Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is raising a child without religious belief the same as raising them WITH it?

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    I'm absolutely baffled not uncomfortable. Its almost like he has a set of rules for existence almost like he is subject to another being higher than him some set of moral codes its pathetic. It sounds like a completely human construct.
    God is only capable of good. What alternative would you suggest? A god capable of evil? Wouldn't such a god be self-destructive?


  • Options
    #63
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,242 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    kelly1 wrote: »
    When God is insulted, he doesn't get into a huff like we often do. He still loves us unconditionally despite our insults. If he didn't love us unconditionally it would imply that His love is imperfect because it would depend on our reaction to His love.
    So god doesn't get into a huff... but he used to smite down people regularly, flooded the entire planet because people were living in sin, and murdered innocent egyptian children because their leader didn't 'let his people go'


  • Options
    #64
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,242 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    kelly1 wrote: »
    God is only capable of good. What alternative would you suggest? A god capable of evil? Wouldn't such a god be self-destructive?

    have you ever read the old testament?


  • Options
    #65
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    Akrasia wrote: »
    So god doesn't get into a huff... but he used to smite down people regularly, flooded the entire planet because people were living in sin, and murdered innocent egyptian children because their leader didn't 'let his people go'
    God gives life and he has the right to take life. If the people who died were just, there's nothing to worry about because they're in Heaven now.


  • Options
    #66
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    kelly1 wrote: »
    God gives life and he has the right to take life. If the people who died were just, there's nothing to worry about because they're in Heaven now.

    I don't often post here but I do read alot and have to say this kind of sounded off to me.

    There might not be worry, but there is the incredible amount of hurt that Gods choice(if he does indeed take away life) has caused for that persons loved ones.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    artanevilla
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,313 Mod ✭✭✭✭artanevilla


    I don't think God would care (if he exists or not) if a child wasn't religious as such, rather they should have good morals and be kind and that sort of stuff. Later if life if they wish to follow a religion then so be it.


  • Options
    #68
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    kelly1 wrote: »
    My definition would be something like "Love is an unconditional giving of self for the good of another".
    With respect that is a pretty bad definition.

    You seem to be talking more about the consequences of love than the noun itself. You may unconditional give of yourself because you love something, but that is not in itself what the word describes. Your definition includes many things that would not be considered love and excludes many that would.

    But even if we assume that your definition does describe "love" I'm still not following where God comes in as the "source" of it.

    Assuming I unconditionally give of myself to my brother (I would say because I love him, but you appear to be saying that that action is in itself "love"), how is God the source of that?
    kelly1 wrote: »
    Love doesn't depend on emotion.
    Well your definition doesn't, but that is part of its problem.

    My PC unconditionally gives of itself for me, but I wouldn't describe that as "love" because my PC doesn't make conscious decisions based on it's emotional feelings. My PC doesn't love me.

    Actions that a person may take because he/she loves something can also be carried out by people or things who don't love. But that is a separate issue.

    I could travel 6 hours in the night to visit my sister because she is very upset and I love her and want to help her. But traveling 6 hours in the night is not "love". A sales man may travel 6 hours in the middle of the night, a man cheating on his wife may travel 6 hours in the middle of the night to have sex with a prostitute.

    I do this because I love my system. The others do it for different reasons. You need to separate the action from the reason.
    kelly1 wrote: »
    Selfish love isn't love at all. A guy might say to his girlfriend, I really love you but behind it he maybe he wants to hold on to her because she satisfies his wants.

    I would agree.

    Which is why I often roll my eyes at people, particularly young people, who claim to "love" a girl/guy they have been going out with for a few days, or even worse someone they only know on the Internet. I would also question, TBH, how much religious people "love" God, for the same reason.

    But because people use the word incorrectly is not a reason to throw it out and replace it with a new definition.

    Above you were talking more about the consequences of love, and now you are talking about a person demonstrating that they actually love someone. All these issues are more side issues around the actual emotion.


  • Options
    #69
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    kelly1 wrote: »
    God is only capable of good....

    Are you sure? The whole hell, purgatory thing not kind of goes against that doesn't it. Besides by definition he created us and in his image no less and humans capable of terrible things?
    Yours confused
    CC


  • Options
    #70
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    kelly1 wrote: »
    When God is insulted, he doesn't get into a huff like we often do. He still loves us unconditionally despite our insults.
    Thats rather irrelevant. How a person response to being insult is a separate issue to whether or not they are insulted.

    At the end of the day it is illogical (as far as I can work out) for a timeless omniscient deity to be "insulted"
    kelly1 wrote: »
    How could a perfectly holy God not find sin outrageous/insulting/offensive?
    The same way I don't find a very badly written software program personally insulting or offensive.

    Think about what you do find insulting, and think why it insulted you. Things insult us because they take from us. You can't take anything from God.

    What ever you feel about how God should view sin, "insulted" is the wrong word to use.
    kelly1 wrote: »
    Sin is a rebellion against the ultimate good.
    Sin is the actions that take place due to the absence of God's Grace.

    Since God removed his grace on purpose as punishment for Adam's disobedience, it is illogical to say that sin is a "rebellion" against God. Sin is a movement away from God, the same way that a magnet moves away from another oppositely charged magnet.

