Objective Morality

[Omen]

While some good has come from it, overall it does not work nor was it meant to work.  Jehovah does not lead his servants through the governments of man.  Satan is in control of the governments of man.  The above statistics I posted are evidence of this.

You mean statistics like these:

http://moses.creighton.edu/jrs/2005/2005-11.pdf

This study repeatedly demonstrates that religious beliefs correlates with poor societal health by examining ever secular democracy in the world.

In every country a higher correlation is drawn from rates of religious belief to societal health factors like: Abortion, STDs, Teen Pregnancy, Domestic Abuse, Violent Crime, etc.

If Satan controlled the world's governments and laws, then why do we find the poorest performing countries in terms of social health with the highest religious representation in the populations?  Why aren't the countries with a less religious populace performing worse?

[Jstwebbrowsing]

This is a claim, unsupported.

You supported it yourself.

The arguments supporting slavery in the US were biblical justifications.  As were, and still are, the arguments against women's rights, gay rights, non-christian rights, etc.  Those who opposed slavery had very little in biblical arguments against slavery, just as those who support women's rights, gays, or non-christians face an uphill battle against a culture that tries to narrowly assume value is only arrived through a belief originating from biblical extremes.

So when your god told the Israelites that they could make slaves of non-israelites, it was not meant to work?

Israel at that time did not have a man made government.  And Jehovah has not acted in the same manner with any other nation on earth and since the resurrection of Christ he has not dealt with Israel in that way.

This a non-sequitur, a fallacy, the laws that they appealed to where laws that god insisted upon.

No, at most they acted upon the past trying to assume the position of Israel in relation to Jehovah.  Christians are not under the Old Covenant that Jehovah had with the Jews.  Christians are under a new covenant and this does not allow for the setting up of a man made government.  So at the very beginning the Christians did not submit to the authority of Jehovah but sat up a government of their own.  I'm sure people won't like the idea of this but a theocratic government is not democratic so it was not Jehovah's Kingdom and is therefore on a path with destruction just as all have in the past.

So while some laws they may have in common, the very form of the government is wrong.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

This study repeatedly demonstrates that religious beliefs correlates with poor societal health by examining ever secular democracy in the world.

Oh well let's just let them starve to death because they are religious.  Let's buy perfume instead.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

If Satan controlled the world's governments and laws, then why do we find the poorest performing countries in terms of social health with the highest religious representation in the populations?  Why aren't the countries with a less religious populace performing worse?

Because this is where he is most needed.  It's sort of like the saying, "You'll never see an athiest in a foxhole."

[Omen]

This is a claim, unsupported.

You supported it yourself.

Please describe a situation where a law can be made that wouldn't apply to the qualification you made it up?

Obviously, you're claim is unsupported.

The arguments supporting slavery in the US were biblical justifications.  As were, and still are, the arguments against women's rights, gay rights, non-christian rights, etc.  Those who opposed slavery had very little in biblical arguments against slavery, just as those who support women's rights, gays, or non-christians face an uphill battle against a culture that tries to narrowly assume value is only arrived through a belief originating from biblical extremes.

This has nothing to do with your claim.

So when your god told the Israelites that they could make slaves of non-israelites, it was not meant to work?

Israel at that time did not have a man made government.  And Jehovah has not acted in the same manner with any other nation on earth and since the resurrection of Christ he has not dealt with Israel in that way.

You are literally making shit up.  There were a host of kings, if biblical history is to be believed, but reality there were already established Jewish states by the time Deuteronomy was found in the temple walls just in time for the religious reforms under King Josiah.

Your arbitrary rationalization defies credulity.

This a non-sequitur, a fallacy, the laws that they appealed to where laws that god insistedupon.

No, at most they acted upon t..

And how is this different from you just randomly making stuff up?

Where are you providing a qualification for when this would never be the case?

So while some laws they may have in common, the very form of the government is wrong.

This is purely circular reasoning, based off a rationalization you literally make up on the spot.  When confronted on god supposedly delivering these laws to jews in the form of Mitzvoh, you suddenly claim that a government didn't exist, as if the laws that they had were not already subject to the ambiguity of interpretation from ruling authorities ( in the full ignorance of the bible and actual history ).  When you don't want to agree to a biblical ethics being used to support slavery, you arbitrary make up a rationale that they are all of a sudden.. trying to interpret subjectively.. and because of that they make errors.

Right, congrats on pigeon holing yourself into your own reductio ad absurdum.

[Omen]

This study repeatedly demonstrates that religious beliefs correlates with poor societal health by examining ever secular democracy in the world.

Oh well let's just let them starve to death because they are religious.  Let's buy perfume instead.

Reported for trolling.

