Be / do good because "you're told to"

[bybee]

When I am afraid I am thinking of my safety and what can I do to save myself?
This totally negates the Cross.

 

[pqmomba8]

You are most welcome, the question you ask is very important.

I do not believe in eternal damnation myself, I lean towards an universalism of apokatastasis.

There are probably quite a few that have a relationship to God based on fear and self-security. That is a very problematic relationship to have to the divine, probably not very healthy either.

This is why I think Luther said (or rather reminded us of) something important. If salvation is by grace, that is not of our merit, then we are truly free to love both God and neighbor. There would be nothing to gain for one self by doing good deeds. Those deeds would then assume their proper object, namely the neighbor and truly be in the service of God. Serving God purely out of fear and self-interest only serves to illumine what Christianity considers to be the root problem in man, namely pride.

Fear of God as a virtue is often misunderstood. It is not meant to be fear as in terror, but rather fear as in awe. But Christians must immediately qualify what we are in awe of, not of might and terror, but of infinite love, forgiveness and humility. Paul speaks of the wisdom that is foolishness to the world, that wisdom is Christ crucified. The glory of God is the crucified Son, the one who forgives even those who tortures and kills him.

This should be obvious to anyone who knows about Christianity. Sadly, it quickly diminishes and returns to worship of God as Emperor writ large, rather than crucified slave.

Thank you Selaphiel! Now, this is something I can "work" with, understand and appreciate. My disillusion with belief in G-d and religion in general was partly due to my observation of the "G-d fearing flock" being more concerned about "pleasing the Boss" than actually doing good for goodness's sake. (Oh, and assuming that somehow, religions had the monopoly on morals. Uggghhh.)

Back in the day, when I belied in G-d (or at least wanted to), I studied with the Rabbi in my Hebrew school and then went to take many religion classes (and therefore read the Torah, Bible, Q'Uran, Bghagawat Ghita, etc.) to understand why the faith in the Divine was so important. Instead, it turned my into an agnostic and then, an atheist. Just seemed like all these religions were basically re-hashing of the mythology that came before them, just in a different "flavor." And the whole supernatural thing - I just don't "buy" any of it.

But it was mostly the premise that "Please the Boss or you will be tortured for eternity" that REALLY turned me off.

Anyway, thanks again Selaphiel. (BTW, you speak in sagely prose.....

Shalom!

 

[Ben Masada]

Be/do good because you are told to...

Be/do good because you are told to...

...and much less with an eye in the reward in the after life. Only dogs do good for a treat which is akin to rewards. And as the Law is concerned, Jews do good because it is a Jewish thing to do.

 

[pqmomba8]

...and much less with an eye in the reward in the after life. Only dogs do good for a treat which is akin to rewards. And as the Law is concerned, Jews do good because it is a Jewish thing to do.

Amen. (So do Buddhists...and Jains, etc. )

 

[Selaphiel]

I do not know enough about the Jain religion to comment. I would be careful with attributing this attitude to Buddhists though. They do not relate to a personal ultimate and karma is not a personal force, it simply is a cause and effect view on morality. Buddhist karma is more about what will inevitably happen following certain paths. It is no secret that Buddhism is about personal striving to get rid of self-delusion or the delusion of a self to be more accurate. I prefer the ideal of the Bodhisatva in Buddhism, where the enlightened hold off their own personal gain and enter into samsara again to help others, I think that is an important corrective to what can be conceived as a too individualistic effort in some forms of Buddhism.

I also think it is important to now view the promise of eternal life, in classical Christianity at least (I'm no Islamic theologian, so cannot speak to that tradition), is not so much understood as a reward as it is understood as the true telos of mankind (Irenaeus' Gloria dei est vivens homo, the glory of God is man fully alive). What that means is that eternal life is not to be conceived as a reward, but rather as creation fulfilled, and sin is a hinderance to that goal as a force of death.

 

[Tambora]

...or you're going to burn FOREVER if you are ot / don't do good...

were my thoughts today after arguing with a "G-d fearing" man (orthodox Jew at work) that without G-d, there is "no way you can have a good moral compass". (What absurdity...I told him to go and re-read the Hebrew Bible, especially, Leviticus, Deutoronamy and Exodus. Some pretty immoral stuff there being commanded by G-d.)

Anyway, I came away with the following thought:

Nothing could be lamer than appealing to a being's vanity to "do the right thing" to avoid eternal punishment.

Case closed.

Sounds like you would prefer that all the wickedness in the world should be without consequence.

