Modern secular morality and it's inability to be authoritative

[perplexed]

, but the presence of Jesus in the middle of the Ethical complex does help.

I agree but the argument that it would help by giving me a solid logical foundation for my ethics is incredibly hollow.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Looking back, I don't see Jesus as being a particularly a particularly large component of any moral framework I used. Church tradition and teachings, God -- those were both there and more important overall. The specific teachings attributed to Jesus in the Gospels not nearly as much.

ok. When I was growing up, Jesus wasn't a fixture of my morality either. So, that seems like a common theme.

And??

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I agree but the argument that it would help by giving me a solid logical foundation for my ethics is incredibly hollow.

Well, I'm not the one who used the term logical, and where various competing Ethical frameworks are concerned, solid logic isn't the central pin that holds any particular Ethical framework together anyway. Moreover, the Bible doesn't offer us a framework either, but it does offer us a particularized ethical worldview centered on Jesus.

 

[Hans Blaster]

ok. When I was growing up, Jesus wasn't a fixture of my morality either. So, that seems like a common theme.

And??

And, I already said right up there in the post you quoted. Most of what I perceived as "Christian morality" back then wasn't particularly due to the direct teachings of Jesus in the Gospels.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

And, I already said right up there in the post you quoted. Most of what I perceived as "Christian morality" back then wasn't particularly due to the direct teachings of Jesus in the Gospels.

Yeah. And what are you trying to say? That you're just as moral as any Christian? I'm not clear on what specifically is the significance of this merely descriptive statement about your past moral constructions. What am I missing?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Z

Yeah. And what are you trying to say? That you're just as moral as any Christian? I'm not clear on what specifically is the significance of this merely descriptive statement about your past moral constructions. What am I missing?

I just found your comment about Jesus in #617 to be odd. Odd because the specific teachings of Jesus don't seem to be particularly central to what is known as Christian morality. (If they were, there would be no such artificial construct as "Judeo-Christian morality" spoken of.)

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Z


I just found your comment about Jesus in #617 to be odd. Odd because the specific teachings of Jesus don't seem to be particularly central to what is known as Christian morality. (If they were, there would be no such artificial construct as "Judeo-Christian morality" spoken of.)

In post #617, I was speaking to @perplexed and I made more than one point in that post. My first point was a brief explication about the actual structure of his moralizing, however simple or complex it may be.

My point about Jesus was additive to, and separate from, all of that. But, you're saying that you don't think Jesus' teachings are central to Christian morality? What specifically do you mean by this and how do you know this? Are you implying that Christians fail to apply Jesus' moral teaching in their own lives and are thus hypocritical, or are you instead implying that what passes today for Christian morality isn't actually drawing from Jesus' teachings?

 

[Hans Blaster]

My point about Jesus was additive to, and separate from, all of that.

OK, fine.

But, you're saying that you don't think Jesus' teachings are central to Christian morality? What specifically do you mean by this and how do you know this?

As for the last bit - 20+ years in Christianity.

As for the role of the teachings of Jesus, let's take a long-term obsession of my old church -- abortion. (No I'm not going to debate it here, that's not my point.)

The Church calls abortion a great immorality and sin, but why do they do that? What is their basis?

1. The "Do not murder" commandment.
2. The doctrine of fetuses having souls.

The first part ("Do not murder") is obviously not a teaching of Jesus. It dates back long before him to at least the time of Moses. (It is also part of virtually every moral system known to man.)

The second part is doctrine for some Christians, but not others. If you want scriptural references to construct this, the scriptural references in any CF abortion thread: "He knew you before you were born."; The "stirring in the womb" in the nativity story by Luke; etc. It isn't based on the specific preaching of Jesus.

If you go more broadly to the "fabric of life" doctrine (no abortion, no suicide, no euthanasia, no executions). I can see honoring the death of Jesus by opposing executions, but he never preached against it. etc.

Are you implying that Christians fail to apply Jesus' moral teaching in their own lives and are thus hypocritical,

Nope. If I want to call y'all hypocrites, I would.

or are you instead implying that what passes today for Christian morality isn't actually drawing from Jesus' teachings?

Almost. I didn't imply anything about "passes today". I was just saying that thinking backward about it that Christian morality wasn't as dependent on the teachings of Jesus as I would have assumed.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

OK, fine.


As for the last bit - 20+ years in Christianity.

As for the role of the teachings of Jesus, let's take a long-term obsession of my old church -- abortion. (No I'm not going to debate it here, that's not my point.)

