Do you think that there is a way to logically come to conclusions about morality?

[Aubrey]

I hope that's not too loaded. We seem to (as a society) agree about the easy stuff. It's just that...less & less seems easy, lol.

 

I guess I'm talking about the particulars w/in faith--Christianity specifically, but the problem probably applies to other faiths, too--not murder or adultery, for ex, but submission or birth control. The way we dress. You know, the smaller things that we all disagree about.

 

W/in the logical confines of your faith--church teaching for some, the Bible for others, etc--can you figure these issues out *logically*? I know what people believe about these things, I know why, & I have a hard time knowing who's right.

 

I read recently about the Bible telling men & women to submit to ea other. Of course I've heard that before, but for the first time, I *heard* it. And I'm finally comfortable completely rejecting the very...conservative ideas of women's submission. Once you add, "And husbands submit to your wives," it all seems kind-of moot.

 

I realize that some will see these verses as asking different kinds of submission, but for me, that's not logical, & therefore easy to reject w/out guilt or emotion. Saying that wine in the Bible is really grape juice does not seem logical to me, so I have no guilt in reading it differently or drinking wine.

 

So what I'm asking is, w/ logic as the guide....well, ok, that only leaves bc out of the examples I gave, & that's really the one I'm thinking about.

 

Jesus & his disciples picked & ate grain on the Sabbath. The law was to serve men, not men for the law. Health & safety are more important than the law. Healing on the Sabbath, pulling your donkey from a ditch--all ok. This seems logical & obvious to me. To that end, bc in the case of a woman whose life is in danger seems entirely acceptable & logical. But I've never had a problem w/ that.

 

What about healthy women? I know the arguments. I know "choose life," I know abortificants, I know "use your brain" & don't have more than you can afford, nurture, etc.

 

I *don't* know which argument is morally *right.* And--fwiw--w/ all of the above, I'm *perfectly* willing to accept that God might lead people to different conclusions. I don't mean any of this as a judgment of someone else's beliefs or choices. I *love* that some can forego bc completely, & it is an act of devotion & faith. I *love* that others can drink wine or not, & that both are holy choices.

 

Ultimately, though, I don't know how to know the answers to these things. And my tendency is toward legalism--toward trying to seem to do the right thing in *everybody's* eyes. :lol: At least I know *that* is futile & wrongly-motivated.

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't think there is a "right" answer to most of these questions. I think people lead different lives, have different struggles and are convicted about different things. This isn't a humanist relativism thing, it is a Biblical teaching.

 

Thou shalt not kill seems pretty cut and dry, but then just reasons for killing are given: in just war, to carry out justice, in self-defense.

 

Jesus repeatedly broke the law to heal, to feed people, etc. It is pretty hard to preach a hardline against situational ethics when they seemed to have been practiced by Jesus.

 

There are several passages from Paul where he directs people not to judge one another or to let each person decide for themselves these debatable points.

[ChrissySC]

Morality is loosely defined as a behavior. It is the chosen way to act or to react. Can you logically decide how to behave? Yes, I think you can. However, you will find yourself greatly influenced by the society around you, and thus, you many not see clarity in a scriptual context of morality.

 

Yet, if you submerge yourself within your faith and your influence is faith-based, perhaps it is possible to logically derive a sense of morality that closely relates to the scriptural fairth that you subscribe. With that said, you should question if morality is a learned behavior.

 

I find that morality, or ethics, are very strongly "group" based. I tend to lean more towards the learned behavior, or morality, idea.

[IsabelC]

I don't think that a system of morality can be derived from pure logic.

 

You can logically decide where to go by using a map and a compass. But if you have no map and no compass (or other way of finding the direction) it's going to be hard to make a meaningful decision about where you're going, because you'll be deciding based only on the landmarks you can see at that moment. If you imagine the map as your worldview and the moral compass as the way in which you prioritize your values (whether from a religious perspective or not) it's a similar scenario.

 

Everyone has some hierarchy of moral values, but how we think and act will depend on whence we derive our values and which ones we are privileging over others. It doesn't help that humans have an inbuilt tendency to do what we prefer and then rationlize it - we all do this, even though we try to be logical, behave with integrity and do right. We feel more comfortable when we imagine that things are black and white, but few things are. And after all, if everything were perfectly clear, logical and easy to decide, why would you need scriptures to guide your decisions?

[Aubrey]

I don't think that a system of morality can be derived from pure logic.

 

You can logically decide where to go by using a map and a compass. But if you have no map and no compass (or other way of finding the direction) it's going to be hard to make a meaningful decision about where you're going, because you'll be deciding based only on the landmarks you can see at that moment. If you imagine the map as your worldview and the moral compass as the way in which you prioritize your values (whether from a religious perspective or not) it's a similar scenario.

 

Let's say your map/compass is your faith, but there are some things w/in that that are debated. So in my case, I believe the Bible. But we've seen how ambiguous that can be! :lol:

 

Everyone has some hierarchy of moral values, but how we think and act will depend on whence we derive our values and which ones we are privileging over others. It doesn't help that humans have an inbuilt tendency to do what we prefer and then rationlize it - we all do this, even though we try to be logical, behave with integrity and do right. We feel more comfortable when we imagine that things are black and white, but few things are. And after all, if everything were perfectly clear, logical and easy to decide, why would you need scriptures to guide your decisions?

 

But see, I think there's also a human tendency to legalism. So sometimes, it's easier to choose to believe/follow the "harder" option because harder MUST mean more right. ;)

 

Otoh, if you think through something & conclude (honestly) that the easier option is "more right" then you're assumed to be "rationalizing" so you can do what you want.

 

What I'm asking is--how can you know you're being intellectually honest w/ your faith w/out rationalizing or becoming legalistic? Iow, your conclusion may not be right for everyone, but it's a choice that is honest for *you.*

 

Wrt submission--in some circles, anyone who doesn't accept a certain view of women is "usurping God's order" & suffering from the same delusions of grandeur as the devil himself. Otoh, in other circles, those who accept this view are door mats & have no self-respect.

