This is clearly false, since there are many hundreds of divine commands from different gods – how do you choose which is sensible and just? Ra? Zeus? Allah? The Flying Spaghetti Monster? Bob? Jim Jones? The crazy guy on the corner? Jesus? Paul? Manson? Joseph Smith? Jehovah? Odin?
Are you defending Odin’s divine commands here?
Whichever one you pick has exactly the same validity as Satanism.
Regards,
Shodan
The OP isn’t asking about Satanism, it’s asking about the seven tenets themselves compared to other religious guidance.
How do you think it compares to, say, the OT’s prohibition against mixing fibers or stoning adulterers or Paul’s admonition against women speaking in church?
They’re the same, or at least are also based on unproven and unprovable axioms.
So, when you compare the seven tenets to other religious guidance, you find that they are valid or invalid depending on whether you accept the axioms on faith. All moral statements are that way, without exception. “I feel that way” is the only justification.
Regards,
Shodan
I’m specifically asking how you feel. What do you think, and why? If you feel nothing, or make no moral judgment about anything, that would also be an answer.
iiandyiiii already answered my first objection, which is that the OP is asking for your opinion on the seven tenets.
However, I disagree that there’s faith involved – I can use reason to try and find moral guidance that will minimize suffering, maximize happiness, or some other measurement.
Your statement is basically saying that all of philosophy is faith-based, which makes no sense to me. You can look at chimp and bonobo societies to see what kind of morals they employ to live in a community and to protect that community from outsiders, and see that some of our moral sense is obviously evolved from our ancestors. You can reason through the implications of various moral statements and see if they will improve, say, happiness, have no effect on it, or make it worse. For example, several of the Ten Commandments will basically have no effect on happiness (no other gods, Lord’s name in vain). Many of the restrictions in the rest of Leviticus may decrease it (especially if you enjoy shellfish or pork), as will Paul’s requirement that women don’t speak in church. Some will increase happiness (don’t commit murder).
IMO, the seven tenets above are a pretty good guide to living, with the wheat already separated from the chaff. What are your thoughts?
iiandyiiii, if you think this is a hijack, I’ll drop it.
I don’t have a problem with this as a side discussion, as long as it doesn’t push aside the main discussion. I’m interested in feelings and opinions on these tenets and other religious moral guidance, and I think your post above qualifies as your feelings/opinions.
I think a disbelief in the supernatural is far more rational - and far more likely to be “valid”, than a belief in the supernatural. So a set of tenets that reflect what is observable and provable is, IMO, far superior to one that relies on something like, “I am the Lord your God…”
Most philosophical arguments for morality are superior to ones that rely on a belief in the commands of a mystical sky pixie. Some “beliefs” are more likely to be valid than others. To contend otherwise, suggests one is an apologist for a weak position.
Titus the fixer:
"5 For when we came into Macedonia, we had no rest, but we were harassed at every turn—conflicts on the outside, fears within. 6 But God, who comforts the downcast, comforted us by the coming of Titus, 7 and not only by his coming but also by the comfort you had given him. He told us about your longing for me, your deep sorrow, your ardent concern for me, so that my joy was greater than ever.
8 Even if I caused you sorrow by my letter, I do not regret it. Though I did regret it—I see that my letter hurt you, but only for a little while— 9 yet now I am happy, not because you were made sorry, but because your sorrow led you to repentance. For you became sorrowful as God intended and so were not harmed in any way by us. 10 Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death. 11 See what this godly sorrow has produced in you: what earnestness, what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what alarm, what longing, what concern, what readiness to see justice done. At every point you have proved yourselves to be innocent in this matter. 12 So even though I wrote to you, it was neither on account of the one who did the wrong nor on account of the injured party, but rather that before God you could see for yourselves how devoted to us you are. 13 By all this we are encouraged.
In addition to our own encouragement, we were especially delighted to see how happy Titus was, because his spirit has been refreshed by all of you. 14 I had boasted to him about you, and you have not embarrassed me. But just as everything we said to you was true, so our boasting about you to Titus has proved to be true as well. 15 And his affection for you is all the greater when he remembers that you were all obedient, receiving him with fear and trembling. 16 I am glad I can have complete confidence in you."
Translation: The letter I sent with my guy Titus here made you all sad because it gave Titus authority to deal out hurt to anyone teaching heretical versions of Christianity (e.g. Cerinthus of Corinth and his followers). Obviously, you all weren’t guilty of any of those heretical ideas like the one Titus had to deal with - the injured one - and we expect continued obedience to whatever Titus tells you to do.
Praise be to Jesus.
It’s not for nothing that, as soon as the Romans stopped killing Christians, the Christians started to kill Christians as fast as possible to get rid of the heretics.
Western Civilization came 1500 years later, when the printing press allowed thinkers to hold debates from long distances.
I disagree, [DEL]but my disagreement is ultimately baseless.[/DEL] because I assert you have no objective standard by which to compare two different moral systems.
I have my own system of morals which agrees with the tenets of The Satanic Temple, but I admit that my own morals are ultimately baseless.
~Max
I’ve never claimed an objective standard. I’m interested in people’s feelings about morality, including the basis (even if it’s not objective) behind their own moral systems.
Geez, how can it be this frickin’ hard to get people to talk about their own thoughts and feelings about morality? 
Lucien Greaves was on Dan Savage’s Lovecast last week and I really enjoyed listening to the interview. I agree with kaylasdad99 that calling it the Satanic Temple makes it a loaded term, but I also see why they’re doing it and it’s to respond to politicians putting overt Christian imagery into public spaces to appease the “Religious right.” Greaves sounded very reasonable and smart in the discussion and he did acknowledge that “trolling” was part of it without saying “Heh heh, yeah we’re trolls.” The only two things that I really wanted to hear from him is whether or not he really worshipped Satan (and they danced around that, Savage didn’t really ask or press on that angle), and how many Republicans are a part of the church and why wouldn’t more be involved seeing as how many don’t act very Christian.
I’m not sure what kind of discussion you expect. If I were a Jew, the ten commandments would necessarily be morally superior because they are God’s commandments, and in that religion morality is literally defined as following God’s commandments. If I were a Catholic, the Catechism would be morally superior because it is the will of God, and in that religion morality is literally what is prescribed by God. If I were a Buddhist, I would necessarily disagree with anchoring all beliefs in science or the material world; that would actually be incompatible with mainstream Buddhist beliefs about rebirth, which goes beyond our “best scientific understanding of the world”.
~Max
That’s what I’m looking for, but not hypothetical others – your genuinely held beliefs and opinions.
All philosophical arguments for morality are based on unproven axioms, and are therefore neither superior or inferior to any other.
Regards,
Shodan
You’re still not answer the OP, which is about personal feelings and opinions about morality (and the 7 tenets in particular as compared to other religious moral guidance). Do you have any feelings or opinions on the subject? This isn’t a gotcha in any way; there are no right or wrong answers.
You claimed this -
Prove it.
Regards,
Shodan
I can’t – it’s just my opinion and feeling. I’m interested in the feelings and opinions of others. If you feel differently, that’s fine, but I’m curious as to why you (and any others) feel differently.
Is it really that hard just to have a discussion about feelings and opinions?
Explain why you feel that way.
Regards,
Shodan
Because I’m curious about the opinions and feelings of others on morality, and on these tenets in particular.
I believe these 7 tenets are superior to the guidance of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible because they focus on behaviors that are inherently harmful to other people, not wasting time on other sorts of behaviors, and my moral system focuses on avoiding harm to other people.
Your turn. Do you think these tenets are superior or inferior, and why?