tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post112991153967307116..comments2023-08-16T07:20:09.921-05:00Comments on Kineti L'Tziyon קנאתי לציון: Morality apart from GodJudah Gabriel Himangohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10277699587853707632noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1133557643349126602005-12-02T15:07:00.000-06:002005-12-02T15:07:00.000-06:00When I was 3 or 4 (my parents aren't sure) we trav...When I was 3 or 4 (my parents aren't sure) we traveled from Colorado to Arkansas to visit my grandparents. I have a particular very vivid memory from the trip. I was driving on a back road with my grandfather (step actually) and aunt, when grandpa hit the breaks, pulled his shotgun off the rack, and killed a bird.<BR/><BR/>I was a little shocked, but more by the noise than the dead bird. I asked him why he killed the bird, and he said it was because that bird ate quail eggs, and he hunted quail.<BR/><BR/>I have no memory of being taught any morals about killing things, one way or the other. But I felt very strongly that while killing a quail to eat yourself was fine, killing the competition was not. It was deep in my gut. I don't know if it was god, or genetics, but there was no question for me that it was wrong.<BR/><BR/>I don't know from whence the nature comes (I'm agnostic, leaning towards atheist) but I do 'know' (as much as I can know anything) that there was no nurture involved in my gut that day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1132251409677904532005-11-17T12:16:00.000-06:002005-11-17T12:16:00.000-06:00"Doing whatever feels right," as you put it, is re..."Doing whatever feels right," as you put it, is really a better description of hedonism, which I hesitate to dub "secular morality."<BR/><BR/>Whatever you may call it, I do agree that there's far too much of it in today's world, with our own society being a -- for lack of a better term -- <I>shining</I> example.<BR/><BR/>I agree, rejecting God in favor of the natural world is foolish. But in my own beliefs, there is no way to separate God from his Creation, either, as I believe he permeates everything. I don't believe there is a space alongside ours, outside of all that we know, where God exists separately. In the same breath, I hesitate to claim the Scriptures were inspired by God, having been written and revised by man.<BR/><BR/>Revised? It didn't translate <I>itself</I> into English, and somehow it still reads like prose. And how many variations on the Bible are out there?<BR/><BR/>I don't want to get into a large discussion about the history of functional literacy and the misuse of the power of the church, but suffice it to say, you probably aren't reading the Scriptures as they were originally inked.<BR/><BR/>Do I believe that the Bible contains many, many guidelines for a good and happy life? Of course. Do I believe that it contains many proverbs and fables illustrating good morality? Definitely! But that's far from making it Godly, in and of itself. Having a solid base and the ability to think for one's self is extremely important.<BR/><BR/>Likewise, I believe that we should <I>worship</I> Jesus less and <I>aspire</I> to him more; to make his teachings the first things that pop into our head when given a choice in which path to choose, and to treat all with the compassion and love that he showed.<BR/><BR/>I also believe that kindness <I>does</I> exist in nature, despite its uselessness in the scheme of survival; it's simply the minority, as it is in the realm of man most of the time. An example might be when a mother of one species adopts an infant of another. Is she chemically confused by the scent of the orphan? I really don't think so.<BR/><BR/>We are <I>all</I> (and indeed, everything is) God's creation. I'm not about to claim that animals are equal to humans, but the similarities can be striking; all are creatures of survival first, then pleasure (when survival needs have been fulfilled), and almost always impulse.<BR/><BR/>The best we can do is attempt to ascend away from our gutteral instincts. The Bible and the teachings of Jesus are guidelines to help us along the way.<BR/><BR/>And I believe, in that respect, our differences in opinion are largely more terminology than substance.<BR/><BR/>I've been tempted before on many occasions to become another of the evil men of the world, as kindness does not always reward in physicalities. But, even being of secular mind, I've rejected those temptations. There <I>is</I> a deeper moral fabric that is independent of <I>all</I> religions and faiths. I didn't ask myself if God would be pleased or angry with my decision, I asked myself how I would feel about myself afterwards.<BR/><BR/>I'm not a Christian, but I feel like one. I guess the one importance I failed to underline was <I>conscience</I>. If you feel bad for doing something that hurts yourself or someone else, you're likely not choosing the right thing. If you never feel one way or the other, I'm not so sure you can be helped... regardless of faith.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1132241792992603192005-11-17T09:36:00.000-06:002005-11-17T09:36:00.000-06:00Not every non-believer in Christ is in the secular...Not every non-believer in Christ is in the secular camp. By secular camp, I meant the folks who reject God outright, opting for a purely natural view of the world.<BR/><BR/>I also wouldn't call religious morality sacred. Sacred morality ("holy") implies a morality that is set apart for God. There is nothing sacred about religious morality, as mentioned already. I happen to believe the Scriptural morality is superior than both religious and secular morality because of its absolute and authoritative law, which is not only unparalleled in secular morality, but also something I personally believe to be inspired by God Himself.