Why do some christians think that morals come from god?

[faroukfarouk]

Exodus 20

 

[workmx]

One only need look at DNA and the messages that are found in the development of the complexity of the cell...and that should be proof enough that there is a Life Giver and Life Orchestrator...for, how do you get informational messages with deliberate specified complexity from things like Materials or Chance ? The trouble is, the Critic of Christianity isn't on a truth seeking quest because that person doesn't want anything to be an affront to his apriori-commitment to atheism -- as one very notable Evolutionist said : ' for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door' (Prof. Lewontin of Yale Univ) . In fact, it is imperative that such a person not consider the vast evidences of intelligent design in ANY of the modern sciences whether it be micro-biology, cosmology, physics, chemistry, archeology, the human anatomy, the sun/earth relationship , et al. The repercussions to a personal Creator existing based on the creation effects, are just too intimidating . That's where I was once in my 10 adult years of 'atheism' ... but praise God he had patience with my pride, arrogance, and rebellion and encouraged me be more concerned with the actual truth and then to go where it led. Now I see so much clearer now and enjoy the truth about our reality instead of trying to make excuses about it.

No what I mean ?

No. That DNA exists is proof that DNA exists. Infer any other exists as a result is a non sequitur.

 

[workmx]

Some of your retorts are just plain silly. But ill answer them quickly :

Interesting choice of words (assuming that we have free will, but that is another discussion). Are we arguing? I was not aware of that.

From my side, I am seeking knowledge of christianity.

Apologies, if that seems aggressive or argumentative.

1. Do you think that a speed limit law was provided by a Law Giver ? How about a Rape law ? Or do u think these just came about randomly ?

Humans are not gods. We cannot say that because humans appear that have intention that gods are in anyway the same (many people on here have assured me that humans are not made in the image of god, I assumed the reverse was true).

As for randomness... well evolution is not in any way random.

It is random mutuation with natural selection (survival of the best adapted).

Maybe we can apply the evolutionary model to morality: those humans with the best morality for group living have been naturally selected and thus over time our morality evolved.

Just like evoution this would not be a random process at all.

This is just my hypothesis though.

2. There is a heart that pumps blood then there is the heart of a Person which is the center place for Ones Being sometimes called a Soul or consciousness. That heart of a person is your inner self...the REAL self which nobody sees , it is apart from the physical , and it consists of your Mind, will, emotions, desires, convictions, and moral oughtness.

How do we measure a soul? In grams?

3. We may have heard of gods upon gods...but there is only One singular Creator (First Cause) for our highly personal intelligent based creation. If you have more than one Creator then there must be a First Cause Creator who made other ones.

Which one?

One god made all other gods?

Why?

And how do you know?

4. Pantheism can be disproved . Be careful next time you cut a blade of grass or youll wipe out God. Theism can be scientifically proven based on modern scientific evidence and is so strong that countless agnostic scientists have and are changing to theism. VERY notable ones at that.

I think you are thinking about animism: every thing has a god associated with it.

Which scientists? I am curious.

Can you tell me about this evidence?

I want to convert.

Whats your excuse for not wanting a personal theistic Creator to exist for our personal intelligent information-infused Creation ? Freedom of lifestyle choices or some other ??

5. I know a lot about people who want to be Atheists because I was a professed One for about 10 adult years before I had to stop the charade of desiring to be my own god . I have also interacted with countless professed atheists and know their MO well.

Okay. That is nice.

What is their modus operandi?

What is my excuse? I want to be a morally good person.

I am unconvinced that religion breeds morality.

If that were true we would have never heard of religious wars.

6. I didn't make anything up. I operate from reality and I regret if it runs counter to your apriori-philosophical commitment to 'atheism' and humanism which requires so much faith that no logical rational person can become a real one .

Your use of the word reality is interesting here.

How do you define it?

Atheism?

I am currently without a rationally justified belief in the supernatural.

But I want to believe in god.

If nothing else but to feel that there is justice for immoral behaviour.

I was hoping you could convince me.

