@DiscoveringReligion To state that atheists maintain that morality is a subjective system of value is erroneous. Atheists like Sam Harris disagree with you on this matter; Sam talks about this in his book "The Moral Landscape."
Who decides all this ??????? We can only try to remain good neighbors citizens family members friends ect. Thats the goal i think to continue where the bible or religious laws have started us off toward from a barbaric time. Without these books to remindus of where we come from we might just forget and repeat this same inhumane mistakes once again. Respect it for what it is don't dwell or fight over it respect others and fight to do good things without harming as way of life.
If your a good person i beleive you will always see the good w your heart and take the good out of everything in life. You will also feel when bad things are happening in your heart and gut. That is God speaking to you in my past experiences. My guess is we all know what I'm talking about. The real person human is the one willing to speak up When another is in pain and help and love one another. Then again there has to be laws for a society to servive in my oppinion within humane standards
The bible was law as it was needed then and should be respected the same way for example run dmc or the beetles are respect today. Although these groups are not the most poular today and the things they were fighting against or singing about might not corispond with todays movements. these bands are absolutely respected and were absolutely needed to bring music where it is today. In same way bible law was possibly needed then to open doors and minds to living a more civil life.
"The day of God WILL HAPPEN IN MY LIFE TIME." Funny, that's what Paul believed as well. Christians have been saying that line for 2,000 + years. What ever happened to: "I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." (Mark 13:30)? What's the hold up? Is God too busy allowing African children to starve?
Shall i give you future events. Everything that God has ordained since the beginning WILL come to pass at its appointed time, and not one moment before.
The time is soon, but not now.
Just as Satan steal, kills, and destroys he uses people to do his will.
God sends people to do his will, and that includes reaching out to the lost.
That applies to you my friend.
I have been part of missions reaching out to people.
God does not exist as you describe. He is not a God of love, but rather, a God of wrath, jealousy, and revenge. I am an insect by comparison, but I am required to grovel before him. To what end? What's worse, he doesn't give evidence of his existence. I must worship God on faith alone, otherwise I will be tortured for all eternity. Ha! I don't buy it. Your God is evil, promoting rape, infanticide, genocide and slavery. The Bible is a collection of Bronze Age myths, nothing more.
@DiscoveringReligion God is real. Your correct in saying that God isn't the God of love.
He is the author of THE love. A love that couldn't comprehended or phathomed by earthly love. God is judgement, jealousy for you. Evidence is everywhere.
God says in his word alone. That only a fool could not see that.
God is good. Satan is evil, and he is the root of evil. Take the human anatomy. It is SO COMPLEX that the information about the eyes alone couldn't be held in a super computer.
If for instance Palestine is giving statehood. That means that Gods holy land of Jerusalem is part of a Islam state. If this happens God will bring within 24-48 judgement upon U.S., and he will wake up many unto HIM "YOUR CREATOR" as a recruiting campaign.
God is sovereign yesterday, today, and forever.
Once you know the TRUTH. You are then accountable for the truth you know.
I think Christianity is stupid, but to say that Jesus' purpose was to REENFORCE the Mosaic law is a lie. Jesus, according to what I was taught, came to replace the Mosaic law when I was a Christian... C'mon, man.
Did you watch the series? If so, then you would know I am referring to the MORAL law. Yes, Jesus abolished the sacrificial, dietary, and judicial laws of Judaism, I said as much in Episode 18. However, Jesus still upholds the MORAL laws of not killing, stealing, committing adultery, and so on.
I heard on The Atheist Experience (great show) a caller claim that if it weren't for his religion, nothing would stop him from raping and murdering everyone he saw. Really??? Those things sure aren't on my agenda, even though I'm a godless atheist. Do they really believe that? Are there actually a hoard of christian would-be rapists and murderers out there?
con'td. Tell that to a child who was raised to believe in a loving god who answers prayers and is kidnapped, raped, tortured and beaten to death. When that child is praying for help that never comes. Timetable, my ass.
You cannot reason with a christian, even if you actually show them the passages in the bible. They can rationalize absolutely anything by telling themselves that its part of god's marvelous, master and ultimately good plan for humanity, and if we suffer its for our own good and we are not meant to question or understand why. This is what I was taught as a child. A christian once messaged me saying that god doesn't answer prayers because he has his own timetable.
I thought Mary and Joseph weren't married yet, just engaged when she became pregnant. And if she was already married, why would Joseph believe the child wasn't his, unless she was already too far along. My theory was that Mary was raped by a family member, since Jewish women were very secluded and she wouldn't have had opportunity to meet other men, and Joseph ran away with her to save her from being stoned to death. Just an idea, I'm not at all certain about it.
The comment made about not working on sundays really brought back some memories for me. As kids, we weren't allowed to go to the store on a sunday, until one afternoon while riding my bike I saw my Dad in the neighbourhood convenience store buying cigarettes. And it was a sunday.
Everybody lies, even christians. The majority of people do not lie in order to cause harm, though. They may lie to spare someone else's feelings, or perhaps to cover up something they are embarrassed or ashamed about. I've seen people actually use that "thou shalt not lie" commandment to actually cause harm, though. To make a truthful statement to someone for no reason other than to hurt them, and then feel virtuous about it. Now that's immoral.
Whether an action is moral or immoral depends entirely upon the circumstances. Ray Comfort blathers on about if someone has ever lied, he is a liar and a sinner. Wouldn't anyone lie, say, if your child was sleeping in the home during an armed robbery and that person asked if anyone else was in the house? I know I would, to protect my child. How would that be wrong?
It depends on the protest. Non-violent protests that don't infringe on the autonomy of others are fine. But you cannot destroy property or injury other people in the name of protest. Balancing autonomy with society's well-being can be tricky. You cannot do or say anything you want, no matter the cost to the well-being of others. Hate speech or calling in false bomb threats might be forms of free speech, but they can incite violence or hysteria, and thus are damaging to society.
I have listened to many speakers on this subject such as the likes of C. Hitchens and while I found them to excellent your presentation to far and above those.Please continue to spread the truth.
Everyone, look up Ralp Ellis' genious theory about the origin of the jewish religion. You find it on Youtube or google it. It says the jews were never slaves or victims of the pharao, but the ruling class of egypt themselves. Furthermore he states, that the old testament was the anals of the pharaos, written history, with other words. This truely gives a different perspective of the so called victim role of the jews throughout history. Also look up the jewish role in slave trade.
well all of these verses this person is stating are really difrent. there the new international version. n new version of the bible change n add words 2 it for exp numeros 31.18 pero a todas las ninas entre las mujeres que no hayan conocido varon las dejareis con vida. basicly saying that ever young girl that's a vergin to let them live. not saying anything about keeping them for urself. u cn totally tell this person has not read the bible by what he said about psalms 137.9 /watch?v=tjzIfNP5BOc
@silence227B in the kjv of the bible numbers talks about keeping the women children for yourselves, and it isn't the only place. and having read psalm 137 even in context it isn't any better. in fact i doubt there is a context in which dashing little children against rocks bringing happiness is ok. even as a metaphor.
@1kenchi Believe in God - just be critical towards the bible. The holy scripture is, I'm afraid, not holy. It is not the perfect word of god, but the word of men. Most christian denominations agrees that the bible needs to be interpreted. Just because the bible isn't the perfect word of God doesn't mean that God doesn't exist - however it is hard to believe in an objective moral code since the interpetation opens up for subjective morals (which is good, cos killing babies is wrong).
@1kenchi believe what you must, only you can find your version of "truth" its your life, let no one person or deity decide for you. only you can do that. strengthen your conviction in what ever truth you find, that is the human way, it's how we continue to live :)
Well, God can do whatever he wants. Imagine you are a computer programmer that makes a virtual world, like the Sims. Since you set the rules of the program, you decide what your creations can and cannot do. However, you yourself are not bound by those rules because you are the programmer, you make the rules. A truly benevolent Creator would follow the same moral rules He has given His creations, but He does not have to, and He apparently does not want to either. What a God we have!
@DiscoveringReligion Well said. Even if god is powerful exist outside the rules, an "all-loving" being would follow them also. There really is no justification for that. Ive enjoyed your series on religion, I think your videos are well done.
@DiscoveringReligion In which case, because you are created and controlled by a being that programmed your reality the way IT wants it to exist, there is NO reason that you should then PRAISE that programmer for inserting you into a bullshit existence created for HIS pleasure, and not yours.
You are locked in a small room, designed by someone else, and told to thank them every day for putting you there.
How could I possibly offend someone with the truth? The beauty of the Scripture is that it is written down, in black and white, there for all the world to see. If you think the Bible passages where God commands his followers to rape, murder innocent women and children, enslave other human beings, and commit genocide against the entire world are offensive, then you should be upset with God, not me.
