Morals

[runco]

I should read more of these posts, I usually just read the posts with the catchy headlines that catch my eye. Morals for some reason didn’t appeal, but this morning, I read, and liked how it morphed into religion, I should have guessed:

Morals, on a grander scale have taken a nosedive over the past 70+ years. Yes, morality has been problem since the first bite of the apple. Yes, there was time in human history it was so bad for a society that a guilt ridden God decided to start all over (a.k.a. Noah story). In modern times, I have read and I must admit that I agree, that the downward spiral of America’s morals on a large scale was the introduction of women into the workforce during WWII. Nothing against women working, but it was the start of the breakdown of family on a large scale. A family is a husband (1-man), wife (1-woman), and children. Any other arrangement, allows for an incomplete family and subject to serious fundlemental problems on a large scale. I know there are exceptions, know very good people from the non-traditional home setup, but I would be willing to bet they had serious challenges that must have been over-comed that a traditional family model does not have to endure. The moral thing is tied directly to the family model period! Fix the family, and you fix morals!

While I am here, yes I was blessed to have been born in America and to have been a child of God fearing saved parents. I was saved as a 7-year-old boy when I received Christ as my savior. During my late teenage years and my 20s and into my early 30s, I drifted far from God. I quit going to church, quit praying, and quit reading the bible. Drank, chased women, and lived the good life or so I thought! But I believe it was my salvation that kept me from drifting into really bad situations during those turbulent years. I had lot guilt and knew that I had made a lot of bad choices. It wasn’t until I moved to new town and I had a sweet neighbor invite me to church that I realized what was missing. I didn’t immediately fall back into church; it was after I was married and we had our second child and after I received a scolding from my brother about alcohol and raising a family. I started praying again, and then one day I had a life changing experience. I had always believed 100% of the bible, but I had chose not to follow its teachings. This emptiness, this desire to be forgiven, and this desire to make sure I spend eternity with my children, I prayed to the all mighty one and one GOD. I wanted back in church, I wanted to share the gospel to my children and wanted to get plugged into Church. That was Jan 1^st, 2007, and I have had my family in church ever since. Some 5 years later, I have never been happier, and wholly fulfilled. The amount of blessings my wife and I have now, I do pin it to the Jan 1, 2007 life changing event. We have been blessed in so many ways and we owe everything to Him.

Folks if you do not believe in God and Jesus Christ, that is natural because the bible teaches that. However, I challenge the ones that went higher than the 3^rd grade if you will just the study the science of the bible, not from a religious point of view, but a historical and science point of view, you might just reconsider your thought process. Understand the bible is not a book, but a collection of 66 individual books that were pinned by man (inspired by God) over courses of 2,000+ years. There is not one sentence or conflicting inspiration in the Holy Bible. The foretelling of Jesus, how we would be born, how he would die, method of death, and resurrection, was all foretold thousands of years before his birth. Was that just a coincidence with the man born as Jesus? Is the bible written so vague that any possibility of interpretation is there? I don’t think so. Either Jesus Christ is who says he was, God and man, or he was the greatest fake of all time, and was unwilling to change his stance even though he endured the most horrible death process of his time. Folks if I was claiming to be a god, and the religious leaders had me arrested, and after being arrested still to stubborn to admit what I really was, just a man deceiving others, don’t know about you, but the first lash of the Scourged process, I would have screamed I am a fake, stop, it hurts, and blah blah blah. Yet, Jesus held to his last breath, who and what he was. The perfect lamb of sacrifice. True Christianity was not designed to be a society control mechanism, it was designed to take the already condemned sinner, and allow a pardon to be granted. Nothing more simpler. Choose Jesus, receive your pardon! Amen!

[Mike.357]

The only thing wrong with discussing christianity or religion is that people seem to get butt hurt when their beliefs are questioned. Happens every time.

I find it just as interesting that while discussing morals, there is no agreement that they have deteriorated or not over the years.

Obviously we are all exposed to the same information but process it differently and come to different conclussions.

