Tagged: morality Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • J. Randal Matheny 3:21 am on 2016-12-23 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , morality   

    One liberal tires of the emptiness 

    That leads me to . . . drum roll . . . the Christian Right. It is no small feat, switching tribes. It feels stressful and weird to abandon your tribe for the Detested Other Side.

    Since November 8, my husband and I have been taking the kids to church. (He is politically conservative with a religious bent, so no argument there.) I have come this close to buying a giant poster of the American flag for the living room. I may do it still.

    Right now, I am struggling to accept the basic Christian doctrines (virgin birth, resurrection, second coming) because I feel the Christian tribe may be the right tribe for my family.

    via ‘My Fellow Liberals, I’m Tired Of You’ | The American Conservative

    The entire letter this California lady wrote to a blogger can be read at the link above. It deserves a careful read, and an approach by faithful Christians that might help people like her to make the jump from the emptiness of a godless life to the abundant life in Christ.

    Her language about “tribe” has been imported by progressives among us to make the church of our Lord into just another denomination. But she means something different by this.

    Obviously, the writer has been attending some denomination. But nothing keeps those who hold to NT faith from making a strong appeal—in fact, ours is stronger than the so-called “Christian right”!

    It’s a shame that we can’t get some WVBS videos and books like Dick Sztanyo’s book, Graceful Reason, on Christian apologetics, in her hands.

    Though she doesn’t mention it in her letter, there’s no doubt her husband’s “religious bent” had some influence over her. Here is evidence for the power of example.

     
  • TFRStaff 6:23 am on 2016-11-01 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , morality,   

    Hugh Fulford (“I’d Give A Pretty”) 

    “I’D GIVE A PRETTY . . .”

    One of the fond memories of my childhood is spending several days each summer with each set of my grandparents. All of my grandparents lived within thirty miles of our home and we spent much time together, not only in the summer, but throughout the year during holidays, birthdays, anniversaries, as well as at other times. (More …)

     
    • James McFerrin 9:00 pm on 2016-11-01 Permalink | Reply

      Yeah, I’d give a pretty too. That was one of my dad’s expressions too. I had not thought of that in many years.

  • TFRStaff 5:53 pm on 2016-10-20 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , morality, , ,   

    Your opinion is wanted 

    House to House, Heart to Heart is taking an opinion poll on multiple issues affecting America that are most important to you.

    This poll is being advertised in the latest issue of House to House, Heart to Heart.

    Feel free to fill out the poll yourself, as well as share it with whomever you think would be interested.

    opinion-poll

     
  • Eugene Adkins 6:52 am on 2016-05-05 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , morality, ,   

    Random thoughts…otherwise known as corollaries to one guy I know 

    Here’s some random thoughts…or maybe corollaries. I don’t know – you decide.

    A few days ago I decided to sit down with my four-year-old daughter and show her some Three Stooges videos. She’s a fan now. The first thing out of her mouth was, “Why isn’t there any color?” The last thing was, “I want to watch the 3 Stewards again.” I can think of a Bible lesson about 3 stewards where one acted like a stooge. Can you? Here’s a hint (Matthew 25:14-30).

    Speaking of stooges, have you ever wondered what a real life “high place” would look like today? Read this and you’ll see.

    Since “politics” is now on the table, I heard that the court-system has decided that North Carolina’s bathroom-bill is unlawful because it “violates” the civil-rights act. Talk about a civil-wrong! So members of the opposite sex now have a “civil-right” to use the bathroom of their choice? How can we boycott the courts along with Target? And don’t forget to pray.

    Speaking of prayer, when’s the last time you thanked God for answering your prayers? If you pay attention to most prayers in the Bible you’ll see that thanksgiving was as much a part of the prayer as asking for reasons to give thanks. I know it’s not November, but thanksgiving is never a bad attitude to have.

    Things that seem out of season aren’t always so bad. There are a lot more than 4 seasons out there! So enjoy the blessings of life in the middle of the burdens, and use the yoke of Jesus to carry the burdens in the middle of good times. Sow for a spiritual harvest and look for low hanging fruit at the same time.

    Well, I don’t know if my list is technically a corollary line-up, but I don’t think they’re hardly as random as I sometimes think they are.

     
  • J. Randal Matheny 4:25 am on 2016-01-14 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , morality, ,   

    Man-made utopias then and now 

    Rick K. nails it with this original association. Do read the entire post.

