Posted on 04/23/2011 7:42:56 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
I'm not familiar with all the terminology or intricacies of your pagan religion but isn't it basically pantheistic? ya know... we all have a spark of divinity or some such? God is in everything... yada yada. What exactly is God's "position" and what is it about his consciousness that cannot be imitated?
Moral absolutes are essentially the same in every religion, that is why they are absolutes.
To some extent, yes, but the question is which of those so-called absolutes we want the government to enforce will be based on from where different religions believe those absolutes are derived. Pagan religions believe that individuals can achieve some level of morality that gains them other worldly benefits.
We Christians believe that individuals are unable to achieve any level of morality that will earn them an other worldly paradise. We rely on a substitute who has already earned it for us. We realize our moral corruption and yet God is willing to accept us for the work of another. That's why we show mercy to our fellow man. We're no better morally than he is and we should show the same mercy to him as God showed to us. Jesus gave a good parable about this in the Bible of the two debtors. Check it out!
As far as what morals a Christian wants the government to enforce we look to our Holy Scriptures and especially the Ten Commandments. We generally refer to those sayings as divided into two tablets. The first tablets describes our requirements to God and the second tablet describes our requirements to our fellow man. So Christians generally refer only to the 2nd tablet to inform the magistrate as to what he needs to enforce. The 2nd tablet can be summarized as not inflicting any coercion, theft, or fraud against your neighbor. So that's it. Any other so-called absolute is not mentioned in the 2nd tablet.
Moralists of any stripe are all the same. They always contradict themselves claiming they want what's best for their neighbor when in reality they only want to impose their own selfish interests.
Hinduism is essentially monotheist, you misunderstand but many people do.
Your statement:
“Moralists of any stripe are all the same. They always contradict themselves claiming they want what’s best for their neighbor when in reality they only want to impose their own selfish interests.”
Makes no sense. You are basically saying anyone who promites morality is bad; ie - immoral. You sound like a libertarian who wants no holds barred porn, dope, prostitution and homo-agenda everything.
IOW, an immoralitst. People wither promote morality or immorality. Your choice. I make my choice clear. I guess you do too, since you fault me for not supporting dope, porn, prostitution and the homo-agenda.
One of my absolute morals is that anyone who worships a false god deserves death.
Should I have the government enforce that?
If you make up smack and call it a moral absolute, it’s not a moral absolute.
Moral absolutes come from God’s instructions, not the minds of fallible human beings.
So unless you’re God, you can’t make any old rule and call it a moral absolute.
Since you don’t want to discuss rationally, there’s no point in discussing. Something about pearls and swine comes to mind. I’m always willing to discuss moral absolutes respectfully, but it has to be a two way street. So, I won’t respond to whatever sniping or snarking you come up with.
Make up smack? It’s in God’s instructions. Apparently what’s “absolute” is only relative to what you agree is absolute. You contradicted yourself again.
I realize it may be hard for you not to be an idiot so I will refrain from saying something like don’t be an idiot. But, here is a quote that goes directly against the Biblical view of charity as a moral duty if you are a Christian. Now, you may not be, but my point was that Rand’s views are opposed to Biblical views.
“My views on charity are very simple. I do not consider it a major virtue and, above all, I do not consider it a moral duty. There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them. I regard charity as a marginal issue. What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty and a primary virtue.”
This was supposedly from an interview in 1964 with Playboy magazine. She is not fighting against compulsory charity as in forced by government. She is fighting against charity as a duty. Of course, she’s not a Christian and you probably aren’t either, which is fine, but spare me the hogwash. You can’t reconcile her to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Then, is this quote from a 1964 interview with Playboy a lie or not?
“My views on charity are very simple. I do not consider it a major virtue and, above all, I do not consider it a moral duty. There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them. I regard charity as a marginal issue. What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty and a primary virtue.”
Charity is a moral duty and a primary virtue for Christians. Just read the verses I listed. If this quote is a lie then I will apologize. Otherwise there is no way to reconcile her philosophy with the Gospel.
I said nothing about reconciling Ayn with Christianity.
Strawman argument.
I said you don’t know what you’re talking about in regards to Rand and charity.
I stand by that viewpoint and you’ve managed to reinforce my observation.
And you are most definitely not a Christian, though you may think you are.
You are amusing, though. Some Christian you are, calling people you don’t know names.
...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.