Morality is rational.

[revelarts]

lets' maybe stay on 1 point at a time.

outsiders would also discredit christianity as it burned witches, and genocided other christians, and did inquisitions.
.

Did Jesus Christ or the Apostles teach any of that?
If not, was it really Christianity?

If all the Priest & preachers become trans and promote marriage to animals, does that make it "Christian"?
Or are they just using the NAME?

When a uniformed cop shoots an innocent person for personal reasons does that mean that that's what "policing" is all about?
Or is that a perversion of what policing is supposed to be?
Some people discredit the police completely too.
Seems an extreme take to me.

[AHZ]

lets' maybe stay on 1 point at a time.



Did Jesus Christ or the Apostles teach any of that?
If not, was it really Christianity?

If all the Priest & preachers become trans and promote marriage to animals, does that make it "Christian"?
Or are they just using the NAME?

When a uniformed cop shoots an innocent person for personal reasons does that mean that that's what "policing" is all about?
Or is that a perversion of what policing is supposed to be?
Some people discredit the police completely too.
Seems an extreme take to me.

I agree. theyre just using the name. but they also placed the nicene creed central to being a christain. maybe that is suspect also.

anything bent into a politically conceived imperial cult will have issues.

maybe it's like making people say men can be women as a sign they place authority over their own rationality.

luckily, morality is rational.

[revelarts]

I agree. theyre just using the name.
anything bent into a politically conceived imperial cult will have issues

agreed.

but they also placed the nicene creed central to being a Christian. maybe that is suspect also.

.

The Nicene Creed was created in like 325AD long before any crusades or killing of witches or inquisitions.
the Christians at the time of the creeds writing were the one's being jailed, hunted down, killed in arenas, burned etc..

But I am curious what do you think is wrong/false/problematic with the creed exactly?

The Nicene Creed
I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.

[AHZ]

agreed.

The Nicene Creed was created in like 325AD long before any crusades or killing of witches or inquisitions.
the Christians at the time of the creeds writing were the one's being jailed, hunted down, killed in arenas, burned etc..

But I am curious what do you think is wrong/false/problematic with the creed exactly?

The Nicene Creed
I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.

It's not about what's right or wrong about it. it's about making people agree with it or burning them.

there is some vagueness in it. maybe some hyperbole? weasel words?

what if you really think the golden rule is the most important point, the actual point of the whole thing, in fact?

[AHZ]

I think the real jesus would say:

"You can think i never existed, as long as you follow the golden rule while doing it."

[revelarts]

It's not about what's right or wrong about it. it's about making people agree with it or burning them.

where does it say anything about burning people who don't agree with it?
It does not. never has.
neither do any of the other Christian creeds that I know of.
As you say Jesus taught to treat others as we would like to be treated.

And why do we even listen to his words? because He is who the creed says he is.
If not, he's just some 1st century Jewish street preacher who was killed by the Romans.
or a myth.

There is some vagueness in it. maybe some hyperbole? weasel words?

Where exactly? what do you mean?

what if you really think the golden rule is the most important point, the actual point of the whole thing, in fact?

People can think what they want.
But Peter who walked with him When asked to speak about Jesus said

..."You know what has happened throughout the province of Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached— how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him."
“We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a cross, but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen. He was not seen by all the people, but by witnesses whom God had already chosen—by us who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”...
Acts 10:37-43

that's what Peter talked about 1st. and thought was the point of the whole thing.

people are perfectly free to think otherwise but again, it's odd to me that we would think we know better "what the REAL Point is" than the people that lived with and Him and heard him speak and explain it all to them 1st hand.
Why would anyone assume they know better?

If someone says I LIKE THIS part better, OK I can get that. but I don't understand people claiming that xyz is WHAT REALY is the point. when it's clear that's NOT what Jesus or the apostles said.

"love your neighbor" is a Foundational truth, but not THE main thing Jesus told the apostles and christians to talk about.