 

I find it very difficult to navigate between other people's opposing view points--partly because I often see both sides. One side seems to ignore the verse that tells women to submit to their husbands; the other side seems to ignore the character of God w/ which this kind of submission seems to conflict.

 

I guess reading all the verses on a subject helps, but it's hard sometimes to disconnect them from the theology we've been taught about them. And sometimes it's hard to find all the verses, esp if some are analogies or parables or something.

 

And then there are the ones like, "choose life." Whose? Or the quiverfull verse--descriptive or prescriptive?

 

I want a syllogism for the Bible. :D

[Carol in Cal.]

See, this is where the concept of adiophora is so helpful and so Biblical.

 

It says that everything you do must be to the glory of God, but that where there is room for differences of opinion as to what God wants people to do, you must not bind where God had not.

 

So, sure, listen to people's arguments and views about these things, and where they are not completely clearcut you get to decide.

 

This is based mostly on the discussions in the Epistles about food offered to idols.

 

The other thing here is that the main thwarter of legalism is really sitting right on those mysteries, not diverting to one side or the other. Those paradoxes show God to be so big that we really can't entirely take Him in. Good thing He chose to come to us, because we sure can't go to Him on our own, and certainly not from our puny 'righteousness'.

 

So, for instance, is the Lord's Supper a memorial or the Real Presence? Yes. Is Baptism an act of God or of man? Yes. Is Jesus God or man? Yes. Is God One or Three? Yes. Going to apply legalism to all that? Go ahead and try. A better course, though, is to focus on God and how great He is. That's when everything falls into place. When we focus on God's love, might, justice, mercy, power, and especially love, we love Him back, and we grow in fervent love toward each other. When we focus on God's forgiveness, we swoon in gratitude and grow in forgiveness to each other. Our gratitude drives our acts, not our legalism.

 

The fruit of the Spirit grows from the life that is in us. It is not tied on with strings.

[Aubrey]

See, this is where the concept of adiophora is so helpful and so Biblical.

 

It says that everything you do must be to the glory of God, but that where there is room for differences of opinion as to what God wants people to do, you must not bind where God had not.

 

I'm not binding--I'm not saying what others should do. (I know that's not what you're saying; just clarifying.)

 

So, sure, listen to people's arguments and views about these things, and where they are not completely clearcut you get to decide.

 

*This* is my question. *How* do you decide?

 

This is based mostly on the discussions in the Epistles about food offered to idols.

 

The other thing here is that the main thwarter of legalism is really sitting right on those mysteries, not diverting to one side or the other. Those paradoxes show God to be so big that we really can't entirely take Him in. Good thing He chose to come to us, because we sure can't go to Him on our own, and certainly not from our puny 'righteousness'.

 

That's fine when it comes to understanding the intangible. What about things that don't have a "sit on it" choice?

 

So, for instance, is the Lord's Supper a memorial or the Real Presence? Yes. Is Baptism an act of God or of man? Yes. Is Jesus God or man? Yes. Is God One or Three? Yes. Going to apply legalism to all that? Go ahead and try. A better course, though, is to focus on God and how great He is. That's when everything falls into place. When we focus on God's love, might, justice, mercy, power, and especially love, we love Him back, and we grow in fervent love toward each other. When we focus on God's forgiveness, we swoon in gratitude and grow in forgiveness to each other. Our gratitude drives our acts, not our legalism.

 

The fruit of the Spirit grows from the life that is in us. It is not tied on with strings.

 

Again, theology is much easier. You can wrestle w/ it, you can let it go. You can Wonder. You can accept that some things are a mystery.

 

Other things...you *act* one way, or you *act* another. Saying NO to bc is a choice. Saying yes to it is a choice. There's no trusting God's mystery to that. ;)

 

Eating foods sacrificed to idols? You can take a strong stance one way or another (for yourself, as God leads you), or you can generally avoid it w/out having a conviction one way or another.

 

I can't think of other examples at the moment; hopefully the gist makes sense.

[Carol in Cal.]

Again, theology is much easier. You can wrestle w/ it, you can let it go. You can Wonder. You can accept that some things are a mystery.

 

Other things...you *act* one way, or you *act* another. Saying NO to bc is a choice. Saying yes to it is a choice. There's no trusting God's mystery to that. ;)

 

Saying, I'm not sure, is sometimes the only right choice. I don't underestimate how difficult it is, but sometimes it's necessary.

 

Eating foods sacrificed to idols? You can take a strong stance one way or another (for yourself, as God leads you), or you can generally avoid it w/out having a conviction one way or another.

 

But in understanding the logic of Peter and Paul's inspired take on this issue, you can take a strong stance that it's right for some and not for others, and root your actions in love instead of in a conviction of one right course of action for all forever. THAT is what we are called to do, as I read Scripture.

 

I can't think of other examples at the moment; hopefully the gist makes sense.

 

There is a question of emphasis here as well.

How many church services have you been to where the pastor went on and on and on about female submission? Believe it or not, there are entire conservative denominations where it's hardly talked about at all. So it's not the big.glaring.issue that you mean here. I would argue that the evangelicals' emphasis on 'what to do' is almost as pernicious as false doctrine, because of what it crowds out--the focus on WHAT GOD HAS DONE and on Him. The Gospel should be where we land, at the end of every sermon and prayer and meditation. That does not, I hasten to emphasize, mean that we ignore issues of morality. But we don't over emphasize them, either. The avoidance of legalism does not lie in being Antinomian. Rather, it lies in a right emphasis on God and what He does, and a response of love toward Him in what we do, and a belief in His forgiveness as the basis and cover of our actions.

[Aubrey]

But in understanding the logic of Peter and Paul's inspired take on this issue, you can take a strong stance that it's right for some and not for others, and root your actions in love instead of in a conviction of one right course of action for all forever. THAT is what we are called to do, as I read Scripture.

 

That's exactly what I mean--take strong stance in love. Or don't take one. My point was that this is an issue that's open for debate & also doesn't have to be decided--by anyone.

 

There is a question of emphasis here as well.

