Christian morals

Christian morals

Spirituality

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
20 Nov 17
1 edit

Originally posted by @fmf
Start a thread about your torturer god ideology if you want to. The topic here is my question about certain superstitious beliefs being the only thing that turn ordinary moral behaviour into "Christian morals". Stop dancing around. If you have other topics you are itching to erect slabs of text about, start threads about them.
Christian morals are utter identification with the living and available Christ.
Moral codes exist elsewhere around the world apart from the Bible.

If you're too thick to grasp what was said maybe six pages ago, that's your problem.

Christian morals is the topic. Identifcation with the living Christ. Living in the realm of this Person is called living by the grace of God.

Now, you're mad because God will enforce His righteous decrees. You're mad that forever God will let the rebel know just how He feels about the rebel's rebellion. You can have your revolt. But God will forever let you know what He thinks about it.

I approach it from another angle - What has God done that we might be saved from our sins? That's the far greater emphasis of the Bible - what God has gone through that when we bump up against absolutely PERFECT in a negative way, we might be saved from our bad choices.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
20 Nov 17

Originally posted by @sonship
Christians have a god figure. Your god figure is a torturer god figure;


You brought it up. You slipped it in there as usual -- ie. "Hey now, don't forget about your torturer God now ... ". YOU make sure you slip it into the discussion. So don't be a hypocrite if a question arises because you pull it out and put it on the table.

Now work on some slimy rationalization to explain this away.
Like I said, start a thread about it - and just answer my specific question on "Christian morals" which is the topic of this thread. Calling my stance "slimy" is water off a duck's back to me, sonship, even if you may think it is the "Holy Spirit" working through you when you say stuff like that.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
20 Nov 17
1 edit

Originally posted by @sonship
Christian morals are utter identification with the living and available Christ.
So, they are just ordinary morals with some religious beliefs about oneself*** attached to them, right?

*** for example: 'I utterly identify with what I believe and assert is the living and available Christ.'

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
21 Nov 17
2 edits

Here is one place among a couple, where Jesus encouraged someone asking about eternal life to go off and fulfill the law of God as Moses had given it.

" And He answered to him, You have answered correctly; do this, and you shall have life." (Luke 10:28)


Yet the law of Moses, though good, and spiritual, and holy, was not able to give life.

" ... For if a law had been given which was able to give life, righteousness would have indeed been of the law." (Gal. 3:21b)


The law of Moses was not "able to give life".
Contrast this to what Christ became in resurrection - " a life giving Spirit ".

"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45b)


The grandest moral code of all, the Law of Moses given by God, was not able to give eternal life. The second man, the "last Adam" as a Head of a new human race became that divine and eternal life imparting Holy Spirit able to dispense God Himself as life into the believers.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
21 Nov 17
3 edits

Above I showed that the grandest moral code in existence even delivered to the world by God through Moses, was not able to cause men to obtain eternal life.

"Is then the law against the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given which was able to give life, righteousness would have indeed been of the law." (Gal. 3:21)

But Paul teaches that the law of Moses was a "child conductor" leading men to faith in Christ who could justify the sinner and impart eternal life to the forgiven.

The law was a kind of tutor or child conductor, as in ancient Rome, leading the student to his classes to learn something.
"So then the law has become our child-conductor unto Christ, that we might be justified out of faith.

But since faith has come, we are no longer under a child-conductor." (Gal. 3:24,25)

Faith in Jesus Christ brings men and women into union with the One Who alone can justify sinners through His atoning sacrifice AND live in them to BE their life and subjective righteousness.
"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45b)

Did Jesus in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John teach the same thing?
Yes indeed. So Paul taught what Jesus had taught.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
21 Nov 17
2 edits

I am repeating because some people will benefit from repetition.
Some will not, but some will.

The Law of Moses was the highest and grandest moral code in existence - given by God. But in man's fallen state it was NOT able to give man eternal life if a man sought to obey it to the hilt.