"He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”

I think the real Jesus would say:
"You can think i never existed, as long as you follow the golden rule while doing it."

"...He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name...”

[AHZ]

where does it say anything about burning people who don't agree with it?
It does not. never has.
neither do any of the other Christian creeds that I know of.
As you say Jesus taught to treat others as we would like to be treated.

And why do we even listen to his words? because He is who the creed says he is.
If not, he's just some 1st century Jewish street preacher who was killed by the Romans.
or a myth.




Where exactly? what do you mean?


People can think what they want.
But Peter who walked with him When asked to speak about Jesus said

..."You know what has happened throughout the province of Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached— how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him."
“We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a cross, but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen. He was not seen by all the people, but by witnesses whom God had already chosen—by us who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”...
Acts 10:37-43

that's what Peter talked about 1st. and thought was the point of the whole thing.

people are perfectly free to think otherwise but again, it's odd to me that we would think we know better "what the REAL Point is" than the people that lived with and Him and heard him speak and explain it all to them 1st hand.
Why would anyone assume they know better?

If someone says I LIKE THIS part better, OK I can get that. but I don't understand people claiming that xyz is WHAT REALY is the point. when it's clear that's NOT what Jesus or the apostles said.

"love your neighbor" is a Foundational truth, but not THE main thing Jesus told the apostles and christians to talk about.

"He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”






"...He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name...”

the church has done that over people not agreeing with specifics in the nicene creed.

you can preach and testify without torture and murder and persecution.

that's a perversion of the faith.

it's not winning hearts and minds. the golden rule, being innately fair, wins hearts and minds.

forcing agreement with unverifiable miracles is counterproductive and unnecessary, unless one just likes to find reasons to force things, like military industrial complexes.

[revelarts]

the church has done that over people not agreeing with specifics in the nicene creed.

police have killed innocent people. but that's not the job of police.
PLUS "the church" didn't do that when it started. it didn't do that when it proposed the creed. the creed did NOT say any thing CLOSE to "kill thoose who don't beleive"
most of Church history the Church did not and HAS NOT killed unbelievers.

if you want to narrow focus on that era that's on you.

you can preach and testify without torture and murder and persecution.
that's a perversion of the faith.
it's not winning hearts and minds.

Every church i've ever been a member of has had a "creed".
somehow we never got around to torturing murdering or persecuting those that didn't believe exactly like we did.
Maybe I was sick on those Sundays and missed the torture, murder and persecution of the unbelievers Sunday.
I'm pretty sure my experience is pretty common for the past 2000 years and around the world.

the golden rule, being innately fair, wins hearts and minds.
forcing agreement with unverifiable miracles is counterproductive and unnecessary, unless one just likes to find reasons to force things, like military industrial complexes.

Jesus & the Apostle's and other followers of Jesus weren't killed over the past 2000 years and around the world because they teach 'the golden rule.'
Jesus was killed, and his followers, because He taught, what you somehow in your greater wisdom think is"counterproductive and unnecessary".

But again Peter said.
"...He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name...”

Billions have heard that message ... the truth... and believed it.
And then FOLLOWING that belief began to apply the golden rule.

You want the milk & eggs without the mess of the cows, chicken & barnyard.

[AHZ]

police have killed innocent people. but that's not the job of police.
PLUS "the church" didn't do that when it started. it didn't do that when it proposed the creed. the creed did NOT say any thing CLOSE to "kill thoose who don't beleive"
most of Church history the Church did not and HAS NOT killed unbelievers.

if you want to narrow focus on that era that's on you.



Every church i've ever been a member of has had a "creed".
somehow we never got around to torturing murdering or persecuting those that didn't believe exactly like we did.
Maybe I was sick on those Sundays and missed the torture, murder and persecution of the unbelievers Sunday.
I'm pretty sure my experience is pretty common for the past 2000 years and around the world.



