Is christian morality superior to secular morality? Why? [Spirituality & Religion]
It seems to me that christian morality ultimately falls back on what god wants, whether or not that is for the well being of humans, while secular morality is based upon what is the in interest of a human's well being.
It seems to me that human well being should be in the better interest of human well being than what a god demands of us for his purposes.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Christian morality is based on a never changing standard- Truth. Secular morality changes with whatever man wants it to be- usually based on falsehood.
So what about when god felt it was ok to enslave people? What about when god says to kill everyone, the women and small babies too? What about when god says that two people can't have the same rights as you because they're the same gender?
Secular morality denounces all of those things. Christian morality embraces them.
@CuriousCutie The irony of your first comment being that the only reason you know of this "God" is through man so when man writes the bible because they claim God speaks to them or are holy, you are basically trusting it really happened. If it didn't happen and it was all a lie then you are (by your own statement) [b]changing your morals to whatever "man" wants it to be- usually based on a falsehood.[/b]
@Pikachu I hope you're not comparing modern slavery to biblical slavery as the two aren't compatible. Biblical slavery is more a fixed contract. I don't find it much different to the modern financial system. The only difference is it doesn't recognise that you are really a slave to a false god. By outlawing slavery we have actually destroyed people's livelihood as there are people who aren't employable financially.
@MeisterAndrew But the financial instability is mostly due to slavery in the first place, you can't tell me that slaves were allowed to be educated. Slavery came about because people were too lazy to do the housework themselves, what would a mass educated populace do? Who would rule over us then? No they wanted to keep certain people subjugated so that other groups don't have a vie for power.
[quote] I hope you're not comparing modern slavery to biblical slavery as the two aren't compatible.[/quote]
I'm sorry, but this is far too common a tool in the apologist belt. You can say that slavery then was something different or it wasn't so bad but you're wrong.
Here's the facts:
Yes, in some instances (as in between Israelites) the relationship was more one of indentured servitude. But that by no means describes all slavery in the bible. The fact is that you were allowed to own people as [i]property[/i]. They could be passed on to your children as property, children could be born into slavery and owned as property. You could beat y our slave half to death and as long as they survived for a couple days then there was no wrong doing because they were your property.
Christians like to characterize biblical slavery as not so bad but that tends to fall down when you ask them if they'd be ok with that for themselves or their mothers or their children.
Here are the facts you ignore. Slaves could be freed, either buying their own freedom or a family member doing so. Slavery was only for a period of 6 six years with the slave being set free on the 7th. During the 49 year jubilee all slaves should be set free irrespective of their working period.
We know these conditions weren't always adhered to and in some cases were not interpreted as applying leading to the destruction of the Kingdom of Judah which actually enforced them.
In short God destroyed it because they made slavery into the modern equivalent rather than the biblical one. Really I don't see it as something so bad when it can give someone the option of a livelihood where the modern financial system lets them starve.
@MeisterAndrew Yikes I was really trying to stay away from a long one but it looks like it's necessary. I'm about 90% sure you're using dog whistles and thought I'd never see the public transcript in action before, though there are plenty of examples. The public transcript in sociology is talking about how the power class of people wanted to appear by making others below them act in such a way that they were happy with their enslavement, usually through fear of consequence and social pressure to conform so it provides a plausible deniability factor for the rest of the public, making them equally easier to control. During slavery times for instance there were pictures of slaves "smiling" but they were made to smile, their oppressors often cast themselves into favorable light that didn't really represent what actually happened. God in the bible and the way he's written is very much the same way but it's the actions that you can't hide that tell us who the oppressors really were.
Anyways for anyone who wants to look this is how early Christians treated slaves, which covers a lot of ground in the fact that the bible said people should accept their slavery which is also part of the public transcript:
Author: James McDonald. Title: Slavery url: http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/gaa_slavery.htm#early Date last modified: 17 April 2013
[quote]In pre-Christian times and in non-Christian countries people expressed doubts about slavery and sought to improve the lot of slaves — the Stoic philosophers provide a notable example. [big]In pagan times slaves who escaped and sought sanctuary at a holy temple would not be returned to their masters if they had a justifiable complaint. [c=#7700B2]When the Empire became Christian[/c], escaped slaves could seek refuge in a church, but they would always be returned to their masters, whether they had a justifiable complaint or not. When Christian slaves in the early Asian Church suggested that community funds might be used to purchase their freedom, they were soon disabused of their hopes, a line supported by one of the greatest Church Fathers (Ignatius of Antioch.). He declared that their ambition should be to become better slaves, and they should not expect the Church to gain their liberty for them2. [/big]His orthodox approach followed the words of St Paul: "Each one should remain in the situation which he was in when God called him. Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you — although if you can gain your freedom, do so." (1 Corinthians 7:20-21 NIV).[/quote]
@MeisterAndrew I understand and empathize with you. It's easier to dismiss then question your narrative of God so in a way it's vital to romanticize a time period to not lose faith or have to create a new identity because of it.
Most people are rather lazy like that ;)
Anyways for anyone else wanting to check out the link, feel free to do so:
@MeisterAndrew Well now, I'm glad you admit there's some truth to the words now the next step is admitting you're upholding the public transcript and white washing slavery. You can do it!
Author: James McDonald. Title: Slavery url: http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/gaa_slavery.htm#early Date last modified: 17 April 2013
[quote]Church Fathers instructed the faithful not to let slaves get above themselves, and the Church endorsed Saint Augustine's view that slavery was ordained by God as a punishment for sin3. Augustine called on the free to give thanks because Christ and his Church did not make slaves free, but rather made bad slaves into good slaves. St. Augustine teaching that the institution of slavery derives from God and is beneficial to both slaves and masters would be cited by many later Popes as evidence, indeed proof, of the acceptability of slavery. It was an integral part of the Christian "Tradition" one of the main sources of authority in the Church.[/quote]
[quote]In 362 AD a Church Council at Gangra in Asia Minor excommunicated anyone encouraging a slave to despise his master or to withdraw from his service. This would in time be incorporated into Church Law, where it would remain from the 13th to the 20th century.[/quote]
@MeisterAndrew It's never about the argument itself, that's where you're wrong. The facts I gave just doesn't fit your narrative of white washing slavery so you don't quite know what to say and that's OK as I told you before I empathize with your need for an identity but I don't like the distortion of facts and I won't allow you to do that.
