Atheist answer to the 10 Commandments: 10 rational positions

[sealybobo]

Who dictates what is moral or immoral? What makes good rewarding and bad evil? How do you affirm this to be true?

That's kinda the point of #8. No one dictates morality, as morality is a personal issue. Now, this might lead some to incorrectly conclude that laws are meaningless. However, this is because many people make the mistake of believing that legally, and morality are interchangeable. They aren't. Laws are not designed as a set of morals so much as sets of agreed upon social structures to allow people to exist together in a society. This is why laws vary from culture to culture; because, those are the set of rules that culture agreed to abide by to get along.

As to "rewarding" good, and evil, if you're talking about what I think you are, that is a function of neurology, and, I would assume, evolution. If you think about most "good" acts, they are acts that encourage survival of the species. As such, the body, over time, developed an internal system to encourage positive behaviours. Now, this is only a theory, mind you, however the theory does seem to be supported by the fact that aberations do exist. Sociopaths, and other aberrations receive the serotonin "feel good" jolt from behaviours that are entirely different from the "norm". Now, bear in mind, this, again, offers an opportunity for misunderstanding. For many the term "aberration" carries with it a negative connotation. Such is not meant. Rather, it is only meant to imply a genetic, or evolutionary outlier.

As to "affirming" the truth, I refer to you points 1, and 2. There are, of course, thruths that cannot be 100% certain. At such times, it is more rational to attempt to understand what is the most likely to be true, and proceed from there.

Who dictates what is moral or immoral? What makes good rewarding and bad evil? How do you affirm this to be true?

Who do you think dictates what is moral or immoral?

Pope Francis explains 'who am I to judge' in his new book

This Vatican adviser is moving Catholics toward LGBT inclusion

More Catholics support gay ‘marriage’ than ever before. Here’s why

Well, that's easy. They would say "God".

But that's just silly. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

Why there is no god

Why is it so important to you that there be no God?

Scares the hell out of you, doesn't it?

You just might be wrong .... in which case, you are .... as we say ... royally fucked!

This is always the fallback argument for theists. Why is it so important to me? Let me count the ways religions offend me.

I’ve always said I’m ok with generic never been seen god. But don’t tell me he visited and if I don’t believe I’m “royally fucked”

Sorry I won’t be feared into your cult.

There are lots of reasons but I’ll give one. If the people are stupid enough to believe a religion then they can be easily manipulated to believe anything

 

[sealybobo]

That's kinda the point of #8. No one dictates morality, as morality is a personal issue. Now, this might lead some to incorrectly conclude that laws are meaningless. However, this is because many people make the mistake of believing that legally, and morality are interchangeable. They aren't. Laws are not designed as a set of morals so much as sets of agreed upon social structures to allow people to exist together in a society. This is why laws vary from culture to culture; because, those are the set of rules that culture agreed to abide by to get along.

As to "rewarding" good, and evil, if you're talking about what I think you are, that is a function of neurology, and, I would assume, evolution. If you think about most "good" acts, they are acts that encourage survival of the species. As such, the body, over time, developed an internal system to encourage positive behaviours. Now, this is only a theory, mind you, however the theory does seem to be supported by the fact that aberations do exist. Sociopaths, and other aberrations receive the serotonin "feel good" jolt from behaviours that are entirely different from the "norm". Now, bear in mind, this, again, offers an opportunity for misunderstanding. For many the term "aberration" carries with it a negative connotation. Such is not meant. Rather, it is only meant to imply a genetic, or evolutionary outlier.

As to "affirming" the truth, I refer to you points 1, and 2. There are, of course, thruths that cannot be 100% certain. At such times, it is more rational to attempt to understand what is the most likely to be true, and proceed from there.

Who dictates what is moral or immoral? What makes good rewarding and bad evil? How do you affirm this to be true?

Who do you think dictates what is moral or immoral?

Pope Francis explains 'who am I to judge' in his new book

This Vatican adviser is moving Catholics toward LGBT inclusion

More Catholics support gay ‘marriage’ than ever before. Here’s why

Well, that's easy. They would say "God".

But that's just silly. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

Why there is no god

Why is it so important to you that there be no God?

Scares the hell out of you, doesn't it?

You just might be wrong .... in which case, you are .... as we say ... royally fucked!

The real question is, why is it so important to you that there is a God? If you woke up tomorrow, and discovered, with absolute certainty, that God does not exist, would anything really have changed? Would the earth spin any differently? Would the sun shine any less brightly? Would anything in the natural universe really stop running as it always has?

See, the only people who fear that they are wrong, are the theists. Because, if they have to admit that they are wrong, then they have to admit that they have denied themselves countless opportunities at pleasure, and personal experiences all in the name of living up to the standards of a God that never existed.

And he should keep in mind what I want has nothing to do with what I believe. I would love to believe there’s a heaven but as much as I want it to be true I can’t believe. Just can’t fake it.

Why would someone who truly believes they’re going to heaven do anything but pitty us? Instead they argue. But who are they trying to convince? Me or themselves.

