black and white morality

[Old Things]

Right and wrong are not a form of knowledge. Not directly, anyway. Knowing right and wrong is discernment, which is a spiritual gift. It's something you cannot teach a person. Same goes for common sense.

Demonstration is what needs to happen first of all. You learn some things from parents and other things from friends and society which is why I mention maturity. Maturity is something that can become more than just facts about the world but an example of what you should and should not do when seen in others and the relationships you have with others. If you have wise parents you will be wise more likely to have parents who teach you deception and hate. What matters in wisdom is self-awareness to know good and bad things but knowing good and bad things has always come from a person's personal experience with actual events that lead to this understanding.

When a person has in them a self-awareness then they too can distinguish what is good and bad just from being placed in a situation requiring them to do what is necessary for the good of others. So when we teach people what is good from the beginning it is proper to have them intend to do good first and to do good one needs to look inside themselves for what would be good for the other person. Is this best for them and in what way and what must they know and understand so they see it is the best good possible? Communication becomes key to showing others what good is and what needs to be done.

When people see that others care for them then it becomes much more easily applicable to get them to become good and have common sense because they will see those good things exist and also the many ways in which good is possible through demonstration and practice.

You cannot teach a person to be a good person. You can control their behaviors and make them more or less successful, but you cannot actually control their thoughts, motivations, and intentions. That's something they have given to them at birth. Now, a discerning person is going to be able to judge things properly because that is part of their nature. It is not something everyone has equally.

That seems to be our main contention. You seem to assume that everyone is "equal." While that is a good sentiment to have, in reality, some people are more good-natured than others. This is not something they have been raised to be. People are not a blank slate when they are born. Ever heard the saying, "Destined for greatness"? Well, I think there is some truth to that. Where the world wants to make what is "better" or "worse" based on how successful a person is, that is altogether absent from the Bible. What makes a person "better" or "worse" is based on their character. Not in a developmental sense but more so in a "who they really are" sense. It's based on the person's natural inclinations that make a person a good or bad person. Worldly success and accomplishments play no factor in this.

 

[birdsnestfern]

Communication becomes key to showing others what good is and what needs to be done.

Very true and explaining why as well if you are an intp because we don't just adopt something because others do it, or because a culture or religion does it, we need to know for what purpose/and if it is actually logical or if its just an anecdote to someones ego, then that makes it pointless. It has to be free of ego appeasing to be real. Ie, it has to be classical and make actual sense to us. If you are ESFJ, then you likely have all kinds of rules we don't understand or care about. So reasons for thinking a certain way are the only way you can persuade sometimes, and even then, not always. One persons common sense might be more about people, anothers common sense is more about fairness, there is a scale that is different for all, so its never the same. If you want to get people to think like you do, tell them why.

Simple example would be, if you have kids and they go to a birthday party and they play a game - is it better to make them learn only ONE person will win a prize and to compete for it, and they leave the party feeling bad that they didn't get anything, or is it better to give prizes to each child so they all come away feeling good about attending the party?

Some argue they have to learn about disappointments and competition, some argue that they learn more that the parents actually cared enough to offer each of them something to take home and felt loved for being included.

So, I happen to think its more kind to plan on doing the same for each child so they felt included, it teaches a better lesson about who adults are, than just winners and losers and tough luck.

Or, that each person has just as much chance to be loved and understood, whatever their differences.
Really, life will give them enough tough luck experiences, why not give a different perspective.

So, if God/and or parents are teaching things, offer some lessons on inclusion, maybe some on exclusion, but really, inclusion and love are the things they need.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I try and interpret the books of the Bible as they were intended. Sometimes that is literally, and sometimes it is not.

So that is heaven metaphor, if you go to heaven, why dwell on it so much?

As for my personal life, "happiness" is a word that often means exuberant jubilation or something. I don't experience "excitement" in terms of glee very often, but I am an extremely content person in general.

I am glad to hear that. Lots of people are not content.

 

[Old Things]

So that is heaven metaphor, if you go to heaven, why dwell on it so much?

No. Jews believed in a final resurrection long before Christ arrived on the scene. And if we are resurrected, then we have to be someplace with resurrected bodies. Hence heaven.

