I have now met a real life creationist.

[Lion IRC]

Give me an example, from Confucius' philosophy, that could benefit me and the rest of humanity.

Love your neighbor as yourself.

...oh wait! Never mind.
That's from the Torah. (Long before Confucius)
I'll keep looking

 

[Lion IRC]

孝, xiào
That's gotta be good for society right?
...oh, sorry. My bad.
That's already one of the Ten Commandments.

 

[funinspace]

Give me an example, from Confucius' philosophy, that could benefit me and the rest of humanity.

Love your neighbor as yourself.

...oh wait! Never mind.
That's from the Torah. (Long before Confucius)
I'll keep looking

Maybe you are impressing yourself, but....

The Pentateuch didn't seem to reach written maturity until the 5th or 6th century BC per the RCC and others. That is hardly big bragging rights over 5th century Confucius living thousands of miles to the east. You may think Moses lived in some fabled but real past, but that is your theology, little more.
http://www.usccb.org/bible/scripture.cfm?bk=Genesis&ch=

The Composition of the Book. For the literary sources of Genesis, see Introduction to the Pentateuch. As far as the sources of Genesis are concerned, contemporary readers can reasonably assume that ancient traditions (J and E) were edited in the sixth or fifth century B.C. for a Jewish audience that had suffered the effects of the exile and was now largely living outside of Palestine.

Of course then there are the Egyptians:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule#Ancient_Egypt

Possibly the earliest affirmation of the maxim of reciprocity, reflecting the ancient Egyptian goddess Ma'at, appears in the story of The Eloquent Peasant, which dates to the Middle Kingdom (c. 2040 – c. 1650 BC): "Now this is the command: Do to the doer to make him do."[12][13] This proverb embodies the do ut des principle.[14] A Late Period (c. 664 BC – 323 BC) papyrus contains an early negative affirmation of the Golden Rule: "That which you hate to be done to you, do not do to another.

 

[Lion IRC]

LOL
Moses - 13th Century before Jesus
Confucius - 5th Century before Jesus

 

[Juma]

Whats more interesting is what else is in those rules given to moses.

Exodus 21:17
Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.

Exodus 21:2-4

2 If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything.
3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him.
4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.

That is really the sign rules made by a God...

 

[DrZoidberg]

Give me an example, from Confucius' philosophy, that could benefit me and the rest of humanity.

Love your neighbor as yourself.

...oh wait! Never mind.
That's from the Torah. (Long before Confucius)
I'll keep looking

How about sorting out any commands that are universal for all human religions and human thought? The golden rule is one such commandment. If we're comparing religions the only thing that is interesting about a religious philosophy is the stuff they've got that other religions don't have. But there's more.

According to current research Leviticus was written down 538–332 BC. And was brought back to Judaism from Babylon. So it was most likely, not an original Jewish idea at all, but something they borrowed from Zoroastrian religious thought.

The core of Zoroastrianism "is good thoughts, good words and good deeds". Zoroastrian thought started with meditation and how to have an attitude to life that is more conducive to a good life. It's pragmatic and focuses on practical application. The goal of Zoroastrian practice is to benefit the individual. And they believe that what benefit you and makes you a more harmonious and balanced person is also good for society as a whole. Which they argue is desirable.

The Zoroastrian commands to control your thoughts and direct them to more useful usages is formulated as "tips from the coach". You don't have to do this, but if you do it'll help you. So the same command moved to Abrahamic thought gets a completely different connotation. Do this otherwise God will punish you. You shouldn't follow these rules for your benefit (or societies benefit), but for God's benefit.

This is why I think Abrahamic religious thought turns all of their faithful into mindless children. There's no appeal to reason in any of it. It's just faith. It's just, do this or else.

Confucianism is a wee bit more complicated to sum up. It's a set of very different ideas that is supposed to fit together as a whole. Partly about the growth of the individual human being, but also about relations between them. My attempt to sum it up is that everybody has their set set of duties in society and they should do their best to fulfil those duties. Confucianism is big on self discipline and self mastery.

The argument for following the confucian rules is that otherwise we'll get chaos in society. Confucians aren't big on change. They want stability and predictability.

So now I've compared Abrahamism, Confucianism and Zoroastrianism. Confusianism and Zoroastrianism appeals to reason and logic. Abrahamism appeals to the raw power and destructive force of God.

So even if you might find wisdom in Abrahamism, what tarnishes it is the dumb foundation of it. The reason by which you're supposed to follow the rules.

 

[Learner]

Meh.
They refused to fight for fascists, but they refused to fight against fascists, too.

They refused to kill for anyone yes.

Here's a question, how do you tell the difference between having balls and just being brainwashed?

By the very example of my previous post.

The JW's having the courage to face the brainwashed nazi's.

 

[Learner]

Additionally, fast forward to this century, and one finds that the more conservative Christian Americans are, the more likely they were to have supported the invasion of Iraq and state (US only of course) sponsored torture.


Other strongly Democrat groups, such as non-whites, are also strongly against the war, with only 35% backing military action.
<snip>
Another poll, carried out by the Pew Research Centre in mid-February, has tracked some of these differences.