As I said in the video, adultery is wrong because the person being cheated on is having his trust violated. Smoking is not immoral because you are doing it to yourself -- it is in accordance with your personal desires. However, if you want to thoroughly examine the issue you need to understand what effect smoking has on healthcare costs, how much this addiction is costing tax payers, and so on. If the cost to society is too great, then smoking could be seen as immoral.
I do not believe in God, so my morality does not take the fact you are killing yourself into account. However, such a view leads to major problems. For example, eating red meat eventually leads to heart disease, which is the number one killer of both men and women, even more so than cancer from smoking. By your logic, eating fatty meat is immoral. Morality based on a god always leads to contradictions and inconsistencies. That's why secular morality works and divine morality doesn't.
@DiscoveringReligion So I know what's subjectively right and wrong. Why should I feel obligated to obey the golden rule? If I can get away with murder or stealing, and it brings pleasure to my life.... why not do it?
because as a human you have empathy, empathy allows us to consider the thoughts, and emotions of others, and feel them as though they were our own. You should feel obligated to follow the golden rule because you can understand how it would make another feel and should therefore restrict your pleasure. Also it guards you, by engaging in the golden rule it encourages others around you to engage in the golden rule as well.
@Dudeatheist Actually, no... The Golden Rule doesn't protect everyone. There have been many nice, caring, and friendly people who were murdered regardless of whether they followed it or not.
My brother is an example of someone who doesn't follow the Golden Rule. He disrespects my mother to the max, and yet he manages to have her give him money. Not to mention he's a sociopath, yet he has tons of friends, girls flock to him even though he treats them like crap. He seems to be living happy...
seems like you're living with a great deal of jealousy, and you also gave up a very important piece of information. If your brother truly is a sociopath than he lacks empathy, and therefore the golden rule doesn't apply to him because he cares not for the treatment of others. Society does not choose what is moral, I wonder if you even paid attention to the rules of the secular morality presented in this video.
@Dudeatheist Yes, I did pay attention.. it was fascinating video. Though just because humans generally don't want to break their empathetic nature, that doesn't mean that it's really WRONG or anything to kill someone, it's just because humans are empathetic and don't like that. Would it be WRONG for a human race to come and enslave humans? Well, to them it wouldn't be, and what makes our opinions greater than theirs? Why should they refrain from wiping us out?
@Dudeatheist I DID listen to the video. What am I missing from it? I'm not trying to be condescending or anything, I am actually WANTING the logical answers to my questions.
@Dudeatheist Sure it's immoral for humans naturally, but does that make any of it really WRONG? We are just piles of goo anyway(As Peter Atkins puts it) aren't we? What difference would it make if the earth somehow got destroyed, and all of us killed? A bunch of different random living creatures may develop on a different planet, and die just eventually like us. Why are humans special, and why shouldn't humans be killed/destroyed, compared to say, a rock?
because rocks are not aware, they have no senses, they don't exist beyond simply existing, humans can intentionally effect the future. Calling humans a pile of goo would be like calling a computer a pile of plastic and copper. It would also minimalism the billions of years of evolution and survival of our ancestors, which are all amazing and rare accomplishments. Life is an amazing thing, a miracle of biology and chemistry.
@Dudeatheist Humans kill each other, and may even be the death of their race. Besides, all life will end in the eventual heat death, many years from now, and it will be like we never even existed. What would be the point? Besides, humans have killed so much non human animals, and the environment.. preventing other animals from thriving, while us violent humans kill mass people at once(nukes and such). I'm sure there would be plenty less unnecessary suffering if humans didn't exist.
@Dudeatheist Besides, who's to say because rocks have no senses, they are less valuable than humans? Because humans operate amazingly? The idea that humans are more valuable than rocks, would be an opinion statement, but how do you prove it with science? How would you prove value anyway? Of course, being complex creatures.. we would be biased towards complex creatures. But what makes us correct?
I thought I explained it, I guess you just didn't get it or are just trying to look for a fight or troll me, either way I'm tired of trying to explain pretty basic concepts to you.
@Dudeatheist Why should I follow my empathy anyway? What if I don't feel obligated to follow the Golden Rule. What would give you the right to condemn me? Because the population wants you to? How many times has the population been wrong? We will all die in the heat death at the end of the universe anyway, why not stop our tyranny now? Humans have been messing up this planet for a long time, and destroying the environment. What makes humans more important than the environment, or even rocks?
Hey there. It all depends on the context. Why is the person asking you to kill them? If they are perfectly healthy and they want to die, then there must be some underlying cause, like abuse, depression, or some other psychological disorder, and it would be your duty to help them find counselling. However, if the person is slowly dying of cancer, is in constant pain, and no longer wishes to live, then, IMO, it would be your moral duty to help that person die with dignity.
They were engaged, in other words, they made a promise to each other. Furthermore, Mary was required to be a virgin before she was wed. Therefore, from the perspective of Joseph, it appears as though Mary had found another lover behind his back, got pregnant, and broke the promise they had made to each other. By any standard it appears Mary cheated on Joseph and broke her commitment. However, because God is never morally accountable for His actions, He gets a free pass. :)
@DiscoveringReligion I said this in a earlier post, but has anyone considered (assuming the Mary story is true), that she may have been raped by a family member and become pregnant? And that Joseph took her away to save her from being stoned to death? Mary would have been blamed, not the man who raped her. And perhaps they were both so ashamed by her dishonor that they made up the whole story?
Though what you're saying about the portrayal of God is true, I think you're becoming preoccupied with pouring out disgust with something that you've already established to be mythological.
We need more focusing on rebuilding and how to re-contextualize religion in light of this data.
Is this about "Discovering Religion" or "Deconstructing Religion"?
I am demonstrating that a morality based on the Bible is impossible, because the objective standard by which Christians claim to live contains horribly cruel and unjust laws, such as slavery, rape, genocide, toddler murder, etc. I don't care about re-contextualizing religion because it is fundamentally flawed -- true morality is subjective. Also, the title is a play on words. Check out the FAQ on my website for an explanation: discoveringreligion(dot)net/?page_id=165
Well, in my view eating unhealthy and doing drugs is "immoral" since you are hurting yourself, but only if you do it in excess ammount.
I like this video, but I'm pretty sure a lot of things are taken out of context. You'll need to back up the claim about Moses and rape a lot, as well as try to show that slavery was as wrong as it seems. It's probably hard to do research since you're busy, but I'll be here to help ;)
Nothing is taken out of context. I cite the Biblical passages and you are free to look them up for yourself. God commanded the Jews to obtain the spoils of war after slaughtering His enemies. Virgins girls were among these spoils, which Jewish men forced to be their wives and tossed aside when finished with them. I read the passage word-for-word. I also agree with your characterization of drug use and over consumption of food. Anything in excess is bad for you, even water.
it seems as though you disagree with the basic objective morality set down in this video, which is why your believe smoking to be immoral. However by your definition of morality, engaging in any activities that are harmful to the body, overeating, eating heavily processed food, eating unhealthy food, working in unhealthy conditions, etc would all be immoral.
Well your definition of a "Secular Morality" can't be used as a basis for comparing the two if one doesn't agree with the definition given. You can't use the secular definition of morality and apply it to the biblical one or vise versa. It just doesn't work. I'm also afraid your taking the Bible out of context. You must consider the entire Bible as a whole in order to make any sense out of it.
Hmm, well thats kind of the point isn't it? That's my subjective definition, and you are free to make your own. However, the point is that a subjective, secular form of morality can be defined according to a non-Biblical standard. I asked the audience to agree with my definition for the duration of the video, but you are free to insert any definition of morality you would like. (cont...)
For example, say both of us do not follow a religion. You might, for whatever reason, find it immoral to drink alcohol. I, on the other hand, do not believe it is immoral. Both of our opinions on the morality of alcohol consumption are different, although they are not based on the Bible. See how that works? However, for the purposes of exploring an argument you might ask me to agree with your definition of morality. And that is exactly what I did in my video.
The point is that its possible to have a version of morality that is not based on the Bible, and as such everyone's definition of morality will be slightly different. However, as a society we collectively agree on certain moral issues, such a not murdering, thieving, and raping. Those who do not agree with society's definition of certain moral actions do not stay within the society (prison). It's as simple as that.
As for the Biblical version of morality, no interpretation is necessary. God makes the laws and that's that. If you feel I am taking the Bible out of context, please provide me an example. The great thing about the Bible is that it's there in black and white for all to see. When God provides instructions for how one is to marry the virgins captured after their families have been looted and slaughtered, there really is no other context in which you can read it! haha
@DiscoveringReligion You assume that the women were raped after the city was looted. There is no indication of that. Also you may have read Ecclesiastes "A time for everything." Killing is wrong but there will be times of war and peace were killing would be acceptable in that circumstance. Same as the example you gave in self defense. Also the story with Joseph and Marry, why would God consult Joseph first? No one knows the reasoning behind all of God's works. Thats why we are human.
