Christianity is a poor source of moral guidance

agrote wrote:

IFeelFree wrote:
agrote wrote:
Anyway, are there any Christians who can tell me what makes an action right or wrong? Do you believe that God's word makes it so, or that other facts about the action (e.g. the fact that it reduces suffering) make it so, and that God's word just reports this to us?

If the former, I give up.

The dilemma is trying to reduce right and wrong action to a set of rules. It cannot be done. We can say that killing is wrong, for instance, but what about defending yourself or your family from an armed killer, or defending your country from an attacking force during wartime, or the doctor who gives a dieing patient an extra shot of morphine to hasten their demise so as to relieve their suffering? All right actions are conditional. When your awareness is fully in the present moment, without the distraction of compulsive thinking, you are open to what is. You look and listen. You are fully aware. Instead of reacting against the situation, you merge with it, and the solution arises out of the situation itself. If action is required, you take action that is appropriate to the whole.

What's this got to do with my last post? I was asking a question about Christian theology.

You're right. My answer has nothing to do with Christian theology. My apologies. I simply wanted to state an opinion. If its religious dogma that you're looking for, others here will likely be able to supply a better answer.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

Anyway, are there any Christians who can tell me what makes an action right or wrong? Do you believe that God's word makes it so, or that other facts about the action (e.g. the fact that it reduces suffering) make it so, and that God's word just reports this to us?

If the former, I give up.

We all possess an inborn moral sense. This Paul alluded to in Romans 2:14-15: "For whenever people of the nations that do not have law do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. 15 They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts . . ."

However, our moral sense (conscience), having been compromised by the Edenic rebellion, cannot be relied on totally. Solomon wrote "There exists a way that is upright before a man, but the ways of death are the end of it afterward." (Proverbs 16:25). And Jeremiah wrote: "It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step." (Jeremiah 10:23)

So the answer to your question, according to the bible, is that we must study the bible.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

agrote wrote:
Anyway, are there any Christians who can tell me what makes an action right or wrong? Do you believe that God's word makes it so, or that other facts about the action (e.g. the fact that it reduces suffering) make it so, and that God's word just reports this to us?

If the former, I give up.
We all possess an inborn moral sense...

However, our moral sense (conscience), having been compromised by the Edenic rebellion, cannot be relied on totally...

So the answer to your question, according to the bible, is that we must study the bible.

I'm afraid you haven't quite adressed the question. What makes an action right or wrong? Is it (A) the fact that God says that it is right/wrong, or (B) something else, e.g. the fact that it causes suffering.

Another way of putting it: when God said, "thou shalt not kill", did his command make it wrong to kill, or was it already wrong to kill?

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

neologist wrote:
agrote wrote:
Anyway, are there any Christians who can tell me what makes an action right or wrong? Do you believe that God's word makes it so, or that other facts about the action (e.g. the fact that it reduces suffering) make it so, and that God's word just reports this to us?

If the former, I give up.
We all possess an inborn moral sense...

However, our moral sense (conscience), having been compromised by the Edenic rebellion, cannot be relied on totally...

So the answer to your question, according to the bible, is that we must study the bible.

I'm afraid you haven't quite adressed the question. What makes an action right or wrong? Is it (A) the fact that God says that it is right/wrong, or (B) something else, e.g. the fact that it causes suffering.

Another way of putting it: when God said, "thou shalt not kill", did his command make it wrong to kill, or was it already wrong to kill?

The command was to not commit murder; and murder has always been wrong.

0 Replies

But the Jews didnt know this until they got to the foot of Mount Siniai. It was only then that Moses revealed to them that murder theft and perjury were wrong. Until then they had been getting along quite well...

0 Replies

Cain was exiled for his murder

0 Replies

Jesus was a great source of moral-ethical guidance, but Christianity (with all the mythological crustacea it has packed around him) is among the worst.
Remember: Jesus pointed the way and we suck his finger (in the form of the Church's nonsence).

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Cain was exiled for his murder

That was god's idea--do you allege that there was a human community which drove him out because they instinctively knew that murder is wrong?

Genesis, Chapter 4, in the King James Version:

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.

And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.

And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;

When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.

Cain was condemned by the god, not by other people.

0 Replies

Seems like its all god's fault to me. Cain makes an offering and God rejects it. I'd be pretty pissed off too. Why didnt God say, nice try Cain but Abel's won this round. Makes God out to be a pretty poor manager.

0 Replies

More than that, this is a vengeful and vindicative god.

Poor you if don't please this god!

0 Replies

yes the descriptions of god (it amazes me that they not only know god exists but go on to describe what he likes and dislikes...remarkably similar to the ruling elites at teh time if you ask me) make him out to be pretty unpleasant.

The new testament is different. Except that it is aparantly the same God.

0 Replies

Steve 41oo wrote:

Seems like its all god's fault to me. Cain makes an offering and God rejects it. I'd be pretty pissed off too. Why didnt God say, nice try Cain but Abel's won this round. . .

That is what happened.

Also Cain brought some fruit, while Abel brought firstlings. Could it be that Cain's sacrifice was perfunctory? Just a thought.

