Righteousness

[IndigoChild5559]

Then you don't believe that Abraham was counted righteous based on his faith?

Do you think Abraham would have been counted as righteous if he had disobeyed God?

 

[Clara Tea]

What is 'righteousness', in your opinion?

How is (your idea of) righteousness achieved?

Does it matter if you fail to achieve (your idea of) righteousness?

Given that RFs reflect a spectrum of thought, l'm interested to hear a wide range of views on this issue.

To be righteous, one must meet God's requirements:

Humble: I'm the most humble person there is....I brag that no one is more humble than I am. I'm humble enough to become president, as George W. Bush did (and he constantly bragged that he was humble), and tell everyone what to do, including those in other countries (whom he attacked). I'm humble enough to declare war on anyone, whether or not I have sufficient proof that they did anything wrong. By the way, the plan to get carved into Mount Rushmore (originally planned by President Ronald Reagan, then planned again by W. Bush) failed. That would be a carving of a truly humble man. As Uriah Heap once said "I'm a very 'umble man."

Follow God: Lets see...."thou shalt kill" (war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and hoped for war in Niger due to yellow-cake Uranium--twarted by Wilson). "thou shalt not bear false witness" against Doctor Death of Iraq.

What happens when God tells you to attack an enemy? Kill whom? Bring you beer? Flap my ears and fly to Mars?

I wonder if we have the clarity of thought to know what is righteous?

 

[Clara Tea]

We could easily talk about 'right' and 'wrong', or 'good' and 'evil'. Does that make it any less religious? Or does morality not really exist outside of God?

Very few people believe that they are doing wrong. Hitler believed that he was doing the world a favor. The KKK consider the crime rates and believe that they are right. Perhaps our perception of right and wrong is flawed? Who judges righteousness? God? Other people? Our victims? The victors?

There are many gray areas of righteousness. Some believe that murdering a thief would get him out of this world and save the rest of us. Is it our place to decide?

 

[Clara Tea]

Do you think Abraham would have been counted as righteous if he had disobeyed God?

The My Lai massacre taught us that obeying orders is not always right. Abraham was ordered by God to kill his son. That seems like a test to send Abraham to hell....a test to see if he follows the power or the morality of God.

 

[Clara Tea]

Another stuck up way of saying "better than you."

We must follow the right path. To do so, it would be nice to know what the right path is, and to discuss it so that we understand it. In so discussing, we come across the requirement of righteousness. Any requirement to be on the right path is a "better than you" type of requirement. (Not you, Shadow Wolf....but people in general).

So, if we talk about generosity, one could say "better than you."

If we talk about being humble, one could say "better than you." (Which is a strange argument, since a humble person can't brag, and therefore can't assert that he is more humble than another person).

Perhaps it isn't about being better than another person, but about competing with oneself to be as good as we can get?

 

[Redemptionsong]

Do you think Abraham would have been counted as righteous if he had disobeyed God?

No. It's apparent from Genesis 26:5 that Abraham was faithful in all that was required of him by God. He listened and acted.

Under law, there are blessings and curses. You know before you do something that a certain outcome awaits you. If you murder someone, you die. If you honour your parents, you live a long life in the land. Under the law, you don't have to know God. You only have to DO as the law dictates. If you don't, you get punished.

Faith is a love response, even when the outcome is not clear. [IMO]

 

[Redemptionsong]

Very few people believe that they are doing wrong. Hitler believed that he was doing the world a favor. The KKK consider the crime rates and believe that they are right. Perhaps our perception of right and wrong is flawed? Who judges righteousness? God? Other people? Our victims? The victors?

There are many gray areas of righteousness. Some believe that murdering a thief would get him out of this world and save the rest of us. Is it our place to decide?

It's because the world presents us with a multiplicity of moral dilemmas that I think it best to seek God, whose 'ways are judgment'. IMO, there can be no better guide in matters of truth than the Spirit of love.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

We must follow the right path. To do so, it would be nice to know what the right path is, and to discuss it so that we understand it. In so discussing, we come across the requirement of righteousness. Any requirement to be on the right path is a "better than you" type of requirement. (Not you, Shadow Wolf....but people in general).

So, if we talk about generosity, one could say "better than you."

If we talk about being humble, one could say "better than you." (Which is a strange argument, since a humble person can't brag, and therefore can't assert that he is more humble than another person).

Perhaps it isn't about being better than another person, but about competing with oneself to be as good as we can get?

I don't know about you, but when I donate to charity, do a good deed, or whatever, I'm not thinking of myself as righteous or better than anyone else. Acting in pro-social ways doesn't require us to think we are "better than you." It's just acting in a way that we have evolved to display by default.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's because the world presents us with a multiplicity of moral dilemmas that I think it best to seek God, whose 'ways are judgment'. IMO, there can be no better guide in matters of truth than the Spirit of love.

