Health and Religion

[CoinCube]

What are your reasons to believe that the objective morality exists?  Assuming God does not exist.

I gave you my reasons why I think morality is relative to the present.

That's quite the question.

Clearly objective morality is tangled up with and difficult to separate from God. The following animated video does a really good job of highlighting why.

Can You Be Good Without God
https://m.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANyPxKp_3uivzV7wkt638SPuusKsE7nzmqs7HiJVZZSIzNOX68TWTORdGbelmM6xXstEt6nLbEtk_pYoC0Kc6pKwqm6KRl9OLg&time_continue=301&v=OxiAikEk2vU


It is possible to argue for objective morality without God, but it requires you to ground morality in some other objective reference point.

Ann Rand a famous atheist did this in her philosophical argument for objective morality.

Morality Is Objective
https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2015/3/8/morality-is-objective-and-we-can-prove-it/

Ayn Rand The Objectivist Ethics

"There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or non-existence – and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of life is not: it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is indestructible. it changes form, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it dies; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of “Life” that makes the concept of “Value” possible."

Biddle adds in his commentary:
"The reason why living things need values is: in order to live. The answer to the question “for what?”is: for life."

Life is the ultimate end served by our pursuit of values, and thus reigns as our objective standard of value. Something has value to us only to the extent that it furthers or enhances our life

But what do we mean by “objective”? Isn’t the idea that life is the standard of value just Rand’s opinion?  Can’t you choose another standard based on your subjective tastes?

Craig Biddle answers:

"No, free will do not make the issue subjective. It does mean that a person can choose not to live; but it does not mean that he can choose a standard of value other than life.

… Without life there would be no one to whom anything could be beneficial or harmful. And why do such alternatives matter one way or the other? Because of the requirements of life. They are values or non-values only in relation to the alternative of life or death – and only for the purpose of promoting one’s life. The fact that we have free will does not change any of this; it simply grants us a choice in the matter: to live or not to live – to be or not to be.

Having discovered this objective standard of value, we have our reference point for further unveiling an objective morality. From the fact of our own existence as living beings with a particular nature, we can rationally ascertain what we ought to do.

Generally speaking, we ought to work to provide for our needs. We ought to act to obtain or keep that which furthers our survival and makes us happy.

This happiness, the sort referenced by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, is not a hedonistic whim. It’s not chocolate for a diabetic. It’s not an affair for a married man. Rather, true happiness is gauged in the context of how life works and what we can reasonably expect to follow from our actions. The diabetic who eats lots of chocolate may gain short-term pleasure, but at the expense of his long-term well-being. The same can be said of the adulterer.



Odd how this objective morality, discovered by an unrepentant atheist, starts to dimly echo the Ten Commandments. Indeed, if God exists, and if He created the universe, it follows that his moral commandments would jive with the facts of his crafted reality – that He would prescribe action in our best interest.

Personally I believe the best choice is to ground objective morality in God. However, for those unwilling to do so Ayn Rand's solution of grounding objective reality in life appears to be at least partially functional. Certainly better than nihilism or moral skepticism.

[CoinCube]

...
Rand basically said that values that support and enhance life are objective moral values. They are good values to follow, but the problem arises when the life changes.  The values that were objective need to be updated to be objective again.

Imagine a new technology that would allow us to clone human brains, or run ancestor simulations, or make hybrids with AI, or give AI our human cognitive abilities
...
The search for morality is work in progress.  Anything else is just an attempt to stop the process, and fix the objective morality in time.  With God or without it.

You could address this by abstracting the idea of life. Or you could define it as self-aware consciousness. In either case the transition you are concerned about could then be viewed as a phase shift like a caterpillar transforming into a butterfly. The Randian objective moral standard would hold across the transitions.

I am not a proponent of Randian objectivism. I just think it's a much better system much closer to truth than moral subjectivity. It is also interesting how that particular form of atheist objectivism dimly echos the Ten Commandments as noted in my prior post.

