The mystery of selfish love

[cardw]

I don't believe a company model really applies here since an all powerful god controls both ends of the cause and effect. This places company order over the needs of individuals. If we really believe in the concept of creation being made for man, not man for creation this model really doesn't address problems with the issue of defining sin and the solution models based on that idea.

If we are going to look at a justice model we have to ask why didn't god simply deal with Adam and Eve rather than allow billions of humans to exist under a curse that god made?

In this model god creates the curse and he allows this curse to spread to innocent humans who had nothing to do with the Garden, the choices of Adam, and the choices of Eve. And then this same god presents a solution of violence and death for a problem this god created with his curse and his order to multiply humankind. This is hardly the high point of ethical solutions.

As far as C.S. Lewis and his view of god as being good above all narratives I would say that this seriously undermines the idea that the Bible is the source of the greatest ethical understanding we have. This would indicate that goodness is defined outside the Bible. I happen to believe that the Bible is not the highpoint of ethical understanding. It would also indicate that the god C.S. Lewis is talking about is not the god of the Bible. This would be more along the line of our founding father's deism. It is a form of agnosticism in which god is not defined or even knowable on any kind of logical manner or proof. God is only present in our highest ethical ideals. And as these ideals are refined the concept of god changes if there is a god. It is an admission that the term god is simply a convenient holding place for our highest ideals because logically a god is unknowable from a human perspective.

[phkrause]

I really like your post CoAspen, couldn't have said it better.

[Woody]

I have to agree with you pk. That was an excellent quote from CoA.

[cardw]

The idea that I have to allow another to take my place is unethical. It is no mystery.

The easiest answer is that some human person or persons made this up. A human person who had a very primitive ethical system. There are a number of other examples of religions where their god dies for them to live. The sun god dies every day in some ancient religions. We have a lot of evidence that the early church thought Jesus was the son of the Sun god.

You can see it in the symbols of the sun behind the cross and many early churches had mosaics of the zodiac on the floor with Jesus as the sun in the middle surrounded by the various constellations in the form of 12 periods of time. Jesus had 12 disciples, was visited by three kings which are the three stars in the belt of orion, Jesus was called the light of the world, early Christians gave the sun salutation when leaving church, and many other evidences that much of the Jesus story was made up to satisfy the needs of the 1st century and its belief in astrology.

Your belief in Jesus as a sacrifice is just as strong as someone who believes in Mohammad, Buddha, or a myriad of other gods and goddesses. A lot depends on what you grew up with. These things are conditioned into us by culture and various forms of ritual reinforcement.

If I believe in Jesus I have a lot to lose if it's not true. I have to live with quite a lot more fear and I have to spend my time trying to convert people which could be spent on far more productive tasks. The Pascal Wager is not really a valid argument because if you applied that to every claim of a bad outcome in the afterlife, to cover your bases you would have to believe a lot of different things. It is also a fear based wager.

And I don't think that if you go to heaven and your god knows that you claimed to believe simply because you were covering your bases that you would qualify for entrance into heaven.

You are certainly free to believe what you want for whatever reason satisfies you, but I don't find the Pascal wager to be that convincing.

I certainly recognize the transcendent, but that experience does not appear to be consistent with the god of the Bible. Your view of that god is certainly a lot more generous than what I read in the Bible so I can understand how your perception of god is far more palatable. I can't do the same type of paradoxical juggling. I know the bible and history far too well.

[fccool]

The issue of Pascal wager would be much more processable if it indeed brought about desired results. If people research Christian fundamentalism, which essentially very Puritan at heart ... you'll find that there's a huge price to pay in the name of the holy and the divine.

If you have someone like George Bush who made a statement that atheists can't be a good citizen, and should not be considered a citizen of one nation under God... you'll start getting the picture of what it was like during the dark Ages and Puritan-Fundamentalism era in the US.

I do believe that there are a lot of redemptive features of Christianity that's worth holding on to. Yet, I likewise don't believe that Christianity has a monopoly on these ideals.

