Morality without god

Genesis 9:25
And he said, Cursed be Canaan (Africans?); a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.Sounds like a prophecy.Genesis 9:27
God shall enlarge Japheth (Causcasians?), and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, (Middle Eastern/Asians?); and Canaan, (Blacks, Nubians, Fezzan, Zanj, Zaghawah, and all the peoples of the Sudan before Arab/Islamic invasions), shall be his servant.
And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, (Mongoloids); and Canaan shall be his servant.

They ALL say be nice to your neighbors, but ONLY Christ said "LOVE THY ENEMY."That is different and profound, because it totally changes the message that all these othe philosophers and religions were saying:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;NOTE:46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

Actually probably not. If you look at the whole Confucius thing it looks like he may be myth also. A myth not created but greatly hyped by Jesuit missionaries.Like most of the biggies of religion Confucius may be much more myth than reality.

I agree that Confusius is probably an elaboration BUT he has more of a semblance of reality than Jesus - but that is opinion and not really relevant as I was merely pointing out that Eastern philosophy is as moral (if not more so) without the Christian God and that the teachings predate JesusOh and on teachings that predate Jesus, Confusius says;"Forgive thy enemy, be reconcile to him
And invoke god in his name"U guys r the only ones who love thy enemy? My aching ass!
Also it's kinda lame and lack lister loving thy enemy after spending thousands of years butchering them, stealing their daughters and sowing salt in their fields don't u think? Maybe Jesus thought there were no enemies left?

RE--Often one hears from the religious side that one cannot have morals without god or holy scriptures, and they seem to be baffled how you just dont run around killing people torturing them and whatnot. --I tend to agree with you somewhat here frako. Morals are an interesting subject, and psychologically much of them are just naturally imbedded within our make up. There is something within our psyche called empathy that is a natural condition that requires zero knowledge of God or scripture to have and be influenced by. We don't like to feel pain and therefore we normally empathize with others we identify with and are usually restrained from inflicting pain.Have you ever wondered why you feel so bad when a dog runs out in front of your car and gets hit, but feel nothing but relief after swatting a fly? This is because of this natural ability we have built in to identify with and feel empathy for others... including other species. The closer we identify with something the more we normally empathize with it. However we do have the mental capacity to over ride empathy, but even then we still have to mentally distance ourselves from the subject. For example during WWII the Nazis had to convince themselves that Jews were really only "non human parasites" in order to treat them so horribly. But on the other hand I once heard a story of an escaped convicted rapist and murderer who had gone on a killing rampage. During his flight from custody he broke into a beautiful woman's home while she was there alone that day. His first inclination was, he planned to rape and kill her, However she had the where-with-all to keep her cool and strike up a conversation with the man. She introduced herself and calmly talked to him for a long time putting him at ease. She made him identify with her and thus he no longer saw her only as "lunch" but as a person. She actually convinced him to in the end, give himself up, and he never touched her. (I won't mention that she was a Christian)The point I'm making is that "Yes" godless people can and most often are just as moral as God fearing people. I'm afraid that my brothers in the faith who claim otherwise are mistaken. But that being said... (you didn't think you'd get by without a 'but' did you?) I'm going to guess that they meant to convey something entirely different. That being that godless people have no solid standard of right or wrong. They can't say..."here is the line of morality and tomorrow it will never change." What's wrong and illegal to them today can be voted out if majority chooses to do so tomorrow. For example yesterday homosexuality was viewed by the majority as wrong, and today it is perfectly acceptable. But for the Christian, God says it is wrong and that will never change. Yesterday gay marriage was viewed as wrong but they redefined the definition of marriage and it will soon be accepted in all of the states. Yesterday abortion was wrong because it was viewed as murder. But then Roe Vs Wade happened... they redefined it from personhood to merely an undeveloped fetus and changed it from murder to merely a "procedure." However to the Christian this is still murder and always will be.So I think what my Christian brothers and sisters mean to say is that the godless can not have a solid standard of morality, not that they are without any morality.

Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)And please don't give me revisionist stuff or I'll have to qoute Mathew 5:18 again