How many church services have you been to where the pastor went on and on and on about female submission? Believe it or not, there are entire conservative denominations where it's hardly talked about at all. So it's not the big.glaring.issue that you mean here. I would argue that the evangelicals' emphasis on 'what to do' is almost as pernicious as false doctrine, because of what it crowds out--the focus on WHAT GOD HAS DONE and on Him. The Gospel should be where we land, at the end of every sermon and prayer and meditation. That does not, I hasten to emphasize, mean that we ignore issues of morality. But we don't over emphasize them, either. The avoidance of legalism does not lie in being Antinomian. Rather, it lies in a right emphasis on God and what He does, and a response of love toward Him in what we do, and a belief in His forgiveness as the basis and cover of our actions.

 

I think we might be talking around ea other here. My point is not submission--I just used it as an example. The churches in which this has been strong (for me) have had it as an undercurrent, not a directly taught theology. But it comes w/ a culture that accepts it.

 

And...although I come from an evangelical background, I'm not coming at this from that angle. Right now I'm specifically thinking about bc & family size. Ime, this is something that Catholics think about, not evangelicals.

 

I agree that the focus should not be on our actions but God's, BUT there are also some instances where we have to make decisions to go one way or another. You can see good people going down both paths. You can see Scripture that leads both ways. But it's hard to know what God wants of *you,* or even what you want of yourself. And there's this feeling...that there *is* right & wrong (for you at least) wrt this issue.

 

*shrug* I don't know. Probably a silly conversation.

[Murmer]

I honestly think that there is not a logical way to answer your questions...but I do believe that you can pray for the right answer for *you*. Then its just a matter on acting on your belief and ignoring the tugs that ask you to keep reevaluating.

[TracyP]

I agree that the focus should not be on our actions but God's, BUT there are also some instances where we have to make decisions to go one way or another. You can see good people going down both paths. You can see Scripture that leads both ways. But it's hard to know what God wants of *you,* or even what you want of yourself. And there's this feeling...that there *is* right & wrong (for you at least) wrt this issue.

 

 

I completely understand this. I see others choosing both ways and I am okay with that. I cannot shake the feeling that I may choose wrong. Not just wrong like I will have baby fever and regrets at some point, but missing what God wanted for me. I did not want/plan #4 but he has been an amazing blessing that caused me to want #5. Now, I feel complete and do not want any more. My dh and I cannot come to a peace with doing something permanent or with using bc, and all other options leave us with another pregnancy being quite likely. I half wish I could be okay with bc and I half wish I could be okay with the thought of more children. I do not clearly see God's best for me. I see the verses that lead some on one path and others down another. None of these verses seem as clear to me as people who have chosen to "follow" these verses see them.

 

I suppose that is what makes it silly, that there is no clear cut answer. But some people read the bible and get an answer! I wish I did too.

[Denise in Florida]

Yes, I think logic/reason is a key element in faith and morality.

 

I believe that without the use of reason, faith can become just a formulaic list of do's and don'ts. Obviously this is my opinion and there are people who have different views and experiences.

 

I have a solid faith, I read and study the Word, I do not find an opposition between reason and faith.

[Robin M]

If you start taking into account everyone else's faith, then it confuses the issue. That's the purpose of free will. To me, god loves us unconditionally. We should do the same. Not necessarily submit to our spouses literately, but love them unconditionally. Support them as long as what they are doing is morally accountable.

 

Not sure exactly what you are trying to get at. Everyone believes or perceives differently - whether young or old earth, etc. It will be impossible for everyone to agree 100% on what the right thing is to do. The thing is - it all starts with God. Live your life by the 10 commandments, behave morally. Base your decisions on what you believe is right and according to God's law.

 

You have to have a solid faith - in God and in yourself. Believe in yourself and when given a decision with two paths, where both could be correct, weigh the pros and cons, pray and make a decision. If you discover the one path isn't working out, then go the other way. Watch for synchronicity - God putting things in your path that will help you make the decision.

[Carol in Cal.]

That's exactly what I mean--take strong stance in love. Or don't take one. My point was that this is an issue that's open for debate & also doesn't have to be decided--by anyone.

 

 

 

I think we might be talking around ea other here. My point is not submission--I just used it as an example. The churches in which this has been strong (for me) have had it as an undercurrent, not a directly taught theology. But it comes w/ a culture that accepts it.

 

And...although I come from an evangelical background, I'm not coming at this from that angle. Right now I'm specifically thinking about bc & family size. Ime, this is something that Catholics think about, not evangelicals.

 

I agree that the focus should not be on our actions but God's, BUT there are also some instances where we have to make decisions to go one way or another. You can see good people going down both paths. You can see Scripture that leads both ways. But it's hard to know what God wants of *you,* or even what you want of yourself. And there's this feeling...that there *is* right & wrong (for you at least) wrt this issue.

 

*shrug* I don't know. Probably a silly conversation.

 

I know, it's difficult and important. It's not silly.

I'm reframing the question, a bit, and perhaps that is unfair.

I just think that it makes those kinds of questions easier to deal with and to prioritize if you start where I started.

 

Then, the methodology is to search the Scriptures, pray, consider the input of other Christians, and take very seriously the earliest and most consistent customs of Christianity as a whole, I believe. The rest of the methodology, really, is to realize that it's gray, and accept that, if it truly is, and to understand that the most strongly held convictions that you may develop for yourself regarding an adiophoron are not necessarily applicable to someone else. Sometimes uncertainty is the cross that we bear. Sometimes not knowing what to do is the challenge of the day that we must lay before the Lord. Many moral issues in life are clearcut, but some are not.

 

Here's a crazy, insane, Easter example. What if we said, all death comes from sin, and so all death is horribly wrong. Christ fought death, healing people and even raising at least three of them from the dead, while He was here on earth. All good so far. Idealistic. Godly. Logical, right? The conclusion: So Christ should not have died. Woah, wait a minute. Remember His reaction to that opinion when it was expressed by Peter, one of His favorite disciples? "Get thee behind me, Satan!"

 

I'm sorry, I know this does not help too much with your primary question, but I think that it's important to consider the possibility that there is room even in God's will for legitimate variations of opinion about moral matters, and that He leaves us that room and blesses a number of different stances in various circumstances. I don't believe in 'situational ethics' in the 70's sense of the term, but I do believe very strongly in not binding where God does not bind.

