RE: pop morality
March 6, 2016 at 1:49 am
(This post was last modified: March 6, 2016 at 1:51 am by TheRocketSurgeon.)
(March 5, 2016 at 11:00 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: Yet it is still, by definition, pop morality. The idea of salvation is a very binary moral idea. It doesn't divide the good and the bad. I know that it doesn't mean saved people are necessarily good and that the unsaved are necessarily bad. However, there is a right and wrong, good and bad element in choosing salvation. To refuse salvation is considered a moral failing, a desire not to be more godly (which is a state equivocal with 'good').
Depends on which god. From what I've read of YHWH, the less I can be like that guy, the more moral I'd consider myself.
The guy in the movies who's a big, powerful Alpha Male that runs everything and everyone he can intimidate/control into submission, and who tells subordinates to kill their children to prove they will obey... is usually the BadGuy.
(ETA: In case it's not obvious, I'm referring to the Abraham and Isaac story in Genesis 22. The vicarious salvation of the boy via the ram is just as creepy.)
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.