Is one religion better than the other.. and if so....

[Segev Moran]

If you are truly thinking clearly, then yes. Obviously if you are truly thinking it is bad
then either she has a horrid voice or she is trying to annoy you.

But if you are being spiteful, or contrary and pretending
that her wonderful voice is not so out of jealousy,
then it follows that you are not thinking in the pure sense of the term.

I Guess you are not familiar with Jewish "laws" stating that hearing a woman sing is considered a sin (for man).. so the solution was to disallow woman to sing in the presence of man..
For me, it is a shameful, abusive and a primitive thought that can only be the product of a religious idiocy!

And how about the fact that woman should cover their faces?
And how about the fact that woman should be bitten if not being obedient?

 

[Segev Moran]

This is a no brainer.

I Will not respond to that phrasing.. lol

It is an objective fact that one religion must be better than another regardless of whether any of them are divine.

Based on what criteria?

If all religions are manmade and not divine then which ever false religion does the most good and least evil is the best.

What is considered most good in your eyes?

However if you claim that all religions are manmade because no God exists then you have ruled out the only foundation possible where actual moral good and evil can even exist.

Please elaborate.. What does God have to do with morality?

So instead you would have to do what atheists already do and invent what is good and what is bad since without God the entire category of objective morality ceases to exist.

I Agree, there is no real objective morality!
But just out of curiosity, Can you give me an example of something you consider Bad?
And once you do, explain how it is good only if God exists

Once you have attempted to smuggle in moral values which cannot possibly exist without God then you can determine which religion produces the most outcomes that line up with the arbitrary moral goals you coughed up in a vacuum.

Let's start with the question of What is Moral?
Can you define Morality?

But if you allow for the possibility God exist then just as there are infinitely far less truths than falsehoods it is reasonable to assume that any good God would produce a single true revelation instead of allowing each religion to have only a few distinct bits of truth buried under mountains of man made garbage and since most religions make claims that contradict other faiths then the religion which is the one pure faith given to us from God it would be better than all the others combined.

Let's assume there is indeed a God... How can you determine it is Good rather than Bad? The question remains the same! It is up to us Humans, to determine what is considered Bad and vice versa.

So no matter what position we begin from there is in fact a religion that is better than all others.

Can you tell me which one? Because if I base my assumption on your ideas above, I have one religion, I can say it is Far better (and I mean it in a matter of far far far far far better) than any other religion I have ever encountered!
It is called Jainism, Yet even this religion, as peaceful and human as it is, have many many bad sides.

The only question left is which religion it is that is the best. I argue that it is the Christian faith. You can argue for which religion is the best, but there is no argument against the inescapable fact that some religion is better than any other religion.

Give me one thing in which Christianity is better than Jainism...

 

[Muffled]

I were a cockroach or fly I would hope to be killed so that I could incarnate to a higher form.

I don't believe there is any way you could be a cockroach or a fly.

 

[Muffled]

Well maybe not everyone has past lives,
but it would be less logical to claim that my memories of past lives are the only ones anyone ever had.

I believe I have memories of one past life. My point was that not every physical being is capable of receiving a spirit and on earth It is only man.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Yet cockroaches will out live humans and probably every other species exiting to date.. so based on what you claim they are a lower form of life?????
Your point of view is of one that is very arrogant! I Assume you also think there are humans that are a lower form of life? (I really really hope the answer to that question is NO!!!)

And if my answer was 'yes', you are implying that I would be lower for stating that.

If I called you a cockroach would you consider that as an insult?

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I Guess you are not familiar with Jewish "laws" stating that hearing a woman sing is considered a sin (for man).. so the solution was to disallow woman to sing in the presence of man..
For me, it is a shameful, abusive and a primitive thought that can only be the product of a religious idiocy!

And how about the fact that woman should cover their faces?
And how about the fact that woman should be bitten if not being obedient?

So what you are saying is that people who do these things have been bad?

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I don't believe there is any way you could be a cockroach or a fly.

Thanks.
Its nice to know that others believe my karma is good.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I believe I have memories of one past life. My point was that not every physical being is capable of receiving a spirit and on earth It is only man.

Well my current cat is my previous cat re-incarnated.
They have identical personalities, and I even found her newest incarnation
on the grave of the previous incarnation precisely one year after she died.
Though this time she opted for shorter fur so as not to annoy me with incessant licking.

 

[1robin]

I Will not respond to that phrasing.. lol

No offense intended.

Based on what criteria?

