Morality Without God

[davewhite04]

Fair enough. I am the son of God.

With this declaration in mind, I think you have provided me with enough information for me to conclude that your simply messing about.

You then went on to describe other candidates which you feel match the criteria I specified and bearing in mind this question is being asked within a biblical context, and your using extra biblical examples goes to show you didn't think too much about what I asked for.

You then finally, did what every other non theist has done within this thread(and many others) and tried to switch the question in hand to query something completely different, thus flowing off into another direction.

I'll let you waste someone elses time.

 

[KennyJC]

So it has to be within the Bible? You didn't mention that. Since I don't believe the Bible and don't believe Jesus is the son of God I can simply name others wether it be from the Bible or not who have been thought to be the son of God.

I honestly see no difference in Hercules being the son of Zeus and Jesus being the son of God.

 

[(Q)]

How can you figure out whether humans learned our (sometimes) ethical behavior from animals? You can't. It is called conjecture, and it will be good "coffee table" talk, and nothing more, if we are going to hold it to standards of evidence.

I don't think they did learn from the animals, they simply learned it themselves through social interaction. It is the philosophy which is conjecture.

One ruling religion shouldn't exist until it is clear that God is doing the ruling, which is going to take a big enough series of the largest scale miracles, visions and revelations, that it would make all other revelations combined look as authoritative as the time old uncle Louie saw jesus in his yogurt.
Perhaps we should take a clue from the fact that God didn't want one ruling religion right now, or God would have made it clearer to us, and we can all just stop trying to have one. And athiests should stop trying to turn their personal ideas into a hegemony too, hello.

Then we should be withholding anything to do with religion until the 'big guy' gets his act together and gives us all 'a clue.'

Since no gods have made anything clear to us all, religion should remain on the backburner and we should all remain nuetral on the subject of religion until further notice rather than going about making claims about gods.

Atheists don't turn personal ideas into a hegemony, theists do, that is evident in your post.

Atheists simply want theists to "show them the money" so to speak.

 

[(Q)]

Well, I'm not sure that's the business of the Bible - more of behavioural zoologists and anthropologists. The Bible is really only an ancient map to point the way towards God. After that it is the work of "grace" to encourage our development as ethical beings (as in Kohlberg). That is not to say that atheists cannot also have a highly developed ethical sense.

Yet, morality existed before the bible. In fact, it existed among societies who never heard of your god. And why would it be grace that encourages our ethical development when its simply a matter of practicality to get along with one another.

God was the central authority and protector of the Isrealites so it made the Law special. Perhaps YHWH was also the inspiration for the idea. Certainly he was if you believe there is some historical basis for the Moses receiving the 10 commandments story.

That's debatable considering there is no historical basis, other than the bible.

 

[KennyJC]

Monkeys have morals too. I remember watching on tv an experiment were two monkeys were in separate cages and had to cooperate to get to the food... But only one monkey had the food after being helped by the other monkey. Did the monkey eat all the food himself, or give a little to his helper? You guessed it, he passed some food over to the other monkeys cage. Jesus would have been proud

 

[water]

Then we should be withholding anything to do with religion until the 'big guy' gets his act together and gives us all 'a clue.'

Since no gods have made anything clear to us all, religion should remain on the backburner and we should all remain nuetral on the subject of religion until further notice rather than going about making claims about gods.

I agree.

However, it is excrutiatingly hard to remain neutral. Anger tends to take over.

Atheists don't turn personal ideas into a hegemony, theists do, that is evident in your post.

I don't think so. Many atheists are very militant, using logically flawed arguments.

Atheists simply want theists to "show them the money" so to speak.

I am intrigued as to why the religious debate between atheists and theists exists ...

