Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
Good thing society does not have to choose to do one or the other, regardless if it often positions it as a choice.
I'm confused slightly by how confused your position seems to be on this. Let me see if I have this correct:
- Collective atonement is a Judeo-Christian value
- Judeo-Christian values are at the root of Western morality
- Collective atonement is not morally good
- But, collective atonement is morally good in the religious sense
Isn't everything that is morally good, morally good in the religious sense if religion is at the root of our morality?
On the other hand, isn't the suggestion that something morally good (in a religious sense) serves only to prove the moral virtue of the person making the expression, a dismissal of Judeo-Christian values? Wouldn't it be strange to defend religion and it's importance to people if we agreed even the best parts of it were ultimately a self-serving way to prove the moral goodness of the follower?
It seems that if we agree that things good in the religious sense and not a utilitarian sense are less important or worthwhile, then the purpose of religion is questionable, and it wouldn't make a lot of sense to defend it. Unless of course "good in the religious sense" is actually worth defending.
|
To Religion! The Cause of, and Solution to, All Life’s Problems!