 

[pqmomba8]

I do not know enough about the Jain religion to comment. I would be careful with attributing this attitude to Buddhists though. They do not relate to a personal ultimate and karma is not a personal force, it simply is a cause and effect view on morality. Buddhist karma is more about what will inevitably happen following certain paths. It is no secret that Buddhism is about personal striving to get rid of self-delusion or the delusion of a self to be more accurate. I prefer the ideal of the Bodhisatva in Buddhism, where the enlightened hold off their own personal gain and enter into samsara again to help others, I think that is an important corrective to what can be conceived as a too individualistic effort in some forms of Buddhism.

I also think it is important to now view the promise of eternal life, in classical Christianity at least (I'm no Islamic theologian, so cannot speak to that tradition), is not so much understood as a reward as it is understood as the true telos of mankind (Irenaeus' Gloria dei est vivens homo, the glory of God is man fully alive). What that means is that eternal life is not to be conceived as a reward, but rather as creation fulfilled, and sin is a hinderance to that goal as a force of death.

Dude (I assume), you are seriously smart. See? I was right about "sagely". Most of your points about Buddhism are correct - but at the end of the day, the don't worship a celestial deity in order to "gain entry to paradise", but are on a path of self-enlightenment. Which I can totally dig. Live your life to the fullest while you're on terra firma - you only live once and life is short.....make the best of it. Pass the better world than you inherited to those that come after you...all that jazz.

Shalom!

 

[pqmomba8]

Sounds like you would prefer that all the wickedness in the world should be without consequence.

When, oh WHEN did I allude to that?

 

[nikolai_42]

Thank you Selaphiel! Now, this is something I can "work" with, understand and appreciate. My disillusion with belief in G-d and religion in general was partly due to my observation of the "G-d fearing flock" being more concerned about "pleasing the Boss" than actually doing good for goodness's sake. (Oh, and assuming that somehow, religions had the monopoly on morals. Uggghhh.)

Back in the day, when I belied in G-d (or at least wanted to), I studied with the Rabbi in my Hebrew school and then went to take many religion classes (and therefore read the Torah, Bible, Q'Uran, Bghagawat Ghita, etc.) to understand why the faith in the Divine was so important. Instead, it turned my into an agnostic and then, an atheist. Just seemed like all these religions were basically re-hashing of the mythology that came before them, just in a different "flavor." And the whole supernatural thing - I just don't "buy" any of it.

But it was mostly the premise that "Please the Boss or you will be tortured for eternity" that REALLY turned me off.

Anyway, thanks again Selaphiel. (BTW, you speak in sagely prose.....

Shalom!

Taking into account your OP and jumping off of your response to Selaphiel, let me add a thought. Leaving to the side the whole question of worship and obedience (one will either worship God - if they want to confess to His existence - self, or state), you are addressing the motive rather than the act itself. One can fear God and love Him at the same time - but one cannot love Him and hate Him simultaneously. If "I" fear God because of what He might do to "me" then - as you say - that doesn't say much about love. But if one's fear of God is because we have considered Him and what that means about us, that is a slightly different thing. Because one says "I will do anything to save my own hide" where the other says "Having been made aware of this God who is to be feared and loved, I find myself humbled before Him". The response of fear is to tremble and be paralyzed. The one of love is to bow and cry out for mercy.

You can see this in Isaiah's vision of God (Isaiah 6). He came before God and couldn't stand his own sin because of being in God's presence. But his reaction wasn't to run away and hide, but to cry out to God - and God responded by removing the iniquity that hindered him. On the other hand, when the demons that Jesus cast out spoke to Him, they didn't do so in the same way - they weren't looking to be changed, just be as far from Him as they could.

Remembering that the Law is summed up in "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy strength and with all thy mind and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself", it is clear to me that the Law - as an expression of God's character - is only (can only be) fulfilled in love. That means honoring God for who He is and not because of what it gets me. And John confirms this - that that sort of fear has no place in the believer's life :

There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
I John 4:18

However, looking again at the big picture, one who hates God won't want to please Him - just avoid his own punishment. But one who fears God is not prevented from loving Him simply because of fear.

Hope that makes at least a little sense...

 

[pqmomba8]

Taking into account your OP and jumping off of your response to Selaphiel, let me add a thought. Leaving to the side the whole question of worship and obedience (one will either worship God - if they want to confess to His existence - self, or state), you are addressing the motive rather than the act itself. One can fear God and love Him at the same time - but one cannot love Him and hate Him simultaneously. If "I" fear God because of what He might do to "me" then - as you say - that doesn't say much about love. But if one's fear of God is because we have considered Him and what that means about us, that is a slightly different thing. Because one says "I will do anything to save my own hide" where the other says "Having been made aware of this God who is to be feared and loved, I find myself humbled before Him". The response of fear is to tremble and be paralyzed. The one of love is to bow and cry out for mercy.