 

[Bonzi]

The irony is that you don't even recognise how disturbing that statement is. I don't choose to not kill your do, boil your wife in a giant pot to eat, while raping your daughter because I am afraid some invisible Sky Mage is going to send me to the Land of Ickiness for all time. I do so, because I am not a sociopath, and such behaviour is cruel, and reprehensible. If you need a fGod to fear to keep you from doing these kinds of things, that says a whole lot more about your lack of morals, than it does anyone else's.

Now, of course you'll ask, "How do you know it is cruel, and reprehensible," Well, I would simply refer you to rational position #7. Knowing how horrified, distraught, and devastated I would be if someone did that to me, it is only reasonable that another would feel just as horrified, distraught, and devastated, were I to do that to someone else. See? Reasonable moral position without the need for any vengeful invisible Sky Mage.

Be that as it may - many people ARE immoral, reprehensible, and sociopathic, so, if those types of people believing in God keep them a little "safer", what is the harm in that?

Most people don't really give a damn about others feelings. We are all selfish creatures, and, if spinning a tale to get people to focus OFF themselves and on God (who, as it turns out, has 2 great commands, one being that we love each other), what is the harm in that?

 

[sealybobo]

The irony is that you don't even recognise how disturbing that statement is. I don't choose to not kill your do, boil your wife in a giant pot to eat, while raping your daughter because I am afraid some invisible Sky Mage is going to send me to the Land of Ickiness for all time. I do so, because I am not a sociopath, and such behaviour is cruel, and reprehensible. If you need a fGod to fear to keep you from doing these kinds of things, that says a whole lot more about your lack of morals, than it does anyone else's.

Now, of course you'll ask, "How do you know it is cruel, and reprehensible," Well, I would simply refer you to rational position #7. Knowing how horrified, distraught, and devastated I would be if someone did that to me, it is only reasonable that another would feel just as horrified, distraught, and devastated, were I to do that to someone else. See? Reasonable moral position without the need for any vengeful invisible Sky Mage.

Be that as it may - many people ARE immoral, reprehensible, and sociopathic, so, if those types of people believing in God keep them a little "safer", what is the harm in that?

Most people don't really give a damn about others feelings. We are all selfish creatures, and, if spinning a tale to get people to focus OFF themselves and on God (who, as it turns out, has 2 great commands, one being that we love each other), what is the harm in that?

We all know of people who religion is improving their lives. I’m seeing a pentacostal. I wouldn’t take religion away from her. That would be mean. I just want her and her cult to worship quietly and stop playing politics. It’s the politics that turned me into a militant theist.

One other thought. How much does god factor in after they leave church? I see my nephews arguing 5 minutes after church. Not very Christian like. Almost as if it all went in one ear and out the other.

And the Pentacostal threw herself at me me on the first night. Maybe she didn’t break a commandment that night but I was shocked at how easy the churchgoer was

 

[Bonzi]

We all know of people who religion is improving their lives. I’m seeing a pentacostal. I wouldn’t take religion away from her. That would be mean. I just want her and her cult to worship quietly and stop playing politics. It’s the politics that turned me into a militant theist.

One other thought. How much does god factor in after they leave church? I see my nephews arguing 5 minutes after church. Not very Christian like. Almost as if it all went in one ear and out the other.

And the Pentacostal threw herself at me me on the first night. Maybe she didn’t break a commandment that night but I was shocked at how easy the churchgoer was

I agree that religion does not belong in politics. Jesus himself said as much.
Many Christians are either ignorant, misled or both. It's unfortunate because it sheds a bad light on an otherwise belief that should be about love, support and striving to live a Godly life. However, part of that life IS to spread the Good News. This is where people get into trouble, because, telling people is one thing, trying to enforce it as a way of life on those that are not interested is another.

Could be your nephews are just going because their family goes. They may not even buy into the whole thing. I really don't know, but, every person argues. Christian or not. The woman that threw herself at you most likely is not taking the Bible or her belief seriously either. Those that believe you are saved by choice of God (predestination), will pretty much do anything because they feel they have a guaranteed ticket to heaven. The same is true of Catholics, but, the only difference with them is the confessional is their ticket.

 

[sealybobo]

We all know of people who religion is improving their lives. I’m seeing a pentacostal. I wouldn’t take religion away from her. That would be mean. I just want her and her cult to worship quietly and stop playing politics. It’s the politics that turned me into a militant theist.

One other thought. How much does god factor in after they leave church? I see my nephews arguing 5 minutes after church. Not very Christian like. Almost as if it all went in one ear and out the other.

And the Pentacostal threw herself at me me on the first night. Maybe she didn’t break a commandment that night but I was shocked at how easy the churchgoer was

I agree that religion does not belong in politics. Jesus himself said as much.
Many Christians are either ignorant, misled or both. It's unfortunate because it sheds a bad light on an otherwise belief that should be about love, support and striving to live a Godly life. However, part of that life IS to spread the Good News. This is where people get into trouble, because, telling people is one thing, trying to enforce it as a way of life on those that are not interested is another.

