Just another newb

Status
Not open for further replies.

Revelation

BANNED
Banned
Hiya. Just a new member here, so I guess I'll say a little about myself.

As far as religion, when I was young I was a Jesus freak. One of the funnest things I could think to do as a kid was to go to Sunday School, and later, to my youth group. But even at a young age I didn't buy a lot of what my church was saying about the Bible. I simply read it and interpreted it differently than how my church told me I was supposed to interpret it.

By high school I was strongly questioning Christianity, especially when I realized I was gay and I had to listen to my peers going on about how gays were sinful, diseased, etc. I studied a lot of different belief systems. Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, Satanism, etc. While all of them provided interesting insights, I found it difficult to decipher which of them would be "the one truth path." And then in college I studied philosophy. I read Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Kant, etc. and what it taught me was how to use critical thinking. That is the ability to look past my own biases and prejudices and to be open to any answer as long as it was supported by reasonable evidence.

So I went out into the world and I forced people to defend their position and I found that the more you questioned people's beliefs in their religion, the more it was revealed how little they actually know outside of their respected holy scriptures. It seems when it comes to morals, everyone I have ever met relies on their feelings and reason to decide what is correct for them to believe. Some people give this very human trait a name like the "Holy Spirit" or "Karma" or whatever, but it's always the same. Sadly, I found the more you push it, the more self righteous and defensive people become, largely because of how aware they are of how intangible their beliefs really are. When I learned psychology I came to understand this was an emotional defense mechanism that people commonly use to avoid anxiety brought upon them when they are forced to contemplate their belief system. Even on this forum I see so many common defense mechanisms being used, like some of the delusional projection I saw in the homosexual thread.

In fact, all this was ultimately how I got over all the guilt my church and peers instilled in me for being gay and I was able to develop my own moral propositions from the world around me.

As far as politics, I've always been a lefty libertarian. I read works by people like John Smith and Ayn Rand, and I went through an anarcho capitalist phase, but I found it all just wasn't applicable to reality. I don't think any pure political ideology is, simply because humans are imperfect. I think political beliefs are largely situational and dependent on things like your upbringing, peer groups, social class, etc. I chose Pinko Commie, not because I believe communism works in the real world, but simply because I'm sympathetic to communism. Personally, I favor responsible capitalism. It really is complicated business separating politics from economics.

Sorry for the long intro, but that is me in a nut shell.
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
First, you're not gay, you're queer. Gay is an apologetic politically-correct term which is merely childish nonsense. You know what you do is wrong, just as much as every other queer does. Second, you aren't critical enough in your thinking, since you haven't yet found the truth.
 

chickenman

a-atheist
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Revelation,
When you were young and a "Jesus freak", what gospel message had you heard and believed?

Randy
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Hiya. Just a new member here, so I guess I'll say a little about myself.

As far as religion, when I was young I was a Jesus freak. One of the funnest things I could think to do as a kid was to go to Sunday School, and later, to my youth group. But even at a young age I didn't buy a lot of what my church was saying about the Bible. I simply read it and interpreted it differently than how my church told me I was supposed to interpret it.

By high school I was strongly questioning Christianity, especially when I realized I was gay and I had to listen to my peers going on about how gays were sinful, diseased, etc. I studied a lot of different belief systems. Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, Satanism, etc. While all of them provided interesting insights, I found it difficult to decipher which of them would be "the one truth path." And then in college I studied philosophy. I read Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Kant, etc. and what it taught me was how to use critical thinking. That is the ability to look past my own biases and prejudices and to be open to any answer as long as it was supported by reasonable evidence.

So I went out into the world and I forced people to defend their position and I found that the more you questioned people's beliefs in their religion, the more it was revealed how little they actually know outside of their respected holy scriptures. It seems when it comes to morals, everyone I have ever met relies on their feelings and reason to decide what is correct for them to believe. Some people give this very human trait a name like the "Holy Spirit" or "Karma" or whatever, but it's always the same. Sadly, I found the more you push it, the more self righteous and defensive people become, largely because of how aware they are of how intangible their beliefs really are. When I learned psychology I came to understand this was an emotional defense mechanism that people commonly use to avoid anxiety brought upon them when they are forced to contemplate their belief system. Even on this forum I see so many common defense mechanisms being used, like some of the delusional projection I saw in the homosexual thread.

In fact, all this was ultimately how I got over all the guilt my church and peers instilled in me for being gay and I was able to develop my own moral propositions from the world around me.

As far as politics, I've always been a lefty libertarian. I read works by people like John Smith and Ayn Rand, and I went through an anarcho capitalist phase, but I found it all just wasn't applicable to reality. I don't think any pure political ideology is, simply because humans are imperfect. I think political beliefs are largely situational and dependent on things like your upbringing, peer groups, social class, etc. I chose Pinko Commie, not because I believe communism works in the real world, but simply because I'm sympathetic to communism. Personally, I favor responsible capitalism. It really is complicated business separating politics from economics.

Sorry for the long intro, but that is me in a nut shell.
Welcome to the form. I see that you are a moral relativist. This is the easy road when you don't agree with God's morals. Have fun and push away!
 

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I read Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Kant, etc. and what it taught me was how to use critical thinking. That is the ability to look past my own biases and prejudices and to be open to any answer as long as it was supported by reasonable evidence.

As far as politics, I've always been a lefty libertarian. I read works by people like John Smith and Ayn Rand, and I went through an anarcho capitalist phase, but I found it all just wasn't applicable to reality.
Even if you reject Christianity these two statements don't seem to fit together.

Could you indulge me for just a moment? This isn't a scientific survey; just a curiousity really - but did you believe God knew the future exhaustively (was outside of time/foreknew or foresaw from the foundation of the earth/was omniscient) when you were a Jesus Freak?

And, one more thing, welcome to TOL!
 

Revelation

BANNED
Banned
First, you're not gay, you're queer. Gay is an apologetic politically-correct term which is merely childish nonsense. You know what you do is wrong, just as much as every other queer does. Second, you aren't critical enough in your thinking, since you haven't yet found the truth.

Well it's a pleasure to meet you as well. :)

I'm afraid your judgment is misplaced since you have absolutely no idea what I do. In fact, I find it very interesting that you seem to assume to know everything about how I live my life because I simply stated I am gay.

And I have found many excellent truths, all of which I choose to incorporate into my life, and all of which have made my life all the better. One such truth is that most people are historically and social scientifically ignorant and yet they arrogantly believe they already know "The Truth". I look forward to seeing if you are any different.

Revelation,
When you were young and a "Jesus freak", what gospel message had you heard and believed?

Randy

Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John. Personally I have a preference for Mathew since some of my favorite verses come from that particular text.

"For if you forgive men for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions." NAS Matthew 6:14-15

I'm just assuming that is what you meant by "gospel".

Don't worry...your perspective will change.
Wait and see.

I hope it does. Life is about being open to change and adapting. I feel great sympathy for those who don't realize it. The greatest mistake a lot of people make is they believe certainty in their beliefs is proof of their correctness. I think my motto says it best, "Even if there is merit to it, it's always best to understand why you believe something, rather than blindly following."

Welcome to the form. I see that you are a moral relativist. This is the easy road when you don't agree with God's morals. Have fun and push away!

Oh, I'm definitely not a moral relativist. I do believe there are universal truths. For example, the Golden Rule which predates Christianity and which was even used by Jesus Christ himself, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." A very rational and objective moral proposition, wouldn't you say?

Even if you reject Christianity these two statements don't seem to fit together.

Could you indulge me for just a moment? This isn't a scientific survey; just a curiousity really - but did you believe God knew the future exhaustively (was outside of time/foreknew or foresaw from the foundation of the earth/was omniscient) when you were a Jesus Freak?

And, one more thing, welcome to TOL!

I think you may have taken that second quote a bit out of context, but allow me to clarify. I went on to say that I don't think any pure political ideology is correct and what people generally believe is circumstantial to their situation. While I am not a moral relativist, I am a political relativist. I don't believe one particular political system works for everyone, simply because people have different fundamental values. Those who value liberty above all will see any form of centralized authority as inherently evil, those who value equality above all will see any unequal distribution of resources as inherently evil, and those who value tradition above all will see any change contrary to their moral truths as inherently evil. With such contradictions, it is virtually impossible to develop an all encompassing system. Personally I feel democracy and responsible capitalism is the least imperfect system that we currently have to come close to attaining that seemingly impossible goal, but I recognize that is just my subjective belief based upon my own circumstances and I wouldn't seek to impose that on others.

