Belief and goodness

[gnostic]

From where I stand "morality" and "belief in a god" (or gods) are independent of each other.

Or perhaps the words I should use, is that "believing" is mutually exclusive to a person "being good". Believing in god don't make a person "good" or a better person. All that praying, worshipping and preaching don't make you a better person if you behave or act horribly towards others.

I think being "good" (or as good as you get), whether you be Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, or whatever you want to call yourself, is far important than simply believing in a deity that might or might not exist.

In any case, "good" is arbitrary measurement. Different people and different cultures measure such value differently to others.

For example, God seemed to judge a person as being in good if you believe in him, don't seem very fair or just judgement. Deeds are far more important.

A murderer or rapist can be a very devout Christian person, but if such person can go to heaven simply because of his belief, and his crimes go unpunished, then I don't want any part of this heaven or this "god".

And if a Muslim can blow up people marketplace or school and still go to Paradise, then I want no part in this Allah and Paradise. To me, it would seem that this "so-called god" is as insane and cruel as the murderer or rapist.

At the same time, if a person who have been kind and good towards others, but yet at the same time don't believe in any deity, and this person go to hell and be tormented forever, then I would say that this god don't know the meaning of justice.

 

[Dunemeister]

From where I stand "morality" and "belief in a god" (or gods) are independent of each other.

Or perhaps the words I should use, is that "believing" is mutually exclusive to a person "being good". Believing in god don't make a person "good" or a better person. All that praying, worshipping and preaching don't make you a better person if you behave or act horribly towards others.

Religion has made a tremendous difference to me. I'm no perfected saint, but my life before religion and my life after it are markedly different. And there are hundreds of thousands, nay millions, of other Christians who would say the same. Other faiths can make this claim, too, but I can only speak of my experience with Christianity. Of course, there are people who profess religion and do abominable things like fly planes into buildings and molest children. But these, we must own, are the exception, not the rule. And we might well question the truth of these people's profession.

So I'd say that it's trivially true that religion doesn't necessarily lead to the positive reform of morals. Nor is it absolutely necessary in order to inculcate morals. But there is something about a religious perspective and training that gives morals and ethics a particular importance in one's daily life, which makes a religious environment particularly good at making people better (or even good) from a moral point of view.

 

[Magic Man]

I think some people need morality from a higher power to be "moral", while others can do it by themselves. It's just like work. Some people can work hard because that's what you should do, while others need a boss standing over them, or at least being close-by, to do the work they're supposed to.

It does get to me when religious people claim that there is no basis for "morality" without religion. This is obviously false, but they can't see it sometimes because it's not how they work, and they assume that no one can work that way.

 

[+Xausted]

It does get to me when religious people claim that there is no basis for "morality" without religion. This is obviously false, but they can't see it sometimes because it's not how they work, and they assume that no one can work that way.[/quote]
serious now
who says this? really?

 

[doppelganger]

serious now
who says this? really?

Here's a recent take on it. There are probably hundreds more on this forum if you're willing to look for them.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/64955-if-you-believed.html

 

[Magic Man]

It does get to me when religious people claim that there is no basis for "morality" without religion. This is obviously false, but they can't see it sometimes because it's not how they work, and they assume that no one can work that way.

serious now
who says this? really? [/quote]

There are people on here who claim that, but more importantly, the author of the book I'm currently reading. It's called "The Delusion of Disbelief", and it's a reaction to the books of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and David Hitchens, who promote the "New Atheism", as he puts it. The author, David Aikman, actually claims that atheism has no basis for morality, and, on the back cover, the question "Can American liberties survive in the absence of widespread belief in God?" is raised.

 

[doppelganger]

"Can American liberties syrvive in the absence of widespread belief in God?" is raised.

LOL. I haven't seen any solid indication that they can survive the widespread belief in "God" either.

 

[Magic Man]

LOL. I haven't seen any solid indication that they can survive the widespread belief in "God" either.

Indeed. When I'm finished reading it, I'm going to post a thread about it. The bood is quite amusing, and I'm almost finished.

 

[gnostic]

Atheism have nothing to do with morality. Morality is a separate issue. Atheism is only about the concept that there are no of god or gods, it is a reaction to theism.

Atheism, by itself, also has nothing to do with science or communism, because the 3 are separate issues.

So being an atheist don't make that person good or bad. Being Christian or Muslim or whatever don't make you good or bad. You are good or bad is really depend on your action, conduct and behaviour.

Belief alone don't make a person more moral than others.

I see the action and behaviour of god to be immoral in the Book of Job. What sort of god would put a man through such test, because of his wager with Satan? There is nothing redeeming about such figure. He never answered Job's question and use his reputation of his might and bragging to browbeat Job into submission. That's not the sign of loving god, to use fear. He seemed worse than Satan in this same book, because ultimately god is responsible for Job suffering and death of his children. So that is not good being...if this story is true.

 

[Magic Man]

Atheism have nothing to do with morality. Morality is a separate issue. Atheism is only about the concept that there are no of god or gods, it is a reaction to theism.

Atheism, by itself, also has nothing to do with science or communism, because the 3 are separate issues.

So being an atheist don't make that person good or bad. Being Christian or Muslim or whatever don't make you good or bad. You are good or bad is really depend on your action, conduct and behaviour.

Belief alone don't make a person more moral than others.

That is completely true. The problem is that some people think that everyone needs some higher power telling them what is "good" and what is "bad". I guess they basically believe that humans are "bad", and if no one tells them to do "good" things, they will only do "evil".

 

[Charity]

Each person has to be true to ones own self. What may be right for me is wrong for you.

I can honestly say that my beliefs have made me a better person. I'm not the person I once was, I don't do the things I use to do, and I don't go to the same places I use to go .......No one told me to change these things, My conscience developed a new awareness, My values changed, things that would have once been morally wrong, I ceased to do.

I believe that there are people in every religion that are good people and have good morals. The same for the atheist. Thanks to this forum I see you as people who are intelligent, witty, idealistic, sometimes opinionated, and (sometimes you can be a pain), but you have challenged my way of life and brought me to a new understanding about people and the difference in what I believed to be true and what I now know is true about the atheist.

In conclusion though for me I must say that my beliefs are going to result in me having mercy and goodness in my life. I hope to grow further in the grace that has been bestowed on me. Peace be unto all

:group: Charity

 

[Rolling_Stone]

It does get to me when religious people claim that there is no basis for "morality" without religion. This is obviously false, but they can't see it sometimes because it's not how they work, and they assume that no one can work that way.

This has been addressed hundreds of times in RF and by theologians. It is addressed even in the Bible.

Those who deny God are, in effect, a law unto themselves. But having not the law (morality) as coming from God and yet obeying it, they show it is written in their hearts while denying it or believing it to be arbitrary. Theirs is a knowledge of God and morality that is innate, a knowledge that that does not originate from observing the external world. In other words, God's general revelation of his existence in consciousness and the starry skies renders those who deny his existence without excuse, and so they are rightly condemned as rebellious fools.

 

[Magic Man]

This has been addressed hundreds of times in RF and by theologians. It is addressed even in the Bible.

Those who deny God are, in effect, a law unto themselves. But having not the law (morality) as coming from God and yet obeying it, they show it is written in their hearts while denying it or believing it to be arbitrary. Theirs is a knowledge of God and morality that is innate, a knowledge that that does not originate from observing the external world. In other words, God's general revelation of his existence in consciousness and the starry skies renders those who deny his existence without excuse, and so they are rightly condemned as rebellious fools.

If you want to see "God" as "Reason", then that works fine. If you see God as the Abrahamic concept, then that doesn't quite work. Human nature dictates morality, and so it is arbitrary.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Human nature dictates morality, and so it is arbitrary.

Those who believe this are "rightly condemned as rebellious fools." For if they have not the law (morality) as coming from God and yet obey it, they show it is written in their hearts while denying its author.

 

[Magic Man]

Those who believe this are "rightly condemned as rebellious fools." For if they have not the law (morality) as coming from God and yet obey it, they show it is written in their hearts while denying its author.

Yes, I heard you the first time. It doesn't come from God. It comes from human reason. That's why unbelievers can use it and not deny its author. Its author is the unbeliever, as well as the believer and all other groups of humans. Why do you think that morality differs from culture to culture? If it was truly a gift from God written in our hearts, wouldn't all people's morality be the same?

 

[gnostic]

Those who deny God are, in effect, a law unto themselves. But having not the law (morality) as coming from God and yet obeying it, they show it is written in their hearts while denying it or believing it to be arbitrary. Theirs is a knowledge of God and morality that is innate, a knowledge that that does not originate from observing the external world. In other words, God's general revelation of his existence in consciousness and the starry skies renders those who deny his existence without excuse, and so they are rightly condemned as rebellious fools.

Morality is about distinguishing right and wrong, and doing what is morally right. Isn't that right?

If morals came from God, then why did God wanted to deprive Adam and Eve to distinguish right from wrong and forbid them to eat from the Tree of Knowledge.

Does that make sense to you rolling_stone?

If God wanted to know right from wrong, he should have encouraged them to eat the fruit, not forbid them.

Apart from that, I don't believe in this story of Tree of Knowledge and Tree of Life. There's too much of this in Sumerian and Babylonian literature, long before Genesis was ever written. The whole Eden story is nothing more than a myth.

 

[idea]

From where I stand "morality" and "belief in a god" (or gods) are independent of each other.

James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Or perhaps the words I should use, is that "believing" is mutually exclusive to a person "being good". Believing in god don't make a person "good" or a better person. All that praying, worshipping and preaching don't make you a better person if you behave or act horribly towards others.

I think being "good" (or as good as you get), whether you be Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, or whatever you want to call yourself, is far important than simply believing in a deity that might or might not exist.

In any case, "good" is arbitrary measurement. Different people and different cultures measure such value differently to others.

For example, God seemed to judge a person as being in good if you believe in him, don't seem very fair or just judgement. Deeds are far more important.

A murderer or rapist can be a very devout Christian person, but if such person can go to heaven simply because of his belief, and his crimes go unpunished, then I don't want any part of this heaven or this "god".

And if a Muslim can blow up people marketplace or school and still go to Paradise, then I want no part in this Allah and Paradise. To me, it would seem that this "so-called god" is as insane and cruel as the murderer or rapist.

At the same time, if a person who have been kind and good towards others, but yet at the same time don't believe in any deity, and this person go to hell and be tormented forever, then I would say that this god don't know the meaning of justice.

We are only held accountable for what we know:

Luke 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

This life is not the only time to hear and accept:
Salvation for the Dead (see also Baptism; Baptism for the Dead; Genealogy and Temple Work; Salvation)
Isa. 24:22 in the prison, and after many days shall they be visited
Isa. 42:7 bring out the prisoners from the prison
Isa. 49:9 (1 Ne. 21:9) say to the prisoners, Go forth
Isa. 61:1 (Luke 4:18) proclaim liberty to the captives
Obad. 1:21 saviours shall come up on mount Zion
Zech. 9:11 sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit
Mal. 4:6 (Luke 1:17; 3 Ne. 25:6; D&C 2:2; 110:15; JS-H 1:39) turn ... the heart of the children to their fathers
Matt. 16:19 (D&C 128:8) bind on earth shall be bound in heaven
Luke 4:18 preach deliverance to the captives
John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
Rom. 14:9 Lord both of the dead and living
1 Cor. 15:19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
1 Cor. 15:29 why are they then baptized for the dead
Heb. 11:40 (D&C 128:15) that they without us should not be made perfect
1 Pet. 3:19 preached unto the spirits in prison
1 Pet. 4:6 gospel preached also to them that are dead

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Morality is about distinguishing right and wrong, and doing what is morally right. Isn't that right?

If morals came from God, then why did God wanted to deprive Adam and Eve to distinguish right from wrong and forbid them to eat from the Tree of Knowledge.

Does that make sense to you rolling_stone?

