QUESTION;
What is inextricably wrong with man's 'ideas', and with the morality of atheism ? !!!


The most compelling answer to that question for me,       .....is that the concept of moral justification for wrongdoing, that has so often been used by mankind is that;

'The end, justifies the means.'


A concept which comes straight out of the communism playbook.       !!!




.



The lesson(s) of the original, French Revolution of !!

Our recent history is, a cautionary tale!

'What is old, is new again.'                  ....or can be!!

When we look at the justifications given by the French Revolutionaries [for their ruthless political violence],        .....we can say with some confidence, imo, that the French Revolution, was probably the first significant public 'outing' [exposure ???] of the 'virtues' and of the 'high moral purpose', of rampant atheists, political progressives, and leftists [i.e. in the French Revolutionaries] !

----------- >


The 'virtue' [to force] of the moslem/Jihadists, and of the French Revolutionaries in 1789, have much in common,     imo !
[read the last half of this following article.]

"...In the high road a la liberte...the first use they make of it is to form insurrections everywhere."


IMAGE.....
http://files.ctctcdn.com/766c6672201/8d16cce0-c184-426f-ba48-42c8b3deb51e.jpg


First beheaded was King Louis XVI then Marie Antoinette in France's Reign of Terror
http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs155/1108762609255/archive/1123450692773.html

Quote:

In 1789, the French Revolution started with the motto "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity." ....... ....... The first to be beheaded was King Louis XVI, followed by Marie Antoinette, but when the country's situation did not improve, Robespierre accused all the royalty, who were then beheaded. When the situation did not improve, the next to be beheaded were the wealthy, followed by business owners, farmers and those who hoarded food. When the situation did not improve, the religious clergy were beheaded, being accused of holding the nation back from achieving a secular utopian society. Priests and ministers, along with those who harbored them, were executed on sight, similar to what happened in Mexico in 1917. When the situation did not improve, they beheaded those who had grown tired of the beheadings, accusing them of becoming 'disloyal' to the revolution. Finally, Robespierre himself was accused, arrested and beheaded. Amid the domestic instability and social confusion, Napoleon began to rise toward dictatorship. ....... ....... As the bloody French Revolution progressed, Edmund Burke wrote in "A Letter to a Member of the National Assembly," 1791: "What is liberty without wisdom and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without restraint. Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites; in proportion as they are disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good in preference to the flattery of knaves..."

"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors."
- Edmund Burke


a little more good advice, to consider....

----------- >

some good reasoning, which i will posit, that the carnal man rejects outright....

----------- >

Three Secular Reasons Why America Should Be Under God
http://www.americanminute.com/store/product.php?productid=13&cat=1&page=1




.




Never old.

IMAGE....
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gvXwPghPsU4/TiV9dY_RIKI/AAAAAAAAC-k/yA0crbVWgvA/s320/10commandments.jpg


We [in our 'modern', secular state] do not live by those laws.

But, imo, we should.



But, if you are a typical atheist [living in this 'modern', 'civilised' age], you will say God's law laws are wrong/inconsistent/unjust.


WHEREAS;
God's say's that his laws are right, and just,      ....and his word, declares that following his laws, will bring about a stable, peaceful, prosperous society,      .....for the people who implement and follow those laws.


e.g.

Deuteronomy 19:15
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
16  If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong;
17  Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;
18  And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;
19  Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
20  And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.



Those words are found, repeated, again, and again, in Deuteronomy [in the bible]....

"So thou shalt put the evil away from among you."

"so shalt thou put the evil away from among you."

"so shalt thou put evil away from among you;"

"so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

"so thou shalt put away evil from among you."

"and thou shalt put evil away from among you."





Deuteronomy 4:5
Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the LORD my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it.
6  Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.
7  For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for?
8  And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?




Quote:

"...which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for? And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?"

But sadly, seeking righteousness, is not for the carnal man.           :(

Hence, the 'political' condition of the world today.