    All societies are engaged in a continual process. Either they draw closer to God, or they grow further away from him. In either case, certain features will become evident in time to mark the direction.

    In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah (and the other surrounding cities), the man-made Utopia involves a number of trademark qualities and preferences (explored more in chapter 19:

    • a segregation from Divine influence,
    • an extreme – even aggressive – lack of tolerance for individuals who disagree with their Utopian way of life,
    • a profound lack of concern for consequence, as the ends seem to justify any means used to achieve them,
    • and this one signature matter: the up-ending of social and sexual norms.

    You can easily track this humanistic, Utopian philosophy from ancient Sodom to modern San Francisco.

    via The great Utopia | Root Downward, Fruit Upward.

     
  • Eugene Adkins 6:00 am on 2015-08-19 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , morality, ,   

    Interesting quote for the day 

    When the topic of treating people like cattle comes up in the tense conversation between Alexander (the “time traveler”) and the “mentally higher evolved being” in the movie version of H.G. Wells’ story “The Time Traveler”, the “uber brained” individual responds with:

    Who are you to question 800,000 years of evolution?

    Indeed! If evolution is the “creator” of us all, who are any of us to question what evolution drives us to do, even when people/organizations such as “Planned Parenthood” treat slaughtered human beings like candidates for the meat market?

     
    • John Henson 11:09 am on 2015-08-22 Permalink | Reply

      Bro. DIck Sztanyo, in his book, “Graceful Reason,” chapter nine, underscores one of the greatest problems for evolutionists in sexual reproduction. If natural selection is true, and plants and animals adapt using the simplest methods, then where did sexual reproduction come from? Cell mitosis is one of the simplest methods of reproduction, yet sexual reproduction is very complex and fairly unreliable. If natural selection takes the easiest and best method, then where did sexual reproduction come from? IT CAME FROM GOD!

      • Eugene Adkins 8:02 am on 2015-08-23 Permalink | Reply

        Good point.

        I’ve often wondered what the odds would be that a compatible female and male “evolving” at the same time would be. If one evolved before the other it would die and fail to pass along its genes without being able to mate, and that would put mutation back in its place.

    • docmgphillips 8:14 pm on 2015-08-23 Permalink | Reply

      And how much longer will God suffer us to exist?

      • Eugene Adkins 6:38 am on 2015-08-24 Permalink | Reply

        I know things are frustrating, and seemingly ever increasingly worse, but I’d say we’re still a ways off from the pre-flood days, and my prayer is that situations like the Planned Parenthood “revelation” will help people to see the blood on our hands and the need for the blood of Jesus to cover our sin. Evolution isn’t billions of years old, but it isn’t a new idea either.

  • John T. Polk II 2:33 pm on 2015-07-01 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , covet, greatest sin, morality, , , , , ,   

    7-3-2015 Sin is Sin 

    No one asked Jesus, “Whose sin is greatest?” But we know the answer: someone else’s! Jesus said, “What comes out of a man, that defiles a man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lewdness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within and defile a man” (Mark 7:20-23 NKJV). Is morality what we don’t do? We don’t murder, but commit adultery? We don’t steal, but we covet? We’re not wicked, but are full of pride? No one’s sin is worse than ours, “because all sinned” (Romans 5:12 NKJV). Temptations are “common to man” (1 Corinthians 10:13 NKJV), and so is sin! Jesus said: “preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark 16:15-16 NKJV).

    This is Johnny Polk, with “Words of Wisdom” brought to you by the Oneida church of Christ.

     
  • Eugene Adkins 9:59 am on 2015-06-26 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: morality, ,   

    Friday the 13th? How about Friday the 26th! 

    Thank you activist judges for giving the Western Culture a new Friday date that has nothing to do with bad luck but every thing to do with a failure in moral decency.

     
    • docmgphillips 4:14 pm on 2015-06-27 Permalink | Reply

      And where will it end? Will there come a time when what disturbs a Christian is fought for as strongly as what disturbs an atheist?

  • Ron Thomas 2:42 pm on 2015-05-02 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: civil contract, morality,   

    A REPLY TO MY Letter to editor (4.29.2015) 

    My letter to the editor to the Decatur Herald & Review generated responses. Here is one of them.