 

[dcalling]

One only need look at DNA and the messages that are found in the development of the complexity of the cell...and that should be proof enough that there is a Life Giver and Life Orchestrator...for, how do you get informational messages with deliberate specified complexity from things like Materials or Chance ? The trouble is, the Critic of Christianity isn't on a truth seeking quest because that person doesn't want anything to be an affront to his apriori-commitment to atheism -- as one very notable Evolutionist said : ' for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door' (Prof. Lewontin of Yale Univ) . In fact, it is imperative that such a person not consider the vast evidences of intelligent design in ANY of the modern sciences whether it be micro-biology, cosmology, physics, chemistry, archeology, the human anatomy, the sun/earth relationship , et al. The repercussions to a personal Creator existing based on the creation effects, are just too intimidating . That's where I was once in my 10 adult years of 'atheism' ... but praise God he had patience with my pride, arrogance, and rebellion and encouraged me be more concerned with the actual truth and then to go where it led. Now I see so much clearer now and enjoy the truth about our reality instead of trying to make excuses about it.

No what I mean ?

Yep, and the fact that human Y chromsome is getting shorter over time is a strong proof that our genes are created and was perfect at the start.

 

[dcalling]

I am quoting my original post below. I said I was brought up taught and believe there is nothing supernatural (that means no God). But my interest in computers give me a strong indication that there must be something supernatural. It is another very long journey to find Christianity is the correct path.

Are you an atheist? If you are, how did you get to that conclusion?


"You got to be kidding me. I have met many and some are pastors now

Ever sine I was young I was taught there is nothing supernatural, no God. Everything can be explained by science (or almost everything, since we can't observe anything accurately), be objective. I have always hold evolution as truth (did doubt it once when I was young and watching the animal world, but that doubt was quickly quenched by my uncle).

My first serious breach from atheist starts after I got interested in computers in high school. After read the whole book on CPUs, and with the books "abrupt" ending (seems abrupt to me since I didn't understand how it worked), it took me several days to realize that is all to a CPU, very primitive, just a stepper. And it took me doubt how it can form intelligence with such things. It can't even create a truly random number.... If you ever worked on programs you might understand what I am talking about."

Forgive me for not being a programer.

Forgive me for not understanding what you said.

Forgive me for thinking that you did not answer the question.

You say someone told you a thing.

Then you doubted that thing.

How does that make you a former atheist?

Atheism (AFAIK) is an active rejection of the claim that gods exist.

If you did not investigate and then reject that claim, how could you have been an atheist?

So, your claim to have been an atheist is illogical.

Seems more like a meme than a reality.

 

[workmx]

Exodus 20

"The Ten Commandements", eh?

Are you saying that is the source of human morality?

 

[workmx]

I am quoting my original post below. I said I was brought up taught and believe there is nothing supernatural (that means no God). But my interest in computers give me a strong indication that there must be something supernatural. It is another very long journey to find Christianity is the correct path.

Are you an atheist? If you are, how did you get to that conclusion?


"You got to be kidding me. I have met many and some are pastors now

Ever sine I was young I was taught there is nothing supernatural, no God. Everything can be explained by science (or almost everything, since we can't observe anything accurately), be objective. I have always hold evolution as truth (did doubt it once when I was young and watching the animal world, but that doubt was quickly quenched by my uncle).

My first serious breach from atheist starts after I got interested in computers in high school. After read the whole book on CPUs, and with the books "abrupt" ending (seems abrupt to me since I didn't understand how it worked), it took me several days to realize that is all to a CPU, very primitive, just a stepper. And it took me doubt how it can form intelligence with such things. It can't even create a truly random number.... If you ever worked on programs you might understand what I am talking about."

You didn't address my post, please read it again.

Then try again, esp this bit:

How does that make you a former atheist?

Atheism (AFAIK) is an active rejection of the claim that gods exist.

If you did not investigate and then reject that claim, how could you have been an atheist?

 

[workmx]

Are you an atheist?

I have already addresses this point. See below.

I am currently without a rationally justified belief in the supernatural.

But I want to believe in god.

If nothing else but to feel that there is justice for immoral behaviour.

And,

If you are, how did you get to that conclusion?

As I said, I am currently without a rationally justified belief in the supernatural.

I consider myself to be a rationalist.

That covers much more than religion.

How did I get there?

Via my readings of Plato and Nietszche.

Thus the realisation that knowledge is rationally justified belief.

And the corollary to that statement: unjustified belief can be discarded.

I was 14 at the time (an early bloomer, I guess) and have not read/hear anything to dissuade me from it (so far).

But knowledge should be held provisionally, so I am open to anything you may say.

Now back to the topic of morality?

