Is the grace and power of God required to live righteously?

[Hope]

If I am able to ride a bike without training wheels, why would it be preferable for me to keep them on? Why would a parent punish me for biking without my training wheels, and only praise me when I biked with them on?

You're incorrectly assuming that we're able to ride that bike without training wheels. It's only our self-delusion that convinces us we are able to do so. And that is essentially the claim of the OP. Being righteous is not analogous to riding a bike. Being righteous is something we can NEVER do on our own.

 

[Shermana]

You're incorrectly assuming that we're able to ride that bike without training wheels. It's only our self-delusion that convinces us we are able to do so. And that is essentially the claim of the OP. Being righteous is not analogous to riding a bike. Being righteous is something we can NEVER do on our own.

What exactly do you think "righteousness" means in the first place?

If David was called righteous, was it because God was taking over his mind?

 

[Hope]

What exactly do you think "righteousness" means in the first place?

As stated in previous post: "I think it also encompasses terms like perfection, completeness, straightness, etc."

If David was called righteous, was it because God was taking over his mind?

No, but I do believe it was because of his close relationship with God. He was known as the man after God's heart. The closer we walk with God, the more we become like Him, and take on His character, hence, His righteousness.

 

[Falvlun]

Hope, basically what you are saying is that telling the truth is not good unless you tell the truth every single time. You are saying that those A's on your report card are not good if you also got a couple of C's in there. You aren't just saying that they aren't good enough; you are saying that they aren't good at all. Does that make sense? Is that a useful, healthy way in which to approach life or morality?

 

[Falvlun]

You're incorrectly assuming that we're able to ride that bike without training wheels. It's only our self-delusion that convinces us we are able to do so. And that is essentially the claim of the OP. Being righteous is not analogous to riding a bike. Being righteous is something we can NEVER do on our own.

How is it self-deluded to know that I am able to tell the truth without asking God to aid me?

 

[Shermana]

As stated in previous post: "I think it also encompasses terms like perfection, completeness, straightness, etc."

So you replace one vague term with another. Do you have any actual specifics of what those terms entail outside of their direct OT meaning which means obedience to the commandments of God? When you say "Straightness", I assume you're not just referring to orientation, right? What do you think constitutes "perfection" and "Completeness" exactly?

No, but I do believe it was because of his close relationship with God. He was known as the man after God's heart. The closer we walk with God, the more we become like Him, and take on His character, hence, His righteousness.

And what do you suppose it means to walk close with God? Can you give some specific examples of what this righteousness would entail as opposed to a direct scriptural meaning that implies obedience to the commandments?

 

[waitasec]

The closer we walk with God, the more we become like Him, and take on His character, hence, His righteousness.

correction...
the more some becomes like the idea they hold of him...

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Only if one in the relationship is proud, imperfect, and controlling.

Notice I quoted the verse where Jesus says He is gentle and humble in heart. There is nothing to fear in a relationship with someone like that. Especially when He's perfect and sinless.

There is if they are neither, and you only perceive them as being so. Since God is supposedly responsible for the deaths of billions of people and the existence of suffering, I wouldn't suggest that God is either perfect or without sin.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Or if He is, then 'perfection' in that context is vastly different than what is commonly understood as the concept that the term perfection refers to, therefore the term in that context should be something else.

 

[Me Myself]

You're incorrectly assuming that we're able to ride that bike without training wheels. It's only our self-delusion that convinces us we are able to do so.

Changing the example a bit, but I never crawled. I just straight went from not walking to walking.

About being righteous, God is righteousness. Acting righteously gives you a more dirct conection with God than just praying to act righteously.

so pray for righteousness just in order to be able to act accordingly. God already gave you your virtues, it is our responsibility to recognize them and act accordingly, wheter we use the word "God" or not.

 

[Father Heathen]

Not according to Scripture.

"Scripture" says a lot of goofy, nonsensical things. But that reflects more upon the ancient goat herders who wrote the thing than it does upon any actual god. The logical thing to do is toss the silly book into the rubbish and rely upon reason and compassion as a moral compass.

 

[McBell]

The logical thing to do is toss the silly book into the rubbish and rely upon reason and compassion as a moral compass.

WHAT!?!?!
and lose the claim "the almighty creator of the whole everything is on my side there fore I cannot be wrong, nah nah nah"?

Have you gone insane?

 

[Hope]

Hope, basically what you are saying is that telling the truth is not good unless you tell the truth every single time. You are saying that those A's on your report card are not good if you also got a couple of C's in there. You aren't just saying that they aren't good enough; you are saying that they aren't good at all. Does that make sense? Is that a useful, healthy way in which to approach life or morality?

Really, all we're arguing over now is semantics. And while I will be the first to admit I am no theologian, I am simply trying to explain to you, to the best of my feeble ability, according to what is written in Scripture, that OUR goodness and OUR righteousness is not the same as God's. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying telling the truth is not good. Of course it is. I said so in a previous post. Our mistake is supposing that just because we tell the truth 99% of the time, which is wonderful, and everyone should strive for that, that that automatically makes us as good or righteous as God.

 

[Hope]

How is it self-deluded to know that I am able to tell the truth without asking God to aid me?

