Some theist state that there religion is good because it gives them a moral code. But if that is the case, then why let a religion with a good moral code die? The Greek Myths may not have a set moral code, but I will use the examples set by the Greek heroes as morals.
On killing:
The Greek heroes had no aversion to killing, at least to there enemies.
Christianity swings both ways on this one. They say "Thout shalt not kill" but have billions killed in holey ways.
I will consider this one a tie, as it depends on how you look at it.
On Woman:
The Greek myths value women to a degree. There were several goddesses and some Greek heroes even went to the extend of going into the land of the dead to save there wives.
The Greeks are all for it. Many of there heroes use intellect and wit to get out of sticky situations and they have a goddess assigned to wisdom.
The Bible seems to not care about any wisdom that is not gods and there heroes, such as "Peter and John ... were unlearned and ignorant men", and things telling you to be ignorant.
Point Greek.
lies:
The Greek heroes and gods lie often to save themselves and others trouble. They don't even pretend to be benevolent.
The God of the Bible have harsh punishments for small lies. It once more swings both ways on this, as god and his prophets had lied. "Say, I pray thee, thouart my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee."
So a point to either depending on how you look at it.
Steeling:
The Greeks have little problem with it and actually have a god of thieves.
The Bible still swings both ways. The tend commandments say not to steel, but then god turns around and tells them to "Burrow" the Egyptians things. And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment:
Still depends on how you look at it.
Sex:
The Greek had no problem with sex. It created many of there heroes and filled their stories.
The Bible swings both ways(Surprise surprise!). The ten commandments and other things say it is bad, yet angels, prophets, and ordinary people have sex all the time in the stories. Some times with people they are not even married to or even family members, as in the case of Drunken Lot.
Depends how you look at it still.
Sacrifice:
The Greek sacrificed periodically for the enjoyment of there non omnipotent gods. They did not sacrifice human often in the stories, save if they really pissed a god off, and even then they some times live happily ever after.
The Christian god was not opposed to human sacrifices, he even killed a few for that purpose, yet the newer books state to not sacrifice any more because of the divine human sacrifice.
Still depends on how you look at it...
In conclusion, why choose Christianity from a purely moral bases if other religions that you think are totally preposterous have equil, some times better, morals?
Look, homosexuality is natural. It isn't some sinful and shameful depraved act. Just as sex between a man and woman shows love, trust and the desire to please - the same applies for homosexual sex. Sure, you won't have your own kids if you are homosexual (unless you entered some sham heterosexual relationship) but you can adopt. Adopting a child is surely in line with the bible? Providing a loving home, a second chance at happiness and a place in your heart is surely the most important part of adopting children - not whether the parents are two dudes, two chicks or one of each?
When translating the New Testament into English, scholars arrive at the Greek word ÏειÏ?Î¶Ï (which is translitered as peirazo) and, when translating the Old Testament into English, they come to the Hebrew word transliterated as Nacah or the Hebrew word transliterated as Bachan. In all three of these cases, they face a choice of which English word to use and, depending on the specific verse (as well as the specific version), all three of those words are interchangeably translated as âtempt,â âtest,â âtrial,â âprove,â or âexamine.â
I'm sorry... This just make me lul so hard... Hippocratic, as in the oath that that doctors take swearing to do no harm, or hypocritical?
The only reference I could find towards lesbians in the bible was Romans 1:26, and that's from an extremely critical viewpoint on women, so I guess you could say that they didn't hate lesbians as much as male homosexuals, great use of double standard there.
Look, homosexuality is natural. It isn't some sinful and shameful depraved act. Just as sex between a man and woman shows love, trust and the desire to please - the same applies for homosexual sex.
True, for the sake of argument let's say it isn't natural. It is still an acted clearly based on two people loving, trusting, and desiring one another. This has no effect on those who do not feel that way.
I don't usually trust wikipedia as a reliable source... It could've been anyone, including anyone who can say a lie very well. There are many things on wikipedia that are false.
Then why are you attempting to convince me that your opinion about my subject is wrong and that you are right? Isn't that Hippocratic?
You just stated that you can not influence my judgment, yet you still try? Have you been paying regard to anything that has been said in your own post?
I'm trying to get you to understand the flawed logic in this thread. I'm not trying to prove to you that you are wrong, but the thread should've never been made.
Anyway, personally, Christianity is flawed in the morals it teaches. Mostly because of its restrictions on certain victimless crimes.
Look, homosexuality is natural. It isn't some sinful and shameful depraved act. Just as sex between a man and woman shows love, trust and the desire to please - the same applies for homosexual sex.
Um how do you get gay? Because I'm pretty sure you can't pass a gay gene...
