If we remove the Bible as our anchor in society which tells us what is right and what is wrong, if morality hasn't been given to us from above but rather we've arrived at it from below through majority rules and consensus, wouldn't that mean that eventually every form of degeneracy will be acceptable? What's keeping us fixed at a certain understanding of morality without God?

What is a 'civilized society' anyway? What sort of meaning can a 'civilized' society get out of life with no God? Drugs, sex, and alcohol? This is exactly what's going to spur the events that lead to the antichrist and the 'new one world religion'.

First they destroyed the Christian society - then they gave you pre-marital sex and drugs - and then lucifer will reveal himself.

Even with God, most people stray away and become degenerates anyway.

But for many, it still helps them to be good or at least learn lessons.

Right now, in what has become a largely secular society in the West, we're barely hanging on to Judeo-Christian values. They still underpin our general morality, as well as our laws, but they're fading. As they fade, they are replaced with pseudo-religions like LGBT+, climate alarmism, hedonism etc.

When you leave a moral vacuum as large as religion, it's quickly filled by pseudo-religions which tend to embrace, glorify and promote degeneracy.

Religions are historically too regional in nature to have a global unifying effect. They cause division between sects due to their differences in origin and story

We need the threat of aliens to unite us

Once the threat of aliens unites us, real or not, we will rely on our leaders to make the necessary decisions regarding social norms, morality, law and order for the entire earth

This is straight from the NWO playbook

i think everyone needs to let go

No retard

I’ll never understand why religious theocrats think you need religion for common sense morals

They’ve already been ingrained due to us becoming a civilized and technologically advanced society

We’re not in the era of ****ing Barbarians or caveman anymore

Why do religious people want to push Christianity on everyone and society is the better question ?

How does that not violate people’s personal liberty and freedom ? It’s like they want communism or socialism just as much as hardcore liberals

Christianity teaches us that we are all sinners and that we are born of sin - since our ancestors were deceived by the evil one hiding inside of a snake.

Not sure what the other religions teach - but according to my own research it's that talking snakes imparting you with 'life advice' and
wisdom' are a 'good thing'

Christianity teaches us that the talking snake is causes of all the problems.

What ingrained them in the first place? God's law. People following Christianity. We no longer live as barbarians and have civilized societies directly because people adopted and operated on the morals given to us by God.

Maybe morals seem "common sense" to you, most likely because your parents or their parents passed down traditional societal values and boundaries, but those common sense morals are becoming less common with the hoards of people adopting the "do what thou wilt" lifestyle. Dissolution of boundaries is in direct correlation with people denying God's existence.

Why are you so against God's moral law having its place in society? Is it because if you acknowledged its legitimacy that you would then suddenly become responsible for your sins? Is your pornography and hedonism really that precious to you that you literally recoil at the suggestion that society operates better when Christian values are its foundation?

Snakes can reproduce spontaneously. How can you trust an animal which can literally go fuk itself?

Maybe in the past to create order and control (based on fear, mind you), not anymore. If you're a religious person and it's an important coping strategy for you, all the more power to you. Just keep it to yourself and don't try to inflict your views on others.

Nope.

I asked a simple question; whether following the Bible makes for a more civilized and better functioning society/Does rejection of the Bible mean morals are therefore being determined by consensus, eventually resulting in "anything goes" and total degeneracy?

One of the first responses was "Why do religious people want to push Christianity on everyone and society?"

You only have to mention the Bible and people start spiralling and ranting about "religious people always wanting to push and inflict Christianity on everything!". I wonder why that is.

Those same people don't bat an eyelid when our children are having the LGBT agenda inflicted upon them. Which is an example of morals being determined by consensus. If the majority decide it is acceptable, then so it is. In todays Godless society we're continuously being pressed to accept new forms of degeneracy.

It's simple immaturity. You'll find that the people who claim Christians constantly "bible-bash" everyone (they don't), have problems with authority, probably stemming from unresolved issues with their parents. To them, religion is like a parent telling them what to do and how to live their life.

Brb, "be kind to people", "don't steal", "don't kill". Reaction - "You're not the boss of me!!!!"

This has more to do with the form of the snake and how demonic beings can take possession of themIt depends on who you ask - an atheist or other 'well informed' individuals would say morals are intrinsic and built in from 'millions of years of evolution', or they may quote some buddhist or even biblical quote that provide insight and wisdom.

A Christian and satanist/luciferian know where morals and anti-morals come from - it's like when you have a wife and some kids.

