Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
William

Collective Ethics - Moralty

Recommended Posts

Staff

by Consensus

 

Comment: As an atheist, it is true that it wouldn't be reasonable to believe that there's such a thing as an absolute, universal morality. Society plays a large part in deciding what's right and wrong. Well, what's so bad about that? Society is made up of people, and I trust our collective opinions to advise me in ethics more than I trust a two-thousand-year-old book written by several different authors ... Plus, it's not like society has it so bad compared to God's opinion that we shouldn't use it. Society in general thinks that killing and slavery is wrong, and God supposedly thinks that murder isn't such a good thing (despite all the 'accounts' in the Bible in which he blatantly murders people), so I guess we're not so different after all.

----

 

Response: Thanks for your comment ... So then according to your logic, it seems to me you would have to believe slavery wasn’t wrong until there was a consensus that it was wrong. In other words, slavery wasn’t wrong in the 1700s, because at that time the collective opinion declared that such things were acceptable? So in response to this if you were to tell me that slavery WAS still wrong in 1700s even though most people didn’t feel that way, then I think you probably believe in moral absolutes. But if you tell me that it WASN'T wrong in the 1700s then it simply demonstrates the reality that slavery is not inconsistent with atheism.

 

Furthermore, morality has been very circular through human history and does not always progressively get better as time goes on. what if you saw the consensus about slavery eroding? On what basis, then, could you argue that the emerging new consensus is wrong, since, in your view, something is only wrong if there is a consensus that it is wrong?

 

I believe I could also demonstrate that currently there are plenty of cultures and places in the world that don’t agree with your ‘consensus.’ Would you argue, then, that the part of the world that believes in your idea of human rights is the enlightened, correct part? Does this mean they are the ones who are thinking "properly" and the others are not?

Share this post


Link to post

This is a great article. Basically, the bigger the crowd the dumber they become and the more accepting they are to doing that are less 'morally' acceptable than if they were on their own. Think of how people act in riots compared to when they are by themselves. In a crowd, people feel safe to do things that under normal circumstances are completely horrible. Think of most of the social warriors on campuses today or the people who go against Trump rallies as current examples. For the most part, they get on youtube and whine to their audience about non-violence and tolerance. Then they get together and throw rocks at people who have opposing opinions and become aggressive to anything that isn't them. We have to be very careful about the culture of our society because it can either be very safe and supportive or violent and destructive.

Share this post


Link to post
This is a great article. Basically, the bigger the crowd the dumber they become and the more accepting they are to doing that are less 'morally' acceptable than if they were on their own. Think of how people act in riots compared to when they are by themselves. In a crowd, people feel safe to do things that under normal circumstances are completely horrible. Think of most of the social warriors on campuses today or the people who go against Trump rallies as current examples. For the most part, they get on youtube and whine to their audience about non-violence and tolerance. Then they get together and throw rocks at people who have opposing opinions and become aggressive to anything that isn't them. We have to be very careful about the culture of our society because it can either be very safe and supportive or violent and destructive.

 

I agree. Societies current values are not a good guide. Society can be manipulated and moral values changed. Gay marriage is a good example of this. Until very recently it was unthinkable in every society. Now it is becoming common in most Western societies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...