 

[Harry3142]

Anthropologists used to believe that people formed societies, enacted laws, and then eventually created a religious belief. However, after archeological findings of ancient temple structures and the villages which surrounded them, anthropologists are now beginning to accept that it was a common religious belief which drew people together in order to form societies, and as these societies grew the need for a set of laws became necessary in order to maintain order. Even the preface to The Code of Hammurabi's laws gives credit to deities, rather than to himself, for those laws which he recorded as necessary to be followed. Like it or not, we are 'hardwired' to first believe in a deity (or a group of deities), and then from that belief formulate a code of morality, written as a set of laws.

As for those who use religion as an excuse for violence, if you believe that they are genuine believers I have some land in Florida that you'd be interested in buying, complete with 'pets'. The truth is that the atheists which the truly religious need to be wary of aren't those who proclaim their atheism; they're those who proclaim themelves to be so holy that anyone who doesn't bow the knee to them is to be seen as evil. IOW, they're those who are using religion in the same way as a hunter uses a blind, namely, to lull the unwary into a false sense of security. But when their ideology and tactics are actually compared with Scripture passages rather than merely verses, and even 1/2 verses, taken totally out of context, it becomes glaringly obvious that the only agenda they have is the attaining of wealth and power for themselves.

 

[workmx]

Anthropologists used to believe that people formed societies, enacted laws, and then eventually created a religious belief. However, after archeological findings of ancient temple structures and the villages which surrounded them, anthropologists are now beginning to accept that it was a common religious belief which drew people together in order to form societies, and as these societies grew the need for a set of laws became necessary in order to maintain order. Even the preface to The Code of Hammurabi's laws gives credit to deities, rather than to himself, for those laws which he recorded as necessary to be followed. Like it or not, we are 'hardwired' to first believe in a deity (or a group of deities), and then from that belief formulate a code of morality, written as a set of laws.

As for those who use religion as an excuse for violence, if you believe that they are genuine believers I have some land in Florida that you'd be interested in buying, complete with 'pets'. The truth is that the atheists which the truly religious need to be wary of aren't those who proclaim their atheism; they're those who proclaim themelves to be so holy that anyone who doesn't bow the knee to them is to be seen as evil. IOW, they're those who are using religion in the same way as a hunter uses a blind, namely, to lull the unwary into a false sense of security. But when their ideology and tactics are actually compared with Scripture passages rather than merely verses, and even 1/2 verses, taken totally out of context, it becomes glaringly obvious that the only agenda they have is the attaining of wealth and power for themselves.

I have heard of that hypothesis, but have not seen it confirmed.

Can you prove evidence?

I am reading Norenzaayan's "Big Gods" at the moment (got it yesterday).

So, that might help.

 

[Lenny3]

My morals come from myself, which is derived from my family, which is derived from my society, which is derived from my species in this time and place.

I don't think I need to take it any steps further.

 

[dcalling]

You didn't address my post, please read it again.

Then try again, esp this bit:

For a long time I don't believe anything supernatural exists. And now I believe in God, that made me a former atheist. I thought I was been very clear.

 

[dcalling]

I have already addresses this point. See below.
As I said, I am currently without a rationally justified belief in the supernatural.

interesting. What rational do you have to believe there is nothing supernatural?

I consider myself to be a rationalist.

That covers much more than religion.

Why a rationalist covers more than religion?

How did I get there?

Via my readings of Plato and Nietszche.

Thus the realisation that knowledge is rationally justified belief.

And the corollary to that statement: unjustified belief can be discarded.

So what evidence do you have that God does not exist?

I was 14 at the time (an early bloomer, I guess) and have not read/hear anything to dissuade me from it (so far).

But knowledge should be held provisionally, so I am open to anything you may say.

Now back to the topic of morality?

Again, my questions is, can anyone prove that there is no God?
I already answered question on morality somewhere in the post line, I think you missed it.

 

[workmx]

interesting. What rational do you have to believe there is nothing supernatural?

There is literally no evidence for anything supernatural.

The James Randi Foundation has a $1mill prize for you, if you can prove otherwise.

Why a rationalist covers more than religion?

It covers all aspects of my approach to life.

So what evidence do you have that God does not exist?

There is no evidence that god exists, therefore I assume that gods do not exist.

In that same way, I assume that Santa and the tooth fairy do not exist.

I could be wrong though: I have seen real presents that Santa is claimed to have delivered.

I think he does more to address his burden of proof than do any gods.

Again, my questions is, can anyone prove that there is no God?
I already answered question on morality somewhere in the post line, I think you missed it.

Burden of proof is with the claimant, my friend.

 

[Joshua260]

My morals come from myself, which is derived from my family, which is derived from my society, which is derived from my species in this time and place.

