How do I into christian morality

judge of what. crime against what.

these concepts don't mean anything by themselves.

>original true faith
>bastardizes every aspect of Christianity and came around nearly two millennia after its creation

Judge of a person for the crimes against God.

God created us and we rebelled against Him. The consequence of sin is death and as the sovereign creator of the universe, God has every right to destroy His unruly children. However, because He is a loving Father He sent His Son to bear the punishment for our sins so those who acknowledge His sacrifice will be given mercy and not endure the punishment themselves.

>this is what papists actually believe
You'd have to be braindead or illiterate to actually believe this

the relevant question is not "judge of [crime]" but "judge of [authority]"

if it's just "god does what he wants because he fucking feels like it" situation then you don't call him a judge. even consistent behavior is just morality. a judge needs to be appointed.

does he enforce law under himself, one synonymous with himself, or something above? what are we bowing at if we do not sin?

Obviously human analogies do not perfectly capture the essence of an eternal omniscient being but by His nature God is the highest authority in existence. He can do things "because He feels like it" because He is sovereign.

To use another human analogy, God is king of the universe and His word is law and defines what is good. See Euthyphro's second horn for a more in depth explanation.

this has no moral implications anymore other than "everything is chaos, nothing is immutable"

are you disowning the christians who believe in this whole morals thing

Christians morals are based on God's example; we try to conform our lives to how Jesus lived.

why though. also would it be related to the whole afterlife thing at this point?

For the same reason that a child learns by imitating his parent.

One's destination in the afterlife is determined by their relationship with God. You cannot "earn" your way into heaven by being good, the only way to heaven is to acknowledge who Jesus is and what He accomplished.

Once you know Jesus, you want to be like Him.

so summary if I understood properly

>morality is a consequence of virtue and not something to be sought by itself, basically not relevant at all
>sin is actions while disagreeing with god
>afterlife is determined by how you feel about god when you die

and christians who don't agree with this, they are heretics?

user I don't think the guy you're talking to belongs to the major branches of Christianity

>However, because He is a loving Father He sent His Son to bear the punishment for our sins
That doesn't make any sense. Why did God have to get Jesus crucified to forgive our sins? Couldn't he do it without torturing himself?
I mean, the whole Harrowing of Hell bit makes sense, with Jesus dying to get into hell so he can free all the souls there, but what does it have to do with living people?

I'd love if the major branches would show up.

No you've misunderstood; morality is a consequence of conforming one's actions to Christ's example and should be sought after because it enhances one's life. However one's moral actions are not what grants one eternal salvation; afterlife is determined by whether one loves God.

I'm an evangelical.

The wages of sin is death, if death is not given as payment for sin then God is no longer perfectly just. Humanity's sins need to be paid for in order for justice to be served so God decided to pay that price Himself. Since God paid the humanity's sin debt for us we simply need to acknowledge this sacrifice (i.e. that Jesus is God who died for my sins) to be saved.

The amount of sins affects the amount of clothes you get in heaven. Repenting on sins = getting into heaven or not, but you must repent out of your heart, which makes committing more sins only improbable.

You can technically commit genocide and get into heaven with true remorse, but you won't have clothes.

Hi OP!

If you really want to get into Christian morality, rather than go by the common standards, it is more important to read the Gospel (at least one) and contemplate the meaning of each phrase Christ speaks. Try not to let church divisions and mainstream perceptions get in your way

>papist
am I in east Belfast or Veeky Forums?

But people are still dying, for one thing. And it doesn't seem just for some totally uninvolved person to be punished so you can let someone else off. Also I'm not sure how one death can justly pay for every sin ever committed. Or if it does, than anyone not redeemed makes there be more punishment than is warranted by the amount of sin, which is imperfectly just. Or is Jesus suffering directly linked to how many people will accept him? Or are the Calvinists right and its all determined beforehand who is in the Book of Life?

...

I know human blood sacrifice sounds crazy, but the lasting effect of His crucifixion is that His teachings were able to be spread throughout time, and that those who recieve the teachings feel deep compassion, at least when you weigh out what He taught in comparison to His death sentence.

He forgives all sins, and we are redeemed but rather than having just faith, you have to work into the repentence. No being is perfect and their is not one without sin, besides Christ who is without sin, becomes the pure sinless sacrifice for the sinners

It goes even farther into it, because Christ is an eternal Spirit and is a direct Source between you and God, but God is within you because the origin of all soul is from God.

Physical death and spiritual death are two different things and the idea that another can atone for one's sins is woven into the fabric of God's covenant with His people. Prior to Christ's incarnation the sin economy was centered around temple sacrifice where slaughtering animals was used to atone for one's sins. Jesus, being perfectly sinless and God in the flesh, was the ultimate "sin offering" and thus pays our debt through this sacrificial system.

