Collection of critical pages on Religion and Morals

Thread started by dhevil

From: dhevil	Date: April 1st, 2005 06:30 pm (UTC)		(Link)

You mention the Christian Gods' way of brining in new commandments. First of all, that is irrelevant because I do no believe in Christianity. ["If there is a God (as you believe, now)" That sentence has implications that my faith will eventually end. Sorry, not gonna happen]

Yes, I accept that there are cultural and social explanations for morality, apart from religious. However, as pointed out in one other of my replies, morality of Islam must be followed as BEST TO YOUR ABILITY if it is to function. Some people will simply not be able to follow some rules of Islam, and whatever reason this is, as long as there is absolutely nothing in their power they can do to TRY to follow these laws, it is forgiven of them. Also, if you do not follow by some morals sometimes, you can be forgiven for that also, as long as you ask for forgivness. Everyone sins at some point in their lives, and there is noone that I know who has followed Islam 100%. We are humans after all, and not machines. So for different people, and different cultures, it will be harder to abide by some laws. God is just, and will make up for this difficulty in the after life. The harder your life was while following Gods laws, the better your reward will be.

And as I have just been arguing, there ARE spiritual morals that people "tap into", and these can be found in the holy Quraan.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous)	Date: September 30th, 2009 11:59 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Absolute morality, Statistics or an Enforced Will.

If reason or logic is allowed?, There can only be three options for morality.

The morality of agreement (statistical) This is what the most of us agree on.
The morality of power (an enforced will) This is what is right because I can make you do it.
The morality of God (an absolute) This is a non statistical, or non enforced will form of morality. Even God must follow this, because it is a part of God's nature.

In the first case we should either be listening to the largest groups in the world, or be having a world wide referendum on what is moral.
India and China should be among the leading forces settng morality.
Possibly the UN would run the referendum.
The problem here is what could we all agree upon.
How would statistical morality be enforced
How often do we check to see if morality has changed.
There is no individual free will, only statistical will.
In the second case whoever has the most power sets morality.
If had won the war then he was right. At the moment the US
has the most power so we should be listening to them.
The problem here is whether might is right. War sets morality?
Powerful people are not always intelligent or loving.
There is no free will, only what I am forced to have by power.
In the third case absolute morality exists.
Either God communicates it to us or
we will have to discover it by studying the nature of God.
The problem here is that if absolute morals exist then
we will all be held to them. Absolute justice/judgement exists.
There is no free will, as morality is fixed.

If we are sensible no other expanations exist. There are no gushy feeling morals. Knowledge and Science constantly change and the more we know the less we agree on. In all three cases there is no free will.

I believe the whole world is mixed up with all three versions of morality.

Will one win out in the end. We will have to wait and see.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)