In regards to your questions, I have had many different conceptions of God ranging from a father figure with all the foreknowledge of his creation, to a deist conception of a natural God who has remained uninvolved in his creation since its creation, to even pantheistic conceptions in which God is the Cosmos itself. I personally believe iin God for all the subjective, intuitive, and mystical reasons everyone else believes in him but my current conception of him is based upon feelings and reasoning derived from my own experiences and the knowledge I have attained. So while I continually try to improve my conception of God with critical thought, I in no way argue that my current conception is unbiased.

Also, thank you for the welcome.
 

chickenman

a-atheist
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Revelation,

When I said "gospel", I was referring to a gospel message of salvation. Many people have different beliefs about what one has to believe to be saved (to be a Christian). So I was wondering what you understood the gospel message of salvation to be and what you believed (assuming that by "Jesus freak" you meant you were a Christian).

Thanks,
Randy
 

Revelation

BANNED
Banned
Revelation,

When I said "gospel", I was referring to a gospel message of salvation. Many people have different beliefs about what one has to believe to be saved (to be a Christian). So I was wondering what you understood the gospel message of salvation to be and what you believed (assuming that by "Jesus freak" you meant you were a Christian).

Thanks,
Randy

My apologies. My old church generally argued that you had to simply accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and choose to accept his love into your heart. Interestingly enough, my old church would still consider me a Christian since I took communion as a child and said the Lord's prayer. They argued that once a person had accepted Jesus, they could never be separated from him, and would find salvation. Although sin in life would lessen the glory of that salvation in heaven. Very Protestant belief system.
 

chatmaggot

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
In fact, all this was ultimately how I got over all the guilt my church and peers instilled in me for being gay and I was able to develop my own moral propositions from the world around me.

Does everyone have the "right" to develop their own moral propositions and live by them?

Does a moral proposition of one trump the moral proposition of another? If so, why and how do you determine which one is the "correct" or "better" proposition?

Welcome!
 

chickenman

a-atheist
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
My apologies. My old church generally argued that you had to simply accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and choose to accept his love into your heart. Interestingly enough, my old church would still consider me a Christian since I took communion as a child and said the Lord's prayer. They argued that once a person had accepted Jesus, they could never be separated from him, and would find salvation. Although sin in life would lessen the glory of that salvation in heaven. Very Protestant belief system.

Your old church didn't ever present you with the gospel, then. The gospel by which one is saved is this: Jesus died for your sins, was buried, and rose to life.

Did you ever believe that? Do you believe that now?

Thanks,
Randy
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
From your OP
...
In fact, all this was ultimately how I got over all the guilt my church and peers instilled in me for being gay and I was able to develop my own moral propositions from the world around me. ...

Your Response
...
Oh, I'm definitely not a moral relativist. I do believe there are universal truths. For example, the Golden Rule which predates Christianity and which was even used by Jesus Christ himself, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." A very rational and objective moral proposition, wouldn't you say? ...
By your own words, you are a moral relativist. You hold to some moral absolutes which is not unusual as most people do. But you have completely redefined sexual morals to make your chosen lifestyle more comfortable for yourself. Since you have moral propositions developed by yourself, those things are relative morals - they are moral relative to you.
 

Revelation

BANNED
Banned
Does everyone have the "right" to develop their own moral propositions and live by them?

People have a right to utilize reason and to expand their knowledge so that they can become better people.

Does a moral proposition of one trump the moral proposition of another? If so, why and how do you determine which one is the "correct" or "better" proposition?

The moral proposition which is supported by the most reasonable evidence would be the correct.


Thank you.
 

Revelation

BANNED
Banned
Your old church didn't ever present you with the gospel, then. The gospel by which one is saved is this: Jesus died for your sins, was buried, and rose to life.

Did you ever believe that? Do you believe that now?

Thanks,
Randy

Oh I certainly learned all that in Sunday School. I believed it then. It seems very unlikely now.
 

Revelation

BANNED
Banned
By your own words, you are a moral relativist. You hold to some moral absolutes which is not unusual as most people do. But you have completely redefined sexual morals to make your chosen lifestyle more comfortable for yourself. Since you have moral propositions developed by yourself, those things are relative morals - they are moral relative to you.