[Timestepper]

I respectfully disagree on this point, and I think it is an important one. While it is true that a person of religious faith can coexist happily with science, neither of these two ways of knowing depends upon the input of the other. In fact, that is exactly where the problem lies. Trying to support faith with science, or vice versa, leads to a corruption of both. The theory of evolution, for example, does not depend on the existence of a supernatural creator. Likewise, belief in a creator in no way depends on the science of evolution. Can a person believe in God and simultaneously embrace science, including evolutionary biology? Sure. Many do. But the happiest among them understand and respect the boundaries.

I reckon I'll have to respectfully disagree with your respectful disagreement. Close minded thinking that says a thing either is or is not can be dangerous. Black is purported to be the presence of all colors while white is purported to be the absence of all colors, and yet very few subjects are black and white. Yes, I realize that I've mixed metaphors, but I did it on purpose. To say that "belief in a creator in no way depends on the science of evolution" is to negate the previously assumed omnipotence of said creator.

Don't get me wrong - I understand what you're saying. But I respectfully submit that, contradictory to your statement that "the happiest among them understand and respect the boundaries." the happiest among them realize that there are no boundaries.

[Guest profgunner]

I reckon I'll have to respectfully disagree with your respectful disagreement. Close minded thinking that says a thing either is or is not can be dangerous. Black is purported to be the presence of all colors while white is purported to be the absence of all colors, and yet very few subjects are black and white. Yes, I realize that I've mixed metaphors, but I did it on purpose. To say that "belief in a creator in no way depends on the science of evolution" is to negate the previously assumed omnipotence of said creator.

Don't get me wrong - I understand what you're saying. But I respectfully submit that, contradictory to your statement that "the happiest among them understand and respect the boundaries." the happiest among them realize that there are no boundaries.

So, what tenets of your faith would you be willing to reject based on evidence obtained from science?

[R_Bert]

it is hard to fathom that a god all knowing would damn for eternity millions upon millions of people who were never even exposed to a certain version of what it takes to go to heaven.

Aliens visiting earth and causing the miracles of the bible is much more believable.

Is god a man or a woman?

Good question - so like the inquisitive heathen sinner I am, I googled "why does God condemn those who never hear the gospel ?"

Turns out there are explanations which make sense to me, anyway. All of them boil down to "He doesn't. He is a gentleman and gives us a choice".

This one is pretty good -

http://kwok.blogs.com/camp/2009/04/why-does-god-condemn-those-who-have-not-heard-of-the-gospel.html

As specifically for the concept of Jews going to hell, well they all have they the same (well informed) choice as their Heroes of Faith that were declared by God to be acceptible, including Abel, Enoch,Noah,Abraham,Issac, Jacob, Sarah, Joseph, Moses,Gideon, Barak, Samson,Jeptah, David, Samuel, all the prophets, and many more mentioned as such by both Hebrew and Christian texts.

In the faith of the Jews, and the Christ followers, the two choices have always been the same (keep the law...and keep it perfectly, or believe by faith). Just one was a whole lot easier than the other.

I also am intrigued by the use of the word "faith" in context of beleivers. What do they mean when they use the word? - That I found here - http://bible.cc/hebrews/11-1.htm . Various translations, and a number of commentaries.

So, it still boils down to personal decisions, and personal responsibility. We are each solely responsible for our destiny. We have no one else to blame but our selves. God is not condemning anyone, but abiding by their wishes.

[daddyo]

The only thing wrong with discussing christianity or religion is that people seem to get butt hurt when their beliefs are questioned. Happens every time.

I find it just as interesting that while discussing morals, there is no agreement that they have deteriorated or not over the years.

Obviously we are all exposed to the same information but process it differently and come to different conclussions.

I see people who don't believe getting butt hurt just as often as those who do. They're just more sarcastic about it, and for some reason can't resist the temptation to ridicule and belittle someone who does believe.

[R_Bert]

The only thing wrong with discussing christianity or religion is that people seem to get butt hurt when their beliefs are questioned. Happens every time.

I find it just as interesting that while discussing morals, there is no agreement that they have deteriorated or not over the years.

