@kellyjay saidIf we imagine ourselves doing only good, then we imagine an impossibility. There is no such thing. It is a toxic ideology to chastize ourselves for not being something impossible.
Our capacities are not what damns us; it is our actions; even FMF said our actions define us, so when we could do good and don't, that defines us, when we shouldn't do wrong, and we do that defines us. If all we have to compare ourselves to is just ourselves, it is all graded upon a curve; you are not so bad compared to that one. That isn't how it is graded; however, we don' ...[text shortened]... ned as we are; we need to be changed from the inside out; this is beyond us alone, we need a Savior.
@moonbus saidWhy would or should doing good be thought impossible? If you love someone, don't you do right by them, be faithful to them? I think the toxic ideology is just accepting what we acknowledge as bad or evil and calling it normal.
If we imagine ourselves doing only good, then we imagine an impossibility. There is no such thing. It is a toxic ideology to chastize ourselves for not being something impossible.
@fmf saidYou incessantly tell me what I should post, and when I tell you no about something, you never take no as an answer. Do I tell you what you cannot say in any post; I have told you what I don't want to respond to; there is a difference.
You complain incessantly about me asking about your personal opinions across multiple threads, and use that to dodge the topics, and here you are asking me about my personal opinions.
What are you talking about right now? Is it atheists and the human condition in this thread? No, me, again! Instead of dealing with this topic, are you taking the opportunity to spend more time talking about posters? If you think it is okay in your threads to cover them the way you seem fit, then why are you still chastising me for doing the same. If, as you say, me asking is okay, why are you still going on and on about it?
1 edit
@kellyjay said
Our capacities are not what damns us; it is our actions; even FMF said our actions define us, so when we could do good and don't, that defines us, when we shouldn't do wrong, and we do that defines us.
@moonbus
If we imagine ourselves doing only good, then we imagine an impossibility. There is no such thing. It is a toxic ideology to chastize ourselves for not being something impossible.
@kellyjay
Why would or should doing good be thought impossible? If you love someone, don't you do right by them, be faithful to them? I think the toxic ideology is just accepting what we acknowledge as bad or evil and calling it normal.
I did not say that doing good is impossible; you misconstrue my post. I was replying to your post, about not doing good when we could. It is not possible to do ONLY good, at all times. It is not possible to do good when one could at all times, at every opportunity which might arise without ever missing any opportunity, such that missing an opportunity to do good is itself bad. That is what is impossible. You set the standard impossibly high. Not even Adam before the fall reached that standard. Adam before the fall knew not good and evil; all he had to do was give names to animals. And then you condemn all humanity for an imaginary fault (of not reaching an impossible standard which not even Adam reached). This is a toxic ideology.
@moonbus saidI, too, believe we can't do right all the time; our nature simply won't. When we are confronted with choices, we make them. That is not a good and normal thing in how it is; it is a flaw, a deviation from what should be and is not. I think Paul said it best.
@kellyjay said
Our capacities are not what damns us; it is our actions; even FMF said our actions define us, so when we could do good and don't, that defines us, when we shouldn't do wrong, and we do that defines us.
@moonbus
If we imagine ourselves doing only good, then we imagine an impossibility. There is no such thing. It is a toxic ideology to chastize ourselves f ...[text shortened]... ault (of not reaching an impossible standard which not even Adam reached). This is a toxic ideology.
Romans 7:18
For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.
1 edit
@kellyjay saidThat's exactly the incoherence in Christian ethics: man is condemned for something he has not the ability to do. Man is condemned for the impossible. Man is condemned because he is not perfect -- but man cannot be perfect. Not even Adam before the fall was perfect. It's equivalent to saying man is condemned because he cannot jump over the moon.
I, too, believe we can't do right all the time; our nature simply won't. When we are confronted with choices, we make them. That is not a good and normal thing in how it is; it is a flaw, a deviation from what should be and is not. I think Paul said it best.
Romans 7:18
For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.
Before you say man has an obligation to something, he must have the ability to carry it out. "Ought implies can," as Immanuel Kant would say.
@kellyjay saidIf you don't want to share what are, for all intents and purposes, your personal opinions and observations in these debates and discussions, why do you keep asking people for their personal opinions and observations?
You incessantly tell me what I should post, and when I tell you no about something, you never take no as an answer.
@moonbus saidIt is condemning because of our actions; they define us in our behavior, and we have no hope in just ourselves. But because of God, there is salvation that doesn't depend on us. If we tell lies, we are liars; if we hate someone, break Jesus' second commandment, the goal is high; it should be nothing but perfection and excellence as the standard; why shouldn't it be so? Our public school systems have taken to lowering the standards so that kids can pass; what a copout; why would God do that with us? The thing about scripture is that it doesn't paint us in a good light; we don't paint ourselves in a good light without scripture; there is a reason why we are not in a good light, but we can be.
That's exactly the incoherence in Christian ethics: man is condemned for something he has not the ability to do. Man is condemned for the impossible. Man is condemned because he is not perfect -- but man cannot be perfect. Not even Adam before the fall was perfect. It's equivalent to saying man is condemned because he cannot jump over the moon.
Before you say man has an ...[text shortened]... omething, he must have the ability to carry it out. "Ought implies can," as Immanuel Kant would say.
1 edit
@kellyjay saidWhy shouldn't it be so? Because it is impossible to attain, that's why. Imagine a country passing a law criminalizing breathing. No one can comply with it. Such a law would be manifestly not only unjust, but incoherent as law.
It is condemning because of our actions; they define us in our behavior, and we have no hope in just ourselves. But because of God, there is salvation that doesn't depend on us. If we tell lies, we are liars; if we hate someone, break Jesus' second commandment, the goal is high; it should be nothing but perfection and excellence as the standard; why shouldn't it be so? Our p ...[text shortened]... in a good light without scripture; there is a reason why we are not in a good light, but we can be.
@moonbus saidBecause it is impossible to attain on our own doesn't mean it isn't possible; that only shows us we need something more than ourselves, not that what is proper, sound, and lovely are not the goals.
Why shouldn't it be so? Because it is impossible to attain, that's why. Imagine a country passing a law criminalizing breathing. No one can comply with it. Such a law would be manifestly not only unjust, but incoherent as law.
@kellyjay saidThere are no good people in heaven, only forgiven sinners. Isn't that what your religion teaches? So even with divine help, man is still a sinner and cannot not be one. Being good is impossible, according the Christian ethic, even with God's help. You said yourself, it is not only man's actions which condemn him, but his nature. Man's nature cannot be changed, not even by God.
Because it is impossible to attain on our own doesn't mean it isn't possible; that only shows us we need something more than ourselves, not that what is proper, sound, and lovely are not the goals.
@moonbus saidThe difference is we are born again in Christ, so that we live in Christ living in Him, putting to death our sinful nature by picking up our crosses and following Him. Its more than a intellectual acknowledgment of some spiritual doctrine.
There are no good people in heaven, only forgiven sinners. Isn't that what your religion teaches? So even with divine help, man is still a sinner and cannot not be one. Being good is impossible, according the Christian ethic, even with God's help. You said yourself, it is not only man's actions which condemn him, but his nature. Man's nature cannot be changed, not even by God.