An objective morality can instantiate itself across time via new laws and behavior necessary to achieve the ultimate moral objective in a changing environment. The laws and behaviors change not the objective standard. The search for morality is indeed a work in progress. Subjective morality is the abandonment of that search with the proclamation that it's all arbitrary.

I am amazed by how otherwise sane people cling to ancient texts for moral guidance.  These texts clearly demonstrate that people who wrote these books knew very little about the world they were living in.  Yet some of us in the 21st century ignore these obvious details.

You should not be amazed. Atheism guts meaning and purpose without offering an alternative. Thus it is often rejected. You may have latched onto subjective morality and maintained happiness by embracing the inconsistency of a personal objective truth, but that does not work for most. The following animated video describes why.

Is There Meaning to Life?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NKGnXgH_CzE

[Astargath]

The problem, you knucklehead is that you are arguing that in ancient times god was there to help people, if we know those things were immoral now, god would have known then too and he would have done something about it not fucking help them with stupid laws that supported their immoral actions.

I think the real problem is that you are unwilling to look past the superficial.

The overall moral message of the Bible in regards to human sexuality seems to be a pretty simple one.

In the Bible any sexual activity outside of traditional marriage is immoral and prohibited period end of story.

Like the challenge of sleeping with married women -> Death Penalty
Farmer who gets frisky with his sheep -> Death Penalty
Man who prefers men to women -> Death Penalty
Rapist -> Death Penalty

Even unmarried consensual sex leads to either the death penalty or a forced marriage depending on the specific circumstances.

If you were serious about examining the morality of this you have to ask yourself not the specific question but the broad one. Is this strict prohibition of all sexual relations outside of marriage moral.

Setting aside the traditional religious answer yes because God declared it  this is not an easy question to answer. What if the functional alternative to such a restriction is cultural destruction and cessation. That appears to be the position of Rabbi Nachum Amsel above. Maybe it's simply not competitive.

The historical record supports this. Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct. It was the puritanical ones that survived.

We are currently running a real time experiment to find out if this holds true today. In Europe the loosening of the restraints on sexuality is quite advanced.

https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/out-wedlock-births-rise-worldwide

In Belgium, Denmark, France, Norway and Sweden the majority of births now occur outside marriage, with government assistance typically provided to single mothers.

Will European civilization continue or will it fall like so many decadent civilization throughout history have fallen when confronted with a culture that lacks this trait?

More like you like to over complicate things using pseudo science bullshit to try to make your point. ''Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct.'' Who cares? Civilizations, descendants, they are all meaningless to me, my purpose is not to reproduce and have children. My purpose is to live my life the best I can trying not to hurt anyone, my freedom ends where yours starts and all that. I couldn't care less about someone's sexual preferences as long as he/she is not taking someone else freedom away.

I understand that a farmer getting frisky with his sheep is immoral because there is no real way of knowing if the sheep is giving consent. However that obviously is not the case with humans. Now the punishment itself seems also quite strong, death penalty, why? Doesn't god want people to repent? How would anyone repent if you get killed immediately?

Cheating is wrong but is it worth it of a death penalty? Again, it's not. In fact in current era we don't even punish people for that.

The fact is that morals change because they were bad in the first place, we are trying to achieve ''perfect morality'' whether that is possible or not, the problem is that god would have known and knows what that is if it exists and yet you don't find it in the bible. If the bible is the only proof he leaves to convince me then he did a poor job.

[CoinCube]

More like you like to over complicate things using pseudo science bullshit to try to make your point. ''Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct.'' Who cares? Civilizations, descendants, they are all meaningless to me, my purpose is not to reproduce and have children. My purpose is to live my life the best I can trying not to hurt anyone...

The fact is that morals change because they were bad in the first place...

I don't think I am over complicating things at all. Quite the opposite actually.

