Universal Morality vs Christian Morality

Many people claim Christian values and morals are universal. But this is not so. As someone from a non-Christian background I discovered these values being espoused by Christianity, which are contradictory to what I have experienced. Chances are, if you have these values, it is because you were influenced by Christian culture. Feel free to add you own.

"Universal" values:

- The end justifies the means. This is contrary to one where all of your evil will be judged, not just negated by your good works.

- It is okay to lie for your benefit or gain or to avoid unpleasant outcomes. In Christianity you are taught that this is wrong.

- It is okay to break promises if they will be undesirable to keep. God tells you not to make promises you cannot keep.

- It is not wrong to lose your virginity before marriage. We are commanded to be chaste and pure for our spouses.

- If it feels good, do it. This is obviously wrong.

-Our purpose in life is to find happiness and pleasure. Our purpose in life is to glorify God and perfect ourselves into saints for His kingdom..

reply to post by 547000


Perhaps that is the christian purpose but not the rest of the world...

The purpose of life is to learn the lessons of life... Not to satisfy some biblical God that can't keep his own commands.

Life is much more then your book my friend

reply to post by Akragon


Do you just come to threads to bash Christians?

Maybe you do not agree that Christianity is God's path for us, but I do. Simply because I see it commanding us to be saintly people, whereas other religions tell you things you want to hear, not to change your ways.

reply to post by 547000


I do not bash Christians... i mearly question their beliefs because usually they don't line up with what Jesus taught...

for example...

It is okay to lie for your benefit or gain or to avoid unpleasant outcomes. In Christianity you are taught that this is wrong.

Calling Jesus God literally suggests he is a liar... Not all Christians believe this issue, but some do.... those are who i argue against...

It is not wrong to lose your virginity before marriage. We are commanded to be chaste and pure for our spouses.

SImply not reality...

Where would our species be if ONLY people who were married had sexual relations...

I know exactly where we would be..... extinct.

God kills regularly in the OT... breaking his own commandments.... thus OT God is a hypocrite, and a liar... I don't believe the true God is either...

Whatever. I wish there was an ignore button. You constantly argue you personally know what Jesus taught but you deny the Church that gave you the scriptures. You ignore the fact that it is not up to one's private interpretation. You don't seem to grasp that God the Father is not human but a divine ruler. And you constantly condescend to Christians.

reply to post by 547000


Actually there are many religions that do not fit your "universal morality" theory but you've lumped them all in together as being in opposition to christian values. Buddhism for instance certainly does not say "the end justify the means" but you have lumped that in there as well. Sex before/outside of marriage is not exclusively a christian tradition either but you've hinted that other belief systems are sexually irresponsible.. while ignoring the fact that marriage has been used for countless centuries (by christianity as well) to treat women as property with those unbroken hymens seen as mere commodities to be traded.

What about..

Making sweeping generalisations and spreading falsehoods about ALL non christian belief systems?

That does not seem very moral to me.

reply to post by Akragon

Dear Akragon,

It's wonderful to see you again, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you're in this thread. I still remember our discussion on Atheism and Morality, it was definitely the high spot of my ATS experience.

Is it possible that the Opening Poster (I've forgotten his number, too many 0s in it) is saying that Christianity furnishes a set of morals that is not susceptible to the winds of societal pressure? That what he is calling "Universal Morality" is subjective morality? If so, he might be trying to establish Christian morality as a codified morality. I'm reluctant to call it an objective morality because of the doors that opens, but it's more objective than anything Western society has available.

Perhaps the fact that it is a religious codification of morality has helped it stay strong through the centuries. I can't recall any moral systems that were scientifically derived.

Anyway, it's a joy to see you.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by 547000
Whatever. I wish there was an ignore button. You constantly argue you personally know what Jesus taught but you deny the Church that gave you the scriptures. You ignore the fact that it is not up to one's private interpretation. You don't seem to grasp that God the Father is not human but a divine ruler. And you constantly condescend to Christians.

Incorrect... Though i do wish there was an ignore button as well... but then who would i have to argue with?

I deny the church simply because of what they teach and how they teach it... I don't ignore the "fact" that its not up to personal inturpretation.... i DENY the so called "fact" that the church has all.... if any of the answers the bible holds.

I know what Jesus taught because i've studied his words without having some "scriptural authority" looking over my shoulder telling me what is right... I've challenged priests, ministers, and the like on their knowledge of Jesus many times and left them questioning.

AND...

