Labeling harmless actions/things/activities as immoral.

[Silmarien]

When I started playing in 1982 I played as a Neutral character. Since 1987 I have consistently played Chaotic Good characters. Suits my real life characteristic quite we’ll.

Chaotic Good forever.

In this case the Christian definition, and therein lies the problem, that being that morality is not universally agreed upon by all Christians. Is there one Christian dictionary that all Christians agree upon? Obviously not thus how the word morality is defined and applied will be subjective.

The thing is that different people mean different things by the word "morality." Some define it as applying to societal norms, so morality is tied into notions of what is polite, and the fact of the matter is that something that's polite in the United States might be rude in France or Japan, and vice versa. So to the extent that manners are tied into morality, morality is relative.

On the other hand, the claim that murder is wrong is in a different category. This approach to morality is tied into questions of how we ought to treat one another (and ourselves), and is much more universal. Christians can and should point to Jesus as the exemplar of how we ought to behave, so to the extent that they do, a universal sense of morality exists. There is some room for interpretation there, but it's really hard to turn "love thy neighbor" into "hate thy neighbor."

Some Christians conflate cultural standards like how people dress or wear their hair with actual moral concerns, which really just leads to confusion all around.

 

[Dansiph]

The question marks tell me that you do not know why God wants men to have short hair. If men having short hair is something that you espouse, then is that not something that you should understand as to why God commands it?

I can't find what I said but I did later say I believe men should have short hair. Also the majority of men the world over have short hair

 

[Dansiph]

I can't find what I said but I did later say I believe men should have short hair. Also the majority of men the world over have short hair

I see the question mark now, sorry I meant of like is this not in the Bible? Type of question mark

 

[Strathos]

Well I agree with the OP that this can be a problem, the opposite (labeling harmful/immoral activities as harmless) is also an issue. There needs to be a balance.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Why does Christianity label harmless action/things/activities as immoral? Examples:Heavy Metal, Dungeons & Dragons, long hair on men, braless women, etc.

The "long hair on men" thingy especially has always baffled me, since just about every depiction of Jesus I encounter in churches etc, always seem to be of a long haired Jesus.

Secondary question: What is the boundary that separates action from immoral action?

I'ld say that the differentiator between moral / immoral is the amount of harm inflicted.
No harm, no foul, is what I say.

And I use the term "harm" broadly here. There's physical harm, but there's also psychological harm etc.

It's also a balance...
Take satire for example. It can inflict "psychological harm" when you laugh with someone.
On the other hand, freedom of speech and art is very important.

You could make satire illegal, because it can cause "psychological harm".
But in doing so, you'ld be removing basic freedoms and I'ld say that removing such freedoms does MUCH harm to a society as a whole.

It's not always black and white. And sometimes, it's about tradeoffs. As in "x is not so nice, but the alternative is even worse..."

Note. If you claim something is immoral/wrong/bad, please say why with as much detail as possible.

I didn't give much detail, but I think you'll understand what I'm talking about.

 

[DogmaHunter]

So when asking where is the line drawn between right/wrong, that subjective line will be drawn in different places depending on who you ask

And when. And where.

 

[Dave-W]

Death metal played an important role and Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris' massacre at Columbine; Kip Kinkel, who in 1998 shot and killed his parents (his mother in the back I believe) and shot up his high school in Oregon, was extremely influenced by Nine Inch Nails and similar music that glorified violence.

Charles Manson was inspired to murder and violence from the Beatles's song "Helter Skelter," which was about a slide in an amusement park in London.

"When you get to the bottom you go back to the top ..."

 

[Dave-W]

Also the majority of men the world over have short hair

"Long" and "short" are relative terms, not definitive.

To the Yul Brynners and Telly Savalases of the world, even a person with hair only a quarter of an inch long has long hair.

 

[Dansiph]

"Long" and "short" are relative terms, not definitive.

To the Yul Brynners and Telly Savalases of the world, even a person with hair only a quarter of an inch long has long hair.

I think that we should not try and find out how long is long. That seems sensible to me. Also I may be wrong but doesn't the Bible say against shaving to the scalp

 

[zephcom]

Well, I come from the secular world, so attacking Christianity and then talking about Divine Love doesn't really make much sense to me at all. It just looks like silly anthropomorphism except in the Christian context, where it might actually be revelation. We are material beings, the Unmoved Mover is unknown and unknowable, and the Old Testament is a collection of ancient mythology. Welcome to the Absurd.

Organized Christianity has been good to me. Left to my own devices, I almost ended up at nihilism, so saying it has zero impact in people's lives just strikes me as silly.

I don't disagree with you that Christianity as an institution is a 2000 year old trainwreck, but I also see it pushing history forward, shaping society in the image of the Gospel almost despite itself. There's a lot of ugliness out there, but you're discounting figures like Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. when you decide that as an organized religion, it's ineffective. It's accomplished a lot, but we don't notice until afterwards.

I'm also not sure why you are so against telling people when they're doing something wrong. If a Christian is measuring success with material goods instead of self-sacrificing love, shouldn't someone sit them down and discuss it with them? Should we be solipsistically ignoring one another's blind spots because it's hypocritical to say anything?

