Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

Patrick H
Gormley


ABOUT THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

 

Religion boasts commands from God that tell us to love and what love entails.  The thought that you do something because God commanded it and just because he said it is your duty and it does not matter if you understand it or not leads to pride and is a form of legalism.  The New Testament has much to say about the fake humility and virtue-signalling that religions about rules produce.   If we obey God it could be that we do it for it is good for him instead of it being good for us.  Indeed we should.  That would make the good results unintended side-effects.  Can  you imagine the implicit boast in something so rare and huge and difficult?  Do you really think somebody who wants you to think they are acting for God and nothing else is humble?

 

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS - GOD COMMANDS LAWS TO WHICH THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS

 

Today we are scared by rules that say some deeds must never ever be considered or done.

 

For example, Christians say that you cannot lie or curse God or have sex outside marriage no matter what the good results will be.

 

Take lying.


If lying is evil in itself simply because lies are bad then circumstances or intentions cannot make it right. It cannot become subjectively good. You cannot defend it as a choice. To say an intrinsically evil act can be good or understandable or neutral morally is to say that murder would be right under certain conditions. Surely getting away with it would count as a condition too!! 

 

The idea that morality has nothing to do with your actions but how you do your relationships, (ie about you and others as persons) is behind attempts to justify breaking the rules at least occasionally or for dressing that up as "the rules do not apply and why should we not just make an exception once or twice?"  So in this view it is okay to lie or steal if it it fosters good relationships between people and yourself and them. And those who say it is not saying that are lying because they want their morality to look good and to come across as nice relationship serving people.  So for this theory good and bad is about good and bad relationships not good and bad deeds as such. This then is substituting the intrinsic evil of bad relationships for the intrinsic evil of bad deeds.  You would think that being accused of being intrinsically evil relationshipist would be more judgemental than being accused of being an intrinsically evil doer of certain deeds.

 

Relationships are expressed and protected by actions so divorcing relationship morality from action morality is just impossible and blind.

 

Plus Jesus said that all relationships are really just a way of relating to God and being in a relationship with him so making morality about relationship does not give you a loophole for softening rules at all.  God alone matters so he can say he does not want lies or sex outside marriage or whatever and having a relationship with him means it should not be up for debate.


In Christianity, only three things show if an action is immoral or moral.


An action is immoral if it is bad or can reasonably be mistaken as bad.


And if you do it with intention – purpose.


The circumstances do matter for if you are not clear if an action is bad then try to see what kind of consequences it will have or reasonably might have. An act is not made bad merely be the results but the results give a clue that it is bad in the first place which is why it leads to further badness.


The Catholic Church like Church Father St Augustine says that lying is bad in itself and the intention to lie is bad too. So the action and the intention are both bad.  So Catholics say that certain things must never be done. They say that if you have a bad intention then do the act with a good one. They say that if the act is just bad then do a good one in its place. They say that if the circumstances show your act will do unnecessary and avoidable damage then either change the circumstances or do something else. They say that is the rationale behind saying that sin is the worst evil even the accidental destruction of the world is better.  So the idea is that though it is better for the whole world to blow up by accident than to commit a single sin this is not fanaticism for you should not be sinning in the first place and don't need to.  It is you creating this dichotomy.

 

The Church says that you cannot justify lying or stealing from somebody to stop them from sinning for any sins will be their concern not yours.  It is their sin not yours. You cannot sin to stop them.

The Church says that if you have to lie or tell the truth to a murderer about where the intended victims are then tell the truth for it is up to the murderer not to commit the sin of murder. It is their  sin not yours. You have not helped anybody murder for it was their choice. Practically speaking no murderers are going to take your word for it so the lies will get you nowhere. And lies to prevent murders soon turn into lies to avoid any kind of bother.


Evil can be hard to make out for if you are getting a leg removed to save your life then the doctors are doing something that is typically harmful for you and physically evil for the sake of the greater good of saving your life. The doctors cannot be said to be intending to save your life not cut off your limb.  Of course they intend to amputate. Otherwise you would have to reason that the stabber only intended to stop you from getting in the way not to impale you.  Otherwise you would have to say the robber did not intend to steal from you but just to have the money to pay somebody off.

 

Christians think that if you truly love God and neighbour you will not need the commandments. If you love having only what belongs to you you will not steal or need to be banned from doing it. The two big commands to totally love God and to love neighbour imply we won't do them or want to and need commanding.

 

So the very idea of commandments is judgemental.

 

EXODUS 20 My Comments in Red

New International Version

And God spoke all these words:

 

The text is clear that these are the words of God. If it were man saying this we would take it as man's words. But liberal Christians are so disobedient they pretend that when God is described as using words that it is not literally saying they are his words!

2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. God is starting the commandments by identifying himself.

3 “You shall have no other gods before me. You must not worship or value anything more than God or as much.

4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. This is a command in itself. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

 

This is plainly another commandment. It commands you to obey or suffer punishment. So the commandment demands that you believe in a punishing God. You are also expected to love him not by keeping his commandments. It is love me and keep my commandments.

 

You shall not have any other gods is taken to ban merely worshiping other gods. But it could mean you must not tolerate any statues of those gods or their temples. The commandment must be interpreted in context and it appears in holy books which stress the need to destroy God’s children who turn to other gods and to destroy the idols and places of worship.  It is therefore an intolerant precept.

