Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Maybe that's because "universal values" are the ones that almost all peoples would come up with, including the writers of the bible. Yes, our society supports values that are in the bible/Christian tradition. That doesn't mean our society is based on the bible/Christian tradition. It means that our society is based on humanism and there is an element of humanism within the bible/Christian tradition.
That's true, but that extreme is thankfully one we don't have to deal with in the US. But we do have a number of individuals pushing to deny theists any public expression of their beliefs. I wouldn't call that a neutral position if adopted by government. Neutral would be to allow everyone, religious or not, freedom to express themselves in public.
I'm not aware of anybody at all who's doing that, although there are a great many people who deny that theist have the right to use public money to promote their beliefs, or the right to set up religious monuments on public grounds. Do you have any examples of anybody pushing to deny theists any public expression of their beliefs?
I understand that's disturbing. But what about taking pleasure in skill? What about taking pleasure in heritage?
Many. Like the thread on another forum where I said that faith-based social activists are compelled to act because of their faith. I got push-back from supposedly open-minded secularists. Over and over again I hear people say, "I don't care what you believe so long as you keep it private."
Like... what? Do you mean they are IN the Bible or are they actually CONDONED in the Bible? It is an historical document after all, they don't leave out the people who do bad things.
Not exactly. You are making a generalization about "humanism". The idea behind humanism is that "universal values" exist in humanity, but they don't. It's a fallacy. Every race and culture has different ideas about what is "rational" and what is "best" for our culture. A great example is the discussion of socialism. Another example is pacifism. It is ridiculous that you could make the argument that there is any sort of "universally accepted values", like what? There are plenty of people in the world that believe there are good reasons to kill people, as well as break the law, manipulate the truth, etc. Where are your universal values exactly?
Hang on... are you really implying that women shouldn't have the right to choose whether to have an abortion because they're "emotional", yet at the same time supporting the right to have firearms for defense?
Which also happen to be Jewish values, Zoroastrian values, Pagan values, Hindu values, Shinto values, Shamanistic values, etc., etc. Interesting coincidence.
Which says to me that our secular laws aren't really based on anyone's idea of how God thinks we should act, IMO.
Would converting a Christian to some other religion "impact the soul"? It's not illegal to do this, yet it'd be arguably worst thing that a person could do to another from the Christian viewpoint.
I would disagree. I can think of a few instances where moral views that I have go against Biblical teachings. For instance, I consider gender equality moral, yet the Bible speaks at great length about how different (and IMO unequal) roles for men and women should be the norm.
No, but they do proclaim certain teachings to be from God, such as most of Leviticus and Deutoronomy, and much of the Epistles are instruction for the faithful. There are plenty of things in those that a reasonable person would find objectionable, IMO.
I'm just beginning my study of Hinduism, but the values that you claim as "unique" to Judeo-Christian belief seem to me to be quite a good description of Hindu values as well.
Is that a generalization or an opinion coming from complete knowledge of each of those religions? Where did Hinduism get the idea for class structures? Those don't exist in Judeo-Christian based cultures, or if they do it has nothing to do with religion. And Shinto? Shinto is not a religion based on morality is it? It's a mystical religion concerned with appeasing 'spirits'. I don't know much about paganism, but its ORIGINAL form seemed to be based on self-satisfaction.Which also happen to be Jewish values, Zoroastrian values, Pagan values, Hindu values, Shinto values, Shamanistic values, etc., etc. Interesting coincidence.
I think you missed my point. Things that impact the soul are between you and God and as such should be excluded from government law. Only sins that impact OTHERS should be governed.
I don't know what you're referring to, but people who were trying to make you keep your beliefs private would be trying to shut down forums like this.
Not really, if you think about it. Universal includes Christian, as well as everyone else. That's what "universal" means. They are not in any way unique to Christianity. Thus, it is false to say that our country is based on Christian principles. Basically, it's claiming credit for ideas that are universal, as well as ideas that are particular to the Enlightenment, Greece, even the Iroquois, but do not derive from Christiantiy. That's why it's a false statement.
I don't know, you may be right. It may impossible or unworkable to base a government on Christian principles. Certainly there have been much more Christian-based governments than the U.S.A, such as Europe before the enlightenment.
Exactly. They have nothing to do with earthly government. Please stop spreading this lie.
It also doesn't make them any more Christian. Do you think they don't have laws in Israel? Japan? Any other non-Christian country?
Baloney. Slavery, polygamy, genocide, revenge murder, stoning disobedient children, prohibitions against masturbation and eating oysters--that's what's in the Bible. We have advanced far beyond that morality, and now value human equality (not valued one iota in the Bible), compassion for all people, including gentiles, opposition to genocide, respecting other people's religious beliefs--that's modern morality, and it's NOT the morality in the Bible.
And yet I just did.
No, they're not, as I have just demonstrated.
Nothing like attacking the person instead of the argument. If you have some actual evidence or reasoning to defend your position, rather than a personal attack, please present it.
There's a little fuzziness between "public" and "civic." What I mean is, you can rent a Billboard depicting Jesus, no problem. State erecting statue of Jesus on capitol lawn--problem. It's not the public, it's the civic.
It's not that they're in there, it's that the Bible endorses them: slavery, polygamy, genocide, infanticide, killing people for violating taboos such as working on Saturday, and so forth. We no longer accept these things as moral, as the Biblical authors do.
So your contention is that only the Judeo-christian tradition values love, trust, and something called "belief in a higher calling?" No other culture or tradition values them? Is that what you're trying to assert?
Are you speaking from utter ignorance of humanist philosophy, or are you deliberately distorting it? Because this is pretty much its opposite. Do you consider spreading disinformation like this to be moral?
(wiki)
It would be much more interesting if you knew anything about what you said before you say it. The core concept of Hinduism (an extremely difficult to pigeon-hole religion) is dharma.
Compassion is the core concept of Hinduism.
Not very familiar with European history?
Well, which is it, do they, or don't they? Not read much European history? Before the enlightenment, all of Europe was a rigid, class-based society, integrated at every level with the Church, based on the idea that God decreed each person's position in society, from the divine right of kings (ever heard of it? It's what we fought a revolution to get away from) on down to the lowest peasant.
Don 't let that stop you.
Oh really? Tell us all about it.
Exactly. And those are covered by practical and universal standards, not Christian doctrine. Under Christian doctrine, we could own slaves, for example. Modern society has moved beyond this level of disrespect for other human beings.
I wouldn't say it's complete knowledge - I just try to learn what I can about other cultures. I have looked at other religions to recognize that Christianity's not the only one that has positive things to say about morality, though.
What does that have to do with anything? You claimed that universal values (life and murder were mentioned specifically, but I'm sure there are others) were in fact unique to Christianity. Regardless of its other teachings, Hinduism does place a large emphasis on things like the value of life - in contradiction of what you said.
It's a religion that's very heavy into the reverence of ancestors. Much of its core philosophy is "honour your father and your mother", but turbocharged.
In the same sense as Christianity is about selfishly protecting your own soul, perhaps.
I think you missed mine. Proselytizing does affect others - that's sort of the point of it.