[Omen]

If Satan controlled the world's governments and laws, then why do we find the poorest performing countries in terms of social health with the highest religious representation in the populations?  Why aren't the countries with a less religious populace performing worse?

Because this is where he is most needed.  It's sort of like the saying, "You'll never see an athiest in a foxhole."

LMAO

So countries that are less religious and as a consequence are more tolerant, enjoying greater overall society health, less poverty, as well as better education.. are only this way because 'Satan'
allows them to be?

So you're really saying that all governments should be run by liberal and secular minded atheist, just to make sure Satan doesn't mess up those governments run by a majority of theist in line with their imagined biblical principles?

[Omen]

Btw, how did you determine any of this, reasonably supported by evidence?

At least, in a manner that we can differentiate you from just making it up on the spot to rationalize away what you don't want to agree with?

[Jstwebbrowsing]

Please describe a situation where a law can be made that wouldn't apply to the qualification you made it up?

My claim is that the men that wrote the constitution did so in light of the Bible.  My claim is that the U.S. congress use to publish Bibles.  This means they tried to mix the laws of the Bible with the laws of man, such as all those laws describing a democracy.

You are literally making shit up.  There were a host of kings, if biblical history is to be believed, but reality there were already established Jewish states by the time Deuteronomy was found in the temple walls just in time for the religious reforms under King Josiah

Yes this is true.  Jehovah also told them that this would ultimately be their undoing becuase they wanted to set up governments over themselves like the other nations did.  So Jehovah made concessions.  But as time went on they drew further and further away from Jehovah that it came to the point they completely broke his covenant with them.

And how is this different from you just randomly making stuff up?

They did not set up Jehovah's Kingdom is my point.  Everything else is moot.

This is purely circular reasoning, based off a rationalization you literally make up on the spot.  When confronted on god supposedly delivering these laws to jews in the form of Mitzvoh, you suddenly claim that a government didn't exist, as if the laws that they had were not already subject to the ambiguity of interpretation from ruling authorities ( in the full ignorance of the bible and actual history ).  When you don't want to agree to a biblical ethics being used to support slavery, you arbitrary make up a rationale that they are all of a sudden.. trying to interpret subjectively.. and because of that they make errors.

Mostly answered above.  However one point I want to make.  Did they also follow the Biblical laws on how a slave should be treated and how long they may remain in slavery?  No.  Hence they went by their own laws.

Reported for trolling.

You may think it trolling but it's an honest statement.  I post statistics showing that greed is the cause of millions starving each year and you post something blaming their religion for their condition.  Aside from the fact that America has been religious and highly successful what is your point?  That you can blame everything on religion and relieve people of any individual responsibility?

[Jstwebbrowsing]

Mostly answered above.  However one point I want to make.  Did they also follow the Biblical laws on how a slave should be treated and how long they may remain in slavery?  No.  Hence they went by their own laws.

And how they may come to be slaves?  It was not by bringing them over by the boatload.

[Omen]

Please describe a situation where a law can be made that wouldn't apply to the qualification you made it up?

My claim is that the mean that wrote the constitution did so in light of the Bible.  My claim is that the U.S. congress use to publish Bibles.  This means they tried to mix the laws of the Bible with the laws of man, such as all those laws describing a democracy.

Ok.

A claim.

Where is your argument?

Where is the explanatory congruent argument that makes valid inferences drawn from premises to conclusions?

Where are these democratic laws in the bible?

Y  But as time went on they drew further and further away from Jehovah that it came to the point they completely broke his covenant with them.

Yet, this has nothing to do with your god delivering laws to justify slavery.

Are you saying slavery is ok as long as its the biblical kind of slavery?

They did not set up Jehovah's Kingdom is my point.  Everything else is moot.

So why would an omnipotent omniscient being tell people to do something, if he already knows they will never do it?  Is it an idiot?

Btw, your point changes whenever you need to equivocate around idiotic rationalizations you've already made.  You've already ignored half a dozen questions and strayed from the original subject, since you couldn't be bothered to answer for it.

This is purely circular reasoning, based off a rationalization you literally make up on the spot.  When confronted on god supposedly delivering these laws to jews in the form of Mitzvoh, you suddenly claim that a government didn't exist, as if the laws that they had were not already subject to the ambiguity of interpretation from ruling authorities ( in the full ignorance of the bible and actual history ).  When you don't want to agree to a biblical ethics being used to support slavery, you arbitrary make up a rationale that they are all of a sudden.. trying to interpret subjectively.. and because of that they make errors.

Mostly answered above.

Nothing you said answers it.  You keep making up more rationale, ontop o fthe ludicrous ones you've already made up.

However one point I want to make.  Did they also follow the Biblical laws on how a slave should be treated and how long they may remain in slavery?  No.  Hence they went by their own laws.

You mean american slavery?

