pop morality

[Drich]

I am showing a direct parallel between pop morality now and the popular morality of Nazi germany. I am simply asking if your only absolute to define what right and wrong is pop culture, then what keeps us/soceity from following the path of the Nazis?

Nothing keeps society from following that path.  If it did, then we wouldn't have had the Nazi's go that path either.  The fact is that all morality is 'pop morality' as you call it. Even the morality that comes from the Bible, and other religious texts. Some people base their morality off of these so called holy books, but in the end most people spin their holy books to fit their morality. 

Wow... So rather than conceed an argument the idea here is to parrot back my actual conclusion but spin it like this is your position... That's a first.

Or maybe you haven't read any of the posts you are responding to and don't actually know I am not pushing any form of 'moral behavior'

If Germany had won World War II most would likely conform their opinions to the idea that Jews were bad, and had to be disposed of. 

Like the Killing unborn babies/abortion example, or if we label It a terrorist I've brought up.

Is this a terrifying concept? No.   Why?  For one simple reason:  Because we learn.  Humanity has been persecuting less and less as we continue intellectual pursuits.

:Roflol: We only "learn" to label and market our persecution differently.
Instead of slave we have the term migrant worker or 'outsourced factory worker' Instead of concentration camp we have a refugee camp, instead of Killing babies we have a woman's right to choose, Instead of religious genocide, we have the war on terror or all we need do is label someone a radical Islamist, and that person looses his humanity. None of these acts 'slavery, forcing people into concentration camps, religious persecution, infanticide, dehumanization of a sect of society were unique to Nazi Germany. As I pointed out they are all very alive and well in our modern western society now. you've only been trained to look at them differently, and to compartmentalize your morality to very specific/extreme examples before you will acknowledge a specific violation.

Bottom line it's the same good olde persecution we always put upon others, just simply under a different name so people like you can feel learn-ed and evolved.

Which if you bothered to read my argument, some if not all of these things given the right circumstance can be justifiable, even needed at times, but my question to you all what returns you to center? what stops the religious persecution if it is renamed a war on terror, what stops infanticide if it is relabeled a woman's right to choose? what stops "the Nazis" in all of us when we no other society can tell us to stop when all absolutes have been removed? Education/Learning??? :Roflol:
What have you learned, except how to fool yourself into thinking you are better than previous generations?

  Even in the short time I've been alive, this country has shifted it's opinion on Gay Marriage.  Look at how not that long ago segregation of blacks and whites had ample support.  Yet today, the only time we separate whites is with our washing machines.   Humans are nothing if not creatures of learning.  We learn from our history so that we do not repeat the mistakes of our past.  That isn't a faith in god, but a faith in humanity.  We've come so far from being apes who were just starting to learn to use tools.  We've taken that learning process to it's logical conclusion.  We learn, and that's why it's not terrifying.

Again you misunderstand. The 'immoral' acts are not the terrifying part. it is the pulling the wool over our own eyes to the truths of sustained 'immoralities' like modern slavery/outsourcing, Infanticide/Abortion, Hospice/euthanasia when these sustainable wicked deeds are justified, and presented to people like you as moral deeds, and you simply accept them or anything done under acceptable titles.

It is only in the presents of absolutes that we can measure or see how far we have come or gone. remove the absolutes and everything become acceptable/relative.

[Drich]

Why is this an over simplified view?

Well...because you are creating a false dichotomy:

According to you, empathy is [i]either:[i]

A. Biologically innate

[i]OR[i]

B.  Taught by society


But there is also secret option C that you don't want anyone to think about:

C. Empathy is a complex combination of [i]both[i] neurobiological predisposition and societal rules, and capable of being influenced my many, many factors.

But if you offer [i]that[i] as an option for discussion then your entire argument turns to dust, so I can see why you would refuse to acknowledge it.  [emoji12]

...and what was my original argument sport? don't feel bad it's called target lock.. Fighter pilots sometimes focus so hard on their targets that they loose sight of everything else and can sometimes even slam into the ground or they can get shot down by another enemy they don't see. You were soo locked on tring to prove this one little specific point you lost sight of the rest of the discussion.

