Tuesday, October 31, 2006

I said I have good reasons for what I believe, but it may take more than one post to explain it. You see, I am dealing with memories that stretch over 5 decades and I have a bias towards Christianity. It was 38 years ago that I settled on Christ as my best option. So, I am going to try to reconstruct the process that brought me to this point.

I don't want to mislead either. I was not obsessed with with some grand spiritual quest, but I did consider "the meaning of it all" from time to time. My so called spiritual journey was a series of sudden starts and stops with long intervals of "who cares."

I remember it was easier to decide what I could not accept than to establish what I did believe. Personal opinion: Doubt is never profound and skepticism is not mentally challenging unless you are trying to defend it. Really, how much brain power does it take to say I don't believe something. If Dustin is correct ("there is sufficient reason to think that most humans are alike") then I would guess most skepticism is rooted in preference. I know that was true for me and at least one other. C.S. Lewis commented once that Christianity troubled him because unlike atheism there was no door marked exit. He preferred atheism because it promised him a way out if life's consequences became too much for him.

Anyway, that is where I will start. What were the world views I rejected and why.

Sunday, October 29, 2006

OOPS, I see some typos in my last post. For some reason Blogger will not let me correct them. This is punishment for posting before the fair one proof read it for me.

Saturday, October 28, 2006

The question is why should I/anyone choose to follow an objective based external moral code? Of course you can ask the same question about going with personal flexible judgements as your moral standard.

What I have decided for myself is to follow the objective standard I find in the Bible, specifically what we call the New Testament. One reason is I really do find my own instincts much too flexible to trust. Decisions carry consequences. Consequences that may bring harm and that makes it more than an academic exercise. Especially if the consequences may produce real harm.

Like the man on the beach, I lack complete information so my judgements are subject to change as rapidly as circumstances. That weakness is also found in objective based codes developed solely on human reason. We are left only with our best guess.

Now, I am not against taking risks. I love adventure. But, I also try to prepare for the probable risks I can assign to any activity. Going dumb into any situation is not my idea of a good time.

So, when it comes to moral values I want to look for something with a track record. Lacking that I want to look for some authority with clout to back up what is being sold. Your best guess is not good enough for me and mine should not be for you.

Where to look, that is the question! My choice is scripture and I have good reasons for it.

Friday, October 13, 2006

It appears that most contemporary thought on morality draws from the individual's perspective. Rather the preferences of the individual drive the moral engine of the mind. Therein lies the trap.
In the example I gave of the 3 men on the beach, the father was troubled by his behavior with the realization he was commenting on his daughter. No issue there, each is free to set his own moral standard. He crossed into the realm of objective morality when he imposed his view on his friends and judged them. After all, what works for them is to keep ogling his offspring.

Moral values make sense when anchored in an objective standard external to the individual and society. But even that has it limitations. Is it enough to establish standards? People are willing to live with an established moral code until it conflicts with their personal desires and happiness. When conflicts arise, values go out the window. If you just thought about imposing values by force you may have pulled back from the objective external standard.

Personal note here: I find my natural instincts are not trustworthy in the area of moral values.
I need the objective standard found in the Christian scripture. But, even that is not enough. I need the results of God's offer to write those truths in my heart. I find the need to walk in the Holy Spirit's shadow in order to avoid executing the lesser desires rolling around in my head.

Friday, October 06, 2006

Since no one commented on that last post I asked a few people who read it what they thought. Gross was a common word used. So, I guess the point was made. Your world view can lead you into some very difficult scenarios. The easy way out of this is to avoid building a consistent frame work by which you deal with life. Oh yeah, that is what I was blogging about.

My own value system puts a strain on my "want to" gland. I find Biblical Christianity very inconvenient. Believing the Bible to be the result of God's intentional communication with the human race, I have made an attempt to use it as my guide to life. It gets tough, because I don't think like God does. Those who know me see the ongoing failures.

Amazingly, when I do choose to follow the Biblical line it works out. Not necessarily the way I expected, but it works. One of the reasons I stick with it. 38 years of observation have left me with no where else to turn. Amazing Grace is still a sweet sound.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?