by UnDisfellowshipped 151 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Hitler wanted the ot detached and deleted from the bible. However, he had no probleem w the nt.
I won't look it up now, but you should read what he had to say to his inner circle while in a bunker late in the war. Like many politicians, Hitler posed as something he was not in order to get support. And like most humans, he was a complex and sometimes contradictory individual.
BTS
There are no true atheists. Everyone has a god
BTS
I disagree. For many weak minded individuals that need to be controlled or "worship" something, perhaps. In my opinion we are all gods, and would do right to believe in yourself, rather than another flesh bag or inanimate object...
Satanus said:
"Anyways, moral law, ie the bible is just a book written by men, not god. Why bother w the captals?"
To clarify, when I referred to the "Moral Law" or the "Ultimate Objective Standard," I was NOT referring to the Bible, I was referring to the Objective Moral Law built in to each one of us, our intuitive sense of "oughtness" (how things OUGHT to be), some people call this our "conscience."
Our Founding Fathers referred to it as "Nature's Law," and at the Nuremburg Trials, the Nazis were found guilty for violating this "Moral Law."
Now, I'm not an expert about whether or not, monkeys or apes are capable of showing some level of empathy. But, I'm not sure how that detracts from my argument anyway.
Francis Collins and many others believe in Theistic Evolution. If our Moral Law-Giver, the First Cause of the Big Bang, did use and guide evolution, then surely He could have endowed other creatures with some fraction of a "Moral Law" or empathy as well.
> What basis does an Atheist have for claiming that anything is "good" or "evil"?
The same thing that has allowed chimps to develop moral codes amongst their groups: The instincts of social animals.
Without such instincts of "good and evil" social animal groups could not exist.
Moral relativism and the atheistic ideologies that exist in symbiosis with it will destroy the West. They are a parasite that saps the vital energy of a people. Indeed, the infection may be too far advanced to stop. Another people will take our place, and occupy our lands. Our children (indeed the few children we actually bear) will serve them. The process is advancing apace in Europe. Hopefully, it will stop there, and the gangrene will result in no more than an amputation, but I am not holding my breath.
BTS
Elsewhere said:
"The same thing that has allowed chimps to develop moral codes amongst their groups: The instincts of social animals. Without such instincts of "good and evil" social animal groups could not exist."
So, then, you are really saying that it's all based on society's or social groups' standards of how to get along, correct?
So, then, you really have no objective basis for saying that an entire society or social group (the Nazis under Adolf Hitler, for example) were wrong or evil when they decided to commit genocide or murder or rape people, or to destroy the "weaker" races, or weaker countries?
And, about the animals:
What about the animals who kill their weaker offspring?
Let's say, if a human being were to kill their 6 month old baby daughter, because they believed that this was the "moral" thing to do, or even if their "social group" commanded it, or their society demanded it, would this act then be acceptable to you? If not, WHY NOT? They're just following their "social group"?
Or, what if YOUR country, determined that it was in the best interests of society or the social group, to rape all females, would this be right or wrong? Or, is there no objective right or wrong?
Let's say, if a human being were to kill their 6 month old baby daughter, because they believed that this was the "moral" thing to do, or even if their "social group" commanded it, or their society demanded it, would this act then be acceptable to you? If not, WHY NOT? They're just following their "social group"?
This is precisely why "honor killings" are acceptable in some countries.
We find such things horrible... yet to them it is perfectly normal.
The people in some of these other countries look at the Western way of life and are equally disgusted as we are at honor killings.
Who's right?
'To clarify, when I referred to the "Moral Law" or the "Ultimate Objective Standard," I was NOT referring to the Bible, I was referring to the Objective Moral Law built in to each one of us, our intuitive sense of "oughtness" (how things OUGHT to be), some people call this our "conscience."'
Is that the point of this thread? Can you prove it, directly?
S
Satanus said:
"Is that the point of this thread? Can you prove it, directly?"
I think I made my case in my first post above.
Everyone demonstrates the "Objective Moral Standard" when they react to injustice, or when they condemn another person's morals. Those actions would be absurd and make so sense and have no meaning without an objective moral standard that we use to determine what is just and unjust, what is right and wrong.
We even recognize that people who do not have this "Moral Standard" have a mental problem, and we label them Sociopaths.
So then, if a moral code is hardwired into humans, theism is superfluous to your basic point. Anyhow, please prove it.
S