The way of understanding, compassion, empathy, and rehabilitation are vastly superior to these dated, primitive, crude, and often excessively and needlessly violent models on judgements and punishments. Eye for an eye is not peaceful, it is void of empathy, and it isn't even justice because it would leave the world blind.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

No. It's apparent from Genesis 26:5 that Abraham was faithful in all that was required of him by God. He listened and acted.[/quot3e] Exactly.

Under law, there are blessings and curses. You know before you do something that a certain outcome awaits you. If you murder someone, you die. If you honour your parents, you live a long life in the land. Under the law, you don't have to know God. You only have to DO as the law dictates. If you don't, you get punished.

Faith is a love response, even when the outcome is not clear. [IMO]

Are you saying that Jews don't know God?

 

[Redemptionsong]

The way of understanding, compassion, empathy, and rehabilitation are vastly superior to these dated, primitive, crude, and often excessively and needlessly violent models on judgements and punishments. Eye for an eye is not peaceful, it is void of empathy, and it isn't even justice because it would leave the world blind.

I think it's important to make a distinction between justice and love. Both are found in the Bible.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think it's important to make a distinction between justice and love. Both are found in the Bible.

I don't see either.

 

[Redemptionsong]

I don't see either.

An 'eye for an eye' is a question of balance. The scales are even.

As for love, I believe Jesus was correct when he said that the greatest thing a man can do is lay down his life for his friends.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

An 'eye for an eye' is a question of balance. The scales are even.

That's not even though. It solves nothing, it addresses nothing, it doesn't even consider individual circumstances. A balanced scale of justice must consider all these things, lest someone who is starving and poor gets a hand lopped off for trying to survive.

As for love, I believe Jesus was correct when he said that the greatest thing a man can do is lay down his life for his friends.

That one does entirely depend. For a very good friend who isn't doing something foolish I'd walk to Hell barefoot to help. But it really depends. It may be the friend made her own bed and must now lie in it.

 

[Redemptionsong]

[IndigoChild5559] Not all Jews, just those under the law!

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The way of understanding, compassion, empathy, and rehabilitation are vastly superior to these dated, primitive, crude, and often excessively and needlessly violent models on judgements and punishments. Eye for an eye is not peaceful, it is void of empathy, and it isn't even justice because it would leave the world blind.

The idea of an eye for an eye is that the punishment should be equal to the crime. Consider what the world is like where instead of justice, we have revenge. Revenge is not proportional to the crime--it goes way beyond. Instead of an eye for an eye, revenge is two eyes for an eye and they eyes of everyone in your family.

IN the Torah, we have a story of what happened at Shechem. Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, gets raped by the prince there. Then the prince has the audacity to ask for her in marriage. The sons of Jacob tell the prince that they will allow the marriage, but all the males in Shechem have to be circumcised first. Well, the prince complies. Then, when all the men in the city are sore from the procedure, Simeon and Levi, the sons of Jacob, attack the city and slaughtered all the men.

That's the world before an eye for an eye. An eye for an eye gets a bad rap.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The idea of an eye for an eye is that the punishment should be equal to the crime. Consider what the world is like where instead of justice, we have revenge. Revenge is not proportional to the crime--it goes way beyond. Instead of an eye for an eye, revenge is two eyes for an eye and they eyes of everyone in your family.

I contend eye for an eye is revenge. In the end, all it does is needlessly produce a physical handicap on someone else. Much like how the death penalty forces another family to go through losing a loved one.

That's the world before an eye for an eye. An eye for an eye gets a bad rap.

Much like "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you," it just doesn't work when you fully flesh this out.

 

[Wildswanderer]

What is 'righteousness', in your opinion?

How is (your idea of) righteousness achieved?

Does it matter if you fail to achieve (your idea of) righteousness?

Given that RFs reflect a spectrum of thought, l'm interested to hear a wide range of views on this issue.

It's something given by God to those who believe on Christ for salvation.
It's not earned, but must be accepted by faith.
It's ultimately not our righteousness or anything we do, but Christ's righteousness, a free gift.

 

[Bird123]

Where do you think the unconditional love comes from? Is unconditional love not God's righteousness?

Unconditional love has no conditions. There is no action that can be done that will stop Unconditional love from loving. Unconditional love always does what is best for the other. It has never been about self.

God's system of returning our actions, in time, so that one might Discover what those actions really mean is teaching everyone to love Unconditionally. After all, that is what everyone wants returning whether they realize it now or not.

When religions attempt to intimidate the choices and actions of people based on what they say God wants, clearly shows religion does not understand God at all. Religion claims to be so right and righteous yet they really do not have a clue. Sad! On the other hand, this should be expected since religions are the creation of mankind. That is who they really reflect.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I contend eye for an eye is revenge.

So we should just get rid of our justice system? Allow criminal activity without consequence?