Obviously we are all exposed to the same information but process it differently and come to different conclussions.

I don't find it offensive, and thought this thread in particular has been pretty tame.

I was going to say I am comfortable in who and where I am.....but really not so. I struggle daily, My recent failures are monumental, life-changing, and will have life-long repercussions.

I cannot judge anyone, for I find myself standing before God every waking moment (and much so in my dreams as well), especially over the last 22 months. I do not know why, but He has responded to me, not with anger, condemnation, persecution, but rather with compassion, mercy, grace, peace,and understanding, hope and restoration. It has forever changed who I am, and how I respond to and regard Him.

I am beyond offence in regards to my faith. It is not mine to begin with. I lay it at His feet and cry for mercy.

[Timestepper]

So, what tenets of your faith would you be willing to reject based on evidence obtained from science?

Depends wholly upon the evidence presented. My faith, like my life, while very real to me, is (also like my life) constantly changing, adapting and evolving. It is also becoming stronger (which also appears to be yet another tenet of evolution).

I'm not the same person I was 20 years ago. Or five years ago. Or even one. But that doesn't make me any less real (at least to myself and those whom I interact with). And the memories I have are still mine and they are still of real events. And while I haven't consciously looked for ways to strengthen my personal faith, it has happened nonetheless and it also is still very real to me.

Of course we all know that even reality is subjective. The amusement park ride that one finds fun and exciting may be either terrifying or stultifyingly boring to another. But it is still an amusement park ride. And the very real experience of one rider does not automarically negate the existence of the equally real experiences of others.

[Mike.357]

Good question - so like the inquisitive heathen sinner I am, I googled "why does God condemn those who never hear the gospel ?"

Turns out there are explanations which make sense to me, anyway. All of them boil down to "He doesn't. He is a gentleman and gives us a choice".

Interesting response. I am pretty sure this is the first time I have been given an answer such as yours to that question. Normally the answer basically is that non believers are screwed, does not matter why they don't believe.

In grade school when asked this question the nuns always answered that as long as each person was true to their faith they would be accepted into heaven. It always struck me as odd that if you are supposed to accept Christ as your savior that there was still a back door to get in.

My personal thought always was that if I did good in my life, did not screw people over and was an honest person that if there is a heaven I need to go to, what I have done better be good enough. I was baptized like most Catholics, as a infant with no say over it.

Odd how different religions practice the same acts (baptism) but do it differently. Of course Catholics confirm their belief at a later date. And of course you really have no choice in that matter. A third grader is not going to tell the nun or priest that they aren't doing it.

I see people who don't believe getting butt hurt just as often as those who do. They're just more sarcastic about it, and for some reason can't resist the temptation to ridicule and belittle someone who does believe.

I was not pointing the butt hurt comment at one side or the other, but at both sides. The sarcasm is cast by both sides. Non believers pointing out the farce of believing in fiction, believers ending it by saying something like "if I am wrong what did I lose, but if you are wrong you are going to hell."

I don't find it offensive, and thought this thread in particular has been pretty tame.

I was going to say I am comfortable in who and where I am.....but really not so. I struggle daily, My recent failures are monumental, life-changing, and will have life-long repercussions.

I cannot judge anyone, for I find myself standing before God every waking moment (and much so in my dreams as well), especially over the last 22 months. I do not know why, but He has responded to me, not with anger, condemnation, persecution, but rather with compassion, mercy, grace, peace,and understanding, hope and restoration. It has forever changed who I am, and how I respond to and regard Him.

I am beyond offence in regards to my faith. It is not mine to begin with. I lay it at His feet and cry for mercy.

agreed that this thread has remained pretty calm.

I am glad when something works for someone, for you the faith you have works. For me I lost it and doubt it will ever be part of my life again.

its good to have civil discussions.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Mike.357

[Guest bkelm18]

Thanks man

Shoot, I figure Hell has got to be a pretty happenin' place with all the non-believers, sinners, and immorals that get sent there. I imagine it like Cancun during Spring Break.

