re: Does Satanism exist without Christianity?

quote:

---

But yes, some Christians have chosen to disregard clear Biblical instruction

---

quote:

---

It seems to be individual local churches making those determinations.

---

I believe there are schisms in both the American Episcopalian and Methodist sects right now over it.

quote:

---

You mean like alcohol?

---

That's just one. Mormons can't drink coffee, either. Then there are also various sorts of drugs. Pork is off limits to some Christian sects.

quote:

---

that overindulgence of alcohol is destructive and therefore sinful. In order to avoid that sin, some denominations teach that you shouldn't drink at all,

---

That literally makes it a moral determination.

There are plenty of churches that demand strict prohibition because drinking itself is a sin.

10 reasons Christians should not drink alcohol

Only 1 involves drunkenness.

I follow lots of former clients who found sobriety in rural Baptist and non-denominational churches, and, trust me, they consider consuming 1 microgram of any intoxicant a sin because it's a tool of the Devil. That's usually the path used by these sorts of churches to make it a sin. That excludes moderation entirely.

That's GENERALLY the avenue (in a thread coming full circle of sorts) that creates lots of flexibility for each sect/church. If you believe that Satan is present on Earth and his goal is to corrupt humans, then literally anything can become a sin via being a tool of Satan.

quote:

---

Same as alcohol above. There's no Christian sect that considers the watching of an R-rated movie to be a sin for it's own sake.

---

I know some Mormons who would 100% disagree with you. And I'm talking normal society Mormons, not the ones with 13 wives under 13 who dress like the Amish.

quote:

---

I'm not aware of any denomination that teaches congregations that it is God's will that people (young people in particular) have pre-martial or extra-marital sex.

---

You're kind of changing what I said.

Just google "premarital sex is not a sin" and it will show you countless examples of churches and leaders agreeing.

quote:

---

even if I agreed that every one of those examples was legit in the context of what we're discussing, that still wouldn't be very much to disagree upon, would it?

---

Those are just a couple random big issues I wrote off the cuff. That is nowhere near an exclusive list.

You don't even have to get into the crazies (like the ones I referenced above who likely handle snakes during night services when the normies are away). Seventh Day Adventists, Mormons, Evangelicals, Jehovah's Witnesses, modern Catholics, Baptists, Unitarians, modern Episcopalians, Orthodox churches, Christian Scientists, and Pentecostals are going to present a wide view of differentiation in how sin is perceived.

quote:

---

If morality were entirely subjective we wouldn't be quibbling over R-rated movies. We'd have people killing and raping and stealing and cheating whenever they thought they could get away with it.

---

Why? This ignores a lot of genetic, familial, social, psychological, emotional, and behavioral influence.

Within the paradigm of your perceived morality, all the things I listed above still influence the decision-making of humans. They are not exclusive concepts. People raised in extremely moral churches and households can commit extreme atrocities with the correct influence from my list.

quote:

---

Even if you do like most atheists and claim that morality is an evolutionary development that genetically programs us to avoid violating feelings of empathy

---

Not what I said.

quote:

---

What atheists always want to frame the questions in terms of epistemology, and in doing so they try to sneak in the premise that morality is basically just information instead of conclusions drawn from circumstance in the context of an actual, real, objective reality of justice.

---

I don't think anyone has made the claim ITT that morality is "basically just information". I think the only 2 statements against morality being from written religious works specifically involve "conclusions drawn from circumstance in the context of an actual, real, objective reality". Justice? That's getting a big vague, so I didn't include it.

quote:

---

This ignores the reality of the situation that if no objective standard of justice exists, there is no "right" or "wrong" as we commonly conceptualize those things.

---

Again, this exists from the religious POV, too. What holes you think you're picking out in the non-religious POV exist within the religious POV, too. This post was just about differences in Christian sects. Now include Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, etc.

quote:

---

And, what if our feelings change? What if in 50 years, that segment of the population that feels no empathy, the anti-socials, what if that percentage climbs from 1-2% to 10%? And in 100 years, what if it becomes 40%?

---

This has always happened.

Again, this has literally happened within every religion.

You think the Islam that dominates Iran today is the same as the 1970s?

You think the Catholicism that dominates today is the same as the 19th and 10th centuries?

shite, just look at all the major US Christian sects that aren't even 200 years old. Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, Pentecostals, modern Baptists, etc. The Christian Revival period of the late 19th Century created a LOT of splinter groups that have grown into populated sects today.