Could be your nephews are just going because their family goes. They may not even buy into the whole thing. I really don't know, but, every person argues. Christian or not. The woman that threw herself at you most likely is not taking the Bible or her belief seriously either. Those that believe you are saved by choice of God (predestination), will pretty much do anything because they feel they have a guaranteed ticket to heaven. The same is true of Catholics, but, the only difference with them is the confessional is their ticket.

No my nephews do believe. I’ve heard them say enough things that I would never tell them I don’t believe. Not till they’re older anyways.

And I don’t think she’s bad for being a horny christians. We all sin. If your sin is making love that’s better than stealing murdering or lying I guess.

 

[featherlite]

If you need to live by your own moral code, go on wit' yer bad self. Why even compare & compete with the 10 commandments at all. Do "rational positions" sound more self actualized?
...and how many atheists actually would live that list? Not many or theyed live a few but ignore the rest.

I would think the reason would be self explanatory. In spite of the fact that many of the "commandments" are pedantic, vague (Do not murder.kill), rigid, and gratuitous (Sabbath), Christians continue to hold up the 10 commandments as a valuable, universal code of morality that should be absolute.,

The 10 reasonable positions, are a rational alternative. None of them speak to specific behaviour, and all of them suggest a rational, reasonable way to act in one's own life, and how to behave towards others.

I notice that no one has tried to deconstruct any of the actual positions, but have instead expressed indignation that someone would dare suggest that there might be a better set of behavioural suggestions than the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are part of the bigger picture, one that you dont want to understand.
No one has tried to deconstruct any of your suggestions? ok, lets start with #1. Be open minded and willing to alter your beliefs. beliefs about what, and who gets to decide what open minded really is. Evidence yes as long as its not altered evidence.

 

[sealybobo]

If you need to live by your own moral code, go on wit' yer bad self. Why even compare & compete with the 10 commandments at all. Do "rational positions" sound more self actualized?
...and how many atheists actually would live that list? Not many or theyed live a few but ignore the rest.

I would think the reason would be self explanatory. In spite of the fact that many of the "commandments" are pedantic, vague (Do not murder.kill), rigid, and gratuitous (Sabbath), Christians continue to hold up the 10 commandments as a valuable, universal code of morality that should be absolute.,

The 10 reasonable positions, are a rational alternative. None of them speak to specific behaviour, and all of them suggest a rational, reasonable way to act in one's own life, and how to behave towards others.

I notice that no one has tried to deconstruct any of the actual positions, but have instead expressed indignation that someone would dare suggest that there might be a better set of behavioural suggestions than the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are part of the bigger picture, one that you dont want to understand.
No one has tried to deconstruct any of your suggestions? ok, lets start with #1. Be open minded and willing to alter your beliefs.

Clearly this list was invented by ancient uneducated and uncivilized men who invented a religion. This is how you get blind obedience.

Ten Commandments List

1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall make no idols.
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4. Keep the Sabbath day holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet.

The first 4 are bullshit. 5, what if your parents sucked? Clearly a lesson in respecting authority even if it molests you. 6 is a no brainer. 7. These men worried about other men banging their wives. 8 and 9 make sense.

10 is bs too. This is bad?

desire, yearn for, crave, have one's heart set on, want, wish for, long for, hanker after/for, hunger after/for, thirst for

 

[featherlite]

If you need to live by your own moral code, go on wit' yer bad self. Why even compare & compete with the 10 commandments at all. Do "rational positions" sound more self actualized?
...and how many atheists actually would live that list? Not many or theyed live a few but ignore the rest.

I would think the reason would be self explanatory. In spite of the fact that many of the "commandments" are pedantic, vague (Do not murder.kill), rigid, and gratuitous (Sabbath), Christians continue to hold up the 10 commandments as a valuable, universal code of morality that should be absolute.,

The 10 reasonable positions, are a rational alternative. None of them speak to specific behaviour, and all of them suggest a rational, reasonable way to act in one's own life, and how to behave towards others.

I notice that no one has tried to deconstruct any of the actual positions, but have instead expressed indignation that someone would dare suggest that there might be a better set of behavioural suggestions than the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are part of the bigger picture, one that you dont want to understand.
No one has tried to deconstruct any of your suggestions? ok, lets start with #1. Be open minded and willing to alter your beliefs.

Clearly this list was invented by ancient uneducated and uncivilized men who invented a religion. This is how you get blind obedience.

Ten Commandments List

1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall make no idols.
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4. Keep the Sabbath day holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet.

The first 4 are bullshit. 5, what if your parents sucked? Clearly a lesson in respecting authority even if it molests you. 6 is a no brainer. 7. These men worried about other men banging their wives. 8 and 9 make sense.

10 is bs too. This is bad?

desire, yearn for, crave, have one's heart set on, want, wish for, long for, hanker after/for, hunger after/for, thirst for

If it turns into an obsession...yes. Covet meaning desire wrongfully or without regard to the rights of others. hmmm, I do believe that IS a major issue in our society today.
Yes honor your father and mother. You added molesting in there. I think it means bieng rebellious and disregarding people who love you and have maybe put your needs above theirs. It also means becoming a caring adult and returning that behavior.