    Listen up Bible believers. I could not possibly care any less about you and your personal religious views or what you “think.” As far as I am concerned no religious leader should ever be required to perform any religious ceremony–weddings or otherwise. They should stay OUT of government and government should leave them alone. It’s bad enough that I am forced to subsidize religion whether I approve or not.
    Marriage as determined under the licensing law is a matter of CIVIL CONTRACT. You have no right to determine for me as a gay man with whom I may love or enter into a marriage CONTRACT. Anymore than I have a right to tell you whether or not you can buy a house or a car. If I ever tried to use the power of the government to restrict your right to marry you would be outraged.

    I am assuming that the parties to such a contract (as in all contract law) are willing, able and ready to agree to terms. This knocks out the dopey right wing nonsense about marrying kids, dogs or pledging myself for life to a table leg. Do NOT try and force your personal (and aberrant in my view) religious lifestyle off on the rest of us.

    Mind your own business. Whether I can or will procreate is none of your business. Straight people have a divorce rate in excess of 50%. That proves you are not stable. Clean your own filthy glass house before you criticize mine.

    I recently married my cop boyfriend of 27 years. It was a great wedding. All four of our grown kids were there. One ex-wife showed up and we danced and had a great time. After 27 years I’m betting my relationship has lasted a lot longer than many of your straight marriages. If my getting married ruins yours–TOO BAD. You apparently had little to lose anyway.

    In this reply against my letter to editor, there is nothing positive with regard to a “moral component” perspective. It is a matter of civil contract, one’s desire, and the role of government in the affairs of the community. This man married his boyfriend.

    From this we can be sure of the following: first, his moral code is only that which he wants and likes. There is nothing that is outside of himself that compels him to behave in a particular way; if he wants, he will. Second, if marriage is a civil contract only, then civil contracts can be altered by the state (community) at will. This moves the moral code from the individual to the community. There is, however, no reason to demand volition from two, when one will do. On what basis should the community demand the volition of two? Only because it wants to; there is no moral obligation on the part of the community that requires them to give attention to another party. If there is, on what basis? Would you say human dignity? That is simply arbitrary. Third, as per the direction of his assertive argument, this justifies polygamy, polyandry, the union of an adult with an arbitrarily declared minor, or two arbitrarily declared minors making a union. If one opposes, on what basis would this be done? The community standard? Arbitrary! Fourth, religious views are aberrant, but not the perspective the homosexual community. Fifth, if “straight” people have a high divorce rate (this is true), then “non-straight” (crooked?) people are not to be judged by a people who fail to live by a particular moral standard they imply (and push) on others.  

     
    • James 6:36 pm on 2015-05-02 Permalink | Reply

      I have warned my son and will warn my daughters when they are older that marriage as recognized by government has nothing to do with what God demands and really has not for quite some time with marriage and divorce for any cause, this is just one more step down the path. Polygamy will be next. It is possible that my children will not go through the government at all to enter into the covenant of marriage as the Bible teaches it. There is nothing in scripture that gives government any authority over marriage at all. We comply with the law of the land out of respect, but the time is coming when we may have to choose a different path. I can’t imagine Joseph and Mary going to the government to get permission (a license) to get married. God has given us permission to marry according to his rules and honestly we do not need a government license to do that. I am not talking about people just shacking up, but a man and woman before God and witnesses pledging themselves to one another for life. We have to quit thinking like Americans and start thinking like Christians.

      • LaraIngalls 11:33 pm on 2015-05-02 Permalink | Reply

        Hi James, your last statement is exactly my thought on most things now. We are Christian first and foremost. The rest is just temporary human geography. Borders, regimes, government forms change, but God and His will for us in the New Testament era has not changed in nearly 2000 years.

        We should advocate full separation of church and state, and my personal preference is for as small a state interference in my daily life as possible. What the state deems legal or not has absolutely no bearing on what I believe morally to be right. I base my morals on the fact all humans err, all have flawed logic (at times, and present company included), thus a Higher Power (God) must be the source of morality that all mankind everywhere should obey by choice. If I were to impose morality on (human) state/ government, I would have to concede other’s right to do so, even if my moral code diverges (e.g., Jewish, Sharia, Catholic or Hindu morals as governance of law instead of what I believe to be God’s law).