I always thought the French revolution was because 99.9% of the people were starving and that 0.1% lived like kings... :)

Yadda wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 9:18am:

QUESTION; What is inextricably wrong with man's 'ideas', and with the morality of atheism ? !!! The most compelling answer to that question for me,       .....is that the concept of moral justification for wrongdoing, that has so often been used by mankind is that; 'The end, justifies the means.' A concept which comes straight out of the communism playbook.       !!!

"The end, justifies the means" has been used by everyone since history began. The hypocrisy becoming most evident (but not confined to) when the murder is being done in the name of a god who you try to claim commands "thou shall not kill". Trying to claim that atheists invented, or personify, the concept of "the end, justifies the means" is ridiculous.


Yadda wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 9:20am:

But, if you are a typical atheist [living in this 'modern', 'civilised' age], you will say God's law laws are wrong/inconsistent/unjust.

Your posts are full of unfounded assertions, this being chief among them. Most atheists agree wholeheartedly with most of the basic "commandments", like not killing and cheating and lying. They just accept that it was society that made these laws, and god was only used as an unquestionable authority figure to justify their enforcement.

Ajax wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 9:36am:

I always thought the French revolution was because 99.9% of the people were starving and that 0.1% lived like kings... :)

Ajax,

I can only comment, that our [i.e. posterity's] later reading of all human history, depends significantly, upon the integrity of the actual persons who wrote down the account of 'history' which has come into our hands.

No ?



e.g.
After the French Revolution, who was it, in France,       .....wrote down, and gave an account, of why the violence of the French Revolution took place ?

Was it King Louis XVI or Marie Antoinette ?

Or was it the progeny of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette?

I don't think so.


Or was it persons who represented the standing political elite of the day,     ....post the the violence of the French Revolution,       .....who wrote down, and gave an account, of why the violence of the French Revolution took place ?

???

boxy wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:46am:

Yadda wrote on Mar 25th, 2016 at 9:18am: QUESTION; What is inextricably wrong with man's 'ideas', and with the morality of atheism ? !!! The most compelling answer to that question for me,       .....is that the concept of moral justification for wrongdoing, that has so often been used by mankind is that; 'The end, justifies the means.' A concept which comes straight out of the communism playbook.       !!! "The end, justifies the means" has been used by everyone since history began. The hypocrisy becoming most evident (but not confined to) when the murder is being done in the name of a god who you try to claim commands "thou shall not kill". Trying to claim that atheists invented, or personify, the concept of "the end, justifies the means" is ridiculous.

n.b.
Yadda actually said.....

Quote:

.......The most compelling answer to that question for me,       .....is that the concept of moral justification for wrongdoing, that has so often been used by mankind is that; 'The end, justifies the means.' A concept which comes straight out of the communism playbook.       !!!

boxy,

You don't believe, that what i suggested [my actual words], is/are accurate ???

Then please,        Google;
communist manifesto, The end, justifies the means





.






boxy wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:46am:

Yadda wrote on Mar 25th, 2016 at 9:20am: But, if you are a typical atheist [living in this 'modern', 'civilised' age], you will say God's law laws are wrong/inconsistent/unjust. Your posts are full of unfounded assertions, this being chief among them. Most atheists agree wholeheartedly with most of the basic "commandments", like not killing and cheating and lying. They just accept that it was society that made these laws, and god was only used as an unquestionable authority figure to justify their enforcement.

boxy,

Really ?

I would argue;
Shouldn't basic [intelligent] human reasoning [e.g. the ethical application of the study of cause and effect], itself be sufficient cause, to justify the individuals being persuaded to obey sensible and just laws ?

And i would argue, if that reasoning [i.e. the application of common-sense observation of human motives] is sufficient to cause people to be law-abiding members of society,        ......then please can you explain why do we see such widespread lawlessness within almost every human society today ?

AN ANSWER [which i would suggest];

The widespread lawlessness which we see, is because the political leftists, and political progressives, have undermined any widespread respect for the traditional rules and laws in societies.

Or would you say no, to that argument, and make the case that political leftists, and political progressives have been doing a wonderful job, in producing peaceful and harmonious human societies ?               :P




I have made that [my] same argument here, too.....

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1434160480/1#1

and in the next post, here.....