You can see this in Isaiah's vision of God (Isaiah 6). He came before God and couldn't stand his own sin because of being in God's presence. But his reaction wasn't to run away and hide, but to cry out to God - and God responded by removing the iniquity that hindered him. On the other hand, when the demons that Jesus cast out spoke to Him, they didn't do so in the same way - they weren't looking to be changed, just be as far from Him as they could.

Remembering that the Law is summed up in "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy strength and with all thy mind and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself", it is clear to me that the Law - as an expression of God's character - is only (can only be) fulfilled in love. That means honoring God for who He is and not because of what it gets me. And John confirms this - that that sort of fear has no place in the believer's life :

There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
I John 4:18

However, looking again at the big picture, one who hates God won't want to please Him - just avoid his own punishment. But one who fears God is not prevented from loving Him simply because of fear.

Hope that makes at least a little sense...

Thank you for your reply. I understand the angle you are coming from....in the CONTEXT that you are expressing. What you are "guily" of (and many, many religious folks) is assuming that I hate G-d. Simply because I don't believe in Him. I don't, I really don't - how can you possibly hate something you don't believe in? I may "hate" for the misery, ignorance, hate, etc. it has brought on to this world since the dawn of man, but I certainly don't hate G-d...or unicorns or Santa Clause or.....well, you get the idea.

Shalom!

 

[nikolai_42]

Thank you for your reply. I understand the angle you are coming from....in the CONTEXT that you are expressing. What you are "guily" of (and many, many religious folks) is assuming that I hate G-d. Simply because I don't believe in Him. I don't, I really don't - how can you possibly hate something you don't believe in? I may "hate" for the misery, ignorance, hate, etc. it has brought on to this world since the dawn of man, but I certainly don't hate G-d...or unicorns or Santa Clause or.....well, you get the idea.

Shalom!

One of the results of love (not causes of it) is obedience :

If ye love me, keep my commandments.
John 14:15

Since we can't see God, the only evidence of our love is our obedience to Him (or, rather, our submission to Him even if we do not evidence perfect obedience).

And I would say that denying the existence of God - if He exists - is hatred since it is no different than rejection. Outright rejection of God is not based on evidence but on personal inclination. At least the agnostic admits his own failure to grasp all things. The atheist has to make an absolute disavowal of something many others have affirmed. Why are their avowals mere fancy where the atheist is absolutely correct?

Hatred (like love) is not a mere emotional response.

 

[Tambora]

When, oh WHEN did I allude to that?

It was my observation of what you have said.

But here's the chance to make it clear.
Do you think wickedness should have consequences?
And if so, who would you like to appoint to decide what the consequence should be?

 

[Lon]

...and much less with an eye in the reward in the after life. Only dogs do good for a treat which is akin to rewards. And as the Law is concerned, Jews do good because it is a Jewish thing to do.

Both are fine. In a sense, this is arguing parenting styles. I tried to be more of an encourager than a punisher as a Dad. The older I got, I redoubled those efforts. Punishment is unnecessary with my kids. I wonder as an adult if I needed to spank at all BUT many fine citizens were spanked a lot as kids. The verdict? To me, it seems moot.

When it comes to theology, because you have kids from all spiritual parenting styles, I 'think' it is a matter of style.

Imho, encouragement works better in all matters, including spiritual.

A kid just has to realize (by encouragement) that his thoughts are God's thoughts. He/she may reject Him yet, but a 'threat' doesn't do much good. I believe all of us who know God, met God. I pray when He comes to their town, they will run and see rather than ignore Him (figuratively for God being there and not silent as a truth). That's the best I can do, well other than knocking and saying "come and see!!!"

In Him, Who is

-Lon

 

[pqmomba8]

One of the results of love (not causes of it) is obedience :

If ye love me, keep my commandments.
John 14:15

Since we can't see God, the only evidence of our love is our obedience to Him (or, rather, our submission to Him even if we do not evidence perfect obedience).

And I would say that denying the existence of God - if He exists - is hatred since it is no different than rejection. Outright rejection of God is not based on evidence but on personal inclination. At least the agnostic admits his own failure to grasp all things. The atheist has to make an absolute disavowal of something many others have affirmed. Why are their avowals mere fancy where the atheist is absolutely correct?