 

[sealybobo]

If you need to live by your own moral code, go on wit' yer bad self. Why even compare & compete with the 10 commandments at all. Do "rational positions" sound more self actualized?
...and how many atheists actually would live that list? Not many or theyed live a few but ignore the rest.

I would think the reason would be self explanatory. In spite of the fact that many of the "commandments" are pedantic, vague (Do not murder.kill), rigid, and gratuitous (Sabbath), Christians continue to hold up the 10 commandments as a valuable, universal code of morality that should be absolute.,

The 10 reasonable positions, are a rational alternative. None of them speak to specific behaviour, and all of them suggest a rational, reasonable way to act in one's own life, and how to behave towards others.

I notice that no one has tried to deconstruct any of the actual positions, but have instead expressed indignation that someone would dare suggest that there might be a better set of behavioural suggestions than the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are part of the bigger picture, one that you dont want to understand.
No one has tried to deconstruct any of your suggestions? ok, lets start with #1. Be open minded and willing to alter your beliefs.

Clearly this list was invented by ancient uneducated and uncivilized men who invented a religion. This is how you get blind obedience.

Ten Commandments List

1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall make no idols.
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4. Keep the Sabbath day holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet.

The first 4 are bullshit. 5, what if your parents sucked? Clearly a lesson in respecting authority even if it molests you. 6 is a no brainer. 7. These men worried about other men banging their wives. 8 and 9 make sense.

10 is bs too. This is bad?

desire, yearn for, crave, have one's heart set on, want, wish for, long for, hanker after/for, hunger after/for, thirst for

If it turns into an obsession...yes. Covet meaning desire wrongfully or without regard to the rights of others. hmmm, I do believe that IS a major issue in our society today.
Yes honor your father and mother. You added molesting in there. I think it means bieng rebellious and disregarding people who love you and have maybe put your needs above theirs. It also means becoming a caring adult and returning that behavior.

You don't have to explain to me what it means or what you think it means. I'm not stupid. I just think this list is lacking big time.

Which one covers bullying?

 

[Czernobog]

The irony is that you don't even recognise how disturbing that statement is. I don't choose to not kill your do, boil your wife in a giant pot to eat, while raping your daughter because I am afraid some invisible Sky Mage is going to send me to the Land of Ickiness for all time. I do so, because I am not a sociopath, and such behaviour is cruel, and reprehensible. If you need a fGod to fear to keep you from doing these kinds of things, that says a whole lot more about your lack of morals, than it does anyone else's.

Now, of course you'll ask, "How do you know it is cruel, and reprehensible," Well, I would simply refer you to rational position #7. Knowing how horrified, distraught, and devastated I would be if someone did that to me, it is only reasonable that another would feel just as horrified, distraught, and devastated, were I to do that to someone else. See? Reasonable moral position without the need for any vengeful invisible Sky Mage.

Be that as it may - many people ARE immoral, reprehensible, and sociopathic, so, if those types of people believing in God keep them a little "safer", what is the harm in that?

The harm is that there is no evidence that a belief in God does any of that. If a persona has no moral principle, or is a sociopath, then they are going to do what they do, God, or no God. so the only thing this belief in God does is create a false sense of security that God will protect his believers from evil people. He won't. He doesn't. There is not God.

Most people don't really give a damn about others feelings. We are all selfish creatures, and, if spinning a tale to get people to focus OFF themselves and on God (who, as it turns out, has 2 great commands, one being that we love each other), what is the harm in that?

And you see, this is yet another harm that Christian mythology does to society. It teaches that everyone is evil, wicked, and devoid of compassion. That is simply not the case. You do know that studies have been done to demonstrate this, right? Most people do care about pothers. Most people want to peacefully co-exist with their neighbours. Now, does this mean that people never put their own interests ahead of the interests of others? Of course not. However, self-preservation is neither evil, nor unhealthy. You also continue to reject the evidence that most people are capable of reasoning, and critical thinking. So, you think it is necessary to create a God to control people. The harm is that when you have created a God to control people, you invariably need someone to "talk to God", and relay his wishes to the people. What you have just created is a system of absolute obedience of faithful with a charismatic leader at its centre. Jim Jones, anyone? David Karesh?

I want to encourage people to think for themselves, not meekly obey the commands of someone else.

 

[sealybobo]

The irony is that you don't even recognise how disturbing that statement is. I don't choose to not kill your do, boil your wife in a giant pot to eat, while raping your daughter because I am afraid some invisible Sky Mage is going to send me to the Land of Ickiness for all time. I do so, because I am not a sociopath, and such behaviour is cruel, and reprehensible. If you need a fGod to fear to keep you from doing these kinds of things, that says a whole lot more about your lack of morals, than it does anyone else's.

Now, of course you'll ask, "How do you know it is cruel, and reprehensible," Well, I would simply refer you to rational position #7. Knowing how horrified, distraught, and devastated I would be if someone did that to me, it is only reasonable that another would feel just as horrified, distraught, and devastated, were I to do that to someone else. See? Reasonable moral position without the need for any vengeful invisible Sky Mage.

