Here is a video that discusses some causes for moral empathetic behavior. Of particular interest is the evidence that we are wired to want to help.

Daniel Goleman: Why aren't we all Good Samaritans?

self-esteem?

This is an EXCELLENT video!!!

I always argue against rationality and reason as a basis for religious beliefs and dogma - because one cannot be sure they have self-corrected for the last time necessary, and if they are not informed with love, can be terribly misused. (Besides that few of us are trained to be scientifically logical, and 'rationalizations' are often unconsciously or maybe purposefully used to prop up ones self-esteem.) If one cannot be sure why insist religiously and persist in beliefs and dogmas based on reason?

The only basis for a true spirituality is love. Religion should be nothing but love. And I agree with you that the Bible does not always promote love. Therefore the Bible is not an infallible quide when taken at face value and interpreted literally. It needs to be 'demythologized' to find spiritual meaning which can actually be applied to living one's life while one is still alive.




It should be love. Perfect love obliterates fear. 'Any man who fears', some one has said, 'has not been made perfect in love.' The reverse is also true, no doubt, - perfect fear casts out love and anyone who does not love is full of fear.

I may have been unclear. I was promoting the idea that reason is a much better basis for ethics than holy books. I don't have much use for dogma, and beliefs should be evaluated on an individual basis.



I would say that reason needs to be informed by love and I would go as far as to say we need to start with love. And reason certainly can recognize the benefits of love.

You are correct, in that choice is usually based upon reason given the recognised options of the individual. It is not a haphazard unfolding of events that one would exepect from the throw of dice....


I disagree with this, though. As stated before, choice is usually based upon reasons given the recognised options of the individual. In Lucifer's case, he has the vast knowledge of how things work in the universe, from atoms to planets, from pschology to physics, from sculpture to music...I expect that there was much that wasn't known to him and the only thing left that wasn't actually experienced/known was God.



This I disagree with. Judgements of guilt are not necessarily based upon cause and effect. For example, I am human..guilty. I am prone to mess up my life and am prone to be hasty....guilty. When I get motivation, I tend to get a project done....guilty. I am, therefore I sometimes mess up...guilty.

Since God is the source for knowledge and is the Creator, living within His guidlines would be reasonable and an act of faith. But to go against the Creator, and live outside those guidlines, would be to go against the Creator. Since Lucifer was told "No" in his desire to be a part of the Godhead, his rebellion/choice is the source of the sin, and an act of illogic and it has repercussions. To give a reason for sin is to excuse it. And there is no excuse for sin.



Trust....Because I was born a sinner, I had no hope. God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit came up with a plan to show,
1]They are trustworthy of my trust
2]They have a plan.
3]They can help with this life if I will experiment with them.



Which also shows that Christianity is not a goverment program, it is an individual program. It also shows that Lucifer/Satan is avidly persueing a program to alter peoples perceptions of that individual program. It also shows that Satan is manifesting his understanding and promoting his salvation plan, which is just a little bit [but significantly] off God's salvation plan. And since Satan is a controling force in this world, no one is willing to factor that into thier equation for life. But where the law abounded, grace did much more abound. For every act of evil in this world, what is not noticed, is the hundreds acts of kindness [for each evil one]that make this life worth living.That is somehting that is not publicized and need to be brought to the forefront of one's thinking.



Reason does not always self correct then, since it is not perfect. I guess that is the reason why there are miscarriages of Justice. It was reason that killed the supposed witches at the Salem Witch Trials. No chance for self correction there...'cept to say, "Sorry we hanged you"... Reason is dependant upon assumptions...erroneous assumptions will lead one to erroreous conclusions thru flawless reasoning.

And religious assumptions do change. That is the reason there are different churches within the Christian denominations. The assumption for Catholisim is different than Protestantism. People, OTOH, don't like change....and stay with what they are familiar with...Human nature, however varied, is still the same.



Trust is a fleeting thing. It is hard to maintain a feeling of trust when you are constantly bombarded with negitivity for making assumptions of trust. Christainity is a belief of trust in a world of negativity. And you can see evidence of how much we trust by our discussions....which all too often is to our detriment.

Ah, yes!

But as that old adage goes - 'Experience is the best teacher.' For if one has never been on the receiving end of human or divine love, it is harder to recognize the supremacy of love over other motivations. But when experienced there is no doubt about it. And if it is so good to be on the recieving end - it is even more satisfing to be on the giving end.

But first one must recieve.

Well said, Mr. Allen....

This might imply that there had to be a Divine source of love outside of humanity, and this might be possible. To me, the nature of this Divine source and its motivations, beyond the expression of love, would be a mystery. And there are certainly alternative myths to account for love such as a Divine like collective consciousness or an inner Divine self that is waiting to be awakened, etc. etc.

But I find no evidence that this would be from the god described in the Bible or would include the complex theology of salvation and the required death of a god's son to satisfy some cosmic court of law. All of these myths find their parallels within many sources available to those who wrote the Bible.

To me, the job of an all knowing God is only to serve, because this God has no needs, this God is all powerful, this God knows the end of the story. Who would want that job? Who would exchange an eternity of exploration and wonder to take on the job of maintaining the universe? Only a very immature being would assume that they could take on that responsibility. This would require an extremely high amount of self deception. And self deception requires a threat to one's self. What would threaten Lucifer unless he was delusional?

Anyone who does this, even within humanity, is considered to have a mental disease. I find that a desire to be God, first of all, would be highly unlikely for an intelligent being, and, second of all, would require that Lucifer be created with a pre-existing flaw.



This is a misuse of the word "guilt." Guilt implies the feeling of guilt, which is based in a form of fear.



What you have listed would more accurately be labeled as facts. You certainly wouldn't be punished or judged for being human. To apply this word in this way is to paint the world with eyes of judgement. Who wants to live in a court of law? Who wants to live in the fear of judgement, where every characteristic and state of being is described in terms of being guilty?



It would be wise to follow someone who demonstrates superior wisdom, but you have not demonstrated that the Bible, the so called Word of God, is that source of wisdom.



What if there is nothing to be cosmically saved from? What if everything we need to move through this life time is presently available? What if there is no Lucifer?



But this was reason based on Christian religious assumptions. This was based on texts in the Old Testament. "Allow no witch to live." This was based on fear and shame based thinking that is clearly outlined in the Bible. Like I said before you can find some bright spots in the Bible, but these don't negate some very violent pictures of a tyrannical god. And no one seems to have a clear picture on which parts of the Bible we should follow and which parts are human based.



I like to be in a state of trust, but I have learned to not trust those who tell me that things that don't make sense to me are simply god's mysterious ways. When I have pursued the truth through love informed reason, the results have been far better. There are insights into one's self and to the world around us that are freely available if you aren't afraid to consider them.

The greatest negativity that I see in the world come from Christian voices. Not that all Christian voices are negative, but I believe, from personal experience, and from observation of many Christian speakers and people, that at the core of Christian theology there is shame and fear.

There are certainly those who have figured out how to live outside this core, but for the most part, these Christians aren't considered Christians by most other Christian believers.

Uninformed trust is dangerous and the myth of Eve demonstrates this quite dramatically. Like I said before, she could of used some mistrust while talking to the serpent.

I have also learned that my senses are all that I have and unless someone demonstrates a clear ability to see in better ways than I know how, I am true to my own senses. And when I see someone who knows how to see better, then I go and learn how to do that. This learning occurs much quicker if I leave my ego at the door, I take personal responsibility, and I commit to rigorous honesty.

This method has some sources in my Christian upbringing, but they are not unique to Christian belief. The other flaw that I see in Christian belief is its exclusivity. This creates a situation where nothing else is considered outside of Christian belief and from what I observe, keeps many Christians ignorant and blind to the many insights of other's experiences.

I have found that if one is really serious about the pursuit of truth, one has to be willing to consider even the most uncomfortable truths or in my experience, even the most fearful ones.