed, because we still inhabit a dead, and decaying body, in a dead and decaying world, but through the knowledge of the Lord, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, OUR spirits have a constant joy in anticipation of our resurrected King and new, sin free bodies.
Secondly, God did not create, nor endorse slavery. The Biblical "slavery" that God endures is far different than the type of slavery we think of today. It is far closer to call it indentured servitude, which in that economy benefited the servant, in a similar way that an employee benefits from an employer today.
God's greatest work is the redemption of mankind from his fall. That is why servitude, even forced servitude, and other human activities YOU deem immoral, can be used to bring others to Christ. Leading people to Him is THE Single, MOST IMPORTANT act a human being can do.
It's what EVERYONE here has been attempting to do with you.
WE, deem your blasphemy immoral, yet we endure it in the hopes that you too will be born again from above.
-
1
- Show all
I have answered this question more times than I care to remember, but I'll do it one more time so you get it. On a Wellbeing scale of 0 to 10 (with zero as maximum harm and 10 as optimum wellbeing), the thousands of people who died instantly would score zero (i.e. maximum harm). The thousands unlucky enough to survive with radiation sickness would also score extremely low values and if you were alive at that time you could have asked them. Your foundation is more arbitrary and more convoluted than that. You would have to be able to justify why your God supported genocide AND slavery in the Old Testament. Are you willing to defend the indefensible?
I just looked it up and you are mostly right. I apologise. Torquemada had 2000 people killed (non-catholic or suspected fake converts and lots of women) in the most appalling manner imaginable and he expelled 40,000 jews from the country. But this does raise the question, which I put earlier. Are Catholics not Christians? How unclear does God's message have to be for people who believe in the same God to kill each other?
The latest scientific evidence does suggest a Universal expansion event around 13.8 billion years ago.
String Theory - This lies way outside my area of expertise. But you could be right?
Love for another human is wanting the best for them, emotionally and physically. It is the desire to be with them. It is also the feeling of sadness at the thought of them not being here any more.
Genocide is not love. Slavery is not love. Banishment to eternal Hell is not love.
String Theory - This lies way outside my area of expertise. But you could be right?
Love for another human is wanting the best for them, emotionally and physically. It is the desire to be with them. It is also the feeling of sadness at the thought of them not being here any more.
Genocide is not love. Slavery is not love. Banishment to eternal Hell is not love.
I think you've hit the nail on the head about Christian motivation. We are mortal and it sucks. I am opposed to death and disease. I think they are horrible. It is our moral duty to extend the quantity of life and improve the quality of life for everyone. We can't individually do it on our own but we can all make a small contribution. Be a good parent. Wake up to what is going on politically.
The point of living is what you make of what you've got. To live in the now moment and try to appreciate life in all it's wonder and majesty. There may be an afterlife but I do not see how the type of afterlife is determined by whether or not I believe in a very old book of myths and folk tales.
The point of living is what you make of what you've got. To live in the now moment and try to appreciate life in all it's wonder and majesty. There may be an afterlife but I do not see how the type of afterlife is determined by whether or not I believe in a very old book of myths and folk tales.
-
1
- Show all