        Since Old Law Israelites rejected God’s direct governance in lieu of a king, God has not directly controlled human governments/ states. God is the ultimate authority, and as the Bible says He is the source of all human government authority. We follow our temporary, geographically determined human leaders and abide by their laws, as God wishes, up until their laws prevent us from following God’s law. Then, as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

        In this instance, any human government defining marriage between various genders/ ages, etc, does not prevent me from practicing marriage as God ordains morally. Hence, let the human government do what it likes. Better yet, let us with our human given votes, cast ours for those who maintain marriage is none of the state’s business anyway. Before we had marriage records kept in churches, Family Bibles, etc. We can do so again.

  • Ron Thomas 4:04 pm on 2015-03-03 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , morality   

    I have written quite a number of letters… 

    I have written quite a number of letters to editor in our local newspaper (Decatur and Mattoon, IL) through the years. I have been somewhat of a broken record, but this is by design on my part. I want to underscore the empty atheistic moral code that many in society seem to want to adopt.

    On occasion I will go to the newspaper website and peruse the comments to my letters. Today (3.3.2015) I looked to see the following replies to what I most recently wrote. So readily are they willing to accept some moral standard that has an objective quality to it, but so “emptily” are they able to put forth a moral code that is obligatory for others to follow!

    Since they have failed to do so, comments that illustrate this follows.

    ****So tell me Mr. Thomas, how is it that our moral code based on religion did not prevent our invasion of Iraq and inflicting massive casualties, war crimes, and misery on a country which did not attack us? How was this not “evil”? Our moral code did not prevent this country from committing a large number of atrocities. It seems “thou shall not kill” has a few loopholes in which you can fly a B52 through.

    ***Religion isn’t responsible for creating moral code, society is my friend. If religion was the source of all morals we would never have had slavery. Which commandment was it that said, “Thou shalt not own or enslave another person”??? Which one? Oh, that’s right…none of them. It’s because society tells us what’s right and wrong, not religion. Society advanced and gave women the right to vote, not religion. Society gave and is still trying to give equal rights to all, not religion. –oblivious

    ***Show me what part of the bible endorses democratically elected governments? Democracy and republicanism is a pagan invention discovered by the intellectual enlightenment. . Christianity was an enemy of democratic rule. The divine right of kings was their standard.

    ***Mr. Thomas pretends to know the workings of the mind of an atheist. Shall we then conclude that dishonesty is morally permissible to the theist? There is no written rulebook for the atheist, and yet all the ones in my acquaintance, and there are many, observe the practice of treating others as they, themselves, would wish to be treated. How does a theist, whose handbook sanctions genocide, incest, cannibalism, and slavery, among other atrocities, find the nerve to criticize anyone else?

     
    • marciasettles 5:03 pm on 2015-03-03 Permalink | Reply

      Do you even bother to respond to such attacks?

      • LaraIngalls 6:03 pm on 2015-03-03 Permalink | Reply

        Whether Mr Thomas replies or not, indulge me with a response. I hear these and others all the time.

        Firstly many, many, many things are done by individuals that break the rules/ moral codes they live under. Just because most drivers speed at some point does not change the law, it shows humans break/ disregard the law. They do the same to a Biblical code in the New law. This does not mean God’s law has no power, it means humans break His law. Grace, mercy and forgiveness are possible under God’s law, generally not man’s law.

        Secondly, God’s law is higher than society’s law, which as we know changes with leaders, borders, and time. God’s law has remained the same, year on year, for nearly 2000 years. As for women’s rights, it is God’s law which makes no distinction between male and female in what is expected. Man is the one who creates societal laws that discriminate against women. The same goes for racism; God is no respector of persons (Acts 10:34). His law applies equally to all genders, colours, nations, sizes and times. There is nothing in God’s New Testament to either endorse or disallow slavery, which is society’s choice. But God’s laws of love, mercy, honesty apply across all human relationships.

        Thirdly, God has never endorsed any human government system. In the Old Testament, when He ruled Israel directly for a time, then He acted as legislature and executive, allowing appointed Judges to be the upholder/ enforcer of the law. And the Israelites asked God for a king like their neighbours and enemies had. So He relented and gave them a king. There is nothing in this which supports the divine right of Kings.

        Lastly, it is my experience that atheists are extremely rude and abusive in language towards those who have a faith in a higher power, whomever that is. It is true that atheistic leaders such as Hitler and Stalin wreak genocide, hatred, mass murder, etc., to spread rule by fear. As for genocide, incest, cannibalism, slavery and other atrocities… Kindly point out for me what New Testament law endorses these?! Please do not confuse the message and the messenger. As stated, a lot is done in God’s name that He detests. In the end He says, Depart from me, I never knew you (Matthew 7:21-23).

