LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Complete CCNA, CCNP & Red Hat Certification Training Bundle
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


View Poll Results: You are a...
firm believer 195 29.41%
Deist 20 3.02%
Theist 26 3.92%
Agnostic 130 19.61%
Atheist 292 44.04%
Voters: 663. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 07-30-2011, 06:41 PM   #2341
baldy3105
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Distribution: Mint (Desktop), Debian (Server)
Posts: 878

Rep: Reputation: 184Reputation: 184

What a pointless question. Virtue is a concept invented by humans so you will therefore get a million different opinions regarding its nature.

You will then get some religious know it all insisting that his definition is the only true one and there we go around the circle again.

Lets not.
 
Old 07-30-2011, 06:47 PM   #2342
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Debian Testing
Posts: 19,192
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 472Reputation: 472Reputation: 472Reputation: 472Reputation: 472
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/virtue - defines virtue very well. I can see that the OP thinks that this is a separate set of discussions from the vastly rambling religious megathread. By virtue of the power vested in me I disagree. This is a religious thread and can anyone tell me where religious threads go? First correct answer wins the prize of being able to post in General. Second prize is to only be able to post in General.

Anyway, my awesomeness aside, this thread has now joined the hive.
 
Old 07-30-2011, 09:21 PM   #2343
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by -demo- View Post
we have no scale at all . . . my perfect is not your perfect
This is only the case if you subscribe that there's no basis for relativity, when in reality, if something is relative, it's relative in relation to something else, that is, relativity has a basis or standard. The position I take is that there is an absolute standard for truth, and with it, truth about what is good and evil.
 
Old 07-30-2011, 11:17 PM   #2344
easuter
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Slackware64 13.0, Slackware64 13.1
Posts: 538

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
This is only the case if you subscribe that there's no basis for relativity, when in reality, if something is relative, it's relative in relation to something else, that is, relativity has a basis or standard. The position I take is that there is an absolute standard for truth, and with it, truth about what is good and evil.
Please watch this carefully, from beginning to end:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSS-88ShJfo
 
Old 07-31-2011, 02:15 AM   #2345
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by easuter View Post
Please watch this carefully, from beginning to end:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSS-88ShJfo
As to the notion of Christians "cherry-picking," I'll grant that this is often the case. More often than not though, I think that it's rather their lack of discipline in studying the book they laud. As for me, if it's generally accepted here that the claims put forward in this presentation are the primary bases for the rejection of the Bible on the part of the generality here, I'm willing to stick my neck out and offer to make it a long-term project, addressing each claim in its turn, if you would give me an ear, and the time--this may take a while.

For now a preview: The speaker claims that Yahweh prescribes "the vilest atrocities," some of the instances mentioned early include stoning a man for breaking the Sabaath and capital punishment for homosexuality.

The man stoned for gathering wood on the Sabaath, in my view, is not an illustration of God's justice, but his grace. The man stoned is an example of Christ, who was also condemned for breaking the Sabaath. God ordained his execution just as he prescribed the death of his Son. I expect to meet that man in God's kingdom.


Apparently the speaker believes a thing should be considered immoral only when it involves a "victim." Granted, most sin entails a victim, but not always. There's also the notion of immorality on the basis of impurity. If homosexuality is acceptable, why not bestiality? There are apparently no victims. The answer is that neither of these are acceptable, just as it's not acceptable when I take a second glance at a lady when I'm a married man. The Bible isn't written to condemn, but to convict you and me of our own sin, causing repentance.

Quickly: God hardened Pharaoh's heart by his mercy. If God had it out for Pharaoh, he wouldn't have chastised him again and again, each time offering that he should repent. Moreover, God's mercy towards Pharaoh had the same effect that someone's kindness has on someone who is devoted to hatred--mercy hardens a heart of stone.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 04:51 AM   #2346
Arcane
Member
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: Latvia, Europe
Distribution: random
Posts: 303

Rep: Reputation: 250Reputation: 250Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by easuter View Post
Please watch this carefully, from beginning to end:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSS-88ShJfo
Nice vid. Another proof of holy book lies and their dogmatic nature. Here is nice question about dinosaurs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
{...}The Bible isn't written to condemn, but to convict you and me of our own sin, causing repentance.{...}
Which is exactly why it could be written by human hand not God. How come if God is so powerfull, allknowing and stuff he can't show(not just talk) truth or just enforce rules or just give information no human can possibly know?

Last edited by Arcane; 07-31-2011 at 05:58 AM.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 05:34 AM   #2347
SigTerm
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 379

Rep: Reputation: 234Reputation: 234Reputation: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
The Bible isn't written to condemn, but to convict you and me of our own sin, causing repentance.
The problem is with concept of "sin" and "vice". Certain things cannot be undone, no matter how you repent, even if you mark them as sin. Other things get marked as sin simply because "bible says so", even if that "sinful" activity could be used to achieve happiness, help you, motivate you, etc (wrath, greed, pride are rather useful). Marking something as a "sin"/"vice" forces black and white thinking, which is rather inefficient, because you won't be able to acknowledge power/uses provided by "vice" and you won't be able to acknowledge situation when you have to commit "sin" in order to prevent something worse from happening. Both "vices" and "virtues" can destroy you or they can aid you, so division is purely artificial.