If you don't care about the future we are unlikely to agree on much at all. Personally I believe we have a duty to pass on a world to the next generation that is better then the one we inherited. That requires us to think about civilizations, and descendants even if we don't have children. If you don't care about maintaining your civilization you are hurting someone. You are hurting the unborn who will inherit the mess. The fact that those individuals don't exist yet does not mitigate the harm.

In regards to changing morals over time please see my next post.

[CoinCube]

Ok I think we are talking about different things.

But I think I understand what you are looking for.

You want an objective moral code? Here it is:

1. Do not harm life in any form.

The details are subjective just like the 10 commandments. They are subjective interpretation of the moral code above.

Holding the truth do not harm life in any form as an objective moral standard is not a bad place to start.

At a minimum it would allow you to compare that standard to other possible objective truths and extrapolate it into a hypothetical future.

The details, however, are not subjective. They are deterministic required details needed to instantiate the objective truth across a changing temporal landscape. Thus they are logically derivable from the objective truth.

Unless God comes back and updates the details, the laws in the scriptures are subjective and wrong because they violate the objective moral code above.

Let's look at an objective moral claim in the Torah or Old Testament of the Bible. Both Christians and Jews agree on this.

Christianity:
"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." - Jesus (Matthew 7:12)

Judaism: Hillel the Elder
"What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn." - Hillel the Elder

Thus we are told that the fundamental objective moral principle the foundation of the entire set of laws is the Golden Rule. Biblical law is thus the instantiation the necessary framework needed to bring that objective truth into reality among the barbaric morass that constituted early man.

Given the reality of our modern culture growing from cultures that embraced Biblical law it is not intellectually honest to casually dismiss the text as non functional or failed.

It is entirely possible that Biblical law was the best possible set of rules that simultaneously moved a barbaric humanity closer to moral truth and ensured that truth successfully propagated maintained itself and spread.  

Any particular rule can become inapplicable or outdated with changing circumstances. The rule requiring sacrificial offerings in a central temple that no longer exists is a good example of this.

Outdated or inapplicable rules are an inevitability of time. They are not an invalidation but a call to action. We are duty bound both to understand how the initial law supported the underlying objective moral truth and then find some other way to achieve a similar or superior end given the changing circumstance.

[CoinCube]

You are better off with any other book.

As for God telling you what the moral standard is, be careful, hearing God is a sign of insanity.
 

Well we disagree.

As I said before I have yet to decide if the Torah and the Bible were written by God through inspired men or written by men inspired by the ideal of God. That is an important distinction I will need to make at some point.

In either case what is crystal clear to anyone who looks at the matter without bias is that the text is not something to be casually dismissed and worthy of deep examination and reflection.

This is the second or third time now that you have implied that I am insane or belong in a mental institution. I will take that as a sign you have nothing further of substance to discuss.

Readers of this thread will have to decide for themselves if my arguments represent a coherent logical position or the wild rambling ravings of a madman.

[Astargath]

More like you like to over complicate things using pseudo science bullshit to try to make your point. ''Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct.'' Who cares? Civilizations, descendants, they are all meaningless to me, my purpose is not to reproduce and have children. My purpose is to live my life the best I can trying not to hurt anyone...

The fact is that morals change because they were bad in the first place...

I don't think I am over complicating things at all. Quite the opposite actually.

If you don't care about the future we are unlikely to agree on much at all. Personally I believe we have a duty to pass on a world to the next generation that is better then the one we inherited. That requires us to think about civilizations, and descendants even if we don't have children. If you don't care about maintaining your civilization you are hurting someone. You are hurting the unborn who will inherit the mess. The fact that those individuals don't exist yet does not mitigate the harm.

In regards to changing morals over time please see my next post.

Yeah, I know you believe many things, however that doesn't make them true. The future doesn't exist. There could be more harm if in the future a meteorite hits the earth and everyone dies, you don't know that, I don't know that, talking about the future is meaningless.

