I have a brother who is a die hard Roman Catholic and says if it were not for his faith, he could rape, steal and kill. Hell, if that is what it takes for some not to hurt their fellow man, then please STAY Catholic. But remember there are people who do good for “goodness sake” alone. Not because there will be any heavenly reward or eternal hell by not doing the right thing.
Unfortunately, religious people can't understand this...
The house is on fire. I don’t want people to die. I have found the path out of the fire and want others to find the path as well.
People of faith sin every day. So religion doesn’t save anyone.
People of faith sin every day. So religion doesn’t save anyone.
People of faith sin every day. So religion doesn’t save anyone.
You might consider reading the sight rules.
Life is a gift. Creation is also a gift.
I do not judge you or harbor any ill will against you in any way.
But with your permission I think I will head off to bed.
“For goodness’ sake”. That’s interesting. And suppose someone who is also an atheist has a different idea of what is “good”? Something you think is “very bad”?
That’s the big problem with doing what one thinks is “very good”. Hitler thought he was doing good for Germany. Helping the German people, making Germany a better place.
I’m sure Pol Pot thought he was doing good. So do many objectively “bad” people. They don’t think they’re doing “bad”, they think the people opposing or criticizing them are the “bad” ones.
You’re riding on the coattails of religious moral principles. At least some honest atheists recognize that they are better off living in a country that has at least a few vestiges of moral principles based on religion.
As I stated in my previous post I accept your premise. I would be concerned about anyone who considers people of Faith to be boring. If one is looking for some flashy, exciting new-age truth, there is none to be had; only a rehashing of old heretical beliefs or paganistic ideals. In truth, the people of Faith are the ones responsible for developing a vibrant and exciting body of knowledge and thought all it takes is the desire to explore it.
Truth be told, there is no such thing as “goodness sake” in my opinion. At least, not as defined by atheists. Being good is a moral condition and is not susceptible to the whims of the intellect. It seems to me that when those who advocate goodness as purely a socio-economic paradigm and take it out of a theological realm we succumb to a dictatorship of relativism, usually expressed by whichever strong-man is in charge at the time. 100 million + people were killed in the 20th century by those who thought they had the “answer”.
Servile love, like that of a servant, is the type of love that man has for God when he fears punishment for sin as his motivator. Some people will refer to "mercenary love" as that type of love which pursues good for the rewards that accompany it. But the goal of the Christian life is neither avoidance of punishment or the receipt of rewards. Servile and "mercenary" love can be steps along the way but they are not the goals.
Filial love, or love of God for His own sake, is our highest level of love. It is the type of love that can love another, even an enemy, because one loves what God loves because He loves it.
Whether a "religious person" understands this or not, depends on the level of love which he experiences. Not everyone's capacity for love is the same.
There are those who would argue that true charity cannot be practiced without loving God for these reasons.
Your brother seems to suggest that his love is servile at this point. As you have pointed out, that's OK but there is something higher. Unfortunately, these types of threads on FR seldom seem to bring it out.
Would you like a cup of hot cocoa with your: