How can Christianity be about morality?

[Divine Insight]

According to Christianity you and I are both immoral sinners undeserving of salvation.

The only way we can be "saved" from damnation is to receive undeserved amnesty. And the only way to obtain this undeserved amnesty is to believe in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus.

According to Christianity (and especially the Gospel of Paul) there is absolutely nothing we can do to merit our own salvation. The only way to obtain it is to believe in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus.

So now what?

Neither you nor I can obtain salvation via any form of moral behavior. This would violate Christianity.

However, if you are willing to believe in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus (possibly even by simply not even questioning them at all), then you will be granted undeserved free amnesty and granted eternal life in paradise.

However, if I question the stories and find them to be utterly inconsistent, illogical, self-contradictory, and thus totally unbelievable, I will be damned to eternal damnation.

NOTE: The above criteria has absolutely NOTHING to do with a person's morality.

So just because you are willing to believe in these stories (even possibly without even questioning them) you WIN eternal life in heaven, even though you don't deserve it.

I, on the other hand, being precisely as undeserving as you, will be cast into hell simply because I found the stories to be utterly absurd and unbelievable.

This religion certainly has absolutely nothing at all to do with morality. That much should be crystal clear to everyone. And especially according to Paul. Paul forbids anyone to merit their own salvation lest they can "boast".

Ephesians 2:
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
[9] Not of works, lest any man should boast.

So according to Christianity (without rejecting the Gospel of Paul) how moral a person is cannot have anything at all to do with whether or not they are "saved".

Question for debate: How can Christianity be about morality?

I mean really. You're going to be rewarded with eternal life just for believing in something despite the fact that you may be an immoral person? In fact, according to Christianity you necessarily ARE and immoral person. There is no such thing in Christianity as a moral human other than Jesus himself.

~~~~~~

NOTE: You are more than welcome to reject the Gospel of Paul and claim that our morality does matter. However, I should warn you ahead of time that this approach opens up a whole new can of worms. Because once you start claiming that you can merit your own salvation this then places your entrance into heaven based on having EARNED it yourself. And that would leave Jesus hanging on a cross for no good reason. So that's extremely problematic. Paul was at least astute enough to recognize this. Our morality can't have anything at all to do with our salvation. So this religion cannot be about morality.

[FarWanderer]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

I see it as a matter of aiming for good rather than necessarily achieving it. Any “belief in Jesus� that doesn’t manifest itself as aiming for good is insincere as faith. It won’t get you into heaven.

But I have faith that any God that might exist would ensure heaven to all who aim for good, whether they call that “believing in Jesus� or anything else.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

I see it as a matter of aiming for good rather than necessarily achieving it. Any “belief in Jesus� that doesn’t manifest itself as aiming for good is insincere as faith. It won’t get you into heaven.

But I have faith that any God that might exist would ensure heaven to all who aim for good, whether they call that “believing in Jesus� or anything else.

But now you have a behavior that is "earning" you your salvation.

Wouldn't "aiming for good" be a form of "works" that Paul rejected?

Also, what about people who "aim for good" but still don't believe in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus? If "aiming for good" is the key to salvation, then there should be no need to believe in Jesus or Yahweh. Belief in any God is not required in order for a person to "aim for good".

So there appears to be a problem the moment we try to suggest that our behavior, or even our intent, is going to play a role in "earning" us our salvation. This would also leave Jesus hanging on the cross for naught if we can earn our own salvation by simply "aiming for good".

[rikuoamero]

You got ahead of me, DI. I was planning on starting a thread on just this very topic. Yes, according to Christianity (especially Pauline Christianity), what gets me into heaven (something I don't deserve), is believing that a very specific Jewish man, about 2,000 years ago, argued with the chief priests of his day, got tortured and executed and then rose from the dead to sit at the right hand of God.
I am declared unworthy, undeserving of their God's gift by simple virtue of having been born human, and then told that I can get this gift anyway merely by believing a Jew came back to life after being nailed to a piece of wood. Their God of infinite justice operates via loop-holes in his laws...

Why...it almost sounds absurd when put like that...

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

Well, some Christians have argued that it is moral to accept Christianity as the truth and immoral to not accept it.

[Elijah John]

According to Christianity you and I are both immoral sinners undeserving of salvation.

The only way we can be "saved" from damnation is to receive undeserved amnesty. And the only way to obtain this undeserved amnesty is to believe in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus.

According to Christianity (and especially the Gospel of Paul) there is absolutely nothing we can do to merit our own salvation. The only way to obtain it is to believe in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus.

So now what?

Neither you nor I can obtain salvation via any form of moral behavior. This would violate Christianity.

However, if you are willing to believe in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus (possibly even by simply not even questioning them at all), then you will be granted undeserved free amnesty and granted eternal life in paradise.

However, if I question the stories and find them to be utterly inconsistent, illogical, self-contradictory, and thus totally unbelievable, I will be damned to eternal damnation.

NOTE: The above criteria has absolutely NOTHING to do with a person's morality.

So just because you are willing to believe in these stories (even possibly without even questioning them) you WIN eternal life in heaven, even though you don't deserve it.

I, on the other hand, being precisely as undeserving as you, will be cast into hell simply because I found the stories to be utterly absurd and unbelievable.

This religion certainly has absolutely nothing at all to do with morality. That much should be crystal clear to everyone. And especially according to Paul. Paul forbids anyone to merit their own salvation lest they can "boast".

Ephesians 2:
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
[9] Not of works, lest any man should boast.

So according to Christianity (without rejecting the Gospel of Paul) how moral a person is cannot have anything at all to do with whether or not they are "saved".

Question for debate: How can Christianity be about morality?

I mean really. You're going to be rewarded with eternal life just for believing in something despite the fact that you may be an immoral person? In fact, according to Christianity you necessarily ARE and immoral person. There is no such thing in Christianity as a moral human other than Jesus himself.