From the secular world, I think your assessment is spot on. The secular world has no provision for something like a spiritual world. At least at this point in time. I am convinced that if there is a spiritual world, it will have to exist within the secular concept of the universe. If that is the case, eventually science will 'discover' it. Everything we know about the universe was unknown at some point in history. There is no reason to suspect that we have discovered everything that can be discovered about the universe.

But back to the idea of Christianity and Divine Love. I am of the opinion that they are two separate things. As such attacking one does not invalidate the other.

The fact that occasionally a star emerges from an organized religion does not validate the religion. A religion is validated by its continued success, not by its accidental success.

I'm not totally against telling someone they are wrong. But that behavior should be supported by something more than just a 'religious' belief. And that is even more important when the 'religious' belief comes from a religion with a lengthy track record of being wrong itself.

One of the most difficult things to do is to lead someone to understand that the religion they grew up with and they rely on moral guidance is wrong and doesn't represent what they have spent a lifetime believing it does represent. It pulls a cornerstone of the life right out from under them.

And if there isn't something there to replace it with they can easily lose their anchor in life. It is something they have to work with within themselves before it can make the change that leads them to take that one objective look at their religion and at the teachings of their Lord before they reach the conclusion that their religion does not represent the teachings of their Lord.

I just keep pointing to the teachings of their Lord...over and over again. And I do it because I honestly think His teachings are valuable to humanity and provide a road map for a successful life. And I find them valuable regardless of who He actually was.

 

[Sketcher]

Why does Christianity label harmless action/things/activities as immoral? Examples:Heavy Metal, Dungeons & Dragons, long hair on men, braless women, etc.

You're painting Christianity with too broad a brush. The Bible only speaks to one of those things, the length of hair on a man, and that is subject to context. D&D seems to have occultish overtones, which makes a lot of Christians uncomfortable, understandably so. It says nothing about bras whatsoever, and nothing about heavy metal whatsoever. I'm a fan of metal myself.

Secondary question: What is the boundary that separates action from immoral action? If you cannot answer question 2 then how can you know right from wrong in terms of morality?

Morality.

 

[Sketcher]

I've wondered that too. People still play Dungeons and Dragons?

I don't play myself, but yes. Grown men and women still play it. Apparently it's up to 5th edition rules now.

 

[Dave-W]

In general, I chafe at the idea of calling anything sinful or immoral that the bible does not specifically condemn.

To do otherwise leads one into the trap Our Lord criticized the Pharisees for: inventing sins. Adding to the commandments.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Why does Christianity label harmless action/things/activities as immoral? Examples:Heavy Metal, Dungeons & Dragons, long hair on men, braless women, etc. Secondary question: What is the boundary that separates action from immoral action? If you cannot answer question 2 then how can you know right from wrong in terms of morality?

Note. If you claim something is immoral/wrong/bad, please say why with as much detail as possible.

It's probably too much to say that these things you've listed and designated as "harmless" are indeed this and nothing more. Moreover, it's probably not really equitable to juxtapose these things side-by-side, as if they're all of the same essence, because they're really not.

• Heavy Metal is a category that encompasses a spectrum of different view points among not only bands, but sometimes among band members within the same band. There might even be various viewpoints expressed among different songs that are all on the same album. So it may be right or wrong for a Christian to say "Metal is immoral!" Some of it is immoral; some of it isn't.

• D&D is a game that offers a malleable and variable perspective among its players and participants. So, for Christians to say that "it's immoral" is really nothing less than a gross jump to a conclusion without their having actually looked at the contents of the game. Nothing in the game actually teaches 'Magic.' Nothing in the game requires a person to desire to be 'evil.'

• Long hair on men? This is an interpretation about the length of hair based on a person's assumptions which come by the use of a particularly stilted interpretation of the Bible. So, I wouldn't give this item more than a few seconds thought. I'd be more concerned with whether the guy in question washes his hair and keeps it clean than I would be with measuring its length.

• Women who go braless? As long as they have a shirt on, I'm not sure how this could be construed as either immoral or unnatural in the grand scheme of things. In fact, the public act of breast-feeding a child probably shouldn't be seen as anything out of the ordinary either. But, here we are, in modern day society, concerned about what in Biblical times would be more or less a common, everyday thing. Now, on the other hand, women who jaunt down the boulevard in Manhattan, New York City, sporting bared breasts in support of a "free the nipple campaign" probably do need to receive a morally intoned glance and a raised eyebrow ... or two. Just sayin'!

 

[Samaritan Woman]

Thank you for your perspective on this.

The fact that countless millions love Metal (including me) yet only the tiniest fraction of Metal lovers then comit murder tells me that the music is not the problem. Most people in our prisons are Christian. So did Christian Hyms drive them to commit their crime? My point is that correlation does not imply “played an important role”. Violent people listen to many different genres of music.

I have yet to meet a Christian who has said otherwise yet I cannot ignore the fact that there is no universal agreement within Christianity as to what the Bible says. In this very thread we have Christians giving many different perspectives based upon each individual’s “interpretation” of the Scripture.

