1
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why can’t we separate Conservative values from religion?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 9:28 am to Lou
Posted on 8/30/26 at 9:28 am to Lou
the translation of the bible into english was a political act not the devine inspiration of god, and once translated, you protestants found all kinds of goofy stuff in it.
here's the good news jethro! the protestant church in the united states (the only country in which has ever mattered) is dying! ordaining women and embracing homosexuality is killing it,
by the year 2100 it will be a distant memory. the methodist as we speak are debating Trinitarian theology.
imagine that the protestant reformation come and gone in 400 years.
and the catholics will be nominating a new pope.
here's the good news jethro! the protestant church in the united states (the only country in which has ever mattered) is dying! ordaining women and embracing homosexuality is killing it,
by the year 2100 it will be a distant memory. the methodist as we speak are debating Trinitarian theology.
imagine that the protestant reformation come and gone in 400 years.
and the catholics will be nominating a new pope.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 9:28 am to Mo Jeaux
The recurring theme that Christians can be criticized and challenged to prove their face is okay, but when a poster is condescending towards believers yet says he never said he didn't believe in God. That's obnoxious?? 
at least being honest on which side of the discussion you're on allows a more thoughtful approach.
at least being honest on which side of the discussion you're on allows a more thoughtful approach. Posted on 8/30/26 at 9:34 am to DCtiger1
quote:
The recurring theme that Christians can be criticized and challenged to prove their face is okay,
That's an extremely dramatic spin to describe the discussion.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 9:47 am to Squirrelmeister
If you're going to attack Christian theology, attack Christian theology rather than an intentionally grotesque parody of it.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 9:51 am to DCtiger1
quote:
The recurring theme that Christians can be criticized and challenged to prove their face is okay, but when a poster is condescending towards believers yet says he never said he didn't believe in God. That's obnoxious??
Oh good lord.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 9:53 am to VooDude
quote:
so why not grow the Republican party through values instead of belief?
Where do those values come from?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 10:00 am to CDawson
quote:
Where do those values come from?
There is a long story that started in Sumer, but really ramped up in the Classical Greek Era and took a major turn with the The Dutch East India Company and how it impacted Anglican economic values in their branch of Western Culture.
These values have been developing for thousands of years, starting with at least a few centuries prior to Jesus
Posted on 8/30/26 at 10:07 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There is a long story that started in Sumer, but really ramped up in the Classical Greek Era and took a major turn with the The Dutch East India Company and how it impacted Anglican economic values in their branch of Western Culture. These values have been developing for thousands of years, starting with at least a few centuries prior to Jesus
Which also begs the question, is it the chicken or the egg? That is, would these baws still be good people without Jesus watching? Did they even need religion to act good? Or are most just naturally good and needed religion at some point because of unbearable grief?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 10:23 am to VooDude
quote:
Which also begs the question, is it the chicken or the egg? T
Considering how much of this existed prior to Christianity and, depending on what we're discussing, Judaism, I don't think that's difficult
quote:
That is, would these baws still be good people without Jesus watching? Did they even need religion to act good? Or are most just naturally good and needed religion at some point because of unbearable grief?
How did societies thousands of years prior to Jesus develop similar morality? Remember, we're talking 2-3k years prior to his teachings being on Earth. This isn't a hypothetical. This is actual human history.
And no, it's not out of the goodness of the hearts of humans. It's a function of society.
And I need to make something clear that a lot of people posting overly defensively and irrationally about Christianity need to understand. Most of this discussion doesn't invalidate the religion of Christianity. These concepts can coexist.
If societies can derive similar morality to what God wrote, that doesn't necessarily argue that the Christian God isn't real
If "Western Culture" was developed with minimal or no influence from Christianity, that doesn't argue God doesn't exist, either. It would just argue that a very recent philosophical branch that is incredibly recent to Christianity and attempts to leave religion and go into socio-political philosophy, is wrong. That branch can be wrong and Christianity still be the true religion.
This post was edited on 8/30/26 at 10:24 am
Posted on 8/30/26 at 11:10 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Especially if atheism is growing but is afraid to latch onto good values because from the outside, it looks like cult that requires belief in listening to an insane man recite crazy passages on Sundays with a wealth tax. We need to get ahead of this and shift before dems get control of this group.
