news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110130/sc_nm/us_fo...
I doubt some of his numbers. 1 billion for new tech? 30% of the land mass dedicated to animals (even if we consider the crops used to feed said animals)?
And this is stem cell research. Thus pure evil!
Maybe, but it is probably tasty evil... or at least better tasting than Taco Bell evil.
'cause it would be really awesome if, in twenty or thirty years, you can just have one of these mini bio-reactors in your basement producing all the protein you need for your diet. The closer we get to being able to have people be self-sufficient in their own homes is the closer we get to being able to sustain life on an inhospitable planet.
________
1Banana peels, left overs, unwanted relatives. You know the kinda stuff.
Hrm... I wonder just what it'll take to "feed" these meat-producing bio-reactors. Will they be something you can have in the basement and just dump your organic waste1 into?
'cause it would be really awesome if, in twenty or thirty years, you can just have one of these mini bio-reactors in your basement producing all the protein you need for your diet. The closer we get to being able to have people be self-sufficient in their own homes is the closer we get to being able to sustain life on an inhospitable planet.
________
1Banana peels, left overs, unwanted relatives. You know the kinda stuff.
Quite true. However, I doubt that the people who run things on this planet want us galavanting off onto other planets, in or out of our own solar system. They prefer to keep their cattle close and under their control.
Quite true. However, I doubt that the people who run things on this planet want us galavanting off onto other planets, in or out of our own solar system. They prefer to keep their cattle close and under their control.
Unless they can profit off of sending you to another planet.
The main problem with space travel is propulsion. It takes forever to travel to the next celestial body. Solve that and we might be able to actually explore space. Even if they can grow food, does a mission of exploration mean anything if it takes 50 years to just go somewhere?
Do I dare for the rest? How can I resist?
As for keeping cattle close:
/clear throat
Yes, you are right! Religious leaders promise their followers Heaven by keeping them on a close leash on... Earth.
/to himself
Not bad,Goldo, but needs improvement.
So do the oligarchs (people who pretend to be capitalists) and the socialists, who view us as cattle, on one way or another.
Look at what Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge did in Cambodia, such as killing anyone who wore eyeglasses (they interpreted that as a sign of someone who did a lot of reading, and thus was intellectual and could see through the scam of socialism/communism), and how they would have their own version of skeet shooting, but using villagers' babies instead of clay pigeons. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
As for my faith, I am a Christian, and my wife and I attend a little independent Baptist church. We have no affiliation with any other church, Baptist or otherwise. We prefer to distance ourselves from psuedo-Christian psychopaths like Freddy Phelps.
History. And yes, socialists and communists have the same goals in mind, but the communists are in a much bigger hurry, and are much more willing to shed blood.
Look at what Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge did in Cambodia, such as killing anyone who wore eyeglasses (they interpreted that as a sign of someone who did a lot of reading, and thus was intellectual and could see through the scam of socialism/communism), and how they would have their own version of skeet shooting, but using villagers' babies instead of clay pigeons. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
As for my faith, I am a Christian, and my wife and I attend a little independent Baptist church. We have no affiliation with any other church, Baptist or otherwise. We prefer to distance ourselves from psuedo-Christian psychopaths like Freddy Phelps.
As I understand it communism is that everything is shared and owned by everyone. What's the difference in socialism?
Of course we have communism in the United States. Anything we pay taxes for is "owned" by everyone. An example is cheap postage...
Socialism is somewhere between them, where everything is owned by someone, but people who own nothing are given stuff by people who own a lot, so that everyone has something.
In a nutshell, anyway. America is closer to the capitalist side then it is to the socialist side, but it´s certainly not a purely capitalist state. I don't think you'd want one, either. Just like a purely communist state, human nature prevents it from working like it should.
They're basically on a sliding scale. Communism means everything belongs to everyone, and nothing can be owned. Capitalism means anything is owned by someone, and you can own nothing new unless the previous owner decides to give up what he owned.
Socialism is somewhere between them, where everything is owned by someone, but people who own nothing are given stuff by people who own a lot, so that everyone has something.
In a nutshell, anyway. America is closer to the capitalist side then it is to the socialist side, but it´s certainly not a purely capitalist state. I don't think you'd want one, either. Just like a purely communist state, human nature prevents it from working like it should.
(emphasis mine)
What I've been trying to say. Thank you.