I don't think I need to take it any steps further.

Hi Lenny,

I don't think most Christians deny that mankind has evolved his moral compass over time. The question is not one of "how we came to know that something is truly right or wrong". The question is, for example, if Hitler had won the war and then brainwashed the rest of humanity into believing that antisemitism was morally acceptable, would it therefore actually be morally acceptable?

I think some things, like raping little girls, slavery, and antisemitism, all have a negative moral value attached to those practices, no matter what opinion has evolved in a society over time. Would you not agree with that?

 

[Harry3142]

I have heard of that hypothesis, but have not seen it confirmed.

Can you prove evidence?

I am reading Norenzaayan's "Big Gods" at the moment (got it yesterday).

So, that might help.

I take it you meant to write 'provide' rather than 'prove'. The evidence is in the form of temple complexes that have been uncovered, and which were built as long ago as 12,000 years. Both archeologists and anthropologists have also uncovered, and then studied, the areas surrounding these temple complexes, having expected to find evidence that their societies were already well set at the time when those temple complexes were built. Instead, they have discovered that the societies which surrounded these complexes only began to take shape following their having been built.

The National Geographic Society has supported the work in this region, especially the complex dated to 10,000 BC. They should be able to provide you with information concerning the ongoing work.

As for Nietszche, I have read some of his works. He had praise and admiration for the Jews, whom he considered to be the most solidly cohesive society even at his time. He also denounced all those who preached 'pure aryanism', claiming that to be only a myth.

He also attacked the church of his day in Germany. However, that church had already descended into viciously antisemitic harangues from the pulpit, as well as support for this same belief in aryanism that Nietszche denounced. So what he was actually fighting against was the 19th century's version of these same people whom I warned you about in my previous message.

 

[Lenny3]

Hi Lenny,

I don't think most Christians deny that mankind has evolved his moral compass over time. The question is not one of "how we came to know that something is truly right or wrong". The question is, for example, if Hitler had won the war and then brainwashed the rest of humanity into believing that antisemitism was morally acceptable, would it therefore actually be morally acceptable?

I think some things, like raping little girls, slavery, and antisemitism, all have a negative moral value attached to those practices, no matter what opinion has evolved in a society over time. Would you not agree with that?

I would have to put it back to you in reverse order:

Should it have ever been morally acceptable to kill people for working on the Sabbath, homosexuality, blasphemy, or kids who disobey their parents?

These were all considered morally acceptable to kill people for just a few thousand years ago.

I agree that morals change over time, but I don't think a divine being is necessary for any sort of moral foundation.

 

[workmx]

I take it you meant to write 'provide' rather than 'prove'. The evidence is in the form of temple complexes that have been uncovered, and which were built as long ago as 12,000 years. Both archeologists and anthropologists have also uncovered, and then studied, the areas surrounding these temple complexes, having expected to find evidence that their societies were already well set at the time when those temple complexes were built. Instead, they have discovered that the societies which surrounded these complexes only began to take shape following their having been built.

The National Geographic Society has supported the work in this region, especially the complex dated to 10,000 BC. They should be able to provide you with information concerning the ongoing work.

As for Nietszche, I have read some of his works. He had praise and admiration for the Jews, whom he considered to be the most solidly cohesive society even at his time. He also denounced all those who preached 'pure aryanism', claiming that to be only a myth.

He also attacked the church of his day in Germany. However, that church had already descended into viciously antisemitic harangues from the pulpit, as well as support for this same belief in aryanism that Nietszche denounced. So what he was actually fighting against was the 19th century's version of these same people whom I warned you about in my previous message.

Yes, provide: one peer-reviewed article will suffice.

Thanks in advance.

 

[workmx]

Hi Lenny,

I don't think most Christians deny that mankind has evolved his moral compass over time. The question is not one of "how we came to know that something is truly right or wrong". The question is, for example, if Hitler had won the war and then brainwashed the rest of humanity into believing that antisemitism was morally acceptable, would it therefore actually be morally acceptable?

I think some things, like raping little girls, slavery, and antisemitism, all have a negative moral value attached to those practices, no matter what opinion has evolved in a society over time. Would you not agree with that?

This is a joke, right?

You cannot actually believe this.

Thanks for making me laugh.

 

[Joshua260]

This is a joke, right?

You cannot actually believe this.

Thanks for making me laugh.

I don't understand your dissension here. Are you saying that raping little girls, slavery, and antisemitism can at times have a positive moral value attached to these practices?