Jesus & the Apostle's and other followers of Jesus weren't killed over the past 2000 years and around the world because they teach 'the golden rule.'
Jesus was killed, and his followers, because He taught, what you somehow in your greater wisdom think is"counterproductive and unnecessary".

But again Peter said.
"...He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name...”

Billions have heard that message ... the truth... and believed it.
And then FOLLOWING that belief began to apply the golden rule.

You want the milk & eggs without the mess of the cows, chicken & barnyard.

Don't blame me for focussing on that era.

Morality is already sold innately because all faiths have fairly close versions of it.


rationality speaks for itself.

making people profess belief in unconfirmable miracles is a form of appeal to authority and totalitarianism.

we should lead with the golden rule. that's all im saying.

i really think jesus would prefer that.

[revelarts]

Don't blame me for focussing on that era.

why not?

you're the only one in the conversation pointing to it as if it's the core of christianity

[AHZ]

why not?

you're the only one in the conversation pointing to it as if it's the core of christianity

I think the core is the golden rule.

the nicene creed is less important.

do you agree?

[revelarts]

I think the core is the golden rule.
the nicene creed is less important.
do you agree?

Should the person who spoke the golden rule be the one to tell us what's his most important teaching is or should we each just take our best guess?

[AHZ]

Should the person who spoke the golden rule be the one to tell us what's his most important teaching is or should we each just take our best guess?

he said it;s the whole of the law. that seems clear to me.

[revelarts]

he said it's the whole of the law. that seems clear to me.

That is clear.
Most important foundation of the LAW.

AHZ, What happens when you break the law? Or break the golden rule?
What do you do with your guilt?
Guilt is just as innately real as the internal morals that expose it.

EVERYONE is guilty of NOT following the golden rule in small and large degrees.
Jesus told Peter and the apostles the most important thing is
"...He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name...”

Wether or not you think that's the best approach is your opinion.
Jesus said THAT'S what Peter and his followers should lead to... if not lead with.

Why? Because the guilt of each of us from not always following the golden rule has to be dealt with.

Wether you believe it or not is between you and God.
But there's plenty of evidence to back it up to make a rational step into that belief.
If you want to see it. A lot is self evident.


BTW I just found out Sunday that a popular YouTube atheist who called himself "Cosmic Skeptic" became a Christian some time last year.
now calls himself "Cosmic Christian". He became a Christian AFTER looking at the evidence. Not by torture, or blind faith, or appeals to authority.

[Gunny]

Morality is definitely rational.

Morality is a set of attitudes and behaviors that faciltate voluntary, cooperative, and mutally beneficial relationships.

To figure out what is moral apply jesus' golden rule, which comes to us from a religious tradition, but the rule calls for the individual to use empathy, imagination, and personal judgement, and is ultimately rational.

if jesus told you to be rational would rationality be religious dogma?

no, it just means that's a good religion.

rationality is not morality in and of itself. one could very easily rationalize lying to and poisoning all of humanity, if one possesses a 'might makes right' darwinian / evil outlook, like big pharma nazis do.

Morality is more that rationality. it is rationality plus wanting coexistence and peace, and presuming acceptance.

all the worlds relgions possess basic moral truths and practice them within the community.

they all have their focuses, peculiarities, and different outlook on relations with "other". some are less peaceful than others.

the "turn the other cheek" /golden rule ethos of christianity and appeal to the heart instead of coercion does make christianity well suited to multicultural contexts we live in now. some are too stabby and beheady and need reforming, though some parties like stabby and beheady due to posessing genocidal ideologies. these are false moralities and seek to cover human on human predation with a patina of thin/bad logic.

i know, "the crusades" etc, but the roman papal cult is not a great version of christianity.

i think the amish have it right and are basically the perfect people, though of course, we all are flawed and falled, life being a constant battle to love perfect a perfect love in a fallen world.

and oh yeah. The catholic church invented islam.

Morality is rationalized, not necessarily rational.