''It is entirely possible that Biblical law was the best possible set of rules that simultaneously moved a barbaric humanity closer to moral truth'' Maybe but even If we agree on that, the bible is still useless now and it's the only proof for god. God should in any case give us new laws, is he asleep?

[BADecker]

You are better off with any other book.

As for God telling you what the moral standard is, be careful, hearing God is a sign of insanity.
 

Well we disagree.

As I said before I have yet to decide if the Torah and the Bible were written by God through inspired men or written by men inspired by the ideal of God. That is an important distinction I will need to make at some point.

In either case what is crystal clear to anyone who looks at the matter without bias is that the text is not something to be casually dismissed and worthy of deep examination and reflection.

This is the second or third time now that you have implied that I am insane or belong in a mental institution. I will take that as a sign you have nothing further of substance to discuss.

Readers of this thread will have to decide for themselves if my arguments represent a coherent logical position or the wild rambling ravings of a madman.

Read my last post again, slowly.  Don't skip important words.

As for your "logical position",  I don't see it as being logical.  You want to believe that some supernatural entity gave people the objective moral standard and in the process you ignore large swaths of the Bible, pretend they do not apply to you personally or say that the laws applied to ancient Jews.  Your first logical mistake is that you think God exists, second is that you think the OT laws are valid moral laws in the 21st century.  

We can argue about individual laws, but I have made my position perfectly clear.  OT is a bunch of horseshit, it does not matter that it is a source of reflection for you.  Slavery is wrong, the OT barbaric laws are wrong, killing babies is wrong, killing gays is wrong.  

Many books, much easier to read will provoke deeper reflections that your precious Bible.

Your position is not only illogical, but outright irrational.  But I understand it, my grandmother is following the same logic.
You need to believe what you believe.  It is the right belief for you.

The only reason there are many books is because of the printing press. If the printing press had never existed, there would have been few books that would have ever been copied other than the Bible. And there still would be thousands upon thousands of hand copies of the Bible.

Why is it that the Gideons, alone, had distributed over 2 billion copies of the New Testament in 198 countries around the world by the late 1990s? And what about the distributions by The International Bible Society, and Faith Comes by Hearing? There are way more copies of the Bible around than you could almost imagine regarding any other book. Such distribution numbers are approaching miraculous.

God doesn't want a bunch of self-educated, college and university morons, who can't even look at nature and see that God exists. Rather, he wants humble people who are reaching out to Him because of their needs.

You are way off in your limited thinking.

[BADecker]

More like you like to over complicate things using pseudo science bullshit to try to make your point. ''Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct.'' Who cares? Civilizations, descendants, they are all meaningless to me, my purpose is not to reproduce and have children. My purpose is to live my life the best I can trying not to hurt anyone...

The fact is that morals change because they were bad in the first place...

I don't think I am over complicating things at all. Quite the opposite actually.

If you don't care about the future we are unlikely to agree on much at all. Personally I believe we have a duty to pass on a world to the next generation that is better then the one we inherited. That requires us to think about civilizations, and descendants even if we don't have children. If you don't care about maintaining your civilization you are hurting someone. You are hurting the unborn who will inherit the mess. The fact that those individuals don't exist yet does not mitigate the harm.

In regards to changing morals over time please see my next post.

Yeah, I know you believe many things, however that doesn't make them true. The future doesn't exist. There could be more harm if in the future a meteorite hits the earth and everyone dies, you don't know that, I don't know that, talking about the future is meaningless.

''It is entirely possible that Biblical law was the best possible set of rules that simultaneously moved a barbaric humanity closer to moral truth'' Maybe but even If we agree on that, the bible is still useless now and it's the only proof for god. God should in any case give us new laws, is he asleep?

The laws of the Bible are best. The overarching law in the Bible is, "Love your neighbor as yourself." It is expressed best in the words, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." There is no law that exists that is better than this. Making new laws or a new-law revision of the Bible would only detract from what is good. There is nothing greater than loving your neighbor as yourself.

