Addressing the issue of constrained morality as Christians - are we truly good people?

Indeed, now we are getting to the full picture...

I understand your point of view in this respect. And it is not my intention ever to argue. I hope to always come to a common understanding and work from there. And I deeply respect you and your thoughts on these things.

originally posted by: randomuser2034

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: randomuser2034

If Jesus had told him the whole truth, he might have changed his mind. That's what being honest and transparent with your friends usually does.

Jesus did tell him the whole truth, that is when Peter quite boldly stated that while everyone else would deny Jesus (in front of all of them as well) that he never would:

"Then Jesus said to them: “All of you will be stumbled in connection with me on this night, for it is written: ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered about.’ But after I have been raised up, I will go ahead of you into Galʹi·lee.” But Peter, in response, said to him: “Although all the others are stumbled in connection with you, I will never be stumbled!” Jesus said to him: “Truly I say to you, on this night, before a rooster crows, you will disown me three times.” Peter said to him: “Even if I should have to die with you, I will by no means disown you.” All the other disciples also said the same thing."-Matthew 26:31-35.

If the conversation never happened, what do you suppose Peter would have done?

Jesus knew Peter was going to do what he did. It was already foretold in scripture that all his followers would scatter, but that doesn't mean he didn't warn them, and even tell them to pray that it wouldn't happen.

Jesus knew that Peter was chosen, and knew what would become of Peter, before Peter knew any of this. So, Peter couldn't have done otherwise, because there was no otherwise for him to do, if God created him to be the Peter that we read about.

Of course he knew Peter. Just as he knew Judas. But he also knows that nothing is impossible with God.

For example, just to open your minds eye to the unfathomable relationship Jesus had with Jehovah and his understanding that with God nothing is impossible, Jesus himself on the night before he died prayed to God that he wanted the cup with which he had to drink removed. That is he did not want to die as a blasphemer. That broke his heart. It was a very hard thing for him to accept, such was his love for his God and Father. But he was willing to subject himself to his Father's will. Because he said, not as I will, but you will:

Then he said to them: “I am deeply grieved, even to death. Stay here and keep on the watch with me.” And going a little way forward, he fell facedown, praying: “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from me. Yet, not as I will, but as you will.”-Matthew 26:38-29.

That is why later Paul was able to write that Jesus Christ learned obedience from the things he suffered:

"Although he was a son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered. And after he had been made perfect, he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him."-Hebrews 5:8-9.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: randomuser2034

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: randomuser2034

If Jesus had told him the whole truth, he might have changed his mind. That's what being honest and transparent with your friends usually does.

Jesus did tell him the whole truth, that is when Peter quite boldly stated that while everyone else would deny Jesus (in front of all of them as well) that he never would:

"Then Jesus said to them: “All of you will be stumbled in connection with me on this night, for it is written: ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered about.’ But after I have been raised up, I will go ahead of you into Galʹi·lee.” But Peter, in response, said to him: “Although all the others are stumbled in connection with you, I will never be stumbled!” Jesus said to him: “Truly I say to you, on this night, before a rooster crows, you will disown me three times.” Peter said to him: “Even if I should have to die with you, I will by no means disown you.” All the other disciples also said the same thing."-Matthew 26:31-35.

If the conversation never happened, what do you suppose Peter would have done?

Before Cain killed his brother Abel Jehovah warned him:

"Then Jehovah said to Cain: “Why are you so angry and dejected? If you turn to doing good, will you not be restored to favor? But if you do not turn to doing good, sin is crouching at the door, and its craving is to dominate you; but will you get the mastery over it?”-Genesis 4:6-7.

I suppose we all have the freewill to listen to the counsel or reject it. But it becomes apparent that the majority of humankind rejects its. So that is where God's patience and mercy comes into play for those who sin against him, but have a good heart. I know what you're trying to get to.