[Peela]

I think we are built with an accurate inner guidance system, but we are not taught how to use it, so we tend to want an outer one.

But to me, love is the only answer, to all such questions. It both includes and transcends all logic and all morality, but you can never go wrong following where it leads. No external system can give you directives to every little nuance in your life, but love can.

[Rosie_0801]

Logic tells me to avoid people who are obnoxiously vocal about disapproving of me.

 

Does that help? :p

 

Isn't there a verse in the Bible somewhere about like pairing up with like?

 

Rosie

[Aubrey]

Logic tells me to avoid people who are obnoxiously vocal about disapproving of me.

 

Does that help? :p

 

Isn't there a verse in the Bible somewhere about like pairing up with like?

 

Rosie

 

Nobody's obnoxiously disapproving of me at the moment. Honestly? I could quit worrying about it, have another half dozen kids w/ a little bit of bc instead of none or a lot, & there's not a church I've been to that would kick me out.

 

I want to be able to defend my choices w/ something more than "Ermm...I don't know," but maybe that's asking too much in some cases. Maybe I should just shrug off the wide eyes, because really--4 isn't *that* many. And they're wanted & loved. Maybe God's perfect will is no bc, but if I don't see that, I can't just do it. Maybe his perfect will is...well...I want to say be responsible & do the math, but...I don't see Jesus saying that.

 

Sorry. I really, really don't mean this to be specifically about bc, but I guess it's getting that way, isn't it? :lol:

[Aubrey]

I think we are built with an accurate inner guidance system, but we are not taught how to use it, so we tend to want an outer one.

But to me, love is the only answer, to all such questions. It both includes and transcends all logic and all morality, but you can never go wrong following where it leads. No external system can give you directives to every little nuance in your life, but love can.

 

Love is so unclear. It could lead you to adopt a child who has no home. Or it could lead you to turn your focus to the kids you already have, to raise them & love them well.

 

Sometimes we should give more, & that's love. Sometimes we need to pull back so we can give a fair amount to those closest to us, & that's love, too.

 

If you give & give & give & realize too late that it's been to the neglect of your family, where does that leave you? Otoh, if you keep your life small so you can have plenty of yourself to give to your family...what if you spoil them, or are acting out of laziness or selfishness, or what if you simply miss out on a relationship, a life, someone...?

[justamouse]

I think it's interesting that up until 1930? ALL churches opposed BC. Not that I agree, I think it's personal and muddled and case by case, but I *do* think that's very interesting.

[Aubrey]

I think it's interesting that up until 1930? ALL churches opposed BC. Not that I agree, I think it's personal and muddled and case by case, but I *do* think that's very interesting.

 

I do, too, but ultimately, I can't conclude anything from this. Before bc was invented, it wasn't approved by any churches, either. :D

[Rosie_0801]

If you give & give & give & realize too late that it's been to the neglect of your family, where does that leave you?

 

With high blood pressure and hopefully a guilty conscience that'll inspire you to change? You might not be able to fix every problem you created, but you can fix some and some is better than none and much better than continuing to neglect your family. If you've left it so late your family doesn't want a bar of you, you cross your fingers that someone, somewhere has stepped in to fill the gap, and you look for a gap that you can fill for someone, I suppose. I hope I don't have to find out.

 

Otoh, if you keep your life small so you can have plenty of yourself to give to your family...what if you spoil them, or are acting out of laziness or selfishness,

 

It occurs to me that the sinner business may not be frowning and finger wagging, but a reassuring pat on the head. Nobody is perfect. If you spoil your family, you'll have to put up with them. That's punishment enough! But what does it matter what your motivation is for devoting yourself to your family?

 

or what if you simply miss out on a relationship, a life, someone...?

 

What if you do? The world goes on turning regardless. The wisdom in homeschooling of "you can't do everything and everyone has gaps" applies just as well to life in general. I suppose it is weird to evangelical Christians who want and like a personal relationship with Jesus, but I actually find it more comfortable to be residing in a universe that doesn't particularly care about me. It takes the pressure off.

 

Now what I don't get is why you are having to justify choices like how many children to have. If all your mates are Christian, surely all you need to say is "this is where we felt God leading us." You haven't said God was leading you, you have only said you felt he was and that's the best you or anyone else can do because God doesn't leave notes on kitchen tables. And if your mates are atheists, you can say "we like kids." Arguing with that will only make the person sound silly.

 

But I'm just a tired, grumpy shmuck who would be thinking "I don't care what you think because I think you are an idiot, not that I expect you to care because you clearly think I am one too. Why didn't we agreed to ignore each other years ago?" and trying very hard not to come out and say it.

 

Rosie

[AvasMom]

This might have been mentioned but have you read Plato's Republic yet? He does cover using logic to think about morality during part of the dialogue.

[secular_mom]

Answer to question in subject line, yes. BUT, IMO that logic would not include the bible or other similar texts. :)

[Aubrey]

With high blood pressure and hopefully a guilty conscience that'll inspire you to change? You might not be able to fix every problem you created, but you can fix some and some is better than none and much better than continuing to neglect your family. If you've left it so late your family doesn't want a bar of you, you cross your fingers that someone, somewhere has stepped in to fill the gap, and you look for a gap that you can fill for someone, I suppose. I hope I don't have to find out.

 

I'm talking about the strangers I meet who have grown children & regrets they cannot fix.

 

The bolded: *exactly.*

 

It occurs to me that the sinner business may not be frowning and finger wagging, but a reassuring pat on the head. Nobody is perfect. If you spoil your family, you'll have to put up with them. That's punishment enough! But what does it matter what your motivation is for devoting yourself to your family?

 

I'm trying to frame it up in a way that won't be offensive to anyone.

 

What if you do? The world goes on turning regardless. The wisdom in homeschooling of "you can't do everything and everyone has gaps" applies just as well to life in general. I suppose it is weird to evangelical Christians who want and like a personal relationship with Jesus, but I actually find it more comfortable to be residing in a universe that doesn't particularly care about me. It takes the pressure off.

