God's Warriors (CNN)

[Peter666]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now I agree that there is a basis for a universal code of morality which helps explain some of the similarities, but what about the profound differences?

Let us take the Hitchens example. He claims that everyone knew that murder was wrong, but why didn't they know that revenge was wrong? If we take the ancient code of Hammurabi, it was very clear that if one man would murder your son, the proper punishment was to murder that man's son. The early Hebrews practiced an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. That is very rational system.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you [censored] kidding me? An eye for an eye is a rational system? Hell no. An eye for an eye is a hateful and vindictive moral stance. One that leads a society into an endless cycle of violence.

As for the revenge thing, I repeat the Golden Rule. Any person adhering to the golden rule would be disinclined to exact revenge for any offense, real or imagined. If you accidentally stepped on someones foot, would you think it fair for them to step on yours.
The answer to violence is not more violence.

Human toddlers can be seen to observe the golden rule before they can speak full sentences, before they can be indoctrinated with religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Toddlers are also seen acting selfishly and stupidly, but we don't blame them because they don't know any better.

You claim that the eye for an eye moral system is irrational, but then why were so many of the ancient cultures irrational by our standards? Every ancient culture we know of and many foreign cultures today have practices that we consider to be morally repugnant. Again, why the differences? Why the irrationality? If this comes from DNA, are they genetically inferior?

[Peter666]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I would gladly stab you in the back if I knew Jesus wouldn't punish me. Pity, eh?

[/ QUOTE ]

It might actually be a good idea to have religion around to keep crazies like this guy at bay.

[/ QUOTE ]

Peter666 is an atrocious Catholic, and not a good representative of the modern Church. The Catholicism of my friends informs their lives with altruism and honesty, not this self-indulgent madness that Peter exhibits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen to the not being a good representative of the modern Church. As for the honesty part, anybody who doesn't acknowledge their evil passions is dishonest and hiding behind a societally acceptable facade.

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]

Amen to the not being a good representative of the modern Church.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you so confident that two millennia of progress in science, social stability, and ethical humanism have done nothing for our spiritual understanding? Observe what a bloodthirsty and unimaginably ignorant age the Church fathers inhabited. And then please explain to me why that environment would cultivate optimal understanding of spiritual and moral truth.

[ QUOTE ]
As for the honesty part, anybody who doesn't acknowledge their evil passions is dishonest and hiding behind a societally acceptable facade.

[/ QUOTE ]

But here's the thing---most people, religious or not, want to sublimate those inimical passions into something positive. They don't need any threat of punishment.

You ignore even the possibility of all higher virtue with such amazing fervor! "Love your neighbor as you love yourself." How can you impoverish this most profound commandment to the status of an injunction against backstabbing and raping? Don't you know we are ordered to be perfect, not only do humanely?

[jstnrgrs]

[ QUOTE ]
The Jewish nutcases are probably the most benign overall. I shudder to think what the Muslim and Christian episodes are going to show.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the Christian episode had nothing to do with violence. It was about the political influence of the religous right in America.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I would gladly stab you in the back if I knew Jesus wouldn't punish me. Pity, eh?

[/ QUOTE ]

It might actually be a good idea to have religion around to keep crazies like this guy at bay.

[/ QUOTE ]

Peter666 is an atrocious Catholic, and not a good representative of the modern Church. The Catholicism of my friends informs their lives with altruism and honesty, not this self-indulgent madness that Peter exhibits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen to the not being a good representative of the modern Church. As for the honesty part, anybody who doesn't acknowledge their evil passions is dishonest and hiding behind a societally acceptable facade.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am obviously unafraid of the wrath of the jesus. I haven't yet been in a situation where stabbing someone is the best option. If you ever thought it was optimal, then please humor us with a trip report. I'd wager that the general response would be something like "wow, you're a moron."

[David Sklansky]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Amen to the not being a good representative of the modern Church.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you so confident that two millennia of progress in science, social stability, and ethical humanism have done nothing for our spiritual understanding? Observe what a bloodthirsty and unimaginably ignorant age the Church fathers inhabited. And then please explain to me why that environment would cultivate optimal understanding of spiritual and moral truth.

[ QUOTE ]
As for the honesty part, anybody who doesn't acknowledge their evil passions is dishonest and hiding behind a societally acceptable facade.

[/ QUOTE ]

But here's the thing---most people, religious or not, want to sublimate those inimical passions into something positive. They don't need any threat of punishment.

You ignore even the possibility of all higher virtue with such amazing fervor! "Love your neighbor as you love yourself." How can you impoverish this most profound commandment to the status of an injunction against backstabbing and raping? Don't you know we are ordered to be perfect, not only do humanely?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice lecture from a nice guy. Here's a better lecture, to a fellow semi sociopath:

There is something wrong with you if you want to stab somebody who curses you on an internet site. The reason why other people would not say they would stab m theory is not because they won't acknowledge their evil passions. And its also not usually because they want to love their neighbor and sublimate their inimical passions. Rather it is because they really don't want to see him die. They want to see him ridiculed, embarrassed, spanked, scammed or something like that. Because they don't appreciate being spoken to that way. On the other hand they would be horrified if their revenge actually resulted in his death.