Now think about this. Later on Peter did change. And he ended up being murdered as was Jesus Christ. So he learned. And also we learn from the experience for it was written down for us to meditate on. So all was not a loss.

originally posted by: randomuser2034

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: randomuser2034

If Jesus had told him the whole truth, he might have changed his mind. That's what being honest and transparent with your friends usually does.

Jesus did tell him the whole truth, that is when Peter quite boldly stated that while everyone else would deny Jesus (in front of all of them as well) that he never would:

"Then Jesus said to them: “All of you will be stumbled in connection with me on this night, for it is written: ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered about.’ But after I have been raised up, I will go ahead of you into Galʹi·lee.” But Peter, in response, said to him: “Although all the others are stumbled in connection with you, I will never be stumbled!” Jesus said to him: “Truly I say to you, on this night, before a rooster crows, you will disown me three times.” Peter said to him: “Even if I should have to die with you, I will by no means disown you.” All the other disciples also said the same thing."-Matthew 26:31-35.

Jesus didn't tell Peter how to avoid a situation that would cause Peter pain. Which you would generally morally expect of a friend. In fact, He told none of them how to avoid any of this, precisely because He did not hold the same moral view that we expect people to hold.

Jesus didn't tell Peter how to avoid a situation that would cause Peter pain. Which you would generally morally expect of a friend. In fact, He told none of them how to avoid any of this, precisely because He did not hold the same moral view that we expect people to hold.

Actually he did. And even on that very night. When he took Peter, James, and John with him to the garden of Gethsemane to pray noticed what he admonished them:


"He returned to the disciples and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter: “Could you not so much as keep on the watch for one hour with me? Keep on the watch and pray continually, so that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit, of course, is eager, but the flesh is weak.”-Matthew 26:40-41.

So yes, he did. Quite to the contrary of what you claim. But this is also a warning example for us on whom the end of the system of things has arrived. We need to pray constantly that we do not fall into temptation, and that we may be saved in that time of judgement that is swiftly approaching. For it is only by prayer that we will get away safe.

What was Jesus doing on the night before he died? He was fervently praying to God. And God sent his angels to strengthen Jesus for what was to come. May we all follow Jesus' example. He didn't even think that he was strong enough to deal with it on his own. He relied on prayer, on his Father Jehovah, and the angels sent to give him the strength to carry out God's will.

His followers didn't do what he said.

Are you going to follow Jesus example or that of his apostles who ignored his admonish to pray not to fall into temptation and fall asleep?

Hmm a good lesson for all of us. The wise ones will learn from the lesson and follow Jesus' example.

originally posted by: randomuser2034

Jesus didn't tell Peter how to avoid a situation that would cause Peter pain. Which you would generally morally expect of a friend. In fact, He told none of them how to avoid any of this, precisely because He did not hold the same moral view that we expect people to hold.

Actually he did. And even on that very night. When he took Peter, James, and John with him to the garden of Gethsemane to pray noticed what he admonished them:


"He returned to the disciples and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter: “Could you not so much as keep on the watch for one hour with me? Keep on the watch and pray continually, so that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit, of course, is eager, but the flesh is weak.”-Matthew 26:40-41.

So yes, he did. Quite to the contrary of what you claim. But this is also a warning example for us on whom the end of the system of things has arrived. We need to pray constantly that we do not fall into temptation, and that we may be saved in that time of judgement that is swiftly approaching. For it is only by prayer that we will get away safe.

What was Jesus doing on the night before he died? He was fervently praying to God. And God sent his angels to strengthen Jesus for what was to come. May we all follow Jesus' example. He didn't even think that he was strong enough to deal with it on his own. He relied on prayer, on his Father Jehovah, and the angels sent to give him the strength to carry out God's will.

His followers didn't do what he said.

Are you going to follow Jesus example or that of his apostles who ignored his admonish to pray not to fall into temptation and fall asleep?

Hmm a good lesson for all of us. The wise ones will learn from the lesson and follow Jesus' example.

