Mr_Anony:
The problem with your question is this:

For it to even be good for one to do good without expecting a reward, there must have been a reward in the first place which the person would feel morally righteous to reject. If as atheists claim, there is really no reward for good and punishment for evil at all, why then is it good or evil?

Let me give you a small analogy: Nigeria has laws: criminals will be punished and heroes will be celebrated. If a hero says don't celebrate me, he will be applauded for being modest. He wouldn't be modest if there wasn't going to be any celebration in the first place. His heroism would only be something he just did. There would be no deserved applause to even reject in the first place. Do you see what I mean?

The above is one of the reasons why I wonder how Anony gets the audacity to tell me that I am illogical.


1) I would like to know what reward an atheist/secular humanist like myself is looking for or rejecting when I help a blind man cross the road or when I give village children soccer balls to play football.

2) I wonder what law is made specifically to honour heroes.

3) Why is it impossible for Anony and his christian theology to believe that people can be good just for being good?

Do you dream of this guy every night??

^^
He is just him a question..

I asked Anony this question on another thread:

cyrexx: @Anony,

who do you think deserve more respect.

A man who is morally good because his religious codes mandate him to be morally good and expecting reward for being good while avoiding punishment.

or

A man who is morally good because he really choose to be morally good. He is not expecting reward or trying to avoid punishment.

to which he replied:

Mr_Anony:
The problem with your question is this:

For it to even be good for one to do good without expecting a reward, there must have been a reward in the first place which the person would feel morally righteous to reject. If as atheists claim, there is really no reward for good and punishment for evil at all, why then is it good or evil?

Let me give you a small analogy: Nigeria has laws: criminals will be punished and heroes will be celebrated. If a hero says don't celebrate me, he will be applauded for being modest. He wouldn't be modest if there wasn't going to be any celebration in the first place. His heroism would only be something he just did. There would be no deserved applause to even reject in the first place. Do you see what I mean?

now i replied again: i see what you mean but it is different answer you are giving to my question. If i get you correctly, you seem to imply that no deed can be deemed to really good if there is no form of reward expected. Aight? If that is the case. That is not true selfless morality. That is an advanced form of selfishness. A truly morally good deeds is done for its own sake, for goodness sake, not because of reward or punishment. i.e. "I'm good because i want to be good, not because God will punish me if I'm not good or reward me if i'm good".

And it is non-religious and atheists who can exhibit this kind of moral goodness because they expect no deity to reward them for being good.

Now the crux of my previous question is that the religious people are NOT TRULY GOOD because they are commanded to be morally good. They are just following orders. If not for the reward and punishment, they will be the worst kind of criminal.

But it is those who are not "commanded" to be morally good (not subject to religious codes) but still choose out of their heart to be morally good who are really good.

Do you agree with this?

If not, kindly show the fault of this logic

uj_sizzle: Do you dream of this guy every night??

Seriously? Is this how you think?

I am still waiting for christians to come and explain Anony's christian logic

cyrexx: I asked Anony this question on another thread:







to which he replied:




now i replied again: i see what you mean but it is different answer you are giving to my question. If i get you correctly, you seem to imply that no deed can be deemed to really good if there is no form of reward expected. Aight? If that is the case. That is not true selfless morality. That is an advanced form of selfishness. A truly morally good deeds is done for its own sake, for goodness sake, not because of reward or punishment. i.e. "I'm good because i want to be good, not because God will punish me if I'm not good or reward me if i'm good".

And it is non-religious and atheists who can exhibit this kind of moral goodness because they expect no deity to reward them for being good.

Now the crux of my previous question is that the religious people are NOT TRULY GOOD because they are commanded to be morally good. They are just following orders. If not for the reward and punishment, they will be the worst kind of criminal.

But it is those who are not "commanded" to be morally good (not subject to religious codes) but still choose out of their heart to be morally good who are really good.

Do you agree with this?

If not, kindly show the fault of this logic

Roman 2:10-16
10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11 For God does not show favoritism. 12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law
will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight,
but it is those who obey the law who will be
declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things
required by the law, they are a law for themselves,
even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written
on their hearts, their consciences also bearing
witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing
them and at other times even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my
gospel declares.



Roman 2:10-16

this though applies befor christ was preach because today every thing hangs on christ.

However:

"15 They show that the requirements of the law are written
on their hearts, "

^^^
that is the way humans are created by nature.
Peace.

Obscession is not a good thing.

All this talk about being "good". You don't decide whether you have done "good" or not, only Yahweh decides that. And besides your "good" will not grant you eternal life (that is also dependent on Yahweh) and if you are doing "good" in order to feel good about yourself, ("good" for the sake of it) you are in error cos your "good" deeds won't bring salvation. Just obey the commandment(s) of Yahweh. Love Yahweh with all your heart and soul.

___________________________

Luke 18:18-19
New International Version
(NIV)
The Rich and the Kingdom of God
18 A certain ruler asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
19 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God
alone.


____________________


Matthew 19:16-17
New International Version
(NIV)
The Rich and the Kingdom of God
16 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do
to get eternal life?”
17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One
who is good. If you want to enter life, keep
the commandments.”