/lit/ - Literature

>You've been programmed so hard that you might as well just give up and give in to their beliefs.

>>5938454
>If it's essentially impossible to escape the Christian morals ingrained in some of us

First define Christian morals, then we can have a discussion.

>>5938454
Morality PREDATES Christianity.

>then isn't it a much better option to take the leap of faith into Christianity? In some other threads, I'm seeing atheists who still have Christian morals but refuse to take that leap. Is that not worse than being a Christian with faith?

Are you fucking kidding me?
4/10

>a much better option.
Why? Social capital?
That's not really Christianity, that's plain ol' Mammonism.

>>5938467
>programmed
I dont like your assumption that cultural backgrounds are "artificial" or "imposed", I believe that this background is not only inescapable but necesary for the proper function of rationality
Not such thing as "le brave independent gentleman living by his absolutely personal values"

>>5938454
>If it's essentially impossible to escape the Christian morals ingrained in some of us, then isn't it a much better option to take the leap of faith into Christianity?
B does not follow from A

>>5938490
>I dont like your assumption that cultural backgrounds are "artificial" or "imposed"
Why do you think your feelings matter?

>>5938454
Lol "Christian morals" is a social construct.

>>5938470
Christian morality is love and self-denial in the pursuit of true love
Love is anti-egoism, love is heroism

>>5938499
what you have just expressed is a feeling itself, it is called "instead of actually making a well constructed argument and learning something i just want to be an asshole because I am not sattisfied with my sad and lonely life"

>>5938505
>Christian morality is love and self-denial in the pursuit of true love

That's too general. I want prescriptive moral statements. Anyone can love someone regardless of religious disposition.

Clearly the secular West today has evolved beyond Christian morality, in that we do not annihilate faggots, practice slavery, and keep our wives as cattle.

So I think you're wrong from the outset.

>>5938501
And you are a mindless slogan-repeating keyboard-typing machine

>>5938530
Morality is not necesarily prescriptive
And love as you know it is a christian discovery, of course I am talking about a very specific kind of selfless love:agape, then you have other nonchristian loves like eros or philia

>>5938543
>Agape is a Christian discovery
>An ancient Greek term that predates monotheism

Nice try though.

>>5938530
And slavery, misogony and destruction have nothing to do with the christian message, in fact, slavery was banned thanks to early christians in the imperial rome; I dont know why you assume that religion is the only institution accountable for the deeds of a culture
Of course there is a symbiosis between the religious caste and the culture, but you cant just make christianity the universal scapegoat just because you dont want to think.
Have you even read the new testament?

>>5938562
>Have you even read the new testament?

Nice try, but Jesus came to fulfill the Law of Moses, not to destroy it.

I like you cherrypicking though. It's typical of all most of you religious people. The fact that you cannot see that you yourself pick the parts you like, and eschew the parts you dislike just makes the whole thing arbitrary.

>>5938556
Eeem, the first christians theologians were greek(the new testament is written in greek), agape is given its full meaning in the posterior work to the writting of the new testament, Dasein is a german word that has existed for millenia but only a stupid would say that Heidegger's dasein cant belong to heidegger because the word existed before he assigned it a new meaning
Words change their meaning you know?, christians worked for centuries in the meaning of agape
Do you even actually know what we are talking about or do you just want to win an internet fight?, because Im willing to surrender if the other option is to lose my time in pointless pissing contests

>>5938581
>Do you even actually know what we are talking about or do you just want to win an internet fight?

I could say the same thing. You have literally defined Christian morality as compassion, which can be said of ANY monotheism, religion and secular value system on this planet.

So be more specific, else you are the one who is shitposting.

>>5938574
I am not religious, I am an agnostic(buddhist friendly) who has actually read the bible. I dont know what wikipedia article you have read but you clearly dont know what you are talking, Jesus' relationship with the mosaic law has nothing to do with what you said, the point of christianity is that the sacrifice of Jesus creates a new covenant between believers and god

>>5938586
What?, I defined christian morality as agape, that is compassion but more complex

>>5938574
It is not that I decide to ignore the old testament, it is that the message of the new testament is "ignore the old testament"

>>5938606
>Jesus' relationship with the mosaic law has nothing to do with what you said

>"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." - Matthew 5:17

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Jesus created a new covenant, indeed, but he clearly stipulated that his followers needed to adhere to the Law of Moses, i.e the 10 Commandments and all it's corollaries.