The unredeemed do not make there more punishment than is warranted because they refused to accept Christ's payment on their behalf so they must pay it themselves.

I am not a Calvinist personally but I respect Calvin as a theologian even if I don't agree with him on everything.

I'm not even a Catholic, I'm just Irish so the word "papist" always conjures up images of Ian Paisley and bonfires in my head

Amen.

>is the popular "weighting sins at heaven's gate" really the deal they're selling?

No. Salvation is achieved through faith, prayer, and good works. Theosis. It is not a one time event, it happens over ones life.

>what's the role of, you know, repenting?

Coming closer to God by means of humility.

>also what the fuck exactly is sin

'Hamartia'. Missing the mark. Acting in a way not in accord with God's intent.

repent, be conscious of the people around you by knowing their suffering is due to the world and what the world teaches people to value.

generally, the rat race so to speak...many only participate because that's all there is, they hate it, but they do it because its all that they see on the surface. as a Christian, believer in Christ, the world is exposed for what it truly is. Because of this you should spread the love that Christ had, dont contribute to your brothers misery.

If you fail or slip in your walk, recognize it, ask for forgiveness and repent. God knows the fight isn't easy, but He will always be there be to lift you up, not break you down.

That voice in man, that voice that tells the man he is worthless, he should kill himself, that voice that only pushes regression and death....that's NOT God. That's your adversary.

So if you fail or slip, your patience gets tested and you accidentally crack in anger, recognize it, ask for forgiveness and be conscious of these temptations to snap so to speak.

And if you snap, God won't call you a failure, the voice of God won't tell you that you're a f--- up, or that you're worthless and weak and failing...again, that's your adversary.

Also I cant remember the scripture, but there's a difference between spiritual milk and spiritual meat, in terms of understanding and knowledge/wisdom...start with milk and just continue to grow in your journey.

Be careful of the ways of man, the regression into degeneracy, pay attention to the energy it takes from you, be mindful of others as well. They're hurting, remember to help when you can. Everyone has their own convictions, don't contend with them about what they eat or drink or say what you cant eat or drink. Basically be careful of trivial arguments about the word of God.

Matthew 15:11 "A man is not defiled by what enters his mouth, but” by what comes out of it."

Just be still, patient, walk with God man. Think on Jesus' teachings.

This man gets it

Calvinism is the worst bastardization of Christianity you could ever recommend anyone. I say this not as a papist, but a Lutheran.

T H I S
H
I
S

>how do I into christian morality

Read the bible, go to church and consult with your priest if you're unsure about something. I'd recommend a Catholic priest seeing as they're pretty well regulated, but whatever you feel to be the best option for you is what you should do, it's all the same God, and generally the same basic principles. I don't believe that the direction you cross yourself or other petty shit like that is going to be the difference between going to heaven or not.

Generally speaking, follow the 10 commandments, don't judge others, don't seek vengeance and try not to let and of what we consider the deadly sins (like lust or wrath) control your life. Having them is normal, but control them. It's not super complex to live a good Christian life.

Repentance (preferably via confession, though through prayer works too) frees you of your sin. Everyone sins, but you don't become tied to it if you're repentant. But people often just assume going to confession and admitting is enough. It's not. You need to honestly be repentant, you can't trick God.

There's no way you can get a comprehensive understanding of Christianity in a thread though, you'd need to spend your life studying it to fully understand.

But what said, as well as being incredibly well written, is also very useful as a starting point.

Oh, and never listen to advice you get from a Christian on /pol/, 90% of the time they're just people using it as a reason why they're better than others and because they think crusaders look cool, they don't live by the principles at all.

Christian morality is simply rote obedience.
If Jesus tells you to do it, you have to do it.

Bonus GBPs: Also do what your pastor/priest/cleric/Pope tells you to do.

>If Jesus tells you to do it, you have to do it.

Following certain guidelines is pretty much the basis of any morality, what's your point?

It's about living a virtuous life within those lines, but still having freedom to live how you wish. Jesus didn't think sinners were bad people even, he simply forgave them their sins. Same goes for Christian morality. We believe we shouldn't sin, but if you do, you shouldn't be judged for that.

all morality is based on obedience

>if my reason tells me to do it i have to do it
>if my penis tells me to do it i have to do it
>if my mom tells me to do it i have to do it

If you just consider that the bible is a bronzeage story book, and the message is as moral as those times, it suddenly becomes a very coherent text.