Some may say there's nothing to loose when clinging to the idea of the afterlife, but that's exactly why Christianity made its way to becoming Roman State Religion. Islam, for example, would never do. It does not encourage tolerance of oppression, slavery, poverty and tyrannical government. I mean, think about some points that are preached from the pulpits during the Dark Ages... and Ironically today.

- Are you poor... well, be thankful, because God favors you and it's easier for you to get into Heaven. Just wait a bit longer... die and you'll have your reward. Just obey your masters faithfully, and suffer like Christ did, and you'll have your reward in afterlife.

- Are you living under oppressive governments who tax you up to your ears. No need to worry, just render to Caesar what's his and give that 10-15% to God and you'll be blessed.

- Have problems? How about praying? Only prayer can solve them. No need on assertive and responsible self-reliance. Self-reliance is BAD. It offends God. God does not like the idea that people can handle their own problems. So, if you have any problems... you can't solve them on your own. The sooner you recognize it, the better need you'll have of God.

- You think that anything you do is good... well, bad luck. All of your good deeds are like dirty laundry. The only true good thing you can have for yourself is to believe and obey God. That one good thing cancels out all of the bad ones. It does not matter if you killed or raped. As long as you've had a change of heart, you are fit for heaven. Now, the people who tried their best, and did not rape and did not kill... yet can't honestly believe, these people will burn. Because their one sin of unbelief negates everything else.

- Don't seek to solve problems right here and right now. People will not be able to. It will only get worse as prophesied (see self-fulfilling prophecy). So, just spread the good news about how it will get really bad really soon, and then how people will need to be rescued from that situation. That's your mission in this world... to tell people to believe. It's not to build houses so that church members will not get into immense debts. It's not to provide free education so that our children can be debt-free in their early years in life. You Job is to spread the news about how the bad things people done will be forgiven on condition that they will accept a human sacrifice as an acceptable substitution for their punishment.

- Don't concentrate on life. But concentrate on death and blood and gore. In blood there's life. In death there's freedom.

- Go ahead and spend Half a Trillion dollars a year on maintaining religious structures, buildings and organizations. Its money well spent, while millions die worldwide from famine and preventable diseases.

... etc... etc...

There's a lot to gain from at least dropping the structural religion and let people make independent decisions apart from structure. If every Christian today spent as much resources and time on improving current conditions of humanity as they spent praying, re-reading the Bible and endless studies ... the world would be much better place.

[Sonny]

Everything you do, without Christ, is for the advancement of yourself. For example, if you gave all you owned to the poor, but didn't have agape the deed would be done for egocentric reasons. In other words everything you do, without Christ, is polluted with selfishness.

People are not naturally good. People will do good things outwardly for self-centered motives inwardly. That's sin.

[cardw]

This idea that agape love has to be a part of every action is an artificial value. The one receiving help isn't affected by the motivation at all. Help is help. The focus itself is ego generated. Anytime we enter into these arbitrary judgments of motives we are supporting self-centeredness.

This idea that we are to set ourselves completely aside is unhealthy. I believe that a certain amount of self interest is important. I would rather look at a balance of concern for myself and others.

What you are presenting is an unhealthy extreme the other way. The way I perceive the world is maintaining balance. This extreme good and bad evaluation doesn't really work.

[Sonny]

Let's be honest...let's be real - you love yourself more than others. Your interests are first and then others. Jesus never lived for Himself - He lived only for others.

This world is a terrible place because of self-interests and selfishness. We always place ourselves first...our own first...our needs first and then maybe will give some leftovers. Our natures are very crafty. In fact you can't do any good without Christ. Your motives will always be self-centered.

Now, since you don't buy this, please tell me how you can turn this world around? I mean if mankind is naturally good I sure don't see it. I see folks do outwardly good things for self-promotion. Much of it is self-righteousness - the flesh (self-centered human nature) trying to look good. It's a lie.

[Bravus]

But the point is, the fact that it's a 'lie' (as you call it) is irrelevant to the project of 'turning this world around': as Rich has pointed out, good deeds are still good, no matter the motivation. If I feed a hungry person because it feels good to me to do so, that person has still been fed.

