Sorry, one account of a son (not even the actual person) saying that his father new what he was doing was wrong, does not account for Hitler, Hussein, etc. They held worldviews that said killing for the reasons they presupposed were true and it is a baseless claim to say that their beliefs were actually trumped by a 'common sense' that said it was wrong. They can only truly believe one or the other! These are mutually exclusive viewpoints - either they believed their worldview truly (which granted the execution of numerous people) or they knew truly what they were doing was wrong. You can't have it both ways.
What are you talking about?
Jim Jones, Hitler, and Hussein all truly believed what they were doing was wrong. They also truly knew that they cared more about their own power than their moral actions. It's not contradictory at all to say that.
Wait a second here. So any who doesn't lineup with your view of 'common sense' has a psychological problem? How do you know that your common sense is 'correct' and someone who holds different views has the 'psychological problem'? Are you claiming that your intuition tells you certain things are right and certain things are wrong and that this intuition is present in everyone EXCEPT those with psychological problems?
Yup. It's fair to say that someone who believes that it's wrong for anyone to kill them, but it's O.K. for them to kill anyone else, has a psychological problem. Not to mention when we look at these people and find chemical imbalances in their brains, we can definitively say that yes, there is a problem with them.
You are just reaffirming that 'do unto others....' is not the sole absolute moral you abide by. So what other exceptions do you abide by outside of this principle? And what binds me to follow ANY of these principles?
That's pretty much it. I've already explained how it's common sense.
Let me put it this way: 99.999999% of people in the world don't want to get killed, burgled, raped, etc. And the only way to accomplish that goal and make everyone happy is for everyone in the world to agree not to do those things to each other.
Bingo. Welcome to the doctrine of 'Fallen Man' that is laced throughout the entire Bible. Seem unfair? Well while through this one man, Adam, comes death, so through one man comes eternal life - Jesus Christ.
So let me get this straight.
God made people. When he made Adam and Eve, he deliberately put that tree in the Garden of Eden for no real reason and said "DON'T EAT THIS!" Now, remember, he created humans, and he created us in a special way so that when you say not to do something with no real explanation, we tend to want to do it. And, he created us with the full foreknowledge that Adam and Eve would eat the fruit, and he didn't bother creating us in a different way so that they would not. They eat the fruit, and they condemn all mankind.
It seems awfully apparent to me that it's really God's own fault that we're sinful.
And after that, he sends his Son down to save some ofmankind, only the ones that had the personality trait of being willing to believe without evidence. Why did Adam condemn all, but Jesus only saved some?
		Upvote
		
		
		0