I have no issue with Christians or any other religion... my issues come when people deny his words. The OT does not line up with Jesus... Thus i deny its value as far as spiritual knowledge goes...

Many christians also deny his words then try to counter them with paul or other writings within the book... those are who i have issues with.

You might find i can not argue with Christians that understand Jesus... it just doesn't work.

Those that don't understand his lessons are easy to challenge....

And so i will continue...

reply to post by riley


So the commonly accepted morals of our time are not universal? Most people argue you don't need to be religious to be moral. But if morality is not universal, morality is just subjective. I'm talking about those morals accepted by most people in our modern times at any rate.

reply to post by charles1952


the pleasure is always mine my friend...

Im pretty easy to find... Any time you find a Christian not listening to his lord... I will be there.

He is not my lord, because i have only one, and that is his father... And even I listen to the words of Jesus

SO how much more should those christians listen to him if they call him lord?

reply to post by Akragon


The OT lines up perfectly with the NT. If you perhaps spend some time learning about why people link them together, you can see the connection for yourself.

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Akragon

 

The OT lines up perfectly with the NT. If you perhaps spend some time learning about why people link them together, you can see the connection for yourself.

Please don't patronize me...

You are incorrect...

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Akragon

 

The OT lines up perfectly with the NT. If you perhaps spend some time learning about why people link them together, you can see the connection for yourself.

Please don't patronize me...

You are incorrect...

What can I say at this point other than "no u"?

One place to consider is the similarities of the paschal lamb and Jesus, who is called the Lamb of God. Consider the breaking of the bones. The OT foreshadows the NT.

Originally posted by 547000

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Akragon

 

The OT lines up perfectly with the NT. If you perhaps spend some time learning about why people link them together, you can see the connection for yourself.

Please don't patronize me...

You are incorrect...

What can I say at this point other than "no u"?

LMAO!!

Fair enough my friend... but notice i didn't say the OT and the NT don't line up...

I said the OT and the teachings of Jesus didn't line up... And you can find instances within the NT of this same thing...

What say you now?

reply to post by Akragon

Dear Akragon,

Any time you find a Christian not listening to his lord... I will be there.

I am glad of that. Keep a close eye on me, I am not safe outside of His care so please offer your reproof freely.

You are doing a very good thing by reminding Christians to be more attentive to their Lord. But may I offer a word of warning, although I'm sure it's unnecessary? Remember to keep love in your heart as you reprove others. Don't allow pride or hatred to get a hold on you. But I'm sure you won't.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


my friend i do humbly sumit to my own fault...

That is my biggest problem with his lessons... Turn the other cheek...

Its never been something i could do.... but im learning still...

And i Know one thing above all... Love

reply to post by Akragon


Do you mean Jesus' claims that it is better to mutilate yourself than to sin or that the unrepentant will be punished?

"Blessed shall you be when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake."

"Wo to you when men shall bless you: for according to these things did their fathers to the false prophets."

No one would stone a prophet who call people good instead of evil, or who tell them they are perfect the way you are instead of telling them to mend their ways.

Jesus came to lead sinners to repentance, not just forgiveness. That sounds totally OT, does it not?

reply to post by 547000

No one would stone a prophet who call people good instead of evil, or who tell them they are perfect the way you are instead of telling them to mend their ways.

Jesus came to lead sinners to repentance, not just forgiveness. That sounds totally OT, does it not?

No one should stone anyone for any reason... Causing harm to another in any way only hurts yourself...

Do you not remember him saying to the crowd... those without sin cast the first stone?

And who among us is "perfect"? perhaps im misunderstanding?

And which version are you reading? That is not what the KJV says...

reply to post by Akragon


I think you are misunderstanding. Prophets who only speak what people find sweet rather than bitter would not be stoned. They are the false prophets.

All the prophets who claimed that Israel should set their ways straight were stoned. Jesus, in effect, was calling many of the prophets in the OT true prophets.

Verses taken from here

reply to post by 547000


I think you're right...

22Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.

23Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets

I have no idea what you're talking about.... Israel?

He says "their fathers" also "cast out the prophet's names as evil"..... meaning they didn't believe the prophets...

The verse you quoted from whatever bible suggest they didn't believe the false prophets... which is obvious.

but look at the verse... Blessed are you when they hate you in my name's sake... Rejoice in that day because your reward is great in heaven... Their fathers(those who hate you) also did this to the prophets....

Its a completely different meaning then the verse you posted...

And besides that he doesn't identify any prophets in your version either way