@DiscoveringReligion Yes, but suppose you feel it is morrally right to give money to a homeless person. Then that homeless person uses that money to buy a gun and kill a group of innocent people. Would that decision to give homeless people money become immoral to you? What doesn't fit in your logic is that morality can change inadvertently. In that sense, morality is completely irrelevant. if it is different for every person then it would not make much sense from an evolutionary stand point.
I did not assume anything about that story, as you can cleary see in the video I read that passage word for word. But why does it even matter in what order they were raped? The fact is they were raped!
You are correct, there are circumstances when killing someone is morally justified. But how do you know that? The Ten Commandments claim you must not kill, period. Therefore, you are making this determinatioin from somewhere outside of the Bible. I find that pretty interesting!
With respect, I find your example of the homeless man bizarre. You're not responsible for the actions of another. If you killed someone in the name of Christianity that doesnt mean the Pope is immoral, YOUR actions are soley to blame. There is a major disconnect in your logic. But morality can and does change with changing perceptions. Alcohol was once illegal and now it's not. Men used to marry girls as young as 12 years old, but now in developed countries that's illegal.
But the fact morality changes doesn't mean it is irrelevant. Quite the contrary, that's how morality maintains it relevancy. Morality derived from the Bible is thousands of years old, and is completely irrelevant to society and culture today. That's why Christians must cherry pick Biblical laws. You want to follow the Ten Commandments found in Exodus 20, but not the laws regarding the enslavement of humans beings, found in Exodus 21!
Moral consequences change depending on the situation. Courts view the theft of one dollar much differently than the theft of one million dollars. Likewise, there are certain actions within society that must always be prohibited and other actions that can change depending on the circumstances. Cold blooded murder can never be allowed because society as we know it would collapse. However, certain states are changing laws on gay marriage and marijuana usage to reflect society's changing views.
@DiscoveringReligion Perhaps I could have used a better example. My point was that according to secular morality, morality is always changing as you mentioned. I personally see that as a huge issue, but thats just me.
@DiscoveringReligion I'm not taking it outside the Bible. I already mentioned, read Ecclesiastes 3. The 10 commandments are the laws we must follow but there are circumstancial times when God will allow it such as a time of war. Also yes the women were taken but there is nowhere in the Bible that God specifically demands to rape a women. You just assumed that it was most likely to happen.
@DiscoveringReligion I noticed the quote from Matthew 7:17 you mentioned Jesus is enforcing the law. I think your missing the point. Jesus came to FULFILL the law with his NEW covenant. The sacrificial and civil laws no longer apply to us, but the moral ones do. He goes further and says anyone who so much as hates a person is like murder.
Every video has been amazing! What could have been mentioned toward the end, when you explained how morality is constantly being molded, is the paradoxically, ever-evolving "objective" morality derived from the Pope. How is a human being appointed to subject the objective morality from God, and filter its values to harmonise our ever-evolving tolerance in society? Though this is obviously necessary for them, because if religious morality wasn't supervised then the vast majority would oppose it.
with all the education with all our spieces knowlege of the natural world people still believe religious propaganda. our species is doomed and organized religion will be the root cause people need to change there way of thinking about god. the chistian and muslim views have been proven wrong countless times. god cannot see or interact with us.
So basically you are saying that you don't like God, therefore he doesn't exist. What a joke, you haven't proven ANYTHING. You think your personal views can be moral, with no ultamate basis? That means anything can be viewed as moral just because you say it is. When given the choice of who to listen to, God the creator of the universe or man, I pick God. God has a good reason for everything, and just because you don't know the reason doesn't mean God is wrong. Have fun in HELL.
@DarthHater100 If you can't follow the video and draw intelligent conclusions from it you should not post. It only hurts your case. Obviously videos like this are going to piss off religious people, the truth often does.
@Clubbingshawn the truth? Ha, what a joke. So you are saying that whatever man feels like dreaming up is truth? Sorry, every couple few decades science changes its mind. The only LOGICAL TRUTH comes from the the Bible, the word of God. I don't know where you are from, but here in the USA, "Gods Country", you are in the minority and you are the one who is stupid, not God.
@DarthHater100 Again, you are not making any sort of intelligent argument. I hope you are just trolling because it's scary that people like you exist. Everything you just said contradicts everything that was in this video. You also brought up science which has not been brought up by anyone on this subject. Which leads me to believe you either read the title and decided to be instantly offended. Or you cannot grasp the information that was presented.
Jesus' "fufillment" of the OT (matt 5:17) put the OT law to death. Col 2:14, Eph 2:15, Rom 7:14, both say that the OT law was put to death on the cross via Jesus. Gal 5:4 says that anyone who tries to b justified by the law is estranged from Christ. The reason why this is is because modern believers follow the teachings of JESUS. Christian=Christ follower. Jesus had 2 commanments- love your God, and love your neighbor as yourself. the OT was written for the children of Israel- not modern xians.
@GenerationEpic90 In the new testament Jesus condones following the laws that were written by Moses as the direct word of God. If you go back to ep 19 part 1 you can see the verses where this is stated. Christians love to cherry pick what they want to believe and what is true, but IMO you have to follow all of it or your not following your own belief. You can't just pick what is convenient or what makes you look better.
@GenerationEpic90 Your just proving that the bible contradicts itself. It contradicts itself so much that I can't even begin to understand how anybody can take it literally. It is the reason for bible school. The teachers tell you what makes sense, by NOT showing all the contradictions. Same with preachers at a sermon. I'm surprised christianity hasn't made it a sin to read the bible on your own without being a "scholar" of it.
@Clubbingshawn God is satisfied with his work Gen 1:3God is dissatisfied with his works. Gen 6:6 contradiction God dwells in chosen temples 2 Chron 7:12,16 God dwells not in temples Acts 7:48God is seen and heard Ex 33:23/ Ex 33:11/ Gen 3:9,10/ Gen 32:30/ Is 6:1/ Ex 24:9-11 God is invisible and cannot be heard John 1:18/ John 5:37/ Ex 33:20/ 1 Tim 6:16 the list goes on and on
Oh, lastly, you said "But the fact remains our morality is being VOTED on" I think that's like saying that the truth of the theory of evolution is being voted on in school districts that would like to teach creationism. It TRUTH of it isn't being voted on, but acceptance of that truth is being voted on. There are right and wrong answers to whether or not blasphemy should be a punishable offence, regardless of who votes on what.
This topic is way too complex to be debated through YT comments. But to address this one issue... you are both right and wrong. Not only do we vote on accepting the truth, but in certain sistuations we also vote on the truth as well -- it just depends on the topic being discussed. Take,for example, the abolition of alcohol. In the 1920s it was widely believed drinking alcohol was a sin and immoral. But what was this perception based on?
It could have been influenced by religion, the social ills alcohol seemed to promote, health concerns, etc. However, the abolition of alcohol resulted in even greater social ills, namely crime and bootlegging, so much so abolition was repealed. The "truth" about whether it is moral to drink alcohol was literally VOTED on by the people. A sip of beer in the 1920s was considered to be illegal and immoral, but now even the president can drink a beer and no one bats an eye.
Now, this is not to say ALL moral values are purely subjective and hold no regard for the truth. Truth can help guide our sense of morality, but ultimately human beings are the ones voting on how to define an action as being "moral". Muslims might find it immoral to eat pork, but who are we to tell them they cant, or for them to tell the West we must abstain from pork? There really is no ultimate truth to such practices, it is just our subjective option of we think is moral.
@DiscoveringReligion "This topic is way too complex to be debated through YT comments" It is!
To your question i can only say that the abolition of alcohol was much like many of the laws that we have in place today, it was meant (As Sam Harris put it) To protect us from sin, not from crime, and was based on subjective religious edict; then again, there was a secular case made for it, IE: the "it leads to this and that" slippery slope.
I love this episode. It is as good as 19 and spot on. "God" is man, and quite a narcissistic one at that; nothing more. Thousands of years of such a disappointing and appalling standard if half of what is written ever occurred; truly sad. "Christ" "forgives" the sins of Christians, and "God's'Christ's" people have always forgiven the sins of "God". Promised land, "eternal life" -symbiotic quid pro quo. You have one of the best series there is on you tube. Fantastic vid.
I come from an atheist family but I’ve always been intrigued on what goes on in the religious minds. For me, the whole “God” thing makes no sense, but the human psychology behind religion is very interesting. I’ve watched all the videos in Andy’s series and to be honest they are the best I’ve witnessed so far in understanding where we come from, where we are going, religion, and atheism. Excellent work!
You said: ""God is hypocritical, If you disagree, explain the argument presented in the video that adultery is punishable by death, yet, when God commits adultery, its prefectly ok.""