Hatred (like love) is not a mere emotional response.

Interesting you should say that (bolded above) - nobody knows everything for sure, I will give you that. I don't KNOW with 100% certainty that there is no G-d. (But then, if there was, WHICH of the 5,000 or so G-d's man has created is the "right one?) Again, NOBODY knows with absolute certainty that there isn't (or is) a G-d. The same way I don't know with 100% certainty that there isn't an invisible magical Unicorn standing behind me at this time and the entire universe was blown out of his horn gazillion bajillion years ago. There is NO way to disprove that.

So when I say I'm an atheist towards (whatever version) of G-d, it is in the same way I am an atheist towards the said unicorn or Santa Claus or....well, you get the picture. The evidence for all of them (including a Judeo-Christian version of a G-d) is equally poor.

So no, my disbelief / rejection of a G-d or a Unicorn or a Flying Spaghetti monster is not manifested as hate. Again I don't "hate" G-d.

Try again.

Shalom!!!!

 

[pqmomba8]

It was my observation of what you have said.

But here's the chance to make it clear.
Do you think wickedness should have consequences?
And if so, who would you like to appoint to decide what the consequence should be?

Hello.

If by "wickedness" you mean negatively impacting other people, then absolutely, resoundingly YES. And the consequences should be decided by the society (or the tribe or whatever) that the transgressor has affected. It's fairly simple.

(And PLEASE don't go on that tired old tirade about "who decides what the transgressions are, and what the judgement is if there's no absolute authority, blah, blah, blah - that silly argument has been thrown out of the window a long, long, long time ago.) Belief in a Supreme Being does not hold a monopoly on morals and justice. (If history is any indicator, it has been quite contrary.)

Shalom!

 

[Tambora]

Hello.

Hi.

If by "wickedness" you mean

The opposite of "being good".

And the consequences should be decided by the society (or the tribe or whatever) that the transgressor has affected. It's fairly simple.

(And PLEASE don't go on that tired old tirade about "who decides what the transgressions are, and what the judgement is if there's no absolute authority, blah, blah, blah - that silly argument has been thrown out of the window a long, long, long time ago.) Belief in a Supreme Being does not hold a monopoly on morals and justice. (If history is any indicator, it has been quite contrary.)

So you do recognize some sort of authority over you, right?

 

[republicanchick]

...or :

Nothing could be lamer than appealing to a being's vanity to "do the right thing" to avoid eternal punishment.

Case closed.

how come?

do u always close the case b4 you know much about it?

hmmmm..

me, I believe more in Hell than I do in Heaven sometimes... b/c some people are just [fill in the blanks] and you just know they deserve soemthing like that... I pray for them... wouldn't want my worst enemy to go there, but I ... again... believe in Hell more and more the more evil I see... ISIS... Planned Barrenhead...


___

 

[pqmomba8]

Hi.

The opposite of "being good".



So you do recognize some sort of authority over you, right?

I recognize a right of an individual not to be unduly negatively impacted by another individual(s.) That's why we have police, armed forces, etc. So?

 

[pqmomba8]

how come?

do u always close the case b4 you know much about it?

hmmmm..

me, I believe more in Hell than I do in Heaven sometimes... b/c some people are just [fill in the blanks] and you just know they deserve soemthing like that... I pray for them... wouldn't want my worst enemy to go there, but I ... again... believe in Hell more and more the more evil I see... ISIS... Planned Barrenhead...


___

>>>>do u always close the case b4 you know much about it?
Everything in life is about context. And everything in life is subjective.......to ME, doing good for the sake of pleasing an overlord while protective oneself from being tortured for life is NOT doing good at all.

>>>>>believe more in Hell than I do in Heaven sometimes..
Must be a pretty dark existence. I'm sorry for you.

 

[republicanchick]

>>>>do u always close the case b4 you know much about it?
Everything in life is about context. And everything in life is subjective.......to ME, doing good for the sake of pleasing an overlord while protective oneself from being tortured for life is NOT doing good at all.

>>>>>believe more in Hell than I do in Heaven sometimes..
Must be a pretty dark existence. I'm sorry for you.

I will bet u r... [sarcasm alert]

I couldn't love God either... if it weren't for Jesus... Jesus is proof that God cares about us.. The Father doesn't love us the way we WANT to be loved or think we should be loved... He sent Jesus... and that is what is needed... a Friend who loves unconditionally... and does not judge us harshly if we are trying...


+++