Its old stories by desert goat herders, for desert goat herders. "Our God is totally nice, and will grant us victory, but will make you burn forever if you are a shit and against us, also girls are gross"

There is no morality in it, just commands you have to follow under threat. It might have worked at the time, but trying to make it fit with modern morality leads to contradictions, wordgames and in worst cases barbarity.

>1434019(You)

The point is that the bible's argument for why some things are good or bad is just "God does/doesn't like it." There's no logic to follow, just a list to memorize.

I think you should read the bible before you start spouting shit like that. There's much more to Christian morality than "Did god say to not do it?", and it's all through the text. You just look dumb when you say things like that.

the logic is that because god is much smarter than us and wants whats best for us we ought to trust him when he tells us to do things that we dont understand

The God of the Bible doesn't seem very "smart", he seems more petty and jealous and vengeful.

When anyone asks him questions he basically says "HOW DARE YOU".

>When anyone asks him questions he basically says "HOW DARE YOU".

What do you get out of saying blatantly false things user? You've clearly not read the bible, you're just going off common atheist strawmen. What do you stand to gain from this?

Enjoy hell

he is the original mind.

have you ever heard of the term "logos?"

also god doesnt need to explain himself to us. when you raise kids you cant always reason with them about why they have to stop making mud pies and come take a bath.

Do you want to be a simpler holier person? A better person with peace and harmony? Knowledge and wisdom are desirable. Sin is everything evil and wrong in life, you want to get rid of that. Repenting is a way of saying sorry.

Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me. Also I think that Einstein more smart than God. Create universe is not such difficult task in comparison with the reverse engineering of the mechanism of universe.

this thread wasn't supposed to be about "is this good?" arguments, you retards. just summarize the proposition and present the theology it's based on.

opinionposters choke on dicks please.

it's a 'dictatorship' in the same way a family is

Empty threat.

Seems like an obvious Greek adoption.

>Repenting is a way of saying sorry.
this part makes no sense.

there is only one god for all people

I don't see how this is a dilemma. No Christian claims you can't be a good moral person without God, the church doesn't own morality. It just says you can't get to heaven without accepting God.

And the whole idea of what it is has already been explained earlier in the thread.

>Seems like an obvious Greek adoption.

How'd you figure that?

And are you dodging the questions about why you're making statements based on nothing for a reason, or what?

You'll change your tune when you get to Hell

Why not? Repenting is knowing you messed up asking forgiveness and trying not to do that thing again. It's turning from your evil ways.

I mean it please stop

>that pic

>No Christian claims you can't be a good moral person without God
I disagree, I hear this CONSTANTLY from Christians.

only the part where you said 'asking forgiveness' again is anything like an apology

I'm just tryna keep it simple

>also god doesn't need to explain himself to us
Also god doesn't need to create a certain guidelines of moral for us.
>when you raise kids you cant always reason with them about why they have to stop making mud pies and come take a bath.
Good parents always can do this.Only selfish or stupid parents can not reason their children. Thay are selfish if they can do it, but don't want lose time, thay are stupid if they can't do it in principle, cose they dont have enough brains.

>it's a 'dictatorship' in the same way a family is
>same way as bad family is
I agree.

excessively

tumblr get out

>I disagree, I hear this CONSTANTLY from Christians.

Well I don't really care what you hear, your anecdotes don't mean much, and you surprisingly only ever hear them from atheists arguing that Christianity is dumb on the internet.

But that's a tangent I don't really want to go off on. It's not stated anywhere officially that you can't be a good person who does good things as a non-christian. It's a really false dilemma.

is this the same kind of reasoning you use on toddlers?

>Good parents always can do this.Only selfish or stupid parents can not reason their children.

How old are you? If you try to reason with a kid as to why they're doing bad shit, they just act like they know better and then get all uppity and keep doing the bad thing. If you just go "It's bad because I said so, don't do it", there's nothing to argue with and get shitty about, it simply is.

If a kid won't go to bed you don't try to explain why they need their sleep from a scientific point of view, you either give them a "So you can grow up big and strong" or you take whatever they're doing off them and send them to bed.

Also, it's really ironic you're judging people for refusing to explain their reasons, but are still dodging answering why you're talking about a religion you don't even slightly understand as if you do?

Good parents can do this and so can God. He gave us instruction of what is good and bad, he doesn't have to explain it. We already know

The Bible is a product of Church tradition, you mong.

>Daddy, me, Timmy and Bobby vote that we have ice cream for dinner tonight so that's three votes against only two from you and mommy.