Are you suggesting, that if they had prayed all night, then nothing would have happened? Ah, but we will never know, because it was not God's will that they succeed in that. If it was God's will, they could have prayed all year. Besides, Jesus praying all night did nothing to change his own fate, tho it may well have strengthened his resolve, when he said "Your will be done"

Are you suggesting, that if they had prayed all night, then nothing would have happened? Ah, but we will never know, because it was not God's will that they succeed in that. If it was God's will, they could have prayed all year. Besides, Jesus praying all night did nothing to change his own fate, tho it may well have strengthened his resolve, when he said "Your will be done"

Jesus set the example. He was busy praying for God's will to be done. His apostles were busy sleeping. Jesus made this empathic observation though, "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak."

God's will will be done. There is nothing that can thwart it. The name Jehovah means "He causes to become." And he can become or cause anyone whom he so chooses to become whatsoever he chooses to accomplish his good will. Jehovah is the Great Potter. And we are the clay in his hand. How will you be molded? If you do not allow yourself to be molded he will discard you. You have freewill to decide:

"You will therefore say to me: “Why does he still find fault? For who has withstood his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to be answering back to God? Does the thing molded say to its molder: “Why did you make me this way?” 21 What? Does not the potter have authority over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel for an honorable use, another for a dishonorable use?"-Romans 9:19-21.

originally posted by: randomuser2034

Are you suggesting, that if they had prayed all night, then nothing would have happened? Ah, but we will never know, because it was not God's will that they succeed in that. If it was God's will, they could have prayed all year. Besides, Jesus praying all night did nothing to change his own fate, tho it may well have strengthened his resolve, when he said "Your will be done"

Jesus set the example. He was busy praying for God's will to be done. His apostles were busy sleeping. Jesus made this empathic observation though, "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak."

God's will will be done. There is nothing that can thwart it. The name Jehovah means "He causes to become." And he can become or cause anyone whom he so chooses to become whatsoever he chooses to accomplish his good will. Jehovah is the Great Potter. And we are the clay in his hand. How will you be molded? If you do not allow yourself to be molded he will discard you. You have freewill to decide:

"You will therefore say to me: “Why does he still find fault? For who has withstood his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to be answering back to God? Does the thing molded say to its molder: “Why did you make me this way?” 21 What? Does not the potter have authority over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel for an honorable use, another for a dishonorable use?"-Romans 9:19-21.

Again, we find ourselves at the root of the matter. It is also written that He has created vessels for both honor and dishonor, and that the righteousness of mankind is as rags in is sight. That by works, no one is justified before Him. So, when it comes to morality, God is the only ultimate judge of that. Samson's parents, for example thought that he sinned by pursuing a foreign woman. However, it says that didn't realize that this desire of his, came from God. David would have sinned by eating the holy bread. Moses would have sinned by committing murder. Lot would have sinned by having sex with both of his daughters. Abraham would have sinned by sacrificing Issac. Rehab was a traitor to her government. Hosea married a prostitute. Samuel killed a prisoner of war. The Israelites engaged in what would be called human trafficking and or pedophilia today. However, God judged all of these acts, done by faith in His will, as righteousness. I dare say, God is above human morality, and if the Bible be taken as historical record, so were many of his followers. Now, this doesn't mean these people did nothing that would be considered "good", just that those that follow God, should perhaps not be so eager to mistake human morality, for God's morality

When it comes to the matter of living a moral life, and having a moral 'core' in our soul/being, what is the deal with us Christians? Are we living a lie based on forcing ourselves to be moral? And if we weren't Christians we'd be immoral, unable to make rightoues moral decisions of our own accord?

Its a very important question. I strongly believe we humans have two natures. Our Eve material nature is mind (egotistical). Our Adam spiritual nature is our heart or soul (altruistic). Those ruled by mind are what Jesus termed as living in evil. The mind only having egotistical desires for one self.

