Behold! The End of Days are Upon us!

[Dr. Pfleschbach]

Originally Posted by jBirch

The concept is simple. The logic is not. WHY is good better then bad? (As Lord Helmet says, "Evil always wins because Good is stupid.") What possible benefit (if you don't believe in any higher power) is there in living a virtuous life? All you've done is squandered your opportunities to procreate.

James.

I'm not sure why the logic escapes you. This isn't some esoteric point I'm making.

It's wrong to pollute the environment because we don't want to live in a toxic cesspool, not because we're liable to be fined for doing so. The Golden Rule is right because we all are treated better when it is adhered to, not because our teachers will give us bad citizenship grades if we don't follow it. To murder is wrong because it brings devastating sorrow to others, encourages acts of revenge and results in the breakdown of civil society, not because we'll be executed and then burn in hell for all eternity. To help another being is right because if you empathize with your fellow beings then their happiness becomes yours plus you have spread goodwill which tends to be reciprocated. It's really just Darwinian principals applied on a more "Enlightened" plane.

[TrainingDummy]

Originally Posted by Dr. Pfleschbach

The Golden Rule is right because we all are treated better when it is adhered to, not because our teachers will give us bad citizenship grades if we don't follow it.

KANTIAN! Not exactly the categorical imperative, but I've never been a fan. And I know you're not a Kantian from your previous posts.

[Epee_Pox]

Originally Posted by TrainingDummy

KANTIAN! Not exactly the categorical imperative, but I've never been a fan. And I know you're not a Kantian from your previous posts.

I'm not so sure. Seems mostly Bentham and a dash of Locke, with a twist of Jesus. Kant's on another track.

[TrainingDummy]

Haven't taken a Philosophy class in awhile, so I'll take your word for it.

[Feltan]

Originally Posted by Dr. Pfleschbach

Why? Precisely because it is all we have, so we must do all we can to make our lives and this world as virtuous and as just as possible. Because the measure of our value in the universe can only be determined by what we do to make our corner of it as good as it can be for all it's inhabitants - human, animal or vegetable. Because our personal well being is dependent on that of all others who share this planet. Because right and wrong are objective values that can be determined by how lives on this Earth are affected. We shouldn't need the threat of eternal damnation to coerce us into doing what is right.

Hmmmmm.....Scientologist or Secular Humanist.......one or the other.

Regards,
Feltan

[Epee_Pox]

Originally Posted by TrainingDummy

Haven't taken a Philosophy class in awhile, so I'll take your word for it.

Don't take my word for anything.

Note my sig line -- IF YOU CAN!!!

[TrainingDummy]

Nope, I'm clueless as to what that means.

[Phaeton]

Some Gnostics are Christian, but no all of them. There was Gnostic Judaism, and plenty of other types of Gnosticism. The most well known varients, and the most burned at the stake by our good friend's the religious institutions were those that were based off Christianity. We may not miss the Borbos, but what has been done to the perfectly harmless Cathars. Gnosticism is an entirely different topic though....

Why have no Nestorian's posted? Eh probably not many of them exist these days.

I've quite decided that Christianity is a Jewish flavor of Mithraism and we can all blame Paul the Apostle and the early church. Look at the parrallels, how they coexisted, the animosity between them, and the need for Christianity to get more popular, much like the fringe religion of Mithraism...

The major question is why did I read this thread? Am I really that bored to go ahead and talk to people who's minds are already made up?

I don't particularly like the golden rule. If I'm a masochist it assumes that everyone is a masochist. What one likes is far less variable than what one doesn't like. The golden rule ought to be negative

"Do Not Treat Others How You Would Dislike to be Treated"

While I'm going on a sleep deprived rant I might as well include:

True faith or peity is not derrived from fear. Those that are righteous are those that WISH to help hummanity regardless of eternal punishment or rewards. Those are the people that should be placed on a pedestal, regarded with respect. They do what they want out of will not religious coercion.

Why have laws? People work best together. Living in a community is accepting a social contract, given rules, and one is ostracised for not following them. If you want to murder somone, go ahead, but you're no longer part of the community. Acting badly has rammifications.

