Christian morals

[Catherineanne]

Morals are work? I never heard that one before!

'Work' in the context of Christianity means anything that we do to try to reach God. Because God is so far beyond us, there is nothing that we can do to effect our own salvation or to work our way towards him.

I am sure you are familiar with Islam and what its view on this is. As I understand it, the good works that a man does are weighed against the bad, and then God decides that man's fate in the light of those works. He may or may not decide in favour of the majority, but the more good works there are, the better chance that man has. To a Christian this is a variant of 'works' theology, where man can effect his own salvation, as long as he is sufficiently moral and does sufficient good during his life.

There is no amount of morality or good works that is sufficient in the Christian faith to achieve our own salvation. Our best good work is pretty well rubbish to God, compared with his own perfection. Therefore, the only way our salvation can be effected is if he reaches to us, rather than us trying to reach him.

And this is the reason for the Incarnation. By being made man, God himself reaches to us, and bridges a gap between God and man which otherwise would remain far too wide. Believing in the Lord, we then do not have to work towards our own salvation, because it is already effected. Any good works, any morality which then result are the product of our faith, and are not motivated by the fear of not being good enough for God. No man can ever be good enough for God, without Christ.

 

[Catherineanne]

Are these christ like people infallible?

You seem to be very interested in the concept of infallibility, M.

Perfection is a quality which belongs to God alone. God created all that is, but he is not created. Anything that is in creation may be called good, or even very good, but cannot be called perfect, because only God is perfect.

Therefore, it is possible to say that the Godhead; Father, Son and Holy Spirit is perfect. Outside the Godhead, however, nothing is. Neither the angels, nor man, nor anything else in creation outside God is perfect.

The discussion in Christianity arises in relation to the Bible, and to what extent its attribute of being 'inspired by God' equates to perfection. The Bible itself does not ever claim to be perfect, although of course it does say that God is. The Scriptures were written, copied and printed by fallible men. One side of the argument says that God protected the core text of Scripture, through all of these processes, but that does not explain why variant texts exist. Another says that the basic text was perfect, but has degraded over time, and that does not explain why God allowed such degredation to happen.

My own view on this is that God allowed Scripture to remain imperfect on purpose; to prevent us from worshipping it. If we ascribe any quality which belongs rightly to God alone, onto any object within creation, then that equates to idolatry. Therefore, elevating any object or person, however holy, to such a state of complete infallibility or perfection, breaks the first and second commandments. This is consistent with all that we read in both the Old and New Testaments. God wants us to worship only him.

This is not to say that nobody can ever speak perfectly about God, or about our faith. Just that when such perfection arises, it is the product of the Holy Spirit, and is nothing to do with our own humanity.

 

[Catherineanne]

I didn't say faith is not important, I want this thread to be strictly about Christians morals, unless you believe morals aren't that important.

Certainly morals are important, but they are the product of our faith, not the cause of our salvation.

A Christian will be far more likely to put emphasis on his relationship with God, rather than on his own good works. Good works alone are not enough.

 

[Catherineanne]

I can have an extremely strong faith yet live a very sinful life. I guess heaven is so easy nowadays.

An extremely strong faith is incompatible with a very sinful life. The Holy Spirit would convict you of your sin, and lead you to repentance and a change of life.

 

[Catherineanne]

Faith in these sinful strangers? Are they God or something close?

Is there anyone that you trust, M?

Jesus died for all humanity, isn't that linked to racism(God used to be for Jews only), also Jesus wants women to submit to their men, I guess that is linked to sexism.

The Lord did not tell women to submit to men, and he came for all people.

 

[Catherineanne]

How do you know all of that? You never even met them!

No, but the Lord has.

Some saints have questionable backgrounds.

In our faith where you come from is not important; what matters is where you end up; at the foot of the cross.

 

[Mahammad]

Then may i ask you to define morals.

Morals are like norms, a set of beliefs on what is right and what is wrong.

