Man's morality

[Drich]

Okay. But, from this it does not immediately follow that the laws in the Bible serve as a good standard.

Righteousness does not have anything to do with what we understand to be 'good.' Righteousness is the standard in which we must obtain (though attonement offered by Christ) to enter Heaven.

Because 'we' generally ascribe 'good' with moral behavior we can think that good people go to heaven and bad people goto Hell. The truth? There will be NO 'Good People" in Heaven at all.

This is why it is so deperatly important to seperate God's true righteousness for our own self righteous 'morality.'

Then what use it this so called righteousness if it has nothing to do with our actions?

When Paul answered this questions in the book of Romans he said we have this standard to point to our sins/short commings.

This means If we can admit to this sins/short commings (rather than justify them with morality) we are 1/2 way to accepting the attonement needed to become Truly righteous before God.

Whatever that means... Accepting Jesus is all that matters?

yes

So acts mean...nothing?

by themselves no. What makes an act good or bad before the eyes of God is the reason you do what you do.

So you don't care that god's rulebook is flawed? Or...is that because it isn't a rulebook?

It is a rule book with one purpose. To highlight that no matter our best efforts we will never be able to follow the rules to the standard need to enter Heaven.

Then it provides an alternitive.

He could also use magic to do something totally unorthodox. I think you are selling his omnipotence short. He sure didn't hold back against Sodom and Gomorrah.

how do you know it was magic? It may have been magic to lot, but Fire, sulfer, salt all 'smell' like an eruption of somesort to me. Last I checked eruptions are apart of this world. What makes this is an act of God is the fact that God triggered it to punish a wicked people as He said He would.

He doesn't have to care...if he exists.

Then if God does not care about man's judgement against Him then doesn't that make man's morality impotent? Fore a standard that can not be supported or enforced is not a standard at all.
What if i wanted to buy light bubls using a star trek unit of energy measure?
What if i demanded that light bulb manifacturers start selling bulbs rated in Cochranes rather than watts?

If I can not enforce or make an authority accept my standard then my 'standard' becomes useless.

Subsequently if God has told us that our 'morality' is meaningless to Him then why would we use it anyway?

At least I'm washing part of my cup. You said acts don't matter, so who cares, right?

Not by themselves. Acts and Heart must speak together in unison. Christ said washing the outside of the cup is foolishness. But if you wash the inside of your cup the ooutside will be cleansed as well.

So if they get reincarnated...why the outrage?

They were never 'incarnate' to begin with so they are not 're-incarnated' We are told we are all given to Live once and die to judgement. If they did not have a chance to live then it stands to reason they will be given an oppertunity someplace else. Why the out rage?!?!? BECAUSE YOU/WE ARE STILL KILLING BABIES BY THE MILLIONS! and it is justified morally. (If not by you by the soceity in which we both live)

so no TV repersenting highschoolers in provoctive outfits

Okay, I guess I have seen a little of that. I thought you were talking about twelve year olds or something.
14 is high school age. 14 is still too young even if it is not 12.

It wasn't the last Adam sandler movie maybe the one before it where the big reveal had to do with incest, last weeks south park featured an incest scene, Arrested Development has an on going 'thing' bewteen two of its characters, Boardwalk empire, Game of thrones, Dexter, Brothers and sisters, Lost, Veronica Mars, Nip tuck all have had incest as a reoccouring them or at the very least focoused an episode's plot point on the subject.

that still 10 instances and millions of dollars and hundreds if not thousands of mans hours spent to protray those relationships. A great effort has gone into taking the sting of incest out of our 'moral standard.'
Again this is how the gay right movement got started in the 60s and 70s with harmless jokes and trivial TV characters that everyone accepted and the boundries kept getting pushed.
Again I only use that to illustrate a point, in that in 20 years soceity will have to accept mother marrying sons or daughters or brother brother/sister brother pairings will have to be accepted as normal rational 'moral' behaivor because there are no absolutes. No way to recenter ourselves.