In That "Empathy" will not preserve pop morality, because it is manipulated/controlled  by the culture.

In other words If option 'c' is correct and empathy is in part controlled by society then how can empathy be used to keep one from become 'Nazi' like if the society itself becomes Nazi like?

[The Grand Nudger]

@Drich

Instead of slave we have the term migrant worker or 'outsourced factory worker' Instead of concentration camp we have a refugee camp, instead of Killing babies we have a woman's right to choose, Instead of religious genocide, we have the war on terror or all we need do is label someone a radical Islamist, and that person looses his humanity. None of these acts 'slavery, forcing people into concentration camps, religious persecution, infanticide, dehumanization of a sect of society were unique to Nazi Germany. As I pointed out they are all very alive and well in our modern western society now. you've only been trained to look at them differently, and to compartmentalize your morality to very specific/extreme examples before you will acknowledge a specific violation. 

You seem to be expressing a synonymous fluidity between all these terms which would lead to their comparison and discussion being utterly useless.  

-Do you think the only thing that's different between pre civil war america and post civil war america in context is the word we use for slavery?  
-Do you think that the only difference in context between nazi germany and NATO held Pristina was what they called the fenced communities?
-Does a woman have the right to choose to dash an infants head on a rock?   



That you choose to muddy the waters such that any of these terms are interchangeabe leads me to conclude that you -simply could not- come to anything but useless generalities by considering them in the first place.  What good is your opinion, or any opinion, on the subject of nothing in particular?  

[Drich]

OMG...
NO! for the 1000th time NO!
It's an absolute, NOT meant to be followed or looked at as a 'moral guide!"

It's only purpose is to identify sin and lay out the plan for atonement.

Once atoned/saved the Law ONLY judges the Unatoned/sinners.

For the Save it serves as a mile marker for the changes you will automatically want to undergo, but won't be able to complete in this life.

NOT A MORAL STANDARD.
The rest of your argument is crap!


actually no one told you to go on the merry go round... You are just pulling out all the old tricks to try and refute what you can't seem to grasp...
I got an idea! Instead of just rambling off good olde atheist standby arguements that give you all such great comfort, how abouts asking a question rather than putting me in a position where I have to decide how to call you stupid with out setting you off all the time. How about asking a question, and stop assuming you know the basics of a religion you clearly know very little about. How about stop doing your victory lap over some other race you won, and maybe for once speak on point/get back into this race.

So, if god's word isn't meant to be a moral standard then wtf was the point of your thread?!  Your whole condescending assertion was that people who don't believe in God can't possibly establish their own internal moral standard, correct?  I'm lost as to the point you are trying to make...

target lock again... You were sooooooooooooo busy being right about empathy you lost sight of where the thread went.

The point of the thread is two fold. One show the contrast between God's absolutes and mans morality (ALL Morality even religious morality) Allowing me to explain why morality is not a standard to be used to judge right and wrong/Is not what God is looking for in us or from us. And why you 'good people' should not rely on it to define your 'righteousness.'

And Two, to point to an existence lived through atonement. which is what God wanted for all of us. To set us apart from rules and law to define our righteousness. to explain a life lived in righteousness is the real freedom you all pretend to have living good 'moral' lives without God.

God only uses His law to judge those who have not accepted the atonement offered by Christ. In biblical Christianity it is explain several times that we (Christians) are not defined or judged by our morality, but by our obedience to accept the atonement offered. Those who do not accept Christ's gift are however judged by their 'morality' and like the Pharisees will be found wanting.

Christ took THE most holy and religious group apart by their seams using their own hypocrisy and morality as His guidelines. Just like how I show you the 'relabeling' of nazi like persecution in modern society Christ took the 'morals' of the pharisees and showed them their own double standard and judged them by their own rules... So too will the 'moral' be judged.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

This vicarious atonement concept makes my eye twitch, a bit...especially when they start talking about "debts we owe".