 

[Mahammad]

No, I speak for myself.

Are you the holy spirit?

 

[Mahammad]

'Work' in the context of Christianity means anything that we do to try to reach God. Because God is so far beyond us, there is nothing that we can do to effect our own salvation or to work our way towards him.

I am sure you are familiar with Islam and what its view on this is. As I understand it, the good works that a man does are weighed against the bad, and then God decides that man's fate in the light of those works. He may or may not decide in favour of the majority, but the more good works there are, the better chance that man has. To a Christian this is a variant of 'works' theology, where man can effect his own salvation, as long as he is sufficiently moral and does sufficient good during his life.

There is no amount of morality or good works that is sufficient in the Christian faith to achieve our own salvation. Our best good work is pretty well rubbish to God, compared with his own perfection. Therefore, the only way our salvation can be effected is if he reaches to us, rather than us trying to reach him.

And this is the reason for the Incarnation. By being made man, God himself reaches to us, and bridges a gap between God and man which otherwise would remain far too wide. Believing in the Lord, we then do not have to work towards our own salvation, because it is already effected. Any good works, any morality which then result are the product of our faith, and are not motivated by the fear of not being good enough for God. No man can ever be good enough for God, without Christ.

Again, this thread is about Christian morality, it is not about faith vs work.

 

[Mahammad]

You seem to be very interested in the concept of infallibility, M.

Perfection is a quality which belongs to God alone. God created all that is, but he is not created. Anything that is in creation may be called good, or even very good, but cannot be called perfect, because only God is perfect.

Therefore, it is possible to say that the Godhead; Father, Son and Holy Spirit is perfect. Outside the Godhead, however, nothing is. Neither the angels, nor man, nor anything else in creation outside God is perfect.

The discussion in Christianity arises in relation to the Bible, and to what extent its attribute of being 'inspired by God' equates to perfection. The Bible itself does not ever claim to be perfect, although of course it does say that God is. The Scriptures were written, copied and printed by fallible men. One side of the argument says that God protected the core text of Scripture, through all of these processes, but that does not explain why variant texts exist. Another says that the basic text was perfect, but has degraded over time, and that does not explain why God allowed such degredation to happen.

My own view on this is that God allowed Scripture to remain imperfect on purpose; to prevent us from worshipping it. If we ascribe any quality which belongs rightly to God alone, onto any object within creation, then that equates to idolatry. Therefore, elevating any object or person, however holy, to such a state of complete infallibility or perfection, breaks the first and second commandments. This is consistent with all that we read in both the Old and New Testaments. God wants us to worship only him.

This is not to say that nobody can ever speak perfectly about God, or about our faith. Just that when such perfection arises, it is the product of the Holy Spirit, and is nothing to do with our own humanity.

It seems like these Christ-like are actually infallible, since the holy spirit changes their wants. What if one of them suddenly wanted to walk naked in public? The holy spirit won't allow them to have such thoughts? Infallible.

 

[Mahammad]

Is there anyone that you trust, M?

After 20 years of life, I'll say no.

The Lord did not tell women to submit to men, and he came for all people.

Ephesians 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord.


Now don't say "this is Paul" I thought these saints were holy to you.

 

[Mahammad]

In our faith where you come from is not important; what matters is where you end up; at the foot of the cross.

Why do a lot of Christians view Constantine I as a holy saint when he was actually a ruthless military dictator who refused to let go his pagan beliefs?

I don't know about you, but to me an emperor and a saint can't fit in a one person, unless "saint" have a different meaning.

 

[Catherineanne]

Ephesians 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord.


Now don't say "this is Paul" I thought these saints were holy to you.

This is indeed Paul, writing a pastoral letter to the Christians at Ephesus. Ephesus is part of the Hellenic (ancient Greek) world, and therefore the culture there is Hellenic, rather than Jewish. Paul is a saint, and is holy, but he is not infallible. However, his letters do have the status of Scripture, and are inspired by God.

