Questioning his Behaviour - Page 7

quote:

---

If hypothetically you believed they did nothing wrong then from your perspective your beliefs would be right. But from my perspective you would be wrong.

---

But without an absolute standard people will always have to wonder wether or not Hitler was actually the most holy of saints.

Hmm . . . My dog (fictional) used a $150 pair of Italian loafers ainstead of the $5 rawhide bone, is the dog evil or is his actions wrong?

It would depend on what the dog thought he was accomplishing. If he could not tell the difference between bone and shoe then he was misguided. If he knew the difference but thought it was useful for him to do then his intention was not evil but his actions are wrong however if he knew that he was not supposed to chew up the shoes and did it anyways then his intention was evil but his actions would appear right to him but still be wrong

Ya, I have to admitt you are right, it is my fault for not teaching
not to chew on shoes.

You can never expect people to behave a certain way unless you teach them

unless you make them. god turght us what good was. he shouldnt have "expected" us to follow.

Because God taught us how to live He has every reason to expect us to do it. If ignorance isn't an excuse how then can education be?

first of all,

"God taught us how to live He has every reason to expect us to do it"

to live?

secondly,

"If ignorance isn't an excuse how then can education be?"

ignorance isn't an excuse for sucking and being stupid. but it is an excuse for going to school for 18 years, and not worknig.

"Awakenedwraith: You didn't interpret the 'Me first, always' ideology correctly. It doesn't mean Athiests are selfish, it means that they realise that there is a standard of goodness independent of a 'god' and they admit that 'god' cannot be the source of morality. In other words, they choose to be independent of a deity."

-summit- i just read that, you are correct. i am sorry for not understanding you.

quote:

---

it means that they realise that there is a standard of goodness independent of a 'god' and they admit that 'god' cannot be the source of morality. In other words, they choose to be independent of a deity."

---

Of course, we have free will, we must develope our own sense of morality.

quote:

---

we must develope our own sense of morality.

---

That being the case why do so many peoples basic morals remain the same? It is only the few extremists who choose their own morals and largely they are crticized for it.

awakendwraith, God gives us instructions on life and so He can expect us to follow them without forcing us to. And ignorance of His instructions is no excuse and so being educated by Him is also no excuse to not follow His example.

quote:

---

It is only the few extremists who choose their own morals and largely they are crticized for it.

---

Ethereal: Not really. Actually about 16%-20% of the worlds population are non-relgious, if not more. Thats approximately 1-1.5 billion people out of the 6billion people. And by the way, in regards to your country, Ethereal- 13.2% of Americans are nonreligious according to ARIS study of 2001.
Non-religious usually refers to: secular humanism, atheism, agnosticism, deism, pantheism and freethought.

I'm not talking about religions because most people religious or not hold the same basic moral standards. My point is the one who truly choose morals that are exclusive to them are criticized for it because they are extremists.

ethereal... you say ignorance from god's instructions is no excuse not to follow them.

seriously, does that really make sense to you?

We choose not to listen to God so why is that an excuse?