" For if a law had been given which was able to give life, righteousness would have indeed been of the law." (Gal. 3:21) "


Righteousness for justification before God could not be given.
Divine life, eternal life also could not be given by that law.

Can we say that in a sense the law of Moses was an example Christian morality ?
I would say yes, we can say that in a sense.

But the law of Moses is a child-conductor bringing the "student" (so to speak) ON to something more substantial in her learning. That is to learn to be justified in Christ and to live in union with Christ. Both matters are accomplished by faith.

It works because God is faithful. If God is not FAITHFUL it doesn't matter how much faith anyone musters up or has.

Once again, the moral code of the law of Moses leads us to the experience of Jesus Christ. We should now be justified through faith in the FAITHFUL God. [edited]

" But before faith came we were guarded under law, being shut up unto the faith which was to be revealed.

So then the law has become our child-conductor unto Christ that we might be justified out of faith.

But since faith has come, we are no longer under a child-conductor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:23-26)


The moral code is replaced by justification in Christ and union with Christ. Both accomplished in faith. God is faithful.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
21 Nov 17
1 edit

Repetition helps some people.
Context of a passage also is helpful to some people.

I have been quoting from Galatians chapter 3 almost to the end of the chapter.
There are many moral codes in addition to that given by God to Moses.

The Jews had theirs. (with and without Leviticus). The Roman society had one.
Slaves had some kind of ethic. Free men had some kind of ethical norms and rules.
And of course males had rules and females had rules.

All of these codes were rules and ethical principles to live by. In that they gave rise to divisions, stratifications, class confict, strife, enmity, competition, vying for power, oppresion, etc. Paul taught that Christ has nullified all this fragmentation of humanity.

Paul suddenly also says that in the realm of union with Jesus Christ all these cultural standards have been made obsolete by living in the realm of Jesus Christ.

"For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

There cannot be Jew nor Greek, there cannot be slave nor free man, there cannot be male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

And if you are of Christ then you are Abraham's seed, heirs according to promise." (Gal. 3:26-29)

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
21 Nov 17

Originally posted by @fmf to sonship
Can a Christian who does not become a good person, in the way the Bible clearly instructs them to, still be demonstrating "Christian morals"?
If I am not mistaken, you missed this on-topic, direct reply to your post. BUMP.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
21 Nov 17
1 edit

Originally posted by @fmf to sonship
So, do you see the "good" Samaritan - in the Bible's story that has taken his name - as displaying "Satan's morals"?
Another on-topic post that you blanked out. BUMP.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
21 Nov 17

[i]Originally posted by @fmf to sonship/i]
And what do you think we can extrapolate from the story about Judas Iscariot that you can then apply generally to non-Christians who show concern for the poor?
You said something about Judas Iscariot and I asked you about it. It was on-topic. You dodged it. BUMP.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
21 Nov 17

Originally posted by @fmf
You said something about Judas Iscariot and I asked you about it. It was on-topic. You dodged it. BUMP.
What am I doing that you do not do?
If you don't want to comment more on something, you don't.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
21 Nov 17

Originally posted by @sonship
What am I doing that you do not do?
If you don't want to comment more on something, you don't.
The stuff you are running away from is on-topic stuff. What genuinely on-topic question about "Christian morals" did I not want to comment on?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
21 Nov 17

sonship, I can see why you are dodging - deflecting from - these three bumped questions - and the basic question that you have been dodging for days and days.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
21 Nov 17
1 edit

Originally posted by @sonship
Judas Iscariot showed apparent concern for the poor. That was the expression of a attribute of generosity. However, it only apparently seemed genuine, Underneath was a baser motive of contempt for the devotion that was being shown towards God.
Is this thing you said to me about Judas Iscariot - in your view - off-limits as a discussion topic in so far as it relates to "Christian morals"?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
21 Nov 17

Don't worry sonship I am not going to call your stances - or your behaviour - "slimy" or anything like that. A kind of bizarre self-parody perhaps, like another poster said, but I am not going to try to slur you by calling you "slimy". 😉