The fact that you don't feel the same way and the fact that you apparently don't realize what I just said means you probably are mentally ill.

[Peter666]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Amen to the not being a good representative of the modern Church.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you so confident that two millennia of progress in science, social stability, and ethical humanism have done nothing for our spiritual understanding? Observe what a bloodthirsty and unimaginably ignorant age the Church fathers inhabited. And then please explain to me why that environment would cultivate optimal understanding of spiritual and moral truth.

[ QUOTE ]
As for the honesty part, anybody who doesn't acknowledge their evil passions is dishonest and hiding behind a societally acceptable facade.

[/ QUOTE ]

But here's the thing---most people, religious or not, want to sublimate those inimical passions into something positive. They don't need any threat of punishment.

You ignore even the possibility of all higher virtue with such amazing fervor! "Love your neighbor as you love yourself." How can you impoverish this most profound commandment to the status of an injunction against backstabbing and raping? Don't you know we are ordered to be perfect, not only do humanely?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice lecture from a nice guy. Here's a better lecture, to a fellow semi sociopath:

There is something wrong with you if you want to stab somebody who curses you on an internet site. The reason why other people would not say they would stab m theory is not because they won't acknowledge their evil passions. And its also not usually because they want to love their neighbor and sublimate their inimical passions. Rather it is because they really don't want to see him die. They want to see him ridiculed, embarrassed, spanked, scammed or something like that. Because they don't appreciate being spoken to that way. On the other hand they would be horrified if their revenge actually resulted in his death.

The fact that you don't feel the same way and the fact that you apparently don't realize what I just said means you probably are mentally ill.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's true, showing mental illness or societal abnormality is a much more compelling argument, as it will force me to think whether I want to conform my actions to this society, or face the consequences of being an outsider.

I LOL at the argument that the Church Fathers lived in an bloodthirsty age, while us modern scientific folk have a greater capacity for spiritual understanding. If large scale bombings, gas chambers, gulags, nuclear weapons, are the mark of a superior age, then I want to be an outsider.

[Duke]

I think I just figured something out.

Why would anyone just "feel like" stabbing someone? I have never felt that way, but animals are pretty violent without the cerebral cortex that we have. If you stop yourself from thinking about things, and hone your emotional responses, you can make your behaviors more like that of an animal.

What groups of people train themselves to discard reason (even if only in certain circumstances)?

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]

I LOL at the argument that the Church Fathers lived in an bloodthirsty age, while us modern scientific folk have a greater capacity for spiritual understanding.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I quote:

[ QUOTE ]
"Yes, and there are other sights: that last day of judgement, with its everlasting issues...when the world hoary with age, and all its many products, shall be consumed in great flame...What there excites my admiration? what my derision? Which sight gives me joy? which rouses me to exultation?---as I see so many illustrious monarchs...in fires more fierce than those with which in the days of their pride they raged against the followers of Christ. What world's wise men besides, the very philosophers, in fact, who taught their followers that God had no concern in aught that is sublunary, and were wont to assure them that either they had no souls, or that they would never return to the bodies which at death they had left, now covered with shame before the poor deluded ones, as one fire consumes them!...What quaestor or priest in his munificence will bestow on you the favour of seeing and exulting in such things as these?"
- Church father Tertullian circa A.D. 197; De Spectaculis from Arbesmann's The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation. (Emphasis mine.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Game, set, match. I cannot fathom any educated Westerner imagining such sentiments even in his most sadistic moments.

[Peter666]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I LOL at the argument that the Church Fathers lived in an bloodthirsty age, while us modern scientific folk have a greater capacity for spiritual understanding.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I quote:

[ QUOTE ]
"Yes, and there are other sights: that last day of judgement, with its everlasting issues...when the world hoary with age, and all its many products, shall be consumed in great flame...What there excites my admiration? what my derision? Which sight gives me joy? which rouses me to exultation?---as I see so many illustrious monarchs...in fires more fierce than those with which in the days of their pride they raged against the followers of Christ. What world's wise men besides, the very philosophers, in fact, who taught their followers that God had no concern in aught that is sublunary, and were wont to assure them that either they had no souls, or that they would never return to the bodies which at death they had left, now covered with shame before the poor deluded ones, as one fire consumes them!...What quaestor or priest in his munificence will bestow on you the favour of seeing and exulting in such things as these?"
- Church father Tertullian circa A.D. 197; De Spectaculis from Arbesmann's The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation. (Emphasis mine.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Game, set, match. I cannot fathom any educated Westerner imagining such sentiments even in his most sadistic moments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another foolish self declared winner. Do you see a SAINT in front of Tertullian's name? Would you like me to start quoting the Marquis de Sade and Stalin as examples your heroes in this more evolved age?