Be that as it may - many people ARE immoral, reprehensible, and sociopathic, so, if those types of people believing in God keep them a little "safer", what is the harm in that?

The harm is that there is no evidence that a belief in God does any of that. If a persona has no moral principle, or is a sociopath, then they are going to do what they do, God, or no God. so the only thing this belief in God does is create a false sense of security that God will protect his believers from evil people. He won't. He doesn't. There is not God.

Most people don't really give a damn about others feelings. We are all selfish creatures, and, if spinning a tale to get people to focus OFF themselves and on God (who, as it turns out, has 2 great commands, one being that we love each other), what is the harm in that?

And you see, this is yet another harm that Christian mythology does to society. It teaches that everyone is evil, wicked, and devoid of compassion. That is simply not the case. You do know that studies have been done to demonstrate this, right? Most people do care about pothers. Most people want to peacefully co-exist with their neighbours. Now, does this mean that people never put their own interests ahead of the interests of others? Of course not. However, self-preservation is neither evil, nor unhealthy. You also continue to reject the evidence that most people are capable of reasoning, and critical thinking. So, you think it is necessary to create a God to control people. The harm is that when you have created a God to control people, you invariably need someone to "talk to God", and relay his wishes to the people. What you have just created is a system of absolute obedience of faithful with a charismatic leader at its centre. Jim Jones, anyone? David Karesh?

I want to encourage people to think for themselves, not meekly obey the commands of someone else.

Especially when the main premise is based on a lie.

In the beginning God made...... Sorry but first you have to prove to me this character exists.

If I start a story that I'm presenting as fact to you and I say, "When the flying purple fire breathing dragon killed my friend" do theists just accept that the dragon is real?

I'd be like, "god? Who's that?" And when they told me who he was, I would think they are gullible for believing that story.

There isn't one person living right now that I trust their word on god. How do they know? They don't. They hope. They have faith. They wish.

 

[Czernobog]

If you need to live by your own moral code, go on wit' yer bad self. Why even compare & compete with the 10 commandments at all. Do "rational positions" sound more self actualized?
...and how many atheists actually would live that list? Not many or theyed live a few but ignore the rest.

I would think the reason would be self explanatory. In spite of the fact that many of the "commandments" are pedantic, vague (Do not murder.kill), rigid, and gratuitous (Sabbath), Christians continue to hold up the 10 commandments as a valuable, universal code of morality that should be absolute.,

The 10 reasonable positions, are a rational alternative. None of them speak to specific behaviour, and all of them suggest a rational, reasonable way to act in one's own life, and how to behave towards others.

I notice that no one has tried to deconstruct any of the actual positions, but have instead expressed indignation that someone would dare suggest that there might be a better set of behavioural suggestions than the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are part of the bigger picture, one that you dont want to understand.

Yeah, no it's not. I am intimately familiar with the "bigger picture" of the Commandments from God. Just those first 10 are ludicrous. You really don't want to get into the rest of them. It only gets worse from there...

No one has tried to deconstruct any of your suggestions? ok, lets start with #1. Be open minded and willing to alter your beliefs. beliefs about what, and who gets to decide what open minded really is. Evidence yes as long as its not altered evidence.

All beliefs. One should be open minded about everything they believe. I "believe" that the Earth is round. Should the Flat-Earth society ever present me with objective, verifiable evidence to the contrary, I would certainly examine it, and alter (or not alter) my beliefs accordingly. Do you think that there is anything that you believe that should be that should be immune from examination? As to who 'decides" if you are open-minded, no one. You know whether you are such. REASON dictates whether one is open-minded, and I just gave the criteria. If you are convinced that you have any belief that is immune from examination, then you are close-minded about that belief. And your comment about evidence is sophomoric, and assenine. Obviously, evidence worthy of consideration needs to be objective, measurable, and verifiable. I apologise, I assumed I was opening a discussion with people over the age of five, and we were all familiar with the criteria for valid evidence.

 

[Czernobog]

If you need to live by your own moral code, go on wit' yer bad self. Why even compare & compete with the 10 commandments at all. Do "rational positions" sound more self actualized?
...and how many atheists actually would live that list? Not many or theyed live a few but ignore the rest.

I would think the reason would be self explanatory. In spite of the fact that many of the "commandments" are pedantic, vague (Do not murder.kill), rigid, and gratuitous (Sabbath), Christians continue to hold up the 10 commandments as a valuable, universal code of morality that should be absolute.,

The 10 reasonable positions, are a rational alternative. None of them speak to specific behaviour, and all of them suggest a rational, reasonable way to act in one's own life, and how to behave towards others.

I notice that no one has tried to deconstruct any of the actual positions, but have instead expressed indignation that someone would dare suggest that there might be a better set of behavioural suggestions than the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are part of the bigger picture, one that you dont want to understand.
No one has tried to deconstruct any of your suggestions? ok, lets start with #1. Be open minded and willing to alter your beliefs.

Clearly this list was invented by ancient uneducated and uncivilized men who invented a religion. This is how you get blind obedience.

Ten Commandments List

1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall make no idols.
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4. Keep the Sabbath day holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet.