I have never actually seen any of those shows, though I have heard of most of them. I don't watch a lot of television.

That does not mean the rest of the nation doesn't.

So you should at least try to follow god's absolute standard, to show him you care, and even if you fail, you're still saved...right?

yes

Or is that not it? I keep getting the impression that you are suggesting that there is no need to even try.

Let's say you were not married, or attached, and you like girls. Then let's say someone way way way too go for you wants to have a relationship with you. She's rich, famous, smart, funny, __________ (fill in your own blanks) There is absolutly nothing you can offer her other than yourself and your whole being in love. Now with in this expressive love (the one thing you can offer) how would you let it manifest? Would you do thing she would like? Flowers, love notes, brush your teeth (Again fill in your own blanks to things you know she likes and wants from you)

-or do you say forget it and cheat on her, stand her up, let your breath stink/teeth fall out? (things you know she hates?)

Now do you do these things because you love this person with all that you have avaiable to you or are you trading these expressions/acts for favors/her love?

Now keep in mind there is nothing you can give her beside love to warrant her love. is Love truly in the things you do or is love the reason you do them?

If you believe love is what you do and not why you do it, then could anyone follow your examples/works and win this girls heart?

I don't even recall you ever trying to defend the law as legitimate (even if it doesn't need to be followed/can't be perfectly adhered to).

It is absolutly legitmate and every aspect of it is still in effect. Which is the reason we need attonement. After we have attonement it serves as a guideline to show us how to love God and relate to each other as God wants us to do.

Allowing gay marriage does not in any way dismantle marriage and family.

Then if it were exactly the same why does God not allow for it? God does not allow for it because in fact it is different. a Gay marriage is based off of Eros a carnal love a want or desire from a physical place. rarly does this love byitself manifest itself into the Agape need to bridge the gap between man and God. Eros philla and storge is basis traditional marriages are based off of. a measure of all three are needed for a marriage to not only last but point the couple to experience Agape, and connect with God. Even straight marriages who are only based off of eros fail and do not point to God.

The fact that your morality is based purely on how many people you can convert unnerves me a bit.

conversion has nothing to do with righteousness. No all are called to do this as a way to express love to God. i do this because I am being faithful to what God has given me.

I keep getting the "Christian serial killer goes to heaven, atheist philanthropist goes to hell" vibe from you. You would really prefer a society in which gays were violently persecuted if it helped spread you religion?

I clearly stated that I did not know which was better. In persecution the act stops but the heart wants/yerns for it, while if it is permitted people get what they want and as with everything else in life are not happy with it either. pushing them to seek contentment full fillment some place else.

Not really, no. Do you mean:
A: God's righteousness is just some standard he made so we would need saving.
B: God's righteousness is a standard we should try to follow; when we inevitable fail Jesus will save us because we tried
C: God's righteousness is a perfect standard, but we shouldn't bother even trying to follow it.
D: None of the above.

B IF our hearts are in the right place.

The bottom line: If our acts in relation to god's righteousness do not matter, as you have claimed multiple times, then why do you bother condemning abortion?

Where is the heart of a person who justifies killing a baby? Is it with the want and will of God? Is it with being faithful to the gift of life God has given you? or is it with self? how this baby will negitivly change the way you would have to live your life?

---

God's 'morality/righteousness' and what you see as morality is completely different?

How does one locate and identify God's Morality? It cannot be located in the bible because the god of the bible is a stolen God. And those moral teachings found in the bible are not original to the bible itself. We can find these moral teachings in cultures that predate the ancient Israelites. We can find great flood tales, virgin saviors, and garden of creation tales in cultures that LONG predate the Israelites. Their culture, their religion, their god is nothing more than a molestation of cultures that came before them.

That all being a fact. Where does one find a clear original example of God's idea of morality? Can you even identify who God is?

I will be happy to answer these questions again (for the 5th or 6th time in this thread) First answer this.

Define morality.