Do you believe in God?

[TRLWNC7396]

I just thought of an interesting question.

If the Bible were proven false, would it suddenly be a bad idea to treat others unkindly?

For as much as that is a circular argument, I think it proves as much as anything else the truths that are in the Bible.

It may be imperfect, but it is NOT wrong.

 

[HenrySwanson]

If the Bible were proven false, would it suddenly be a bad idea to treat others unkindly?

Did you mean to say "kindly"?

 

[Com Fox]

I just thought of an interesting question.

If the Bible were proven false, would it suddenly be a bad idea to treat others unkindly?

For as much as that is a circular argument, I think it proves as much as anything else the truths that are in the Bible.

It may be imperfect, but it is NOT wrong.

The Bible isn't the be all, end all on how to treat people and isn't the first recording of nice action in civilisation.

If someone was only nice to me because they fear what a higher deity would do to them if they weren't nice, I'd be incredibly concerned.

That would be like thinking, because Hitler was horrible. That would mean Animal Rights is terrible because he was an Animal Rights advocate

 

[UKMikey]

I just thought of an interesting question.

If the Bible were proven false, would it suddenly be a bad idea to treat others unkindly?

For as much as that is a circular argument, I think it proves as much as anything else the truths that are in the Bible.

It may be imperfect, but it is NOT wrong.

No more than for any other book or artefact considered holy I think. It may have inspired a lot of good but it's also inspired a lot of reprehensible acts, from the Conquistadores and Crusades all the way up to today's anti-abortion legislation.

 

[TRLWNC7396]

I'm not saying that the Bible is or isn't the only thing out there. Or that it is or isn't the be-all, end-all in holy books.

I'm merely asking if the truth of being nice is true.

And accepting the fact that the Bible, in many ways, tells us that being nice is the better way to live.

Which is true.

 

[Liquid]

Morality exists outside of religion. Religion has no monopoly or verified authority on morality.

 

[TRLWNC7396]

I'm not saying that, either.

As I am thinking about this, I realize that it is a paradox argument.

The paradox is this:

Being king to others is good.

The Bible says this. (As a bit of a DUH! moment. )

If the Bible were completely wrong,

Would being nice be wrong?

But, yet, it is always good to be kind.

So the Bible can't be completely wrong.

I'm not good at explaining this. Check out these two videos for an idea on paradoxes:

 

[HenrySwanson]

So the Bible can't be completely wrong.

Does anyone argue that it is?

 

[UKMikey]

I'm not saying that, either.

As I am thinking about this, I realize that it is a paradox argument.

The paradox is this:

Being king to others is good.

The Bible says this. (As a bit of a DUH! moment. )

If the Bible were completely wrong,

Would being nice be wrong?

But, yet, it is always good to be kind.

So the Bible can't be completely wrong.

I'm not good at explaining this. Check out these two videos for an idea on paradoxes:

I'm pretty sure we all know what paradoxes are. If the supernatural claims in the Bible were somehow proved to be unfounded I don't see how this would be a justification for not behaving altruistically and doing unto others etc.

With scientific theories if part of the theory that leads to their basis if proved to be incorrect, then scientists refine the theory rather than completely throw out its results. They start with an observed phenomenon and try to determine the processes that lead up to it, adjusting their findings as new information comes in. I don't think it would change the result any.

 

[Gingerale]

The paradox is this:

Being king to others is good.

The Bible says this. (As a bit of a DUH! moment. )

If the Bible were completely wrong,

Would being nice be wrong?

That is not a paradox. In the book The Hobbit the trees are green. We all know The Hobbit is fiction, but no one would deny most trees can be green.

You might also want to question yourself, if the Bible is the only thing keeping me from not being nice, what kind of person am I?

 

[TheCracker]

I'm not saying that, either.

As I am thinking about this, I realize that it is a paradox argument.

The paradox is this:

Being king to others is good.

The Bible says this. (As a bit of a DUH! moment. )

If the Bible were completely wrong,

Would being nice be wrong?

But, yet, it is always good to be kind.

So the Bible can't be completely wrong.

The bible as we know it now is full of paradoxes.

It's a set of short fables written over a period of at least 1500 years by people of very differing cultures.

Christian preachers use excerpts from it to teach morality. Some parts of it, the new testament Jesus bits, do largely teach that being kind to each other is a good thing but there's also plenty of instances of adultery, bigamy, murder, child abuse, bigotry, deceit, violence and slavery. So really there's enough source material there to preach whatever you want from it.

I don't think many scholars believe that any of the events/stories that appear in the bible actual ever happened - or if they did they've certainly been embelished over the centuries. So it can't be proven to be 'completely wrong' because it is only a loose collection of stories not pieces of irrefutable evidence.

Even from a moralistic point of view there are so many contridictions within itself that in a court of law, you couldn't prove that it's a reliable guidence to any form of morality.

 

[UKMikey]

Even from a moralistic point of view there are so many contridictions within itself that in a court of law, you couldn't prove that it's a reliable guidence to any form of morality.

Oh, yeah? Then why do some people swear on the bible in court then? Checkmate, atheists. /s

Of course people also swear upon other holy books and atheists simply promise to tell the truth (and nothing but the truth, so help me Richard Dawkins). I think courts recognise that if the person given testimony believes in the holy book enough not to commit perjury, then they can be reasonably sure that they're not fibbing.

 

[Famine]

Being kind to others is good.

The Bible says this.

«snort»

It also gives lots of direct instruction on how to be very specifically unkind to others if they belong to certain groups or types of people, or are sex crime survivors, and so on.

This approach of "well, if it says one thing that's right it can't be wrong" is insane. You could use that - and indeed you now must, unless you're going to abandon it - to defend literally any awful human being in history because they said something that was right or did something that was good once.

 

[MatskiMonk]

If the Bible were completely wrong,

Would being nice be wrong?

But, yet, it is always good to be kiSo the Bible can't be completely wrong.

If you're theistic the bible as you know it could be snapped out of existence and the Golden Rule would still exist in many of the other religions you may choose to follow. If without the bible, you were to become atheistic, you'd probably immediately realise that treating others as you'd like to be treated just makes sense in both the presence or absence of works of Holy fiction.

 

[McLaren]

And accepting the fact that the Bible, in many ways, tells us that being nice is the better way to live.

Personally speaking, this is really how the Bible should be; a book that's ultimate message is treat others with kindness & be a better person in the end. Not a book for some to take everything (or pick & choose as some do; not referring to you with that comment) literally.

 

[Liquid]

This approach of "well, if it says one thing that's right it can't be wrong" is insane. You could use that - and indeed you now must, unless you're going to abandon it - to defend literally any awful human being in history because they said something that was right or did something that was good once.[/COLOR][/B]

The ever reliable TV Tropes.

Hitler Ate Sugar

A logical fallacy, specifically a sub-type of Association Fallacy, that assumes that anything done or liked by a bad person must be bad itself, taking things to absurd levels.

 

[Danoff]

If you're theistic the bible as you know it could be snapped out of existence and the Golden Rule would still exist in many of the other religions you may choose to follow. If without the bible, you were to become atheistic, you'd probably immediately realise that treating others as you'd like to be treated just makes sense in both the presence or absence of works of Holy fiction.

View attachment 1273411

The earliest version of this I was able to track down for my Humanity's Greatest Minds thread was Confucius.

 

[MatskiMonk]

The earliest version of this I was able to track down for my Humanity's Greatest Minds thread was Confucius.

As it happens I nearly tagged you in my post as it was a post based on the derivation of rights based on reciprocity that you once made that made me think of it (and a YouTube video I'll never be able to re-find).

 

[TRLWNC7396]

Personally speaking, this is really how the Bible should be; a book that's ultimate message is treat others with kindness & be a better person in the end. Not a book for some to take everything (or pick & choose as some do; not referring to you with that comment) literally.

I don't take the Bible completely literally. The idea that ALL of the stories are original is like saying a story teller doesn't embellish....

But the overall history is (probably mostly) accurate.

However, the idea that the overall morals are true is reflected in most people's lives.

Most people understand, just on a basic level, that being nice and following basic decent morals is a good idea.

And the Bible agrees. So there is actually truth in the Bible.

Arguments of how much will take a life time to even gather.

 

[Danoff]

Most people understand, just on a basic level, that being nice and following basic decent morals is a good idea.

And the Bible agrees. So there is actually truth in the Bible.

Being nice and following basic decent morals is not really in the Old Testament for sure. New Testament is a big improvement. Book of Mormon (is that part of the bible?) gets pretty racist. Not that NT wasn't racist, just that it's more striking for something as recent as BoM.

It is true that the NT adopts some moral teachings that well predate it. It is revealing that by those same standards, the OT has some deeply immoral teachings. The NT the co-opts some existing moral teachings into some kind of revelation that God has evolved to be more like the social and moral progress on Earth. Kinda makes you wonder why God is needed at all. It's obviously contrived nonsense for the deity that God is supposed to represent. Book of Mormon comes along and doesn't really add anything to the discussion, just recombines a few things from the past, introduces some weird stuff like being your own god of your own planet or some such, and sprinkles in some "white and delightsome" for good measure.

Anyway, there is truth in any book you can find, fiction or nonfiction. There is truth in all religion, even the dead ones.

 

[Exorcet]

And the Bible agrees. So there is actually truth in the Bible.

There exists much better literature to get good messages across. My family is religious and we went through a serious event nearly a decade ago now. At first, while saddened by the cause, I was glad that it seemed like it was causing people to give up faith, but in the end it just made them believe more and take the bible more seriously. The main result of that has been ignoring reality and disapproving of perfectly normal people (ie any who is not a traditional straight person). The bible gets somethings right, it has to balance out all of its inconsistencies and falsehoods with just enough logic that its following survives as a culture. That doesn't make it a good source of information though.

 

[UKMikey]

Saying Christians can be good people isn't the same as saying people are good because they're Christians. Bad people can be Christians too, or any other religion or none.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I don't take the Bible completely literally. The idea that ALL of the stories are original is like saying a story teller doesn't embellish....

But the overall history is (probably mostly) accurate.

However, the idea that the overall morals are true is reflected in most people's lives.

Most people understand, just on a basic level, that being nice and following basic decent morals is a good idea.

And the Bible agrees. So there is actually truth in the Bible.

Arguments of how much will take a life time to even gather.

I'm not sure what your point is?

If there's truth in the Bible....so what? Does that make it special somehow.

 

[Joey D]

Saying Christians can be good people isn't the same as saying people are good because they're Christians. Bad people can be Christians too, or any other religion or none.

Gestures broadly at Russia

Putin is very much a Christian and he's one of the most terrible people alive on the planet today.

 

[UKMikey]

Gestures broadly at Russia

Putin is very much a Christian and he's one of the most terrible people alive on the planet today.

These guys may not be quite in Vlad's league but I think they may also be illustrative...

 

[TRLWNC7396]

I'm not sure what your point is?

If there's truth in the Bible....so what? Does that make it special somehow.

Not saying one way or the other. I'm just saying that there is truth in it.

And, no, the B of M is not the same as the Bible.

But it's not about whether or not it's racist. I have never felt that. But it does speak about how people can be good or bad, and what happens with each one.

 

[TB]

Not saying one way or the other. I'm just saying that there is truth in it.

And, no, the B of M is not the same as the Bible.

But it's not about whether or not it's racist. I have never felt that. But it does speak about how people can be good or bad, and what happens with each one.

Hypothetical situations:

I do read the Bible and am a "good" person. What happens me when I die?

I don't read the Bible and am a "good" person. What happens to me when I die?

I do read the Bible, but it's the "wrong" one, and am a "good" person. What happens to me when I die?

Same questions for "bad" people.

 

[shadow0460]

I just thought of an interesting question.

If the Bible were proven false, would it suddenly be a bad idea to treat others unkindly?

For as much as that is a circular argument, I think it proves as much as anything else the truths that are in the Bible.

It may be imperfect, but it is NOT wrong.

If it turned out to be false, I would still be glad to have lived the way I have, and honest, I doubt I'd change much. If treating you with kindness and respect makes your day better, if being honest and fair puts you at ease, that's great!

 

[Gingerale]

If it turned out to be false, I would still be glad to have lived the way I have, and honest, I doubt I'd change much. If treating you with kindness and respect makes your day better, if being honest and fair puts you at ease, that's great!

This really surprises me. I mean, you devote time to it? Go to church? It changes your whole view on life on this planet. You would still pray?

Again, you can also treat people with kindness and respect without believing in God, but why do all the stuff which then wouldn't make ANY sense at all because its all false?

Thats just weird to me because thats like the main point of religion: it's BELIEVING. If you cant believe is it still religion and not just human decency?

 

[Danoff]

But it does speak about how people can be good or bad, and what happens with each one.

You mean it says the bad people get dark-skinned and the good people get light-skinned... which is racist.