Jesus also enjoined slaves to respect their masters, and never spoke out against it being immoral.

>>5938612
Buddhism also preaches compassion, does this mean that atheists are actually closet Buddhists and should convert immediately else they are hypocrites?

>>5938620
>it is that the message of the new testament is "ignore the old testament"

Except that's wrong you ignoramus.

>>5938586
And there are plenty of moral systems, religious or not,not based on empathy: hedonism, nihilism, egotism, "ars fiat pereat mundis", etc
The fact that you believe that morality is linked with compassion only shows how your "secular" morality is just an echo of fading christianity.
>>5938632
"The law of the prophetS" that means he is talking about messianic prophecies not about the israelite covenant

Luke 22:20"This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you."

"
This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.

—Hebrews 8:10

>>5938632
Well, if you refer to western buddhists, they should abandon buddhism as soon as possible
Converting...there is no need to convert, they are already christians
Regarding asian atheists or nonwestern buddhists in general, i cant say anything because I dont know enough about them

>>5938632
>Buddhism also preaches compassion, does this mean that atheists are actually closet Buddhists and should convert immediately else they are hypocrites?
Atheists grow up around Christian parents. If not, they grow up around Christian people, Christian friends, Christian schoolteachers, Christian billboards, Christian television, and in general, grow up around Christian thought. This leads to lots of aspects of Christianity becoming 'common sense' to them- treat others as you would like to be treated, fidelity in marriage (and probably marriage in general), giving to/helping those in need, forgiving others, humility, etc. And as I said, most people are Christian from the get-go, so these values are even more present in their lives. Society also mostly favors those with the said Christian values. So when people become atheist, they're basically Christians minus the hard part- having faith in something that may or may not exist.

This is somewhat ridiculous, because the whole reason people are supposed to follow these values is because God wants people to. You don't HAVE to follow the rules because there's no proof there's a God who wants you to, but you take the harder road because you have faith. Atheists who came from Christian families or societies that follow the Christian values without the faith are just foolish, and if they truly rejected the possibility of a God then they should become their own masters. But instead, they still let themselves be ruled over by somebody they claim not to believe in.

>>5938532
And you made them seem right by being petty. Besides, they have a point

>>5938454
so are morals somehow exclusive to the christian religion now, and all instance of morality in the individual is because of christianity?

fucking lol

>>5938606
It doesn't fucking matter what you personally got out of the bible. religion is the interpretation shared by a group, not an objective fact.

>>5938574
>Jesus came to fulfill the Law of Moses

so believing in jesus is the same as following the law of moses. the commandments essentially preserved humanity until jesus came to do the rest

old testament a shit

>>5938946
a+ post, did you even read what you were replying to?

If you're an atheist, you're under the scientific moral paradigm most likely, the antithetical of Christianity.

>>5939054
0/10

>>5939100
No really, the scientific moral paradigm dictates human behavior. Nietzche predicted it in Essay three of the Genealogy of Morals.

>>5939029
yes, did you?

>>5938473
Except ours was directly inherited from the Christian religion, so you're retarded/illiterate.

>>5939117
i'm not sure how you managed to read "it's essentially impossible to escape the Christian morals ingrained in some of us... I'm seeing atheists who still have Christian morals but [reject Christianity]" as a claim that "morality is exclusively christian" - but i'm pretty impressed

a fucking plus

>>5938473
the post is talking about the specific set of morals from christianity/the christian tradition, not morality in general.

>>5938454
>implying Christian morals didn't originate from natural instincts favouring tribal co-operation.
About the only institution Christianity reinforced was exclusive monogamy over serial monogomy.

>>5938454
Christian morals are not ingrained in people, Christianity took ingrained morals from people.

>>5939136
The ideal way to read Homer is in Homeric Greek.

>>5939172
Alright. "Christian morality" is Fagles translation tier.

>>5938687
Sorry brah, the golden rule is not unique to Christianity. It's a fundamental tenet of confuscianism as is compassion and fidelity. Try again