So in seeking the reward of heaven exists a conundrum. Seeking the reward of heaven in itself is an egotistical desire. Yet the gate will only open to those with purely altruistic desires. This conundrum is answered by the death of Jesus on the cross. Surrendering eve within one self for the single reason of helping others escape from their pain in life (hell) etc. Is to metaphorically die on the cross like Jesus did to help save others from their sins. In doing so, one can pass the gate having absolutely no egotistical desires at all.

The vast majority of us are ruled by mind (Eve). When Jesus stated in Matthew 7:23 “Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’”. Jesus was saying he only exists in Adam, the spiritual nature of our heart or soul (altruistic). If we choose to exist in mind (Eve) he cannot know us.

a reply to: glend

You are on to something here. The idea of humans having two minds, that of flesh (ego) and spirt. Works of the ego are meaningless from the position of the Spirit, but they might look like good works from the human perspective. Yet, there are works that come from the Spirit, by individual faith, that are manifested in the material realm of flesh, that might lool foolish or immoral. As a result, it is not entirely possible, nor is it wise, to use human morals as a judgment on which is which.
"Judge not..."

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

You did this before and you need to stop it. You misquote people then go on a tangent. You said:

Now this raises some very thorny issues for us Christians. Firstly, let me state that even from a Scriptural perspective, NeoHolographic was categorically WRONG to claim that atheists & agnostics cannot be moral people capable of independently making morally righteous decisions in the course of their lives, in terms of how they interact with other people & the world in general.

This is a flat out lie!

I said over and over again in my post that atheist have subjective morality. You have to stop making things up. I said all behavior and subjective marality has to be equally good and this leads to modal collapse. If you're going to quote me then do it accurately. You don't have to lie.

I said there can't be moral law with atheism because there's no objective standard of good. You said atheist can be:

moral people capable of independently making morally righteous decisions

What's a morally righteous decision if there's no objective standard of good?

If one atheist feeds the homeless and takes care of his family and another atheists trafficks women and says it's morally good because it feeds his family, how can either one not be good without any objective standard of good.

What you're saying goes against scripture. It's not works that make you righteous, it's Christ born within you.

How can any behavior not be morally righteous in the eyes of atheism? Each atheist is a law unto themselves. This is lawlessness and this is why the Bible says the carnal mind isn't subject to God's law.

You need to stop bearing false witness:

"Bearing false witness" means to knowingly state something as true when it is untrue. It can also mean to start or continue a rumor by lying about a person, thing, or event.

So it's simple, tell me how any behavior isn't good with atheism without an objective standard of good?

As Christians, we say God's Will is the objective standard of good. This is why we say not my will but your will be done. We give up our subjective will and subjective morality to follow God's Will. What your saying is lawless. You're saying you can be morally righteous without an objective standard of good.

Inherently, we all know there's an objective standard of good which comes from the transcendent tuth of God's existence but atheist say they're soulless animals that come from a soup of chemicals. So again, tell me how one atheists subjective morality is any more good or evil than any other atheists subjective morality without an objective standard of good?

a reply to: HKMarrow

Agree. There is also the point of judging mind (evil) with mind (evil). Doing so keeps one in mind (evil). When one awakens the spirit. The spirit will cleanse the mind. A process that in some people can take years. The holy spirit is audible as wind in the early stages. Eventually changing into the sound of trumpets as the process completes. When the mind is finally cleansed it no longer seeks desires or continually makes judgement. It serves the spirit. The two become one.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: HKMarrow

Agree. There is also the point of judging mind (evil) with mind (evil). Doing so keeps one in mind (evil). When one awakens the spirit. The spirit will cleanse the mind. A process that in some people can take years. The holy spirit is audible as wind in the early stages. Eventually changing into the sound of trumpets as the process completes. When the mind is finally cleansed it no longer seeks desires or continually makes judgement. It serves the spirit. The two become one.