[BADecker]

More like you like to over complicate things using pseudo science bullshit to try to make your point. ''Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct.'' Who cares? Civilizations, descendants, they are all meaningless to me, my purpose is not to reproduce and have children. My purpose is to live my life the best I can trying not to hurt anyone, my freedom ends where yours starts and all that. I couldn't care less about someone's sexual preferences as long as he/she is not taking someone else freedom away.

I understand that a farmer getting frisky with his sheep is immoral because there is no real way of knowing if the sheep is giving consent. However that obviously is not the case with humans. Now the punishment itself seems also quite strong, death penalty, why? Doesn't god want people to repent? How would anyone repent if you get killed immediately?

Cheating is wrong but is it worth it of a death penalty? Again, it's not. In fact in current era we don't even punish people for that.

The fact is that morals change because they were bad in the first place, we are trying to achieve ''perfect morality'' whether that is possible or not, the problem is that god would have known and knows what that is if it exists and yet you don't find it in the bible. If the bible is the only proof he leaves to convince me then he did a poor job.

But perfection is the important thing. Consider. There are countless actions and reactions between materials and energies, all operating perfectly, as evidenced by the non-destruction of the universe. Yet there is an appearance of imperfection in many things we do and think. How can we reconcile the idea of perfection necessary for existence with the imperfection that we are aware of?

The answer is the torture and death of Jesus in taking the imperfection and... the resurrection of Jesus, in perfecting even imperfection itself.

Jesus, having had enough power to take the punishment, and then having enough power to arise from the dead, shows that He has enough power to control everything. When we don't believe what He says, it's like we are asking for the destruction we would receive from having imperfection.

This perfection of imperfection is only temporary time, before the time of the new order and the New Universe. It exists only for God to find the people who will believe in Him, and who will accept movement from this life to the New Universe. It's called Jesus salvation.

[Astargath]

More like you like to over complicate things using pseudo science bullshit to try to make your point. ''Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct.'' Who cares? Civilizations, descendants, they are all meaningless to me, my purpose is not to reproduce and have children. My purpose is to live my life the best I can trying not to hurt anyone, my freedom ends where yours starts and all that. I couldn't care less about someone's sexual preferences as long as he/she is not taking someone else freedom away.

I understand that a farmer getting frisky with his sheep is immoral because there is no real way of knowing if the sheep is giving consent. However that obviously is not the case with humans. Now the punishment itself seems also quite strong, death penalty, why? Doesn't god want people to repent? How would anyone repent if you get killed immediately?

Cheating is wrong but is it worth it of a death penalty? Again, it's not. In fact in current era we don't even punish people for that.

The fact is that morals change because they were bad in the first place, we are trying to achieve ''perfect morality'' whether that is possible or not, the problem is that god would have known and knows what that is if it exists and yet you don't find it in the bible. If the bible is the only proof he leaves to convince me then he did a poor job.

But perfection is the important thing. Consider. There are countless actions and reactions between materials and energies, all operating perfectly, as evidenced by the non-destruction of the universe. Yet there is an appearance of imperfection in many things we do and think. How can we reconcile the idea of perfection necessary for existence with the imperfection that we are aware of?

The answer is the torture and death of Jesus in taking the imperfection and... the resurrection of Jesus, in perfecting even imperfection itself.

Jesus, having had enough power to take the punishment, and then having enough power to arise from the dead, shows that He has enough power to control everything. When we don't believe what He says, it's like we are asking for the destruction we would receive from having imperfection.

This perfection of imperfection is only temporary time, before the time of the new order and the New Universe. It exists only for God to find the people who will believe in Him, and who will accept movement from this life to the New Universe. It's called Jesus salvation.

But you yourself said that the laws in the old testament are no longer applicable, if they are the best, they should, no?

