What is that ethic and how was it revolutionary when compared against the OT ethic that predated it? — Hanover
How has its ethic better stood the test of time in comparison to other ethical theories? — Hanover
If the New Testament was a first stab, why is it called "new" — Hanover
Jesus and the Buddha are examples for higher ideals — Jack Cummins
Why would an OT ethic be the thing it replaced? — Kenosha Kid
By having more correlates in modern ethics than others. — Kenosha Kid
You know it's almost 2000 years old, right? — Kenosha Kid
NT aka "Platonism for the masses" – really? :chin:To an extent, the New Testament is a foundational moral theory, completely revolutionary, that has mostly stood the test of time. It's sort of the Newtonian mechanics of morality: yes, we've moved on (or at least the secular world has), but what a first stab! — Kenosha Kid
You identified the New Testament as providing a revolutionary new ethic. In order for it to have been revolutionary, it would have had to overthrow the prevailing ethic of the time, whatever that might be. The OT ethic was at least one of those ethics pre-existing the NT ethic, so I asked what distinguished the NT ethic from the OT one that it would have had to replace following this revolution in ethics. — Hanover
You indicated that the New Testament was a good first stab at an ethical theory, and I pointed out that it couldn't have been the first stab if it was newer than a prior ethical theory. — Hanover
NT aka "Platonism for the masses" – really? :chin:
Not the Torah (re: Hillel the Elder's "golden rule")?
Not the Nicomachean Ethics?
Not Epicurus-Lucretius? Not Seneca & Epictetus? — 180 Proof
which includes ethics.the development of philosophy in Western society — Jack Cummins
Who said "most of the world's morality"? In the spirit of the OP, I'm referring to
the development of philosophy in Western society
— Jack Cummins
which includes ethics. — 180 Proof
I disagree, but appreciate why this view is (still) dominant. Ethics in the West, I think, developed in contrast to, or despite, Biblical theology (theo-idiocy).I do believe that interpretations of ideas in the Bible have been central to ethical traditions in Western society. — Jack Cummins
But I think that the important links of this were the theologians and the Church, because these were leading authorities. — Jack Cummins
I agree that forgiveness was important but I don't think that it was always that simple. For example, I believe learning in history that in the Catholic church there were 'indulgences' in which people were expected to pay for their sins to be forgiven, even though tasks such as building bridges. I also believe that it is likely that the rich and powerful still oppressed the poor. I imagine that behind the scenes of the church and the rhetoric of Christian ethics there was so much oppression. In particular, the Church held onto the wealth and power. — Jack Cummins
If anything, by this list of particulars, the Christian Bible maldeveloped ethics in Western societies for at least the first millennium of Christendom.The "Christ Cult", canonized and creedally begat down massacred & martyred millennia, is a burned witches' brew of dogmatic
• inherited guilt
• vicarious redemption via (symbolically reenacted) human sacrifice
• self-abnegating masochistic "worship" of misery-torture-execution porn
• "blood libel" anti-semitism
• ritual (symbolic) cannibalism & vampirism
• child abuse by "Vicars of Christ" with threats of "hellfire" for little ones, their pets & parents if they resist ecclesiastical "grooming" for molestation, rape or other forms of sacramental sadism
• missionary demonization of non-christian "heathen savages" ... — 180 Proof
If anything, by this list of particulars, the Christian Bible maldeveloped ethics in Western societies for at least the first millennium of Christendom. — 180 Proof
In particular, the Church held onto the wealth and power. — Jack Cummins
That's a fairly pollyannish view of history, Jack. Without "The Church" Western societies almost certainly would have been more ... civilized. And without Church-sanctioned library burnings, inquisitional censorship & clerical terrorism plunging the Meditteranean Basin countries into "dark ages" lasting several centuries, Western social systems, sciences & technologies would be, more likely than not (ceteris paribus), 500-1,000 years further developed than they actually are now. For all the so-called "good" done in the name of "Christ", I think, none of that compensates for the deluge of atrocities, crimes & ignorance also unleashed in "His" name as a matter of course by Holy Mother Church (& her belated Reformers).It is hard to know what would have happened if the Church had not existed. As far as I can see the Church, despite its negative effects, did form the underlying structure for Western civilisation, for better or worse. — Jack Cummins
Without "The Church" Western societies almost certainly would have been more ... civilized — 180 Proof
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.