 

Here's the weird thing: I'm not asking because I'm afraid God will be mad at me or something. As far as final righteousness goes or whatever, I know I'm doing the best I can w/ the information I have. I guess...I'm trying to get some more information, lol. This is not really a question coming from fear, though, but of wanting to be content w/ my decision, in the context of my faith.

 

Now what I don't get is why you are having to justify choices like how many children to have. If all your mates are Christian, surely all you need to say is "this is where we felt God leading us." You haven't said God was leading you, you have only said you felt he was and that's the best you or anyone else can do because God doesn't leave notes on kitchen tables. And if your mates are atheists, you can say "we like kids." Arguing with that will only make the person sound silly.

 

It's something I'm self-conscious about because I know it's controversial. If we could afford them, it would be easier. If we were required by our faith to have them, it seems like that would be easier.

 

But I'm just a tired, grumpy shmuck who would be thinking "I don't care what you think because I think you are an idiot, not that I expect you to care because you clearly think I am one too. Why didn't we agreed to ignore each other years ago?" and trying very hard not to come out and say it.

 

Rosie

 

.

[Aubrey]

This might have been mentioned but have you read Plato's Republic yet? He does cover using logic to think about morality during part of the dialogue.

 

Yes, but it's been a while. I remember the broad strokes well, & I find his reasoning extremely helpful wrt morality. Maybe I should reread as an adult.

[Rosie_0801]

I'm trying to frame it up in a way that won't be offensive to anyone.

 

I think that is impossible unless you associate only with people who know how to mind their business.

 

Rosie

[AvasMom]

Yes, but it's been a while. I remember the broad strokes well, & I find his reasoning extremely helpful wrt morality. Maybe I should reread as an adult.

 

I read it not very long ago and I disagreed with Socrates on many points. I soooo wanted to have a conversation with him in person about a few of his points. lol! I felt like his logic was totally wrong with regard to justice. There's just a big difference between what he feels is "justice" and what I say is the "right" way to respond to injustices.

 

I guess that's how you know you are truly engaging with a book. I decided that next time I read it it will be with a friend because I felt somewhat schizophrenic arguing with a dead Greek dude and a book but darn it he was WRONG! :tongue_smilie:

[Tracy]

Normally, I think I am very much of an absolutist. But I think that these are very personal decisions and that the right thing may not be the same for everyone. My church teaches that we should avoid finding excuses to prevent children from coming into this world but does not dictate whether or not we should use bc. Before I had children, I firmly believed that for me, that meant that I would never use bc. But then I had an emergency c-section with my first, and I was told that it would be dangerous to get pregnant right away. I did not see the harm in using bc for a year. Then after my second, I had some minor but pervasive health issues related to the pregnancy and recovering from the birth. It took 2 years to get back to normal. I felt like I had already asked so much of my older dc, having a zombie of a mom for 3 years, and I couldn't do that to her again. My responsibility is first to my living children. I am willing to change my mind if God makes it really clear to me that I ought to. But unless He convinces me otherwise, I cannot believe based on my past experience that He created this body to carry any more children than I have.

 

I have met women that never use bc, because they believe that God meant for them to have as many children as they can. I believe them, though I have no stewardship to advise them one way or another.

 

But to answer your question, yes, I believe that there is always a logic to the answer. But just as some people will look better dressed in prints and others will look better in solids, the answer may be different for everyone. If you believe in the Bible, you need to consider what is written there. If you have a minister, you may want to consult with him. You should definitely consult with your dh (and I think that it is very illogical to give up bc without dh's consent). I believe that God expects us to study out the problem in our own minds and then go to Him in prayer to find out whether our decision is correct. I believe that He will reveal to you the best path for you and that at some point, you will understand the logic of that choice.

[Aubrey]

I read it not very long ago and I disagreed with Socrates on many points. I soooo wanted to have a conversation with him in person about a few of his points. lol! I felt like his logic was totally wrong with regard to justice. There's just a big difference between what he feels is "justice" and what I say is the "right" way to respond to injustices.

 

I guess that's how you know you are truly engaging with a book. I decided that next time I read it it will be with a friend because I felt somewhat schizophrenic arguing with a dead Greek dude and a book but darn it he was WRONG! :tongue_smilie:

 

Yeah, class discussions on that one were awesome. And the profs' public debate the next year. I felt that most people simply misunderstood him. :lol:

[lakotajm]

 

 

I agree that the focus should not be on our actions but God's, BUT there are also some instances where we have to make decisions to go one way or another. You can see good people going down both paths. You can see Scripture that leads both ways. But it's hard to know what God wants of *you,* or even what you want of yourself. And there's this feeling...that there *is* right & wrong (for you at least) wrt this issue.

 

*shrug* I don't know. Probably a silly conversation.

 

Oh, gosh no, not a silly conversation at all, and I totally get you. This has been an issue with me for ages. This is especially true with an atheist sister, pagan?deist?who knows? Mom and far out there Universalist sister no. 2. I'm sure you can imagine some of the conversations, since I am a born again Christian and often put in the position of defending some of my beliefs.

 

Also, my dh and I do not agree about spirituality as much as I had assumed when we were dating (isn't it fun to figure that out way too late in the game to get out?!:glare:)

 

So there is much of this discussion both within my head and with others i must deal intimately with. It affects very important issues like parenting/discipline. And I mean that in more than just the "to spank or not to spank" issue-though your undercurrent of morality determines whether you choose to do so, but not necessarily because it is or is not specifically spoken of in the scripture.

 

That sounds weird, but I mean this: I see my job as a parent to teach them to love God and others foremost and that morality is about more than just avoiding punishment or seeking reward-though that exists and must be dealt with IRL. It should be about something bigger-a personal code that, for me, seems to come from gratitude to God and a desire to do his will for no reason other than that it is his will (regardless of reward or punishment). And sometimes I may feel he has called me to do something that I cannot totally understand in its entirety. I just know that *I* read it in the Scripture and it resonated *with me* and I felt convicted and it seemed obvious God considers it part of his "core curriculum". So I'll do it. I'll do it even if I suffer, I'll do it without thinking I'm going to be rewarded. God's will is good enough for me in many cases. Not easy-not always fun, but I'll do it. I want my parenting style and discipline practices to reflect that view. So this issue of how you decide personal morality is definitely not silly-IT. IS. EVERYTHING!