The first 4 are bullshit. 5, what if your parents sucked? Clearly a lesson in respecting authority even if it molests you. 6 is a no brainer. 7. These men worried about other men banging their wives. 8 and 9 make sense.

10 is bs too. This is bad?

desire, yearn for, crave, have one's heart set on, want, wish for, long for, hanker after/for, hunger after/for, thirst for

If it turns into an obsession...yes. Covet meaning desire wrongfully or without regard to the rights of others. hmmm, I do believe that IS a major issue in our society today.

It also means to eagerly wish for. So, apparently, there are some instances where it is perfectly reasonable to covet things.

Yes honour your father and mother. You added molesting in there. I think it means bieng rebellious and disregarding people who love you and have maybe put your needs above theirs. It also means becoming a caring adult and returning that behavior.

Yeah, that's not what it says not. You're attempting to read meaning into the command that is not evidenced. It says ":Honour your mother and father", Period. Full stop. When I say, having authority over you, "Obey this man," am I implying, in any fashion, any situation in which you are allowed to not obey him? No, I am not. It is a universal, absolute. "Obey. This. Man," There are no qualifiers there. It is an absolute, universal statement. And do you know how you are wrong? Out of the 613 commandments in the entire Books of the Law, do you know how many concerned the appropriate behaviour of parents towards their children? Lemme answer that for you: that would be NONE. As in zero, nada, not a single word written. Do you know how many were written about how to deal with disobedient children? 18. So, parents were not exhorted in any manner to treat their children in any manner, but children were demanded to obey their parents in all things, unambiguously, universally, and absolutely.

Which brings us back to sealybobo 's comment. That law is absurd, and demonstrates a complete disregard for the well-being of children.

 

[featherlite]

If you need to live by your own moral code, go on wit' yer bad self. Why even compare & compete with the 10 commandments at all. Do "rational positions" sound more self actualized?
...and how many atheists actually would live that list? Not many or theyed live a few but ignore the rest.

I would think the reason would be self explanatory. In spite of the fact that many of the "commandments" are pedantic, vague (Do not murder.kill), rigid, and gratuitous (Sabbath), Christians continue to hold up the 10 commandments as a valuable, universal code of morality that should be absolute.,

The 10 reasonable positions, are a rational alternative. None of them speak to specific behaviour, and all of them suggest a rational, reasonable way to act in one's own life, and how to behave towards others.

I notice that no one has tried to deconstruct any of the actual positions, but have instead expressed indignation that someone would dare suggest that there might be a better set of behavioural suggestions than the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are part of the bigger picture, one that you dont want to understand.
No one has tried to deconstruct any of your suggestions? ok, lets start with #1. Be open minded and willing to alter your beliefs.

Clearly this list was invented by ancient uneducated and uncivilized men who invented a religion. This is how you get blind obedience.

Ten Commandments List

1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall make no idols.
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4. Keep the Sabbath day holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet.

The first 4 are bullshit. 5, what if your parents sucked? Clearly a lesson in respecting authority even if it molests you. 6 is a no brainer. 7. These men worried about other men banging their wives. 8 and 9 make sense.

10 is bs too. This is bad?

desire, yearn for, crave, have one's heart set on, want, wish for, long for, hanker after/for, hunger after/for, thirst for

If it turns into an obsession...yes. Covet meaning desire wrongfully or without regard to the rights of others. hmmm, I do believe that IS a major issue in our society today.
Yes honor your father and mother. You added molesting in there. I think it means bieng rebellious and disregarding people who love you and have maybe put your needs above theirs. It also means becoming a caring adult and returning that behavior.

You don't have to explain to me what it means or what you think it means. I'm not stupid. I just think this list is lacking big time.

Which one covers bullying?

I didnt mean to imply you were stupid. I just never understood the word covet to mean anything good. The 1% are practically the definition of this word.
Ok so you think its lacking, Im saying its not the beginning and end of all things Biblical.

Bullying? quite a few do actually. Id say the one who confronts it by themselves regardless of the bs.

 

[sealybobo]

I would think the reason would be self explanatory. In spite of the fact that many of the "commandments" are pedantic, vague (Do not murder.kill), rigid, and gratuitous (Sabbath), Christians continue to hold up the 10 commandments as a valuable, universal code of morality that should be absolute.,

The 10 reasonable positions, are a rational alternative. None of them speak to specific behaviour, and all of them suggest a rational, reasonable way to act in one's own life, and how to behave towards others.

I notice that no one has tried to deconstruct any of the actual positions, but have instead expressed indignation that someone would dare suggest that there might be a better set of behavioural suggestions than the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are part of the bigger picture, one that you dont want to understand.
No one has tried to deconstruct any of your suggestions? ok, lets start with #1. Be open minded and willing to alter your beliefs.

Clearly this list was invented by ancient uneducated and uncivilized men who invented a religion. This is how you get blind obedience.

Ten Commandments List

1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall make no idols.
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4. Keep the Sabbath day holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet.

The first 4 are bullshit. 5, what if your parents sucked? Clearly a lesson in respecting authority even if it molests you. 6 is a no brainer. 7. These men worried about other men banging their wives. 8 and 9 make sense.

