To ask if you are not a Christian, what non Christian values you live by?

[BlossomBlanket]

Just that really!

I share some values with (some) Christians. Mostly the big over-simplifications such as "Do unto others as ...", "(Try to) love your enemies," "Turn the other cheek" and so on, but also some of the Thomist-Aristotelian details, such as for instance the essentially embodied nature of human selves (which underlies the (false for other reasons) resurrection of the body in the Creed, but which also denies (correctly) the possibility of gendered souls and hence all that trans nonsense).

It's just so much of the metaphysics of Christianity (and other theisms/deisms) I disagree with. It really is plainly absurd to believe (or perhaps pretend to believe as I suspect many do) in an omnipotent omniscient omnibenevolent creator of the universe. Likewise Purgatory Hell and Heaven, surviving death, ghosts Virgin Births and Resurrections and so on. (I learned about Limbo as a child ... all that is no less ridiculous than Limbo (Limbo!))

None of that stuff could possibly be true. But the world would be better if we all tried to do good to them that hate us and so on and so forth.

Does that count?

I ran out of time reading the whole thread so I don’t know if anyone’s mentioned this yet, but I think The Golden Rule is about right. It’ll come up on a google search (I just checked). It basically says that pretty much all religions and philosophical schools of thought end up leading to the fundamental idea that we should treat other people as we want to be treated. And, because this is the result of so many different unconnected philosophies, it is is actually fundamental to being human rather than being specifically a religious or philosophical moral. We all do better as a group if we treat others with consideration.

So, I believe in the golden rule. I believe in not judging people for things that don’t harm anyone even if they’re not my cup of tea. I’m not sure of the exact wording, but I think the satanic bible says “do what though wilt” is the whole of the law, but this is followed up with the point that you can’t cause harm to anyone else. So the idea that everyone should have freedom to please themselves, provided they are not impinging on anyone else’s freedom.

I am atheist, humanist, and socialist, because that is what makes most sense to me. I found this quite an interesting thread.

@Brahumbug

Moses for example is almost certainly a mystical character

"If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” JC

As for 'believe in Jesus', we haven't established that such a belief is necessary or required as the evidence for that position is distinctly lacking.

I'm not sure what you mean by this - could you expand please?

- doesn't say oh by the way owning another person as property is wrong.

It was already an established practice long before the time of Moses. If God had forbidden it completely, what would you suggest as an alternative to paying off debts etc? Selling all their possessions, leaving them unable to buy food and starving, selling themselves and/or their loved ones into slavery within foreign nations, criminal behaviour, prostitution? Slavery within Israel at the time was different to slavery as we might recognise it today.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

Look at Egyptians' treatment of the Hebrews in the book of Exodus. These regulations would have been a radical change for the time period in which they were given.

And there we have it. Desperately trying to justify the unjustifiable. Are you seriously suggesting that slavery is an acceptable way to pay off debts? That is absolutely monstrous. Slavery in ancient Israel was as morally repugnant as any other slavery. You think it is acceptable to beat a slave to death? To pass them on as property to your family? To trick a Hebrew slave into being a slave for life?

Believing in Jesus, why is that necessary?

Did you even read the article? @Brahumbug Which verses are you referring to?

Believing in Jesus, why is that necessary?

Because He is the Messiah. The visible image of the invisible God.

If he's visible, where is he?

Why is it necessary to believe in a person we're not able to see?

I read the article. It's mealy-mouthed apologist drivel. There's a reason why slavery is illegal. There's a reason why we no longer have feudal systems or indentured service - and where we do have such things, they are still wrong, still immoral, still to be utterly condemned.

Currently in heaven, soon to return @IpsyUpsyDaisyDoos.
I have no idea about the second question, being sadly lacking in omniscience, unlike God.

Some of the most vocal and prominent absolutists were Christians who campaigned and fought for an end to the Atlantic slave trade @pointythings. They included William Wilberforce and other members of the Clapham Sect and John Wesley, to name but a few.

The Israelites were going to carry on the system of indentured servitude etc regardless. The Law of Moses helped to mitigate some of the damage that would have otherwise been caused. Every good parent of teenagers knows that managing risky behaviour starts with solid boundaries, rules and consequences.

Every good parent of teenagers knows that managing risky behaviour starts with solid boundaries, rules and consequences.

What's that got to do with Jesus? Or any religion in fact?

We've been discussing slavery within Old Testament law @IpsyUpsyDaisyDoos.

Ok, so what's the parenting point got to do with that?

It would be really, really, really helpful if Christians admitted openly that sections of the bible are no longer relevant in today's world. The bits about treating your slaves nicely are the absolute prime example of that - Christians really should be saying 'yep, that was revolutionary in the context of its time, but we're a little bit beyond that'. Other examples are also available.

And you might be married and very much not want your husband to impose himself on you without your consent.

I thought that part would be obvious @pointythings.

Simply put, I was making the point that God regulated Israel's behaviour, as a parent would with a wayward teen. That doesn't mean He approved of that behaviour. @IpsyUpsyDaisyDoos

I've never heard any Christian say anything other than this! In fact I'd be interested if you could provide examples of any mainstream Christian figure or ordinary Christian person who has suggested otherwise. Maybe you don't know much about Christian teaching and discourse but this really is quite a clanger.

There are plenty of Biblical literalists around who don't think any word of the Bible might no longer be relevant. The prohibitions around homosexuality as justified by what is in the Bible are a typical example. You have but to look at the way Evangelical Christianity enthusiastically supports the persecution of gay people in much of Africa.

The point I was making only had slavery as one example - as I mentioned, there are others and I've just given you one. I haven't even had to go into the madness of taking the story of the Flood literally.

Or the way Catholics behave around same sex couples wanting to marry.

"Pro-life" activists.

There's quite a few to be named.

Many people who aren't Christian have values that are very similar to the values taught by Christ but reject the concept of a God or subscribe to a different religion.
As far as Christian values go there are the ten commandments in the Old Testament, which are held in common with other monotheistic religions and then there is the New Covenant in the New testament which basically says "Love God with all your heart and tour neighbour as yourself and everything else will fall into place".
Beyond this there are debates within Christianity of what constitute Christian values.
I don't think that you can really say that there is such a thing as non-Christian values. Some people are guided by a different religion and some people do not have a religious belief but have developed their own values. There isnt a body of values that are held in common.

Some Christians don't take the Bible literally and accept that its a series of writings from a particular time which need to be read in that context. They acknowledge that there's also a lot of myth, other Christians are very literal and think that the Bible is the direct word of God and is all relevant.

For sure.

Same as a Christian I suppose,just without he religion bit.
Would never deliberately hurt a person or an animal.
Try to be kind,polite, know right from wrong,would never steal and if something bothers my conscience I don't do it. Pretty basic every day stuff really,like most folk I assume. I do believe in ghosts though so not sure how that fits with Christian beliefs.
I only truly hate 3 people but hey ho, who's perfect!

Can you give an example of a mainstream Christian justifying slavery then? Because that was the example you actually gave.

mine are definitely my own values - much less complicated than a religious rule book with its threats of non compliance.

Oh come on! It was one example, based on something pointed out by a pp. It wasn't about modern Christians justifying slavery, it was about some branches of Christianity maintaining that their version of the Bible, whatever it might be, is the immutable word of God, is still true in all it aspects today, and must never be looked upon in the light of the world we live in now.

And then I pointed out that the Bible isn't exactly sound on homosexuality either, and is used to justify the persecution of homosexuals. Care to comment on that?

Many churches are still discriminatory and won’t conduct same sex marriages.