[Astargath]

More like you like to over complicate things using pseudo science bullshit to try to make your point. ''Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct.'' Who cares? Civilizations, descendants, they are all meaningless to me, my purpose is not to reproduce and have children. My purpose is to live my life the best I can trying not to hurt anyone, my freedom ends where yours starts and all that. I couldn't care less about someone's sexual preferences as long as he/she is not taking someone else freedom away.

I understand that a farmer getting frisky with his sheep is immoral because there is no real way of knowing if the sheep is giving consent. However that obviously is not the case with humans. Now the punishment itself seems also quite strong, death penalty, why? Doesn't god want people to repent? How would anyone repent if you get killed immediately?

Cheating is wrong but is it worth it of a death penalty? Again, it's not. In fact in current era we don't even punish people for that.

The fact is that morals change because they were bad in the first place, we are trying to achieve ''perfect morality'' whether that is possible or not, the problem is that god would have known and knows what that is if it exists and yet you don't find it in the bible. If the bible is the only proof he leaves to convince me then he did a poor job.

But perfection is the important thing. Consider. There are countless actions and reactions between materials and energies, all operating perfectly, as evidenced by the non-destruction of the universe. Yet there is an appearance of imperfection in many things we do and think. How can we reconcile the idea of perfection necessary for existence with the imperfection that we are aware of?

The answer is the torture and death of Jesus in taking the imperfection and... the resurrection of Jesus, in perfecting even imperfection itself.

Jesus, having had enough power to take the punishment, and then having enough power to arise from the dead, shows that He has enough power to control everything. When we don't believe what He says, it's like we are asking for the destruction we would receive from having imperfection.

This perfection of imperfection is only temporary time, before the time of the new order and the New Universe. It exists only for God to find the people who will believe in Him, and who will accept movement from this life to the New Universe. It's called Jesus salvation.

I don't see how your answer has anything to do with what we were discussing, which is morals, homosexuality and punishments but go ahead, be delusional as always.

[bluemongrel]

It's not religious belief in itself that is helpful with health, but many religions are set up to promote social collectivism and keep the family unit together, which helps with health as it provides a good, stable environment to raise children in.

Also, just because a group has many children does not mean they are more healthy. There is alot of overweight, fat Christians in the US, for example. However I would say that as a group, Mormons are physically healthy because many of them focus on family helping eachother in hard times, providing a social net for fellow Mormons, and because they don't smoke, drink, or do drugs.

[CoinCube]

What about if your neighbors are a gay couple who adopted two Christian boys and dressed them as girls.  They also sublet to a group transvestites who go door to door to sell women's underwear and lipstick.  One time you saw your gay neighbors make out right in front of your house. They also burned bunch of bibles in their backyard (they called the fire department to warn them about the yard garbage fire).

Your son goes to the same school as the two boys and fell in love with one of them.  He told you that he will marry one of them.

They also have a nice statue of Jesus sitting on a massive cock made out of wood surrounded by the village people Apostles in their backyard.

Your other neighbor is a swinger couple who host swinger's parties in their backyard.  They keep inviting you to their parties to bang some hot 20 year olds with massive boobs but you keep refusing, you dream about it, but instead you go and read the bible with your wife.

1. What does the Bible say how to deal with your neighbors?
2. What would the people in the ancient Israel do to your neighbors after reading the Bible?

All of those activities are now totally legal. Your scenario sadly becoming less far fetched by the day. The Bible says those things are wrong and sinful severe crimes which should be outlawed. The Bible, however, does not promote vigilante justice.

In situations such as this it offers clear guidence. Move away, enroll your child in private school or home school and let your neighbors deal with the fallout of their own choices. See the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Biblical law does not promote vigilante justice. In ancient Israel the those suspected of capital crimes would be arrested and their would be a trial with strict standards of evidence including multiple eyewitness required for conviction.

[Impulseboy]

Regardless of the religion isn't the basis of humanity to show kindness and compassion to one another? I'm just asking...

