Morality without Absolute Morality

[Niels]

But what would an absolute morality offer that fundamental reason alone cannot already determine?

Ideally, reason alone should be sufficient. It seems to me that optimal morality can be arrived at via sound reasoning. Through sound reasoning we can approach absolute morality. We should keep in mind, however, that people are unreasonable to varying degrees. The more unreasonable the person, whether incapable or simply unwilling, the less likely they are to reach morally optimal conclusions on their own. They may be taught morals that sound reasoning ultimately supports, and reap the benefits, but it doesn't mean their own reason brought them there.

Absolute morality, as such, can therefore provide optimal morality for the unreasonable.

 

[Hawkins]

The core of morality, that is, human conscience, is objective and will be used on the Final Judgment for (gentile) humans not choosing the New Covenant. What humans miscalculate is the angel effect posed on humans.

The big picture. The Final Heaven is about how the high intelligence angels (their existence is to participate in God's various creations, that's why they are created with high intelligence and high abilities) interacting with the low (yes, very low in comparing with that of the angels) intelligence humans. Eden is so modeled that even within God's own dwelling realm that humans (Adam and Eve) are utterly beaten by angels (the crafty snake).

Earth is the same platform modeling the Final Heaven, it's also designed for the same interaction to occur. It's in the same situation where humans are utterly defeated and completely captive under Law. The difference is that this time humans will beat the angels through Faith, such that the Final Heaven is built with both angels and humans living in. Thanks to Jesus and God. Without Jesus then, the utterly defeated humans shall be fully destroyed together with planet earth (by the Flood of Noah).

Earth is literally a hell (more precisely a wilderness, as God is where His sheep are, God hasn't yet fully withdrawn His influence), where Satan is referred to as "the god of this world". Wherever God has His influence withdrawn, such as the so-called permanent separation, the most evil and the most powerful figure will naturally and eventually rule, whose name happens to be Satan. Earth is not yet fully hell, not yet fully separated from
God simply because God still has a job to do, which is to save His sheep (falling victim in the wilderness and captive).

Earth is always with the overwhelming influence from the fallen angels, they have all the intelligence and ability to hammer our morality, especially by means of our society cultures (the guy asking question is partly right, he doesn't know what is behind the scene though). One has to dig deep inside ourselves to recover/regain our conscience which is the objective one. The simplest to get rid of this mess, where humans lost their sense of the objective conscience especially with cultural influences, is to accept the New Covenant and turn to Christ. That's the ultimate solution, unless you insist on fighting the fallen angels with might and intelligence (instead of Faith). That is to say, use your Faith instead of your might/intelligence to deal with the crafty snake, or else it's a fight humans stand no chance to win!

 

[Colo Millz]

... Your standards are a reflection of who you are. Your upbringing and all those other factors we've been listing determine that. ...

So:

Follow your heart, and blame your upbringing?

Sounds like you are in fact developing a way to avoid taking the blame for anything.

If we blame upbringing, why not blame any other outside forces - guns, racism, parents, poverty - but at all costs, don't blame the malfunctioning conscience.

 

[Colo Millz]

Furthermore, if morality comes from society, then the source of your rights is the government.

They are not something as high-falutin as "God-given".

And if the government can give the government can take away.

By contrast:

"[T]he rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God."

- JFK

"[A]ll men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

- Declaration of Independence

If God gives something, humans cannot take it away.

 

[com7fy8]

And God knows, by the way, if a certain action will have a bad result; it may not be obvious, but God knows.

So how do you know?

God is able to personally communicate with us. And His communication matches with all that He knows.

So, for one thing, it is not going to work to try to make some absolute written moral code. We need how God personally in us communicates and guides us.

How do we know it is really God? At every moment, we depend on Him to make sure He is really the One guiding and communicating.

"for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure." (Philippians 2:13)

And we can check with His written word to evaluate if He is really the One communicating and guiding. However, of course, there are things not explicitly dealt with in the Bible, but we trust God about this, that He will make sure. And with experience we know the difference between God and what is not God. One scripture which can help with this is > Colossians 3:15 >

"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful." (Colossians 3:15)

We are commanded to be ruled by God Himself in us, by means of His own peace ruling us. In God's peace we are sharing with Him in His own harmony with almighty immunity against cruel and vain feelings and drives and emotions. Plus, in this peace we share with God in His creativity for how to love any person, at all. Because God is all-loving. So, His peace will take care of us in His all-loving way, not merely making us feel good and safe, for our own selves.

So, included in the covenant of having peace with God who is all-loving is how we are growing in being all-loving in how we live and love. So, one way we can tell something is not God is if it isolates us and has us only or mainly concerned about our own selves and maybe about certain other people we like and hope to use > Jesus deals with this >

"if you love those who love you, what reward have you?" (in Matthew 5:46)

So, we may not always be perfectly sure if God is communicating and guiding, but we can rather easily identify what is not God. And trust Him to make sure; after all, we are not God; so . . . how can we know unless He does His miracle of having us know, which He can >

Jesus does say His sheep hear Him. John chapter 10. This is a miracle, to hear and know Jesus. We trust Jesus to do this with us. And Jesus guarantees this, for whoever is really His sheep > John chapter 10.

