Is Christian faith necessary for Selfless Love?

[ReapReason]

I don’t.

I disagree, for the reasons I posted which you have evidently ignored.

We care, because it is good to care.

You do not know that it is truly good to care in the sense of moral truth, at least not if you are honest to the nature of your beliefs. There is no such thing as moral truth in your world-view, there are only cultural or traditional standards and they rise and fall according to their practicality to the individual or society as a whole depending on the desires of the individuals comprising society. Caring is not always practical or beneficial to your survival or the survival of society as a whole. Thus you sometimes require rational reasons to care or a sense of moral truth transcending that which is merely pragmatic or utilitarian. Such evidently cannot be provided by your bleak world view.

Some do that for sure. Does that include believers of all faiths, that do things in the hope of an eternal reward with their God?

Its irrelevant. We are talking about moral truth, not whether or not people act according to those standards.

Right. Divine Command Theory is pretty dangerous for us all.

I am not aware that Catholics believe in divine command theory in the way you express it here.

 

[PRmerger]

When I think about it, how can any Christian love be truly selfless, except that love Jesus Himself demonstrated?

'zactly!

Moreover, if I say, “I risked my life for you because of my belief in God,” then what is that saying to the person I saved? It’s telling them, “it could have been anybody. Nothing special about you. I did it because I love God and God tells me this is what I need to do.”

Firstly, what Christian is commanded to tell the person he saved, “I did this because of my belief in God”?

That’s just :whacky:

We do it because we love. And we love because we are given the grace to love through Christ and His Church.

If I say, “I risked my life for you because I believe in you and your future,” NOW I’m going to give a person a reason to be glad I saved them.

Alan

I don’t think it’s necessary to provide any explanation as to why we risked our lives for the other.

Truly, the question isn’t going to come up: why did you save me? Is it because you think I’m valuable? Or is there some other reason? Please tell!

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Firstly, what Christian is commanded to tell the person he saved, “I did this because of my belief in God”?

That’s just :whacky:

I don’t see that they are commanded, but you hear it at awards ceremonies, “well I was just doing my duty.” I have heard Christians help people roadside, then refuse a payment and say, “we do it because we love God.”

We do it because we love. And we love because we are given the grace to love through Christ and His Church.

We are given the grace; I agree. And we can love unselfishly. But I don’t know of many active Christians who get over the initial bribe/threat thing of heaven or hell. We’re commanded to love, which only matters if we do it on our own account with our free will. This does not compute to the typical dualistic mind, and I still dare say very few get past this stage.

So it’s like when I’m little I’m told I must love – OR ELSE – then when I get older it’s almost impossible to isolate the behavior from the original bribes/threats. Those who do make the transition may have to undergo their own Dark Night to get there from here.

I don’t think it’s necessary to provide any explanation as to why we risked our lives for the other.

Truly, the question isn’t going to come up: why did you save me? Is it because you think I’m valuable? Or is there some other reason? Please tell!

Actually, the question does come up from time to time. First, we have situations in which they know each other and the one saved is both grieving and feeling a million other feelings and questions – what if? Also, if it is a public event, you will have people discussing all angles of it, including the motivation. The press likes to make heroes when it can, or if they don’t like the person as much they will try to dismiss their motives. And if we’re talking about a person dying for another, it’s going to be a public event.

Some people have a great deal of guilt when people actually do get hurt defending them, whether to the death or even some small inconvenience. So really it isn’t such a rare issue at all.

Alan

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t see that they are commanded, but you hear it at awards ceremonies, “well I was just doing my duty.” I have heard Christians help people roadside, then refuse a payment and say, “we do it because we love God.”

Okay.

Do you think when a victim hears that he really interprets it as, “I guess I wasn’t valuable on my own to be helped”?

We are given the grace; I agree. And we can love unselfishly. But I don’t know of many active Christians who get over the initial bribe/threat thing of heaven or hell. We’re commanded to love, which only matters if we do it on our own account with our free will.

Sure.

This does not compute to the typical dualistic mind, and I still dare say very few get past this stage.

Not following you here, Alan.

 

[PRmerger]

Actually, the question does come up from time to time. First, we have situations in which they know each other and the one saved is both grieving and feeling a million other feelings and questions – what if? Also, if it is a public event, you will have people discussing all angles of it, including the motivation. The press likes to make heroes when it can, or if they don’t like the person as much they will try to dismiss their motives. And if we’re talking about a person dying for another, it’s going to be a public event.

Some people have a great deal of guilt when people actually do get hurt defending them, whether to the death or even some small inconvenience. So really it isn’t such a rare issue at all.

Alan

Okay. Fair enough.

 

[DeepBlueSea]

No we know for people that have committed suicide (lost the will to live) that right to the moment of their death, they carried on as normal.

Did these people you mentioned who carried on as normal have prior history of, say, going on missionary work to various parts of the world, providing shelter to the refugees, speaking out against the tyranny which resulted in them getting imprisoned? Did these suicidal people you mentioned give up their lives in place of others so that others might live to tend to the needs of their wives and children? Did their suicidal acts lead to equivalent outcome as Kolbe’s, say, a man like Franciszek whose life was spared and lived to retell the gift of life he received?