Matthew 22:23-32
"That same day some Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came up to him and questioned him: “Teacher, Moses said, if a man dies, having no children, his brother is to marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first got married and died. Having no offspring, he left his wife to his brother. The same thing happened to the second also, and the third, and so on to all seven. Last of all, the woman died. In the resurrection, then, whose wife will she be of the seven? For they all had married her.”
Jesus answered them, “You are mistaken, because you don’t know the Scriptures or the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like angels in heaven. Now concerning the resurrection of the dead, haven’t you read what was spoken to you by God: 'I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”"

So Christ used what the Sadducees believed in to make his case for a final resurrection because he quoted from Exodus 3:6 (part of the five books that they believed in). I wish I was half as good at arguing a point as Christ was.

 

[Black Rose]

You cannot teach a person to be a good person. You can control their behaviors and make them more or less successful, but you cannot actually control their thoughts, motivations, and intentions. That's something they have given to them at birth. Now, a discerning person is going to be able to judge things properly because that is part of their nature. It is not something everyone has equally.

That seems to be our main contention. You seem to assume that everyone is "equal." While that is a good sentiment to have, in reality, some people are more good-natured than others. That seems to be our main contention. You seem to assume that everyone is "equal." While that is a good sentiment to have, in reality, some people are more good-natured than others. This is not something they have been raised to be. People are not a blank slate when they are born. Ever heard the saying, "Destined for greatness"? Well, I think there is some truth to that. Where the world wants to make what is "better" or "worse" based on how successful a person is, that is altogether absent from the Bible. What makes a person "better" or "worse" is based on their character. Not in a developmental sense but more so in a "who they really are" sense. It's based on the person's natural inclinations that make a person a good or bad person. Worldly success and accomplishments play no factor in this.

No, As I see it it is the same problem we have with IQ tests and MBTI.

What you have is a proclivity to be good and bad in many circumstances.

But as with any genetic system people are on a spectrum so of course the psychopath born a psychopath will not change but that is not to say free will is impossible for everyone because the brain and life experience is so variable.

If everyone was a robot as you propose then no one would have the free will to accept or reject God and such other things. Human beings are more plastic than that.

 

[Old Things]

You cannot teach a person to be a good person. You can control their behaviors and make them more or less successful, but you cannot actually control their thoughts, motivations, and intentions. That's something they have given to them at birth. Now, a discerning person is going to be able to judge things properly because that is part of their nature. It is not something everyone has equally.

That seems to be our main contention. You seem to assume that everyone is "equal." While that is a good sentiment to have, in reality, some people are more good-natured than others. That seems to be our main contention. You seem to assume that everyone is "equal." While that is a good sentiment to have, in reality, some people are more good-natured than others. This is not something they have been raised to be. People are not a blank slate when they are born. Ever heard the saying, "Destined for greatness"? Well, I think there is some truth to that. Where the world wants to make what is "better" or "worse" based on how successful a person is, that is altogether absent from the Bible. What makes a person "better" or "worse" is based on their character. Not in a developmental sense but more so in a "who they really are" sense. It's based on the person's natural inclinations that make a person a good or bad person. Worldly success and accomplishments play no factor in this.

No, As I see it it is the same problem we have with IQ tests and MBTI.

What you have is a proclivity to be good and bad in many circumstances.

But as with any genetic system people are on a spectrum so of course the psychopath born a psychopath will not change but that is not to say free will is impossible for everyone because the brain and life experience is so variable.

If everyone was a robot as you propose then no one would have the free will to accept or reject God and such other things. Human beings are more plastic than that.

I'm not sure what I said that has you believing that I think we are robots. I also believe in free will, but just not the same way you do. Accepting the Gospel is accepting a truth that was there long before the person ever made that "choice." So is the case for any other truth proposition. Gravity existed long before Newton came up with his theory of gravity. He's just the first person who put it in that language. So a person does not "choose" to believe in gravity. Gravity exists whether a person believes in it or not. So too is the Gospel. If Christ rose from the dead, then Christianity is true, period. If Christ did not rise from the dead, then Paul says, "We are most to be pitied."

 

[Black Rose]

I'm not sure what I said that has you believing that I think we are robots. I also believe in free will, but just not the same way you do.

I do not understand.

How is a person's character not able to change? Why is it set from birth? You are a hard determinist then?

 

[Old Things]

How is a person's character not able to change? Why is it set from birth?

That's the view that pretty much everyone believed before humans got so concerned with free will.

You are a hard determinist then?

No, my view on free will has not changed.

My Theory of Free Will

Here I would like to outline my thoughts on Free Will and the capacity that we have it. There will be several steps to this, but I hope it is clear at the end of this that you [all] know where I stand on this issue. First, I should break up the human psychology so that we know what is going on...

www.intpforum.com

 

[Black Rose]

How is a person's character not able to change? Why is it set from birth?