It is self-deluded to think I can be as righteous as God without His aiding me. That is all.

With all due respect, while I am enjoying this argument, I'm getting dizzy from going in circles so much trying to explain a simple principle over and over.

 

[Hope]

So you replace one vague term with another. Do you have any actual specifics of what those terms entail outside of their direct OT meaning which means obedience to the commandments of God? When you say "Straightness", I assume you're not just referring to orientation, right? What do you think constitutes "perfection" and "Completeness" exactly?

You see, all we're really arguing over is semantics now, so forgive me for any "vagueness." It's difficult to express the totality of the meaning of righteousness, because it means much more than simply being "good," and the Bible uses the word in different contexts. But if this helps you any, the Hebrew word for righteousness encompasses the following: integrity, equity, justice, and straightness. And of course, no, straightness is not just referring to orientation. Perfection and completion are pretty straightforward in their meanings.

I've listened to some excellent teaching on the meaning of Biblical righteousness, and if I had the time, I'd share some of it with you. It's really fascinating to delve into the history of the word. But alas, you will have to put up with my very feeble attempts to explain its more simple meaning.

And what do you suppose it means to walk close with God? Can you give some specific examples of what this righteousness would entail as opposed to a direct scriptural meaning that implies obedience to the commandments?

To walk closely with God simply means to have a close relationship with Him---to commune with Him regularly.

I'll have to get back to you on the second question, as I don't have time right now to go into it.

 

[waitasec]

It is self-deluded to think I can be as righteous as God without His aiding me. That is all.

1st of all, you need to explain that god is righteous...
where does that idea come from?

 

[Falvlun]

Really, all we're arguing over now is semantics. And while I will be the first to admit I am no theologian, I am simply trying to explain to you, to the best of my feeble ability, according to what is written in Scripture, that OUR goodness and OUR righteousness is not the same as God's. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying telling the truth is not good. Of course it is. I said so in a previous post. Our mistake is supposing that just because we tell the truth 99% of the time, which is wonderful, and everyone should strive for that, that that automatically makes us as good or righteous as God.

I am not saying we are as righteous as God. I am arguing against the idea, that you are proposing, that our good actions are worthless because we are not good every single time.

You've said things like "That's why the Bible states that even if you break one commandment, you've broken them all" and

and

""...all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment." ~Isaiah 64:6

This is why we can never please God in our own strength, no matter how good we are. Because our righteousness, compared to His, which is true righteousness, is not enough. I wouldn't say God is arbitrary about righteousness...He is simply righteousness personified and therefore has every right to reject our feeble attempts at righteousness."

I don't think people are arguing that we can be perfect. What we are arguing is that we are able to be good. You, and (your interpretation of) God, are rejecting all instances of goodness as "filthy"; and claiming that the one time you lied to your best friend cancels out the hundreds of time you have told her the truth.

That makes all those instances of telling the truth to be worthless. I am just taking your argument to its logical conclusion.

It is self-deluded to think I can be as righteous as God without His aiding me. That is all.

It's not about being perfect. It is about striving for the best we can be. I am very good at rollerblading, but that doesn't mean I don't crash every now and then. Does that mean I cannot rollerblade, and that I shouldn't even try to do it without someone holding my hand?

If you have a kid, would you tell them that they are a horrible student because, in a report card full of A's, they got a single B? Would you refuse to even acknowledge the A's because of the B? Would you then require that they ask you to tell them the answer to every single homework question?

all due respect, while I am enjoying this argument, I'm getting dizzy from going in circles so much trying to explain a simple principle over and over.

Because your "simple principle" is not internally consistent.

Additionally, I find it to be exceedingly unethical and unhealthy.

 

[Falvlun]

No argument here. God wouldn't be displeased with Davey's course of action. However, He would find it more pleasing that one boy turned to Him for help.

Why would God find that more pleasing? Shouldn't God simply revel in good actions, if indeed, he is the embodiment of righteousness?

Only God's righteousness is true righteousness. And while it absolutely has to do with being good, I think it also encompasses terms like perfection, completeness, straightness, etc.

Straightness? Are you claiming that God is a line?

I'm not being flippant. Words like perfection, completeness, and straightness are meaningless unless you also include what the perfection entails, what fills the completeness, and what is considered to be straight.

If true righteousness merely entails always doing good things, then all instances of doing good things should be celebrated as instances of righteousness.

I also think the term "true" righteousness is misleading, if you are defining it simply as "always doing the right thing". It would be more accurate to label it as "perfect righteousness". As mentioned before, telling the truth is telling the truth. You can't do it any better than God in any single instance. There is no difference between God telling the truth and humans telling the truth. They are both the exact same example of righteousness. One cannot be "more true" than the other.

 

[McBell]

It is self-deluded to think I can be as righteous as God without His aiding me. That is all.

So, is your god really as self righteous as you portray him, or could you perhaps be mistaken?

With all due respect, while I am enjoying this argument, I'm getting dizzy from going in circles so much trying to explain a simple principle over and over.

yes, circular logic will do that to a person.

 

[McBell]

Straightness? Are you claiming that God is a line?

I think she means that god is not gay.