 

Lakota

Edited April 25, 2011 by lakotajm
sp

[Free]

I think we are built with an accurate inner guidance system, but we are not taught how to use it, so we tend to want an outer one.

But to me, love is the only answer, to all such questions. It both includes and transcends all logic and all morality, but you can never go wrong following where it leads. No external system can give you directives to every little nuance in your life, but love can.

 

:iagree: This is so right. I have learnt this the hard way at least as far as parenting is concerned. There are so many different ways to do something right that morality can never be absolute. There is no one rule that can be applied to all people for all time, or even just a rule that will hold true always for just one situation or one person.

 

Love is so unclear. It could lead you to adopt a child who has no home. Or it could lead you to turn your focus to the kids you already have, to raise them & love them well.

 

Sometimes we should give more, & that's love. Sometimes we need to pull back so we can give a fair amount to those closest to us, & that's love, too.

 

If you give & give & give & realize too late that it's been to the neglect of your family, where does that leave you? Otoh, if you keep your life small so you can have plenty of yourself to give to your family...what if you spoil them, or are acting out of laziness or selfishness, or what if you simply miss out on a relationship, a life, someone...?

 

You know it is funny that you should say this because I am going through this exact dilemma. On the one hand I want to adopt and on the other I want to just do the best I can for the child I have.

 

There is no handbook for life, which is actually the point of living in the first place isn't it? You are supposed to make mistakes and learn from them and grow and do better the next time. There is really no way other than to just do the best you can with what you do know right now and then trust yourself.

[lakotajm]

:iagree: This is so right. I have learnt this the hard way at least as far as parenting is concerned. There are so many different ways to do something right that morality can never be absolute. There is no one rule that can be applied to all people for all time, or even just a rule that will hold true always for just one situation or one person.

 

 

 

There is really no way other than to just do the best you can with what you do know right now and then trust yourself.

 

The problem comes when you both believe so strongly in opposite directions that you feel you cannot just "agree to disgree" because that would mean 2 things: compromising your personal ethics, and possibly you/dh screwing up your kids. This may be leading s/o, but how do couples decide what to do in situations like this, where you both feel that to remain silent is to be complicit in something you cannot abide?:glare:

 

Inquiring minds want to know.;)

 

Lakota

[Peela]

Love is so unclear. It could lead you to adopt a child who has no home. Or it could lead you to turn your focus to the kids you already have, to raise them & love them well.

 

Sometimes we should give more, & that's love. Sometimes we need to pull back so we can give a fair amount to those closest to us, & that's love, too.

 

If you give & give & give & realize too late that it's been to the neglect of your family, where does that leave you? Otoh, if you keep your life small so you can have plenty of yourself to give to your family...what if you spoil them, or are acting out of laziness or selfishness, or what if you simply miss out on a relationship, a life, someone...?

 

So, are you looking for an answer than means that if you do this, life wont hurt you anymore? Or a recipe for life, so you don't make any mistakes? A way to be perfect (I used to have that one running)? because...I don't think there is a way for that to happen. And if it was, we wouldnt be free- we'd be robots.

 

Life is self correcting. If you feel drawn to look after an orphan- that is your path and whatever the consequences, you will deal with them as they come up. We are all so different and what is right for one person is not going to be right for everyone.

If you give and give and give...to the neglect of yourself...then you are out of balance, your health will suffer, your family might suffer, and love would encourage you to turn around and take care of yourself better- for the greater good. Love works both ways and it is intelligent- its not the opposite to logical, rational thinking. But isn't that why we are here? To love- and to live love, and to learn to live love? If it was easy, or clear, or obvious- well, what would be the challenge in that and how would we grow and learn? I really do think it is simple- really simple- but not easy.

 

There are no guarantees, no matter what moral system you follow, or if you follow your inner knowing and guidance, or love, or however you frame it for yourself. No guarantees that you will not make mistakes, or be hurt, or that life won't throw you a doozy But we get up, brush ourselves off and keep going.

 

There is ultimately no security in any moral system, but human nature is to want security...if I do this, I will get this. If I am good, I will have an easier life, or I will be rewarded later.

The being good, the doing your best according to what you know now, in this moment...is its own reward. And life gives us feedback if we go out of balance. I think that's the best we can do.

[Rosie_0801]

Nice post, Peela :)

[Jeanne in MN]

Aubrey, I would pray about it. I would ask God to lead me in the direction he desires me to go. Ask him to show you what is right or wrong and to feel it so strongly in your heart that you don't doubt. Maybe he'll lead you to a book or a Bible passage or an individual who can help clarify these issues better.

 

As far as BC, I'm a Catholic and we use BC. I have a guilty twinge of my conscience, because I have read about why the Catholic Church believes as it does. It's protecting the sacredness and the reverence for the gift that is shared between husband and wife. The act wasn't meant to be a lustful thing, but a means to procreate and that is beautiful.

 

When we use BC, it devalues the gift of intimacy and procreation. It keeps a part of ourselves apart from each other. At least that's how I understand it. Our youngest children are 12 and we have no desire for more kids, but we can not bring ourselves to have my dh getting a vasectomy either. There's something to final, so closed off from a part of who he is and who we are together, that it just doesn't seem right. So I think I get what the Catholic Church is saying.

 

However, we had three children in 18 months and I never want to go through that again. I fell into major depression and those years were very difficult for me in many ways. So we still choose to use BC. It sounds pretty backwards to believe one thing, but not totally accept it. I'm sharing to let you know, not everyone has it "figured out".

 

As for submission. I think it really boils down to mutual respect. Some may take it to a harmful extreme, (I think) but I think there's a healthier pov which is, as wives it is beneficial if we don't nag and we show respect and trust in our spouses. Our husbands in turn show us a great love. When we feel loved, we want to lift up our husbands and when they feel respected, they in turn feel more love for us. I can see how women and men are motivated by those two things respectively and how it can strongly bless a marriage. I don't see it as a woman being a door mat-it's more about mutual respect.