<BR/><BR/>My beliefs, as pointed out both in the blog post and in the comments following, fall short of Scriptural morality. I'm on no higher ground than you, because by nature, people enjoy doing evil things, myself included unfortunately. It's really by nature that people are generally evil. We like to cheat, take the easy way out, lie, curse people, lust after things not ours, do violence, hate other people. That's the easy way. That's the "do whatever comes to you" way. That's the way of no moral guidline, you're kind of just doing whatever the situation lead you to, without any regard to God or God's standard of what is right and wrong. Contrast this with the life of Jesus Christ, who taught the greatest of all the Scriptural laws were to love God, and love one another, and that all other Scriptural laws hang on these 2 laws. (see <A HREF="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022:35-40;&version=31;" REL="nofollow">this bit</A>)<BR/><BR/>Rather than take the easy path of doing whatever feels right (which secular morality really is all about, underneath it all), I say go for what is right and follow God. I think if God really does exist, then any simple person can see that for sure God's values of what is right and what is wrong are far superior to anything humanity has cooked up so far.Judah Gabriel Himangohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10277699587853707632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1132235580972686112005-11-17T07:53:00.000-06:002005-11-17T07:53:00.000-06:00Lumping every non-Christian into a "secular morali...Lumping every non-Christian into a "secular morality" pile is a bit callous. The entire basis of your argument is a small set of personal beliefs, a fact which you have already admitted above. Therefore, you have effectively proven that the morality for which you stand is <I>equivalent to</I> the "secular morality" you decry.<BR/><BR/>For the record, I have a disdain for the labels of "sacred" and "secular." One gives implicit superiority over the other without argument.<BR/><BR/>Not everyone in the "secular" world shares the sheep mentality you refer to in the blog post, changing their beliefs like clothing. Critical thought and a measure of introspection do wonders for the soul of man; it just happens that these skills are lacking in many. Finding out what you truly believe in is a good portion of the journey of life, and there are no absolutes.<BR/><BR/>Generalizations, stereotypes, and flawed assumptions were the root causes of the Crusades, slavery, and the Holocaust, just to name a few. And before this world's last breath, these <I>true</I> evils of man will accomplish far more despicable.<BR/><BR/>I would implore you to become part of the solution, rather than siding with the problem. Embrace your sacred and secular bretheren both, without trying to persuade everyone that your beliefs reign supreme.<BR/><BR/>Who are you trying to convince?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1131322635957539732005-11-06T18:17:00.000-06:002005-11-06T18:17:00.000-06:00Wow, looks like this struck a little nerve in the ...Wow, looks like this struck a little nerve in the secular camp! I'm glad to hear what you all have to say, so thanks, guys, for posting.<BR/><BR/><I>"Absolute morality of scripture demands that the crusades would not have occurred."</I><BR/><BR/>No it doesn't. The Crusades, and other assumedly immoral acts by religious people, simply means that religious people are not always moral or righteous people, and do not always reflect the goodness of God. I put myself in this same group; it's really hard to be a moral person in the modern world. It is, because the world puts out a lot of immoral things, and our human mind tends towards evil, we enjoy doing evil things. <BR/><BR/>I know Scriptural morality to be superior to the world's relative morality, from a natural standpoint at least, because I believe that if an act in some circumstance is considered right or wrong at one instance in time, then that same act under the same circumstances is still judged the same, right or wrong. Secular morality doesn't give me that. Secular morality tells me to do what feels good. Secular morality tells me to follow the whim of the majority. Secular morality tells me there is no absolute and no authority. In essence, secular morality is akin to a lawless, anarchists' morality: to each his own; what we may consider immoral today, secular morality may say otherwise tomorrow. That doesn't make any sense; provided the same circumstances, why would time change whether an act be considered immoral? But we've already seen the world sway on this, with everything from prostitution to homosexuality to pornography. What's next, Beastiality? Pedophilia? Here I'm touching on only the sexual practices of the world, yet this same relative, hedonistic views apply to all aspects of morality.<BR/><BR/>From a faith standpoint, we who believe in God also believe Scriptural morality superior because we believe both that God exists and that Scripture is inspired by God. If by chance we are right, then there is little question remaining for us (I am speaking to believers in God here).<BR/><BR/>That isn't to say people who try to follow God always succeed in being moral and ethical. On the contrary, <B>we have no claim to be holier-than-you</B>. This absolute right-and-wrong set of moral rules we know as Scripture only points out how immoral and evil we really are. It also points out that we need someone from God to pardon our immorality, in order to make us clean again and free from immorality. That person is Jesus Christ.