Religiosity, Spirituality and the Moral

[ether-ore]

[quote='ether-ore' pid='878860' dateline='1424323860']

This is a determination each individual has to make for themselves. If you are indeed searching, may I suggest you look for one that has an eternal perspective.

And how am I suppose to know who has an eternal perspective? More importantly, how do I know the eternal perspective is the correct perspective?

My understanding is that there are only two perspectives: temporal and eternal. Temporal connotes this life is all there is; nothing before and nothing after. You may disagree, but this makes no sense to me. An eternal perspective connotes an eternity of progress in learning and ability.

I think on the contrary, we do have to depend on God since He is our Heavenly Father as well as the administrator of the law. What you have said is akin to saying that you do not have to answer to a judge if you broke the law. God because of His nature, does not have the capacity to be immoral.... it is just not in His nature. If He were to do something immoral, He would cease to be God and all of His creations would collapse into chaos.

I really despise the "not in his nature" defense. It at no point addresses how one objectively determines god's nature. Quoting a book he supposedly authored is not objective. Asking him directly is also not objective. Also, the defense does not prevent god from being out of his nature for a brief moment.

I guess we have a different understanding of the word "nature". For me, it is kind of like the "leopard cannot change his spots" thing. A natural condition is something that just is. also we have a disagreement about the word "objective". For me, truth and reality are objective. Since I believe the evidence of the eye witness accounts of prophets as recorded in scripture; those things represent truth to me and indicate the reality of God.

Since I don't believe God exist, the whole "administrator of the law" and "answer to a judge" are meaningless statements. They are more of a distraction from the primary discussion.

That you do not believe in God is the key. For me, within the reality of God is His administrative capacity as a judge. An eternal law exists, and God will render judgment according to law. I believe that the analogy of a mortal judge fits.

By what standard are you saying vicarious redemption is immoral? I hope you will not claim that such a standard is objective and universal, because I suggest to you that it is not. I am suggesting that according to God's law it is not immoral. Christ did indeed voluntarily suffer and give His life for us, but He is resurrected, and He lives.

The standard is very simple and originates as the consequence of our freewill. The standard: a person must bear the responsibility of their actions. The only valid excuse is if the person in question cannot reasonably comprehend the consequences of their actions e.g. child or mentally ill. Vicarious redemption states that someone else can take the responsibility without justification. It would encourage immoral actions since the consequences could be given to someone else.

I have no doubt but that what you say is more than reasonable, but it is still subjective. There is no objectively identifiable basis for that. Only you and or your group would adhere to it which makes it either subjective or relative and in no way objective. It certainly is not applied universally. I do admit that the Atonement (vicarious redemption) is difficult to comprehend, but on accepting the reality of God and His law (because for me they make sense), then I must accept the Atonement on faith. By the way, I do not believe faith is without reason. I believe it requires it.

Just imagine a parent gets a spurt of road rage because someone cut him off. The parent punches his child. Vicarious redemption states that is perfectly fine especially if the child gave permission to his parent to hurt him instead of the driver that cut him off. And it wouldn't make it any less immoral if the driver who cut them off asked the child to take the punch for him.

The following explanation will not satisfy, I'm sure, because it requires faith, but here goes: The things that qualify Jesus Christ to Atone for our sins are characteristics the individual(s) in your example(s) do not have. Jesus Christ is God and he is sinless.

The eternal law that I mentioned absolutely requires a penalty be paid for a breach of that law. That penalty will be paid either by us or by God on our behalf. Because Jesus Christ is God (the administrator of the law; the judge) and because He is sinless, this qualifies Him to pay the penalty for us on condition of our repentance. It is through repentance that we align our will with God's, thus becoming "one" with Him.

This point is crucial. It is the unity of will and purpose with an infinite eternal and sinless God and the finite sins of the sinner as presented before justice that makes the combination appear as sinless before justice (Infinity plus anything is infinity). If we are one with Jesus Christ, His infinite sinless goodness completely obscures our finite sins and we appear to justice as sinless with Christ. The critical thing that makes us one with Christ is our exercise of charity. Yes, it is a hard concept, and it requires faith to believe it, and I'm sure you will not believe it, but there it is.