Actually, they did.  They even created laws, based around biblical ideas of servitude.  Slaves could buy their way out of slavery.  The argument for american slavery was 100% biblical.

Are you trying to say biblical slavery is somehow humane?

You may think it trolling but it's an honest statement.

It's a statement that demonstrates you didn't even read the post.  I didn't say anything about any other kind of government beyond secular democracies.

[Omen]

Mostly answered above.  However one point I want to make.  Did they also follow the Biblical laws on how a slave should be treated and how long they may remain in slavery?  No.  Hence they went by their own laws.

And how they may come to be slaves?  It was not by bringing them over by the boatload.

The biblical laws in slavery allowed slaves to be taken through warfare, as well as indentured servitude.

Read your bible.

[Omen]

I need something better than you randomly making stuff up on the spot that you can't support with evidence.

[Alzael]

Not if his foreknowledge is accurate.  There were many times he waited for the "full measure of their sins" to add up before he executed judgment.  This is what was happening while the Israelites were slaves to the Egyptians.  Jehovah basically killed two birds with one stone by giving Israel the Promised Land and executing those he deemed as deserving death.

Not when he killed the first born. He killed the first born in Egypt simply to prove his own greatness. He outright says so. That's why he mind-controlled Pharoah into refusing Moses. To give him an excuse.

Seriously, have you never read that book at all?

Azael I believe I covered your objections.  If not then let me know.

You didn't even begin to address them. Nor acknowledge that you even read them.

But back to greed.  I'm really trying to get away from discussing my religious beliefs.  It seem only to cause hostility.

Only because you make claims based on it and don't bother to back them up. If you would actually try to be honest it wouldn't cause any hostility.

But back to greed.  I'm really trying to get away from discussing my religious beliefs.  It seem only to cause hostility.

The argument didn't fail. You never addressed it.

[Alzael]

Ok wait a minute. Before this goes any further I want everyone to stop posting for a moment as I think there is something that needs to be addressed here.

Jst, we keep coming back to this. So I want a straight answer from you before the argument goes forward.

I have to ask what part of being required to back up your claims do you not get?

And I'm not being snide, I'm being serious. You consistently react as though the thought of actually having to justify an idea is new to you.

You do realize that if you can't provide a reason or support for something you say then you're effectively just spouting nonsense right?

[Graybeard]

This study repeatedly demonstrates that religious beliefs correlates with poor societal health by examining ever secular democracy in the world.

Oh well let's just let them starve to death because they are religious.  Let's buy perfume instead.

This seems an entirely unsatisfactory answer to Omen's point. Could you please address it?

Both points, Alzael's and mine, need addressing

Edit to add: It seems I was typing as Azael was posting.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

Where are these democratic laws in the bible?

There are none.  My argument is that Jehovah cannot be blamed for any failure of the U.S. government at it's people because this is not Jehovah's Kingdom.  It's a man's kingdom.  Therefore man is to blame.  If Christians were involved in wrongdoing then they are to blame too.  So whether man argued for laws about slavery with Bible's in their hands is irrelevant.  What they did does not have Jehovah's blessing, from beginning to end.

Yet, this has nothing to do with your god delivering laws to justify slavery.

Well I guess by definition I put my children into slavery.  It's a quite common occurance around there that they want to borrow money and they promise they "work it off".  I give them money and then when there is a special chore that needs done then they work off the debt.  There is nothing evil about this arrangement.  It does, however, create room for abuse.

So why would an omnipotent omniscient being tell people to do something, if he already knows they will never do it?  Is it an idiot?

Some are doing it.  I could say more but not without my "magic ring".

And don't get me wrong.  I don't think these men were evil or were trying to set up something they thought would be evil.  I believe quite the contrary.  They put up a good effort but ultimately fell short by imposing man made laws or laws that even conflict with the Bible.

And a lot of it has to do with understanding.  Believe what you want but the Bible shows that as time goes on more and more will be understood about his unfolding purpose and evidence shows this has occured.  There are even places in the Bible where Jehovah ordered his words be "sealed up" from our understanding until the time for their fulfillment.

Many of these truths and prophesies wouldn't be understood until they began to be fulfilled.  Much knowledge, secular and biblical, was prophesied to reach a crescendo during the "Last Days".   And his is proving to be true.  So while some of the men, but not all, may have been Christian they were still largely living in the dark, scripturally speaking.

I know you will call it all BS but this is what the Bible says and this is what I see and this is what I believe.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

Where is a claim I have not backed up?

[Jstwebbrowsing]

You may think it trolling but it's an honest statement.  I post statistics showing that greed is the cause of millions starving each year and you post something blaming their religion for their condition.  Aside from the fact that America has been religious and highly successful what is your point?  That you can blame everything on religion and relieve people of any individual responsibility?

