Trying to help a religious fundamentalist learn how to develop and use logical thinking skills.




Joshua Barnes

That’s certainly a satanic perspective. Just because (some Christian-themed cults are abusive) doesn't mean God isn’t real.


James Apperson

The OP has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of whether or not any gods exist.

Nor does it call out any particular cult. 

Also,
calling the meme out
(and the person who posted that meme) for "certainly Satanic" thinking
is just a current cultural iteration of "The Satanic Panic". 

 It's a thought-stopping line of mental coding
implanted into your mental-computer's Operating System, as a way to trigger an emotional-defense, in order to prevent you from being reasonable. 

Joshua Barnes

the OP assumes subjective morality trumps an absolute morality that stems from God.

James Apperson

 No. 
It doesn't.
--

Think about it.

A religious Jew, Muslim, or any other religious person
could make exactly the same statement and point as the OP; without contracting their own theistic moral narrative.

How so?

Because:

1. The idea of an objective-absolute moral law giver
is not a claim shared by all theists.

Many theists, instead, hold to the idea of a "God" whose thought processes are what yours and mine are "made in the image of", and who only differs from our moral conclusions (sometimes). And only simply because he knows everything (that can be known) and has perfect character.

So then his moral intuitions would simply be based on:
giving a damn about others
and
knowing enough data that he can always make a fully formed decision about what's best; to maximize human wellbeing and minimize harms (at least, in the long run).

I don't share those beliefs.

Our world is clearly not even in the zone of a best possible world.

Also, the choice to allow so much suffering simply cannot be justified with an "ends justifies the means" philosophy.

If every human (and animal) consented to everything they suffer-badly from, then I'd be a lot less critical.
#ConsentMatters.

But the point is only that billions of God-believers would (and actually do) agree with the OP.

Those theists aren't being accidentally-atheists about it.
They are honoring their own theological perspectives. 

2. I'll get to this next point in a moment.

James Apperson

2. Even if we grant the idea of an "absolute morality that stems from God" (whatever a "God" is), ...
the OP is still legit.

How so?

Because:

Any hypothetical "God" (whatever that is)
could just as easily read the OP and agree with it.

He/she/It/The/Whatever might look down,
notice that ugly chunk of Christian fundamentalism,
and think themselves:

"My absolute and objective morality" doesn't jive with Christianity.

As it happens, my absolute and objective morality would prohibit me from planning, sanctioning, or committing to any such behaviors.

I would simply never reason and behave in such a way. And only some impressively messed up humans would build a religious system that assumes I'd reason and behave in such ways."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gods Exist; As A Way Of Thinking And Speaking That We Can Grow Past

Image
[Version 3.0 Please pardon the typos and other "wonk". This is a work in progress. Feedback would be greatly appreciated. But even if all you do is read it, I'll still be very grateful.  Thanks] ====== Some people worship actually-existing things; like the Sun.  Some Sun worshippers proceed without assuming the Sun is sentient.  They have that relationship to the Sun, as a brilliant, live-giving, and sometimes punishing power.  It's a humbling awe. It's also an idea that informs them of who they are. They are a recipient of life from a personified life-giver.  They are a subject to the threat that anyone who dares stare too long at the Sun may be struck blind. They are subject to limits and consequences, if they spend too much or too little time in the Sun's presence.  The Sun blesses us caretakers and sharers of the abundant life that the Sun imparts.  The Sun makes sure the lakes and sky share their life giving waters. It directly helps ~shape~ ever Sun-wors
Read more

Responding to "HOW DO YOU KNOW?" that (any) historical issue is a settled issue(?)

Image
This blog was inspired by a discussion happening in a forum on Facebook. Specifically, the issue on the table was: "Did the writers of Matthew, Mark, and Luke/Acts think that Jesus was either part of a Triune-Godhead, or at least the same "God" as the patriarchal deity of 2nd Temple Judaism?" Predictably, a Trinitarian religious fundamentalist said "yes". Predictably, an enabler of unspecified background has rushed in to support that fundamentalist. In context, it's really obvious to me that the enabler was raised in that same ideological culture; no matter how religious they may-or-may-not-be currently. So when I pointed out what actual scholars say about it, I also pointed out that this is a settled issue. In reply, he insisted: There are never any truly settled issues among qualified scholars. Both a real scholar and an honest (and minimally intelligent) laymen would realize this. [Note: this is just a variation of the stunt being
Read more

Christian-Fundamentalism's Relationship To Racism

Image
For now, I'll just start with a few key issues; in no particular order. 1. Atheism isn't a worldview or a values system. It's like being a non-astrologist, or a non-Leprechaun-ist. If someone doesn't believe in leprechauns in general, or if they more specifically don't believe in "The Eternal King of the Leprechauns", this really doesn't inform their personal views and values. 2. For context, I don't identify as an "atheist". The term "atheist" means "not a theist". The term "theist" means "believes in a god". The term "god" means: whatever the invoker wants it to mean. Therefore, the term "atheist" fails to make any meaningful distinction, because the term "god" fails to provide its own meaning. However, ... 3. Once a god-word-invoker does clarify their meaning, then (in that context) the term "atheist" can be contextually meaningfu
Read more