/lit/ - Literature

>>11041693
You're on the literature board. Take this worthless shit to the 'redpill' boards

>>11041702
>get these arguments I cannot refute off my board NOW!

>>11041716
Prase Lord Kek and Hitler :D womemes BLOWN THE FUCK OUT
baseeed

>>11041693
we would've had morals, but they would've been different, probably a lot worse desu

>>11041893
The morals in the bible were based on the morals of the people who wrote it. Our modern day morals are based on those that came before, it has nothing to do with the bible. The bible is just a snapshot. People are looking at the snapshot and pointing out the things they like, while ignoring the things they don't.

>just because the bible is full of inconsistencies doesn't mean we don't have to take it seriously

Christian morality is an imposed system of jewish morality, which is, as is often pointed out on here, slave morality. It teaches the worship of the weak and is universalist.

>>11041693
Without God, then it's correct.

>>11041923
damn.... did you read that in a Dawkins book?

>>11041923
morals in the bible are pretty solid overall m8.

>>11041693
>nothing in modern science can disprove existence of god

>>11041976
like what? most seem restrictive, tribal, anti individualist, etc

>>11041996
>these are bad things

>>11041996
The Bible is universalist, i.e., not tribal, and Christianity was spread precisely for this reason, because it broke down tribal identities among Europeans, forced their allegiances around an alien doctrine of meek-worship, and gave jews an in-road to jew.

>>11041693
The values which fuel our contemporary moral system are secularised christian ones though.

>>11042020
>not tribal
>jews special
>non believer bad.
>X country not living in Y way must be crushed because god.
>you are having a hard life? well its because you don't worship enough
you don't have to call it tribe but there is clearly an in and out group

>>11042016
yeah have fun being born first as a tool for your father and then for your state. your only "joy" being a bitter cunt who makes tools of his own
>>11042034
they predate Christianity

>>11042042
>you're a tool for your father because the bible is tribal and restrictive

>>11041996
>anti individualist
what are you smoking? did you miss the whole thing with Jesus which was written from the point of view of the individual and showed that the community was wrong to just gang up on him—basically the might of all doesn't make right?
this is the birth of western individualism, whereas the greco-roman world was still like "nah, we totally can just like murder ceasar for the good of the state"

>>11041732
embarrassing.

>>11041693
But we don't have morals today.

>>11042042
>reads Stirner once

>>11041716
What arguments

>>11042037
As there will be with anything, but it's not based on exclusivity or tribe, but, like semitic universalist doctrines generally, conversion of the nonbeliever. Truth and morality in jewish/semitic belief systems is totalitarian and imposed by the "priest class": either you believe or you are a heretic. European societies are not naturally structured in this way because we are more egalitarian, but many centuries of Christianity and our moral nature have caused us to shape it around ourselves. It has also made for an easy transition into the modern religion where liberals want to convert others to their agenda. We need something less universalist and more particular to break out of this spell.

>>11041955
No just simple logic.

>>11042042
>they predate Christianity
So what? Christianity was a mean

I have never ever heard somebody say that you have to read the bible or be a Christian to be moral. This is an argument that only exist in atheists minds. What actually being said is that in a universe without a transcendent standard of perfect goodness like God the concept of evil doesn't make any sense. And because evil exists it follows that God exists. That's the essential argument. The reason people will say that you need God in order to justify morality--in order to say something good is actually good--is because in order for an atheist to deny that god exists they would have to deny the existence of evil which would undermine any morality claim that they could have. After all, if evil doesn't exist then there's no such thing as good, and there can be no real difference between two actions. A relativist doesn't get to make moral claims.

>>11042066
Who is this "we"?

>>11041923
>The morals in the bible were based on the morals of the people who wrote it. Our modern day morals are based on those that came before, it has nothing to do with the bible. The bible is just a snapshot. People are looking at the snapshot and pointing out the things they like, while ignoring the things they don't.
You've clearly never read the bible.

>>11042088
Ah yes! A rare rationalist. Why come you came here instead of building rocketships?

>>11042134
>What actually being said is that in a universe without a transcendent standard of perfect goodness like God the concept of evil doesn't make any sense
what?
>And because evil exists it follows that God exists.
What?

>>11042080
>semitic
Serious question: how's it feel to be 16?

>>11042169
How do you know the difference between a good bowler and a bad one? Only one thing matters in bowling. The person who knocks down the most pins wins. It’s the score that counts. Knowing the difference between mediocre and masterful in anything requires a way of keeping score. There must be some standard of perfection by which to measure a performance. In bowling that standard is 300 — every pin down in every frame. Notice that even if perfection is not attainable (like in golf where a score of 18 on an 18-hole course is unheard of), a scoring system is still necessary to differentiate between excellence, mediocrity, and abject failure. In the same way, moral judgments require a way of keeping score to distinguish virtue from vice.

We use the word "evil" or "bad" when we see things that are not as they are supposed to be. We have a standard in mind — a moral scoring system of sorts — that allows us to recognize moral shortfalls. The reason we say some things are evil is we realize that they score low on the goodness scale. If there were no standard, there could be no error. In other words, without a standard like God there can be no evil.

>>11042183

>>11042172
Why are you under the impression that people who use the word 'semitic' are 16? Because you are a dirty semite who's angry that people are openly discussing your deranged people here?

>>11042183
>bowling
What? That is not really a good example since immoral bowling can lead to higher scores. in fact in life being good or evil can have different outcomes for you depending on the situation.
>moral judgments require a way of keeping score to distinguish virtue from vice
What? you can't keep score, if you could than you could be immoral and improve your score with good actions later. each action stands on its own.
>that are not as they are supposed to be.
bad action can be logical and proper for the situation while still being bad. how does any of this connect to god? also God does evil and petty shit but it is played of as cosmic morality that is beyond humans, you can't use crap like that as a standard

>>11042042
>they predate Christianity
Maybe but Christianity popularised these values and made the adherence to them attractive. Before Christianity, moral universalism was not widespread. And even Christianity as practiced state religion did not always embody these values. The society we have today is due to rigorous enforcement of these ideal Christian values in the 19th century by the fledgling bourgeois society.

>>11042156
Im not pretending this is a rare viewpoint.

>>11042144
So tell me where I'm wrong please.

>>11042066
Morals today are stronger than ever.
The morals people hold just aren't part of any well developed or organized philosophy.

>>11042283
Oh but it is. You are a rationalist individual . Tis a strange thing to see!

>>11042311
Oh shit nibba, you're right. I am the most rationalist (smartest) individual who has ever existed.

>>11042327
Dumb christianfags am I right? Have you seen the new Bill Nye show? E P I C

>>11042292
I already did, but out of ignorance you don't recognize it. Of course that doesn't prevent you from readily volunteering your empty views, so thanks for that.

>>11042045
I want weirder brainlet pictures like this.

>>11042392
No you didn't you just told me to read a book, that's nod an argument.
Telling someone that they are wrong is not the same as telling them what the error in their thinking is.