        I have taken the time to read Darwin, Dawkins, Hitchens and such to understand atheism. I wonder how many atheists have read the Bible cover to cover. Most I know take what they hear from movies or others, or worse, what some Catholic history or tradition does, and lay that at the feet of God. This is a fatal flaw. Read the Bible, Old and New, to understand who God is and what He wants from you.

      • Ron Thomas 7:18 pm on 2015-03-03 Permalink | Reply

        No, I don’t respond. I am, however, interesting in seeing if there is a substantive reply to anything I write along that line. As you can see there was nothing.

        On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:03 PM, The Fellowship Room wrote:

        >

    • Andrew 5:52 pm on 2015-03-03 Permalink | Reply

      Last paragraph – how do people think the Bible ‘sanctions’ genocide, incest, cannibalism, and slavery? Such nonsense…

  • TFRStaff 6:45 am on 2015-02-27 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , morality,   

    5 Reasons Racism is Ridiculous 

    Atheism has no rational basis upon which to call anything objectively just or unjust, including racism. If mankind is merely the result of billions of years of mindless evolution and is nothing more than animals (as atheistic evolution contends; Marchant, 2008), then man can logically make evolutionary-based racist remarks that are consistent with the godless General Theory of Evolution. In fact, Charles Darwin’s “Bulldog,” atheist Thomas Huxley, did just that in his 1865 essay, “Emancipation–Black and White.” He alleged, for example, “no rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average Negro is the equal, still less superior, of the white man.” In truth, if there is no God, mankind could just as easily look down upon and mistreat others (whom he deems are less evolved), as he does roaches, rats, and orangutans (Lyons, 2011; Lyons and Butt, 2009). Those who are Christians, however, logically contend that since (1) God exists, and (2) the Bible is the Word of God, racism is morally wrong–and completely ridiculous for the following five reasons. Read >>
     
  • Ed Boggess 8:27 am on 2015-02-23 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Girl Scouts, , morality,   

    Two teenage girls were caught stealing money off a table at a supermarket in Boynton Beach, Florida. The table was being used by a Girl Scout selling cookies. When questioned by WPBF-TV, they said they had no remorse. One said on camera, “We went through all that effort to get the money. We got all these charges against us, and we had to give the money back.” The other added, “I’m not sorry. I’m just mad I got caught.” The girls were caught because they returned to the store the next day and taunted the little girl. Our society is adrift without a moral compass. Some call it progress. But if this is what it means to cut the apron strings of our Christian beginnings, I’m all for staying home. “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?” This is Just A Minute.

     
  • J. Randal Matheny 4:36 am on 2015-02-14 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , morality,   

    Must read: 50 shades of … 

    Must-read: Rick Kelley’s article on his blog, “50 shades of rationalization.” Don’t miss a single word of it.

     
    • Harold Jones 8:07 am on 2015-02-14 Permalink | Reply

      Excellent article. It was sad to hear co-workers so excited to go see this movie. They did not listen to any reason not to see it. Thank you for the inspiring encouragement to reject Satan’s lures!

  • Ron Thomas 5:53 pm on 2015-02-12 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , morality, standards   

    Brian Williams – Did he really do anything wrong? 

    (Letter to editor),

    It is most unfortunate that Brian Williams “fell from grace” in the television news business like he did. The unfortunate aspect is the humiliation he is experiencing at this moment because of his unwise engagement in false news reporting. That Brian Williams needs to pay a price goes without saying, but the humiliation is tough for anyone to handle.

    To the atheistic model of morality, though, Brian Williams did nothing wrong! It was not long ago that someone wrote, “Claiming that there is any standard that is objective and transcendent of man, set forth by God, is plain and simply a lie.” To an atheist (or secularist), what is a lie? For that matter, to an atheist, what is truth? If there is such a thing as truth, then on what is it based? Is it man’s opinion, perspective?

    If truth is based on facts, and there is no objective truth, then the facts are subjected to an interpretation. Subjective truth, therefore, is nothing but one man’s opinion, or perspective. Thus, Brian Williams did nothing wrong from the vantage point of the atheistic moral code.

    Yet, atheists can’t live like that because of the obvious moral chaos it produces. In order to live by an objective truth they deny even exists, they “steal” Christianity’s standard of morality, and complain about and against those who try to promote it!