An infinite punishment for a finite crime is not something LDS believe in. As I said in another post elsewhere, Christ said that those who do not repent must suffer even as He has suffered. This, I don't believe has reference to the cross. Rather, it has reference to what took place in the Garden of Gethsemane. What I believe took place there was Christ making the transition from being mortal to being immortal. He bled from every pore. He was shedding His blood in an extremely painful process.

I'm not too familiar with all the stuff Mormons believe. Does mormonism have an eternal hell where sinners will burn forever and ever?

Not in the sense of most of Christianity. Here is an overview of what LDS believe happens when we die: Upon death we go to one of two places; either paradise or spirit prison. You could look upon this as a kind of arraignment. In paradise, one is free to go on their own recognizance, while in spirit prison, one is bound over for trial. (Trial happens on Judgment Day after this world has completed the purpose of the mortal test for all of us). I can imagine that those in spirit prison will be suffering a bit as a consequence of the anticipation of the judgments that will befall them.

On Judgment Day we will be judged according to what we did and how we behaved according to God's law as presented by His prophets. Those who have repented, had charity and have become one with Christ will be able to return home to their Heavenly Father and continue to progress.

LDS doctrine holds that there are two other places one can go , depending on the severity of their crimes, but both taken together can be consider a hell because for LDS, hell is defined as eternal separation from God. However prior to going to one of these two places, a penalty must be paid for the sins committed in order to satisfy justice since these individuals chose not to repent. This punishment is not of endless duration and once the penalty is paid, the individual goes to where he will have as much peace and happiness as he was willing to receive as indicated by his action on earth. However, for these souls, there will be no further progression.

Immortal beings do not have blood in their veins. What is there, I do not know, but when the Roman soldier pierced Christ's side with a spear, a clear fluid is reported as having come out.

There is oxymoron. Immortal being that dies. Plus, this is unfounded claim.

It is within the power of Christ to cause that His spirit could leave His physical body. This is what death is; the separation of the spirit from the body. Christ's spirit also had the power to take up the body again upon His resurrection.

Another thing that needs to be understood ti that LDS believe that Jesus Christ and Jehovah (the God of the Old Testament) are one and the same. Jehovah while in spirit form (because He had not yet been born of Mary) created this finite heaven and this earth; this state of existence where entropy exists, within the infinite universe where entropy does not exist. Consider it like a bubble within an ocean. The point being, Christ, being God has power in His spirit that we do not have.

The point being that unless we repent, we will have to endure that painful transition from mortality to immortality without the help of God. If we had repented, then Christ's sacrifice will have changed us "in the twinkling of an eye", and we will not have to endure that. However, after that penalty has been paid, we go on to a reward commensurate to our behaviors during mortality where we will find such peace and happiness as our actions suggested we desired.

Here is another annoying thing. Why would you repent to the judge? You repent to the person you wronged not some third party. That would be the moral thing to do.

You have to do both. Repentance is a process with several steps and lasts until the day of one's death. True repentance requires remorse for the sin, the making of reparations to the those injured and a determination not to repeat the sin. Since we are prone to make more mistakes, we have to continue to repent. As far as Christ is concerned it is the effort; the direction we are going; are we making progress in the right direction as opposed to attaining perfection in this life. By becoming one with Christ, we are perfected in Him. His grace is sufficient for us as long as we are making an effort to keep His commandments. But another person; the one offended is not the only consideration. The law was offended as well. This concept is true with our earthly laws. A person who breaks the law has to make reparations to the person offended as well as answer to the law.

God does not render judgment until after our mortal test is complete. "Judgment Day" is yet future and then God will render His verdicts according to the eternal moral law as it applies to each individual according as their works have been.

That doesn't answer the question. How would you know if God administered the moral law correctly?

How would you know if any judge administered the law correctly. As far as I know, that cannot be answered until judgment is handed down. But if God is a perfectly just God, then I have faith that He will indeed be just. I'm not sure I understand your concern. Would you have the same misgivings when going before an earthly tribunal? Why would you have such misgivings? If one is not guilty, it would seem to me they need not fear.