If the bible was absolutely correct

1. 56

   nonto21posted 11 years ago

   Everyone on earth would see it as so. There would be no rejection.
   
   Christians talk about absolute morals. If I don't see that as true and I have a completely different set of morals, how can there be an absolute moral?

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There are only two thing in this world that I've come to understand would be (a) wisdom and (b) truth.
      
      Everything else is just a perception.
      Ego would still reject it. Ego can reject truth as it stands now.
      Yes, they do and when they do, many reflect themselves back on themselves and fail to see their own actions. Absolute morals is a falsehood. The highest moral standard isn't achievable. It cannot be done. Why? Humans are not perfect. Anyone who thinks it can, then doesn't understand individual rights. I wrote about the absolute highest moral standard and rights vs morals.
      
      Actually, there's a universal moral code every citizen of the world could independently live by and if more people did then the world would be a much safer place.

      replyreport
      1. 56

         nonto21posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Name it.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Integrity.

            replyreport
            1. 56

               nonto21posted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Integrity is a value, not a moral. Try again.

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Integrity is the description with which actions are to be of.
                  
                  Actions are moral or immoral. An immoral action will speak to having no integrity. Integrity represents utmost honesty. An honest action is always moral.

                  replyreport
                  1. 56

                     nonto21posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Values are just like morals, in that they are still going to differ from person to person. Still nothing universal.

                     replyreport
                     1. 71

                        Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Really? Wisdom is universal. It is recognized when read or heard.
                        
                        Really? I mean seriously?
                        
                        Is that your ego talking? Or did you just tell me that you have no integrity?
                        
                        It's either that, or you don't know what the word means. A person of integrity is going to be the most honest person they can be. Are you telling me this isn't UNIVERSAL throughout all of humankind? The more people living with integrity is better than it not happening.
                        
                        I look at it this way- Integrity, understand it, you'll live honestly, living honestly, brings out love for self, which in turns allows love for others.
                        
                        Every person only needs to learn that word, live it and prosper from a peaceful life.

                        replyreport
                        1. 56

                           nonto21posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           For me, stoning a person is morally incorrect. For some else, stoning someone is a moral act.
                           
                           How are any of the two universal, if there is a variance of what is correct and what is not?
                           
                           Integrity would be an unwavering fortitude, based on what morals I have.
                           
                           Integrity is a value.

                           replyreport
      2. 59

         cocoandcrysposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         What is this moral code based on? If you do not believe in a God, creator, or any sort of deity, on what exactly do you base these universal morals of which you speak?

         replyreport
         1. 71

            Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            A person's actions are the only thing that can be classified as being moral or immoral. If you understand the human morality concept, then you would have learned that it's nothing more than a description of actions which should be conscience based.
            
            For an individual to hear their own conscience, they are required to see beyond themselves(seeing past one's own ego), which requires a higher level of awareness about self. It also requires a better understanding of yourself and the world around you.
            
            A person's character is defined by what he does or doesn't do and why he did or didn't do something. How your actions or that of anyone else is specific measured against the morality concept. If it does match, then your actions are not of conscience.
            
            The primary character trait a person needs to understand is integrity. After which, everything else falls into place.

            replyreport
            1. 78

               pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               So expanding ones level of awareness is crucial for integrity to be more useful?

               replyreport
   2. 78

      pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There are no absolutes as I see it.

      replyreport