Based on the philosophical concept of degrees. Basically given a goal everything relevant to that goal perform their function to varying degrees. I am a Christian but I am not making an argument that the bible is the greatest (at least I am not doing so here). I am simply saying that given whatever goal you position for religions they will satisfy that goal to different degrees with one that is worst and one that is best. First you must state what goal it is that we are to evaluate the roll of any given religion in fulfilling that roll, and why religions are measured by what ever roll you declare they are to be judged by..

What is considered most good in your eyes?

I was not really attempting to show what goals a religion must have, just that no matter what it is that is actually "good" that there is a religion that is better at promoting it than others. That is a given with no argument possibly really.

However if you want me to provide a goal for religions to measure up to, I select truth. A religion is best which contains the most truth.

Please elaborate.. What does God have to do with morality?

Well that is obvious but I will explain it anyway.

1. For any moral absolute to actually be true it must correspond to an external moral law or duty.
2. For example if you said torturing children was morally wrong and another person said it was morally good. Who is right?
3. For either you or another person to be right and to settle who is actually correct then what is necessary is for the opinion of one you to be right is that what you believe corresponds to an objective moral law or duty which transcends your mere opinion. IOW if you said 2 + 2 = 4, and another person said it equals five then for one of you to be correct there must be an objective mathematical law which would show who is right.
4. Just like natural laws like arithmetic, moral laws must exist and just like mathematics moral laws are not produced by the material universe.
5. Nature can only tell us what is not what should be. Laws are descriptive not prescriptive. This is called the "is" "out" paradox.
6. So nature cannot create moral laws or duties yet they are necessary for any moral objective to exist. So if objective morality exists it's source transcends nature and by definition must be supernatural. I.e. God or the divine.

I Agree, there is no real objective morality!

Well I am glad an atheist finally admits to what must be true given their world view. But then you are faced with the moral bankruptcy of atheism, so as I point out every once in a while. We ought to act as if Christianity was true even if it isn't because only then do we have a foundation which affirms what we all want to believe is true. For example racial equality, the sanctity of human life, the moral high ground necessary to stop Hitler's and Pol Pots, objective meaning and purposed to human life. IOW without God we act in ways that have no justification or foundation. Societies require moral absolutes that do not exist unless God exists to flourish to their greatest degree. If we actually lived consistently with an atheistic world view the only foundations we have lead to anarchy or nihilism.

However none of this is evidence that God given morality exist. The evidence for that are arguments for God's existence and the fact that almost every one acts as if the realm of moral truths which we all perceive are true. Think of it like this. If even a single moral intuition that anyone in history has had turns out to be true then God must exist. Are you really suggesting that billions and billions of us and the trillions of moral responsibilities we perceive are all wrong, every single one? I do not have enough faith to be an atheist.

I like debating morality because it is so easily resolved. However it makes for long debates. So I will separate this post into two parts and address the second part separately.

Continued below:

 

[1robin]

But just out of curiosity, Can you give me an example of something you consider Bad?

Sure I can tell you something I consider bad without the slightest chance of being wrong because you did not ask if I could post something that actually is bad, just something I consider bad.

I consider abortion for convenience morally wrong.

And once you do, explain how it is good only if God exists

You already asked, and I have already answered why that if there exists a single moral fact or duty that is actually true (just one) that God must exist. If you disagree then I will await your response to the argument I made in the other post.

Let's start with the question of What is Moral?
Can you define Morality?

That is not a question about what is moral, that is a question about what is morality. Regardless, I wil use my response to show two things.

I will show what the morality I am referring to is by defining it and also show what I do not mean by morality.

The first is something some mistakenly think is morality but it is merely ethics. It is defined as:

Malum prohibitum (plural mala prohibita, literal translation: "wrong [as or because] prohibited") is a Latin phrase used in law to refer to conduct that constitutes an unlawful act only by virtue of statute, as opposed to conduct that is evil in and of itself, or malum in se.

The second is actual morality and only exists if God does. It is defined as.

Malum in se (plural mala in se) is a Latin phrase meaning wrong or evil in itself. The phrase is used to refer to conduct assessed as sinful or inherently wrong by nature, independent of regulations governing the conduct. It is distinguished from malum prohibitum, which is wrong only because it is prohibited.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se

Please read this carefully because it is of major importance and will stop misunderstandings as to what I mean in this discussion.

Let's assume there is indeed a God... How can you determine it is Good rather than Bad? The question remains the same! It is up to us Humans, to determine what is considered Bad and vice versa.

To explain this better than I could, look up a philosophical concept concerning the generic description for God called great making properties. However if that is unsatisfactory I can lay out other arguments for the specific God of the bible if necessary. I am short on time at this moment or I would launch into the arguments for the nature of the biblical God.