<BR/><BR/>To the 'lamb of god' poster, let me reply by saying one thing I did not want to convey in my post is one of superiority coming from the religious side. In fact, I said this very thing in the post: that religious people have done very evil things throughout history, and that religious morality is not righteousness. I knew secularists would try to paint any moral talk as "holier-than-thou" nonsense, as people on your side of the fence have done in the past, so I outlined a good part of the post on the wretched state of religious morality that falls from God. I hope I made that clear enough in the post. Likewise, I do <B>not</B> claim higher moral ground than you, because I do lots immoral things. My flesh wants to do immoral things. It's our nature. My morals are no better than yours, despite having an absolute moral system defined. The only thing that absolute moral system has done is make me realize how evil and immoral I am. It also makes me realize that if God does exist, as I believe, and point me to the need for someone to save me from my immorality. <BR/><BR/>That is the only thing I can boast about, I think: I have pardoning and forgiveness of my immorality through Jesus Christ. To me, that's a lot better than wishing and hoping there's no god there, putting the secret, immoral things I do in hiding, pretending they aren't immoral, hoping no one finds out.<BR/><BR/>I don't have all the answers. I do have beliefs, and those are the things I convey on this blog and share with people like you.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for posting all, good conversation.Judah Gabriel Himangohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10277699587853707632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1131319525229516732005-11-06T17:25:00.000-06:002005-11-06T17:25:00.000-06:00"lamb of god" you say that Judah is putting himsel..."lamb of god" you say that Judah is putting himself on a high and arrogant position, above others.<BR/>All Judah did was explain that morality based on his God is one that doesn not waver and change according to many factors, like secular morality does. <BR/><BR/>Is Judah saying his morality is more consistent? Yes. <BR/>You can't deny that secular morality does not change all the time, and you can't say that morality based on the Judeo-Christian God changes, because it is written in stone - litterally (the Ten Commandments).<BR/><BR/>All Judah is saying is that his chosen morality is more dependable than that of secualar, hellenistic/hedonsitic thought of today, which freely allows all forms of sinful (sinful based on the Law of God) pleasure, as anyone wishes to indulge in.Chassidishe Yidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12529195696031830910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1131280588914974942005-11-06T06:36:00.000-06:002005-11-06T06:36:00.000-06:00I am someone who knows alot about nothing and noth...I am someone who knows alot about nothing and nothing about a lot of things. Unlike you, it seems.<BR/><BR/>That does not make me morally, or "scripturally" superior to you, nor superior in any sense of the word, but it does mean that I have lived a bit longer than yourself and, consequently, have learned a few more life lessons than you.<BR/><BR/>While your belief in Christianity, in itself, is harmless, you do not do yourself or others a service by touting it as the highest and most superior way and manner by which to live your life.<BR/><BR/>Your Saviour did not have this in mind during his short period of existence on Earth. It is clear from your writings that you put yourself upon a high and defensible position, unfortunately above others. Even if not intentional on your part, your thoughts are not humble nor moderate. For this, I pity you, but you are young, like I was once. My hope is that you will change over time and become more tolerant of others, realizing that you, as an individual, do not have all the answers to all questions as you so earnestly try to convey via your blog.<BR/><BR/>Maybe you realize this or maybe you do not; but what you write here, your thoughts, are accessible to the public at large and we too are free to express our own thoughts on what you write here. Do not take this as a personal assault, but rather as something on which you should ponder.<BR/><BR/>Best wishes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1131279368447169662005-11-06T06:16:00.000-06:002005-11-06T06:16:00.000-06:00How do you propose that scriptural morality is abs...How do you propose that scriptural morality is absolute? Absolute morality of scripture demands that the crusades would not have occurred. This is clearly not the case. If it <I>were</I> the case then both Urban II and yourself would arrive at the same conclusion regarding the moral interpretation of scripture. Obviously this has not occurred. Thus possibly your interpretation of scripture is incorrect, or in the past the interpretation was incorrect. Hence, you do not arrive at an absolute. Do you understand the concept of "absolute"?<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, by what metric are you judging morality such that you can declare scriptural morality superior? Do you gauge it by your moral superiority?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1131082944571337232005-11-03T23:42:00.000-06:002005-11-03T23:42:00.000-06:00Hi, thanks for visiting.You said, "it's sad that y...Hi, thanks for visiting.<BR/><BR/>You said, <I>"it's sad that you've fallen into the standard "art holier than thou" trap of forgetting that your religion is arbitrary."</I><BR/><BR/>I plainly agree that religious people have committed evil acts. In fact, I said that in the blog post (see "Religious Morality is Not Righteousness" section, where I stated "<I>One thing I don't want to incite in you, the reader, is a feeling of superiority coming from the religious side of the fence. Don't get me wrong, religious people have carried out some definitely evil acts in the world."