[Dr. Pfleschbach]

Originally Posted by Feltan

Hmmmmm.....Scientologist or Secular Humanist.......one or the other.

Regards,
Feltan

Scientologist? Ouch, that hurts! I'll accept Secular Humanist as a possible label if you insist on pigeonholing me. However, I could be a Deist, too. It depends on my mood. I guess that actually makes me an Agnostic.

[Dr. Pfleschbach]

Originally Posted by Phaeton

I don't particularly like the golden rule. If I'm a masochist it assumes that everyone is a masochist. What one likes is far less variable than what one doesn't like. The golden rule ought to be negative

"Do Not Treat Others How You Would Dislike to be Treated"

My reference to the Golden Rule was an example that assumes general agreement on what constitutes moral and ethical conduct. Apparently that assumption is more controversial than I anticipated. Okay, so pick your own example and apply the logic. The specifics are less important than the premise.

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by Phaeton

Some Gnostics are Christian, but not all of them. There was Gnostic Judaism, and plenty of other types of Gnosticism. The most well known varients, and the most burned at the stake by our good friend's the religious institutions were those that were based off Christianity. We may not miss the Borbos, but what has been done to the perfectly harmless Cathars. Gnosticism is an entirely different topic though....

You are right, of course. Gnosticism isn't confined to Christianity. I was expounding it primarily in its Christian variant.

"Do Not Treat Others How You Would Dislike to be Treated"

Interesting. This is the version most often identified as Jewish, said to have first been formulated by Maimonodes.

Why have laws? People work best together. Living in a community is accepting a social contract, given rules, and one is ostracised for not following them.

Thomas Hobbes would be proud...

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by Epee_Pox

Don't take my word for anything.

Note my sig line -- IF YOU CAN!!!

What sig line? By the way, the Erisian League meeting has been postponed until next month.

[latenight]

Originally Posted by lochinvar

What sig line? By the way, the Erisian League meeting has been postponed until next month.

The interjection "fnord" is given hypnotic power over the unenlightened, or so they say....silly Illuminati

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by latenight

The interjection "fnord" is given hypnotic power over the unenlightened, or so they say....silly Illuminati

It boots nothing. The Illuminat will burn with the rest of us on Judgement Day.

[latenight]

Originally Posted by lochinvar

It boots nothing. The Illuminat will burn with the rest of us on Judgement Day.

LOL

Every day is judgment day.........


“What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more' ... Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.'”

— Nietzsche

[fencingfrog]

Every day is judgment day.........

so its come a full circle...

i give up. believe whatever. im done debating about this. its a good thread for a question though - when/why did christians stop celebrating passover?

[Epee_Pox]

Originally Posted by fencingfrog

i give up. believe whatever. im done debating about this. its a good thread for a question though - when/why did christians stop celebrating passover?

You mean Holy Thursday? Didn't know we stopped observing that.

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by fencingfrog

so its come a full circle...

i give up. believe whatever. im done debating about this. its a good thread for a question though - when/why did christians stop celebrating passover?

When they stopped being Jews, of course.

Which was when St. Paul (whom you sadly don't seem to know much about) convinced the rest of the Apostles that gentiles could be Christians.

For which you should be glad, or you couldn't be one. Unless you're Jewish, of course...

[fencingfrog]

You mean Holy Thursday? Didn't know we stopped observing that

passover is longer than one day. thursday is one day.

When they stopped being Jews, of course.

Which was when St. Paul (whom you sadly don't seem to know much about) convinced the rest of the Apostles that gentiles could be Christians.

For which you should be glad, or you couldn't be one. Unless you're Jewish, of course...

what i mean is why because passover was not just about being jewish. its the blood of the lamb saves us stuff, and its celebrating the angel of death passing over the jew's homes. we have those books from the old testament in the Bible and all, so who said "we'll keep the stories, but not continue the custom?"
we've been over this. I'm catholic, not jewish. but, i know more about judaisim than some jews i know, which is sad. cuz i dont know that much...

[Feltan]

Originally Posted by fencingfrog

... which is sad. cuz i dont know that much...

I knew that you would, sooner or later, say something that everyone can agree on.

Regards,
Feltan