[Astargath]

What about if your neighbors are a gay couple who adopted two Christian boys and dressed them as girls.  They also sublet to a group transvestites who go door to door to sell women's underwear and lipstick.  One time you saw your gay neighbors make out right in front of your house. They also burned bunch of bibles in their backyard (they called the fire department to warn them about the yard garbage fire).

Your son goes to the same school as the two boys and fell in love with one of them.  He told you that he will marry one of them.

They also have a nice statue of Jesus sitting on a massive cock made out of wood surrounded by the village people Apostles in their backyard.

Your other neighbor is a swinger couple who host swinger's parties in their backyard.  They keep inviting you to their parties to bang some hot 20 year olds with massive boobs but you keep refusing, you dream about it, but instead you go and read the bible with your wife.

1. What does the Bible say how to deal with your neighbors?
2. What would the people in the ancient Israel do to your neighbors after reading the Bible?

All of those activities are now totally legal. Your scenario sadly becoming less far fetched by the day. The Bible says those things are wrong and sinful severe crimes which should be outlawed. The Bible, however, does not promote vigilante justice.

In situations such as this it offers clear guidence. Move away, enroll your child in private school or home school and let your neighbors deal with the fallout of their own choices. See the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Biblical law does not promote vigilante justice. In ancient Israel the those suspected of capital crimes would be arrested and their would be a trial with strict standards of evidence including multiple eyewitness required for conviction.

The question still remains would they be legal in the absence of our secular legal framework.  What would happen if people used only Bible as the moral guidance?

Think Islamic or Christian state devoid of secularism.

What do you think would happen to BADecker's neighbors?

At this point it's clear that they don't to admit that the morals that are taught in the bible are simply wrong, most of them at least, also contradictory. The punishments are also extremely hard or just stupid.

[BADecker]

What about if your neighbors are a gay couple who adopted two Christian boys and dressed them as girls.  They also sublet to a group transvestites who go door to door to sell women's underwear and lipstick.  One time you saw your gay neighbors make out right in front of your house. They also burned bunch of bibles in their backyard (they called the fire department to warn them about the yard garbage fire).

Your son goes to the same school as the two boys and fell in love with one of them.  He told you that he will marry one of them.

They also have a nice statue of Jesus sitting on a massive cock made out of wood surrounded by the village people Apostles in their backyard.

Your other neighbor is a swinger couple who host swinger's parties in their backyard.  They keep inviting you to their parties to bang some hot 20 year olds with massive boobs but you keep refusing, you dream about it, but instead you go and read the bible with your wife.

1. What does the Bible say how to deal with your neighbors?
2. What would the people in the ancient Israel do to your neighbors after reading the Bible?

There are many places in the Bible that show what we are to do regarding our neighbor. One of them is Mark 12:31 (partial):

Love your neighbor as yourself.

The next question has to do with who your neighbors are. Jesus says it this way, Luke 10:30:

29But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35The next day he took out two denariie and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Now that we know who our neighbors are, we need to distinguish between closer neighbors, and neighbors who are farther away. Since closer neighbors may be family members who you are responsible for, you have to judge which neighbors you might have to protect from other neighbors who are farther away.

Next, you have to judge between neighbors and enemies, or neighbors who might not be neighbors, but might be enemies. Jesus says in Matthew 5:43-48:

43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Is all this easy to do? Not all the time. For example, you might have to treat some neighbors harshly, both to protect other neighbors, and also to straighten those "naughty" neighbors out. You might even have to consider some of your neighbors to be enemies if they are adamant in their incorrect living. But you have love for them in your heart even as you straighten them out, and protect other neighbors from them.

God guides His people in the best ways to do all of this.

[BADecker]

So God is a dictator?  How do you know what God wants?

Are you sure?  Maybe it is what you want?  Your personal projection on what God wants is enough proof that God is in your head.

But we have been over this many times.

I suspect you secretly wish the printing press has never been invented because people would only read from one book, the Bible.