That's the view that pretty much everyone believed before humans got so concerned with free will.

I believe that a person can change if they see the error of their ways.

A person's character is not set from birth but is dependent on both genetics and social environment.

My character was very different when I was depressed.

How To Build Self-Esteem - The Triple Column Technique (CBT)

 

[Old Things]

How is a person's character not able to change? Why is it set from birth?

That's the view that pretty much everyone believed before humans got so concerned with free will.

I believe that a person can change if they see the error of their ways.

A person's character is not set from birth but is dependent on both genetics and social environment.

My character was very different when I was depressed.

How To Build Self-Esteem - The Triple Column Technique (CBT)

Again, IDK why you think I am saying that people cannot change. The Gospel makes people better people or it should. I'm not arguing against self-improvement. On the contrary, people should pursue self-improvement. But their fundamental nature does not change with improvement. It even says that Christ learned obedience through suffering even though he is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

 

[Black Rose]

How is a person's character not able to change? Why is it set from birth?

That's the view that pretty much everyone believed before humans got so concerned with free will.

I believe that a person can change if they see the error of their ways.

A person's character is not set from birth but is dependent on both genetics and social environment.

My character was very different when I was depressed.

How To Build Self-Esteem - The Triple Column Technique (CBT)

Again, IDK why you think I am saying that people cannot change. The Gospel makes people better people or it should. I'm not arguing against self-improvement. On the contrary, people should pursue self-improvement. But their fundamental nature does not change with improvement. It even says that Christ learned obedience through suffering even though he is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

You said morality cannot be taught. I said people learn morality by seeing people who lead by example and are kind to them. So what is the disagreement?

 

[Old Things]

You said morality cannot be taught. I said people learn morality by seeing people who lead by example and are kind to them. So what is the disagreement?

A person's moral proclivity to be good or bad does not change. But people should become better or worse depending on hearing the Gospel.

 

[ZenRaiden]

No. Jews believed in a final resurrection long before Christ arrived on the scene. And if we are resurrected, then we have to be someplace with resurrected bodies. Hence heaven.

Matthew 22:23-32
"That same day some Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came up to him and questioned him: “Teacher, Moses said, if a man dies, having no children, his brother is to marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first got married and died. Having no offspring, he left his wife to his brother. The same thing happened to the second also, and the third, and so on to all seven. Last of all, the woman died. In the resurrection, then, whose wife will she be of the seven? For they all had married her.”
Jesus answered them, “You are mistaken, because you don’t know the Scriptures or the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like angels in heaven. Now concerning the resurrection of the dead, haven’t you read what was spoken to you by God: 'I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”"

So Christ used what the Sadducees believed in to make his case for a final resurrection because he quoted from Exodus 3:6 (part of the five books that they believed in). I wish I was half as good at arguing a point as Christ was.

I am not sure you missed my point, or you are making the right point and I don't get it, but to make sure, what I am saying, heaven is a place we go to after we die?
Or are you saying heaven is a place we get in life?
I thought if heaven is after we die, then there is not point.
But now thinking about what are we even talking about?

 

[ZenRaiden]

A person's moral proclivity

Are you sure?

 

[Black Rose]

You said morality cannot be taught. I said people learn morality by seeing people who lead by example and are kind to them. So what is the disagreement?

A person's moral proclivity to be good or bad does not change. But people should become better or worse depending on hearing the Gospel.

I disagree because people can change because of love regardless of biblical literacy.

 

[Old Things]

No. Jews believed in a final resurrection long before Christ arrived on the scene. And if we are resurrected, then we have to be someplace with resurrected bodies. Hence heaven.

Matthew 22:23-32
"That same day some Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came up to him and questioned him: “Teacher, Moses said, if a man dies, having no children, his brother is to marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first got married and died. Having no offspring, he left his wife to his brother. The same thing happened to the second also, and the third, and so on to all seven. Last of all, the woman died. In the resurrection, then, whose wife will she be of the seven? For they all had married her.”
Jesus answered them, “You are mistaken, because you don’t know the Scriptures or the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like angels in heaven. Now concerning the resurrection of the dead, haven’t you read what was spoken to you by God: 'I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”"

So Christ used what the Sadducees believed in to make his case for a final resurrection because he quoted from Exodus 3:6 (part of the five books that they believed in). I wish I was half as good at arguing a point as Christ was.

