Christianity and morals

[Silver]

Yes they would live their lives like there was no justice. That would be secular morality.

There is such a thing as secular justice, but it is not perfect. Just because sometimes bad people elude the justice system does not mean that a sky daddy is there to ensure those bad people suffer after death.

[fr0d0]

Yes that would be a non sequitur. And justification for a lower moral standard. Belief being an option, higher moral standards are also.

[Silver]

Yes that would be a non sequitur. And justification for a lower moral standard. Belief being an option, higher moral standards are also.

You obviously have no comprehension of fallacies. Considering that the most atrocious acts perpetrated by humanity are from those who claim belief in a deity, that is about as low as one can fall in justifying a moral standard. Non-believers are law abiding citizens, statistically more so than believers, because we believe in being good for the sake of being good rather than having to be informed that we must be good in order to be rewarded after death.

[John V]

Non-believers are law abiding citizens, statistically more so than believers, because we believe in being good for the sake of being good rather than having to be informed that we must be good in order to be rewarded after death.

Correlation 'n causation 'nat.

[Mister Agenda]

Consider this a side question, then: Your point seemed to be that Christians don't keep slaves because they're instructed to obey the law, and now slavery is against the law.

No, that wasn't my point.

Therefore it is consistent for Christians not to keep slaves.

This was my point. Note that the instruction to obey secular law was only my second point. My first was simply that, while the Bible allowed owning of slaves, it did not mandate owning of slaves. That alone refuted the charge. I could have stopped there. The point on obeying secular law was given as additional information. It was unnecessary for my argument.

The implication is that if it weren't against the law, maybe some Christians would keep slaves with the idea that it's biblically okay.

If it weren't against the law, people of many types would keep slaves, as secular society would be saying it's OK. Some Christians probably would. Some atheists probably would.

Thanks for clarifying, and I agree that slaveholding certainly wasn't a requirement.

---

Yes they would live their lives like there was no justice. That would be secular morality.

You mean like Denmark or Sweden?

[fr0d0]

You obviously have no comprehension of fallacies. Considering that the most atrocious acts perpetrated by humanity are from those who claim belief in a deity, that is about as low as one can fall in justifying a moral standard. Non-believers are law abiding citizens, statistically more so than believers, because we believe in being good for the sake of being good rather than having to be informed that we must be good in order to be rewarded after death.

So to you then, people who say they are acting on behalf of Christ, yet clearly act counter to Christs example, makes them actually the opposite?

This is more than fallacy. It's plain illogic.

[Silver]

So to you then, people who say they are acting on behalf of Christ, yet clearly act counter to Christs example, makes them actually the opposite?

I am not claiming that religious belief is logical. Religious people acting on their beliefs tend to behave very unreasonably.

[pocaracas]

Yes that would be a non sequitur. And justification for a lower moral standard. Belief being an option, higher moral standards are also.

I'll say... If there's a chance these people would start running amok, going against the civil law, then... let them believe all their mumbo-jumbo. At least, they have their [imaginary] babysitter keeping them in their best behavior.

[fr0d0]

You mean like Denmark or Sweden?

I don't think you can legislate morality. What underlies the Scandinavian psyche that would make them more moralistic, and, incapable of improved morality given the logic already presented?

---

So to you then, people who say they are acting on behalf of Christ, yet clearly act counter to Christs example, makes them actually the opposite?

I am not claiming that religious belief is logical. Religious people acting on their beliefs tend to behave very unreasonably.

People under any banner/ideology/ power act as the mob dictates. You're failing to grasp the difference between people who say they're Christians and Christ like acts.

I am a Christian. Everything I do isn't Christian. My aim would to be a good Christian, but mostly I fail at that. Is Christ to blame? No, I am.

---

I'll say... If there's a chance these people would start running amok, going against the civil law, then... let them believe all their mumbo-jumbo. At least, they have their [imaginary] babysitter keeping them in their best behavior.

It's funny how you Catholics see things ;)

[Tonus]

We live in a what again?

Fallen world.

Do you think it will ever get up again, or...