I would suggest that if we were a species that devoured it’s young (a highly intelligent spider, if you will), we would do so, and not consider it immoral. As it is, we are not that sort of species. On the other hand, we are the sort of species that goes to war very easily, and manages to justify that behavior on moral grounds, to the point of evoking justification from our gods. If it were our nature to eat babies, I’m sure we would find similar justification.
If there is an absolute moral standard, IMO it is absolute because it is hardwired into the species. One can argue that it was
wired in by a creator, or that it evolved, depending upon one’s proclivities. From this one can infer that I am not a strong believer in free will, although I do think we have some wiggle room. For example, the point made by juan2003, that sinful thoughts constitute sin, permeates Christianity, but is not to be found in Judaism. Yet both religions maintain that their view reflects their god’s absolute moral standards. Of necessity, the god of Christians and Jews must be the same god, aka God. It escapes me how you can have it both ways. Of course, each says the other is wrong, but that gets us nowhere. In the end I think the individual is powerless to stop “sinful” thoughts, or most other thoughts, for that matter, although the possible reactions to those thoughts are somewhat flexible.
The person who says his morality is based on the dictates of a god is, I think, merely deluded as to the source of that morality. His morality, or lack of it, would be retained if the religious belief was removed.
In a mere four paragraphs, you have summed up all the religious beliefs that I would define as pure evil. Everything you have written is anti-Man, anti-Life, anti-Reality, anti-Reason, anti-Passion, anti-Self-Esteem. Especially:
"Everytime I see an attractive woman and get a boner, I’ve sinned, and in God’s view, it is no different than had I raped and killed her."
This one sentence speaks *volumes. * When I respond to an attractive man (my partner), it’s a beautiful life-affirming celebration of both of our lives, and of this existence that we’re a part of. I can’t imagine, for one moment, thinking of this as a sin.
When God created us, he gave us “free will”. God willingly gave up some of his power so that he could have beings that could express love. If we love God, we would follow His Will of our own accord.
On the other hand, free will gives us the option of going against God. When we see others partaking in sinful pleasures, it influences us. Because we are imperfect, we can be shortsighted and seek sinful pleasure now instead of eternal happiness with God.
You are missing the point of my quote. I am not married, so any lustful thoughts I have are sinful fornication in the eyes of the Lord. One doesn’t do evil deeds without first harboring evil thoughts.
When you feel lust and sin and evil coming over you, say, “Lord it is not your Will! It is not your way!” and He will deliver you from evil and temptation and you will desire not this temporary world, but to follow the Lord and share His Kingdom! Glory Hallelujah!
No, you are missing the point of **my **quote. My partner and I are not married, because it’s not legal in this country for two men to marry. And whatever “lustful thoughts” we have for each other are joyously celebrated with “lustful deeds.”
By considering this a sin, you are committing a far greater sin. Glory Hallelujah!
Oh, so now you’re changing your story–that’s hardly honest. First you say that any and all sexual desire is inherently evil and sinful, now you say it’s only when it is not within marriage?
You specifically stated the following:
So which is it? It is ADULTERY for me to have desire FOR MY OWN WIFE??? You stated that ALL sexual desire is “sinful lust and adultery”. I guess you’ve never actually read Scripture, or you would never say that.
Likewise, since when is it automatically “sinful” for me to want a drink of water? That’s a natural urge and desire? How is it “sinful” for me to feel fatigue? Is that not a natural urge? Did not Christ, Himself feel fatigue? Did he not have the natural urge of sorrow? Did he not weep therefrom? Are you saying that Christ is filthy with sin for having at least some of what we would call “natural urges”?
IzzyR: I can assure you it is correct, if by “sin” one is referring to something for which one is to be punished by God. It is true that the Torah says not to indulge in sinful thoughts, and Jews recognize that sinful thoughts are generally considered something to avoid, but Judaism recognizes that such thought control is virtually impossible. As such, sinful thoughts are considered a desecration of the individual’s mind, but not cause for divine punishment. A punishable sin, and this was what juan2003 is talking about, is an action.
Getting back to the OP: philosophers have originated secular theories of ethics for thousands of years, and nobody who’s taken Philosophy 101 can claim that ethics can exist only within a theological framework.
Let’s use some common sense, please. I didn’t mean every natural urge and desire is sinful. I was making a generalization that many things that we may desire are contrary to God’s way. My point is that we need Jesus because we can’t escape sin by ourselves.
I didn’t make the rules, God made the rules. God specifically created marriage as an exception to the rule of lust. Even then there are limits to what you and your spouse can do that is within God’s plan. To make an example would be to nurture an evil thought. Take it away, Lord!
Sometimes I have evil thoughts, but don’t we all? The key is to not dwell on the impure thoughts lest they become evil deeds.
“Common sense”??? How does common sense apply to **anything **you’ve said?
And by the way, I totally challenge the idea that we all have “evil thoughts.” I assume you’re speaking for yourself, but please don’t speak for everyone else. Of course, if you define every natural thought and feeling as “evil,” then by that twisted definition we are all evil. So much for “common sense.”
I wanted to start a similar thread, Mangetout, as someone tried very hard to explain to me that I could not raise moral children without a belief in God. It was heavily implied that I should not even be allowed to have children since I was such a godless heathen.
I tried to explain for example, that I can see how stealing is wrong even without the threat of hell or jail. If I work hard for something I don’t want someone else to come and take it from me.
Further I think that if the only reason people don’t kill, steal, whatever is that they will be punished by God then they haven’t progressed much further than a small child who won’t take a cookie because mommy will punish him. I would think that doing good things simply because you want to is better than doing good things because you feel guilty if you don’t.
Um… no. Lust is a misappropriation of sexual desire. Any sexual desire outside of God’s Way is Lust! The only exception God made was through marriage.
By definition, yes.
God gave us “Free Will”, which created the potential for sin. Man himself created sin by disobeying God.
Anyway… enough of that.
You might produce children who act morally on the surface, but will they think morally? Thoughts don’t hurt anybody. Stealing a little doesn’t hurt anyone. Stealing from the rich doesn’t hurt as much. Where does one draw the line? Who polices their thoughts?
Only though Jesus can you wash your brain of wicked filth.
Oh, please. Not the tired old “free will” chestnut.
God supposedly knows everything, even the outcome of “free will”, so the concept is pointless.
It also reduces human choice to randomness, since to be “free”, it can’t be determinable from earlier conditions. Without causality, there’s only chance.
Not that you’re capable of rationally examining the concepts long enough to notice the inherent contradictions…
Our free will is a complex recursive formula that takes in millions of different variables. God knows all of the values of all of the variables and all of the formulas involved. Human choice is not “random” but it is “chaotic”. God knows how we will react to anything and everything up to a point.
To some extent, God sees the future like a meteorologist sees the weather. God can see and 80% chance for this, 30% chance of that.
:eek: :eek: :eek: OMG! This is perhaps the dumbest thing I have EVER hear from a fundie. God is a fucking METEOROLOGIST! Please excuse me while I urinate all over myself as a result of the uncontrollable laughter that is issueing fourth.
I’m not literally saying that God is a meteorologist! My point is that it God doesn’t know what we will do because by creating “Free Will” He made it impossible to know the future.
But since God is still omnipotent, He knows everything that can be known. So while He doesn’t know exactly what we will do, He knows what we are likely to do.
If God knows everything that can be known, and He can know our behaviors only in terms of probabilities, then our “choice” is nothing but pure randomness.
You’re also ignoring the long-held tradition (beginning before Christianity ever existed) that God knows the future absolutely.
You know nothing of reason; you know even less of your own faith. How appropriate.