Absolute truths have been admitted....

by Shining One 102 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  LittleToe

  I wasn't addressing you, Terry. If I were I would have been clearer in my speech

  But you're right to pull me up on my vague comments - I phrased myself awfully - I'll take it on the chin.

  Sometimes things seem to evade description, but that doesn't stop me trying. Even Einstien made comments about oversimplification. In the realms of the spiritual things often seem inverted.

  ...I'm still not reaching the phrases I want to use to explain my perspective... I guess I'm too tired to respond appropriately tonight, too, and have a hellish schedule this week. I'll try to address this properly at some point. Meanwhile I apologise for my rambling incoherence.
• 

  juni

  This sounds like my 59 yr. old former hippie brother philosophing.

  I have such a headache.

  Juni (Can you answer me this question: If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, did it make a sound?)
• 

  Hellrider

  Press any key:

  that is something that you believe, I believe, 99.9 of the people reading this will believe, and yet some people do not believe as it happens every day, therefore it is not absolute you and I may believe it absolutely, with every fibre of our being, but it is not with every fibre of everyones being, so it is not absolute

  Your approach here is descriptive. Mine is normative. The fact that attrocities has followed mankind since the beginning, isn`t an argument for that it should be this way. Just because I still smoke cigarettes (although I`ve cut back), and a lot of other people also do it, this doesn`t mean that it`s smart of me to do it (of course, that has nothing to do with morals, just about being smart enough to not hurt oneself). You proposed that I argued that "not to commit atrocities against helpless individuals" is what I would consider an absolute. I think it`s even simpler than that, and Immanuel Kant summed it up: "Never do something towards another individual that you would not want that individual to do to you". I would not like to be stolen from, robbed, attacked, beaten up, raped or killed. And consequently, I should not do this towards anyone else. It`s simple.

  Consider the alternative, that no "moral absolutes" exist. I know that it is popular to believe that, because values is not something that can be proven, they are "invisible", and consequently, they are just ideas, like God is an idea. There is no proof that God exists, and the same can be said about values. But consider the alternative: With no "moral absolutes", no murder in the history of mankind was "morally wrong". This, because morals do not exist! I find it to be so incredibly funny when I talk with liberals/leftists (for example on this forum), and we are discussing something like, oh say, abortion! And I will voice my opinion and say that although I`m not a christian, I`m not so sure abortion is morally acceptable. I will then have tons of shit thrown right in my face from people who accuse me of being a biggot, woman-hater, sexist, male chauvinist pig, because I dare try to voice an opinion that "imprisons women". But can`t you all see?!?! When a person calls me that (I know this is a lame example, but it`s the only one I could come up with right now), they are making a moral judgement towards me! And this, from people who will claim that no "moral absolutes" even exists! The point is: If there are no "moral absolutes", then there are just differing opinions! There would be nothing wrong in outlawing abortion, chasing the women back to the kitchen, tell her to lie fucking still while you fuck her, slap the kids around when they misbehave, etc. It would be the law of the strong, and that would not be wrong (because there would be no such thing as wrong). Women (for example) would have nothing to complain about, because it was just their destiny in life to be physically weaker than men, and that means that their wishes, views, etc, will be overlooked. (Does me saying this upset you? Try to isolate that feeling, and analyse it). The same goes for everything else. When the Einsatzgruppen marched into the occupied eastern territories in 1942, rounded up all the jews, lined them up in front of the mass graves and shot them, that was perfectly ok. It was just "differing opinions" (in the sense that the unarmed civilian jews didn`t want to get shot, of course), but once the opinion of the one side was silenced with the machinegunfire, the "differing opinions" was stopped, and nothing "wrong" had been done. Because nothing is really "wrong". And when a pedophile kidnaps, rapes and murders a child, he just had some "different views" on what acceptable behaviour. To bad for the kids parents, but hey, that`s not his problem, as long as he doesn`t have to hear them cry. He did no wrong, because nothing is wrong.

  This whole issue is not about what is the case at present. It is about how it should be!
• 

  hamsterbait

  
  The trouble with arguing that things are only right or wrong as God says is that it actually makes morality even more relativistic.

  it doesn't matter what you do - it is morally neutral - it all depends on God's opinion.

  For instance, if I went into a small town and slaughtered all the old folks women and babies, because Blly-Joe Lee told me to,most people would say I was wrong.

  Yet God said to do this in Jericho, and it was right. And in case you think smashing babies' heads agaisnt doorposts is the worst thing in Jehoobie's opinion, let me just point out that the punishment of plagues on the jews was visited upon them, not for having pity and sparing a baby's life, but Achan keeping a snazzy bit of a cloak for himself. (money again - how like the WT god)

  it starts to boil down into the Platonistic argument that whoever is in power is right, no matter what they tell you to do.

