I'm saying that we both think we're inadequate BW. Only Christianity overcomes that. Humanism lives with it.

If you think it's a hopeless persuit then that's consistent with humanism.

My motive for acting morally is that everything is awesome™. You act morally out of fear of the law.

I act in accordance with what I deem to be moral for more reasons than just the law. Since we are social creatures, I also think it's a good idea to be honest with the people you interact with on a day-to-day basis, for the rewards are tangible. I do things because I believe my actions influence society and cause positive change; I don't do it for intangible rewards that benefit an invisible god. That's a big reason I'll never be socially a republican.

Like many humanists, I work with others to overcome inadequacies through our own merits, and not by a long-dead "savior". As far as reality is concerned, this is by far superior to your system, Frodo.

Fine Christian principles spoilt by bias BW.

(June 24, 2014 at 7:00 am)fr0d0 Wrote: That's what I defined as a humanist view. I think it's clearly inferior to the Christian view. I don't think it's healthy to feel constantly inadequate. That sounds like you would think justified confidence is a bad thing. So I can't agree.

I see it as the reverse: the Christian believes that humanity has lost something that only god can return to us; without him we cannot achieve our potential and will always fall short of it. The only thing worth striving for is to serve god so that when he returns that gift to humanity, we are there to receive it. In other words, you cannot help but to feel inadequate. We have had Christians come here and tell us that they consider humanity to be fallen, sinful, wretched people who are unworthy to be saved and only have hope because god is merciful.

The humanist believes that full human potential is within our reach and that we do not need to wait on god to reach it, we can reach it ourselves by learning and experimenting. Before Roger Bannister ran a four-minute mile, the feat was considered impossible; anyone who had tried had failed. Within a few years after he did it, dozens of people also did it. The current record is almost 17 seconds lower! In other words, justified confidence is not only not a bad thing, it is one of the mechanisms by which we progress.

The Christian believes that we will never reach our potential on our own and that the longer we exist in this state, the farther we get from it. The humanist understands that we are barely even realizing just how much potential we have, and that we are getting better and better. IMO, only the latter has the motivation to continue to push towards the limits of human potential.

(June 24, 2014 at 8:22 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Fine Christian principles spoilt by bias BW.

Christianity by no means has the monopoly on morality. If you like what I said about my reasons for being moral, then just say that instead of accusing me of ripping off your religion (which I didn't, btw). Perhaps there's more to life than walking the thin line your god has set before you. I can tell you that man definitely has the potential to be more moral than Yahweh or Jesus.

Christianity thinks we have the potential and offers a way to achieve it. Humanism stops at the inadequacies. It accepts what we are and tries to work with that. Best of a bad job.

---

(June 24, 2014 at 8:41 am)Bad Writer Wrote:

(June 24, 2014 at 8:22 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Fine Christian principles spoilt by bias BW.

Christianity by no means has the monopoly on morality. If you like what I said about my reasons for being moral, then just say that instead of accusing me of ripping off your religion (which I didn't, btw). Perhaps there's more to life than walking the thin line your god has set before you. I can tell you that man definitely has the potential to be more moral than Yahweh or Jesus.

You don't have to be ripping it off if you want the same thing. Again with the bias.

(June 24, 2014 at 7:15 am)fr0d0 Wrote:

(June 24, 2014 at 7:10 am)Hoopington Wrote: But you do consider yourself a Christian?

There's no but about it. I am a Christian and I don't agree with the translation there.

I'm interested how you can claim to be a Christian, but so readily dismiss the teachings of Christ?

When did you stop beating your wife?

(June 24, 2014 at 8:58 am)fr0d0 Wrote: When did you stop beating your wife?

I am not married and don't hit women.

Now, how you can you claim to be a Christian, but at the same time be so arrogant as to dismiss the teachings of Christ?

(June 24, 2014 at 8:50 am)Hoopington Wrote:

(June 24, 2014 at 7:15 am)fr0d0 Wrote: There's no but about it. I am a Christian and I don't agree with the translation there.

I'm interested how you can claim to be a Christian, but so readily dismiss the teachings of Christ?

He's a Christian of convenience. Try walking the path of an atheist someday, Frodo. It's no cakewalk, but at least it's the most honest position a person can take.