By pleasure I mean drinking, sex, etc. - you know, the usual objects of indulgence. I'd like to know how you can hold these against anyone, since they're really just lifestyle choices that don't have any direct effect on other people. The reason my worldview allows for indulgence in pleasure is because you can do that without hurting a single person (including yourself, assuming you're responsible). This would seem to make pleasure not an inherently evil thing.
This is grey area for Christians.
The Bible speaks of numerous times when drinking (wine) is used for good and bad. See: Seducing old man in Genesis, or Jesus turns water to wine, or the Last Supper. I've concluded that social drinking is OK. Drunk driving/always being drunk/doing stupid shit, is not.
Sex is a stickier issue. It's always listed with a slew of other sins great and small. Know that this is "sexuall immorality" and when given an example, its usually something horrid (imo) like having sex with your mother or massive gay orgies. John chapter 8 will give you a good idea of Jesus' capacity for forgiveness on this issue, just read it. Why was the act evil? From a humanist perspective it was wrong because it was disrupting the family. Why shouldn't YOU have casual sex? Because you might get an STD? Sex makes babies? The Bible lists idleness as a minor sin. If you are having sex all the time, you are not accomplishing anything. At least you hope you're not
.
I won't hold THESE things against anyone as they don't affect me. God will, apparently. If you absolutely can't live without these things (being a drunk/having massive gay orgies)...try Satanism.
Okay, I realize that morality in the Christian sense isn't just action based - that you can repent from your sins and get forgiveness. You still don't address the problems I point out with the notion of good and evil. Why do people need to be forgiven for "evil" when their actions have non-supernatural, real-world motives?
You regressed in the argument. As I said earlier, Christians believe that the spiritual realm and the physical realm exist simultaneously. Yes, I know there is a non-supernatural explanation for everything YOU have experienced. Forgiveness is a way to start clean. Even non-christians do it.
For that matter, how can you consider someone truly absolved of their guilt through penitence? Most of the time, if people screw up once, they're going to keep screwing up, regardless of how much they're forgiven. I think the patchy success rate of penitence kind of shows that it's not really addressing the problem of "evil" that it was meant to address. If someone really has some kind of mental or emotional instability that makes them "do wrong", then there's often very little that can be done to improve them. This seems to me like a good case for a naturalistic view of morality.
Ah, the problem with Catholocism. "Sin on Saturday/repent on Sunday". This is where salvation enters. If you are saved (this implies alot of faith and a change in your worldview), you will choose not to sin. You WILL sin, but tend to not sin as much as you did before salvation. Salvation is continuous. You were saved, you are saved, and you will be saved. That is, unless you reject Jesus. It may sound simple, but it's really a beautiful struggle.
I am vexed by the mental istability issue. My "he does not judge on actions alone" argument breakes down in some cases. Give me a concrete example.
That's cool. Thanks for indulging my relentless argumentation thus far. I don't get to debate religion as much as I'd like, and you've been much more logical and patient than most opponents I've had in the past. I look forward to your next reply.
Thanks! It's been a pleasure.