First of all, God doesn't have a penis and can not commit adultery, but let's say for the sae of argument that he did. according to the author, that
s God's subjective moral framework, and just as valid as any other. he makes the rules and can break them if he wants. If Morality is subjective, why not? (con't)
What he ought to have said is that morality is a rational proposition, not a dogmatic one. that is pertains to the proposition that all men are by nature equal in that we all share natural needs, and thus natural rights. he should not have said that morality is subjective until an arbitrary set of values is applied to a group.
15:00 mark there is quite a comprehensive list. Every quote demonstrates the hypocrisy of God according to the ten commandments and his immoral actions. How is this subjective if God is not subject to his moral outline?
"There infants will be dashed to pieces before thier eyes; thier house will be looted and thier wives violated...their bows will strike down the young men; they will have no mercy on infants"...etc.
The difference is that subjective reasoning is debated against other subjective reasonings to find and agreeable consensus. In God's sense his objective reasoning trumps others and therefore is only objective if it wasn't we wouldnt be having this conversation. If it is subjective than alterations must be made to the bible to reflect that.
Impregnating a women who is married to another man is not adultery? If God's moral reasonings are subjective than yes there is an argument for his actions but that completely contradicts much of whats said about God in the bible such as "Fear God and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man."
to your second point, I say again, if Morality is an arbitrary edict that becomes objective when applied to a group, then God doesn't HAVE to follow the rules that he lays down for other people; but I think you missed my point: This video made a critical error in saying that morality is subjective, and then proposing than edicts handed down by God are immoral (con't)
Again, what he ought to have said is that Morality is a rational subject, not a dogmatic one. Saying that it's subjective puts God, Hitler, Lincoln, and everyone else on perfectly equal footing.
@TheSecularTheist I can see your point. The point the author of the video was trying to make,i think, was that secular subjectiveness is reasoned with others ideas and objective in a broad scope as a society. In God's moral reasoning none of this is considered in society and God's word is final and also that God is not subject to his own moral reasoning therefore making it hypocritical in assessment. God is the foundation of morality yet he commits immoral acts and is not held accountable
@therabbithole999 I think he mischaracterized both. Mosaic law had nothing to do with general morality in terms of how to achieve the good life on earth, like all religious edicts it dealt exclusively with how to be right with God. (though i have to add that this video is merely repeating an error made by most modern day religious people.) But I think you hit the nail on the head as to why morality can not be said to be subjective if we're judging moral frames against a criteria.
@TheSecularTheist "No, Having sex with a married woman is adultery." I am clear now, I may conclude that impregnating someone is WORSE than "lying" with them in a morality sense as defined in this video.
This has been flagged as spam show
BIBLE MORALITY
If your neighbor works on saturday,kill them.
If your child throws oatmeal at you,kill them.
IF your mom plants corn and pumpkins in the same field,kill her.
If your sister has pre-marital sex,kill her.
(but dont think twice about her sex partner)
If the folks in the next town arnt christians,kill them all and take their baby girls home for sex slaves.
Its all there,advice for a perfect life.
JESUStheATHEIST1 2 weeks ago
@DiscoveringReligion To state that atheists maintain that morality is a subjective system of value is erroneous. Atheists like Sam Harris disagree with you on this matter; Sam talks about this in his book "The Moral Landscape."
ronwisegamgee 2 weeks ago
14:03. The Holy Hand Grenade.
libbotoppo 3 weeks ago
Thanks for this, keeo it up!
:offtopic: Nice soundtrack!
vladimirFNX 1 month ago
its great to do good for your god ect. but should be enough to do good because it feels great for you and is great for everyone.
spiralpeck100 1 month ago
Who decides all this ??????? We can only try to remain good neighbors citizens family members friends ect. Thats the goal i think to continue where the bible or religious laws have started us off toward from a barbaric time. Without these books to remindus of where we come from we might just forget and repeat this same inhumane mistakes once again. Respect it for what it is don't dwell or fight over it respect others and fight to do good things without harming as way of life.
spiralpeck100 1 month ago
If your a good person i beleive you will always see the good w your heart and take the good out of everything in life. You will also feel when bad things are happening in your heart and gut. That is God speaking to you in my past experiences. My guess is we all know what I'm talking about. The real person human is the one willing to speak up When another is in pain and help and love one another. Then again there has to be laws for a society to servive in my oppinion within humane standards
spiralpeck100 1 month ago
The bible was law as it was needed then and should be respected the same way for example run dmc or the beetles are respect today. Although these groups are not the most poular today and the things they were fighting against or singing about might not corispond with todays movements. these bands are absolutely respected and were absolutely needed to bring music where it is today. In same way bible law was possibly needed then to open doors and minds to living a more civil life.
spiralpeck100 1 month ago
Who's the hottie fortuneteller? Daaaaamn.
PaladinHero 1 month ago
I have seen how real God is, and many others.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
God is love regardless of what you would say.
This loving admonishment alone is to warn others of what is coming.
God will bless you beyond you could imagine in your day's to come, and eternal.
Choose not God, and you will have ZERO hope of eternal, and hope of survival to what is coming.
I know what future events are coming.
It will look like a Hollywood movie.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
This is the day of man.
The day of God WILL HAPPEN IN MY LIFE TIME.
When you stand before the white thrown judgement for rejecting him, adding, and subtracting from his word. Show God your video.
The world you know will CEASE to exist.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
@TheIggy457
"The day of God WILL HAPPEN IN MY LIFE TIME." Funny, that's what Paul believed as well. Christians have been saying that line for 2,000 + years. What ever happened to: "I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." (Mark 13:30)? What's the hold up? Is God too busy allowing African children to starve?
DiscoveringReligion 2 months ago 14
@DiscoveringReligion Paul thought Jesus would set his kingdom up on earth.
Shall i give you future events. Everything that God has ordained since the beginning WILL come to pass at its appointed time, and not one moment before.
The time is soon, but not now.
Just as Satan steal, kills, and destroys he uses people to do his will.
God sends people to do his will, and that includes reaching out to the lost.
That applies to you my friend.
I have been part of missions reaching out to people.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion God is love, and his love will been by those who choose Jesus.
YOU are considered "those who choose" Jesus.
God is like you tube. He has been subscribed to you. "Your whole life", but you reject HIM.
That is why you don't know him, and how real, and loving he is.
God has said that he has reached out to you "countless times", but you continue to reject the heeding of his voice.
AS long as you breath. You can accept him, and he will forgive you.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
@TheIggy457
God does not exist as you describe. He is not a God of love, but rather, a God of wrath, jealousy, and revenge. I am an insect by comparison, but I am required to grovel before him. To what end? What's worse, he doesn't give evidence of his existence. I must worship God on faith alone, otherwise I will be tortured for all eternity. Ha! I don't buy it. Your God is evil, promoting rape, infanticide, genocide and slavery. The Bible is a collection of Bronze Age myths, nothing more.
DiscoveringReligion 2 months ago 9
@DiscoveringReligion God is real. Your correct in saying that God isn't the God of love.
He is the author of THE love. A love that couldn't comprehended or phathomed by earthly love. God is judgement, jealousy for you. Evidence is everywhere.
God says in his word alone. That only a fool could not see that.
God is good. Satan is evil, and he is the root of evil. Take the human anatomy. It is SO COMPLEX that the information about the eyes alone couldn't be held in a super computer.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion We NEVER came from a single cell or animals.
The odds of the human anatomy came from nothing is absolutely obsurd.
The odds have so many zeros against of such an occurance that.
The same odds would be as if a tornado touched down in a boeing 747 junk yard, and when it passed through. The tornado assembled it before exiting.
That is how impossible we came from the big bang, soup, animals, single cell.
God is there with you. Seek HIM, and you shall find him.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion Countless people of all nationalities have stated the same thing.
That there is NO God, but how many yearly come to know how real he is. " Including Atheists".
TheIggy457 2 months ago
@TheIggy457 Who told you God reached out to him?
irr3v 1 month ago
@irr3v Sorry friend. I received Plethora emails.
Please give clarity on your comment.
Thanks, and shalom to you.
TheIggy457 1 month ago
God is sovereign.
If for instance Palestine is giving statehood. That means that Gods holy land of Jerusalem is part of a Islam state. If this happens God will bring within 24-48 judgement upon U.S., and he will wake up many unto HIM "YOUR CREATOR" as a recruiting campaign.
God is sovereign yesterday, today, and forever.
Once you know the TRUTH. You are then accountable for the truth you know.
YOU are now HELD accountable for what you know.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
Interesting video.
There will be a level of damnation unto those who reject God.
There will be a new level of damnation unto those who use this garbage to lead people away from God.
HIS IS YOUR CREATOR. If you like it or not.
HE is sovereign.