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1434160480/2#2




boxy,   You have asserted that;

Quote:

Most atheists agree wholeheartedly with most of the basic "commandments", like not killing and cheating and lying.

Do they ?

Really ?

Well, i have argued that the result of this social engineering and experimentation in ethics, by political leftists, and political progressives [UPON A SOCIETY WITH A NOW, LARGELY SECULAR/ATHEIST POPULACE],        .....has actually resulted in a widespread moral and ethical abdication among the real children, of those applied 'progressive' social 'theories'.

--------- >

'Normal' criminal behaviour - in mankind
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1293669294/0#0




boxy,

A basic question;

If persons are members of a society of men [regulated and governed by laws], and if many, many of those individuals within that society of men refuse to be accountable for their behaviour [in law], i.e. they regularly flout and break the laws of their society, and are actually allowed to regularly flout and break the laws of their society!!!,         .....then what efficacy [in maintaining peace in society] do such laws actually have,        ....to the benefit of the members of that society of men ???

I would suggest;            Absolutely none!       Zip!      Nada!

Yadda wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 10:47pm:

Ajax wrote on Mar 25th, 2016 at 9:36am: I always thought the French revolution was because 99.9% of the people were starving and that 0.1% lived like kings... :) Ajax, I can only comment, that our [i.e. posterity's] later reading of all human history, depends significantly, upon the integrity of the actual persons who wrote down the account of 'history' which has come into our hands. No ? e.g. After the French Revolution, who was it, in France,       .....wrote down, and gave an account, of why the violence of the French Revolution took place ? Was it King Louis XVI or Marie Antoinette ? Or was it the progeny of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette? I don't think so. Or was it persons who represented the standing political elite of the day,     ....post the the violence of the French Revolution,       .....who wrote down, and gave an account, of why the violence of the French Revolution took place ? ???

When you read real historians you find their sources are so extensive you couldn't jump over them
They are meticulous in cross checking one source against another to elicit as close to the truth as possible.
I give as examples Antonia Fraser's biographies of Marie Antoinette or Oliver Cromwell.

You do not need to have a PhD, to become a historian, but you do need a real love of putting yourself in the mindset of former times. Firsthand accounts are an absolute must. It requires long term study of broad sources, and it is still subjective at best. But it is what separates insight from the cliches of pop-history.

bogarde73 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2016 at 3:06pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 25th, 2016 at 10:47pm: Ajax wrote on Mar 25th, 2016 at 9:36am: I always thought the French revolution was because 99.9% of the people were starving and that 0.1% lived like kings... :) Ajax, I can only comment, that our [i.e. posterity's] later reading of all human history, depends significantly, upon the integrity of the actual persons who wrote down the account of 'history' which has come into our hands. No ? e.g. After the French Revolution, who was it, in France,       .....wrote down, and gave an account, of why the violence of the French Revolution took place ? Was it King Louis XVI or Marie Antoinette ? Or was it the progeny of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette? I don't think so. Or was it persons who represented the standing political elite of the day,     ....post the the violence of the French Revolution,       .....who wrote down, and gave an account, of why the violence of the French Revolution took place ? ??? When you read real historians you find their sources are so extensive you couldn't jump over them They are meticulous in cross checking one source against another to elicit as close to the truth as possible. I give as examples Antonia Fraser's biographies of Marie Antoinette or Oliver Cromwell.

bogarde73,

Thanks for that contribution.

I'm not going to argue with what you have stated.

I'm not qualified to.

Yadda wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 9:18am:

QUESTION; What is inextricably wrong with man's 'ideas', and with the morality of atheism ? !!!

It is all "man's ideas."

If I was to choose between Cardinal Pell or Fred Hollows, I know whose example I would choose.

Cardinal Pell

Quote:

Living the good life as created beings depends on living within the limits and according to the truths of the human condition. Purity of heart and the capacity to channel desires toward personal self-mastery in holiness are part of the high calling of the Christian life.