10 is bs too. This is bad?

desire, yearn for, crave, have one's heart set on, want, wish for, long for, hanker after/for, hunger after/for, thirst for

If it turns into an obsession...yes. Covet meaning desire wrongfully or without regard to the rights of others. hmmm, I do believe that IS a major issue in our society today.
Yes honor your father and mother. You added molesting in there. I think it means bieng rebellious and disregarding people who love you and have maybe put your needs above theirs. It also means becoming a caring adult and returning that behavior.

You don't have to explain to me what it means or what you think it means. I'm not stupid. I just think this list is lacking big time.

Which one covers bullying?

I didnt mean to imply you were stupid. I just never understood the word covet to mean anything good. The 1% are practically the definition of this word.
Ok so you think its lacking, Im saying its not the beginning and end of all things Biblical.

Bullying? quite a few do actually. Id say the one who confronts it by themselves regardless of the bs.

My point is, if Religions did a good job at teaching people how to be good, how is it that the good little christians run out right after church and start bullying each other. The 10 commandments doesn't even address bullying. So it's an incomplete list.

I am Moses. Here are my 15 commandments from God.....err a....10

 

[Spare_change]

That's kinda the point of #8. No one dictates morality, as morality is a personal issue. Now, this might lead some to incorrectly conclude that laws are meaningless. However, this is because many people make the mistake of believing that legally, and morality are interchangeable. They aren't. Laws are not designed as a set of morals so much as sets of agreed upon social structures to allow people to exist together in a society. This is why laws vary from culture to culture; because, those are the set of rules that culture agreed to abide by to get along.

As to "rewarding" good, and evil, if you're talking about what I think you are, that is a function of neurology, and, I would assume, evolution. If you think about most "good" acts, they are acts that encourage survival of the species. As such, the body, over time, developed an internal system to encourage positive behaviours. Now, this is only a theory, mind you, however the theory does seem to be supported by the fact that aberations do exist. Sociopaths, and other aberrations receive the serotonin "feel good" jolt from behaviours that are entirely different from the "norm". Now, bear in mind, this, again, offers an opportunity for misunderstanding. For many the term "aberration" carries with it a negative connotation. Such is not meant. Rather, it is only meant to imply a genetic, or evolutionary outlier.

As to "affirming" the truth, I refer to you points 1, and 2. There are, of course, thruths that cannot be 100% certain. At such times, it is more rational to attempt to understand what is the most likely to be true, and proceed from there.

Who dictates what is moral or immoral? What makes good rewarding and bad evil? How do you affirm this to be true?

Who do you think dictates what is moral or immoral?

Pope Francis explains 'who am I to judge' in his new book

This Vatican adviser is moving Catholics toward LGBT inclusion

More Catholics support gay ‘marriage’ than ever before. Here’s why

Well, that's easy. They would say "God".

But that's just silly. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

Why there is no god

Why is it so important to you that there be no God?

Scares the hell out of you, doesn't it?

You just might be wrong .... in which case, you are .... as we say ... royally fucked!

The real question is, why is it so important to you that there is a God? If you woke up tomorrow, and discovered, with absolute certainty, that God does not exist, would anything really have changed? Would the earth spin any differently? Would the sun shine any less brightly? Would anything in the natural universe really stop running as it always has?

See, the only people who fear that they are wrong, are the theists. Because, if they have to admit that they are wrong, then they have to admit that they have denied themselves countless opportunities at pleasure, and personal experiences all in the name of living up to the standards of a God that never existed.

Aren't you just the sweetest thing?

Your failure to recognize that there is a God is steeped in arrogance. You have continually stated that since there is no God, Man is the "supreme authority" [my phrase], and, as such, is the ultimate authority.

Then, you posit that we, in fact, don't need an ultimate arbiter, that as thinking, rational human beings, we are able to determine the validity, or fallacy, of our own actions.

And, then, you acknowledge Man's relativism, that man will make decisions based on his own best interests.

And, then, you have the temerity to ask me what is there were no God? Stop and think, man.

Man's penchant for self-forgiveness, coupled with his relativist mindset, ensures that there are no rules, no laws, no covenants, no commandments. All things will be relative - relative to the personal well-being of the man making the judgement. Murder will be disallowed - unless, of course, you murder somebody who has upset the judge of those actions. What you find reprehensible, I find justified - what you believe is appropriate, I find morally repugnant. Consistency is impossible, and justice is simply a dream.

You create a moral code that is dependent on who perceives its pertinence. I note that your "suggestions" (never, ever call them a code!!) offers absolutely nothing in structure nor consequences. There is no penalty for ignoring your "suggestions" - there is no definition of propriety in your actions with others. That which I can justify in my mind is permissible, under your approach. If I kill your mother for walking on my grass, I feel justified (if I hadn't felt justified, I wouldn't have done it) - you feel anger

To suggest that society can survive without rules, without laws, without punishment, without compensation is nonsensical. It defies logic, and it defies the evolution of thought and social interaction.

THAT is your discussion ... it is just plain stupid.

