@fmf saidBlessed are those who love their neighbours as themselves.
obey his commands*
Blessed are those who do not deceive, damage or coerce.
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are they who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the land.
Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the clean of heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.
Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
@FMF
I wonder sometimes if, with the precise doctrinal assertions removed, the essence of this debate is really about the difference of outlook between people in the various stages of something like Lawrence Kohlberg's six (disputed) stages of moral development :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development
or the psychiatrist M Scott Peck's four stages of spritual development:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Scott_Peck#The_four_stages_of_spiritual_development
remarkably similar as it turns out - as well as what is referred to by the word God.
@fmf saidObviously, but that isn't the gospel of Jesus Christ.
'God, our creator, is a good and loving deity who favours people who obey his commands* and who strive to be loving and good. Obey Him and you will have everlasting life. Disobey Him and this finite lifetime is all you've got.'
"Obedience" doesn't come naturally. One must be born again, or else one will never have the power to obey.
Read the following verses carefully.
John 1:10-13
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
Romans 6:3-7
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Romans 8:1-4
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
@secondson saidIt's not intended to be.
Obviously, but that isn't the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Does the religion, i.e. the deity and his promise and his wishes, as encapsulated in the OP and following post, make moral sense?
@fmf saidWhy didn't you ask that question in your OP and following post?
It's not intended to be.
Does the religion, i.e. the deity and his promise and his wishes, as encapsulated in the OP and following post, make moral sense?
@FMF said
obey his commands*
Do you think that the "blessed are..." are commandments?
They are not. The "blessed are..." are those that obey God's commandments, and are as a result "blessed".
God's commandments make perfect moral sense because they produce moral blessedness in the lives of those that obey God.
It's a no-brainer. Simple logic. Do you still not understand?
@secondson saidHere is the thread's question:
Why didn't you ask that question in your OP and following post?
Does this religion** - this God and His promise and his wishes - make moral sense?
@secondson saidThey are commandments in this thread's "religion".
Do you think that the "blessed are..." are commandments?
They are not. The "blessed are..." are those that obey God's commandments, and are as a result "blessed".
To be "blessed" is to go on to everlasting life.
Do such and such in order to be blessed. etc. etc.
Read the first few posts again.
This thread's 'religion' is not supposed to be Christianity. It simply draws upon the moral vision encapsulated by the beatitudes.
@secondson saidThe question on this thread is does the God/religion described at the beginning of page 1 make moral sense.
God's commandments make perfect moral sense because they produce moral blessedness in the lives of those that obey God.
@FMF
Okay. After reading your last few posts the intent of this thread is clearer to me now.
I'm a little bit dense sometimes. You should have prefaced the OP indicating it was a hypothetical God/religion. It looked as if you had quoted something somebody had said about Christianity.
The God/religion described in the OP does not make moral sense because the God of the OP requires adherence to rules by innately flawed beings that are not equiped to perform up to the standard required for receiving everlasting life.
After all, if a standard of performance is required, then it is inferred that the beings are imperfect and are flawed. Otherwise why would rules be needed if the created beings were already flawless? The flaw must be corrected first. The created being is flawed, thus the correction cannot be made by the one that is flawed. That's why the scenario in the OP doesn't make moral sense. The God of the OP would be immoral in creating a standard of performance a flawed being was unable to attain to because they are flawed without some means of correcting the flaw.
To be perfected so as to perform up to a standard of perfection necessary for obtaining everlasting life, one must look to the perfect creator for that correction to be made.
The man needs a savior! 👁 🤔 🙂
@fmf saidI think a loving God would force us to do his bidding.
'God, our creator, is a good and loving deity who favours people who obey his commands* and who strive to be loving and good. Obey Him and you will have everlasting life. Disobey Him and this finite lifetime is all you've got.'
You know, true love
@secondson saidThey are simply rewarded for striving to be loving and good not for being flawless. There is nothing about the God of the OP creating a standard of performance a flawed being was unable to attain.
After all, if a standard of performance is required, then it is inferred that the beings are imperfect and are flawed. Otherwise why would rules be needed if the created beings were already flawless? The flaw must be corrected first. The created being is flawed, thus the correction cannot be made by the one that is flawed. That's why the scenario in the OP doesn't make mora ...[text shortened]... wed being was unable to attain to because they are flawed without some means of correcting the flaw.