This is a bit Hyberbolic is it not?
If anything, I would say Christianity is seeing a revival across the country with our younger generations.
quote:
If societies can derive similar morality to what God wrote, that doesn't necessarily argue that the Christian God isn't real
I agree with you. The problem is letting society dictate what is moral and immoral. When you have no basis, it becomes about feelings and current social trends.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 11:12 am to DCtiger1
quote:
The problem is letting society dictate what is moral and immoral. When you have no basis, it becomes about feelings and current social trends.
Society as a whole has always done so though.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 11:47 am to DCtiger1
quote:
The problem is letting society dictate what is moral and immoral.
This "problem" is lterally the story of human society since it's inception about 12k years ago
quote:
When you have no basis
You're assuming there is no basis.
Again, the development of morality isn't that different historically in societies that have no connection with each other. Clearly there can be a derived basis outside of a specific religion.
quote:
, it becomes about feelings and current social trends.
How much of Christian theology is from Jesus directly, and how much i s from "feelings" by regular men responding to "current social trends"?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 12:52 pm to DCtiger1
quote:
What kind of weird straw man is that?
I didn’t make a straw man argument. How do you mistakenly believe I misinterpreted anything?
quote:
The fact that you can be forgiven for any sin and accept Jesus paid the ultimate price for our salvation does not mean sin is moral.
I never said or meant sin to be moral. What I’m trying to show to you guys is that God simply can’t forgive you. He has to have his very own son killed to satiate his anger and bloodlust so that you can be forgiven. It’s patently immoral for an innocent to be killed to make up for the sin of another.
If some gang banger murdered your kid in cold blood. You could forgive that person as he rots in prison. Or you could have some innocent kid murdered, and that innocent kid pays the price for the gang banger who is then set free. Would that be just? Fair? Moral?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 12:54 pm to RoyalWe
quote:
attack Christian theology rather than an intentionally grotesque parody of it.
You acknowledge it is a parody. A parody is an imitation of another thing. And you also admit it is intentionally grotesque. That’s what I was trying to show, that the Christian theology is grotesque.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 1:43 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:That's what you're going with?
You acknowledge it is a parody. A parody is an imitation of another thing. And you also admit it is intentionally grotesque. That’s what I was trying to show, that the Christian theology is grotesque.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 3:19 pm to dickkellog
quote:Quite the opposite. Every new physical artifact found (over 24,000 of them now) help confirm the authenticity. If there is any specific scripture you think has been mistranslated, we have the original Hebrew and Greek (w Arabic) manuscripts to reference.
the translation of the bible into english was a political act not the devine inspiration of god, and once translated, you protestants found all kinds of goofy stuff in it.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 3:38 pm to VooDude
quote:
more education
Ahh, the old “I’m too smart to believe in God.”
If you were “educated” you’d know GOD is undefeated against history trying to prove he wasn’t real.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
How much of Christian theology is from Jesus directly, and how much i s from "feelings" by regular men responding to "current social trends"?
And how much was clever work by Claudius and his vicious henchman Saul of Tarsus?
LINK
This post was edited on 8/30/26 at 5:20 pm
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:36 pm to shinerfan
quote:
Karl Marx did not believe in a permanent, universal, or abstract code of morality. He argued that moral ideas are not fixed truths. Instead, they change over time and act as tools of the ruling class to protect their economic power.
Marx viewed everything with a political lens It seems.
I'm sorry, you were busy here.
This post was edited on 8/30/26 at 5:40 pm
Posted on 8/31/26 at 11:37 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:The Bible explains why: as image-bearers of God, He has give mankind a conscience that testifies to the moral law of God. We inherently know good and evil because we were created to know it. We often times pervert it and suppress it in our sinful rebellion, but it's still there.
Then why have the basic tenets of morality been seen near universally with populations that have never interacted with each other, with the vast majority never interacting with this "objective truth" to consume the content of that truth?
And don't quote the Bible, because this question presupposes those populations have never consumed that particular content.
In summary: humans generally share the same moral outlook because we share the same moral creator.
Page 14 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News