 

[Spare_change]

That's kinda the point of #8. No one dictates morality, as morality is a personal issue. Now, this might lead some to incorrectly conclude that laws are meaningless. However, this is because many people make the mistake of believing that legally, and morality are interchangeable. They aren't. Laws are not designed as a set of morals so much as sets of agreed upon social structures to allow people to exist together in a society. This is why laws vary from culture to culture; because, those are the set of rules that culture agreed to abide by to get along.

As to "rewarding" good, and evil, if you're talking about what I think you are, that is a function of neurology, and, I would assume, evolution. If you think about most "good" acts, they are acts that encourage survival of the species. As such, the body, over time, developed an internal system to encourage positive behaviours. Now, this is only a theory, mind you, however the theory does seem to be supported by the fact that aberations do exist. Sociopaths, and other aberrations receive the serotonin "feel good" jolt from behaviours that are entirely different from the "norm". Now, bear in mind, this, again, offers an opportunity for misunderstanding. For many the term "aberration" carries with it a negative connotation. Such is not meant. Rather, it is only meant to imply a genetic, or evolutionary outlier.

As to "affirming" the truth, I refer to you points 1, and 2. There are, of course, thruths that cannot be 100% certain. At such times, it is more rational to attempt to understand what is the most likely to be true, and proceed from there.

Who dictates what is moral or immoral? What makes good rewarding and bad evil? How do you affirm this to be true?

Who do you think dictates what is moral or immoral?

Pope Francis explains 'who am I to judge' in his new book

This Vatican adviser is moving Catholics toward LGBT inclusion

More Catholics support gay ‘marriage’ than ever before. Here’s why

Well, that's easy. They would say "God".

But that's just silly. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

Why there is no god

Why is it so important to you that there be no God?

Scares the hell out of you, doesn't it?

You just might be wrong .... in which case, you are .... as we say ... royally fucked!

Ever hear of Pascal's wager?

Yes - the question is who loses the most of they are wrong.

 

[Spare_change]

More sanctimonious BS from our resident egotist.

Please explain in detail why the list is BS. Would you rather leave the world worse off than you found it?

i have posted several times the sheer stupidity of the overall approach - attacking each one of those serves no practical purpose.

As for your second question (Would you rather leave the world worse off than you found it?), we have seen over the past 75 years the impact of moving away from God. Surely, you can't believe we are better off for forsaking our moral and ethical code.

 

[Spare_change]

That's kinda the point of #8. No one dictates morality, as morality is a personal issue. Now, this might lead some to incorrectly conclude that laws are meaningless. However, this is because many people make the mistake of believing that legally, and morality are interchangeable. They aren't. Laws are not designed as a set of morals so much as sets of agreed upon social structures to allow people to exist together in a society. This is why laws vary from culture to culture; because, those are the set of rules that culture agreed to abide by to get along.

As to "rewarding" good, and evil, if you're talking about what I think you are, that is a function of neurology, and, I would assume, evolution. If you think about most "good" acts, they are acts that encourage survival of the species. As such, the body, over time, developed an internal system to encourage positive behaviours. Now, this is only a theory, mind you, however the theory does seem to be supported by the fact that aberations do exist. Sociopaths, and other aberrations receive the serotonin "feel good" jolt from behaviours that are entirely different from the "norm". Now, bear in mind, this, again, offers an opportunity for misunderstanding. For many the term "aberration" carries with it a negative connotation. Such is not meant. Rather, it is only meant to imply a genetic, or evolutionary outlier.

As to "affirming" the truth, I refer to you points 1, and 2. There are, of course, thruths that cannot be 100% certain. At such times, it is more rational to attempt to understand what is the most likely to be true, and proceed from there.

Who dictates what is moral or immoral? What makes good rewarding and bad evil? How do you affirm this to be true?

Who do you think dictates what is moral or immoral?

Pope Francis explains 'who am I to judge' in his new book

This Vatican adviser is moving Catholics toward LGBT inclusion

More Catholics support gay ‘marriage’ than ever before. Here’s why

Well, that's easy. They would say "God".

But that's just silly. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

Why there is no god

Why is it so important to you that there be no God?

Scares the hell out of you, doesn't it?

You just might be wrong .... in which case, you are .... as we say ... royally fucked!

This is always the fallback argument for theists. Why is it so important to me? Let me count the ways religions offend me.

I’ve always said I’m ok with generic never been seen god. But don’t tell me he visited and if I don’t believe I’m “royally fucked”

Sorry I won’t be feared into your cult.

There are lots of reasons but I’ll give one. If the people are stupid enough to believe a religion then they can be easily manipulated to believe anything

Ohhhhh !!! You're "offended" by religion ..... I'm sorry, but that gives me a real bad case of "Who Gives A Fuck?" It is not my job to make sure you aren't offended ... it isn't my job to protect your feelings.

You want to feel free to choose your path - but want to deny others the same privilege. While I am not surprised by the sheer effrontery of your belief that you somehow have the answers and should be able to impress them onto others, I am continually amazed by the amazing arrogance of such a belief. It truly knows no bounds.