Is christian morality superior to secular morality? Why? [Spirituality & Religion]
It seems to me that christian morality ultimately falls back on what god wants, whether or not that is for the well being of humans, while secular morality is based upon what is the in interest of a human's well being.
It seems to me that human well being should be in the better interest of human well being than what a god demands of us for his purposes.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Living a life with purpose and meaning. Being in relationship with the God who has created that person. Human well-being is a matter of fulfillment of some sort, isn't it? To feel like one isn't all alone in this world, a striving to be the best one can be, to love and be loved.
Why is god necessary to that goal? How is attempting to follow the enigmatic and apparently self-serving edicts of a god more beneficial to human well being?
@SatyrService Understood. It comes down to individual choice. I'm careful not to use inclusive language, as in "your" Creator. I believe Him to be my creator--and of everyone else--but I'm speaking only for myself. I find my fulfillment and purposefulness and sense of well-being through my relationship to God. I'm not about to condemn anyone for choosing differently. I'm addressing this question as if I am being asked person to person.
And I cannot separate the theology from the matter. Apart from God I find life meaningless and unfulfilling.
Do I think "Christian morality is superior to secular morality?" Yes, because it has a consistent standard that I consider to be trustworthy and universal. Secular morality, as I see it, is too fluid and relative. Who defines secular morality? What standard is used to measure moral behavior? Is it the one who is in power who sets the standard? Is it subject to a certain group's opinion? What happens when the standard changes? If I'm acting according to one moral standard and that standard changes, am I then acting immorally?
Choosing to live by the standard Jesus set forth, I believe I can live a life that is beneficent to those around me and causes harm to no one. I find personal fulfillment and live harmoniously with others. How is that offensive or oppressive to anyone? I don't require anyone else to abide by that standard. I hold only myself accountable to it.
@SatyrService [quote]and he said he that does not believeth in me? bring him before me and slay him with a sword[/quote]
You need to read that in context. Jesus was telling a parable and the character in the story made that statement. That was not a command uttered by Jesus.
@otto78 parable, is where we get in trouble. some are VEry ANgry, if you describe anything in the bible as metaphor or parable. those word for word truth types worry me at times [i]I will take the time to go read the entire parable[/i].
@SatyrService Jesus frequently taught using parables, stories to illustrate his point. To define the issue he was addressing, he would use parables to challenge the listeners to think and process his message, his intent. Not everybody understood his parables. His disciples asked him on numerous occasions to explain the parables to them. Word pictures are very powerful and effective tools for teaching and instruction.
Matthew 7 is an example of this. Here Matthew records Jesus using several parables. Check it out, see if that helps you understand this.
@newjaninev2 [quote]So are you talking about the Old Testament morality, or the morality you see as being taught by Jesus? Which one can be ignored? [/quote] They are one and the same.
Jesus was asked what was the greatest or most important commandment in the Law (the Old Testament standard). He answered, "You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and most important commandment. The second is exactly like it: 'You must love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets depend on these two commandments."
The Old Testament standard was upheld and clarified by Jesus. There is no difference. He also said, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I didn't come to destroy them, but to fulfill them."
@newjaninev2[quote]So it's OK to murder children who tease bald men? [/quote] Jesus did not say he condoned all the actions and choices made by the prophets. They were imperfect people who did wrong at times, in varying degrees. He said he upheld and fulfilled the law God set forth in the ten commandments. The actual standard was still the same.
He took it a step further, though, in how he applied it. In the sermon on the mount, he taught that abiding by the law outwardly was not enough. What mattered most was the intention, the mindset, the motive behind the behavior. That was where sin began, the thoughts of the mind. The spirit of the law mattered more than the outward obedience.
@otto78 As I said elsewhere here... the much-vaunted Ten Commandments come down to: Don't lie, steal, murder or cheat. Frankly, I had that pretty much sorted out by the time I left kindergarten.
All of the others revolve around: Do what the old men tell you to do, and don't even think about questioning where all this authority comes from.
@newjaninev2 [quote]Do what the old men tell you to do, and don't even think about questioning where all this authority comes from.[/quote] Just how do you derive that? Please clarify your perspective for me.
@otto78 [quote]I don't require anyone else to abide by that standard. I hold only myself accountable to it.[/quote] That's essentially what a Pagan priest once told me - "Remember, nobody else is perfect." The principle being that one should hold oneself to a higher standard than one holds others to.