~~~~~~

NOTE: You are more than welcome to reject the Gospel of Paul and claim that our morality does matter. However, I should warn you ahead of time that this approach opens up a whole new can of worms. Because once you start claiming that you can merit your own salvation this then places your entrance into heaven based on having EARNED it yourself. And that would leave Jesus hanging on a cross for no good reason.

Not so, Paul was mistaken in asserting that "if we could be saved by works, then Christ died in vain". Non-sequitor. One does not follow the other. If we can be saved by "works" (morality) Christ's exectution can still be viewed as a martyrdom. Martyrdom is far from "dying in vain". Jesus died for his beliefs, and may well have inspired others to make difficult moral choices in the process.

And that is not Paul's only doozy of a non-sequitor. Another is "if Christ is not raised, then your faith is in vain and you are still in your sins". Before "Christ was raised", many heroes of the OT lived virtuous lives. Abraham, Job, Noah, etc, etc. They were considered righteous and were certainly not "in their sins".

So that's extremely problematic. Paul was at least astute enough to recognize this. Our morality can't have anything at all to do with our salvation. So this religion cannot be about morality.

In Paul's opinion, yes. And I agree with your overall OP point. And Thomas Paine made a similar observation, saying in effect that Christianity is the only religion that makes a virture out of belief. (or words to that effect). Paine meant that as a criticism.

But Christianity can still have something to do with morality, even if not for "salvation". Morality is still desirable, and still advocated in this religion. It is not as though (even) Paul was advocating immorality.

And I actually agree with Paul insomuch as viewing salvation as a gift. Grace. I just differ with him in seeing that gift as having anything to do with "right" belief that Christ's execution and martyrdom is some kind of "atonement", or blood payment/ransom to liberate us from sin and death.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

I would like to thank you for this OP, because it has certainly helped me in another thread where an unbeliever is insisting that I, as a Christian am held accountable to the, Ten Commandments, and he is also insisting that I would be on an island by myself to believe that Christians are not held to any sort of moral law, as far as God is concerned.

So then, you and I would be in agreement here for the most part, accept for the fact that it is not simply "believing in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus." Rather, it would be as you say, we as Christians giving up on our efforts to appease God, by attempting to live up to some sort of moral code, in order to demonstrate our morality, and to rather grab ahold of what God has done on our behalf, through Christ.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

I would like to thank you for this OP, because it has certainly helped me in another thread where an unbeliever is insisting that I, as a Christian am held accountable to the, Ten Commandments, and he is also insisting that I would be on an island by myself to believe that Christians are not held to any sort of moral law, as far as God is concerned.

So then, you and I would be in agreement here for the most part, accept for the fact that it is not simply "believing in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus." Rather, it would be as you say, we as Christians giving up on our efforts to appease God, by attempting to live up to some sort of moral code, in order to demonstrate our morality, and to rather grab ahold of what God has done on our behalf, through Christ.

In spite of whatever Paul may have said, Jesus said:

If you would enter into life, keep the Commandments.

How do you work that into Paul's theology?

[Divine Insight]

In spite of whatever Paul may have said, Jesus said:

If you would enter into life, keep the Commandments.

I agree. But then according to Jesus a person can earn their own salvation by keeping the Commandments.

According to the Jesus also supposedly said:

Matthew 25:46 And these (the unrighteous) shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

So again, Jesus is saying that we earn our own salvation into eternal life via the works of our own righteousness.

Ironically, this then makes the idea that Jesus died to pay for our sins ridiculous. If a person's own righteousness is what earns them eternal life, then they have no need of Jesus.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 1 by Divine Insight]

I would like to thank you for this OP, because it has certainly helped me in another thread where an unbeliever is insisting that I, as a Christian am held accountable to the, Ten Commandments, and he is also insisting that I would be on an island by myself to believe that Christians are not held to any sort of moral law, as far as God is concerned.

So then, you and I would be in agreement here for the most part, accept for the fact that it is not simply "believing in the stories of Yahweh and Jesus." Rather, it would be as you say, we as Christians giving up on our efforts to appease God, by attempting to live up to some sort of moral code, in order to demonstrate our morality, and to rather grab ahold of what God has done on our behalf, through Christ.

But still, this violates a need for morality anyway. Now all you have is precisely what I described in the OP. Some immoral unrighteous people being given a free gift of eternal life simply because they grabbed onto of a promise from some ancient culture's religion. And other immoral unrighteous people being cast into hell for simply not believing in that particular religious folklore. According to Christianity, even if those other people are sincerely seeking God and eternal life through another religion, they will still be cast into hell for not having guessed the right religion to choose.

Does this truly make any sense?