The best Religious Ethics books: Reddit reviews

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

Cool. Bit of advice though: in about a week or two you're probably going to come down off the emotional high and start to question it and then be tempted to conclude you were just being emotional.

Don't give it in to it. Pick up some religious books with substance in them. Just offhand, since it's sitting nearby, I would suggest The Screwtape Letters.

I'd recommend the recent book by Edward Feser and Joseph Bessette, By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed, a historical and philosophical defense of the traditional Catholic view on capital punishment.

That's an acceptable view, but not one that is consistent with the tradition of the Catholic Church on the subject. Check out this book for more information:

https://www.amazon.com/Man-Shall-His-Blood-Shed/dp/1621641260

He also has a website with many articles written on the subject that you can read for free.

Right? Or as Sam Harris says,

>If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?

I think you should read By Man Shall His Blood be Shed by Edward Feser and Joseph Bessette. Then read Fratelli Tutti. I don't know if Catholics have received extremely clear guidance either way, but at least you'll feel like you have the background for the current situation.

Three things:

• Memorize Proverbs 5-7
• Get mentoring / counsel regularly from a parent or a minister / elder at your church
• Read Overcoming Sin and Temptation by John Owen

The second one is especially important. If you're not ready to confess to a person who knows you and can hold you accountable, you're not ready to repent. And when I say this, I don't mean your best friend: I mean someone in authority, who is one of the three categories above (parent, minister, elder).

The short answer is not in Christian theology, no.

Jesus specifically replaces the Old Testament notion of "an eye for an eye" with the doctrine of forgiveness in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5. There's plenty more to say about it, but the best place to look for a more thorough treatment is THIS BOOK.

I have several CS Lewis books in my library. One of my favorites is The Screwtape Letters. I also read the Narnia books to my kids.

https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/

https://www.amazon.com/Man-Shall-His-Blood-Shed/dp/1621641260/ref=pd_sim_14_6?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1621641260&pd_rd_r=9SQGPQ0HAX9Y392GRR12&pd_rd_w=yz0mr&pd_rd_wg=zFiiQ&psc=1&refRID=9SQGPQ0HAX9Y392GRR12

Before you do anything I suggest you first read a short but poignant book called Screwtape Letters by CS Lewis.

It's satire about how demons tempt Christians away from the faith.

Take a look at this one:

• <strong>[Book] In the Footsteps of the Prophet: Lessons from the Life of Muhammad</strong> - Tariq Ramadan, presents the main events of the Prophet's life in a way that highlights his spiritual and ethical teachings.

You can find other books and videos here

Well, I've read very convincing argument that the permissibility is part of the infallible ordinary magisterium. Which puts one in the position of having to construe Francis as making a prudential judgment, so as to square things (or some sort of peculiar disciplinary decree; or saying frankly that he's simply wrong, but he's not attempting to make an infallible proclamation so it's not falsifying infallibility).

There's a great book on the subject written by a Christian pastor. https://www.amazon.com/Myth-Christian-Nation-Political-Destroying/dp/0310267315 From the description:

The church was established to serve the world with Christ-like love, not to rule the world. It is called to look like a corporate Jesus, dying on the cross for those who crucified him, not a religious version of Caesar. It is called to manifest the kingdom of the cross in contrast to the kingdom of the sword. Whenever the church has succeeded in gaining what most American evangelicals are now trying to get – political power – it has been disastrous both for the church and the culture. Whenever the church picks up the sword, it lays down the cross. The present activity of the religious right is destroying the heart and soul of the evangelical church and destroying its unique witness to the world. The church is to have a political voice, but we are to have it the way Jesus had it: by manifesting an alternative to the political, “power over,” way of doing life. We are to transform the world by being willing to suffer for others – exercising “power under,” not by getting our way in society – exercising “power over.”

I'm sorry you're hurting. I know how much it can feel like the entire world isn't working right when we're heartbroken, and I pray that God will comfort you in this difficulty. Here are a few things to consider as well.

First, I would encourage you to read a book by C.S. Lewis called "The Problem of Pain". I read this after my dad passed away, and while it didn't make the pain go away, it did help to give me a different perspective on pain. It was really helpful, and I think it could be for you too. To (very briefly) sum it up, pain is a guardrail, it tells us where the boundaries in life are, and while it's unpleasant, it's often a sign that God is trying to keep us from the really bad things. You can learn from pain, if you can wrap your mind around a different perspective.

Second, if God didn't allow pain, then we would have no free will. Pain is the result of choices - ours or those made by others - that diverge from His will. But if He only ever allowed us to choose things that were in His will - and as a result, avoid pain - then we wouldn't really be free, would we?