The Church calls abortion a great immorality and sin, but why do they do that? What is their basis?

1. The "Do not murder" commandment.
2. The doctrine of fetuses having souls.

The first part ("Do not murder") is obviously not a teaching of Jesus. It dates back long before him to at least the time of Moses. (It is also part of virtually every moral system known to man.)

The second part is doctrine for some Christians, but not others. If you want scriptural references to construct this, the scriptural references in any CF abortion thread: "He knew you before you were born."; The "stirring in the womb" in the nativity story by Luke; etc. It isn't based on the specific preaching of Jesus.

If you go more broadly to the "fabric of life" doctrine (no abortion, no suicide, no euthanasia, no executions). I can see honoring the death of Jesus by opposing executions, but he never preached against it. etc.

Well, we should all know and understand by inference that the Bible doesn't contain everything that Jesus likely said or thought. So, it's kind of an argument from silence and not only is weak, but assumes that the bible should and can only be appraised in some kind of virtually contrived cognitive vaccum. You and I know very well this isn't the case. This is why I put philosophy and academics BEFORE the Bible.

But, I take your point with having given abortion as an example. So, I understand what you're saying.

Almost. I didn't imply anything about "passes today". I was just saying that thinking backward about it that Christian morality wasn't as dependent on the teachings of Jesus as I would have assumed.

I'll agree that Christian morality is often---and necessarily by social default---more than the teachings of Jesus. What I won't agree with is any inference that Christian morality has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus. For me, being that I didn't grow up with "Jesus at the wheel," it was a BIG moment of reconsideration of certain moral outlooks when I read the New Testament for the first time as a teenager. I did have to reorient and reconsider the moral outlook that I originally had at that time. But of course, my own Ethics don't include ONLY the Bible. They just don't exclude it though either.

 

[Neutral Observer]

Under a secular worldview I can't. That's the point of the post. All "moral truths" assume other morals in order to give the proposed morality justification. It's circular.

Wait a second... isn't this true under any moral standard?

 

[Ken-1122]

If I had a blow to the head and forgot I was a Christian I would still need a reason as to why my morals are correct without assuming the truth of them because of stimulus

So being a Christian, how do you know your moral views are correct? All you know is your moral views align with your God, and you assume via faith your God's moral views are correct. But what method do you employ to verify that what you take on faith as correct IS correct?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Well, we should all know and understand by inference that the Bible doesn't contain everything that Jesus likely said or thought.

I'm not convinced it includes *anything* Jesus likely said, but that's a very different topic.

 

[o_mlly]

1. The "Do not murder" commandment

Applying reason to the command:
1) I may not kill the child in the crib for I know that it is a human being.
2) I may not kill the child in the womb for I do not know that it is not a human being.
3) In ignorance, we may not act in such a way that an innocent human being may be killed.
4) May the hunter shoot at the object moving in the bush uncertain as to whether the mover is a deer or another hunter? No.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Applying reason to the command:
1) I may not kill the child in the crib for I know that it is a human being.
2) I may not kill the child in the womb for I do not know that it is not a human being.
3) In ignorance, we may not act in such a way that an innocent human being may be killed.
4) May the hunter shoot at the object moving in the bush uncertain as to whether the mover is a deer or another hunter? No.

I wasn't trying to start (another) debate about the morality of abortion. I was just noting that to get to The Church's position does not require quoting Jesus. (Just like you didn't need to above.)

 

[Neutral Observer]

1) I may not kill the child in the crib for I know that it is a human being.

Who says you can't?

 

[o_mlly]

I wasn't trying to start (another) debate about the morality of abortion. I was just noting that to get to The Church's position does not require quoting Jesus. (Just like you didn't need to above.)

Absent the command, "Do not murder" the rationale provided has no predicate to support its conclusions See Matthew 5:18.

 

[o_mlly]

Who says you can't?

I wrote "may" not.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Absent the command, "Do not murder" the rationale provided has no predicate to support its conclusions See Matthew 5:18.

And I'm not disagreeing with you. But... the "Do not murder" command is from the *Old* Testement. That one that comes before the preaching of Jesus. That's my point. The source is OT stuff, not Jesus stuff. (The quote in Matthew is just Jesus saying: "nope, the old law *still* applies.)

 

[Neutral Observer]

I wrote "may" not.

Okay, who says you "may" not?

 

[perplexed]

Okay, who says you "may" not?

I don't understand why I should care who says you "may" not