Are "morals" more important than god

lostexpectation

which it doens't but. (only as a concept)

Zombrex

Excelsior wrote:

See I think this is the biggest failure of the main Irish church that Irish citizens are completely unfamiliar with Grace.

Its probably because they are all Catholics, and the Catholic's position on Grace is a little different than yours (AFAIK). I am assuming you are a member of one of the Protestant religions?

Yossie

I was tempted to make a joke here about “Grace” being one of Jeff Buckley’s better albums, but seeing the reaction to pH before, now I’m not so sure.

Excelsior wrote:

Wow. That is permissable? That is an astoundingly arrogant paragraph: "cult following of nerdiness", comparison to Trekkies, "debating fictional plots", "large fictional base of writings", "to take pointless intellectual positions", "to look big and clever".

The Atheist wrote:

I'll have to agree this comment is somewhat OTT.

pH, I'd refer you to the second of only two rules in the charter. Suffice to say your comments would have been better rephrased. From now on you'd be doing yourself a favor to watch this - for one you might not sound so out of your depth*.

Asiaprod wrote:

I have to second that, that was a little to strong for my taste. It was not merrited and quite ungracious.

:eek:

With the greatest of respect for civility and manners I really don’t think pH stepped over any line or could by any objective measure be considered to have caused offence. (At worst, the comment could have been considered to be pH 7.8 (a little bit basic - [Bad joke –Sorry pH couldn’t resist.;) ])

The bible is a book, dare I say just a book, with no special claim over any other book, no matter what significance believers may put in it. To compare devotion to it to others who similarly worship books/films/people etc (e.g. Lord of the rings/trekkies/John Lennon etc) is a fair comparison imho. There was no maliciousness or viciousness, that I can read, in pH’s comment.

It seems to me that its offensive nature is based on the size and fervour of the group who imbue this particular book with divinity rather than pH’s comparison. Unless of course pH’s comments are regarded to be just as offensive to trekkies as christians. (Under Rule 2 unequal protection is offered to christians and muslims and not equally devote trekkies – this seems unfair to me.)

Does “Life of Brian” offend everybody as much; can we discuss Salman Rushdie’s “Satanic Verses”, or even “Father Ted”?

A little off topic - sorry:o

Asiaprod

Yossie wrote:

With the greatest of respect for civility and manners I really don’t think pH stepped over any line or could by any objective measure be considered to have caused offence.

With all respect, I guess it is down to how each individual read it. I will stick with what I said because that is how I felt. Having said that, it does not in any way cast pH in a bad light with me. I have always enjoyed what he has posted and will continue to do so. I say my mind and then move on. If for any reason pH felt offended by what I said, I do apologise .

Dades

Yossie,

I suggested to pH that his comments "would have been better rephrased" and I stand by that. The comparison made in the post was unproductive, but also disparaging whether or not that was the intent.

TBH I'd probably have posted what I said mod or not. There may be a time or place for such remarks but in the middle of this thread isn't it. But, like Asiap, I hope pH comes back and doesn't read to much into it.

Your remarks are welcome BTW.

Yossie

I'm a "long time listener first time caller" on this forum - I like it and those on it (mostly;) ) and the tone of both. Just think there is no harm in robust discussion.

I'm not speaking on behalf of pH - from what i've seen they are well able to do that for themselves.

A thread on what is legitimate criticism of religion might be an idea. Especially with the laws they are trying to bring in across the water.

pH

Firstly, my intention was not to offend anyone, nor was I offended. As a user of many BBs and having previously used USENET for a long time I'm used to a more robust exchange of views than is generally tolerated on boards.ie

My comment about 'being big and clever' was uncalled for and I can see how it could be taken as causing offense.

However I started the comment with 'To me it seems ...' making it clear I was expressing an opinion, and to me there is an interesting debate to be had somewhere in all this, as to:

First of all why do groups of people get worked up/nerdy and obsessive about obvious works of fiction (Tolkein/star wars etc.)?

Secondly can the same reasons/motivations be attributed to 'Biblical Scholars' etc ... 'How many angels fit on the head of a pin etc ..."

I also apologise to the mod for the offtopicness of all of this, but in my defense let me say- "HE STARTED IT"

Dades

pH wrote:

I also apologise to the mod for the offtopicness of all of this, but in my defense let me say- "HE STARTED IT"

Don't be apologising to me!
But you're right I did 'start' it earlier (though I did 'rephrase' when promoted to explain my youthful impetuousness).

I wish I more time for this thread, but two 1st Feb deadlines are melting my head.

Samos

I think the question should not be about choosing betwenn 'morals' and 'God'. It is the case that everybody has a moral code whether they know it or not. The question should rather be: "Is it necessary to have an all-powerful deity to ensure that people adhere to their particular moral code?"

I think the answer is no. In fact being forced to do something, whether through promise of reward or threat of punishment, is not a justified means for any action. I think the whole idea of God commits this argumentum ad baculum, and fails to give a valid reason to prescribe to its particular ethical maxims. It is akin to someone powerful asking you to jump of a cliff or killing someone and you must do so in order to be morally good. The action becomes good only because a powerful moral agent has demanded it, but conventional morality may not consider the action good on any other criteria, which we use in everyday life, such as reducing suffering or being fair to others.

Charis

For me God is more important than morals. God's grace and love for me causes me to care about what the Bible says...love one another, do good to all men, treat others the way you want to be treated, etc. I don't do this because I am afraid of God's wrath (I have a Christian world view) but rather because I appreciate his love and Grace and owe my life to Him. If anything I believe that people have a much higher tendancy to tell me what morals they think I should have based on my belief system than God does. I am always amused with people who tell me I shouldn't drink or talk about sex. Where does that morality come from???