Quote:
THE seven deadly sins of the Christian Church are: greed, pride, envy, anger, gluttony, lust, and sloth. ...

...there is nothing wrong with being greedy, as it only means that he wants more than he already has. Envy means to look with favor upon the possessions of others, and to be desirous of obtaining similar things for oneself. Envy and greed are the motivating forces of ambition - and without ambition, very little of any importance would be accomplished.
Gluttony is simply eating more than you need to keep yourself alive. When you have overeaten to the point of obesity, another sin - pride - will motivate you to regain an appearance that will renew your self-respect.

Anyone who buys an article of clothing for a purpose other than covering his body and protecting it from the elements is guilty of pride...

Being reluctant to get up in the morning is to be guilty of sloth, and if you lie in bed long enough you may find yourself commiting yet another sin - lust. To have the faintest stirring of sexual desire is to be guilty of lust. In order to insure the propagation of humanity, nature made lust the second most powerful instinct, the first being self-preservation. Realizing this, the Christian Church made fornication the "Original Sin". In this way they made sure no one would escape sin. Your very state of being is as a result of sin - the Original sin! The strongest instinct in every living thing is self-preservation, which brings us to the last of the seven deadly sins - anger. Is it not our instinct for self-preservation that is aroused when someone harms us, when we become angry enough to protect ourselves from further attack?
...
Since man's natural instincts lead him to sin, all men are sinners; and all sinners go to hell. If everyone goes to hell, then you will meet all your friends there. Heaven must be populated with some rather strange creatures if they all lived for was to go to a place where they can strum harps for eternity.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 09:44 AM   #2348
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,634

Rep: Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956Reputation: 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
If homosexuality is acceptable, why not bestiality?
Start thinking about how much suffering this absolutely ridiculous attitude has caused.

CLUE: most modern societies consider the phrase "between consenting adults" to be relevant. That the Bible ignores this says something about either the Bible or about society. That you think it's the latter says something about you.

Also here's something I've always wondered about: why does the Bible go out of its way to ban beastiality? Usually when something is banned, it's a sign that it has become a widespread problem...

Last edited by dugan; 07-31-2011 at 09:53 AM.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 10:16 AM   #2349
easuter
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Slackware64 13.0, Slackware64 13.1
Posts: 538

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
As to the notion of Christians "cherry-picking," I'll grant that this is often the case. More often than not though, I think that it's rather their lack of discipline in studying the book they laud. As for me, if it's generally accepted here that the claims put forward in this presentation are the primary bases for the rejection of the Bible on the part of the generality here, I'm willing to stick my neck out and offer to make it a long-term project, addressing each claim in its turn, if you would give me an ear, and the time--this may take a while.

For now a preview: The speaker claims that Yahweh prescribes "the vilest atrocities," some of the instances mentioned early include stoning a man for breaking the Sabaath and capital punishment for homosexuality.

The man stoned for gathering wood on the Sabaath, in my view, is not an illustration of God's justice, but his grace. The man stoned is an example of Christ, who was also condemned for breaking the Sabaath. God ordained his execution just as he prescribed the death of his Son. I expect to meet that man in God's kingdom.


Apparently the speaker believes a thing should be considered immoral only when it involves a "victim." Granted, most sin entails a victim, but not always. There's also the notion of immorality on the basis of impurity. If homosexuality is acceptable, why not bestiality? There are apparently no victims. The answer is that neither of these are acceptable, just as it's not acceptable when I take a second glance at a lady when I'm a married man. The Bible isn't written to condemn, but to convict you and me of our own sin, causing repentance.

Quickly: God hardened Pharaoh's heart by his mercy. If God had it out for Pharaoh, he wouldn't have chastised him again and again, each time offering that he should repent. Moreover, God's mercy towards Pharaoh had the same effect that someone's kindness has on someone who is devoted to hatred--mercy hardens a heart of stone.
You're doing the exact same thing discussed in the video: you're torturing logic in order to justify the sadistic nature of your god.
A man getting stoned to death for working on the sabbath is an illustration of god's "grace"? Not only is executing someone for working on the "wrong" day of the week an extremely disproportionate punishment, you're still trying to make it look like something virtuous.