 

[TheVisitor]

Monkeys have morals too. I remember watching on tv an experiment were two monkeys were in separate cages and had to cooperate to get to the food... But only one monkey had the food after being helped by the other monkey. Did the monkey eat all the food himself, or give a little to his helper? You guessed it, he passed some food over to the other monkeys cage. Jesus would have been proud

Animals do have more morals than most people.
I've heard that the wolf was looked at by some native americans cultures as an "elder" brother.
I raised a pure white wolf/shepherd hybrid for eight years, and he never ceased to amaze me.
Dogs can teach man volumes in the lessons of loyalty, truth from the heart, humility and reverence to ones master.
From the true heart beating in the breast of this beast, lies a living example of what we should be, never would they betray the love of their master.

G
O
D

Man

D
O
G

There is much we can learn, if we have eyes to see.

 

[Sarkus]

I am intrigued as to why the religious debate between atheists and theists exists ...

For several reasons:
1. Because it p1sses some atheists off that they have to live in a society that is driven by beliefs that the atheist doesn't hold, and yet the atheist still has to live their lives in many ways determined for them by these beliefs. And debating with the theist is their way of trying to implement changes - by making their voice heard.

2. Because they are fascinated as to why there is such a fundamental difference in brain-function - i.e. why do some people believe without evidence when others will not.

3. To obtain an understanding of the similarities and differences, to be able to appreciate these differences and thus become more tolerant of them.

4. To have a laugh.

5. To educate.

6. To display ignorance equal to the other side - just to show it's not always one-sided.

7. To try to understand why people think the way they do, to understand the drivers and the events that have shaped some peoples' way of thinking, and to offer counterpoints.

 

[AAF]

Godless: "Here!here! BEEF IS WHAT'S FOR DINNER..."



I hope it's now clear that Darwin's Evolution theory presents the strongest moral reprimand so far since the days of the Prophet Jeremiah:

{Look at the slaughterhouses around every big city!
It's a massacre and cannibalism on a colossal scale.
Humans literally are devouring and cannibalizing millions of their mammal relatives every day}.

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

Yet, morality existed before the bible. In fact, it existed among societies who never heard of your god. And why would it be grace that encourages our ethical development when its simply a matter of practicality to get along with one another.

Ethics is not just about "getting along together". Often it is about going against the majority to speak the truth or stick up for what you believe. This can involve putting up with insults, threats, coercion and violence.

Theism is the love of God - this changes a person. They are more likely to take a difficult moral stance out of the love (e.g. of God), than any other reason. If you think about it, most of the great reformers were theists:
e.g. William Wilberforce, Lord Shaftsbury, Mahatma Ghandi, Rosa Parks, Desmond Tutu, Martin Luther King and even Mother Teresa to name but a few.

 

[KennyJC]

Except religion doesn't turn everyone into Mother Teresa - It appears to turn most into intolerant, dumb, sometimes violent people.

I really wan't to avoid a world that resembles southern states in America. I think we have secularism to thank for that.

 

[BSFilter]

Morality is a product of "survival of the 'whole'". Within any SOCIAL group of animals you will find evidence of what man calls morality. However it is not morality to animals, it is knowing that 5 in a pack/group is better than 3. Until testerone enters...

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

Except religion doesn't turn everyone into Mother Teresa - It appears to turn most into intolerant, dumb, sometimes violent people.

Maybe they'd be intolerant, dumb and violent people anyway who just happen to be religious. However, I have to agree with you that having 'God on their side' makes a dumb person into a dumb moralististic bigot. I think that's a good reason to choose your religion carefully!

I really wan't to avoid a world that resembles southern states in America. I think we have secularism to thank for that.

You wouldn't be showing signs of intolerance here Kenny?

 

[spidergoat]

Except religion doesn't turn everyone into Mother Teresa - ...

And thank God for that, she raised lots of money for the church, and never built one hospitol, most of the money went into missionary work. She has been described by Christopher Hitchens as "a fraud, a fanatic, and a fundamentalist... corrupt, cynical, nasty and cruel."

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

Morality is a product of "survival of the 'whole'". Within any SOCIAL group of animals you will find evidence of what man calls morality. However it is not morality to animals, it is knowing that 5 in a pack/group is better than 3. Until testerone enters...

I'm not sure this is a good theory. It would predict that any human behaviour that assisted "survival of the whole" would be considered moral, which I don't think is true e.g. torture of terrorists during interrogation to gain information.