This is the concept you're failing to comprehend. Good being judged by its consequences in the world, not by whether it makes God happy.

[cardw]

My goal is not to be good. I think that is a shallow egocentric goal.

My goal is to be truthful and to seek what is true. The effect of that is freedom for myself and others.

I don't see the world as a horrible place. There is much to preserve and to value. This idea that we are going to hell in a hand basket is only sustained by fear and you spread fear with this world view of yours.

Fear is what sustains religion, not love. And you and others like you continue to prove that.

[Sonny]

Good deed: A man helps a young girl who is down on her luck.

Motive of this man: He is hoping she'll be grateful so that she'll have sex with him.

I could go on...but I think you see the point. Motive is everything.

What's the motive? To have your name brought up in the evening news? To be the talk of the town? If there's something in it for you then it is sin. It is iniquity, which is doing something good outward, but done so that you receive a reward in someway. It could be money, recognition, etc. It could be, as in the example above, for sex. I've seen many guys help woman in distress only to try to sleep with them. You say the deed is good, but heaven disagrees. Motive is everything.

When Lucifer, who was sinless, began to rebel against God in heaven, he was really rebelling against God’s agape love - the spirit of His law. The idea that “love (agape)” is not self-seeking was too restrictive to Lucifer. All this began in the mind at the motivational level.

It's not about what makes God happy, it's about what is real love. Fallen humans can produce only self-love - that is, things done for the promotion of themselves. So they do kind things, but always to gain something from it. That's iniquity and it can't enter into heaven or else heaven would end up like this world.

[Bravus]

I mean this completely kindly: you are demonstrating that you are incapable of thinking outside your own pre-existing framework.

[Sonny]

You can't be good...so don't try. Accept what God did in Christ. As you remain in Christ by faith a change will begin in heart. Agape will start to be seen in the life of the believer.

Really? Everything is just great, huh? I think that's a bit delusional.

No, not at all. It is folks like yourself who, through self-righteousness, promote a society that doesn't need God and His love. This is secular humanism.

The fruits of ungodliness (living your life without God) brings more decay and chaos.

[Sonny]

And the same goes for you, Bravus.

[Bravus]

I don't think so. I completely understand your perspective, and have considerable attraction to it. I *do* think it matters what is in our hearts, not just what we do.

The point is that it is possible to imagine and explore a different approach. It is possible to do so without adopting it yourself. But not if you cannot but see every other perspective in terms of 'sin'.

[fccool]

Sonny,

But what if the man helps a girl who is down on her luck and expects nothing in return... does it automatically mean that the guy is a Christian? I think such ideals separating charity and make it something outside of human being... i.e. impossible. So, in such world true charity is impossible but through some sort of religious conversion?

Don't you think it's a bit shallow? I mean, the soldiers out in the battlefield jumping on the grenades to save their friends... such was the case in Godless Soviet Union, just as it was in Christian USA. And if an atheist would be walking through the desert alone and found a child dying of thirst, do you really think he'd just leave it there to die? I hardly think it would be the case, unless the person lost all humanity and desensitized to the point of robotic existence. I mean, even rats save their own kind and take care of each other.

To say that all people do EVERYTHING for selfish reasons is to discredit creator to begin with.

There's a unique distinction between ethical egoism and plain egoism in psychology. The ethical one is predictable, it states that everyone ought in every situation act in self interest. It's rather deterministic, like the law of gravity. Yet, even psychology will admit that this does not happen. In a complex field of human desire and emotion, there are plenty of instances when people instinctively act against their ideals of self-aggrandizement and self-preservation.

[fccool]

There's this silly idea floating around that if person derives self-satisfaction from helping other... that would make him selfish . By that definition, there's no unselfish acts other than those that done with no motive at all. If we have only one color, then there's no need for a linguistic term color. Color is a measurement of variation, and not a single set standard. If everything is white, then term color looses it's meaning. Term -white- takes over. The same with term "selfish" or "selfless". Consider these sentences:

Example:

a) The kidney donor is so selfish. He only does it because it gives him sense of accomplishment and pleasure.