TheIggy457 2 months ago
I think Christianity is stupid, but to say that Jesus' purpose was to REENFORCE the Mosaic law is a lie. Jesus, according to what I was taught, came to replace the Mosaic law when I was a Christian... C'mon, man.
luomio 2 months ago
@luomio
Did you watch the series? If so, then you would know I am referring to the MORAL law. Yes, Jesus abolished the sacrificial, dietary, and judicial laws of Judaism, I said as much in Episode 18. However, Jesus still upholds the MORAL laws of not killing, stealing, committing adultery, and so on.
DiscoveringReligion 2 months ago 2
Sorry, but the part at 14:40, where the guys is licking the cat's butt, is hilarious.
yuothineyesasian 2 months ago
it took me the hole video to realize this was for atheist
jasonmarden 2 months ago
@jasonmarden *whole
jasonmarden 2 months ago
I heard on The Atheist Experience (great show) a caller claim that if it weren't for his religion, nothing would stop him from raping and murdering everyone he saw. Really??? Those things sure aren't on my agenda, even though I'm a godless atheist. Do they really believe that? Are there actually a hoard of christian would-be rapists and murderers out there?
8698gil 2 months ago
con'td. Tell that to a child who was raised to believe in a loving god who answers prayers and is kidnapped, raped, tortured and beaten to death. When that child is praying for help that never comes. Timetable, my ass.
8698gil 2 months ago
You cannot reason with a christian, even if you actually show them the passages in the bible. They can rationalize absolutely anything by telling themselves that its part of god's marvelous, master and ultimately good plan for humanity, and if we suffer its for our own good and we are not meant to question or understand why. This is what I was taught as a child. A christian once messaged me saying that god doesn't answer prayers because he has his own timetable.
8698gil 2 months ago
I thought Mary and Joseph weren't married yet, just engaged when she became pregnant. And if she was already married, why would Joseph believe the child wasn't his, unless she was already too far along. My theory was that Mary was raped by a family member, since Jewish women were very secluded and she wouldn't have had opportunity to meet other men, and Joseph ran away with her to save her from being stoned to death. Just an idea, I'm not at all certain about it.
8698gil 2 months ago
The comment made about not working on sundays really brought back some memories for me. As kids, we weren't allowed to go to the store on a sunday, until one afternoon while riding my bike I saw my Dad in the neighbourhood convenience store buying cigarettes. And it was a sunday.
8698gil 2 months ago
Everybody lies, even christians. The majority of people do not lie in order to cause harm, though. They may lie to spare someone else's feelings, or perhaps to cover up something they are embarrassed or ashamed about. I've seen people actually use that "thou shalt not lie" commandment to actually cause harm, though. To make a truthful statement to someone for no reason other than to hurt them, and then feel virtuous about it. Now that's immoral.
8698gil 2 months ago
Whether an action is moral or immoral depends entirely upon the circumstances. Ray Comfort blathers on about if someone has ever lied, he is a liar and a sinner. Wouldn't anyone lie, say, if your child was sleeping in the home during an armed robbery and that person asked if anyone else was in the house? I know I would, to protect my child. How would that be wrong?
8698gil 2 months ago
would protesting also be called "chaos"?
OrganicKing 4 months ago
@OrganicKing
It depends on the protest. Non-violent protests that don't infringe on the autonomy of others are fine. But you cannot destroy property or injury other people in the name of protest. Balancing autonomy with society's well-being can be tricky. You cannot do or say anything you want, no matter the cost to the well-being of others. Hate speech or calling in false bomb threats might be forms of free speech, but they can incite violence or hysteria, and thus are damaging to society.
DiscoveringReligion 4 months ago
I have listened to many speakers on this subject such as the likes of C. Hitchens and while I found them to excellent your presentation to far and above those.Please continue to spread the truth.
dan69052 4 months ago
@dan69052
Thank you very much! I plan to. :)
DiscoveringReligion 4 months ago
FUCK GOD!!!
237Michael 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Everyone, look up Ralp Ellis' genious theory about the origin of the jewish religion. You find it on Youtube or google it. It says the jews were never slaves or victims of the pharao, but the ruling class of egypt themselves. Furthermore he states, that the old testament was the anals of the pharaos, written history, with other words. This truely gives a different perspective of the so called victim role of the jews throughout history. Also look up the jewish role in slave trade.
Bommelmensch 4 months ago
25:33 LMAO!
CaptainCrules4life 5 months ago in playlist Discovering Religion (Original Series)
Sorry to be a stickler but the last song is Mad World not Mad Word. By the way, I love your videos.
shanellypooh 5 months ago in playlist More videos from DiscoveringReligion
@shanellypooh
Oops! That was a typo, thank you very much for the correction. And I am glad you enjoy the videos, I really appreciate it. :)
DiscoveringReligion 5 months ago
well all of these verses this person is stating are really difrent. there the new international version. n new version of the bible change n add words 2 it for exp numeros 31.18 pero a todas las ninas entre las mujeres que no hayan conocido varon las dejareis con vida. basicly saying that ever young girl that's a vergin to let them live. not saying anything about keeping them for urself. u cn totally tell this person has not read the bible by what he said about psalms 137.9 /watch?v=tjzIfNP5BOc
silence227B 6 months ago
@silence227B in the kjv of the bible numbers talks about keeping the women children for yourselves, and it isn't the only place. and having read psalm 137 even in context it isn't any better. in fact i doubt there is a context in which dashing little children against rocks bringing happiness is ok. even as a metaphor.
satanisthetruegod666 5 months ago
i believe god is real but it sad what god has done now i dont know what to believe in
1kenchi 6 months ago in playlist Discovering Religion (Original Series)
@1kenchi Believe in God - just be critical towards the bible. The holy scripture is, I'm afraid, not holy. It is not the perfect word of god, but the word of men. Most christian denominations agrees that the bible needs to be interpreted. Just because the bible isn't the perfect word of God doesn't mean that God doesn't exist - however it is hard to believe in an objective moral code since the interpetation opens up for subjective morals (which is good, cos killing babies is wrong).
BjornSeverinLarsen 4 months ago
@1kenchi believe what you must, only you can find your version of "truth" its your life, let no one person or deity decide for you. only you can do that. strengthen your conviction in what ever truth you find, that is the human way, it's how we continue to live :)
phantomwolf2 3 months ago
This is the best and most informative documentary I have seen on religion.
xinic5 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
check his profile out
pepper8777 6 months ago
philhellenes
pepper8777 6 months ago
for any one that enjoyed this series i recommend this guy has a lot of great vids similar to this way of thinking
pepper8777 6 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion and yet why would jesus all of a sudden have to lead by example
jccarbunkle 6 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion How do you think think christians would justify the fact that god has a separate moral standard for us and himself?
jccarbunkle 6 months ago
@jccarbunkle
Well, God can do whatever he wants. Imagine you are a computer programmer that makes a virtual world, like the Sims. Since you set the rules of the program, you decide what your creations can and cannot do. However, you yourself are not bound by those rules because you are the programmer, you make the rules. A truly benevolent Creator would follow the same moral rules He has given His creations, but He does not have to, and He apparently does not want to either. What a God we have!
DiscoveringReligion 6 months ago 5
@DiscoveringReligion Well said. Even if god is powerful exist outside the rules, an "all-loving" being would follow them also. There really is no justification for that. Ive enjoyed your series on religion, I think your videos are well done.
jccarbunkle 6 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion In which case, because you are created and controlled by a being that programmed your reality the way IT wants it to exist, there is NO reason that you should then PRAISE that programmer for inserting you into a bullshit existence created for HIS pleasure, and not yours.
You are locked in a small room, designed by someone else, and told to thank them every day for putting you there.
What an absurd mindset.
XoSINNoX 6 months ago 3
@DiscoveringReligion
skepticsannotatedbible(dot)com/contra/by_name
give me an answer for them.
Oh and you just compared your "god" with Sims?
for that I love you.
ABPitcher 6 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion Very Very interesting point
crazyballs9 5 months ago
great series, I look forward to the next episode!
Dudeatheist 7 months ago
Wow great flick
cadeere74 7 months ago
i used to watch and locve yp.our show
until this i saw this episode
you started to offence all religions under the term of(freedom of speach)
sad to find such person like you
doing what is morally wrong
salmaabdo 7 months ago
@salmaabdo
How could I possibly offend someone with the truth? The beauty of the Scripture is that it is written down, in black and white, there for all the world to see. If you think the Bible passages where God commands his followers to rape, murder innocent women and children, enslave other human beings, and commit genocide against the entire world are offensive, then you should be upset with God, not me.
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago 24
@DiscoveringReligion Simple, The Truth hurts :D
NateXzX 5 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion well done sir.
surshot56 3 months ago
sir
what about smoking???
and what about having sex with your frends wife??
are they morraly wrong???
salmaabdo 7 months ago
@salmaabdo
As I said in the video, adultery is wrong because the person being cheated on is having his trust violated. Smoking is not immoral because you are doing it to yourself -- it is in accordance with your personal desires. However, if you want to thoroughly examine the issue you need to understand what effect smoking has on healthcare costs, how much this addiction is costing tax payers, and so on. If the cost to society is too great, then smoking could be seen as immoral.