That being said, how can you actually want people to be religious? Religious beliefs, like ideologies, just do not work and are used for bloodshed, war and control.
Everything is dangerous when it becomes an ideology. It's a quick route to "end justifies the means" mentality. It applies to Christianity, Islam, communism, patriotism, etc.
Also, try not to ignore how Christianity helped develop modern society. Democracy for instance wouldn't look like it does if not for the Christian dogma of equality of people (as even the freaking God became a man to emphasize this); or imagine politics in Europe without the culture of forgiveness; it would probably look more like Middle East right now.
Also, try not to ignore how Christianity helped develop modern society.
Why not? Turn-about is fair play, right?
They're basically on a sliding scale. Communism means everything belongs to everyone, and nothing can be owned. Capitalism means anything is owned by someone, and you can own nothing new unless the previous owner decides to give up what he owned.
Socialism is somewhere between them, where everything is owned by someone, but people who own nothing are given stuff by people who own a lot, so that everyone has something.
In a nutshell, anyway. America is closer to the capitalist side then it is to the socialist side, but it´s certainly not a purely capitalist state. I don't think you'd want one, either. Just like a purely communist state, human nature prevents it from working like it should.
(emphasis mine)
What I've been trying to say. Thank you.
It wasn't very clear you know. With the whole communism is evil thing.
But I can agree with you. It is just common sense. Ideologies can be inspirering but they lack pragmatism and do not take into account the Humon FactorTM.
That being said, how can you actually want people to be religious? Religious beliefs, like ideologies, just do not work and are used for bloodshed, war and control.
Again, you don't understand history, and how EVERY communist takeover of a nation has led to bloodshed. Pol Pot, Ho Chi Min, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Gueverra, and the list goes on.
"Religious" is NOT what I want. To be religious means that you are doing things in the hope of pleasing God so that he will let you into Heaven. What Christianity preaches is that God has taken the burden of attaining God's standards off of man and onto Himself. The ONLY requirement is that we accept what He has done. Jesus' sacrifice has completely fulfilled the requirements of God's Law.
With that taken care of, we can now focus on treating each other kindly, forgiving each other and ourselves, and helping out one another.
With that taken care of, we can now focus on treating each other kindly, forgiving each other and ourselves, and helping out one another.
Even Pinkos?
With that taken care of, we can now focus on treating each other kindly, forgiving each other and ourselves, and helping out one another.
Even Pinkos?
Yes.
Again, you don't understand history, and how EVERY communist takeover of a nation has led to bloodshed. Pol Pot, Ho Chi Min, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Gueverra, and the list goes on.
Uhm, the track record of capitalist/democratic nations ain't much better you know. Unless you want to conviently ignore the war for oil on terror or the crap going down in other countries with kids working in sweatshops and slave labour so that big corporations can make an extra buck. The only big difference is that it's far from your bed and the media are paid to report on other stuff, but it's not exactly doing so much better that you can label communism "terrible" without realising that our current solution ain't that much better.
Again, you don't understand history, and how EVERY communist takeover of a nation has led to bloodshed. Pol Pot, Ho Chi Min, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Gueverra, and the list goes on.
I'm pretty sure that every takeover of a nation, period, has led to bloodshed, regardless of the government structure involved.
I can't wait for this technology to be perfected. The sooner it is, the sooner we stop needing to factory-farm and slaughter animals en masse to feed ourselves.
Lather, rinse, repeat, cash the ****ing check.
The ability to disregard people's safety and well-being isn't unique to any government.
The ONLY requirement is that we accept what He has done. (...)
Unless you mean "and follow His teachings", no.
Ephesians 2:8-10
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
The ONLY requirement is that we accept what He has done. (...)
Unless you mean "and follow His teachings", no.Ephesians 2:8-108 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
So are you saying that if you are an axe murderer and you accept His gift, you can continue to be an axe murderer? I don't think so.
That was exactly my point; some people claim that you only need to claim to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior; I say you must live it.
Sorry for misjudging you. Or judging in general.
So are you saying that if you are an axe murderer and you accept His gift, you can continue to be an axe murderer? I don't think so.
That was exactly my point; some people claim that you only need to claim to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior; I say you must live it.
Sorry for misjudging you. Or judging in general.
You do need to live it. Again, once you accept His gift, nothing can take that away, but if you're stubborn in your actions, He's going to throw some roadblocks into your life (and if you decide to continue to be an axe murderer, He's likely to throw police and/or vengeful people in your path, and as Han Solo would say, that'll end your trip real quick...actually, if you were such an axe murderer, the first thing you would do after conversion would be to turn yourself over to the police, plead guilty in court, and take what they give you).
BTW, it's all right. I try to get what I say across, but sometimes it doesn't always work. Must have been the valium they made me take when I was a wee lad.
Your God is about as useful as a flaming bag of dog crap on a mattress, or a fork in the eye, and anyone who preaches about his "goodness" is simply trying to spread an infection the world would be better without.
Oh yes. God's so loving and caring that He thought it'd be a good thing to give thousands of children every year cancer. He's so forgiving that if you don't do exactly what He wants you to you get to burn in eternal torment. Let's all overlook the fact that, as an infallible being, it must have been his intention to create evil in all it's forms so that He could have an excuse to condemn some souls to eternal torment.
Your God is about as useful as a flaming bag of dog crap on a mattress, or a fork in the eye, and anyone who preaches about his "goodness" is simply trying to spread an infection the world would be better without.
...and here you're ignoring what I asked not to ignore (though I'm not sure it was this thread): the many ways Christianity positively influenced modern society.
And the last part is simply baselessly insulting.
And of course, if there were no bad things, would we see the good ones?
And the last part is simply baselessly insulting.
And of course, if there were no bad things, would we see the good ones?
There's nothing baseless about it. Go to a children's cancer ward and try to put a smile on those kids' faces when you know that some of them will be dead, through no fault of their own, in weeks.
If the suffering of children is the price of knowing that good things happen to people, I'd be happy to give up that knowledge.
No, murderers are NOT walking God's way. Murder, death, and destruction were NEVER meant to be.
Wait, never meant to be? Isn't that implying that God made a mistake?
There's nothing baseless about it. Go to a children's cancer ward and try to put a smile on those kids' faces when you know that some of them will be dead, through no fault of their own, in weeks.
It is; it looks like you're accusing religion of causing cancer. Which is weird, to say the least.
If the suffering of children is the price of knowing that good things happen to people, I'd be happy to give up that knowledge.
People usually get so used to good things they start taking them for granted. Sometimes you need an eye-opener.
Yes, this is not a perfect word. But check this verse I brought up earlier:
For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
(Ephesians 2:10)
You could say all that is bad are the tasks we're given, the "good works" we're supposed to do. What do you propose, whine about cancer or try to do the "good work" and research a cure?
(I hope this answers your question as well, EE)
As for blaming religion for cancer. No. I'm saying your "all loving" God is the cause, since He created everything with a purpose (including this Devil guy you all seem to think is so bad).
The thing is, you all seem to overlook that your teachings say that God is omnicient, omnipotent, and infallible, and, therefore, must have created the Devil (and evil - murderers, rapists, child molesters, politicians [ok that last one is bad, but not in the same class with the rest ;)] intentionally. Does that sound like a good thing? Would an "all loving" being really do that?
edit: And I believe EE was questioning whether you believe God is capable of making a mistake.
I see. So all those children are suffering just so that a few people "have something to do". Well that certainly makes me think this God of yours is a great guy.
I don't think of God as a "guy", but that's another story.
Yes, that is a call for action. Man is not perfect, the world is not perfect - if you believe the Bible to the letter, since that incident with the snake and the fruit.
I do not claim to understand God's workings.
As for blaming religion for cancer. No. I'm saying your "all loving" God is the cause, since He created everything with a purpose (including this Devil guy you all seem to think is so bad).
In other words, you blame God for cancer. Sounds like a personal beef, but whatevs.
The thing is, you all seem to overlook that your teachings say that God is omnicient, omnipotent, and infallible, and, therefore, must have created the Devil (and evil - murderers, rapists, child molesters, politicians [ok that last one is bad, but not in the same class with the rest ;)] intentionally. Does that sound like a good thing? Would an "all loving" being really do that?
The all loving being apparently doesn't want to be "loved" by puppets; the believers should be intelligent and choose to love their God - and some choose differently. Free will, it's as simple as that; I don't believe in predestination myself.
edit: And I believe EE was questioning whether you believe God is capable of making a mistake.
See above.
In other words, you blame God for cancer. Sounds like a personal beef, but whatevs.
Do you or do you not believe that God created everything? If you believe God is the creator of all things, then you must agree that he created cancer (and AIDS, smallpox, ebola, the common cold, whatever).
As for blame: I don't blame this God of yours for anything. I don't believe He exists, therefore He can hardly be blamed for good or for ill. My beef is not with God, or your belief in Him (why not Her btw?), but rather with the fact that some people won't shut up about Him. Well, that and the blatant hypocracy of those same people.
And? We were just as bad a hundred years ago.
The ability to disregard people's safety and well-being isn't unique to any government.
The first thing I thought of was "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair
I hope this answers your question as well, EE
Nope. Not at all. Iqwinn made a claim that something was not "meant to be". Since the Christian god is supposed to be infallible, that seems to be a highly curious claim.
Your beliefs on the matter are of, at most, tangential interest to answering my question.
They're basically on a sliding scale. Communism means everything belongs to everyone, and nothing can be owned. Capitalism means anything is owned by someone, and you can own nothing new unless the previous owner decides to give up what he owned.
Socialism is somewhere between them, where everything is owned by someone, but people who own nothing are given stuff by people who own a lot, so that everyone has something.
In a nutshell, anyway. America is closer to the capitalist side then it is to the socialist side, but it´s certainly not a purely capitalist state. I don't think you'd want one, either. Just like a purely communist state, human nature prevents it from working like it should.
(emphasis mine)
What I've been trying to say. Thank you.
It wasn't very clear you know. With the whole communism is evil thing.
But I can agree with you. It is just common sense. Ideologies can be inspirering but they lack pragmatism and do not take into account the Humon FactorTM.
That being said, how can you actually want people to be religious? Religious beliefs, like ideologies, just do not work and are used for bloodshed, war and control.
Yeah, I've seen everything used for bloodshed, war, and control. heck just the love of power or money do that. Without religion you have not moral traditon. Whether its true or not doesn't matter, most popular religions focus on moral ideals. A society without religious roots will not have the traditions of less killing, less theft, and less other crimes. Of course religions are distorted all the time, so its not really the religions fault, its extremists fault that bend religious tenents and traditions to serve their own purposes. Like the whole terrorist ifsillatmer(minus filter) groups. Their religion states that if you kill someone you go to hell, no exceptions. Yet they still think that if they die, while they kill, they will somehow "slip" into heaven when this is clearly not the case according to their religious teachings and books...
And the last part is simply baselessly insulting.
And of course, if there were no bad things, would we see the good ones?
There's nothing baseless about it. Go to a children's cancer ward and try to put a smile on those kids' faces when you know that some of them will be dead, through no fault of their own, in weeks.
If the suffering of children is the price of knowing that good things happen to people, I'd be happy to give up that knowledge.
Except your forgetting the part about free will. Cancer is an environmental disease, meaning it is caused by the things that happen in the environment. It doesn't just pop up one day out of nowhere. Recent studies link it to pollution, EM fields (power lines), genetics, and other environmental factors. These are all caused by the ability to choose. So we could be mindless drones that never deviate and always are perfect, but where's the fun in that?
And the last part is simply baselessly insulting.
And of course, if there were no bad things, would we see the good ones?
There's nothing baseless about it. Go to a children's cancer ward and try to put a smile on those kids' faces when you know that some of them will be dead, through no fault of their own, in weeks.
If the suffering of children is the price of knowing that good things happen to people, I'd be happy to give up that knowledge.
I almost forgot there is a cure for cancer. One is a drug they refuse to sell as a cancer treatment, and the other is called "the Gerson Treatment" and has little or nothing to do with drugs. It is extremely effective, but alas illegal in the United States...
These are all caused by the ability to choose.
To exist or not to exist isn't a choice at all.
How would you know if you can have a moral society without a religious history? There haven't been any! That whole "atheists are immoral" spiel is just 100% grade-A garbage.
It isn't that they can't, its that they won't. There won't be any reason too. Its religious tradition that gives right and wrong. Parent's teach their children morals, this is tradition. If there is no moral tradition, then children won't be tought that. They will instead be taught to follow the law, which in turn will be changed. So instead of "quit hitting your sister, because its wrong", it would be "Hit your sister if you want the TV"...
These are all caused by the ability to choose.
To exist or not to exist isn't a choice at all.
You can choose not to exist. Its called suicide.
You can choose to reduce the toxins in your environment, and choose to live in an area that does not have an EM field that constantly give you headaches...
And quite frankly I'm appalled at your lack of humanity. Telling me that children that had no choice in the conditions they were brought into should have made the choice of suicide over living in a hostile environment? How can you sit there, claim to be a Christian, and then blatantly say children who had no say in the matter should commit what you believe is a mortal sin?
Uh... I'd say "hate to break it to you", but I really don't. I'm a second generation atheist. My parents taught me morality. You are, quite simply, wrong. People can, and do have moral traditions that don't rely on God. To claim otherwise is to lie about the world.
And quite frankly I'm appalled at your lack of humanity. Telling me that children that had no choice in the conditions they were brought into should have made the choice of suicide over living in a hostile environment? How can you sit there, claim to be a Christian, and then blatantly say children who had no say in the matter should commit what you believe is a mortal sin?
Are you replying to me? I never said I was a christian...
Sure your parents taught you morality and your a second generation atheist. So were your grandparents religious? If so did they have "higher" moral standards than your parents? Do you have lower moral standards than your parents? it isn't that there's some magical power that makes people moral. Its that religion emphasizes a set of morals that then get passed down generation to generation. I'm sure if you find an area of the world that lacks morals you will find a gap of anti-religion that lasted for several generations. Take China for instance. They have vastly different morals than we do. They also have generations that have no religion. They have a thing they call "honor" that replaces it, and if you dishonor your family you are to immediately commit suicide. Do you feel that is right? if not it's because of the moral traditions passed down to you from your ancestors...
Second, most people typically don't need religion to tell them that bad things (murder, ****, theft, etc) are bad because they have the ability to say 'gee willikers, I wouldn't like it if someone did that to me'.
Third, religion doesn't prevent people from doing evil, horrible things. The BTK killer (Bind, Torture, Kill) was caught because he wrote some stuff on a computer ... at his church ... at which he was a prominent, respected member. Sure seems like religion did a wonderful job instilling proper moral behavior in him, no?
Fourth, religion has been the direct inspiration for some of the most heinous acts perpetrated by man on man ranging from the murder of culture all the way through the murder of people. Done in the name of god. Not exactly what I'd consider a guiding light.
Second, most people typically don't need religion to tell them that bad things (murder, ****, theft, etc) are bad because they have the ability to say 'gee willikers, I wouldn't like it if someone did that to me'.
You think so? In Judeo-Christian tradition there's an unconditional "though shall not kill"; hence people from this cultural circle see a problem with "honorary kills" or "curative ****" for instance. Yet some people see those as acceptable.
Third, religion doesn't prevent people from doing evil, horrible things. The BTK killer (Bind, Torture, Kill) was caught because he wrote some stuff on a computer ... at his church ... at which he was a prominent, respected member. Sure seems like religion did a wonderful job instilling proper moral behavior in him, no?
Here we could be giving each other examples of religious and atheistic horrible people, but I don't want to Godwin. And there's little point anyway.
Fourth, religion has been the direct inspiration for some of the most heinous acts perpetrated by man on man ranging from the murder of culture all the way through the murder of people. Done in the name of god. Not exactly what I'd consider a guiding light.
Right now you're doing something similar to people accusing D&D and video games of Satanism and raise in violence.
I think I wrote this in another thread... anything mutated into ideology is dangerous, as it instills the "end justifies the means" mentality.
It's also funny how freedom-loving and tolerant people are often hostile towards religion. That's a start of ideological thinking.
You think so? In Judeo-Christian tradition there's an unconditional "though shall not kill"; hence people from this cultural circle see a problem with "honorary kills" or "curative ****" for instance. Yet some people see those as acceptable.
Obviously I think so as I said as much.
People invented religion. People, therefore, have always known that certain things are bad. They figured this out all on their own - something most people are still capable of pulling off today.The Judeo-Christian 'thou shalt not kill' is also not unconditional. God killed, god asked man to kill for him. In some places today (as in this literal day), it's perfectly ok to kill homosexuals. Unless, of course, it's a semantic thing and this is different because, to these Christians, homosexuals aren't people. And that, of course, is its own problem and one, incidentally, that stems directly from the religion that nation practices.
Here we could be giving each other examples of religious and atheistic horrible people, but I don't want to Godwin. And there's little point anyway.
Well, if the idea is that religion instills a moral compass, I think my example has plenty of point. It failed. As it was presented by the other poster as the only sure way to build a conscience, I feel perfectly ok pointing out an example of a major failure on its part to do so. The man was president of his congregation so, apparently, everyone he went to church with figured he got the message loud and clear - perhaps even louder and more clear than they. The fact that he tortured and murdered girls as a hobby seems to contradict that in a pretty emphatic way. The point isn't that religious people do bad things too, it's that religion cannot be held as some paragon of morality building - especially considering its rather sordid history.
In short, if both atheists and religious folk commit horrendous acts, what, precisely, does religion do to ensure a 'better man'?
Right now you're doing something similar to people accusing D&D and video games of Satanism and raise in violence.
I think I wrote this in another thread... anything mutated into ideology is dangerous, as it instills the "end justifies the means" mentality.
It's also funny how freedom-loving and tolerant people are often hostile towards religion. That's a start of ideological thinking.
Of course it's the people that follow the religion that commit the acts. But the fact remains that these acts were committed in the name of the religion. Until some world leader gathers his people and coerces them to acts of genocide in the name of Grand Theft Auto, I don't think your comparison holds true.
Also, if you look at what people have done because of religion, it's fairly easy to see why people are hostile toward it. Faith is fine. Religion is fine. Organized religion is one of the most dangerous things this world has ever invented and I'm confident in saying that as the facts are there to support it. And if anything can be interpreted in such a way as to make the removal of rights from a group of people something not only acceptable but expected and done as 'good work', it's a terrible, terrible thing and I would hope that that's something you can see.
Sure your parents taught you morality and your a second generation atheist. So were your grandparents religious? If so did they have "higher" moral standards than your parents? Do you have lower moral standards than your parents?
Hrm... actually, I'd say that my parents had higher moral standards then their parents and have been generally better at leading meaningful productive and "good" lives then their parents, and that while their parents were barely religious, my atheist parents are significantly better people then their siblings who all have quite a bit more religion in their lives.
And I aim to be at least as good as them and so far have been successful, as have my siblings.
So yeah. Individual people and what they teach their kids is so much more important then whether or not you have religion in your life.
And the last part is simply baselessly insulting.
And of course, if there were no bad things, would we see the good ones?
There's nothing baseless about it. Go to a children's cancer ward and try to put a smile on those kids' faces when you know that some of them will be dead, through no fault of their own, in weeks.
If the suffering of children is the price of knowing that good things happen to people, I'd be happy to give up that knowledge.
That's what my church does. My pastor's 4 year old grandson died a couple of years ago from an inoperable brain tumor. People in my church, me included, prayed for that little boy, gave him gifts to cheer him up (I gave him a collection of Three Stooges DVDs). There were also people who begged God to spare him, offering themselves instead. My pastor did it. I did it.
Still, the boy died, but not before letting us know that he saw something we normally couldn't see. On the last day that he was conscious, his mother was begging him to open his eyes. His reply, which was the last thing he said, was, "But Mama, my eyes are open."
But you ignore what I said previously: Man was only meant to know good and to love God, but love without an alternative is meaningless; that's why the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was in the garden. Man (Adam AND Eve) chose to know evil as well as good, and that was what made Calvary and the cross necessary; so that man could be saved from his fallen state and be reunited with God.
I remember an old Jewish story, similar to the parable of the Prodigal Son. The son takes his part of the inheritance and lives frivilously, loses everything, and decides to go home to his father and live as one of his servants. But he has moved a long way away from his father, so he sends a letter to his father, asking him to come back. The father replies that he has his place in his house ready, all he needs to do is return. The son writes back that he is far away, and may not be able to make it home. The father writes to him, "then come to me as far as you can, and I will meet you where you are, and take you home from there."
I also remember something about the Jewish symbol, the Star of David. I've heard that it is two triangles overlaid one on another, one pointing up, and one pointing down. The upward-pointing one represents man reaching up to God. The downward-pointing one represents God reaching down to meet man where he is, to take him home from there.
Sure your parents taught you morality and your a second generation atheist. So were your grandparents religious? If so did they have "higher" moral standards than your parents? Do you have lower moral standards than your parents?
I think I have higher moral standards then my parents, and I feel they only went up after they stopped trying to raise me as a christian. They've stopped going to church as well now.
I dunno, but to me "Contemplate the good of your actions" speaks stronger then "god does not want you to do that". Then again, just because it works for me doesn't mean it'll work for everyone.