That guy who saved a child from fire is selfish. He did it only because he could not live with himself thinking that he could save the child.

c) That poor person sharing some food with other poor person is selfish. He only does it because he expects to be treated with same favor.

There are a number problems with above. First of all, they guess and assume motives. Unless there are people who can read minds and motives, the above make no sense. People themselves will admit that they don't know why they do certain things that they do at times. People eat when they are not hungry, they take wrong turns when they know they should go straight. Human desire is a fairly complex process. Sometimes it's conscious, and many times it's not. Psychologically speaking... there's ego and there's a hidden layer(s) we don't often see.

Consider Christ's words requesting that if it was possible he would not suffer the Cross. Was it a selfish request? I'm not asking about the outcome, or what was the second thought... but even the idea that Christ on some level did not want to go through the suffering would sort of count for a pinch of selfishness by your own definition of it.

[Sonny]

Without Christ, in the inner mind, it is impossible.

We are fallen - we need a Savior not only for salvation, but in order to bring agape back into the heart. Without Christ everything you do is motivated by your love of self. To deny this is to be deceived by your own nature.

[cardw]

Sonny,

Simply repeating the same thing without addressing the problems with your world view is rather disingenuous. You reveal one of the major problems with religion. It argues from authority rather than reason.

It also addresses the fact that you, being a self-centered being in your own definition, cannot utter a non self-centered view self negating anything you state as being true.

Because anything you say is suspect to your selfish motivation to get us to believe what you believe because you have some nefarious motive.

[fccool]

Don't you think you at the very least owe an explanation of mechanics by which a previously selfish motive of plainly helping people is transformed to now unselfish motive of plainly helping people?

You speaking from perspective of mysticism when you state -bring agape back into the heart-. What do you mean by <agape>, and what do you mean by <heart>? It's very easy to just plaster religious bumper stickers without any underlying explanation for these. Anyone can make claims about anything this way... i.e. as an example, you can't truly be a Christian unless you are a Catholic. Or, in Bush's words, you can't be a citizen of USA, unless you are a theist. It's just a statement without any underlying argument or explanation.

[Sonny]

We are all selfish, hopefully the christian is less self-seeking because of the indwelling Christ. Before you and I can enter heaven we must receive glorified lives. Otherwise we will never enter heaven or it will end up like this world - a mess!

[Sonny]

What do I mean by heart? The mind, the seat of emotions & thought, etc

What is agape love?

First we need to understand human love. Human love, at its very best is self-seeking. We are by nature egocentric and therefore everything we do and think, in and of ourselves, is polluted with self-love or selfishness. Hence man’s love is always trying to ascend, whether it be socially, politically, academically, materially, economically, or even religiously; we are all slaves to our own way. Consequently all of us, without exception, are coming short of God’s glory or agape love.

Agape, therefore, is loving others without a selfish motive.

[cardw]

Sonny,

If you have a selfish motive period it's not love. It's manipulation.

How can you love someone with a selfish motive?

Again since you have these same selfish motives how do I know that what you are telling me is true?

In your world view all your motivation is evil so what ever you say is evil.

Obviously you are telling me this to discourage me and destroy me because you can't possibly have love because you fall short. You must be telling us all this because you are trying to ascend and your evil heart is spreading destruction where ever you go.

Oh woe unto all of us sinners we can't possibly ever have any thoughts but continual evil all the time.

Stop thinking evil

Stop thinking evil

Stop thinking evil

Stop thinking evil

Noooooooo I can't stop thinking evil.....

[Sonny]

Evil = selfishness

In my world view everything you and I do, outside a faith based relationship with Christ, is egocentric/selfish. The act my look good, but it is polluted with sin. If not, then you don't need Christ to be your righteousness. If that's the case we can save ourselves through our own actions.

[cardw]

Then whatever you say is selfish.