0 Replies

Your thought has no textual basis. The text says that Cain brought "the fruit of the ground"--which could well mean grain, vegetables, sweet potatoes, horse radish, truffles, morel mushrooms--hell, just about anything. The text doesn't tell us how much he brought, nor does it tell us why your boy god was not pleased with it.

Just like the sucker play in the "Garden of Eden," your boy god sets people up, knocks 'em down when they predictably fail, and then punishes them for having been the victim of his sucker game.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Your thought has no textual basis. The text says that Cain brought "the fruit of the ground"--which could well mean grain, vegetables, sweet potatoes, horse radish, truffles, morel mushrooms--hell, just about anything. The text doesn't tell us how much he brought, nor does it tell us why your boy god was not pleased with it.

Just like the sucker play in the "Garden of Eden," your boy god sets people up, knocks 'em down when they predictably fail, and then punishes them for having been the victim of his sucker game.

There was two parts to my post and you picked the one I offered with a disclaimer.

But never mind.

If you promote the idea that the bible reveals God to have set up his creations to fail, hence exhibiting a degree of sadism, then you really should consider explaining how this God was able to imbue in humans the qualities of love and justice he himself lacked.

Of course, you could just blow this off, but then I would wonder if all the money I have spent on coffee has been in vain.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

murder has always been wrong.

Okay. If that's your view, and if you think that Christianity is a good source of morality (do you think that?), then the dilemma I posed at the start of this thread applies to you:

(1) You could refrain from murder because God tells you to. In this case you would desire de dicto to refrain from murder, because your desire to refrain from murder would be derived from your desire to do what God tells you to do. You would be motivated by a desire to serve God, and not by your kindness or compassion. You might be kind and you might feel compassion and genuine concern for the well-being of those who are affected by murder, but by hypothesis those concerns would not be what motivate your behaviour. Is it really morally virtuous to do 'good deeds' not out of kindness or compassion, but simply because God commands you to?

(2) You could refrain from murder because of the reasons that make murder 'wrong'. So suppose murder is wrong because it causes suffering. You would then refrain from murder because you care about reducing suffering. Your desire to refrain from murder would not be arrived at through reason or derived from a seperate desire to do God's bidding; you would desire to refrain from murder because you just do - because it's part of who you are, as a kind and compassionate person. This would be a de re desire to refrain from murder, and if it would be enough to make you a morally virtuous person then your religion and what God says would be redundant as a source of morality. Your moral goodness would come from you, and not from adhering to Christianity. The only morality that Christianity can offer is fetishism (see (1)).

This only applies if you do indeed believe that murder was already wrong before God said that it was.

Those Christians who believe that God's word is what actually makes certain actions right/wrong are safe from my argument.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

neologist wrote:
murder has always been wrong.

Okay. If that's your view, and if you think that Christianity is a good source of morality (do you think that?), then the dilemma I posed at the start of this thread applies to you:

(1) You could refrain from murder because God tells you to. In this case you would desire de dicto to refrain from murder, because your desire to refrain from murder would be derived from your desire to do what God tells you to do. You would be motivated by a desire to serve God, and not by your kindness or compassion. You might be kind and you might feel compassion and genuine concern for the well-being of those who are affected by murder, but by hypothesis those concerns would not be what motivate your behaviour. Is it really morally virtuous to do 'good deeds' not out of kindness or compassion, but simply because God commands you to?

(2) You could refrain from murder because of the reasons that make murder 'wrong'. So suppose murder is wrong because it causes suffering. You would then refrain from murder because you care about reducing suffering. Your desire to refrain from murder would not be arrived at through reason or derived from a seperate desire to do God's bidding; you would desire to refrain from murder because you just do - because it's part of who you are, as a kind and compassionate person. This would be a de re desire to refrain from murder, and if it would be enough to make you a morally virtuous person then your religion and what God says would be redundant as a source of morality. Your moral goodness would come from you, and not from adhering to Christianity. The only morality that Christianity can offer is fetishism (see (1)).

This only applies if you do indeed believe that murder was already wrong before God said that it was.

Those Christians who believe that God's word is what actually makes certain actions right/wrong are safe from my argument.

Remember when I posted this?

neologist wrote:

So the answer to your question, according to the bible, is that we must study the bible.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Well, once again the answer to your question, according to the bible, is that we must study the bible.

What question?

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

neologist wrote:
Well, once again the answer to your question, according to the bible, is that we must study the bible.

What question?

This one

agrote wrote:

Anyway, are there any Christians who can tell me what makes an action right or wrong? Do you believe that God's word makes it so, or that other facts about the action (e.g. the fact that it reduces suffering) make it so, and that God's word just reports this to us?

If the former, I give up.

Found here

0 Replies

Neologist, you had already answered that question by saying "murder has always been wrong". If murder has always been wrong, and was therefore wrong before God told us so, then the thing that makes it wrong is not the mere fact that God says it is wrong.

So it seems, according to your claim that "murder has always been wrong", that morality does not originate from God's word; God's word reports to us what is right and wrong, but the rightness/wrongness itself originates from something else - perhaps, say, from facts about whether an action causes suffering or not?

Do you have a response to the dilemma I reiterated in my previous post?

0 Replies

Christianity is a poor source of moral guidance

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know