I'm sure there is an instinctive level of morality e.g. repulsion or outrage at the murder of a child. There is also a rational element. I think morality is a product of the desire to defend what we consider of most value e.g. life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 

[usp8riot]

Morality couldn't have happened without God since He created us. But I believe He did instill it in us or anything that is intelligent. Rules from God were only established for the unintelligent or rebellious among us who seem to not have the intellect to see negative consequences in things we do or those that don't care of the consequences. Many here on the forums are very smart and have already established very wise rules for themselves even without God. A wise/intelligent man can see the wrong he imposes on someone or society and will more than likely try to go the path so as not to inflict hurt upon someone unduly. But ultimately, I think it is wise for even a non-believer to believe in God because He will be the one to answer to in the end, the creator of the rules, or instiller of the knowledge and rules we have inside which He gave us.
Just like if you left your kids at home with a note on how to behave, some may say, I don't believe Dad/Mom wrote this, some may know, and be rebellious anyway. But the only way for the kids to be more insured to do right is for them to believe in your words and you will be back soon to judge their actions. Just think how kids act home alone even though they may know better unless they have someone to answer to in the end and believe judgement time is soon. That's why you will be more than likely to act accordingly by belief and even as rebellious as I was and still am somewhat, have learned to calm down a lot after finding God.

 

[BSFilter]

"survival of the whole" would be considered moral, which I don't think is true e.g. torture of terrorists during interrogation to gain information.

Tortured to gain information about deadly weapons that threatened the survival of the nation (group/pack) of the United States.

 

[(Q)]

Ethics is not just about "getting along together". Often it is about going against the majority to speak the truth or stick up for what you believe. This can involve putting up with insults, threats, coercion and violence.

All you've described, speaking the truth, fighting for what you believe against insults and threats - these all reside under the "getting along together" umbrella, learned things through trial and error that have evolved along with us over the years.

Theism is the love of God - this changes a person. They are more likely to take a difficult moral stance out of the love (e.g. of God), than any other reason. If you think about it, most of the great reformers were theists:
e.g. William Wilberforce, Lord Shaftsbury, Mahatma Ghandi, Rosa Parks, Desmond Tutu, Martin Luther King and even Mother Teresa to name but a few.

Those were great people, I agree. And the reason why they're prominent is because the work they have done was with theists. In other words, they were theists trying to settle disputes between other theists.

Atheists have no time to get involved with theist wars and violence, they are of the mind that getting along with your family, neighbors, state, who and whatever, is logical and leads to happiness and prosperity.

It is not a utopian society by any stretch of the mind. Please remember, mankind is still evolving, we're merely in our infant stages and have a lot of things yet to learn - in fact, a huge universe full.

And there are probably still a lot of things yet to learn about morality and ethics. If we continue to evolve, as we should, it will become increasingly more efficient and practical for mankind to learn how to "get along together."

But if holy wars continue to rage upon the Earth, mankind may reach the point of no return and wipe itself out.

 

[cole grey]

Since no gods have made anything clear to us all, religion should remain on the backburner and we should all remain nuetral on the subject of religion until further notice rather than going about making claims about gods.

Since nothing is "clear", why not let everyone do their own thing, instead of trying to create the great secular hive mind, some people long for.

Atheists don't turn personal ideas into a hegemony, theists do, that is evident in your post.
people try to, atheist and theist alike.

Atheists simply want theists to "show them the money" so to speak.

If you "want" to find some religious idea that will make sense to you by trying to find the most heinous examples of religious behavior and then calling that religion as if religion were one thing, with religion as a whole, and religious people as a whole being a single entity of sorts, you will fail. This is your first mistake.

The way is narrow = only one person goes through at a time.

 

[cole grey]

Except religion doesn't turn everyone into Mother Teresa - It appears to turn most into intolerant, dumb, sometimes violent people.

I really wan't to avoid a world that resembles southern states in America. I think we have secularism to thank for that.

yeah the various human rights movements over the years, never had any theists involved, it was completely secular.