The only way this makes sense is if the bible is treated for what it is: mythology mixed with laws from a savage era long past and unacceptable in a civilized society.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 01:17 PM   #2350
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcane View Post
Nice vid. Another proof of holy book lies and their dogmatic nature. Here is nice question about dinosaurs.
How come if God is so powerfull, allknowing and stuff he can't show(not just talk) truth . . .
If I understand you right, you're stating that if God really is God, he should show himself. One of Jesus' disciples asked a similar question--"But, Lord, why do you intend to show yourself to us and not the world?" Jesus' answer in paraphrase is this: God is holy. He makes his--home--with those who love his Son. Would you invite somebody who hates your son to a celebration at your home whose in your son's honor? Would you live with them in the house you call your home? God has never revealed himself in just a blanket fashion--"my dogmas number 1, number 2, etc." Never. God's revelations to humanity have always been through intimate communication. He wants to make his home with us. He can't do that when we reject him.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 01:35 PM   #2351
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by easuter View Post
You're doing the exact same thing you're torturing logic in order to justify the sadistic nature of your god. A man getting stoned to death for working on the sabbath is an illustration of god's "grace"?
First that's exactly what I did not say. I did not say the grace was in his being executed for his trespass. Try looking at this in reverse. If Christ is God incarnate, who willingly gave his life, enduring much suffering to show his love & to save sinners, is this not the purest instance of grace? Now, the text says nothing about the man being stoned defending himself, or even making any plea. In my view, he was lead to the cross, just as Christ was, without any resistance and with a wonderful sense of purpose. The grace is in this man's laying down his life as an example of Christ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by easuter View Post
you're still trying to make it look like something virtuous.
There is no virtue in what any of those men did who stoned him. The virtue is in the character of that man being stoned.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 01:41 PM   #2352
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by SigTerm View Post
(wrath, greed, pride are rather useful). Marking something as a "sin"/"vice" forces black and white thinking, which is rather inefficient, because you won't be able to acknowledge power/uses provided by "vice" and you won't be able to acknowledge situation when you have to commit "sin" in order to prevent something worse from happening.
That's clearly Machiavellian thought.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 01:54 PM   #2353
SigTerm
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 379

Rep: Reputation: 234Reputation: 234Reputation: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
If Christ is God incarnate, who willingly gave his life, enduring much suffering to show his love & to save sinners, is this not the purest instance of grace?
No. The correct solution is to avoid suffering/giving life and "save the sinners" regardless. Self-sacrifice is generally a careless waste of human resources. If situation requires self-sacrifice, then it should be solved without it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
The grace is in this man's laying down his life as an example of Christ.
There is no grace in willingly sacrificing your own life - it is simply meaningless. If solution requires sacrifice, then problem should be solved without sacrifice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
That's clearly Machiavellian thought.
You should elaborate, but I don't see the problem anyway. Character traits that are marked as vices are quite useful, and traits marked as "virtues" can destroy you.

Last edited by SigTerm; 07-31-2011 at 01:58 PM.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 02:12 PM   #2354
easuter
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Slackware64 13.0, Slackware64 13.1
Posts: 538

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
First that's exactly what I did not say. I did not say the grace was in his being executed for his trespass. Try looking at this in reverse. If Christ is God incarnate, who willingly gave his life, enduring much suffering to show his love & to save sinners, is this not the purest instance of grace? Now, the text says nothing about the man being stoned defending himself, or even making any plea. In my view, he was lead to the cross, just as Christ was, without any resistance and with a wonderful sense of purpose. The grace is in this man's laying down his life as an example of Christ.



There is no virtue in what any of those men did who stoned him. The virtue is in the character of that man being stoned.
You're doing it again! You just twist and squirm and use the most perverse excuses to justify something evil your god is responsible for.

There is no "grace" in begin murdered for the "crime" of working on the wrong day of the week. I'm trying to impress upon you just how wrong it is to have the death penalty for such a stupid and arbitrary law, yet you still seem to think it's just fine because the person being murdered was an "example of Christ".
If this is what you really think, then life has very little value in your mind.

Lastly, you made no attempt to address any of the points in the video where instances are given of god punishing the innocent. A truly omnipotent and benevolent god would never do such things.
 
Old 07-31-2011, 02:19 PM   #2355
easuter
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Slackware64 13.0, Slackware64 13.1
Posts: 538

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel
There is no virtue in what any of those men did who stoned him.
They were upholding a law that your god supposedly said they must enforce! They did everything "by the book", as it were.
Again, you torture logic in any way you can to try to justify the brutality your holy book contains.
 
  


Reply

Tags
bible, censorship, christ, christian, determinism, education, faith, free will, god, human stupidity, humor, islam, jesus, magic roundabout, mythology, nihilism, peace, pointless, polytheism, poser, quran, religion, virtue, war, zealot


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Religion (no linux in this thread, sorry) Calum General 16 07-11-2016 02:48 PM
The touchpad "tapping" questions answers and solutions mega-thread tommytomthms5 Linux - Laptop and Netbook 4 10-30-2007 07:01 PM
What is your religion? jspenguin General 9 04-25-2004 02:28 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:37 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration