New religion

[DeistPaladin]

What I mean with objective measure of morality is some standard independent of our subjective judgement of issues.

This definition does not conform to the dictionary definition of "objective", which is a measure independent of ANY subjective judgment. This is why GodWillsIt is not, by definition, objective. No matter how powerful, wise or benevolent the being in question may be, if that being exorcises judgment to make rules, it is a subjective set of rules, based on that being's perspective.

Using your definition, I could just as easily say that North Koreans have an objective standard of morality based on the whims of their "Dear Leader", whom they regard as a god. Followers of other religions could make similar claims. The followers of Bin Laden thought it was morally correct to kill "infidels" because they thought it was the "Will of Allah". There are many examples in history of Christians who've committed atrocities and even today there are Christian terrorists (see the Hutaree movement).

Now you may say these were not True Christians and they acted contrary to scripture. The problem is that neither Jesus nor Allah ever come down from Heaven to explain their will. It's always filtered through religious priest-type characters who have their own agenda.

Some of the issues that “modern man” has an issue with is for instance the “husband/wife”relationship. The Bible states that the husband is the head of the wife. Now this does not go down too well with many.

Myself included, not just in my rejection of inequality but also as a matter of personal preference. My wife is a headstrong passionate woman. We fight sometimes but in truth I prefer it this way and I suspect she does as well.

Seeing that the issue of slaves were raised, and a topic of a recent a sermon at our church, the following will be guidelines for employer/employee relationships.

Would I be right in assuming that the passage that speaks of beating your slave to death is OK as long as he doesn't die right away was not mentioned? Exodus 21:21

“How can you judge others by your standards as they are not accepted as "universally applicable” or use your criteria to judge what should generally be accepted as morally right? This is the predicament.

Only in the Christian mind. Much of these "philosophical arguments" of apologetics seem to revolve around finding a problem that doesn't actually exist and then offering "GodDidIt, GodWantsIt, GodWillsIt" as the solution.

Morality is a matter of empathy. We identify with the suffering of others, the very nature of compassion. The "social contract", as summed up by Jesus and others before him, is to do unto others as we would have them do unto us. To do otherwise would be hypocritical. How can you pardon the existence of slavery when you would not be a slave yourself?

It is now accepted that children may be aborted

It is actually not accepted that "children" be aborted, though it was in the OT (Deuteronomy 21:18-21).

What is accepted now is that a 1st trimester fetus may be aborted. Since the brain doesn't form until roughly week 21, a 1st trimester fetus is not another conscious being but a collection of cells.

Late term abortions are not on demand, as conservatives suggest, but only available when the woman's health is at risk. You can't just walk into an abortion clinic after week 21 and say you've changed your mind and want an abortion. Your life must be at risk.

The issue is thus the treatment of people and clear guidelines are given in this respect in the Bible.

The Bible can be used to justify any belief. Jesus is a liberal, a conservative, a capitalist, a socialist, black, white, straight, gay or anything else you want him to be. This is why there are thousands of denominations of Christianity, each one thinking they got it right.

Why is homosexual behaviour accepted as fine? On what basis? If you believe in evolution, it seems to me that nature has worked out a really great method to ensure the survival of the specie- which is jeopardized by homosexual behaviour.

Evolution is about communities, not individuals. Homosexual couples may not reproduce themselves but can be effective godparents to children orphaned in a community. Research has shown that gay couples are every bit as effective at parenting as their heterosexual counterparts and in nature we see same sex animal couples raising orphaned young.

Also, evolution is not about morality, though I do believe that morality is its own reward in the long run.

As for why homosexuality should be accepted but not predatory sexual behaviors like rape or child molestation again comes back to the social contract. Someone who's not gay might still fight for the rights of gays because they would not wish to be abused themselves. This is distinguished from predatory behaviors where there is a victim.

God’s law does not change and does not have to.

One word: Shellfish.

Leviticus 11:10

The issue is Jesus Christ, who was by all accounts having all his faculties, and claiming to be the Son of God and equal to God, laying down his life so you could have eternal life in fulfillment of the prophecy

And this is the biggest problem I have with Christian morality. What are the three classic steps again?

1. Admit you're not perfect
2. Repent what you've done wrong
3. Believe that Yahweh sent his own son who was also himself down to earth to bleed upon a cross as the only means by which he could convince himself to forgive you because human sacrifice makes everything better because... because... well, that part is never explained.

You had me. You had me. You lost me.