(September 7, 2013 at 4:35 am)Christian Wrote: The difference is that the origin of human morality is the Holy Bible, from where, different groups took their own version of morality and branded it as their own.

Bullshit. Human morality existed long before your Wholly Babble did.

(September 7, 2013 at 4:35 am)Christian Wrote: The difference is that the origin of human morality is the Holy Bible, from where, different groups took their own version of morality and branded it as their own.

How do you come up with this shit?

(September 7, 2013 at 1:27 am)genkaus Wrote:

(September 6, 2013 at 6:38 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I think the morality of a person is based on the emotional motivation associated with their convictions. I don't think there's much about atheism that induces especially strong emotional motivations, but it's obvious that religion is capable of doing that. So I'd say the most moral people in existence are likely so because of their religious ideas.

However, I think on average, atheists have one less layer of justification to skew in their favor when they are going to do something that's obviously wrong. So I wouldn't give the point to religion overall-- only to those rare specimens.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that superiority of morality is determined by the strength of emotional motivations related to one's convictions or is it determined by the validity of those conviction? Ot are you saying something else altogether.

Purely by the emotivel strength, not at all by the validity. If I really thought the Flying Spaghetti Monster was going to reward me with an eternal buffet, that (almost for sure totally false) idea could lead to actual moral behavior.

That's not a claim that religious people overall are more moral; it just seems to me that some kind of symbology that you can visualize, combined with social conscience feelings like guilt, is more likely to inspire action than a less visualizable but maybe more truthful perspective.

I'd also say that I think for the same reasons that religious people are more likely to be mass murderers-- they have a confused sense of morality and a strong emotive impulse.

(September 7, 2013 at 6:14 am)bennyboy Wrote: Purely by the emotivel strength, not at all by the validity. If I really thought the Flying Spaghetti Monster was going to reward me with an eternal buffet, that (almost for sure totally false) idea could lead to actual moral behavior.

That's not a claim that religious people overall are more moral; it just seems to me that some kind of symbology that you can visualize, combined with social conscience feelings like guilt, is more likely to inspire action than a less visualizable but maybe more truthful perspective.

I'd also say that I think for the same reasons that religious people are more likely to be mass murderers-- they have a confused sense of morality and a strong emotive impulse.

Still not fully getting your view on the issue. Are you saying that one criteria for superiority of a morality is how strong of an emotive impulse it can generate? With, ofcourse, the added qualification that not all strong emotive impulses are necessarily from morality - as is the case with many religious people?

No religious standard trumps my non-titled morality!

(September 7, 2013 at 4:35 am)Christian Wrote: The difference is that the origin of human morality is the Holy Bible, from where, different groups took their own version of morality and branded it as their own.

One question...in what magical universe did this take place?

(September 7, 2013 at 4:35 am)Christian Wrote: The difference is that the origin of human morality is the Holy Bible, from where, different groups took their own version of morality and branded it as their own.

You know humans existed before the Bible was written, right?

(September 7, 2013 at 12:17 pm)CleanShavenJesus Wrote:

(September 7, 2013 at 4:35 am)Christian Wrote: The difference is that the origin of human morality is the Holy Bible, from where, different groups took their own version of morality and branded it as their own.

You know humans existed before the Bible was written, right?

Has he taken a page from the Book of Ronedee?

(September 7, 2013 at 4:35 am)Christian Wrote: The difference is that the origin of human morality is the Holy Bible, from where, different groups took their own version of morality and branded it as their own.

Basically everything about your bare assertion is wrong.

Christian morality is not based on a system or set of rules. Instead it is based on loyalty to and trust in the person of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.