And I would like an answer to this.

[Alzael]

Where is a claim I have not backed up?

Jst, your constant lying is getting very tiresome.

And don't get me wrong.  I don't think these men were evil or were trying to set up something they thought would be evil.  I believe quite the contrary.  They put up a good effort but ultimately fell short by imposing man made laws or laws that even conflict with the Bible.

And a lot of it has to do with understanding.  Believe what you want but the Bible shows that as time goes on more and more will be understood about his unfolding purpose and evidence shows this has occured.  There are even places in the Bible where Jehovah ordered his words be "sealed up" from our understanding until the time for their fulfillment.

Many of these truths and prophesies wouldn't be understood until they began to be fulfilled.  Much knowledge, secular and biblical, was prophesied to reach a crescendo during the "Last Days".   And his is proving to be true.  So while some of the men, but not all, may have been Christian they were still largely living in the dark, scripturally speaking.

There are seven claims in this part alone.

Now, cease trying to answer a question with a question. Address what you have been asked to address.

[Alzael]

You may think it trolling but it's an honest statement.  I post statistics showing that greed is the cause of millions starving each year and you post something blaming their religion for their condition.  Aside from the fact that America has been religious and highly successful what is your point?  That you can blame everything on religion and relieve people of any individual responsibility?

And I would like an answer to this.

That was you talking to Omen. You can do that later. Right now you're talking to the mods. Stop dodging.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

The sum of the matter was this.

I know you will call it all BS but this is what the Bible says and this is what I see and this is what I believe.

Any evidence I give will summarily be dismissed because the evidence is in the Bible.  So far as some other claims?  That the writers of the constitution wrote it in light of the Bible?  That the US congress use to publish Bibles?  I do not intend to back this up.  If I have to back this up then I'd rather talk with someone that is already aware of the facts.

I honestly don't see where I've left anything unsupported.  My only evidence is that people had things all f'd up and this is testified to by history.  Like the slavery we've been talking about.

[Alzael]

This does not address what either Greybeard or myself asked.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

You have a problem here - the Israelites were never slaves in Egypt.

Claim without support.

To the rest of Graybeard's post I will say that yes he did that with the sheep.  But that is not how he did it when he sent Israel into Canaan.  Why?  I don't really know.  I assume because he considered the way he did in instead to be more moral.  You are still trying to show that God is immoral.  But if all morality is subjective then it can't be done.

Not when he killed the first born. He killed the first born in Egypt simply to prove his own greatness. He outright says so. That's why he mind-controlled Pharoah into refusing Moses. To give him an excuse.

Seriously, have you never read that book at all?

Yes he did this.  What is the point?  The above still applies.  He considered it moral to do so and so he did it.  Why?  That really is the question you need to ask throughout the Bible.  But when you get stumped you don't just forget the first truth.  And the first truth is that he did so because he considered it moral.  So the correct question is "How can that be moral." 

And remember since all morality is subjective you must look from his point of view.

[Alzael]

Jst, you will address what the mods have asked of you to address. Do so now.

[Omen]

I know you will call it all BS but this is what the Bible says and this is what I see and this is what I believe.

Any evidence I give will summarily..

This is just a demeaning dismissal of other people, because you can't be honest enough to support your own claims.

You can't just make a claim, randomly cite some biblical scripture, and expect to be believed.  You have to exert the effort to explain yourself, from reasonable premises to conclusions in a manner that is congruent.  Typically, this is a kind of formal logic where you're trying to argue in the following format:

P1. A=B
P2. B=C
C3. A=C

You don't bother with P2, the kind of arguments you deliver are like this:

P1. A=B
C2. A=C

We are asking you to explain how P1 is valid or where is P2.  Instead of either explaining P1 and/or explaining where P2 is or how it ties to C2, you immediately resort to excusing yourself from explaining anything or blaming others for your inability to do so.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

<snip> post is removed pending Jst responding to the mods requests.

Jst, you know very well what you are being requested to respond to. The mod comments are in big green letters like this one.

Omen, you were asked to refrain from this for the time being.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

I have to ask what part of being required to back up your claims do you not get?

I understand it.  But I don't see that I have not done so.  This is very vague as I still don't know what claims you are talking about.

This seems an entirely unsatisfactory answer to Omen's point. Could you please address it?

Now this is specific.  And I had already readdressed it in my very next post, and it is quoted again above.

[Alzael]

So then you don't see how this.

Many of these truths and prophesies wouldn't be understood until they began to be fulfilled.  Much knowledge, secular and biblical, was prophesied to reach a crescendo during the "Last Days".   And his is proving to be true.  So while some of the men, but not all, may have been Christian they were still largely living in the dark, scripturally speaking.

Is a claim that needs to be backed up?