When asked if it was "common knowledge" that Ridsdale abused children:

Quote:

It's a sad story and it wasn't of much interest to me

http://monumentaustralia.org.au/content/directory/full/Fred_Hollows-56928-20485.jpg

Quote:

"To my mind, having a care and concern for others is the highest of the human qualities" "I believe that the basic attribute of mankind is to look after each other" "I'm a little embarrassed about the honors being heaped upon me but I'm not ashamed of it being done."

John_Taverner wrote on Mar 27^th, 2016 at 4:25pm:

It is all "man's ideas." If I was to choose between Cardinal Pell or Fred Hollows, I know whose example I would choose.

JTaverner,

I can't imagine, that Cardinal George Pell would dare, to compare his virtue, with the virtue of Jesus Christ.

What about Fred Hollows ?

Undoubtedly Fred Hollows is recognised, as a very compassionate and charitable man,       .....but do you believe that Fred Hollows, if he were still alive, would compare his virtue, with the virtue of Jesus Christ ?

It is silly and absurd thing, for any man, to try to do such a thing.


And, imo;
We should not compare ourselves, with others,        ....in an effort to demonstrate that our own virtue is superior to another.


Though men often will do it,        .....comparing ourselves with others [because we have an opinon of ourselves, as being more virtuous], is a futile attempt to justify ourselves.

The truth is, that no matter how high our [narcissistic] opinion may be, of ourselves,      ....WE ARE [simply] NOT 'JUSTIFIED',      ...to God's standard of virtue.


And for me, this now leads on to a QUESTION;

With all of our own faults,       .....when we see hypocrisy and wrongdoing [e.g. when we see men living among us, which evidence and commonsense would suggest, are all latent wanna-be murderers, and sometimes actual murderers!!],        .....should we all remain silent [i.e. because we find that we ourselves are not faultless] ?

?????

Isaiah 48:17
Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.


Isaiah 1:17
Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.




.




LETS COME BACK TO THE EXAMPLE OF JESUS

Why was Jesus killed ?

And by whom ?

Jesus was [effectively] murdered by the religious leaders of his day.

The Pharisees conspired to murder Jesus.

But why ?

Because Jesus spoke obvious truths, which embarrassed, and exposed the failings of, the religious leaders of his day.

And liars, and wicked people [in this age too!],       .....know that truth is a very dangerous thing.

......they avoid it like the plague!

......and they will try to suppress it, and prevent it from being openly spoken.




John 3:19
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.


John 8:43
Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44  Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.


John 18:37
.....To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.


Matthew 5:20
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.


Matthew 20:25
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
26  But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
27  And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:
28  Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.



John 10:4
....he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
5  And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.

John 10:11
I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

John 10:14
I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
.....
17  Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18  No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.


John 10:27
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:


John 12:44
Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.
45  And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
46  I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.
47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
48  He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
49  For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
50  And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.



Myself ?.....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1214199336/431#431



Quote:

It is wrong to be right, in an evil time. It is wrong to call for what is right, in an evil time.

But what do you think Yadda

Yadda wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 11:28am:

Undoubtedly Fred Hollows is recognised, as a very compassionate and charitable man,       .....but do you believe that Fred Hollows, if he were still alive, would compare his virtue, with the virtue of Jesus Christ ?

He was too humble for that. He was also an atheist, in case you didn't know.

Jesus made no virtue of his own. He inherited it. I'll take mortal virtue every time.

boxy wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:46am:

Yadda wrote on Mar 25th, 2016 at 9:18am: QUESTION; What is inextricably wrong with man's 'ideas', and with the morality of atheism ? !!! The most compelling answer to that question for me,       .....is that the concept of moral justification for wrongdoing, that has so often been used by mankind is that; 'The end, justifies the means.' A concept which comes straight out of the communism playbook.       !!! "The end, justifies the means" has been used by everyone since history began. The hypocrisy becoming most evident (but not confined to) when the murder is being done in the name of a god who you try to claim commands "thou shall not kill". Trying to claim that atheists invented, or personify, the concept of "the end, justifies the means" is ridiculous. Yadda wrote on Mar 25th, 2016 at 9:20am: But, if you are a typical atheist [living in this 'modern', 'civilised' age], you will say God's law laws are wrong/inconsistent/unjust. Your posts are full of unfounded assertions, this being chief among them. Most atheists agree wholeheartedly with most of the basic "commandments", like not killing and cheating and lying. They just accept that it was society that made these laws, and god was only used as an unquestionable authority figure to justify their enforcement.