 

Sorry that got so long and it's awfully late, so I hope it makes sense in the morning. :)

 

I hope someone here can give you something that makes sense and will be helpful. But please don't feel silly about it! :)

 

 

Nobody's obnoxiously disapproving of me at the moment. Honestly? I could quit worrying about it, have another half dozen kids w/ a little bit of bc instead of none or a lot, & there's not a church I've been to that would kick me out.

 

I want to be able to defend my choices w/ something more than "Ermm...I don't know," but maybe that's asking too much in some cases. Maybe I should just shrug off the wide eyes, because really--4 isn't *that* many. And they're wanted & loved. Maybe God's perfect will is no bc, but if I don't see that, I can't just do it. Maybe his perfect will is...well...I want to say be responsible & do the math, but...I don't see Jesus saying that.

 

Sorry. I really, really don't mean this to be specifically about bc, but I guess it's getting that way, isn't it? :lol:

[Free]

The problem comes when you both believe so strongly in opposite directions that you feel you cannot just "agree to disgree" because that would mean 2 things: compromising your personal ethics, and possibly you/dh screwing up your kids. This may be leading s/o, but how do couples decide what to do in situations like this, where you both feel that to remain silent is to be complicit in something you cannot abide?:glare:

 

Inquiring minds want to know.;)

 

Lakota

 

Yes, I know what you mean. Everyone has to deal with differences with spouses I suppose, especially when it comes to parenting and more so when the husband and wife come from completely different value systems. I know I have had to deal with it...I still do. There are times when I just let things slide and times when I will stand up for what I believe is right. We have to pick our battles I suppose. It helps me to remember that my DH is also trying to do his best within his capability. Patience and conversation and not trying to turn the other into a villain in my mind for believing differently than me helps too I have found :001_smile:

[anabelneri]

I don't know that I'll have much to offer, but a few thoughts.

 

An earlier poster talked about allowing the mystery or paradox continue, a primary example being "is Jesus human or divine?"... "Yes" is the true, but the paradoxical answer.

 

When it comes to issues that seem to be more concrete, and you can see the way that God might call you to either, making a paradoxical decision might be the right response. For example, bc is actually pretty easy to look at this way. My husband and I are feeling "done-ish" with having kids, but while we're not trying to have more we are open to them. Great choices for someone in our situation is to use NFP or just the simple barrier type without any extras. Unless someone is extremely careful with NFP, there is a user-failure rate. And the simple barrier type definitely has a failure rate. We can choose to say "we prefer to be done having kids" while being open to God's movement in our lives on that issue. We can choose both.

 

I imagine the submission issue is more complicated... it's not something we talk about much in my church. But I would think that there would be a way do both. I could see a couple agreeing that they are equal and share in decision making, but where the husband still is the primary decision maker. I don't know. But I just wanted to suggest that, if living in the mystery in your faith life works for you, finding the mystery in submission-to-each-other/submission-of-the-wife might be an interesting thing to pray about.

 

Blessings to you on your search!

[anabelneri]

The problem comes when you both believe so strongly in opposite directions that you feel you cannot just "agree to disgree" because that would mean 2 things: compromising your personal ethics, and possibly you/dh screwing up your kids. This may be leading s/o, but how do couples decide what to do in situations like this, where you both feel that to remain silent is to be complicit in something you cannot abide?:glare:

 

Inquiring minds want to know.;)

 

Lakota

 

 

IMO that's when it's time to find a good couples-counselor... that's pretty heavy stuff, and having someone help moderate the conversation and help pinpoint the threads of similarity/agreement would be invaluable.

 

FWIW...

[Free]

What about healthy women? I know the arguments. I know "choose life," I know abortificants, I know "use your brain" & don't have more than you can afford, nurture, etc.

 

I *don't* know which argument is morally *right.* And--fwiw--w/ all of the above, I'm *perfectly* willing to accept that God might lead people to different conclusions. I don't mean any of this as a judgment of someone else's beliefs or choices. I *love* that some can forego bc completely, & it is an act of devotion & faith. I *love* that others can drink wine or not, & that both are holy choices.

 

Ultimately, though, I don't know how to know the answers to these things. And my tendency is toward legalism--toward trying to seem to do the right thing in *everybody's* eyes. :lol: At least I know *that* is futile & wrongly-motivated.

 

If you are perfectly willing to accept that God can lead people to different conclusions and choices, then how can there be a single morally right choice? Why can there not be several right choices? Would it not be better to think that God intended for us to use our hearts and minds and intellect when making choices for ourselves and our families than to try and second guess God's will?

[8circles]

Love is so unclear. It could lead you to adopt a child who has no home. Or it could lead you to turn your focus to the kids you already have, to raise them & love them well.

 

Sometimes we should give more, & that's love. Sometimes we need to pull back so we can give a fair amount to those closest to us, & that's love, too.

 

If you give & give & give & realize too late that it's been to the neglect of your family, where does that leave you? Otoh, if you keep your life small so you can have plenty of yourself to give to your family...what if you spoil them, or are acting out of laziness or selfishness, or what if you simply miss out on a relationship, a life, someone...?

I didn't want to reply sooner because I didn't want you to think I was stalking you - you've had some great threads lately Aubrey. But this is ?exactly what I've been angsting over for a few months now & you said it very well.

So, are you looking for an answer than means that if you do this, life wont hurt you anymore? Or a recipe for life, so you don't make any mistakes? A way to be perfect (I used to have that one running)? because...I don't think there is a way for that to happen. And if it was, we wouldnt be free- we'd be robots.

 

Life is self correcting. If you feel drawn to look after an orphan- that is your path and whatever the consequences, you will deal with them as they come up. We are all so different and what is right for one person is not going to be right for everyone.