Who are these people you are referring too? I am would like to know more so that I could draw their inspiration from their courageous acts.

Thanks.

I’m trying to understand the logic of your thoughts in totally discounting Kolbe’s decades of work living out his christian faith and his ultimate sacrificial act to spare the other three lives is branded as a loss-of-will suicidal attempt.

Suicide is selfish. Sacrifice is selfless.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Okay. Fair enough.

Thank you for your reply. I have actually bored myself with my own posts on this topic, so I’m going to try to cut back for rest of the evening.

Alan

 

[tonyrey]

And yet you have no objectively rational reason to aspire not to steal cheat murder and rape accept for fear of what other contingent beings think of you. In the world you think you live in, the act of aspiring to the dictates of some kind of moral truth makes you either a victim of an irrational illusion or a slave of circumstances beyond your power; and any disgust or sense of guilt for any action is equally an objectively meaningless produce of physics.

So I fail to understand why you think that you truly have the moral upper hand by being an atheist and at the same time performing acts that conform to subjective cultural standards or the desires of others. True morality can only be known if there is such a thing as true morality, rather than a set rules which happen to fit the mould of social survival and appreciation.

Truly good people do good because they know that it is truly good; and they care because they know it is truly good to care despite their feelings or insercurities; as opposed to behaving in a particular manner for social and cultural benefits. They know that they ought to do good. True morality is not suppose to be the whim of some vein egotistical fantasy (hey look at me I am a good person, and I am not religious!!!) .

Such is vanity and is meaningless.

Deep down in their hearts they know good and evil are not just man-made rules…

 

[tonyrey]

Did these people you mentioned who carried on as normal have prior history of, say, going on missionary work to various parts of the world, providing shelter to the refugees, speaking out against the tyranny which resulted in them getting imprisoned? Did these suicidal people you mentioned give up their lives in place of others so that others might live to tend to the needs of their wives and children? Did their suicidal acts lead to equivalent outcome as Kolbe’s, say, a man like Franciszek whose life was spared and lived to retell the gift of life he received?

Who are these people you are referring too? I am would like to know more so that I could draw their inspiration from their courageous acts.

Thanks.

I’m trying to understand the logic of your thoughts in totally discounting Kolbe’s decades of work living out his christian faith and his ultimate sacrificial act to spare the other three lives is branded as a loss-of-will suicidal attempt.

Suicide is selfish. Sacrifice is selfless.

Although many suicides are the result of deep depression caused by the pseudoscientific propaganda that we are merely advanced apes which exist for no reason whatsoever.

 

[tonyrey]

I disagree, for the reasons I posted which you have evidently ignored.
You do not know that it is truly good to care in the sense of moral truth, at least not if you are honest to the nature of your beliefs. There is no such thing as moral truth in your world-view, there are only cultural or traditional standards and they rise and fall according to their practicality to the individual or society as a whole depending on the desires of the individuals comprising society. Caring is not always practical or beneficial to your survival or the survival of society as a whole. Thus you sometimes require rational reasons to care or a sense of moral truth transcending that which is merely pragmatic or utilitarian. Such evidently cannot be provided by your bleak world view.

“bleak” is the only reasonable description but materialists often refuse to admit it or the fact that it drives people to suicide.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Although many suicides are the result of deep depression caused by the pseudoscientific propaganda that we are merely advanced apes which exist for no reason whatsoever.

I’ve heard this asserted before, but never of an actual case.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

If a person cannot exercise True Selfless Love without believing in God, then can that person commit a mortal sin without believing in God?

If no, does that mean that atheists will all go to heaven because they have done no mortal sins and are thus in a state of grace?

If yes, how can full knowledge and intent be considered?

Alan

 

[PRmerger]

If a person cannot exercise True Selfless Love without believing in God, then can that person commit a mortal sin without believing in God?

It may be objectively sinful, and objectively a mortal sin…but the degree of his culpability depends upon his knowledge.

But remember, because of Original Sin we are all born in the enemy’s camp so to speak, so the fact that we can’t love selflessly without God’s grace but can sin without God makes perfect sense.

If no, does that mean that atheists will all go to heaven because they have done no mortal sins and are thus in a state of grace?

If an atheist has done no mortal sin, and says yes to the Eternal Logos, then he can go to heaven.

If yes, how can full knowledge and intent be considered?

Alan

I can’t imagine any case that we would be able to consider whether an atheist had full knowledge and what his intent was. Can you?

 

[DeepBlueSea]

Selfless love is the highest form of love. It is more than infatuation, admiration, affection, in that degree of order.

It is the highest form because it is pure, simplistic and it endures. It is manifested regardless of circumstances and its expression is consistent towards all.

Not a lot of people know how to love. Of those people who know how to love, only very few achieve this highest form of love.

Most people (such as me) fail to know how to love because of the circumstances, conflict of interest, conceited intention, confusion, fear of unrequited love and disappointment. Even when I learn to love, it only lasts temporarily and it is subjected to my emotional state and the external environment that influences me. My ability to love is thus subjected to external factors, which by nature is inconsistent and could not achieve the highest form of love.