Guess what? Your religion con is up.  It has been exposed.  Hopefully, humanity can look past the ancient zombie myths (Jesus, Mithras, Osiris etc) and advance forward.

You religitards are a dying breed.
  

God absolutely IS a dictator. What do dictators do? They dictate, right? God dictates freedom, so that you have the ability to do what you want. He also dictates what is best for you to do in your freedom, so that you can have freedom in the best way. It is up to you to be more free by listening to God's dictation, or less free by doing your own dictation.

The printing press is great. It allows for Bibles to be spread around the world. And the Bibles are being spread more than any other book. Why? Because the Bible is the best information out there. If it wasn't, it would have been overrun easily within the last 2,000 years.

Unfortunately for them, there are a bunch of "secularitards" who are so caught up in their desires for destruction, and ignorance about the destruction they are desiring, that they keep on being "secularitards."

[BADecker]

More like you like to over complicate things using pseudo science bullshit to try to make your point. ''Almost all of the sexually permissive civilizations of antiquity are extinct.'' Who cares? Civilizations, descendants, they are all meaningless to me, my purpose is not to reproduce and have children. My purpose is to live my life the best I can trying not to hurt anyone, my freedom ends where yours starts and all that. I couldn't care less about someone's sexual preferences as long as he/she is not taking someone else freedom away.

I understand that a farmer getting frisky with his sheep is immoral because there is no real way of knowing if the sheep is giving consent. However that obviously is not the case with humans. Now the punishment itself seems also quite strong, death penalty, why? Doesn't god want people to repent? How would anyone repent if you get killed immediately?

Cheating is wrong but is it worth it of a death penalty? Again, it's not. In fact in current era we don't even punish people for that.

The fact is that morals change because they were bad in the first place, we are trying to achieve ''perfect morality'' whether that is possible or not, the problem is that god would have known and knows what that is if it exists and yet you don't find it in the bible. If the bible is the only proof he leaves to convince me then he did a poor job.

But perfection is the important thing. Consider. There are countless actions and reactions between materials and energies, all operating perfectly, as evidenced by the non-destruction of the universe. Yet there is an appearance of imperfection in many things we do and think. How can we reconcile the idea of perfection necessary for existence with the imperfection that we are aware of?

The answer is the torture and death of Jesus in taking the imperfection and... the resurrection of Jesus, in perfecting even imperfection itself.

Jesus, having had enough power to take the punishment, and then having enough power to arise from the dead, shows that He has enough power to control everything. When we don't believe what He says, it's like we are asking for the destruction we would receive from having imperfection.

This perfection of imperfection is only temporary time, before the time of the new order and the New Universe. It exists only for God to find the people who will believe in Him, and who will accept movement from this life to the New Universe. It's called Jesus salvation.

I don't see how your answer has anything to do with what we were discussing, which is morals, homosexuality and punishments but go ahead, be delusional as always.

You can't seem to understand that there is no use for homosexuality, and that it is therefore imperfection.

People of the same sex can sleep together if it doesn't involve the sexual acts that heterosexual people do. They can be best of friends... even better friends than husband and wife... as long as they don't do the sexual acts that are to be done between heterosexuals only.

It is the imperfection that is the problem.

[BADecker]

But you yourself said that the laws in the old testament are no longer applicable, if they are the best, they should, no?

Nope. I didn't post that. They are totally applicable. But, they are not given to us. There is not one living person on earth to whom they have been given. Why? Because there is no ancient Israel person alive any longer.

What we have exists in two parts:
1. The laws written in the heart and mind of all people, but flawed in their visibility and application;
2. The Holy Spirit's guidance in the hearts and minds of the Christians so that they know the laws in the best way.

The Christians are guided by the HS to do what is right according to "love your neighbor as yourself," the way God wants it to be done.

The "secularitards" simply use pieces of the law in their hearts and minds to erroneously formulate laws that they think are better.

Become a Christian, and get the best instructions for living from God, Himself.