     
    • J. Randal Matheny 6:01 pm on 2015-02-12 Permalink | Reply

    • Eugene Adkins 7:58 pm on 2015-02-12 Permalink | Reply

      Double amen to the last sentence of your last paragraph.

      Guess you’ll have to settle for a single amen when it comes to the rest 😉

    • Ron Thomas 8:15 pm on 2015-02-12 Permalink | Reply

      That’s funny -and singles are always good.

    • Eliza 11:21 pm on 2015-02-12 Permalink | Reply

      I just want to know why we feel sorry for a liar who was caught in his lies. So many are coming to his defense and making excuses, but he is the managing editor of the network that brought us these examples of news tampering: putting an explosive charge on a Chevy truck gas tank that refused to explode on impact, falsifying George Bush’s National Guard records, and editing George Zimmerman’s 911 call log to make him appear a racist. It is not only there is no standard, it is that there is a concerted attempt to manipulate the news to manipulate the populace. Unfortunately, liars and news work so well together at NBC. God bless you:)

      • Ron Thomas 4:04 am on 2015-02-13 Permalink | Reply

        Perhaps I am a bit different. I don’t want to see another suffer humiliation, even when decisions made result in actions completed. Brian received the consequences of his actions. Thank you for reading and posting. On Feb 12, 2015 11:21 PM, “The Fellowship Room” wrote:

        >

        • Eliza 1:20 pm on 2015-02-13 Permalink | Reply

          You are assuming those are the only two instances where Brian Williams lied to others about major news events. What other lies has he told millions while anchoring the news on NBC. They have that track record of ginning up the news to prove their preconceived point. Maybe so many feel sorry for Brian because he got caught and they hope that they don’t get caught.
          On another note, humiliation can be the starting point for changing one’s behavior, perhaps it can lead to humility. Humility is a godly attribute, and being humiliated over sin, for lying is sin, could, Lord willing, lead the sinner to repentance and life.

    • john 11:10 am on 2015-03-11 Permalink | Reply

      You have no understanding of morality, philosophy, or secular humanism. Christian morality steals from secular humanism heavily. Morality does not require religion, and most educated religious scholars (educated meaning a well rounded balance of religion AND philosophy) will agree with this. Religion can promote morality but morality can and has been arrived at through secular philosophical thought alone.

    • Ron Thomas 3:21 pm on 2015-03-11 Permalink | Reply

      You are pretty good at the assertion, now set forth your case for an objective/transcendent standard of morality that has its origin “through secular philosophical thought alone.”

  • Ron Thomas 7:00 am on 2015-01-27 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , delusional, , Mattoon Journal Gazette, morality, , Warren Jeffs   

    Delusional Jeffs 

    In the January 24th paper is an article on the life of a community with its religious leader, Warren Jeffs, incarcerated for immoral practices with young girls. Unfortunately, many in the religious community are still deceived that Jeffs speaks for God. “To his followers, roughly estimated to be about 6,000, he is a prophet who speaks for God and can do no wrong.” Because many find their spiritual guidance from a delusional religious man, the religious community is also delusional.

    Moreover, there is no foundational difference between a delusional Jeffs and a woman in New Jersey “who put her newborn baby in the middle of a road and set the child on fire” (Herald-Review, 1.18.2015, p. A-3). Moral codes that have an origin in the thinking of man spawn such actions. Of course, a moral code that has its origin in a man like Jeffs is not really all that much different than a moral code put forth by atheists, agnostics, and skeptics (AAS).

    Anything that has its origin in man, by the very nature of the case, is a subjective opinion. Thus, one opinion differing from another opinion on the very same topic of discussion allows for both to be right. For instance, one atheist believes there is a universal code of respect for human dignity, but another atheist rejects this out of hand by saying there is no dignity to be given an animal. According to moral codes that have an origin in man – both are right!

    This is further illustrated with the following remark: “Claiming there is any standard that is objective and transcendent of man, set forth by God, is plain and simply a lie.”

    If there is no objective standard, then standards are subjective. If standards are subjective, then the opinion which belongs to one person is just as right as that which belongs to another – though they are on opposite ends of the same topic (this also applies to actions). One thinks it is wrong to lie, while another thinks it is perfectly acceptable. This is why atheism, in its truest form, produces moral chaos and is devoid of moral substance. Atheists, however, must steal the moral foundation coming from God because they can hardly live with their own!

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel