Question concerning the "Might Makes Right" ethic. -- <font size = "4">The Drunks Bar </font size "4">

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, [10] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 13:15:31 04/22/01 Sun
Author: Steve A.
Subject: Question concerning the "Might Makes Right" ethic.

I have taken it upon myself to visit a large evangelical church service on Saturday evenings as of late. Probably not a good thing with finals starting May 3rd, but anyways.

I was chatting with one of the adherents last night, and i basically boiled his theological base-plate down to "might makes right" He fully endorsed the ethic, provided he was allowed to "qualify" gods might makes right with "love" and "relationship" which i did not allow him to do, because i did not have 3 more hours to give him after the two i already had given to him.

Is there any inherent vulnerability to a "might makes right ethic" providing that might is vested with Yahweh?

I am kind of confused and be-wildered on the concept. The individual i was talking to construed me as just basically a rebellious slave, whose job and moral duty it is for Yahweh to "put down the rebellion" in the end? Only, in Yahweh's world, there is no Canada, no Mason Dixon line to escape across, his agents will always find you, cut off your foot and back to the cotton field you go.

Isn't holding to a theological might makes right position bordering on moral relatavism, ie: "love" can be deemed any behavior god wants to exercise over you, be it driving a steak knife through your hand, or incinerating you for eternity, or letting you eat grapes and sing "lord i lift your name on high" forever and ever and ever?

I welcome any input to my random brain fart.

P.S.: I told them that since i was a self professed sinner, to explain why i shouldn't go in for some cheap sex. His reply was not to do so, because "saw God in me"

A manipulator to the end!

Steve A.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Question concerning the "Might Makes Right" ethic. -- SM78, 14:03:11 04/22/01 Sun
Re: Question concerning the "Might Makes Right" ethic. -- OPB, 15:11:08 04/22/01 Sun
- But where does that leave one? -- Steve A., 16:57:35 04/22/01 Sun
  - Re: But where does that leave one? -- OPB, 17:48:53 04/22/01 Sun
    - Addendum -- OPB, 18:07:33 04/22/01 Sun
    - No matter how you pretty it up, shit is still shit -- SM78, 21:51:08 04/22/01 Sun
      - Mc Donald's is far more coherent than Christianity -- SM78, 22:06:55 04/22/01 Sun
        Blessed are the meek (or something like that).... -- Leo P�tsch, 10:43:57 04/23/01 Mon
        That explains why Reagan had ketchup labeled as a vegetable in school lunches! (NT) -- Queer, 21:13:38 04/27/01 Fri
      - Re: No matter how you pretty it up, shit is still shit -- OPB, 06:38:32 04/23/01 Mon