Can you tell me which one? Because if I base my assumption on your ideas above, I have one religion, I can say it is Far better (and I mean it in a matter of far far far far far better) than any other religion I have ever encountered!
It is called Jainism, Yet even this religion, as peaceful and human as it is, have many many bad sides.

Then you have answered your own question. You say you have found a religion far far far better than the rest therefor that religion would be the best. However if instead you want me to debate what religion I think is best we must first agree what makes a religion the best. I believe the best religion is the truest religion, do you agree with that?

Give me one thing in which Christianity is better than Jainism...

I can think of many but I will just give one. I believe the integrity of the biblical textual tradition is vastly greater than the textual tradition for Agam Literature or the Agam Sutras.

However Jainism is such a minor and obscure religion that it is not on my radar very often so if your knowledgeable about it then maybe this is an opportunity for me to examine it in depth.

 

[Segev Moran]

And if my answer was 'yes', you are implying that I would be lower for stating that.

Not at all, I Don't think any human is lower than other.
I Also don't think ANY living being is lower than another in any form.
Each animal has something it excels way above our human abilities and vise versa.
What is your way of determining that one is better (or higher form) than the other?

If I called you a cockroach would you consider that as an insult?

It depends in what sense..
If I'll call you a Bull, will you be offended? It depends on the context.
If I'll call you a stud? or a Bear?
It all depends why I called you that.

 

[Segev Moran]

So what you are saying is that people who do these things have been bad?

That's the entire problem!!! They are not doing it because they are Bad... They are doing it because they believe God wants it to be so!!!
But yes.. I Think those actions are Bad indeed! why? because they deprive other beings from having the freedom we all humans fight so hard to achieve.
(And before, I Meant Beaten lol.. not bitten)
Inflicting pain to someone else is Bad in my opinion (Unless there is no other option, like surgery, self defense and such).
Inflicting misery on others is Bad! (With no exception!!!)
Inflicting harm on to other being just for the sake of control and power is BAD!

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Nature can only tell us what is not what should be. Laws are descriptive not prescriptive.

Are you referring to natural/physical laws above?

So if objective morality exists it's source transcends nature and by definition must be supernatural. I.e. God or the divine.

What do you mean by 'the divine' above?

We ought to act as if Christianity was true even if it isn't because only then do we have a foundation which affirms what we all want to believe is true. For example racial equality, the sanctity of human life, the moral high ground necessary to stop Hitler's and Pol Pots, objective meaning and purposed to human life.

Why Christianity? Other religions can provide these foundations too.

IOW without God we act in ways that have no justification or foundation.

Are you saying without God existing or without believing that God exists here?

Societies require moral absolutes that do not exist unless God exists to flourish to their greatest degree.

Why does God have to exist to give societies the moral absolutes they require?

If we actually lived consistently with an atheistic world view the only foundations we have lead to anarchy or nihilism.

Why, necessarily?

Think of it like this. If even a single moral intuition that anyone in history has had turns out to be true then God must exist.

Why?

The second is actual morality and only exists if God does. It is defined as.

Malum in se (plural mala in se) is a Latin phrase meaning wrong or evil in itself.

What about more than one god (or goddess)? Or some other supernatural force? Why 'God'?

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Not at all, I Don't think any human is lower than other.
I Also don't think ANY living being is lower than another in any form.

But you claim that a person who believes in higher and lower is wrong.
Surely you must think that to be wrong is lower than to be correct?
If not then there is no difference between right and wrong,
hence you cannot claim that believing in equality is better than not doing so.

Each animal has something it excels way above our human abilities and vise versa.
What is your way of determining that one is better (or higher form) than the other?

There are obviously lots of facets to any such judgment.
But ultimately it reduces to ethics.
There are infinite ethical situations,
but social-contract-theory is a good place to start.
In this way, any relationship between creatures is based on a social contract.
This is certainly not a universal description of all ethical situations.
But karma, for example could be said to be a transcendental social contract.
It cannot be reduced to simply not killing, however.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

That's the entire problem!!! They are not doing it because they are Bad... They are doing it because they believe God wants it to be so!!!
But yes.. I Think those actions are Bad indeed! why? because they deprive other beings from having the freedom we all humans fight so hard to achieve.
(And before, I Meant Beaten lol.. not bitten)
Inflicting pain to someone else is Bad in my opinion (Unless there is no other option, like surgery, self defense and such).
Inflicting misery on others is Bad! (With no exception!!!)
Inflicting harm on to other being just for the sake of control and power is BAD!