In Hellenic societies, women were not educated, and were regarded as second class citizens; pretty well the property of the husband, to do as he liked with. See how Paul continues, in verse 25: Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.

In other words, we are each to submit to one another, not just one way. To the Greeks at Ephesus, this would have been a radical new way of considering their wives; not as second class, but as much to be loved as the church is by Christ.

It may well be that the question here arose because believing husbands had unbelieveing wives, and vice versa, and Paul was asked what these people should do; should they defy their spouse and leave the marriage. He is encouraging such people to stay with their spouse, and to work to retain the marriage and their faith. This is consistent with the Christian injunction not to divorce.

In other words, this text does not denegrate women; it enhances their status to this particular audience.

If you take any single verse out of Scripture, without this kind of understanding of who wrote it, and to whom, then there is a very real danger that you end up with a distortion of the Gospel message. To ensure that the reading I offer is more accurate than the one you presented above, we then have to check both against Christ himself, and see if we can see any evidence in what he said or did that he regarded women as inferior, or to be naturally submissive at all times. There is no evidence whatever to that effect. Christ is shown talking to women just as readily as to men. He does not send them home to ask their husbands' opinions.

 

[Catherineanne]

Why do a lot of Christians view Constantine I as a holy saint when he was actually a ruthless military dictator who refused to let go his pagan beliefs?

I don't know about you, but to me an emperor and a saint can't fit in a one person, unless "saint" have a different meaning.

I think you have to understand the context of the times. We cannot judge former ages by present beliefs. In the context of his time, in the Christian world, Constantine was accepted as a saint, because God used him to ensure that Christianity became the accepted faith of the Roman Empire. That is no small achievement.

In the OT we see many flawed men being used by God in this way; David, Abraham, Moses. They are none of them perfect.

 

[Catherineanne]

After 20 years of life, I'll say no.

That is a shame. Someone has clearly caused you a lot of harm at a young age. I am very sorry.

 

[Catherineanne]

Are you the holy spirit?

No, but the Holy Spirit is with me. Most of the time, anyway.

This does not make my words the same as the Holy Spirit writing; sadly it is not as clear cut as that. You have to take what I say, weigh them against Scripture (all of it) and against Christ, and then decide whether God would say the same, or not.

It takes years to learn how to do this. Mostly, however, the general rule to follow is, if I say it, then it is me. Far safer.

 

[Mahammad]

In verse 25: Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.

In other words, we are each to submit to one another,

I can't see the word submit. I guess that what they teach you in British new-age liberal churches

In other words, this text does not denegrate women; it enhances their status to this particular audience.

Sounds very similar to what Muslims say.

 

[Mahammad]

I think you have to understand the context of the times. We cannot judge former ages by present beliefs. In the context of his time, in the Christian world, Constantine was accepted as a saint, because God used him to ensure that Christianity became the accepted faith of the Roman Empire. That is no small achievement.

In the OT we see many flawed men being used by God in this way; David, Abraham, Moses. They are none of them perfect.

I thought the holy spirit would make him a very good Christian especially that he's a saint. Where was the holy spirit when that saint murdered people?

 

[Mahammad]

That is a shame. Someone has clearly caused you a lot of harm at a young age. I am very sorry.

No, I just learned that humans are not trustworthy, and they prove it to me everyday.

 

[Mahammad]

No, but the Holy Spirit is with me. Most of the time, anyway.

This does not make my words the same as the Holy Spirit writing; sadly it is not as clear cut as that. You have to take what I say, weigh them against Scripture (all of it) and against Christ, and then decide whether God would say the same, or not.

It takes years to learn how to do this. Mostly, however, the general rule to follow is, if I say it, then it is me. Far safer.

You said the holy spirit is the one who shaped Tradition. Unless you are the holy spirit or you have spoken with him, how do you know?