The kind of love the Christ profess, however, comes from within. It originates from a heart of purity and simplicity. Its internal origin thus frees itself from being subjected to external fluctuation, which is why it stays consistent and endures.

The only reason a heart could stay pure and simple is because it always tends towards God, the origin of all that is pure and simple. It originates from God and it ends towards God.

Long story short, love of Christ is the beginning of selfless love. Thus, Christian faith is necessary for selfless love.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

It may be objectively sinful, and objectively a mortal sin…but the degree of his culpability depends upon his knowledge.

But remember, because of Original Sin we are all born in the enemy’s camp so to speak, so the fact that we can’t love selflessly without God’s grace but can sin without God makes perfect sense.

Interesting. There are acts that are objectively mortal sins even without consent and knowledge, but there are no objectively good acts …

Maybe it makes sense somehow, but there is something very unbalanced about this.

I can’t imagine any case that we would be able to consider whether an atheist had full knowledge and what his intent was. Can you?

No I can’t. That’s why I wondered how we can even have a mortal sin if we only have one of three ingredients for the recipe.

Alan

 

[PRmerger]

Interesting. There are acts that are objectively mortal sins even without consent and knowledge, but there are no objectively good acts …

Why do you believe there are no objectively good acts?

Maybe it makes sense somehow, but there is something very unbalanced about this.

We’re “unbalanced” because of Original Sin.

No I can’t. That’s why I wondered how we can even have a mortal sin if we only have one of three ingredients for the recipe.

Alan

Not sure where your confusion lies, Alan.

Something can be objectively sinful, but the degree of one’s culpability is not for us to know.

It’s futile to spend time wondering whether Person A has committed a mortal sin or not. The only person whom we should be fearful has committed a mortal sin is Person Me.

 

[PRmerger]

Selfless love is the highest form of love. It is more than infatuation, admiration, affection, in that degree of order.

It is the highest form because it is pure, simplistic and it endures. It is manifested regardless of circumstances and its expression is consistent towards all.

Not a lot of people know how to love. Of those people who know how to love, only very few achieve this highest form of love.

Most people (such as me) fail to know how to love because of the circumstances, conflict of interest, conceited intention, confusion, fear of unrequited love and disappointment. Even when I learn to love, it only lasts temporarily and it is subjected to my emotional state and the external environment that influences me. My ability to love is thus subjected to external factors, which by nature is inconsistent and could not achieve the highest form of love.

The kind of love the Christ profess, however, comes from within. It originates from a heart of purity and simplicity. Its internal origin thus frees itself from being subjected to external fluctuation, which is why it stays consistent and endures.

The only reason a heart could stay pure and simple is because it always tends towards God, the origin of all that is pure and simple. It originates from God and it ends towards God.

Long story short, love of Christ is the beginning of selfless love. Thus, Christian faith is necessary for selfless love.

DBS, have you read our Holy Father’s magnificent encyclical, Deus Caritas Est? It’s simply sublime!

 

[atheistgirl]

Long story short, love of Christ is the beginning of selfless love.

My experience is quite different.

There was an exact moment in time in my life, during a specific event, when I realized just how much I loved my family. It was at that moment I realized that I would do anything for them, including willingly and easily giving up my life for them.

This became even more accute when I started my own family.

Thus, Christian faith is necessary for selfless love.

It may be necessary for Christians to have this faith in order to exhibit selfless love, but it’s simply not true of others, as has been amply demonstrated throughout this thread.

Sarah x

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Why do you believe there are no objectively good acts?

I was referring to:

… the fact that we can’t love selflessly without God’s grace …

After reading it about five more times, I think I’m seeing how you are connected this one-sidedness with original sin. I’m not inclined to agree just yet, but I think I got your point.

Something can be objectively sinful, but the degree of one’s culpability is not for us to know.

OK, help me with the terminology here. Are there acts are are objectively mortal sins regardless of intent and knowledge? That’s what I thought you said. If you didn’t, then I’m chasing a straw man.

It’s futile to spend time wondering whether Person A has committed a mortal sin or not. The only person whom we should be fearful has committed a mortal sin is Person Me.

I don’t wonder whether Person A commits mortal sin; it isn’t my job and I’m happy to let others do it.

But the reason it’s important for this discussion, is that if a person may move away from God without even knowing of the existence of God, then doesn’t it make sense that a person may move toward God – such as by performing acts of selfless love – without knowing the existence of God? Or does God dodge out of the way when someone who doesn’t believe in Him does kindness?

Alan

 

[tonyrey]

I’ve heard this asserted before, but never of an actual case.

It’s not likely you would because suicides are usually due to a combination of factors but it stands to reason that if they believe there is nothing after death it seems like an easy solution to all their problems.

In the case I mentioned a young boy was orphaned. Without her faith to sustain her the poor mother had arranged for him to be adopted. Six months later his new mother killed herself. The whole affair gave me reason to believe it wasn’t just a coincidence…