Firstly, has it ?

issuevoter wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 4:43pm:

Jesus made no virtue of his own. He inherited it. I'll take mortal virtue every time.

How's that?

John_Taverner wrote on Mar 27^th, 2016 at 4:25pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 25th, 2016 at 9:18am: QUESTION; What is inextricably wrong with man's 'ideas', and with the morality of atheism ? !!! It is all "man's ideas." If I was to choose between Cardinal Pell or Fred Hollows, I know whose example I would choose. Cardinal Pell Quote: Living the good life as created beings depends on living within the limits and according to the truths of the human condition. Purity of heart and the capacity to channel desires toward personal self-mastery in holiness are part of the high calling of the Christian life. When asked if it was "common knowledge" that Ridsdale abused children: [quote] It's a sad story and it wasn't of much interest to me

http://monumentaustralia.org.au/content/directory/full/Fred_Hollows-56928-20485.jpg

Quote:

"To my mind, having a care and concern for others is the highest of the human qualities" "I believe that the basic attribute of mankind is to look after each other" "I'm a little embarrassed about the honors being heaped upon me but I'm not ashamed of it being done."

[/quote]
I can't say that's an unwelcome contribution: he is revered by many for his actions and not words no less!

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 11:46am:

But what do you think Yadda

Exactly, yeh: Yadda, if you want quote the bible as a reference that guides your opinion(or the one you wish to convey) I think that's fine but quoting too many is a distraction IMHO!

John_Taverner wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 12:20pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 29th, 2016 at 11:28am: Undoubtedly Fred Hollows is recognised, as a very compassionate and charitable man,       .....but do you believe that Fred Hollows, if he were still alive, would compare his virtue, with the virtue of Jesus Christ ? He was too humble for that. He was also an atheist, in case you didn't know.

That is a point worth making.

What is wrong with man's 'ideas

Nothing ... it's what people do with those ideas that can be a problem.

Take religion for example, the idea is fine in and off itseld, but when people use it to try and control or manipulate others, or as an excuse to claim some 'moral' high ground, then it defeats the purpose of religion in the first place.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 5:31pm:

issuevoter wrote on Mar 29th, 2016 at 4:43pm: Jesus made no virtue of his own. He inherited it. I'll take mortal virtue every time. How's that?

Give it a minute.

Yadda wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:21pm:

And i would argue, if that reasoning [i.e. the application of common-sense observation of human motives] is sufficient to cause people to be law-abiding members of society,        ......then please can you explain why do we see such widespread lawlessness within almost every human society today ? AN ANSWER [which i would suggest]; The widespread lawlessness which we see, is because the political leftists, and political progressives, have undermined any widespread respect for the traditional rules and laws in societies. Or would you say no, to that argument, and make the case that political leftists, and political progressives have been doing a wonderful job, in producing peaceful and harmonious human societies ?               :P

The problem you have, proving a correlation between atheism and lawlessness, is that we live in a time and a place, that is much more  peaceful, and that is much safer than any time where the theist sociopaths held sway.

Despite the sensationalist headlines... we are living in a utopia, when it comes to freedom from violence and crime, despite the fags having the audacity to come out in public.


Yadda wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:21pm:

boxy,   You have asserted that; Quote: Most atheists agree wholeheartedly with most of the basic "commandments", like not killing and cheating and lying. Do they ? Really ? Well, i have argued that the result of this social engineering and experimentation in ethics, by political leftists, and political progressives [UPON A SOCIETY WITH A NOW, LARGELY SECULAR/ATHEIST POPULACE],        .....has actually resulted in a widespread moral and ethical abdication among the real children, of those applied 'progressive' social 'theories'.

Show me a social engineering experiment that goes against core commandments such as not killing, cheating or lying.