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion
even when somone somkes alone
he does not have the right to do it
do you know
because in my view he is hurting the body and the soul which are given by God to him
and it is also wrong fromour view too
because he is damaging the body and the soul which are given from natur
in other words
he is killing himself
and this is religously and morally wrong
salmaabdo 7 months ago
@salmaabdo
I do not believe in God, so my morality does not take the fact you are killing yourself into account. However, such a view leads to major problems. For example, eating red meat eventually leads to heart disease, which is the number one killer of both men and women, even more so than cancer from smoking. By your logic, eating fatty meat is immoral. Morality based on a god always leads to contradictions and inconsistencies. That's why secular morality works and divine morality doesn't.
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago 14
@DiscoveringReligion So I know what's subjectively right and wrong. Why should I feel obligated to obey the golden rule? If I can get away with murder or stealing, and it brings pleasure to my life.... why not do it?
jamesluc256 7 months ago
@jamesluc256
because as a human you have empathy, empathy allows us to consider the thoughts, and emotions of others, and feel them as though they were our own. You should feel obligated to follow the golden rule because you can understand how it would make another feel and should therefore restrict your pleasure. Also it guards you, by engaging in the golden rule it encourages others around you to engage in the golden rule as well.
Dudeatheist 7 months ago
@Dudeatheist Actually, no... The Golden Rule doesn't protect everyone. There have been many nice, caring, and friendly people who were murdered regardless of whether they followed it or not.
My brother is an example of someone who doesn't follow the Golden Rule. He disrespects my mother to the max, and yet he manages to have her give him money. Not to mention he's a sociopath, yet he has tons of friends, girls flock to him even though he treats them like crap. He seems to be living happy...
jamesluc256 7 months ago
@jamesluc256
seems like you're living with a great deal of jealousy, and you also gave up a very important piece of information. If your brother truly is a sociopath than he lacks empathy, and therefore the golden rule doesn't apply to him because he cares not for the treatment of others. Society does not choose what is moral, I wonder if you even paid attention to the rules of the secular morality presented in this video.
Dudeatheist 7 months ago
@Dudeatheist Yes, I did pay attention.. it was fascinating video. Though just because humans generally don't want to break their empathetic nature, that doesn't mean that it's really WRONG or anything to kill someone, it's just because humans are empathetic and don't like that. Would it be WRONG for a human race to come and enslave humans? Well, to them it wouldn't be, and what makes our opinions greater than theirs? Why should they refrain from wiping us out?
jamesluc256 6 months ago
@Dudeatheist Also, would it be WRONG to kill a sociopath? If they do nothing but make other people unhappy?
jamesluc256 6 months ago
@jamesluc256
you really, really didn't listen to this video did you?
Dudeatheist 6 months ago
@Dudeatheist I DID listen to the video. What am I missing from it? I'm not trying to be condescending or anything, I am actually WANTING the logical answers to my questions.
jamesluc256 6 months ago
@jamesluc256
if you did then you would already know the answer to the question. Its immoral because it violates their autonomy.
Dudeatheist 6 months ago
@Dudeatheist Sure it's immoral for humans naturally, but does that make any of it really WRONG? We are just piles of goo anyway(As Peter Atkins puts it) aren't we? What difference would it make if the earth somehow got destroyed, and all of us killed? A bunch of different random living creatures may develop on a different planet, and die just eventually like us. Why are humans special, and why shouldn't humans be killed/destroyed, compared to say, a rock?
jamesluc256 6 months ago
@jamesluc256
because rocks are not aware, they have no senses, they don't exist beyond simply existing, humans can intentionally effect the future. Calling humans a pile of goo would be like calling a computer a pile of plastic and copper. It would also minimalism the billions of years of evolution and survival of our ancestors, which are all amazing and rare accomplishments. Life is an amazing thing, a miracle of biology and chemistry.
Dudeatheist 6 months ago
@Dudeatheist Humans kill each other, and may even be the death of their race. Besides, all life will end in the eventual heat death, many years from now, and it will be like we never even existed. What would be the point? Besides, humans have killed so much non human animals, and the environment.. preventing other animals from thriving, while us violent humans kill mass people at once(nukes and such). I'm sure there would be plenty less unnecessary suffering if humans didn't exist.
jamesluc256 6 months ago
@Dudeatheist Besides, who's to say because rocks have no senses, they are less valuable than humans? Because humans operate amazingly? The idea that humans are more valuable than rocks, would be an opinion statement, but how do you prove it with science? How would you prove value anyway? Of course, being complex creatures.. we would be biased towards complex creatures. But what makes us correct?
jamesluc256 6 months ago
@jamesluc256
I thought I explained it, I guess you just didn't get it or are just trying to look for a fight or troll me, either way I'm tired of trying to explain pretty basic concepts to you.
Dudeatheist 6 months ago
@Dudeatheist Why should I follow my empathy anyway? What if I don't feel obligated to follow the Golden Rule. What would give you the right to condemn me? Because the population wants you to? How many times has the population been wrong? We will all die in the heat death at the end of the universe anyway, why not stop our tyranny now? Humans have been messing up this planet for a long time, and destroying the environment. What makes humans more important than the environment, or even rocks?
jamesluc256 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion I do believe one aught to treat themself with the same respect and reverence that they treat others.
If someone asked me to stab them in the heart, I still consider it immoral.
Same if I want to stab myself in the heart. It's the golden rule in reverse. But in this case, the reverse is also true.
Therefore, Hitler was no hypocrite when he eventually executed himself.
DannyPhantomBeast 6 months ago
@DannyPhantomBeast
Hey there. It all depends on the context. Why is the person asking you to kill them? If they are perfectly healthy and they want to die, then there must be some underlying cause, like abuse, depression, or some other psychological disorder, and it would be your duty to help them find counselling. However, if the person is slowly dying of cancer, is in constant pain, and no longer wishes to live, then, IMO, it would be your moral duty to help that person die with dignity.
DiscoveringReligion 6 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion Yeah, I'm not referring to mercy killings motivated by physical pain.
DannyPhantomBeast 6 months ago
Wait... Joseph and Mary weren't married yet?
I don't think there was technically any infraction.
DannyPhantomBeast 6 months ago
@DannyPhantomBeast
They were engaged, in other words, they made a promise to each other. Furthermore, Mary was required to be a virgin before she was wed. Therefore, from the perspective of Joseph, it appears as though Mary had found another lover behind his back, got pregnant, and broke the promise they had made to each other. By any standard it appears Mary cheated on Joseph and broke her commitment. However, because God is never morally accountable for His actions, He gets a free pass. :)
DiscoveringReligion 6 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion Supernatural Artificial Insemination?
DannyPhantomBeast 6 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion I said this in a earlier post, but has anyone considered (assuming the Mary story is true), that she may have been raped by a family member and become pregnant? And that Joseph took her away to save her from being stoned to death? Mary would have been blamed, not the man who raped her. And perhaps they were both so ashamed by her dishonor that they made up the whole story?
8698gil 2 months ago
@DannyPhantomBeast not technically but ethically it was wrong
nwin6 3 months ago
Though what you're saying about the portrayal of God is true, I think you're becoming preoccupied with pouring out disgust with something that you've already established to be mythological.
We need more focusing on rebuilding and how to re-contextualize religion in light of this data.
Is this about "Discovering Religion" or "Deconstructing Religion"?
DannyPhantomBeast 6 months ago
@DannyPhantomBeast
I am demonstrating that a morality based on the Bible is impossible, because the objective standard by which Christians claim to live contains horribly cruel and unjust laws, such as slavery, rape, genocide, toddler murder, etc. I don't care about re-contextualizing religion because it is fundamentally flawed -- true morality is subjective. Also, the title is a play on words. Check out the FAQ on my website for an explanation: discoveringreligion(dot)net/?page_id=165
DiscoveringReligion 6 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion
Well, in my view eating unhealthy and doing drugs is "immoral" since you are hurting yourself, but only if you do it in excess ammount.
I like this video, but I'm pretty sure a lot of things are taken out of context. You'll need to back up the claim about Moses and rape a lot, as well as try to show that slavery was as wrong as it seems. It's probably hard to do research since you're busy, but I'll be here to help ;)
Mectrixctic 6 months ago
@Mectrixctic
Nothing is taken out of context. I cite the Biblical passages and you are free to look them up for yourself. God commanded the Jews to obtain the spoils of war after slaughtering His enemies. Virgins girls were among these spoils, which Jewish men forced to be their wives and tossed aside when finished with them. I read the passage word-for-word. I also agree with your characterization of drug use and over consumption of food. Anything in excess is bad for you, even water.