First and foremost, I would like to welcome you to the board and now onto the debate... I must disagree with you on this being a "wonderful" rule. In fact, I find the idea behind this rule somewhat repugnant. At first glance it really makes you think that you are treating all people well and in most cases this is how it would work. However, we must look at it from the point of view of someone who perhaps enjoys something that other individuals might claim is a little darker.In the case of a sadist, this would be an individual who would want pain and degradation inflicted upon them because that is their enjoyment. Is this how they should then treat others, even those who do not share their enjoyment of pain? Well, according to the Golden Rule, that is the proper way for these individuals to treat others. This is one area where a flaw in logic on this idea really shines forth, but you can think of other examples where the "Rule" will break apart.This is why I have begun to move away from "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" and toward an ideal of "Do unto others as they would like you to do unto them". This way, instead of treating people how you want to be treated, you are treating people how THEY want to be treated.Another point I would like to make is that there are ideas that are stating we can quantify morality. Earlier in the thread, we were discussing Sam Harris' "The Moral Landscape". This is an interesting idea that morality can be measured through the benefits or pains caused to sentient creatures. Creating more benefit raises our standing in the moral landscape, while creating more pain reduces our standing.An example I used to explain it was of an individual walking down the beach and seeing a fish lying there dying on the beach. There are a few options to consider in this scenario1. The person literally steps around the fish and continues on his or her way. This would reduce the standing in the moral landscape because the person is gaining no benefit and suffering is visited upon the fish through death.2. The person sees the fish, grabs it and puts it back into the water. This would raise the level in the moral landscape because the person is not increasing his or her suffering and is reducing the suffering and adding benefit to the fish.3. The person sees the fish and takes it home to feed to his or her family. This would also be a moral action because while the suffering is increased for the fish through death, the person has created more benefit by feeding a few people through this sacrifice.As I said, Harris' idea is very interesting to me and I think that given time we can definitely find a way to fully quantify morality. I just do not think that we are quite there yet.

Does it matter, if billions of chinamen have been saying the same thing for thousands of year?
The same abou the other sources which ALL insist on Kant's Categorical Imperative:ONLY THE NT ISPRO-ACTIVE!!!!!Matt. 5:44: (New Testament)
But I say unto you, Do Love your enemies,(1) Lev. 19:18 (Torah)
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.(2) Judaiam: (Talmud; Shab. 31a)
"What is hateful to thee, do not unto thy fellow man: this is the whole Law; the rest is mere commentary" (Hillel said)(3) Islam: (Sunnah)
No one of you is believer until he desires for his brother that which he deires for himself.(4) Brahmanism: (Mahabharata 5:1517)
This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause pain if done to you.(5) Buddhism: (Udana-Varga 5;18)
Hurt not others in ways you yourself would find hurtful.(6) Confusianism: (Analects 15:23)
Surely it is the maxim of loving-kindness:
Do not unto others what you would not have them do unto you.(7) Taoism: Tai Shang Kan Ying Pien
Regard your neighbor's gain as your gain and your neighbors loss as your loss.(8) Zoroastrianism: (Dadistan-i-dinik 94:5)
That nature alone is good which refrains from doing unto another whatsoever is not good for itself.Hillel said: "What is hateful to thee, do not unto thy fellow man: this is the whole Law; the rest is mere commentary"

Muslims believe that eliminating whole towns of sexually promiscuous pagans and thereafter stoning to death a dozen wayward promiscuous girls every year is better than aborting 1.2 million babies annually in America, ignoring the sexual morality which enables teenagers to give birth to a Welfare State that cost $1 Trillion dollars annually now, because of 1.5 million annual illegitimate babies.You can argue either side, 12 girls verses 1.2 million babies plus $1 trillion taxes,... but the OT says better yet, be sexually responsible and moral in not hurting others.

Don't accuse me of being a christian.

With regards to the sadist comment u r mixing up ur S with ur M there, Sadists enjoy inflicting pain not being hurt themselvesBut in mentioning that u bring up an interesting talking point, full disclosure I am a Sadist and I enjoy a very healthy and happy sex life in the Dublin alt and fetish scene - but I do not go around hurting random people and the subs I know don't randomly whip people
Either, in that regard the golden rule would mean respect others and make them as happy as you want to be.
There is a lot of biblical time spent on sexual morality and it all
Misses the point hugely - in the fetish scene there are actual sexual morals which I've never seen a preacher mention and are far
More valid, rules like ensure full consent, if anyone is unhappy end the current play immediately and of course always practice safe sex - those r good morals that leave everyone very happy. Just an aside but an interesting one I think as my life style would be considered grossly immoral by some, but I would consider the people in the scene to be exceptionally decent, loving and accepting

Sorry Kof how does pointing out musilim craziness help
Ur case? Just looks like a cheap tangental dig

All very well worded and delighted to have ur two cents, u may have missed it but I began my arguement on this thread referencing some of the evils in the bible - if ur god given morality is unwavering then can I expect that u go with the following;Kill People Who Don't Listen to Priests
Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Kill Witches
You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

Kill Homosexuals
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

Kill Fortunetellers
A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

Death for Hitting Dad
Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

Death for Cursing Parents
1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)
2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

Death for Adultery
If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

Death for Fornication
A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

Death to Followers of Other Religions
Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

Kill Nonbelievers
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Kill False Prophets
If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)There is more but u get the point right

You do realize that the Confederate slave-owners were primarily Christians, right?"Christians" stopped legal slavery in the US in the same way that vertebrates did - that is, their membership in that particular class was not the determining factor.And of course slavery still exists even here in the US. It's just not legal any more.

How does that make your Heinlein quote any less ridiculous?It turns out that you can actually enslave free people by force. We have plenty of historical evidence for that.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.