If you give and give and give...to the neglect of yourself...then you are out of balance, your health will suffer, your family might suffer, and love would encourage you to turn around and take care of yourself better- for the greater good. Love works both ways and it is intelligent- its not the opposite to logical, rational thinking. But isn't that why we are here? To love- and to live love, and to learn to live love? If it was easy, or clear, or obvious- well, what would be the challenge in that and how would we grow and learn? I really do think it is simple- really simple- but not easy.

 

There are no guarantees, no matter what moral system you follow, or if you follow your inner knowing and guidance, or love, or however you frame it for yourself. No guarantees that you will not make mistakes, or be hurt, or that life won't throw you a doozy But we get up, brush ourselves off and keep going.

 

There is ultimately no security in any moral system, but human nature is to want security...if I do this, I will get this. If I am good, I will have an easier life, or I will be rewarded later.

The being good, the doing your best according to what you know now, in this moment...is its own reward. And life gives us feedback if we go out of balance. I think that's the best we can do.

Peela, thank you. This is the best answer/explanation to my angst that I've heard. It doesn't remove the angst but... gives it a purpose or something. Anyway, it's less uncomfortable. You are very wise.

[8circles]

But I'm just a tired, grumpy shmuck who would be thinking "I don't care what you think because I think you are an idiot, not that I expect you to care because you clearly think I am one too. Why didn't we agreed to ignore each other years ago?" and trying very hard not to come out and say it.

 

Rosie

 

Rosie, you crack me up. I like you.

[Aubrey]

If you are perfectly willing to accept that God can lead people to different conclusions and choices, then how can there be a single morally right choice? Why can there not be several right choices? Would it not be better to think that God intended for us to use our hearts and minds and intellect when making choices for ourselves and our families than to try and second guess God's will?

 

Sure, but you can't use bc & not use it. You can't have more kids & not have them.

 

There can be many right answers w/in one faith, but an individual must follow ONE of those.

 

Paul suggests that it might be better not to marry. Dh & I both intended to follow that *until* we both *heard* God call us to marry ea other. At that point, we had clear instruction for our individual lives. No one else can apply that to their lives, & I don't assume that single people have failed to follow God. :)

[Merry]

This is a very interesting thread but I have a practical suggestion that might help....talk to your dh about the issue of birth control, if you haven't already. Work together as a couple that submits to one another. Settle the issue of bc. Hugs to you.....

[Free]

Sure, but you can't use bc & not use it. You can't have more kids & not have them.

 

There can be many right answers w/in one faith, but an individual must follow ONE of those.

 

Paul suggests that it might be better not to marry. Dh & I both intended to follow that *until* we both *heard* God call us to marry ea other. At that point, we had clear instruction for our individual lives. No one else can apply that to their lives, & I don't assume that single people have failed to follow God. :)

 

So what you are asking is not whether we can derive a single unambiguous moral code that applies to all. Rather you seem to be asking if there is a way one can be sure the path one has chosen is moral? But if you agree that there are many moral paths that can be chosen, why should you obsess about it? I apologize for asking so many questions, but I do not think I truly understand what exactly it is that is puzzling you.

[Carol in Cal.]

So what you are asking is not whether we can derive a single unambiguous moral code that applies to all. Rather you seem to be asking if there is a way one can be sure the path one has chosen is moral? But if you agree that there are many moral paths that can be chosen, why should you obsess about it? I apologize for asking so many questions, but I do not think I truly understand what exactly it is that is puzzling you.

 

Because she still has to decide what to do, and it's a big decision, and in addition to not wanting to mess it up, she wants to make sure that she's not defying the will of God.

[secular_mom]

Sure, but you can't use bc & not use it. You can't have more kids & not have them.

 

There can be many right answers w/in one faith, but an individual must follow ONE of those.

 

Paul suggests that it might be better not to marry. Dh & I both intended to follow that *until* we both *heard* God call us to marry ea other. At that point, we had clear instruction for our individual lives. No one else can apply that to their lives, & I don't assume that single people have failed to follow God. :)

IMO, if you aren't sure about whether it would be a good thing to have another child, then the obvious answer is DON'T DO IT.

[Mejane]

So, are you looking for an answer than means that if you do this, life wont hurt you anymore? Or a recipe for life, so you don't make any mistakes? A way to be perfect (I used to have that one running)? because...I don't think there is a way for that to happen. And if it was, we wouldnt be free- we'd be robots.

 

Life is self correcting. <snip> There are no guarantees, no matter what moral system you follow, or if you follow your inner knowing and guidance, or love, or however you frame it for yourself. No guarantees that you will not make mistakes, or be hurt, or that life won't throw you a doozy But we get up, brush ourselves off and keep going.

 

 

 

Hope you don't mind that I snipped, Peela, but this is excellent and so true. I was never as miserable as when I tried to do everything "right" (by some standard I thought existed), and never so free as when I simply did my best and let life self-correct. I do think much of this "wisdom" comes with age. ;)

[lionfamily1999]

Aubrey, I've never understood why no one was supposed to use bc. I understand why abortion is wrong, I understand why bc that results in abortions are wrong, but I've never understood why barrier methods were wrong.

[lionfamily1999]

If you are perfectly willing to accept that God can lead people to different conclusions and choices, then how can there be a single morally right choice? Why can there not be several right choices? Would it not be better to think that God intended for us to use our hearts and minds and intellect when making choices for ourselves and our families than to try and second guess God's will?

I could be completely off base here, but I think I understand what you're saying, and if I do then :iagree:

 

Not everyone is meant to be a missionary to a foreign land. That does not make it immoral not to be a missionary, it does not make it immoral to be a missionary. It depends on what God calls you to do. Is God calling you to have more children? If He is and you're hoping to use bc to avoid it... :lol: well, there's plenty of anecdotal evidence that all the bc in the world isn't going to get in His way ;)

[Aubrey]

This is a very interesting thread but I have a practical suggestion that might help....talk to your dh about the issue of birth control, if you haven't already. Work together as a couple that submits to one another. Settle the issue of bc. Hugs to you.....

 

We've been talking about it since before we were married. We're on the same page completely: neither of us sure which way to go. But we're both completely happy to honor the other's convictions if one of us should "figure it out." LOL