DiscoveringReligion 6 months ago 2
@Mectrixctic Look in the description bar.
roboticsynapse 5 months ago
@salmaabdo
it seems as though you disagree with the basic objective morality set down in this video, which is why your believe smoking to be immoral. However by your definition of morality, engaging in any activities that are harmful to the body, overeating, eating heavily processed food, eating unhealthy food, working in unhealthy conditions, etc would all be immoral.
Dudeatheist 7 months ago
Wow your rhetoric is completely flawed. Just because one studies the Bible does not mean one understands the Bible.
Phenylalanine22 7 months ago
@Phenylalanine22
Care to elaborate? Nice name by the way, haha.
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion Thanks...
Well your definition of a "Secular Morality" can't be used as a basis for comparing the two if one doesn't agree with the definition given. You can't use the secular definition of morality and apply it to the biblical one or vise versa. It just doesn't work. I'm also afraid your taking the Bible out of context. You must consider the entire Bible as a whole in order to make any sense out of it.
Phenylalanine22 7 months ago
@Phenylalanine22
Hmm, well thats kind of the point isn't it? That's my subjective definition, and you are free to make your own. However, the point is that a subjective, secular form of morality can be defined according to a non-Biblical standard. I asked the audience to agree with my definition for the duration of the video, but you are free to insert any definition of morality you would like. (cont...)
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion
For example, say both of us do not follow a religion. You might, for whatever reason, find it immoral to drink alcohol. I, on the other hand, do not believe it is immoral. Both of our opinions on the morality of alcohol consumption are different, although they are not based on the Bible. See how that works? However, for the purposes of exploring an argument you might ask me to agree with your definition of morality. And that is exactly what I did in my video.
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion
The point is that its possible to have a version of morality that is not based on the Bible, and as such everyone's definition of morality will be slightly different. However, as a society we collectively agree on certain moral issues, such a not murdering, thieving, and raping. Those who do not agree with society's definition of certain moral actions do not stay within the society (prison). It's as simple as that.
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion
As for the Biblical version of morality, no interpretation is necessary. God makes the laws and that's that. If you feel I am taking the Bible out of context, please provide me an example. The great thing about the Bible is that it's there in black and white for all to see. When God provides instructions for how one is to marry the virgins captured after their families have been looted and slaughtered, there really is no other context in which you can read it! haha
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion You assume that the women were raped after the city was looted. There is no indication of that. Also you may have read Ecclesiastes "A time for everything." Killing is wrong but there will be times of war and peace were killing would be acceptable in that circumstance. Same as the example you gave in self defense. Also the story with Joseph and Marry, why would God consult Joseph first? No one knows the reasoning behind all of God's works. Thats why we are human.
Phenylalanine22 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion Yes, but suppose you feel it is morrally right to give money to a homeless person. Then that homeless person uses that money to buy a gun and kill a group of innocent people. Would that decision to give homeless people money become immoral to you? What doesn't fit in your logic is that morality can change inadvertently. In that sense, morality is completely irrelevant. if it is different for every person then it would not make much sense from an evolutionary stand point.
Phenylalanine22 7 months ago
@Phenylalanine22
I did not assume anything about that story, as you can cleary see in the video I read that passage word for word. But why does it even matter in what order they were raped? The fact is they were raped!
You are correct, there are circumstances when killing someone is morally justified. But how do you know that? The Ten Commandments claim you must not kill, period. Therefore, you are making this determinatioin from somewhere outside of the Bible. I find that pretty interesting!
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion
With respect, I find your example of the homeless man bizarre. You're not responsible for the actions of another. If you killed someone in the name of Christianity that doesnt mean the Pope is immoral, YOUR actions are soley to blame. There is a major disconnect in your logic. But morality can and does change with changing perceptions. Alcohol was once illegal and now it's not. Men used to marry girls as young as 12 years old, but now in developed countries that's illegal.
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion
But the fact morality changes doesn't mean it is irrelevant. Quite the contrary, that's how morality maintains it relevancy. Morality derived from the Bible is thousands of years old, and is completely irrelevant to society and culture today. That's why Christians must cherry pick Biblical laws. You want to follow the Ten Commandments found in Exodus 20, but not the laws regarding the enslavement of humans beings, found in Exodus 21!
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DR
Moral consequences change depending on the situation. Courts view the theft of one dollar much differently than the theft of one million dollars. Likewise, there are certain actions within society that must always be prohibited and other actions that can change depending on the circumstances. Cold blooded murder can never be allowed because society as we know it would collapse. However, certain states are changing laws on gay marriage and marijuana usage to reflect society's changing views.
DiscoveringReligion 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion Perhaps I could have used a better example. My point was that according to secular morality, morality is always changing as you mentioned. I personally see that as a huge issue, but thats just me.
Phenylalanine22 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion I'm not taking it outside the Bible. I already mentioned, read Ecclesiastes 3. The 10 commandments are the laws we must follow but there are circumstancial times when God will allow it such as a time of war. Also yes the women were taken but there is nowhere in the Bible that God specifically demands to rape a women. You just assumed that it was most likely to happen.
Phenylalanine22 7 months ago
@DiscoveringReligion I noticed the quote from Matthew 7:17 you mentioned Jesus is enforcing the law. I think your missing the point. Jesus came to FULFILL the law with his NEW covenant. The sacrificial and civil laws no longer apply to us, but the moral ones do. He goes further and says anyone who so much as hates a person is like murder.
Phenylalanine22 7 months ago
Every video has been amazing! What could have been mentioned toward the end, when you explained how morality is constantly being molded, is the paradoxically, ever-evolving "objective" morality derived from the Pope. How is a human being appointed to subject the objective morality from God, and filter its values to harmonise our ever-evolving tolerance in society? Though this is obviously necessary for them, because if religious morality wasn't supervised then the vast majority would oppose it.
redbreast3 7 months ago in playlist Discovering Religion (Original Series)
This is a fantastic series you've made here. Congratulations on a great job.
I found the first earlier today, and have watched the lot back to back.
Now I have to go back and thumb them all up! =P
L00NGB00W 7 months ago
The picture at 27:50 is fucking awesome lol
Clubbingshawn 8 months ago
with all the education with all our spieces knowlege of the natural world people still believe religious propaganda. our species is doomed and organized religion will be the root cause people need to change there way of thinking about god. the chistian and muslim views have been proven wrong countless times. god cannot see or interact with us.
stalkingcat123 8 months ago
So basically you are saying that you don't like God, therefore he doesn't exist. What a joke, you haven't proven ANYTHING. You think your personal views can be moral, with no ultamate basis? That means anything can be viewed as moral just because you say it is. When given the choice of who to listen to, God the creator of the universe or man, I pick God. God has a good reason for everything, and just because you don't know the reason doesn't mean God is wrong. Have fun in HELL.
DarthHater100 8 months ago
@DarthHater100 If you can't follow the video and draw intelligent conclusions from it you should not post. It only hurts your case. Obviously videos like this are going to piss off religious people, the truth often does.
Clubbingshawn 8 months ago
@Clubbingshawn the truth? Ha, what a joke. So you are saying that whatever man feels like dreaming up is truth? Sorry, every couple few decades science changes its mind. The only LOGICAL TRUTH comes from the the Bible, the word of God. I don't know where you are from, but here in the USA, "Gods Country", you are in the minority and you are the one who is stupid, not God.
DarthHater100 8 months ago
@DarthHater100 Again, you are not making any sort of intelligent argument. I hope you are just trolling because it's scary that people like you exist. Everything you just said contradicts everything that was in this video. You also brought up science which has not been brought up by anyone on this subject. Which leads me to believe you either read the title and decided to be instantly offended. Or you cannot grasp the information that was presented.
Clubbingshawn 8 months ago
@Clubbingshawn darthHater100 is shock of god this is one of his troll names.
alltiedup217 8 months ago
@alltiedup217 I kinda figured he was a troll because of his name. It's hard to tell anymore because I've met people like that.
Clubbingshawn 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DarthHater100 hey darthhater100 is shockofgod this is one of his many troll names.
alltiedup217 8 months ago
Excellent.
KomicGenius 8 months ago
Jesus' "fufillment" of the OT (matt 5:17) put the OT law to death. Col 2:14, Eph 2:15, Rom 7:14, both say that the OT law was put to death on the cross via Jesus. Gal 5:4 says that anyone who tries to b justified by the law is estranged from Christ. The reason why this is is because modern believers follow the teachings of JESUS. Christian=Christ follower. Jesus had 2 commanments- love your God, and love your neighbor as yourself. the OT was written for the children of Israel- not modern xians.
GenerationEpic90 8 months ago
@GenerationEpic90 In the new testament Jesus condones following the laws that were written by Moses as the direct word of God. If you go back to ep 19 part 1 you can see the verses where this is stated. Christians love to cherry pick what they want to believe and what is true, but IMO you have to follow all of it or your not following your own belief. You can't just pick what is convenient or what makes you look better.