Beautifully put...

originally posted by: neoholographicpart2
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

You did this before and you need to stop it. You misquote people then go on a tangent. You said:

Now this raises some very thorny issues for us Christians. Firstly, let me state that even from a Scriptural perspective, NeoHolographic was categorically WRONG to claim that atheists & agnostics cannot be moral people capable of independently making morally righteous decisions in the course of their lives, in terms of how they interact with other people & the world in general.

This is a flat out lie!

I said over and over again in my post that atheist have subjective morality. You have to stop making things up. I said all behavior and subjective marality has to be equally good and this leads to modal collapse. If you're going to quote me then do it accurately. You don't have to lie.

I said there can't be moral law with atheism because there's no objective standard of good. You said atheist can be:

moral people capable of independently making morally righteous decisions

What's a morally righteous decision if there's no objective standard of good?

If one atheist feeds the homeless and takes care of his family and another atheists trafficks women and says it's morally good because it feeds his family, how can either one not be good without any objective standard of good.

What you're saying goes against scripture. It's not works that make you righteous, it's Christ born within you.

How can any behavior not be morally righteous in the eyes of atheism? Each atheist is a law unto themselves. This is lawlessness and this is why the Bible says the carnal mind isn't subject to God's law.

You need to stop bearing false witness:

"Bearing false witness" means to knowingly state something as true when it is untrue. It can also mean to start or continue a rumor by lying about a person, thing, or event.

So it's simple, tell me how any behavior isn't good with atheism without an objective standard of good?

As Christians, we say God's Will is the objective standard of good. This is why we say not my will but your will be done. We give up our subjective will and subjective morality to follow God's Will. What your saying is lawless. You're saying you can be morally righteous without an objective standard of good.

Inherently, we all know there's an objective standard of good which comes from the transcendent tuth of God's existence but atheist say they're soulless animals that come from a soup of chemicals. So again, tell me how one atheists subjective morality is any more good or evil than any other atheists subjective morality without an objective standard of good?

Ultimately, all morality is subjective. Be it subjective to feelings, society, religion or God. And God doesn't say that everyone should, for instance, attempt to sacrifice thier kids, or marry a prostitute. That means God's morality is fluid...

So, reverting this irrelevant discussion about make up religious nonsense to the original topic - none of it provides a sound basis for morality. Everything randomuser2034 has said only proves the cruel, selfish and petulant nature of his "god", which is absolutely NOT what you want to use for your basis of morality.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

That still doesn't make any sense though.

If a person is involved in human trafficking or slavery because they think god wants them to, it doesn't suddenly make the action moral or right.

It's the same action regardless of their beleif and motivation

If you need a book to dictate to you what is considered good or bad, than you are definitely not a good person, you are just pretending to be to avoid the so-called punishment (hell).

Republican Christians are not good people, they use "God" as a weapon to justify their hate and lies.

originally posted by: NoOneButMeAgain
So, reverting this irrelevant discussion about make up religious nonsense to the original topic - none of it provides a sound basis for morality. Everything randomuser2034 has said only proves the cruel, selfish and petulant nature of his "god", which is absolutely NOT what you want to use for your basis of morality.

I believe you are correct. The bible, upon closer investigation, is not necessarily a book about being a "Good person". It's a book about having faith in deity, even if that makes you a "bad person". So, you are correct in your statement that allegance to "God" isn't what human social morals should generally be based on. Many Christians have confused worldly things like patriotism and social norms with the ideals of "God", when clearly there exist a record of these things often being at odds with each other. From the social perspective, an atheist can easily be a moral person. Whilst a follower of a deity may be led to go against social norms at any moment.

Morality is also tied to social norms, and what's considered right and wrong changes with time and place. It's simply what is socially acceptable.

a reply to: bastion

Agreed. Human trafficking, abduction of young girls or whatever, will be looked upon by the victims in unfavorable terms, regardless of if the people who are doing so, are doing it out of faith. Same thing with killing every man woman and child. Funny thing is, when ISIS, for instance does such things out of faith in their belief in God, Christians in the west act as if God couldn't possibly support such. Acting real brand new, as they say.