Also, God gives us His example, in us >

"Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us." (Romans 5:5)

If I have really experienced God's own love with His quality and goodness and kind and tender compassion and personal sharing . . . this is my example of how to be in my relating with any and all people. So, this is an absolute moral standard. No law of itself can get humans to do this; we need to be with God in union with us so we can experience Him and this example.

And I think of this > the Bible is our absolute written moral standard. Every scripture can ***somehow*** help us to know how to love and how to live morally.

Using the previous example, sending a child to her room is quite acceptable. But for how long? How do you know when it becomes morally unacceptable?

Well . . . my offering on this is we can be personally guided by God so we do what is right; and He has us doing better than humanly understandable rules ever could tell us to do; because He is God so better than we are, able to have us doing better, even by the moment, than we could imagine, moments before > with such discovering, indeed, in this.

My opinion as one who has never brought up children is > first, spend some time with the child before sending the child to the child's room. Discuss how we are going to make good use of the "time out". One person said his children pray and get right with God, so they can then return from the room; possibly, the child is trusted to know when the child is ready to rejoin the family relating. Of course, we need to have a good family relating atmosphere, as the child's good example, so that when the child becomes wrong, however, the child can see that the child is breaking away from loving as family; and so the child knows what to prepare to return to, and do not come back until you are ready, please. Another person would communicate and negotiate through the closed door, never leaving the troubled child alone.

A pastor I knew would say, "Don't ever have an attitude like that." And that would be it. Attack the cause of what some bad behaving might be. And then the child has a tool, to catch the child's self right when trouble starts in the child. This helps me, anyway > there are things clearly not loving and not in peace, that can get started in me; and already I know I am wrong; and I can trust God to clear that out and restore me to pleasant and soul-resting . . . and all-loving . . . love.

So . . . may be we should not ask what quantity of time is moral, but what quality of atmosphere of family caring and sharing should be the standard. And we grow in this; we discover this, best of all with God.

For moral absolutes for caring and sharing as a family, I would say, God has humility, kindness, patience, creativity so we don't argue or complain, and good example is very important so the child can know readily when the child is going against us by going against our good example, and there is forgiveness but evaluating when and how and why to trust.

 

[com7fy8]

For example > God's word says not to do sexually wrong things which the Bible says are wrong. Now, getting a little sexual pleasure, in itself, is not what I would say is harmful.

So it's not a case of absolute morality if you can decide it's ok at times.

But I did not say "you" decide. Just before what you quoted, I offered >

And God knows, by the way, if a certain action will have a bad result; it may not be obvious, but God knows.

So, in case God knows a nice feeling thing is not what would be good for you . . . what He knows is the standard. And so, He has rules to guide us. Because we can get side-tracked . . . away from God's way . . . by seeking pleasure too much and maybe only for its own sake . . . only using other people, being intimate really only with our feelings inside of us, versus having real sharing with another person. God's love is where pleasure came from > He is perfectly good in His love, so better than pleasures humans get without Him. And He knows which pleasures He wants to share, and how He does not want to share pleasure with a human.

So, I offer to clarify > morality is not about "you" deciding what is ok. But it is in sharing with God.

However, moral principles can help people to spot what is not God, but they need to submit to God in order to get all that is really good.

And along with what you quoted, I offered, also >

But if God knows His Holy Spirit will not have you do that thing, doing it will have you getting affected by "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" > in Ephesians 2:2.

There are pleasures which are not God's will for us. And so, only Satan's wrong spirit will have people doing them. This is included in what I mean.

And Satan's evil selfish spirit is harmful, emotionally and spiritually and even having physical effects that are not good. And so you can see how sexually wrong people can keep on having personality problems that do not go away . . . because of not doing their things in God's love.

And even is, therefore, a pleasure is not ruled to be immoral, it can be bad for someone if the person has too much of it . . . like eating too much candy, among other items. One can become more and more weak if a person is deeply weak for pleasure, instead of gaining strength in sharing with God and become a stronger person by learning how to love and relate with different people.

A problem of selfish pleasure is it can isolate someone with only others the person is using for the pleasure. Many have a preference for pleasure, and deeply they stay weak so they can keep suffering various emotional torments. The weakness for some treasure pleasure can be addicting and distracting and >

that weakness for pleasure can also work as weakness to keep suffering pain.

And the Bible does give us guidelines for detecting if we are too involved with pleasures that might not be directly dealt with morally in God's word. For example >

"I will not be brought under the power of any," we have in 1 Corinthians 6:12.

This is a moral guideline . . . not to let an ok pleasure get you under its power, but share it with God guiding you, and then you can truly enjoy it and "enough is enough" > "be content with such things as you have," we have in Hebrews 13:5.

So, even for things ok, there is a moral way to do them.

God's love makes us strong so we do not give in to fear and worry and arguing and complaining and hurts and unforgiveness; so God has rules about what to do and not to do . . . knowing which things He approves of and therefore has us doing these things in His love which does us so much good while doing things in God's own love.

A basic moral, then, is do only what God has us doing with Him in His love. So, we are not deciding, on our own. But yes we can share with God, choosing with Him. And again, as context with what you are quoting >

And when people do not follow God's objective moral rules, they get the emotional and social and relational outcomes of disobeying God. And God does not want them to have such outcomes, because our Father cares about any and all people. But people want their pleasure.