pop morality

[Drich]

[quote='Drich' pid='1192767' dateline='1454438721']
Yes

yes

Not good or bad they are neutral, and were or are necessary.

All meaning Any yes, Damnation meaning Hell/eternal seperation/2nd death yes
Yes

More or less, they are also describe as being a debt you accumilate that is yet to be paid.
(as in the wages of sin is Death.)
All pain we identify is not sinful, no. On the other hand God identifies other 'pain' we cause one another and identifies it as sin. like divorce.
Only God is righteous. We seek atonement to cloth ourselves in the righteousness of Christ.

God's law is based on His will, and therefore does not change.
No, All I am saying is morality is a non stable standard and to judge yourself by it or anything else is foolish, because it can be literally made to say anything is right to wrong.
No because they can justify anything they want with it.
No I refer to OT jews following the law. Their are no more OT jews, that means non are exempt. Even modern day Jews do not follow the practices of OT jews, even the most devout.

:thumbsup:

@ Dritch I went to some effort to understand you.  Above is your recognition that I do indeed understand.  I think most of the rest of us do too. We just think you are wrong.

If you do understand my position, it doesn't mean your logic or final conclusion is correct.
Besides if you will note I had to make several key changes to your understanding. (I said NO Several times) Your last post suggests that you did not incorporate those changes into your final conclusion, because as this post seems to suggest you feel that you are 'close enough.'

Your first error is in thinking that there is a god and you personally understand his will.

and this is evidenced by what?? Wishful thinking on your part?
God's will is not a mystery. It is laid out in our very own language word for word. All any need do to know this will is to study and read the bible.

Your second error is in thinking that a being who would create the system you describe is worthy of worship.

and what is this empty assertion based on? Snips and snails and puppy Dog tails? Boy oh boy, someone really thinks highly of her opinion to just put it out there and not back it with anything.. As if her word was enough to just 'wake someone up.'
So Sorry Jen-a, but people who are not related to you don't generally work that way. It would be pretty difficult to get me to just blindly follow your direction on a good day, but here God has directly given me sooo much, their is next to nothing you could do to change my mind on that.

 Your third error is in thinking that the fact moral consensus changes over time makes it valueless.

:Roflol:
Seriously... just for a moment think about what you just said...
" that the fact moral consensus changes over time (doesn't) makes it valueless"

If it had value why would it need to change? What happens to the 'old moral consensus? does it still retain value? So what will happen to the current 'moral consensus' when it changes again will it retain any value, what so ever?

So then what value is their in the current 'moral consensus' outside the fact that it is the current moral consensus?

...And that's what i am talking about when I trivialize 'pop morality.' it only has value to those who currently live by the standard.. What's more (the reason I bring up the Nazis) no culture or society deems themselves evil by their own pop moral standard. Not even the Nazis.

So again, If two completely polar opposite standards stand in complete contradiction to one another, are you saying both retain equal value?

What if right now the Nazi standard was the way of the world outside of history books. could this 'morality' be ever truly deemed just?

My question is then how do we know we are selves haven't already crossed the Nazi line of pop morality?
(Doing truly EVIL things and morally justifying them.)

 Your fourth error is in thinking atheists don't believe in god for the purpose of avoiding god's stricter law. 

This is your 4th error. I don't think atheists even know what I am talking about when I say "we are to live apart from God's law as Christians. If they did they would not accuse me of 'thinking atheist dont believe in God's law to avoid a stricter law.'

(tell me again how you understand my position)

My only concern is that you appear to believe genocide and slavery are necessary or even morally neutral. Other than sociopathic positions like that, I have no interest in god's law absent credible evidence of god. To the extent you and others believe such things, I think your god story is morally abhorrent and a danger to society.

Do you understand my position? Have you tried to understand it?

No. What I have said IS THIS CULTURE HAS ADOPTED SLAVERY AND GENOCIDE, But Relabled it so it seems 'morally just.' Which is extremely dangerous because without being honest with ourselves we put no terms or limits on slavery or our genocidal war.

I am waving the flag, bring attention to how this society is actively participating in no restriction Slavery and is gearing up for a genocidal war, and in your mind I'm the one who endorses it?? What kind of broken mind do you have?
The problem little miss doesn't thinks she wrong, is that without owning your immoral behaivor/Changing your immorality to judtify your actions, you are making it ok to literally do the things you yourself claim is immoral!

How can you not see that?