Third, Scripture does not say that God will not give us more than we can handle. 1 Corinthians 10:13 is the often-cited justification for this belief, but it's also misquoted. It says that God will not allow us to be tempted beyond our ability, but also that He will give us a way of escape. This doesn't mean we'll never get more than we can handle, it means that when we're overwhelmed God will provide a way out. And the usual way? Relying on Him.

Again, I hope that God will help to mend your wounded heart and help you to rely on Him through this time.

>Who says death penalty teaching is infallible? Please point me to the source.

The best contemporary summary of historical Church teaching on the topic, including a discussion on its status as an infallible teaching, can be found in Edward Feser's book By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed.

> Why did the Vatican execute people?!

For the same reason we put people in prison. In the past operating and maintaining a prison was much harder than today and thus the death penalty was much more common.

&#x200B;

> I don't see how that is Jesus' teachings and this has me worried. Any advice?

Capital punishment is warranted in the bible. While not as harshly applicable as in the OT (since the people hearts were hard and also see the adulteress story in John) capital punishment is permissible for he overall good of society (and other reasons some argue).

One can argue that today, with modern technology and the modern prison system, the capital punishment is obsolete.

However Catholic philosophers like Feser and Bessette argue that capital punishment is still warranted in their book: By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment

Personally I think capital punishment should be abolished except in very special occasions (e.g. times of war when detention is not possible)

Bro be coming into r/ChristianMemes calling us cultists for acknowledging the attributes of God; cool story. Fodder for philosophy/religion class, I’d wager.

Also, I never said God was omnibenevolent; by virtue of the fact that some people were created for the ultimate purpose of spending an eternity in hell, that attribute is irreconcilable with the character of God as we know Him.

C.S. Lewis has a decent book addressing the problem of evil, if you’re so inclined.

At least CS Lewis wrestled with the concept and wrote a whole book about it. The fact that these people don't seem to learn anything from it and just wave it away as "God's Plan" is very telling of their faith.

I'm sorry to hear that you are having such trouble, I presume, through health problems. C.S. Lewis deals with this issue in his book "The Problem of Pain." We can learn from it about what to avoid, for example. It's not an end in itself, but a means to another end. https://www.amazon.com/Problem-Pain-C-S-Lewis/dp/0060652969

Interesting question and discussion. Love seeing all the varying viewpoints. For anyone interested who happens to be Christian or quasi-Christian, one of the best books I’ve read on Christianity and contemporary politics is Myth of a Christian Nation by Greg Boyd. Definitely from a progressive evangelical perspective (which are few and far between, but an ever-growing demographic of Christianity), but man, do i wish every Christian in the US would read it. Also, Boyd is an incredibly smart scholar, but this book is an easy read. Highly recommend it, especially if you are a person of faith. If you’re not, it will at least give you perspective from a Christian voice who doesn’t buy into standard political stances/rhetoric from either side. For me, as a progressive Christian, this book was life-changing. OP- DM me your address, and I’ll send you a copy. :)

>When adam and eve had kids and all, they are the only humans in existence, incest must have happened

I don't think they

>After god drowned the earth and Noah survived, they are the only humans, incest must have happenedwere the only humans.

I don't think the flood was global. But that being said, I do think incest happened here (Ham and his mother / Noah's wife).

>Why aren't we all born with birth defects, and why does incest cause birth defects then?

I'm not a biologist so I won't even attempt this answer. I don't know the exact mechanism that causes birth defects.

>Why does he need to test us? He already knows the outcome

The wisest words I've ever read on this come from CS Lewis. He uses the example of God testing Abraham to sacrifice Isaac before stopping him.

“If God then is omniscient, he must have known what Abraham would do, without any experiment. Why then this needless torture?” But as St. Augustine points out, whatever God knew, Abraham at any rate did not know that his obedience would endure such a command until the event taught him: and the obedience which he did not know that he would choose, he cannot be said to have chosen. The reality of Abraham’s obedience was the act itself; and what God knew in knowing that Abraham “would obey” was Abraham’s actual obedience on that mountain top a that moment. To say that God “need not have tried the experiment” is to say that because God knows, the thing known by God need not to exist. (<em>The Problem of Pain</em>, 101)

My source is his book The Moral Landscape

In the book, Sam says we must build a moral system off science alone without philosophy. But then he goes and makes philosophical positions and tries to bridge the is/ought problem via science (not possible). Had he done so, he would’ve been awarded every prize available in the humanities. Wonder why that never happened?

For my evidence, here’s a copy of his book you can read yourself: https://www.amazon.com/Moral-Landscape-Science-Determine-Values/dp/143917122X

It’s one of my favorite books. I recommend this version:

https://www.amazon.com/Overcoming-Temptation-Redesign-John-Owen/dp/1433550083

I always speak to The Moral Landscape (Sam Harris). You're coming across a common argument from religious people, so having a clear science & reason based answer backing up morality can be huge in debates/conversations. If you're unfamiliar w/ it I highly recommend the book.

Have you not been listening to anything Sam says?

For me personally, I do something that stirs my affection for God. Whether that be singing a hymn in my head, praying, or reciting scripture that I've memorized. However, I think the most useful thing is to take action in such a way that glorifies God. I can avert my eyes and flee temptation all I want, but I need to turn to do things that praise Him. I venture to say that it's not enough to not do the sin we need to be proactive in doing other things. I am very involved with the Baptist Student Ministry on my campus, and God has given me the privilege to do ministry here. I can say this personally has helped me significantly. It's rather hard to fall into temptation when I am sharing the Gospel with someone or serving on campus. So my advice again is to be proactive. For example, in the subway, if your being tempted, share the Gospel with someone, break out your bible and start reading right there, or help a homeless person. I know these things are "radical" and scary but I venture to say were called to do them. I especially can say that how much more it speaks of God's work in us when we turn from the lusts of the flesh to do things for HIM. I'll be praying for you friend, stay saturated in scripture and in a biblical community!

Along with your normal Bible reading, I would recommend you read Of the Mortification of Sin in Believers by John Owen. I'll link an edition that I particularly like. It has helped me understand a lot of the things behind lust and repentance

https://www.amazon.com/Overcoming-Temptation-Redesign-John-Owen/dp/1433550083/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_1?_encoding=UTF8&amp;psc=1&amp;refRID=5HQAAE4TC3X4G5JJKE80

I mean a lot of Catholics believe in anarcho capitalism. One of them wrote a book on how the Catholic Church built the West. His name is Thomas Woods, I think you should look into him, his books, and his podcast.

Here is his podcast: https://tomwoods.com/podcasts/

He wrote a book on a catholic defense of capitalism.

https://www.amazon.com/Church-Market-Catholic-Defense-Economics/dp/0739110365

Hopefully you look into it instead of being a whiny commie.

If you want to believe in what's true why don't you start with something small and then work your way up to the bigger things. For example, you still won't admit that the Kalam Cosmological argument has 5 premises in total.

What in the world makes you think you'll ever believe in God if you can't even believe the basic foundation of an argument for Gods existence?

As far as pain and suffering goes, nobody likes pain and suffering. Mankind does not have the perfect answer to that question because we are totally and completely limited in cognitive ability to understand why a being so powerful as God would allow such things to exist.

My question to you is, how much research have you done on that topic? How many books have you read that describe possible reasons for allowing pain and suffering in the world?

You can't expect me to tackle that question and do it justice in a Reddit post, but I can give you the tools to help you understand. Start by reading The Problem of Pain and I would also suggest you read Is God a Moral Monster.

It's going to take a lot of time and effort to read up on these issues and you won't get a simple answer to that question in a simple Reddit post. The onus is on you to do the proper research because humans have been thinking about this problem and writing books about it for hundreds of years.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument IS evidence for the existence of God.

Looking for "Ethics" by (or rather edited) Peter Singer (amazon link here).

EDIT: Complete

Its not anger (unless I am the victim or a family/friend of the victim of one of these heinous crimes). Im merely discussing the death penalty with you. But you cant seem to detach yourself from personal attacks

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic

How is something that is created by humans any less legitimate than something natural? Murder is natural. Shall we embrace murder and shun justice systems because they are man made?

There is a case for objective morality too. I suggest this book. The author is quite famous and has a PhD in cognitive neuroscience from UCLA.

https://www.amazon.com/Moral-Landscape-Science-Determine-Values/dp/143917122X

> Sam Harris seeks to link morality to the rest of human knowledge. Defining morality in terms of human and animal well-being, Harris argues that science can do more than tell how we are; it can, in principle, tell us how we ought to be. In his view, moral relativism is simply false—and comes at an increasing cost to humanity. And the intrusions of religion into the sphere of human values can be finally repelled: for just as there is no such thing as Christian physics or Muslim algebra, there can be no Christian or Muslim morality. Using his expertise in philosophy and neuroscience, along with his experience on the front lines of our “culture wars,” Harris delivers a game-changing book about the future of science and about the real basis of human cooperation.

Morality and ethics have existed long before religion. Human interaction and being benevolent towards ones fellow tribe are how we survived in the first place. Morality is derived from evolution and human fulfillment can be measured within the brain. Therefore we can make claims that there are universal truths about actions that lead to more fulfillment or to more suffering.