In a real. Birth of a new person is not moral at all.
The presence of pain is bad.
The presence of pleasure is good.
The absence of pleasure is not bad.
The absence of pain is good, even if that good is not enjoyed by anyone.
If someone exists, there is the presence of pain and the presence of pleasure. If no one exists, nothing bad happens and pain is avoided. Procreation is only morally justified if there is some method for acquiring informed consent from a non-existent person, and due to the impossibility of this, procreation is therefore immoral.

Did you post the wrong image, or was this post just you going all out on the bait, no matter if it was related?

This thread's about Christian morality, not anti-natalism. Go make your own thread.

>Good parents can do this and so can God. He gave us instruction of what is good and bad, he doesn't have to explain it. We already know
If parents doing this - they are not good parents. Or being stupid or selfish is good.
Also I was thinking that Good God can do this and so can Good parets. I thought that morality comes from God to us and not from us to God.
>He gave us instruction of what is good and bad, he doesn't have to explain it

Thats why democracy is shit.

No user, a good family should be a representative situation. The children elect a representative who then takes part in regular meeting with the representatives of the adults to attempt to find an agreeable middle ground on whether or not bed time should be extended to 10 o clock instead of 8.

Just because your family were fascists doesn't mean everyone elses should be.

A Christian parent's imperative is to train their children to accept arbitrary orders under threat of punishment so they in turn will become good Christians themselves.

God doesn't have to explain good and evil to us because we know what they are. When we are kids we don't know so our parents explain to us just like our God in heaven let us know. Good parents should tell they're kids from right from wrong. A kid will not understand why it is but will understand that it is wrong and not to do it. They will understand when they get older and cycle repeats. A kid won't understand why and this and that, just yes and no

>A Christian parent's imperative is to train their children to accept arbitrary orders under threat of punishment so they in turn will become good Christians themselves.
It is good?
God said that it is good? Or Christians said to God that it is good?
Also.
>threat of punishment so they in turn will become good Christians themselves
People have free will given by God. The Will of the man cant be bended under threat of punishment. Christianity denied the punishment. People are either good or bad, nothing can change that.

>explain good and evil to us because we know what they are
>When we are kids we don't know
How first parents learned what is good and what is bad? Threat for Adam was death, but death cann't be a punishment.

I'm not sure hatposting is the correct answer to the Euthyphro Dilemma, lad.

They learned from their parents and when you get older you understand why on your own. Death of the body is punishment but really only for those who go to hell.

In the Book of Genesis says that God warned Adam "but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die". It does not sound like a threat for me. Why death is treated as a threat?

Go to bed Calvin.

Actually, Dad, under subsection C of the Bedtime Agreement Act 2016, I still have 5 more minutes.

>They learned from their parents and when you get older you understand why on your own.
Is the first parents were not Adam and Eve? Do were more people on earth? they seem to have been immortal
>Death of the body is punishment but really only for those who go to hell.
How first parents knowed that they will go to hell?

...

This is more or less the accepted explanation, although of course it doesn't explain everything. When studying Christian theology you will pretty quickly get to the point where you either have to make your own opinions or throw your hands up and declare a "divine mystery".

>Did here was more people on earth?*

>Is the first parents were not Adam and Eve? Do were more people on earth? they seem to have been immortal

Adam and Eve were immortal until they ate the fruit and were cast out. That's what was meant by "you will surely die". Not that God will kill them if they eat it, but that they'll create death if they choose to eat it. Earth was as perfect as heaven at that time.

>How first parents knowed that they will go to hell?

If you're talking adam and eve, I'd assume that they knew this from God, or at least what sin is (which is stated to some degree). They wouldn't go to hell unless they were unrepentant though, as they didn't create sin, they were seduced by the serpent into bringing it to humans.

This person puts it really well, in the first reply.
>quora.com/Were-Adam-and-Eve-saved-Did-they-go-to-heaven-If-no-would-they-have-gone-to-heaven-if-they-had-not-sinned

Also, I should add that the reason they died was because by sinning, they cut themselves off from God, who's the source of all life. Theoretically, someone who's completely without any sin would live forever, according to that, but we all sin to some degree, it's impossible to be completely without any sin.

Why "cast out" is a threat?
>That's what was meant by "you will surely die"
Also. How could Eve guess what you will surely die meant you are will be "cast out". And why she had to consider that this a threat?
>I'd assume that they knew this from God
Book of Genesis does not say about it. Also there is no mention about the existence of hell, before the fall. If God did not tell them, but they just knew it because of "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness", but nothing is said about the fact that Adam and Eve were created on the same plan. It means that God steel did not warned them by his words. They could not have known about their fate. And they could not consider that it a threat. God did not tell them that their expulsion would entail at least some effects besides death after some time, or "cast out" in your expulsion.

still*

your interpretation*