C
Corki
Guest
Not really off topic, especially since this thread ended up in the Philosophy sub-forum.Off topic…probably…
Idea for a new thread…maybe…
What exactly is morally neutral? Right is right, wrong is wrong. There is no relativism in morality. Every thought, word and action has a consequence. Does it lead us nearer to God or separate us from Divinity?
If our actions point us towards the Divine they are without doubt worthy of endeavor.
However, if they lead us to self or things considered worldly, can they truly be considered morally neutral?
Everything leads to something, doesn’t it?
Right is right and wrong is wrong but most of what we do every day is neither - it’s morally neutral.
Eating, sleeping, walking, reading, going on the computer … none of these things is intrinsically good or bad. It’s what we add that has the moral content.
Eating - if you eat a meatless meal as a form of abstinence, you have made a neutral act into a holy one. If you eat to excess, you turn a neutral act into an act of gluttony.
Walking - if you walk to work instead of drive as a form of self-denial, you turn a morally neutral act into a holy one. If you walk to avoid picking up a co-worker who needs a ride, you have turned a morally neutral act into a selfish one.
Football (playing) - if you keep your body in shape and play with good sportsmanship its a positive act, if you play to win at all costs and take steroids to bulk up, its a negative.
Video games - if you play for simple recreation, nuetral; if you play to keep in shape (as in some Wii games), good; if you play because you love to kill things, bad.
None of these things, even in the negative application, end in Satanic worship. Not all sin is satanic.
Even things that point toward the Divine are not always good. Many of the great saints, for example, practices severe self-denial and astheticism. When you read about them, they were always on guard lest their efforts at holiness led to pride which would turn a good act into a bad one.