Clubbingshawn 8 months ago
@Clubbingshawn "You are severed from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law."Gal5:1
"Having abolished in His flesh the law of commandments " Eph 2:15
"You also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ." Rom 7:4
"The law was our tutor to bring us to Christ but after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. " Gal 3:24-25
"dead to the law," "no longer under," "abolished," and whoever continues to follow it is considered "severed from Christ."
GenerationEpic90 8 months ago
@GenerationEpic90 Your just proving that the bible contradicts itself. It contradicts itself so much that I can't even begin to understand how anybody can take it literally. It is the reason for bible school. The teachers tell you what makes sense, by NOT showing all the contradictions. Same with preachers at a sermon. I'm surprised christianity hasn't made it a sin to read the bible on your own without being a "scholar" of it.
Clubbingshawn 8 months ago
@Clubbingshawn God is satisfied with his work Gen 1:3God is dissatisfied with his works. Gen 6:6 contradiction God dwells in chosen temples 2 Chron 7:12,16 God dwells not in temples Acts 7:48God is seen and heard Ex 33:23/ Ex 33:11/ Gen 3:9,10/ Gen 32:30/ Is 6:1/ Ex 24:9-11 God is invisible and cannot be heard John 1:18/ John 5:37/ Ex 33:20/ 1 Tim 6:16 the list goes on and on
alltiedup217 8 months ago
@alltiedup217 I don't even understand what your trying to prove? Are you trying to prove my point? Because your doing a wonderful job! Thanks!
Clubbingshawn 8 months ago
@Clubbingshawn yes i was ..not that I thought you needed the help just wanted to toss in my 2 cents.
alltiedup217 8 months ago
@alltiedup217 Ok your a cheeky monkey you are! lol good examples mate.
Clubbingshawn 8 months ago
Oh, lastly, you said "But the fact remains our morality is being VOTED on" I think that's like saying that the truth of the theory of evolution is being voted on in school districts that would like to teach creationism. It TRUTH of it isn't being voted on, but acceptance of that truth is being voted on. There are right and wrong answers to whether or not blasphemy should be a punishable offence, regardless of who votes on what.
TheSecularTheist 8 months ago
@TheSecularTheist
This topic is way too complex to be debated through YT comments. But to address this one issue... you are both right and wrong. Not only do we vote on accepting the truth, but in certain sistuations we also vote on the truth as well -- it just depends on the topic being discussed. Take,for example, the abolition of alcohol. In the 1920s it was widely believed drinking alcohol was a sin and immoral. But what was this perception based on?
DiscoveringReligion 8 months ago 3
@DiscoveringReligion
It could have been influenced by religion, the social ills alcohol seemed to promote, health concerns, etc. However, the abolition of alcohol resulted in even greater social ills, namely crime and bootlegging, so much so abolition was repealed. The "truth" about whether it is moral to drink alcohol was literally VOTED on by the people. A sip of beer in the 1920s was considered to be illegal and immoral, but now even the president can drink a beer and no one bats an eye.
DiscoveringReligion 8 months ago 3
@DiscoveringReligion
Now, this is not to say ALL moral values are purely subjective and hold no regard for the truth. Truth can help guide our sense of morality, but ultimately human beings are the ones voting on how to define an action as being "moral". Muslims might find it immoral to eat pork, but who are we to tell them they cant, or for them to tell the West we must abstain from pork? There really is no ultimate truth to such practices, it is just our subjective option of we think is moral.
DiscoveringReligion 8 months ago 3
@DiscoveringReligion "This topic is way too complex to be debated through YT comments" It is!
To your question i can only say that the abolition of alcohol was much like many of the laws that we have in place today, it was meant (As Sam Harris put it) To protect us from sin, not from crime, and was based on subjective religious edict; then again, there was a secular case made for it, IE: the "it leads to this and that" slippery slope.
TheSecularTheist 8 months ago
Your videos are extremely subjective.
D3athB4H0n0r 8 months ago
@D3athB4H0n0r
So is your comment...
DiscoveringReligion 8 months ago
Wow I'm surprise Camp Jesus did not send you dirty emails yet haha. Great Video
grownman455 9 months ago
This is probably the best secular morality video on youtube. I hope it becomes viral
drbarry00 9 months ago
I love this episode. It is as good as 19 and spot on. "God" is man, and quite a narcissistic one at that; nothing more. Thousands of years of such a disappointing and appalling standard if half of what is written ever occurred; truly sad. "Christ" "forgives" the sins of Christians, and "God's'Christ's" people have always forgiven the sins of "God". Promised land, "eternal life" -symbiotic quid pro quo. You have one of the best series there is on you tube. Fantastic vid.
PawnBACM 9 months ago
The Bible, " the world's greatest horrer novel"
It gave Stephen king chills X (
yxrcbszg 9 months ago
I come from an atheist family but I’ve always been intrigued on what goes on in the religious minds. For me, the whole “God” thing makes no sense, but the human psychology behind religion is very interesting. I’ve watched all the videos in Andy’s series and to be honest they are the best I’ve witnessed so far in understanding where we come from, where we are going, religion, and atheism. Excellent work!
TwistedMind6969 9 months ago
You said: ""God is hypocritical, If you disagree, explain the argument presented in the video that adultery is punishable by death, yet, when God commits adultery, its prefectly ok.""
First of all, God doesn't have a penis and can not commit adultery, but let's say for the sae of argument that he did. according to the author, that
s God's subjective moral framework, and just as valid as any other. he makes the rules and can break them if he wants. If Morality is subjective, why not? (con't)
TheSecularTheist 9 months ago
@TheSecularTheist (Fin)
What he ought to have said is that morality is a rational proposition, not a dogmatic one. that is pertains to the proposition that all men are by nature equal in that we all share natural needs, and thus natural rights. he should not have said that morality is subjective until an arbitrary set of values is applied to a group.
TheSecularTheist 9 months ago
@TheSecularTheist 10:35
15:00 mark there is quite a comprehensive list. Every quote demonstrates the hypocrisy of God according to the ten commandments and his immoral actions. How is this subjective if God is not subject to his moral outline?
"There infants will be dashed to pieces before thier eyes; thier house will be looted and thier wives violated...their bows will strike down the young men; they will have no mercy on infants"...etc.
Isaiah 13:15-18
therabbithole999 9 months ago
@TheSecularTheist
The difference is that subjective reasoning is debated against other subjective reasonings to find and agreeable consensus. In God's sense his objective reasoning trumps others and therefore is only objective if it wasn't we wouldnt be having this conversation. If it is subjective than alterations must be made to the bible to reflect that.
therabbithole999 9 months ago
@TheSecularTheist
Impregnating a women who is married to another man is not adultery? If God's moral reasonings are subjective than yes there is an argument for his actions but that completely contradicts much of whats said about God in the bible such as "Fear God and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man."
Eclesiastes 12:13
God is not following his own moral reasoning and is determining morality completely objectively and hypocritically.
therabbithole999 9 months ago
@therabbithole999 No, Having sex with a married woman is adultery.
to your second point, I say again, if Morality is an arbitrary edict that becomes objective when applied to a group, then God doesn't HAVE to follow the rules that he lays down for other people; but I think you missed my point: This video made a critical error in saying that morality is subjective, and then proposing than edicts handed down by God are immoral (con't)
TheSecularTheist 9 months ago
@TheSecularTheist (con't)
Again, what he ought to have said is that Morality is a rational subject, not a dogmatic one. Saying that it's subjective puts God, Hitler, Lincoln, and everyone else on perfectly equal footing.
TheSecularTheist 9 months ago
@TheSecularTheist I can see your point. The point the author of the video was trying to make,i think, was that secular subjectiveness is reasoned with others ideas and objective in a broad scope as a society. In God's moral reasoning none of this is considered in society and God's word is final and also that God is not subject to his own moral reasoning therefore making it hypocritical in assessment. God is the foundation of morality yet he commits immoral acts and is not held accountable
therabbithole999 9 months ago
@therabbithole999 I think he mischaracterized both. Mosaic law had nothing to do with general morality in terms of how to achieve the good life on earth, like all religious edicts it dealt exclusively with how to be right with God. (though i have to add that this video is merely repeating an error made by most modern day religious people.) But I think you hit the nail on the head as to why morality can not be said to be subjective if we're judging moral frames against a criteria.
TheSecularTheist 9 months ago
Comment removed
therabbithole999 9 months ago
@TheSecularTheist "No, Having sex with a married woman is adultery." I am clear now, I may conclude that impregnating someone is WORSE than "lying" with them in a morality sense as defined in this video.
therabbithole999 9 months ago
@therabbithole999 If not worse than equally immoral as immorality is not expressed in degrees of harshness except in law.
therabbithole999 9 months ago
@therabbithole999 If it were against her will I would agree with you.
TheSecularTheist 9 months ago