I saw it from thugs in the prison system, all the time. They'd trap some newbie by offering them a "free gift", and then say the person was in debt, and the only way to pay off that debt is to accept a little lovin'.

Your God is a psychopath. Thus my signature line.

ETA: I'll quote my signature line here, since I just remembered many of y'all don't see the sig line:

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.

[downbeatplumb]

What's going on in this thre-

Oh, Drich and the rofl-smiley emoji.  Nevermind.

He's attempting a "coupe de twat".  (I will popularise that phrase)

[Aroura]

Yes, it is extremely disturbing.
There is this thing at my kids old public school called The Good News Club. It is in many public schools now.
The good news is that you can be saved!
The bad news, which they tell kids after luring them in with candy and treats and the supposed good news, is that we are all born in sin. Our 'souls' are stained. No amount of good works, kindness, or righteous acts can save you. Only belief in and acceptance of Jesus Christ as your savior, and becoming the obedient slave of God can save you.

It is one of the most perverted and disgusting things to teach anyone, let alone a child. Their actions towards other humans and any other thing on this planet are meaningless, only their thoughts count. How completely and utterly backwards can you get?

[downbeatplumb]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUnhfvGdmmw

[dyresand]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUnhfvGdmmw

That's really disturbing and i watched the movie when i was little watching it again it's like... wow...

[Drich]

I am confused a bit about your point in this whole thing

Finally! Thank you for asking questions rather than arguing points!!!

"humanity is flawed when it comes to deciding right and wrong."

agreed this is why we need to always look at ourselves with clear understanding as best we can.

But without an absolute defined measure (something that does not change) how then can we measure or judge
what we are looking at? It is only because we have an absolute value that we can judge distance, or a volume of liquid. Take these away, and each measure is subjective to pop culture.
Which again is where the Nazi illustration comes in. They did not see themselves as evil, but doing what they had to do to save the 'race/sub-species' and develop the ultimate evolutionary human being. Which my question asks if you grew up in that time what would keep you from being a Nazi? then I ask How do you know you are not one now?

This point back to God's perfect measure/absolute standard.

Then I explain this Measure was never meant for us to try and live by..

That is why we have atonement. once we accept atonement we are free from living by the 'rules'/morality to find righteousness before God.

"we need to atone to God"

Tell me how atonement is morality?

It's not.

tell me for certain that there is a god?

Their is absolutely for certain A God.

tell me how the Christian god is the right one?

He makes himself available for question/proofing.

then tell me how you are any different from any other Christian trying to get me back to Jesus?

I don't want anything from you. I'm not invested in you or your situation, I only offer what God himself offers, not through a specific denominational lens or one set of rules or another, but freedom from them as God intended (unless you need rules for him to make sense, which I myself don't offer but I can point you in the right direction) I don't think anyone else has offered you this otherwise you would have never left.

show me that what you are trying to sell is going to A) make sence in a real world

It's not. The 'real world' has a good cross section represented here. Look at all the arguements, look at your own. ALL of you only understand morality based righteousness. worse yet you are only willing to look at your own pop morality and judge the world on it...
I've been here 3 or 4 years and have been trying show you all the difference. we are 22 pages in and I'm still getting people tring to judge God based on their pop morality...

so make sense from your currect POV probably not. From where I stand I don't understand why you all would want to try and live any other way!

and B) give me any better understanding of how to be a better person.

That's the thing their are no 'better people' only those who pretend to be/fooled themselves into thinking they are by redefining and relabeling the evil they need/want in their lives.

All any of us can do is correctly identify our sin and not justify them, and apply the forgiveness we have been offered and move on avoiding said sin when we can.

The fundamental design flaws of this whole thing are the existence of a creator, the multiple theories of a creator, and what reason we have to atone for anything that doesn't harm a real being.

I don't know what you mean.