Edited April 15, 2012 by bkelm18

[daddyo]

I was not pointing the butt hurt comment at one side or the other, but at both sides. The sarcasm is cast by both sides. Non believers pointing out the farce of believing in fiction, believers ending it by saying something like "if I am wrong what did I lose, but if you are wrong you are going to hell."

I've never heard a believer make that kind of statement. I'm not doubting that there are those who believe it, but it does show that some things are better left unsaid or said in a less confrontational manner. Sometimes it's better to lead one to his own conclusions.

[Mike.357]

I've never heard a believer make that kind of statement. I'm not doubting that there are those who believe it, but it does show that some things are better left unsaid or said in a less confrontational manner. Sometimes it's better to lead one to his own conclusions.

I have read it any number of times. If my search foo was stronger I am sure I could show it has been posted on this board before.

No one had or has ever tried to convince me that there is no god.

[R_Bert]

Posted Today, 10:27 AM

mikegideon, on 15 April 2012 - 12:01 AM, said:

Thanks man

Shoot, I figure Hell has got to be a pretty happenin' place with all the non-believers, sinners, and immorals that get sent there. I imagine it like Cancun during Spring Break.

So, you guys might want to meet up with this guy, he is way ahead of you - http://dailycaller.c...ry-of-all-time/

Reminds me of a question to ask - has anyone done any real research, and produced truly rational and logical reasoning as to why Hell would be a preferred choice ?

Edited April 15, 2012 by R_Bert

[Guest bkelm18]

I've never heard a believer make that kind of statement.

I've seen that statement numerous times on this board alone. I counter it by saying that if God does exist, I assume he's a pretty scientific fella (I mean he'd have to be if he created the entire universe), and he would appreciate skepticism over people who feign belief just to be on the safe side.

Edited April 15, 2012 by bkelm18

[Guest profgunner]

So, you guys might want to meet up with this guy, he is way ahead of you - http://dailycaller.c...ry-of-all-time/

Reminds me of a question to ask - has anyone done any real research, and produced truly rational and logical reasoning as to why Hell would be a preferred choice ?

LMAO.“So many of [blanchard's] childhood friends that weren’t killed in Vietnam went on to become criminals, prostitutes and/or Democrats. He asks that you stop by and re-tell the stories he can no longer tell.†What an OBIT. Thanks for sharing.

[Guest profgunner]

Reminds me of a question to ask - has anyone done any real research, and produced truly rational and logical reasoning as to why Hell would be a preferred choice ?

"Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in." -Mark Twain

[R_Bert]

"Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in." -Mark Twain

There is indeed much theology behind Mr. Twain's statement. Theologians refer to it as the 'doctrine of grace'.

(and if you make it in there, your cherished pet will be waiting for you...God likes to make folks happy, that's why he calls it Heaven)

My favorite quote is from Jim Elliot (1927-1956) - "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose."

Edited April 15, 2012 by R_Bert

[Guest profgunner]

There is indeed much theology behind Mr. Twain's statement. Theologians refer to it as the 'doctrine of grace'.

(and if you make it in there, your cherished pet will be waiting for you...God likes to make folks happy, that's why he calls it Heaven)

That quote is taken from Twain's "Letters from the Earth". The book is pretty much an indictment of religion, especially religion of the protestant Christian variety. Twain complains that despite man's unbridled enthusiasm for sex God left that out of heaven, choosing instead to focus on activities such as singing and the playing of harps.

[R_Bert]

That quote is taken from Twain's "Letters from the Earth". The book is pretty much an indictment of religion, especially religion of the protestant Christian variety. Twain complains that despite man's unbridled enthusiasm for sex God left that out of heaven, choosing instead to focus on activities such as singing and the playing of harps.

You will see in the teachings of Christ, that He often indicted religion (with just cause). Paul's words even went as far as to indict religious "Christians". Ironic that Twain's words are also an expression of grace (although Twain intended them as an indictment of God). It's too bad Twain did not have a better understanding of Heaven and what God has in mind for us there. For an amazing read on the characteristics of heaven, I suggest a book by Randy Alcorn - "Heaven". Traditional images of boring worship, singing, & harps are not accurate at all.