    It must be remembered that his is the way God designed it.

    We naturally move away from God due to the fundamental way he constructed the world, the same way a magnet naturally moves away from another magnet due the fundamental laws of electromagnetism.

    The magnet is not "rebellion" against the way the universe works, it is in fact following the way the universe works. It is actually when the magnet is forced together that it is rebelling against its nature and the nature of the universe.

    The rebellion is not when we move towards sin. That is simply moving towards the natural order of the universe. The rebellion is actually when we move towards God, as we are resisting the natural order that resulted from God's punishment of Adam.

    Now naturally Christians would argue that this rebellion is good, and that God wants us to do it, to demonstrate our free will by fighting against this natural flow that he set up.

    But it is illogical to say that he is displeased if we don't. If we don't we simply are falling back to the natural order, in the same way that the magnet falls back to be pushed away from the opposite magnet.

    (wow, I would make a good theologian)


  • Options
    #71
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Akrasia wrote: »
    have you ever read the old testament?

    Yes, the question is have you? From Genesis to Malachi with the Apocrypha? then you will realise that perception of God is utterly inaccurate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Jakkass wrote: »
    then you will realise that perception of God is utterly inaccurate.

    Did he put forward a perception?

    He was using the Old Testament to counter the assertion put forward that God is only capable of good.

    If the only response to this is the self referencing assertion that God is only capable of good because everything God does is by definition good then that isn't an argument.

    You can believe that everything God does is by definition good, but the statement that God can only do good must be with drawn because it cannot be known.

    You cannot test or judge it in any meaningful way.

    If God does something "bad" you just change the definition of that thing to "good" and move on. So how can you determine that God only does good if everything he does, good or bad, is simply re-classified as "good"


  • Options
    #73
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    See this is what the issue is you believe that morality is something different people come up with. I believe that morality is a thing revealed to us by God. Note the singular.

    Who deems what is right and wrong? In my opinion the Lord did, in your opinion all different people in mankind did.


  • Options
    #74
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I believe that morality is a thing revealed to us by God. Note the singular.

    That's fine, but because of that you can't say that God is only capable of good, since because of the above assertion you cannot judge that in any meaningful way.

    Or put it another way, how do you determine if something God does is good or bad if you have already asserted that everything God does must be good.

    Its like saying you are going to give a review of a film when you have already said that the director can and will only produce brilliant films before you see the film

    How would you actually judge if the film was any good?

    Anything he does must be brilliant, so even if you didn't like the film you are in fact wrong and must change your tastes accordingly.

    Your judgment therefore becomes irrelevant. Same to for God.

    Neither yourself or Kelly or any human can say "ah yes, what God did here was just"

    It becomes impossible for you to determine if the film was actually any good or not.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    Who deems what is right and wrong? In my opinion the Lord did

    Which means you cannot judge it. And therefore you cannot say God only does good. You can't judge if God only does good or not because your standards of good are meaningless.

    You can't in fact make any determinations about how good God is at all. Which gets you into a bit of a paradox, because a lot of you Christians seem to use the good you judge God doing in the Bible as evidence for why you accept he exists.


  • Options
    #75
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,242 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Many actions of the Old Testament god go against the morality that Christians believe god instilled in us.

    I have heard lots of theologens ask 'How do we know rape is wrong?' and then answer that we know because god has given us an innate sense of morality.

    Well, that innate sense of morality tells us that it is wrong to punish a child for the sins of his father. It is wrong to torture a loyal friend because you want to prove a point to an enemy that he will stay loyal no matter what, It is wrong to commit genocide. The god of the old testament was one of the most misogynistic, violent jealous, conceited demanding and cruel characters ever created.

    If we get our morality from God, then it is no wonder the world is so screwed up sometimes.


  • Options
    #76
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Akrasia wrote: »
    Well, that innate sense of morality tells us that it is wrong to punish a child for the sins of his father. It is wrong to torture a loyal friend because you want to prove a point to an enemy that he will stay loyal no matter what, It is wrong to commit genocide. The god of the old testament was one of the most misogynistic, violent jealous, conceited demanding and cruel characters ever created.

    If we get our morality from God, then it is no wonder the world is so screwed up sometimes.

    I'd love for (yet another) discussion on the Old Testament in another threat. I'm ready for another discussion, and a general look at the Old Testament (instead of isolated verses) during punishment, take a look at the many things that the Lord the God of Israel did for them when they did abide by their rules which they received from the height of Sinai.

    Also on the place of the Old Testament in the Christian sphere of things today.


  • Options
    #77
    Dave!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    Jakkass there is no doubt that god did lots of good, but that doesn't excuse the genocides and murder. Hitler built autobahns and got rid of unemployment, y'know?


  • Options
    #78
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    DaveMcG wrote: »
    Jakkass there is no doubt that god did lots of good, but that doesn't excuse the genocides and murder. Hitler built autobahns and got rid of unemployment, y'know?

    Set up a new thread and I will be willing to discuss it with you in full. Let's not impede on the topic of this thread.

    God is not comparable to Hitler by any mans standards.


Advertisement