The danger of a morality based on religion is that as the perception of religion changes, as less people attend church due to apathy, as less people identify as being religious, then any morality built upon the precepts of those religions is likely to decay over time.
Generalised religious based morality is being replaced by a social and political correctness (small p, small c), I.e. the Chinese takeaway of morality...here today, gone in 30 minutes.
Is right and wrong becoming a matter of public opinion?
@divegeester saidIn theory, and through the slow turning of the wheels of constitutional or democratic mechanisms, what is "right or wrong" is defined and dealt with by laws, which are enacted by society's representatives and are affected by public opinion.
The danger of a morality based on religion is that as the perception of religion changes, as less people attend church due to apathy, as less people identify as being religious, then any morality built upon the precepts of those religions is likely to decay over time.
Generalised religious based morality is being replaced by a social and political correctness (small p ...[text shortened]... ity...here today, gone in 30 minutes.
Is right and wrong is becoming a matter of public opinion?
As for morality, rather like 'obeying the law' [although what-is-legally-sound and what-is-morally-sound are not always synonymous), that is each and every individual's responsibility and we each have a unique moral compass which synthesizes our [human/social being] "nature" with our "nurture" [all that's absorbed from our environments].
"Religion" is part of "nurture" because it is one of the influences that shape people's moral compasses, both directly and indirectly.
When disputes about what is "right and wrong" reach some sort of crisis ~ whether it be between individuals, or between an individual and society ~ the laws are used to arbitrate.
The only thing you really need to worry about is the laws of nature and the physics of action-reaction. If your laws or beliefs conflict with the above, you're on an inevitable road to conflict and misery.
Example 1 of a trillion: If you steal my berries that I picked to feed my kids, that's good for you ... until I kill you. No Bibles or laws necessary.
@divegeester saidBlimey O’Riley!
Gosh, 2 thumbs down without them replying.
Interesting.
I’m even getting thumbs down about noticing my thumbs down 👎🏻
@bunnyknight saidAre you claiming that murdering thieves is a “law of nature”?
The only thing you really need to worry about is the laws of nature and the physics of action-reaction. If your laws or beliefs conflict with the above, you're on an inevitable road to conflict and misery.
Example 1 of a trillion: If you steal my berries that I picked to feed my kids, that's good for you ... until I kill you. No Bibles or laws necessary.
@divegeester saidOne of the weaknesses of basing morality on religion is that it requires a compelling proof of God’s existence.
The danger of a morality based on religion is that as the perception of religion changes, as less people attend church due to apathy, as less people identify as being religious, then any morality built upon the precepts of those religions is likely to decay over time.
Generalised religious based morality is being replaced by a social and political correctness (small p ...[text shortened]... rality...here today, gone in 30 minutes.
Is right and wrong becoming a matter of public opinion?
It has been my experience that the only people who find proofs of God’s existence compelling, are those who believed in God already, before they knew about such proofs.
@divegeester saidYou would be murdering yourself by choosing to steal food from a hungry family; just like you would be murdering yourself by choosing to fly off a cliff without wings.
Are you claiming that murdering thieves is a “law of nature”?
You can do anything you want, but the universe will always react to your action.
@bunnyknight saidhmmmm, so, more of a "karmic payback"?
You would be murdering yourself by choosing to steal food from a hungry family; just like you would be murdering yourself by choosing to fly off a cliff without wings.
You can do anything you want, but the universe will always react to your action.
@moonbus saidThis statement must surely be incorrect given that religions have existed for thousands of years and much of accepted morality Has been based upon them and no prof of God’s existence has been forthcoming.
One of the weaknesses of basing morality on religion is that it requires a compelling proof of God’s existence.
@bunnyknight saidNot if I got away with it.
You would be murdering yourself by choosing to steal food from a hungry family; just like you would be murdering yourself by choosing to fly off a cliff without wings.
You can do anything you want, but the universe will always react to your action.
@divegeester said
"The danger of a morality based on religion is that as the perception of religion changes, as less people attend church due to apathy, as less people identify as being religious, then any morality built upon the precepts of those religions is likely to decay over time."
True. I am reminded of a precept found in Proverbs 14:12 that says "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." And again in 16:25 "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death".
Any morality not based on the immutable and infallible Word of God is destined, as you said, to "decay over time", ending in death.
"Generalized religious based morality is being replaced by a social and political correctness (small p, small c), I.e. the Chinese takeaway of morality...here today, gone in 30 minutes."
Ephesians 4:14
"That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;"
(Consider the context)
Here again I am reminded of Paul's prophetic teaching relative to end time events found in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 that says, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first,.."
"That day" is the "the day of Christ" as stated in the preceding verse. It is my belief that we, the human race, are living in the time of the "falling away"(apostasia) of which Paul characterizes in 2 Timothy 4:3 > "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;.."
"Is right and wrong becoming a matter of public opinion?"
Technically, that has always been the case relative to a lost world. But in this our day, what with the advancement of science and technology, rapid transit, telecommunications, the internet, etc. etc. etc., man is essentially writing his own script and drifting farther and farther from The Truth.
"People" want a "religion" that conforms to their own "way" of thinking things ought to be. Death is waiting at the end of that path.
@secondson saidReligions are an omnipresent and diverse upshot of the human condition. They arise as a product of anthropology and psychology. Therefore, they are influenced by culture, geography, and history. Adherents of most religions believe that death is not the end and that they can go to have everlasting life.
"People" want a "religion" that conforms to their own "way" of thinking things ought to be. Death is waiting at the end of that path.
@bunnyknight saidConsidering that atheistic communism has murdered more people than any other ideology in the last century, your assertion can be seen to be blatantly false.
The only thing you really need to worry about is the laws of nature and the physics of action-reaction. If your laws or beliefs conflict with the above, you're on an inevitable road to conflict and misery.
Example 1 of a trillion: If you steal my berries that I picked to feed my kids, that's good for you ... until I kill you. No Bibles or laws necessary.
@fmf saidAgreed. "Religion" is man made based on the "human condition" at a particular place and time relative to the perceived needs of them as a collective.
Religions are an omnipresent and diverse upshot of the human condition. They arise as a product of anthropology and psychology. Therefore, they are influenced by culture, geography, and history. Adherents of most religions believe that death is not the end and that they can go to have everlasting life.
Question is though, is man left alone being subject to the vagaries of earth, wind and fire? Are the "influences" borne only by "culture, geography and history"? Or is there an influence bearing on the mind of man stemming from a dimension beyond the perceptions of the physical senses?
It seems that, as you said, "adherents of most religions believe that death is not the end and that they can go to have everlasting life" proves there is an "influence" on man greater than that of only "culture, geography and history".