7 “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

8 “Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

 

This command says you must not do any work or even get a pagan slave to do it for you. The reason for the rest is how God made all things in six days and rested on the seventh. The commandment says the Genesis story is literal. It also commands you to work six days.  No sane person thinks Genesis is true.  Those who say it is not literal are as mad as those who say it is literal for both still say it is true and the story gives no hint of being non-literal.  The detail in it in a time when people had no time to read or source books or work out the meaning if the meaning is a bit obscure shows it is indeed meant to be taken literally.  The Ten Commandments command a literal interpretation of the Bible.  They are meant to be learned as the words of God.  Liberals with their lies try to make things more complicated but they care about avoiding embarrassment and being seen as crazy and not about the truth.  The truth is that the Bible except where it clearly states otherwise is to be taken literally.

12 “Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.

 

The commandment promises a long life on earth.  God's promise is no good for lots of good sons and daughters die.  A promise is a promise and you cannot use the excuse, "They had to die for a reason."  God uses that excuse or rather men invent God and then make excuses for why their invention does not act or keep his promises.  Its disgraceful.

13 “You shall not murder. Banning murder does not necessarily mean banning all killing. In the past, capital punishment was not consider murdered by law.

 

Murder refers not to killing but to illegal killing. In Hebrew the word for murder here is razach which refers to killing from anti-social motives. It has nothing then to do with wars and executions that are sanctioned by God or the Israelite community in accordance with the capital punishment laws.

14 “You shall not commit adultery.

The Church stretches the commandment say against adultery beyond all logic. It says it forbids sexy fantasies and sex before marriage. A whole list of sexual sins is condemned aside from adultery! The commandment should read, "You shall confine sex to marriage". The Church shows no logic at all. The close relationship between religion and self-inflicted psychosis is evident when it reads texts and takes such outlandish interpretations and is immune to correction.  Jesus stretched the commandment to include a ban on sex fantasies about other men's wives.  He either forgot there was a do not covet commandment for that anyway or did not realise that the commandments are a public code not a private one.  The state cannot punish you for what you think and neither do the commandments.  Covet probably refers then to actions taken to get somebody else's property.

15 “You shall not steal.

16 “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

As false testimony is supposedly stealing somebody's good name why is the Church not able to derive the ban on slander from, "You shall not steal"?

17 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

This commandment forbids thoughts that wish to take from or hurt another person.  The rule against coveting another man’s wife is about the injustice of trying to take a man’s marriage away from him. If it means he owns his wife that is shocking.  And it does mean that.  Jesus did nothing to fix the male centred point of view when he referred to such commandments.  He just directed people to the commandments.

18 When the people saw the thunder and lightning and heard the trumpet and saw the mountain in smoke, they trembled with fear. They stayed at a distance

 

19 and said to Moses, “Speak to us yourself and we will listen. But do not have God speak to us or we will die.”

20 Moses said to the people, “Do not be afraid. God has come to test you, so that the fear of God will be with you to keep you from sinning.”

21 The people remained at a distance, while Moses approached the thick darkness where God was.

22 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Tell the Israelites this: ‘You have seen for yourselves that I have spoken to you from heaven: 23 Do not make any gods to be alongside me; do not make for yourselves gods of silver or gods of gold.

 

God rules out the liberal view that as long as you spare some worship for God idolatry is fine. This excuse is used by Protestants who are ecumenically minded. They want to excuse Catholics worshipping a communion wafer. God confirms that he has literally spoken.

24 “‘Make an altar of earth for me and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and fellowship offerings, your sheep and goats and your cattle. Wherever I cause my name to be honored, I will come to you and bless you. 25 If you make an altar of stones for me, do not build it with dressed stones, for you will defile it if you use a tool on it. 26 And do not go up to my altar on steps, or your private parts may be exposed.’

The book Christianity is Not Great tells us that "No commandment to do good appears in the Ten Commandments of Moses." Religion says that sometimes it is easier to tell people what is not good than what is good. But you would expect a command to give alms or something. There is nothing. Why do we have, "You shall not commit adultery" when we could have, "You shall have relations in love only with your husband or wife"? That is a better way to put it and clearer and more encouraging.

There are no decent commandments! Why not, "You shall not wage war!"? Why not, "You shall not enslave your fellow person but see all people as your equal"?

 

EXODUS 34

 

If we have two sets of ten commandments and one does not agree with the other then you have to take the latter one as the one that is in force.  We have Exodus 34 which gives us, apart from three,  different commandments altogether including instructions about animal sacrifice and keeping festivals.  Christianity is apostate for it is obvious that it was meant to keep Jewish and it didn't. 

 

FROM THE JESUS DELUSION BY HEINZ-WERNER KUBITZA

 

The first four commandments were all concerned exclusively with the correct way to honor God and the avoidance of foreign cults. A waste of space, if one remembers that we want to formulate only Ten Commandments (in imitation of the number of fingers). But now come separate instructions, the first of which is to honor one’s parents. That this commandment is given such a prominent position is surprising. Should we not have expected a ban on killing to come first? Furthermore, in our society honoring parents is not a law demanding court action, but at best a show of decency and gratitude toward those to whom we owe our life and who have reared us. It is done voluntarily, not because one hopes to gain a long life from the act, as is dubiously justified by this commandment. In no way should we make this commandment a foundation for some sort of family policy. The status of parents in old Israel gave them not only the right to inflict corporal punishment but also the right to kill, if necessary, a refractory son or daughter. So this verse, which sounds so positive, also has its perils. It is only suitable to a limited extent for the instruction of children and adolescents, for example.

Love of one’s neighbor, yes – but better not dependent on the belief in a God, but rather on a feeling of solidarity with all fellow men. Or, as Lessing expressed the wish, doing good for the sake of good. Lessing’s concept is superior to a derivation from religion.