WHo do they get their morals from? Their father or the TV. Where does the father get his morals from? HIS Heavenly father or the TV? Where does the TV get their morals from? Perhaps an unheavenly 'father'?

That's good lol. Same can be said about any other belief system, regardless of what it is.

To answer OP more directly: absolutely not.

Why do religious people need someone to tell them what to do, and how to behave?

Why can’t you just look at someone, and that one spot in your brain that recognizes human faces be like “hey, that thing is similar to me. I don’t want anything bad to happen to me, and he possesses a lot of the same qualities I do. I don’t want people to be chitty to me, and he probably has similar feelings, I don’t need to be a dick to them”

It is called human empathy. A lack of it is what make psychopaths psychopaths.

So do you or do not have this sensation?

I do think on the aggregate/marco level...that a society is better off with a "God" and people believing that there is some sort of divine accountability for their actions. There's a whole lot of degenerate mouth breathers, and the like, and putting a fear of God in them is more likely to help mitigate shyt behavior imo.

You can call that "cope" all you want (and I'm not at all Christcel or anything - I'm Agnostic), but it's just being honest about human nature - which contains many unsavory aspects. Also, you have to be in serious denial to not see the absence of some sort of "God"/spiritual aspect/whatever leaves a vacuum for a lot of people that can often end up filled with negative shyt. Why was a big part of the Communist Revolution and the "Great Leap Forward" stamping out religion and cultural traditions?


Yeah, but I think the question is overall does it provide a net benefit to society at large? I suspect that it probably does.

This might be a shock to you but most people really aren't a good as you would like to think they are....

As a matter of fact most people are selfish *******s.

[QUOTE=Polaris post_id=1678752243]I do think on the aggregate/marco level...that a society is better off with a "God" and people believing that there is some sort of divine accountability for their actions. There's a whole lot of degenerate mouth breathers, and the like, and putting a fear of God in them is more likely to help mitigate shyt behavior imo.

You can call that "cope" all you want (and I'm not at all Christcel or anything - I'm Agnostic), but it's just being honest about human nature - which contains many unsavory aspects. Also, you have to be in serious denial to not see the absence of some sort of "God"/spiritual aspect/whatever leaves a vacuum for a lot of people that can often end up filled with negative shyt. Why was a big part of the Communist Revolution and the "Great Leap Forward" stamping out religion and cultural traditions?

[img]https://d24fkeqntp1r7r.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/18215350/EX6NJN-e1545170198509.img]




Yeah, but I think the question is overall does it provide a net benefit to society at large? I suspect that it probably does.[/QUOTE]I agree that the human invented institution of religion does have many benefits on the individual and collective level. I do not deny that for a second.

But a threat of eternal punishment or a reward of eternal pleasure or something like that should not be the only motivation we have to be good people.

And let’s be real here, the integrity of a lot of the religious institutions has been destroyed for a long time.

Religious people who do the lip service and “accept God” can still be really chitty human beings.

Christianity is supposed to save YOU from eternal damnation - it's not supposed to benefit human society... not primarily... although it is a secondary benefit of Christianity.

What is society anyway? Getting rich until you don't know what else to do except explore various forms of sexual perversion and degeneracy?

This is what people are referring to when they are talking about 'great civilizations' - they always revert back to sodomy and ****philia.

Yep, that's why I find the "everyone is inherently good and will self regulate" type thing some silly libtard level nonsense/cope. It doesn't mean there aren't a fair number of people who that largely applies to, but there's also a lot that it absolutely does not. Would a fear of God help keep some of those who are not in line (or at the very least decrease the amount of their shyt behavior)? In a lot of cases, probably to some degree.

Absolutely! Just look at the clown world that the western society has become...

You're an idiot who knows nothing about history. Most of our current legal and political system was created by following the ideals of the Roman republic. The founding fathers knew religion was bullchit which is why they created a secular system free from the influence of religion. Just like Ancient Rome. The religious wars fought throughout Europe and the Middle East for a thousand years after the fall of the Roman empire proved just how silly religion can be. Law and government has existed in ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, China, and Europe. And none of them believed in the Christian sky fairy. You don't need God to have law and order. You certainly don't need Christianity or Judaism to prosper.

All of those societies did have religion(s) though. Rome was very religions, and worship/attending religious festivals was basically seen as a civic duty.