It found that evangelical Protestants supported a war against Iraq much more strongly (85% in favour) than Catholics, non-evangelical Protestants and non-religious Americans.

I have no doubt about this as it says (though not sure of the statistics) ; There'll be many coming in the name of Jesus.

I have always said it is profoundly odd when a preist or pastor blesses a warship or tank so to speak.

 

[Keith&Co.]

By the very example of my previous post.
The JW's having the courage to face the brainwashed nazi's.

But i'm not taking that example at face value, that's what i'm asking.
How, exactly, would you show that the JWs were the courageous ones and the Nazis brainwashed? And not the other way around? Or both brainwashed? Or both brave?

How do you tell the difference in the JWs between being brave and just afraid to doubt?

 

[Learner]

By the very example of my previous post.
The JW's having the courage to face the brainwashed nazi's.

But i'm not taking that example at face value, that's what i'm asking.
How, exactly, would you show that the JWs were the courageous ones and the Nazis brainwashed? And not the other way around? Or both brainwashed? Or both brave?

How do you tell the difference in the JWs between being brave and just afraid to doubt?

Pain and torture changes peoples minds so I guess in this regard it would vary ...people still being able to resist despite their suffering would do so by strong belief ... even belief by those who have been brainwashed or perhaps sheer hatred and defiance to an enemy.

But I wouldn't doubt at all that a person who thought he was "not" brave would surprisingly be brave if he or she did so for the love of someone very close or for the love of God. The several options you gave may be true to some degree for all types of different people.

 

[funinspace]

LOL
Moses - 13th Century before Jesus

Yep, pretty funny. Moses who? What Exodus? Or should I say Moshe, which in the Egyptian language means "son of"...kind of a funny name. Sounds like the story tellers knew very little of Egypt by the time his fairly tales were getting solidified. Maybe Moshe is hanging out with Jason and his Golden Fleece, after all archaeologists think they have found their family grounds. So there must be a Golden Fleece...

Confucius - 5th Century before Jesus

Yes, a real living person who wrote a lot of stuff in the 5th century.

And this still ignores the Egyptian The Eloquent Peasant tale from at least the 17th century BC which has the first recorded maxim of reciprocity.

 

[Learner]

Yep, pretty funny. Moses who? What Exodus? Or should I say Moshe, which in the Egyptian language means "son of"...kind of a funny name. Sounds like the story tellers knew very little of Egypt by the time his fairly tales were getting solidified. Maybe Moshe is hanging out with Jason and his Golden Fleece, after all archaeologists think they have found their family grounds. So there must be a Golden Fleece...

Well people are making comparisons with Sargon in Sumeria with Moses where some also incredibly spoke with semetic languages way back then , obviously there is the issue as who plagarised who. Besides Moses may seem to have quite a few meanings in Egyptian apparently; Child or son. Interestingly "son of" may have some correlation with the idea that some researches think Moses is not the full name -a "son of" something as in Thutmose but would need looking into a little more of course.

 

[DrZoidberg]

They refused to kill for anyone yes.

In the face of something like fascism, that's being an enabler. That's nothing to be proud about.

 

[Keith&Co.]

But i'm not taking that example at face value, that's what i'm asking.
How, exactly, would you show that the JWs were the courageous ones and the Nazis brainwashed? And not the other way around? Or both brainwashed? Or both brave?

How do you tell the difference in the JWs between being brave and just afraid to doubt?

Pain and torture changes peoples minds so I guess in this regard it would vary ...people still being able to resist despite their suffering would do so by strong belief ... even belief by those who have been brainwashed or perhaps sheer hatred and defiance to an enemy.

But I wouldn't doubt at all that a person who thought he was "not" brave would surprisingly be brave if he or she did so for the love of someone very close or for the love of God. The several options you gave may be true to some degree for all types of different people.

So, really, you have no way to tell, but you're emotionally drawn to admire one over the other.

 

[wilson]

The video you posted is an excellent example. This is actually something I like about Jehovas witnesses. They've accepted that the Bible is out of date, and they've created a companion piece to it. An update.

Is there something in their literature that says so? Please point me to it.

"Studies in the Scriptures" I've actually read it.

With no proof for this allegation forthcoming, this charge is sufficiently debunked.

 

[Lion IRC]

It's no surprise that the so-called golden rule appears in so many civilisations.
We are created moral beings in God's likeness.
Confucius and Moses both understood the transcendence of the moral law.

 

[Juma]

We are created moral beings in God's likeness..

No we are not.
We are the same species and we are all from the same small group of humans.
Not so strange that we have similar values.

 

[Juma]

Is there something in their literature that says so? Please point me to it.

"Studies in the Scriptures" I've actually read it.

With no proof for this allegation forthcoming, this charge is sufficiently debunked.

You aint that bright, are you?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It's no surprise that the so-called golden rule appears in so many civilisations.
We are created moral beings in God's likeness.
Confucius and Moses both understood the transcendence of the moral law.

Don't forget murder, rape and genocide. Part of the package deal I suppose.

 

[Lion IRC]

That's my point.
We recognise the immorality of those sins/evils.
If we had no internal moral compass rape would be nothing more than a fetish.