How does one decide right vs wrong?

[knucklehead]

Which pre-evangelical days? The 60's? Before America was settled? My take is that the pre evangelical days were measured in years B.C..

You're right, Pete, it's your business. Not all who evangelize do so out of the air of superiority you imply (or didn't - I could be misinterpreting a little steam blowing). It wasn't until I got away from some Christians that I discovered Christ. Forgive us if we remind you sometimes of them - we can't be aware of your personal experiences. Writing isn't the same as face time.

I would ask you to consider that some who attempt to point the way to Christ do so in the same spirit of brotherly concern as those who one year ago, and every day around the world, enter burning buildings, or otherwise put themselves in harm's way, to rescue others. This is how evangelism is portrayed in scripture. To be honest, if there wasn't an eternal perspective kept in front of me on a daily basis, I'd be content to mind my own business. There was a time when the thing I disliked most about this world was people. It's still a struggle.

Having said that, my $0.02 is that we are created by a living God, and our makeup already contains a recognition of His desire for us in relation to behavior. So we do have intrinsic knowledge of good, but it is created in us. It is our fall, as detailed in scripture, that has introduced the element of evil. My take on why that is not easliy understood (or admitted) anymore is that we have drifted away from valuing our spiritual heritage, partially due to the easy times we have experienced (as a nation), and now do not make the connection of the necessity of God being involved in our lives. Just like some young people do not make the connection between that new car and the bucks it costs because they have not had to work for the dough - we have not suffered through the building of this country, or through another place where freedoms do not exist, or through a war for our country's existence, and we are becoming an ungrateful nation by default - we simply do not understand the link between faith and freedom, between God and mankind.

I don't expect to convince anyone - I just think we've moved far away from our spiritual heritage as a nation due the ease of life, so far that it's existence is being questioned by otherwise intelligent people.

Hope this ain't threadjacking - I just wanted to respond to you from my heart.

 

[wroughtn_harv]

Evening Chuck,

<font color=blue>I'd weigh in but you guys are doing a better job than I usually manage. I especially like Pete's version of "can't we all just get along", even if the answer is, in all likelihood, NO.</font color=blue>

As much as I love your posts and applaud most of your positions I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

I'm living proof that total heatherns can be loved by the righteous!!!!!!!!!

And even more unbelievable heatherns are not only lovable but capable of love!!!!!!!!!!

We can get along, do it every day, you just got to get to know me./w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

 

[Kelvin]

Hi pbenven,
I must admit that I have no clue what you are trying to say. I'll try to re-word my statement to see if you have further disagreement.

Whether absolutes exist or not has NOTHING to do with the Christian bible. My statement is that in order for absolutes to exist, there must be some diety or god that is FAR superior to mankind that makes the rules. Then the debate could begin as to WHICH god is in control.

If one feels that there is no gods or other diety superior to mankind, then my statement is absolutes can not exist because it is impossible for mankind to come up with them.

Hopefully this makes it more clear for you. It is difficult to respond to you since I don't know exactly what point you are trying to make.

Kelvin

 

[rancar]

Well...let me add to the debate here and I'll try to do so by offering a perspective on this issue regardless of one's belief in God or not.

To answer Kelvin's question in a few words, I would respond by saying "Rely upon your conscience." Ah....but this is a bit tricky for my conscience is not your conscience and my interpretation of right from wrong may not be your interpretation of right from wrong.

So, to try to clarify matters a bit, let me quote from John MacArthur who attempts to address this issue of right from wrong in his book entitled The Vanishing Conscience (pages 36-37).

Mr. MacArthur writes the following: "...The conscience is generally seen by the modern world as a defect that robs people of their self-esteem. Far from being a defect or a disorder, however, our ability to sense our own guilt is a tremendous gift from God. He designed the conscience into the very framework of the human soul. It is the automatic warning system that tells us, "Pull up! Pull up!" before we crash and burn.

...Conscience is at the heart of what distinguishes the human creature. People, unlike animals, can contemplate their own actions and make moral self-evaluations. That is the very function of conscience.

The consciene is an innate ability to sense right from wrong. Everyone, even the most unspiritual heathen, has a conscience: "When Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a Law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them (Rom. 2:14-15)

The conscience entreats us to do what we believe is right and restrains us from doing what we believe is wrong. The conscience is not to be equated with the voice of God or the law of God. It is a human faculty that judges our actions and thoughts by the light of the highest standard we perceive. When we violate our conscience, it condemns us, triggering feelings of shame, anguish, regret, consternation, anxiety, disgrace, and even fear. When we follow our conscience, it commends us, bringing joy, serenity, self-respect, well-being, and gladness..."

Regards,
Bob Ancar
<font color=red>"Let the decisions you make today be the choices you can live with tomorrow"</font color=red>

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Isn't this right and wrong/ethics/absolutes thread really just a politely shielded way of argueing about whether god exists or not? Why don't you guys take off the kid gloves? Or am I interpreting this wrong? You know that in the end you are going to have to agree to disagree. A Christians faith can't be shaken by logic, and an Agnostic's logic has trouble bending for faith.