Either you don't know what a moral relativist is or you are reading too much into my words.

Wikipedia said:
Moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances.

I believe in universal truths which can be obtained from reason and evidence through careful observation and study of the world. I do not claim that morals are subjectively based upon society or culture or my personal circumstances, merely that any individual who appropriately uses critical thinking and logic can determine the moral truths of the world.

Although I will admit I phrased it poorly in my OP.
 
Last edited:

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I think you may have taken that second quote a bit out of context, but allow me to clarify. I went on to say that I don't think any pure political ideology is correct and what people generally believe is circumstantial to their situation. While I am not a moral relativist, I am a political relativist.
As other people mentioned, you said you were a moral relativist in your original post.

Rev continues:
I don't believe one particular political system works for everyone, simply because people have different fundamental values. Those who value liberty above all will see any form of centralized authority as inherently evil
This doesn't make sense. Well, for anarchists it does, but I don't think you'll find many libertarian or liberty loving fundamentalists like me who are anarchists. Libertarians realize the importance of a central government, and I even go as far as to say we need to return to a monarchy.

Rev continues:
, those who value equality above all will see any unequal distribution of resources as inherently evil
Quite true.

Rev continues:
, and those who value tradition above all will see any change contrary to their moral truths as inherently evil.
"their" moral truths? What does that mean? Someone can have their own moral truths?

Rev continues:
With such contradictions, it is virtually impossible to develop an all encompassing system.
It is easy, just throw out the wrong ones, which you mentioned, and that leaves you with one left. That would, by definition, be an all encompassing system.

Rev continues:
Personally I feel democracy and responsible capitalism is the least imperfect system that we currently have to come close to attaining that seemingly impossible goal, but I recognize that is just my subjective belief based upon my own circumstances and I wouldn't seek to impose that on others.
You are correct. Democracy plus capitalism is a bust. However, a monarchy plus capitalism would be the all encompassing system.

In regards to your questions, I have had many different conceptions of God
Stop right there. I'm only interested in the time you were a Jesus Freak (as the text stated).

Also, thank you for the welcome.
You're welcome. And thanks for the complete reply.
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Either you don't know what a moral relativist is or you are reading too much into my words.



I believe in universal truths which can be obtained from reason and evidence through careful observation and study of the world. I do not claim that morals are subjectively based upon society or culture or my personal circumstances, merely that any individual who appropriately uses critical thinking and logic can determine the moral truths of the world.

Although I will admit I phrased it poorly in my OP.
Homosexual sex is immoral according to the creator of the universe, the only one with the authority define morals. Since you have defined it to be okay, you have made a moral claim relative to your social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances.. Sorry. Your are just another amoral soul.
 

Revelation

BANNED
Banned
As other people mentioned, you said you were a moral relativist in your original post.

And as I have been telling that person, no I didn't.

This doesn't make sense. Well, for anarchists it does, but I don't think you'll find many libertarian or liberty loving fundamentalists like me who are anarchists. Libertarians realize the importance of a central government, and I even go as far as to say we need to return to a monarchy.

That is a rather unusual position for a Libertarian. I'd like to hear your thoughts on that sometime.

"their" moral truths? What does that mean? Someone can have their own moral truths?

Imperfect moral truths. Those that are generally derived from holy scriptures as opposed to careful observation and study of the world. Moral truths that are not necessarily substantiated with reasonable evidence beyond their holy scriptures.

It is easy, just throw out the wrong ones, which you mentioned, and that leaves you with one left. That would, by definition, be an all encompassing system.

If you have the blueprint for one I would most certainly love to see it.

You are correct. Democracy plus capitalism is a bust. However, a monarchy plus capitalism would be the all encompassing system.

I would love to see the evidence you use to substantiate such a claim, especially since capitalism was born out of a rebellion by the merchant class to feudal rule.

Stop right there. I'm only interested in the time you were a Jesus Freak (as the text stated).

Okay, I can't imagine why you would only be interested in that one particular point in my life.

You're welcome. And thanks for the complete reply.

Any time.
 

chickenman

a-atheist
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Oh I certainly learned all that in Sunday School. I believed it then. It seems very unlikely now.

What seems unlikely? That He died? That He died for your sins? Or that He rose from the dead?

What's your opinion of what will happen to you when you die?

Thanks, Rev.

Randy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top