So if all do the above then all will agree. In a perfect world perhaps. In reality words are open to interpretation. Google a bunch of words and look up the definitions in multiple dictionaries and you will see what I mean. Even worse is most people do not go by dictionary definitions, they go by whatever definition is in their head which is not always in line with any of the actual dictionary definitions. Simply getting the worlds 2.2 billion Christians to agree on the meaning of all words is impossible. If you all do not go by the same dictionary definitions then universal agreement on what the Scripture says is impossible.

So the best case scenario is that morality is objective and adjudicated by God and that any errant misinterpretation is the fault of us mortals. If this is the case why would God command us to follow his rules knowing that we are incapable of accuracy understanding the rules and can't reach a universal agreement?

As for the worst case scenario, God does not exist thus the Bible is a book of moralistic stories. Which is true? As an agnostic I say that I do not know.

I do respect your opinion and perspective regarding the influence (or lack thereof) of music on people's actions. Let me clarify my position – music alone is not the sole contributor to people's (violent or even lascivious) behavior, because other factors are always in play, but rather it can definitely intensify such actions by arousing feelings and thoughts. I think that we are going to have to agree to disagree on this topic, however!

I am perplexed by your assertion that most people imprisoned are Christians – can you cite some sources to back up this statement?

Christianity does lack universal agreement on Biblical interpretation, I admit, but that is because believers do not take the time and effort to learn how to study scripture properly according to the universal principles of hermeneutics as agreed upon by Biblical scholars. One does not need to attend seminary nor be a scholar to be the student of God's word that believers are called to be. While Christians have good intentions when they earnestly read the Bible, the clergy more often than not fails to teach their congregations such things while much of the laity lacks interest in taking real responsibility for proper learning on their own; many have been overly influenced by secular culture and do more “fluff” study unfortunately. And those who lack the ability (for whatever reason) to do intensive study should be receiving teaching from those who can. I, myself, only learn from and study under teachers who are genuinely called to such a position, that being they have learned both Greek and biblical Hebrew, have taken the time to study the historicity of scripture, and apply the principles of hermeneutics to their teaching and study.

Biblical words are to be studied using a Strong's concordance in conjunction with Greek and Hebrew lexicons. A concordance provides all the possible definitions of every single word in the Bible corresponding to the language in which it was written, and Lexicons provide the more specific definition of said words in relation to their literary context. So in reality Biblical words/passages are not so easily manipulated to suit one's bias.

Due to the fall of man, all persons lack the ability to fully comprehend and possess perfect understanding of God's word; however this does not nullify the fact that we are called to strive to know Him through scripture. Anyone who reads the Bible even just on the surface can easily grasp the concept hat he is sinful and needs a mediator equivalent to God to justify him before a holy God.

As for your statement regarding the possibility that God doesn't exist thereby rendering the Bible a book of moralistic stories, that is a topic for another thread.

 

[Robert65]

I can't find what I said but I did later say I believe men should have short hair. Also the majority of men the world over have short hair

A good argument for those who base their sense of right and wrong upon peer-pressure. I however do not use social norms as the basis for my morality.

 

[Robert65]

Well I agree with the OP that this can be a problem, the opposite (labeling harmful/immoral activities as harmless) is also an issue. There needs to be a balance.

What harmful activities are labeled as moral or amoral?

 

[Halbhh]

Most people in our prisons are Christian. So did Christian Hyms drive them to commit their crime?

A great many are converted in prisons due to strong efforts to bring the Good News to prisoners, to the lost. Of course, once converted, they are still in that prison until released.

 

[Dansiph]

A good argument for those who base their sense of right and wrong upon peer-pressure. I however do not use social norms as the basis for my morality.

I'm not trying to make a good argument I am just replying to your point about criminals having short hair being not a good point imo as the majority of men have short hair anyway.

I don't know if it's sinful or immoral but I know it is a shame for a man to have long hair according to the Bible. It's not so big a deal that I'd highly encourage non Christians to cut their hair short. I'd let them feel compelled to do it on their own

 

[Robert65]

The "long hair on men" thingy especially has always baffled me, since just about every depiction of Jesus I encounter in churches etc, always seem to be of a long haired Jesus.

Ya, it seems silly to single out long hair as immoral when I literally look like the paintings of Jesus, more so when I was young. I am a white man with long brown hair and a goatee. I even had a kid turn to me in Church one time and say “Look mommy, Jesus!”

I'ld say that the differentiator between moral / immoral is the amount of harm inflicted.
No harm, no foul, is what I say.

And I use the term "harm" broadly here. There's physical harm, but there's also psychological harm etc.

It's also a balance...
Take satire for example. It can inflict "psychological harm" when you laugh with someone.
On the other hand, freedom of speech and art is very important.

You could make satire illegal, because it can cause "psychological harm".
But in doing so, you'ld be removing basic freedoms and I'ld say that removing such freedoms does MUCH harm to a society as a whole.

It's not always black and white. And sometimes, it's about tradeoffs. As in "x is not so nice, but the alternative is even worse..."




I didn't give much detail, but I think you'll understand what I'm talking about.

I agree with the underlying premise of your argument as I see harm as the boundary that separates action from immoral action.