If God wanted to know right from wrong, he should have encouraged them to eat the fruit, not forbid them.

Apart from that, I don't believe in this story of Tree of Knowledge and Tree of Life. There's too much of this in Sumerian and Babylonian literature, long before Genesis was ever written. The whole Eden story is nothing more than a myth.

I don't see the relevance to what I said.

 

[Dunemeister]

Yes, I heard you the first time. It doesn't come from God. It comes from human reason. That's why unbelievers can use it and not deny its author. Its author is the unbeliever, as well as the believer and all other groups of humans. Why do you think that morality differs from culture to culture? If it was truly a gift from God written in our hearts, wouldn't all people's morality be the same?

On a biblical point of view, we all (of normal intelligence and sufficient maturity) have access to the knowledge (a) that there is right and wrong for all persons at all times, at least on the "big issues", (b) that there is a Creator of All to whom we owe gratitude and fidelity. Those are pretty vague. There's no assumption that everyone has exhaustive or complete knowledge of God or of morality, only that they know these minimal propositions. As a result, from the very nature of the case, it's quite possible for there to arise a great number of religions and moral perspectives. And this, even if there weren't a problem with humans as such.

But there is a further complication, again on the biblical point of view. Namely, humans are all subject to sin, a dreadful and deplorable condition in which we naturally (and even joyfully) rebel against God. We want to be in charge and resent the claims that a Creator would have on us. So instead of worshipping God, we make idols of wood, stone, and metal. Or we invest our own intellects and capacities with godlike significance. In any case, instead of worshipping and honoring God, we worship and serve the creation -- whether that means worshipping natural forces, inventing a pantheon of gods, or idolizing ourselves, our intelligence, or whatever. We rationalize (rational lies) this whole business to ourselves and soon come to believe our own lies. We actually begin to more or less sincerely believe that there is no Creator, or that if there is, he's not worth worshipping because our idols are somehow better.

And according to the bible, idolatry (worshipping the creature rather than the Creator) leads to immorality of all types. The bible never spells out how this works, but it asserts it strongly enough in Romans 1 - 3 and throughout the Old Testament prophets.

IF this anthropology is correct, THEN it's no wonder there are umpteen religions, all saying different and even contradictory things about the Creator; and no wonder there are umpteen philosophies, saying different things about "god", "the first cause", or the lack thereof. No wonder we can hold to different moral and political systems with such bewildering variety.

And it's no wonder that, although we all seem to understand that there's a right and wrong, we don't ever seem to be able to live ethically. We all (except the most arrogant among us) have regrets about our past behaviors or even present behaviors. We have wronged others and have been wronged. And it's not a matter of each person being "fallible" or "making mistakes." No, we have all gone much farther than that. We've done wrong knowing it was wrong, and sometimes we have even enjoyed it. Of course, some will deny it, but such people either have no actual conscience or are lying. Plain and simple.

In short, humans are thoroughly self-deceived. As the bible says, "the heart of man is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can fathom it?" In another place, it says "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one of us, to his own way."

That's why we need a Savior, someone who can free us from our bondage to self-delusion and immorality, and the judgment that awaits us.

You may choose to believe or disbelieve the account I've just given. I've offered it only to explain how, on a biblical perspective, there may be many different moral points of view and cultural practices even though God grants to all proof enough of his existence and of our responsibilities to each other and to him.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Some of the criticisms are best answered with, "Well, I certainly hope so!"

Human beings comprehend goodness and truth looking from the finite to the infinite while God looks from the infinite to the finite. This means that each of us see goodness from our own little corner of the world, from our own experience and temperament. None of us see truth the same or in its entirety. Differences in beliefs and culture is to be expected, as is their cross-"contamination."

"General revelation" gives people a general sense of right and wrong (you might say it is written in their genes), hence, the similarities; "special revelation," such as Jesus Christ, is specific to the age and culture; "autorevelation" is a personal realization of truth or an "epiphany."

All secularism has to offer in place of religious morality is genetics, politics and power--all of which is quite dehumanizing and why so many people thought Hitler was "reasonable."