Sure.
But you have just stated reasons why some beings are lower or higher than others.

 

[Segev Moran]

But you claim that a person who believes in higher and lower is wrong.

That indeed I do. But that doesn't make you wrong in everything rather in that specific issue.

Surely you must think that to be wrong is lower than to be correct?

No, it is not lower.. it is just wrong. EVERYBODY is wrong about something. I Am wrong about thousands of things.. it doesn't make me lower.. it just makes me wrong about those things.

If not then there is no difference between right and wrong,

There is a difference.Right is an assumption that fits reality, Wrong is an assumption that does not.
Doing something right is doing something that benefits your goals and the goals of our humanity.
Religious people are not lower than non-religious, they are just wrong sometimes.. Atheists, are also wrong sometimes.

hence you cannot claim that believing in equality is better than not doing so.

As equality is one of our goals as humans. I can say believing in equality is something right because it advances us to experiencing a better existence as a species.

but social-contract-theory is a good place to start.

I agree... social, not religious.

But karma, for example could be said to be a transcendental social contract.
It cannot be reduced to simply not killing, however.

Karma is a nice word of what you are "Handed" in your cards deck... Dharma is what you choose to play with those cards...
I Can't see how that all fits to our issue.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

No, it is not lower.. it is just wrong.

I am afraid that is a contradiction.

Sure, a few wrong actions do not make an entire individual totally wrong.
I never said they did.
But the more wrong actions a being makes, the lower it makes them.

 

[Segev Moran]

I am afraid that is a contradiction.

Sure, a few wrong actions do not make an entire individual totally wrong.
I never said they did.
But the more wrong actions a being makes, the lower it makes them.

I Think I don't understand your use of the term Lower...
What do you mean when you say Lower? Compared to what?
Lower is a respective term...
I Can say that someone has lower values regarding well of others (or their value for life is lower).
I Can say someone has lower education about a purview.
I Can say someone has lower self-esteem.
None of the above doesn't make someone a lower form of being!
What do you mean when you say lower?

 

[SomeRandom]

I Was wondering what you think about the various religions and religion streams in the world.

Expressions of different cultures. Isn't that how religions start? People want to answer questions, so they try to figure stuff out. Which is then informed by their cultural values or vice versa?

Do you think that God is really in favor of one religion? If so, Which one and why?
Please try to avoid using scriptures as arguments as all religions are eventually based on scriptures and this is not a valid argument IMO.

Not really. If there is a God, I don't personally think he or she would really care. As long as one is sincere that should be enough to sate it.
Also, not all religions are scripture based. For example many Hindus regularly ignore scripture if it seems too outdated.

If you think that one religion is indeed the "right" one, do you believe that following the wrong religion is a "Sin" or on the lighter case, Not the way to salvation.
Please note I'm asking those question out of interest and not because I look for a religion to follow (I personally think they are all false).

That's a very..........Abrahamic approach. People follow or don't follow religion depending on what works for them. That can't be a sin, imo, it's just people following their personalities. I mean following tradition out of familial duty might be involved depending on the person's circumstance. But people should not be condemned for doing what makes them happy or feel fulfilled intellectually or spiritually or both.

I Raise this question because it seems that no matter who i debate, their religion is always seems to be the truth and the valid way to win God's favor.

Really? I find that's really only the case with some Abrahamics. Not all, but some. Most Easterners and Pagans are pretty chill about the whole "truth" thing. I mean sibling rivalry between the sects notwithstanding, one person's "truth" is another's silly superstition.

Also, If indeed one religion is better than the other, Is it better to be a Good person believing the wrong religion or a Bad person believing the right religion?

And I'm not talking about Good and Bad in a sense of following traditions or Mitzvot..

For example:
For Jews, the Sabath is one of the holiest things..
So is it better to be a thief that keeps the Sabath or A decent honest person who sees Sunday as a holy day?

Humans are pretty faulty. Ethics and morality should depend on many factors. For example, if this thief who keeps the Sabbath only steals to feed him/herself or his/her family, then is it really theft? Or mere survival? A thief is not necessarily a bad person.

Hard and fast morality is far too rigid, one needs to allow for nuance, since the world is full of them.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I Think I don't understand your use of the term Lower...
What do you mean when you say Lower? Compared to what?
Lower is a respective term...
I Can say that someone has lower values regarding well of others (or their value for life is lower).
I Can say someone has lower education about a purview.
I Can say someone has lower self-esteem.
None of the above doesn't make someone a lower form of being!
What do you mean when you say lower?

A lower sense of ethics.
A lesser compassion for others.
But it is more than those as well.