 

[wroughtn_harv]

<font color=blue>Isn't this right and wrong/ethics/absolutes thread really just a politely shielded way of argueing about whether god exists or not? Why don't you guys take off the kid gloves? Or am I interpreting this wrong? You know that in the end you are going to have to agree to disagree. A Christians faith can't be shaken by logic, and an Agnostic's logic has trouble bending for faith.</font color=blue>

You're right of course, we won't change each other's mind. The problem is I strongly suspect those yea hoos are just like me. We're not gonna let the other side make an uncontested statement! /w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

I mean this is how it all got started, right? That kelvin, enough to make one shake his head.............repeatedly and often /w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

 

[Kelvin]

Hi wroughtn_harv,

At this point I'm not ready to discuss individual items in the "absolute" category. That is why I offered the list as a "suggested" list.

I'd like to hear you take on whether absolutes exist or not.

If you feel that they don't exist (which I suspect will be your stand, but I don't know), then I don't see much point is discussing the items that should be on the list. Rather, we can discuss issues like "What basis do you use to decide that rape, murder, adultry, homosexuality, stealing, lying, etc. are wrong, IF they are?" The bible shouldn't even have to enter that particular discussion.

If you feel that they DO exist, then discussions of WHO is in control of the list and WHICH ITEMS should be on the list would then make sense. Discussions about whether gods exist will probably be necessary, but detailed discussion about any particular god won't be necessary here either.

On a side note, I didn't get any tractor time today as I had planned. I plan to be moving dirt all day tomorrow, then work my real job Fri-Sat-Sun. So if I am slow in responding to posts over the next few days, hopefully you'll understand and not place anymore wagers on whether I'll show up again. I enjoy the seat time on my tractor much more than these discussions which I actually don't enjoy at all, but think are necessary...at least for now.

<font color=blue>Thank you for your polite reply</font color=blue>. Even though I highly disagree with your stand on issues, I admire your honesty, even if you are brutal at times. There's been a time or two that you've got my blood pressure up (which I suspect that you enjoy doing to Christians), but I try to make sure that I'm over it before I respond. It is amazing how quickly that I go from being angry at your stand on issues to simply feeling sorry for you.

Kelvin

 

[Boondox]

<font color=blue>we simply do not understand the link between faith and freedom, between God and mankind.</font color=blue>

Mark -- Therein lies the fundamental difference -- and similarity -- between us. I believe that god is us and we are god. Both points of view incorporate goodness, decency and nobility. Both are beautiful. Both work.

Just my $0.02.

Pete

 

[Kelvin]

<font color=blue>What's god have to do with it? </font color=blue>

Like I asked wroughtn_harv "What basis do you use to decide that rape, murder, adultry, homosexuality, stealing, lying, etc. are wrong, IF they are?" Additionally, for the items that you consider to be wrong, can they be re-classified as right 10 or 20 (50?) years down the road?

<font color=blue>Probably the mere thoughts expressed herein twisted some knickers</font color=blue> Not really, at least for me. I abandoned God for a while in my life and I understand the feelings that you have.

<font color=blue>I dislike Christian zealots no more or less than zealous atheists.</font color=blue>
Actually, I believe that a small percentage of Christians (good intentioned?) do far more harm to the Christian faith than atheists do. Here is my shortened Christian testimony: Back in the late 1970s / early 1980s when I was a much weaker Christian, I turned away from God because of what I observed the "so-called Christians" doing, and figured that if that is what Christianity was all about I didn't want to have anything to do with it. There were 3 specific items that bothered me: (1) Whites telling blacks that they belong in black churches and not the white churches, (2) the tele-evanglist fiasco of the early 1980s, and (3) heated discussions between denominations as to whether baptism was required for salvation. A pastor posed this question to me, which I in turn pose to you: When God asks "What did GOD do to you that caused you to deny Him", what will you say? "That so-and-so did this or that?", to which God will clarify, "Never mind what THEY did; what did I do to cause you to deny Me?" There are a lot of Christians that set bad examples for those seeking God.

<font color=blue>And if I'm wrong, and burn in hell for all eternity, isn't that my business? </font color=blue> Absolutely. The Christian charter is to spread the word, not to force (or attempt to force) anyone to become Christians and share their religion. I think that forceful Christians, while presumably good intentioned, cause more harm than good.

I beleive that our nation is strong today because when America was a young weak nation we relied heavily upon God and God responded favorably. There was prayer in public schools, the Ten Commandments were posted in public places, and yet God was not FORCED upon anyone; Christianity was, is, and will always be, a voluntary decision that only the individual can make.

<font color=blue>It in no way detracts from the message to say that god was created in man's image instead of the other way around.</font color=blue> That takes EVERYTHING away from the message. Either the bible is 100% accurate and true, or it is 100% lies (okay, if it is a bunch of lies the creative author may have accidently gotten 10% right...)

Kelvin

 

[Kelvin]

karmakanic,
<font color=blue>The nut of this discussion boils down to the question: Is man inheritly good or is man inheritly evil? </font color=blue>

Without using biblical references (which indicate that all men have a sinful nature), I would say that there is not a "one answer fits all" to your question, and therefore some men are inherently evil and some are not. I know that you <font color=blue>believe man is good, and if left to his own devices will make the right choice</font color=blue>, but there are a lot of exceptions, such as ******, ******, *****, etc.

<font color=blue>I think it would be a bummer to have to go through life believing the oposite.</font color=blue> I think that 9/11/2001 is a peek into the "bummer" lifestyle. Fortunately, mankind has more "good" apples than "bad" ones.

Kelvin