Author Topic: religious books have given moral guidance. Why do you think they are still bad?  (Read 10003 times)

eniyan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 41
    • View Profile

But all the religious books have given moral guidance to the people, like not killing the neighbors. Why do you think they are still bad?

ashirth

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
The religious books do talk about not killing your neighbors, at the same time they talk about not showing skin of women or killing the infidels. The God of the Old Testament, as I described, is not at all a good 'person'. The God is certainly a lot better in New Testament. However, when you pick and choose the good verses out of a religious book, the parameters, those you use, does not certainly come from the religion itself. For example, when you say New Testament is better, you are certainly not using Christianity as a judge. The parameters you use, are the effect of the morality that is already with you, assimilated from different sources in your life time.

agncvw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
The religious books may give moral guidance, but so do other books about ethics.  Religion can't claim to have a monopoly on ethics, by any means.  The difference is that if you look at the religious books, there are so many other rules and regulations in there that it makes nonsense of the ones that do make sense.  It is precisely because people are still hung up on the precepts of Leviticus that there is so much fuss about gay marriage and homosexuality.  From an ethical point of view there is nothing bad about gay marriage - how can something done by two consenting adults possible be regarded as evil? 

When it comes down to it, religion has always been about control. 

sofree

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
In spite of all the moral guidance and the wise precepts that man has access to, he still sins and goes against what's good and wise because he has an inherent flaw in his character. The Bible calls it original sin. Man became tainted with it when Adam chose to disobey God. From then on, this flaw towards self-determination became ingrained in man's DNA. It is the result of free will.

tahn1000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
    • Aliens Amongst Us
free will is not a sin
if all you see is 'suffering' then that is all you will feel. look for what is better in yourself and see only that.

LoveofUniverse

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
    • View Profile
In spite of all the moral guidance and the wise precepts that man has access to, he still sins and goes against what's good and wise because he has an inherent flaw in his character. The Bible calls it original sin. Man became tainted with it when Adam chose to disobey God. From then on, this flaw towards self-determination became ingrained in man's DNA. It is the result of free will.

Free will can not be described as a sin, neither as a flaw. Free will is what we are given even before birth to decide whether or not we will come to earth for the physical experience. If free will were a sin, how could you just get up in the morning and do the things that you do throughout the day? Every decision you make in your life can not be based on some religious book you know. We exercise our free will constantly and that certainly doesn't make us sinners!

cris2fear

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
But all the religious books have given moral guidance to the people, like not killing the neighbors. Why do you think they are still bad?

What do you think they have been reading ,when an islam fanatic  terrorist blows himself up in public or during the holy crusades or the Salem Witch trials? what book do you think they lived by with their actions? i highly doubt they were reading mad magazine

jackydragon

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
But all the religious books have given moral guidance to the people, like not killing the neighbors. Why do you think they are still bad?

It is rarely the book that is bad but more so how people tend to use the information. Like any information received what we do with it is more important.  Our actions will reveal just how we have chosen to use or not use the information.

Opinions about a book are meaningless.


jackydragon

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
The religious books may give moral guidance, but so do other books about ethics.  Religion can't claim to have a monopoly on ethics, by any means.  The difference is that if you look at the religious books, there are so many other rules and regulations in there that it makes nonsense of the ones that do make sense.  It is precisely because people are still hung up on the precepts of Leviticus that there is so much fuss about gay marriage and homosexuality.  From an ethical point of view there is nothing bad about gay marriage - how can something done by two consenting adults possible be regarded as evil? 

When it comes down to it, religion has always been about control.

And our society is not all about control? Take a look at legislation, by laws, regional laws, vehicle laws etc etc. We have no choice but to accept this type of control. One thing I will give religion is that we can choose.

zerospin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
But all the religious books have given moral guidance to the people, like not killing the neighbors. Why do you think they are still bad?

Wait, are you calling the Bible moral, while it tells you to stone a homosexual person? And you think that's not bad?

cris2fear

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
The same kind of moral guidance that started the holy crusades that killed thousands of people including women and children, the same moral guidance that hanged innocent people during the salem witch trials, and the same moral guidance that drives islamic radicals to blow themselves up and killing thousands of people, quite a moral guidance

Mandrei

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
If by "all" you mean a precious few and by "moral" you mean, moral as long as it's convenient, then yes, I fully agree with you all religious texts are moral.

You know who often poses as a moral guide? Catholic priests that enjoy bumping uglies with children. You'll excuse me if I don't want to be in any way associated with this group.

jackydragon

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Wait, are you calling the Bible moral, while it tells you to stone a homosexual person? And you think that's not bad?

I have always wondered where it said that? Do you know? Be interesting to know which of the writers scribed that. Perhaps it was more how the scholars of modern times have interpreted the verse to suit their own prejudices. It is common with translations.

Seahunter

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
    • The God Hypothesis
The religious books do talk about not killing your neighbors, at the same time they talk about not showing skin of women or killing the infidels. The God of the Old Testament, as I described, is not at all a good 'person'. The God is certainly a lot better in New Testament. However, when you pick and choose the good verses out of a religious book, the parameters, those you use, does not certainly come from the religion itself. For example, when you say New Testament is better, you are certainly not using Christianity as a judge. The parameters you use, are the effect of the morality that is already with you, assimilated from different sources in your life time.

I'm sorry, but as a moral guide, the Bible has to be one of the worst books in existence.  The morality and ethics relayed to us in the Bible do NOT conform, for the most part, to 21st century ideals.  They are what they have always been, words written largely by bronze-age superstitious barbarians.  A lot of is is great, human wisdom at it's best.  It also positively absolves rape, incest, slavery, genocide, and a wealth of other horrors.  So what part of the Bible do you listen to and what part do you ignore?

zerospin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
I have always wondered where it said that? Do you know? Be interesting to know which of the writers scribed that. Perhaps it was more how the scholars of modern times have interpreted the verse to suit their own prejudices. It is common with translations.

Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

As a part of the Law of Moses, the penalty for breaking it was death by stoning.

As a funny side note, did you know that Ian McKellen, the famous actor (Gandalf), is ripping out this page from any Bible he finds in his hotel rooms? :D He is gay, btw. Here is a part of a recent interview where he admits doing so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK7b2Pfw6xU


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
2971 Views
Last post July 18, 2009, 05:03:30 AM
by st_hart
9 Replies
4257 Views
Last post November 11, 2009, 06:45:21 PM
by rahman_abrar
4 Replies
3164 Views
Last post September 26, 2009, 02:38:18 AM
by uplana
5 Replies
2352 Views
Last post April 27, 2012, 09:38:03 PM
by artistry
9 Replies
2526 Views
Last post April 17, 2012, 01:06:53 PM
by artistry
7 Replies
2619 Views
Last post September 02, 2012, 05:35:41 PM
by DiminishingInsanity
5 Replies
1532 Views
Last post July 20, 2012, 06:55:47 PM
by artistry
0 Replies
1128 Views
Last post August 13, 2012, 08:47:40 PM
by sunilz