By the third and fourth centuries AD, it is proper to speak of a Greco-Roman tradition of thought. The Romans tried to limit the influence of Greek thought in the early days of the Empire. However, over time Greek ideas joined with Roman conceptions and a new tradition of thought was forged. In some respects, the Hellenistic world became Romanized. This is just one more example of how the Romans succeeded by assimilated other cultures. Furthermore, the Greco-Roman tradition refers as much to classical and Hellenistic Greece as it does the days of the Roman Republic and the Empire. Both civilizations produced a world view which we could only call pagan. This world view was secular through and through. Gods and goddesses were common to both civilizations and yet as time passed it was the virtuous life of the good citizen that was of supreme importance. The emphasis was on living the good life in the here and now, whether in the city state or the cosmopolis.

The Greco-Roman tradition was fashioned over the one thousand year history of the classical world, the world of Greece and Rome. The Renaissance of the 14th through 16th centuries attempted to revive the ideals of the classical world, and so the humanists of the Renaissance tried to imitate the humanism of centuries past. Humanist scholars took great pains to study the texts of the ancient world, not just to "harvest" the virtuous life of classical man, but to learn classical Greek and Latin. If ancient texts needed to be studied, then they needed to be studied in the language in which they were composed. What had happened between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance was the bastardization of classical languages. As scholars, the humanists needed the classical world for its language as much as it did for its ideas.

However, it was also during the age of the Pax Romana that this pagan tradition, this Greco-Roman tradition, was joined by another important tradition, by another world view. This world view is called the Judeo-Christian tradition. That is, the ethical and ordering principles of the Jewish and Christian faiths.

The Greco-Roman tradition was secular: it proposed no one God and formal religion as we know it today, did not exist. While the Greeks would pay homage to their many deities, as would the Romans, there is no doubt that they placed their true faith in the hands of man. In other words, humanism: man the thinker, man the doer, man the maker. For the Greeks, man was endowed with Reason, the capacity to think and use his intellect. This initially took the form of glorifying the city state: the city state was the world. Anything outside the city state was somehow inferior, barbarian. In an important respect such an attitude was narrow in focus and provided the Greeks with a tunnel vision that prevented them from further growth during the Hellenistic Age.

The Greeks were also obsessed with the personal cultivation of the individual. "Know thyself," repeated Socrates. The good man ought to seek the good life and so become a good citizen, a virtuous citizen. And a collection of virtuous citizens would constitute the virtuous city state. The only way that the good life was at all possible was through personal examination. Or, as Socrates again argued, "the unexamined life is not worth living."

Above all, the Greeks asked questions. What is knowledge? What is the state? What is beauty? What is virtue? What is justice? Was the best form of government? The Greeks, in the last analysis, were thinkers rather than doers. In time, the Greek world view came or to be based on the intellect more than it was on action. The best illustration of this world view -- a view of thought rather than of action-- was the Stoic and Epicurean therapies of the Hellenistic Age. These therapies taught resignation in the face of chaos and disorder -- they taught men to resign themselves in private reflection and thought.

The Romans, on the other hand, were doers, they were men of action. They succeeded in translating into action what the Greeks had only thought possible. The Romans also asked questions about the world, about nature, and about man. To be sure, they inhabited the same world as the Hellenistic Greeks. They understood and accepted the chaos and disorder of the world. However, they were clearly more prepared to develop their thought of the world in relation to what kind of world in which they wanted to live. The Romans also had the example of the Greeks and their history. In other words, the Romans were cognizant of what the Greeks had accomplished and not accomplished. The Greeks had no such history to which they could refer.

The end result for the Romans was that they managed to create their own world and they called it the Roman Empire. And their world view became embodied in a pagan cult. This cult was nothing less than the patriotic worship of Rome itself. And throughout the Empire we find the expression Genius Populi Romani celebrated by all Romans. If anything sustained the Empire, it was the conception of the "Genius of the Roman People." The Romans were taught to believe that the destiny of Rome was the destiny of the world and this became embodied in a civil religion which embraced the genius of the Roman people. This civil religion was a secular, pagan religion, in which all men devoted their energies toward public service to state. It was their duty to serve the state. It was virtuous. These duties consisted of service and responsibility because only through responsible service would one come to know virtue.

There's a subset that will pretend to be that way to manipulate

https://www.learnreligions.com/chris...fathers-700789
And on and on and on there are dozens more quotes like those from all the founding fathers found at the link above.






As far as Opie’s question, yes, I think a relationship with God is possibly the most important thing a person can build in their life. Not getting into the religious aspect of it, but it is clear that a strong relationship with God is beneficial on a personal level, and crucial on a societal level. Without a foundation(unwavering set of morals and ethics found via God) our foundation is built in quicksand and quickly slips into tyranny and ClownWorld honkery, as we see in the world today.