Edited April 15, 2012 by R_Bert

[Guest profgunner]

Traditional images of boring worship, singing, & harps are not accurate at all.

Twain obviously thought that the singing and playing of harps was somewhat of a bore, but my great aunt (on my father's side) would have loved it. My uncle (her husband), on the other hand, would have been delighted to find heaven full of poker, sex and whiskey. I wonder if they ever run across each other up there!

[R_Bert]

Twain obviously thought that the singing and playing of harps was somewhat of a bore, but my great aunt (on my father's side) would have loved it. My uncle (her husband), on the other hand, would have been delighted to find heaven full of poker, sex and whiskey. I wonder if they ever run across each other up there!

Well, There will be wine, maybe other drinks as well (Jesus said he would be leading us in a toast at his big dinner ,don't need food, but able to enjoy it), and I personally have no doubt friendly games of poker & other recreations.

Given that God defines sexual relations in the context of marriage, and Jesus said there would be no marriage in heaven...I am not holding much hope on sex, but am confident that the benefits will greatly outweigh that particular omission. .

I hope that your aunt and uncle indeed run across each other. Relationships continue (and are even healed / restored when needed), and I am confident that it is a whole lot better than they expected.

Edited April 15, 2012 by R_Bert

[mikegideon]

I see people who don't believe getting butt hurt just as often as those who do. They're just more sarcastic about it, and for some reason can't resist the temptation to ridicule and belittle someone who does believe.

Sarcasm on TGO? That has to stop . I respect everybody in this community, Most of us have strong opinions on here, including you. Religion should be no different, but it is. I guess that's why the topic is banned on a lot of boards. Last time I checked, it was banned here.

[mikegideon]

Twain obviously thought that the singing and playing of harps was somewhat of a bore

I can understand his feelings.

[R_Bert]

Twain obviously thought that the singing and playing of harps was somewhat of a bore

I can understand his feelings.

me too. I am not wired at all for that. Besides, my voice is what the mute button was designed for. I have a face for radio as well.

[wewoapsiak]

I know I'm jumping in on this a bit late, so I'm just going to add one long rant and leave it at that. Because I think we all can agree nothing any of us say on this forum is going to cause the other to change their mind.

I've never heard a believer make that kind of statement. I'm not doubting that there are those who believe it, but it does show that some things are better left unsaid or said in a less confrontational manner. Sometimes it's better to lead one to his own conclusions.

It sounds basically like what is called Pascal's Wager or Pascal's Gambit. In philosophy class at Pellissippi we started off proving that the desert god exists. The desert god being a non-specific all knowing, all loving, all powerful god. The religious were all happy with the proving points, the non-religious sat there and listened then argued respectfully. When we got to the disproving of an illogical desert god, the religious about shat themselves. While some presented pretty valid arguments, most were "Because that's not what the bible said!" And got all huffy and puffy. , but I think this is the blind belief bkelm18 was talking about. The complete belief in a book that has been written, copied, translated, and then canonized all by a man just seems silly to me. If you want to believe in religion, great. But don't use your beliefs to persecute the beliefs of others and then go crying to mommy when someone stands up for what they believe.

As far as the original post, I don’t think morals have fallen as far as you think. There have always been a percentage people who act “immorally†and now thanks to are growing population, media, and internet we are able to hear about these people more easily.

But morality a subjective term. Who defines it? Stanford defines morality as:

“1) A descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a society or,

a. some other group, such as a religion, or

b. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or

2) Normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.

But what society are we talking about? That is something for someone way smarter than me to ponder on. Clearly this forum has quickly jumped on the Christian Morality train. Religion vs. Evolution aside, our society is clearly evolving, and so are our morals. Going by that "Golden Rule" idea profgunner mentioned way back on post 1, always seems to be a good choice. This guideline of treating others as you want to be treated is not an original biblical idea. The Code of Hammurabi, Taoism, and Egyptians all had a similar idea. It only makes sense that if humanity wants to grow, they will have to come together in some fashion.

Edited April 15, 2012 by wewoapsiak