  Look at the Bible. According to this God changes his mind so often, you are left dizzy.

  As for your criticism of Hinduism, you are of course ignorant of the natural laws of Karma. Hindus are taught that whatever deeds you do affect your future lives - murder, cheat steal and your future will be impacted, just as helping the poor, kindness and fidelity to oneself will bring future benefits. And benefitting yourself ( as isaiah says is what God wants too) Jgnat - all four of your suggested absolutes, Reverence for life, Protect the young, survival of the fittest, defend the collective, are violated by the God of the Bible - if he defines the absolutes of morality these are not absolutes...

  HB
• 

  Terry

  I wasn't addressing you, Terry. If I were I would have been clearer in my speech

  But you're right to pull me up on my vague comments - I phrased myself awfully - I'll take it on the chin.

  Sometimes things seem to evade description, but that doesn't stop me trying. Even Einstien made comments about oversimplification. In the realms of the spiritual things often seem inverted.

  ...I'm still not reaching the phrases I want to use to explain my perspective... I guess I'm too tired to respond appropriately tonight, too, and have a hellish schedule this week. I'll try to address this properly at some point. Meanwhile I apologise for my rambling incoherence.

  Aw shucks...you're no fun to pick on!
• 

  DanTheMan

  I find it to be so incredibly funny when I talk with liberals/leftists (for example on this forum), and we are discussing something like, oh say, abortion! And I will voice my opinion and say that although I`m not a christian, I`m not so sure abortion is morally acceptable. I will then have tons of shit thrown right in my face from people who accuse me of being a biggot, woman-hater, sexist, male chauvinist pig

  I must have missed that thread, can you point it out to me?
• 

  Shining One

  Hi Daniel,
  Oh such foul language, Dan-o. Are we getting frustrated that everyone doesn't 'knuckle under and run away'? Get over it boy> If you had enough brain power to actually make an intelligent comment you just might do so. Only infantile miscreants attract attention by crudeness.
  Rex
• 

  press any key

  Hellrider

  It seems that agreement is breaking out all over the place. I thought you were defending the Rex view that absolute moral truths existed.

  If there are no "moral absolutes", then there are just differing opinions!

  Couldn't have put it better myself. Thats why democracy is so beneficial. It gives the loudest voice to the biggest group not the strongest individual (in theory anyway).

  (Does me saying this upset you? Try to isolate that feeling, and analyse it).

  No not at all, I'm sitting here nodding my head.

  The same goes for everything else. When the Einsatzgruppen marched into the occupied eastern territories in 1942, rounded up all the jews, lined them up in front of the mass graves and shot them, that was perfectly ok. It was just "differing opinions" (in the sense that the unarmed civilian jews didn`t want to get shot, of course), but once the opinion of the one side was silenced with the machinegunfire, the "differing opinions" was stopped, and nothing "wrong" had been done.

  During the war those soldiers were heroes, after the war they were criminals. A cynic would say that history decides right and wrong. Although we now have our opinions and can judge whether it was right or wrong, not by some absolute morals, but with our own judgement.

  when a pedophile kidnaps, rapes and murders a child, he just had some "different views" on what acceptable behaviour. To bad for the kids parents, but hey, that`s not his problem, as long as he doesn`t have to hear them cry. He did no wrong, because nothing is wrong

  I think he did wrong. However I think this not because I compare his behaviour to some absolute moral, but I compare it to the behaviour I expect of myself and the behaviour I expect from others.

  The choice with morals is not absolute or nothing. Morals exist but they are relative, relative to the way we ourselves feel. And when a big enough section of society feels the same this becomes the moral norm and then law etc. Therefore morals can change over time, and dare I say it, evolve.

  The problem with wanting absolute morals rather than relative morals is that they have to be set by someone, or some group, and then never changed. Alright if you're that someone, or if they agree with you, but otherwise ......

  cheers

  pak
• 

  Shining One

  Hey Dan,
  What Hellrider is talking about happens all the time. Libs are true despots: they allow no dissent within their camp. Libs favor socialism first, then into communism and finally to the Gulag for anyone that they find dissent from the part line.
  Rex
• 

  Shining One

  Hi Dan,
  >And can you provide me the complete list, so I can at least see what all it is that I must believe is absolutely true in order to avoid damnation?
  Sure I can. What is really great about it is the fact that if you are genuinely searching you will see the point right away. Romans 3:10, 23; Romans 6:23; John 3:3, 5, 16; Eph. 2:8-10; 1 Cor. 5:15; Romans 10:9-11, 13. The gospel message is so simple that people who are searching can find it and those who will not believe will call it 'foolish'. Next, if you want to see why people do not choose life, read John 3: 18-20.
  Rex