I am not sure you missed my point, or you are making the right point and I don't get it, but to make sure, what I am saying, heaven is a place we go to after we die?
Or are you saying heaven is a place we get in life?
I thought if heaven is after we die, then there is not point.
But now thinking about what are we even talking about?

I think I misunderstood what you were asking. Sorry. I'm not saying heaven is an emotion or something like that. We experience a foretaste of heaven on Earth, but in the final resurrection, God will create an entirely new universe called the Lake of Fire (the bad place) and New Jerusalem (the good place). See the book of Revelation for more. Before the final resurrection, we die, and so go to one of two places: Hades (the bad place) or Abraham's bosom (the good place). See Luke 16:19-31 for more.

A person's moral proclivity

Are you sure?

Not 100% certain, obviously.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I think I misunderstood what you were asking. Sorry. I'm not saying heaven is an emotion or something like that. We experience a foretaste of heaven on Earth, but in the final resurrection, God will create an entirely new universe called the Lake of Fire (the bad place) and New Jerusalem (the good place). See the book of Revelation for more. Before the final resurrection, we die, and so go to one of two places: Hades (the bad place) or Abraham's bosom (the good place). See Luke 16:19-31 for more.

Yeah I see.

Not 100% certain, obviously.

OK. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Old Things]

Yeah I see.

There is also a view I have called the Pre-Millennial kingdom which is yet to come, but that's something I don't know a great deal of detail about. It's not Dispensationalism because I do not believe in a Pre-Tribulation rapture, but the Great Tribulation has to happen before Christ returns in any case.

 

[birdsnestfern]

Just fyi, everything in the book of Revelation was someones trance like hallucination, really.
Its a lot like a profit such as Nostradamus and them having people taking it much too literally. Not all of the bible is
meant to be taken literally, but more as a teaching tool. Its healthy to slightly distrust anything in that whole section, its just someones dream or perhaps a myth or legend to get the general idea of what it wants you to know.
Absolutely NOTHING in life is ever fully learned, because life has something new to learn constantly and that is why you can't graduate from life or a religious teaching. Most likely, the heaven and hell are all within you as day to day experiences. Its more important to know how to navigate each than to fear either. Ie, what Psalm 23 is about. But, more than any of this, if you have a relationship with and surrender to spirit/universe, you become more Christ like in your own spirit. There is only ONE, all opposites are on a continuum, all things exist at the same time. Accessing these dimensions is just knowing you can move through any of it just with thoughts and will alone and spirit is eternal, whether you believe or not, and it just needs to know balance.

Psalm 23 says, go into the dark, go down, into the depths, this transforms you into wholeness. Shadow work does this also.
Don't be afraid to get to know hell, for it will then allow you to transverse back up to heaven. A lot of humanities great works of art and artists did this. Think of Van Gogh.

https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31412

 

[Old Things]

Just fyi, everything in the book of Revelation was someones trance like hallucination, really.
Its a lot like a profit such as Nostradamus and them having people taking it much too literally. Not all of the bible is
meant to be taken literally, but more as a teaching tool. Its healthy to slightly distrust anything in that whole section, its just someones dream or perhaps a myth or legend to get the general idea of what it wants you to know.
Absolutely NOTHING in life is ever fully learned, because life has something new to learn constantly and that is why you can't graduate from life or a religious teaching. Most likely, the heaven and hell are all within you as day to day experiences. Its more important to know how to navigate each than to fear either. Ie, what Psalm 23 is about. But, more than any of this, if you have a relationship with and surrender to spirit/universe, you become more Christ like in your own spirit. There is only ONE, all opposites are on a continuum, all things exist at the same time. Accessing these dimensions is just knowing you can move through any of it just with thoughts and will alone and spirit is eternal, whether you believe or not, and it just needs to know balance.

Psalm 23 says, go into the dark, go down, into the depths, this transforms you into wholeness. Shadow work does this also.
Don't be afraid to get to know hell, for it will then allow you to transverse back up to heaven. A lot of humanities great works of art and artists did this. Think of Van Gogh.

https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31412

All I can say is that I hope you come to realize the truth of Christianity someday. I think I might have mentioned this on this forum before, but there was a time when I had very similar thinking to you. But God changed all that for me. Of course, I cannot blame you for not having the same experience as me, but I know the Bible is true based on this experience. And, after I went to learn more about Christianity and apologetics, I found it was not necessary for me to rely on my own fallible experiences to convey the truth of Christianity. Ultimately, what Christianity is dependent on is the resurrection of Christ. If Christ rose from the dead, then Christianity is true. End of story.