</I><BR/><BR/>Does that make God evil or religion evil? No, the acts of religious people do not always reflect the goodness of God, unfortunately. In fact, this is more often the case than not, sadly.<BR/><BR/>So, I want to reiterate that religious morality is not superior to secular morality. Scriptural morality, however, is superior, and one reason is because it is absolute in nature. Unfortunately, we who believe in God don't always follow Scriptural morality and we often reflect poorly on the goodness of God. Even you will agree that if God does exist, he certainly wouldn't condone the evil evil acts carried out by religious people (Crusades, abortion clinic bombings, Islamic terror, Catholic priest sexual abuse, etc.) All these things are immoral whether you are religious or secular. And certainly if God does exist, he would not condone these acts. This is the superior moral system I'm talking about. If a religious person commits an evil act, that makes that person -- not God -- immoral.<BR/><BR/>You said, <I>"and as far as "whatever happens to be the majority's in vogue morality at the moment" -- the same is true for your religions."</I> And you go on to cite examples of poor morality on the religious side. <BR/><BR/>Yes! You're right. Like everyone else, we who believe in God aren't good at being moral & ethical people. It's hard. Especially in today's world where it's really easy to do immoral things. But that doesn't change that Scriptural morality is absolute, and if it is inspired by God -- which we believe -- then it is superior to anything you or I could write. Contrast this with secular morality which is always changing (never any true, absolute right and wrongs) and has no authority (who's to say what is right and wrong?).<BR/><BR/>You are right that morality is based on belief. You have to take a leap of faith to believe something is right or wrong. My belief is firmly planted in the author of the universe, and yours in the contemporary, ever-changing world system. And with that, I'm glad my son will grow up with the knowledge of Christ and not the easy-out view of "do whatever feels right" that the world pushes to its own demise.Judah Gabriel Himangohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10277699587853707632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1131076503335854572005-11-03T21:55:00.000-06:002005-11-03T21:55:00.000-06:00your article is both funny and stupid. i find it ...your article is both funny and stupid. i find it odd that you place all secularists into one group which (apparently) must be accounted for.<BR/><BR/>the weakest point of your argument is that you fail to mention the arbitrary nature of any moral system. your system of religion is arbitrary: someone decided to write some stuff down in a book, and people follow that and thereby claim those to be their moral belief. simply because more people follow that book does not mean the morals contained therein are any better than the arbitrary morals *I* write in a book and claim to be moral. <BR/><BR/>your religion is just as arbitrary as anything else. your morals are just as arbitrary as anything else. there is no "solid rock of Christ" -- there's just a book you've accepted as being true, and maybe other people have too. it's not better than my morals.<BR/><BR/>it's sad that you've fallen into the standard "art holier than thou" trap of forgetting that your religion is arbitrary.<BR/><BR/>any sort of morals are based on a belief -- something that science obviously does not touch -- an assertion one holds to be true without proof. secular morals are beliefs just like your religion is a belief. neither is better.<BR/><BR/>and as far as "whatever happens to be the majority's in vogue morality at the moment" -- the same is true for your religions. your religions persecuted innocent people, held the Crusades, the spanish inquisiton ... your priests rape young boys. your religion is not moral. it's the vogue morality of the moment. how about churches accepting money to absolve one's sin? <BR/><BR/>it's pathetic that you have such a slanted, unfairly positive view towards your own religion. you see consistency that is not there. i feel sorry for you, and especially for your son who will grow up in an environment without perspective.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1130885005477470662005-11-01T16:43:00.000-06:002005-11-01T16:43:00.000-06:00where's your rss?where's your rss?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1130806692763121042005-10-31T18:58:00.000-06:002005-10-31T18:58:00.000-06:00I guess with this topic, there's not much you can ...I guess with this topic, there's not much you can do but accept that we all have our own morals, and try to follow yours as best as you can, whatever the motivation behind them.<BR/>Something I thought of just a second ago - how about when parents teach their kids about right and wrong? Can they permanantly effect what they grow up to accept as right and wrong? i guess this is getting closer to a nature/nurture argument, but still, how much of people's morals can be put down to their parents?<BR/>Oh, and as for pure evil? Skeletor. If you don't know who that is, I don't know if you should be glad or not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1130773176553052292005-10-31T09:39:00.000-06:002005-10-31T09:39:00.000-06:00Excellent analysis!Excellent analysis!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6836835.post-1130612358849229492005-10-29T13:59:00.000-05:002005-10-29T13:59:00.000-05:00Very good article, especially the last part.Very good article, especially the last part.Chassidishe Yidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12529195696031830910noreply@blogger.com