Can you be good without God?

[Ed1wolf]

Ed1wolf said: ↑
So morality is just getting what you want? Since Stalin wanted the aristocracy and intelligentsia dead, then he was doing what was moral for him correct?

dw:That's correct, whether you agree with his sense of morality has no bearing on whether morality exists without god..

Well thanks for your honesty most atheists wont admit that Stalin did nothing really wrong. He just went against your own personal feelings against killing people. But that is irrelevant to reality so he and other mass murderers should not be punished for something that is not objectively wrong correct?

 

[Freodin]

Well thanks for your honesty most atheists wont admit that Stalin did nothing really wrong. He just went against your own personal feelings against killing people. But that is irrelevant to reality so he and other mass murderers should not be punished for something that is not objectively wrong correct?

Oh, how you play with words!

Was it not "really" wrong? Or was it not "objectively" wrong? Is this the same? Are feelings and personal judgements "not real"?

Can you only be "punished" for something that is "objectively" wrong?

And what about all this Stalinesque stuff that was alledgedly done on divine command? Amalekites... objectively right or wrong?

 

[Hikarifuru]

Well thanks for your honesty most atheists wont admit that Stalin did nothing really wrong. He just went against your own personal feelings against killing people. But that is irrelevant to reality so he and other mass murderers should not be punished for something that is not objectively wrong correct?

You misunderstood... I say Stalin was morally wrong and should be punished. You are obsessed with morality being objective when it never was and never needed to be. You keep using Stalin as an example... just use Jesus or Yahweh as an example, he did worse things that Stalin ever did. Yes these people should be punished, but im not trying to be objective.

 

[Ed1wolf]

The patient tells me.

Supporting someone move from being too scared to leave the house or wanting to kill themselves to being able to go out side and wanting to to re engage with life is what I would think a reasonable person would call a good thing.

Yes, but that is true only if humans have some intrinsic objective value, according to atheistic evolution we are just another animal of no more value than a cockroach. Of course we have sentimental feelings for our species but that is meaningless in any objective sense. And if one human wants to kill themselves due to certain feelings why do your feelings trump theirs? One persons feelings are no more important or valuable than anothers correct? Just because your feelings make you value all humans some other humans feelings may cause them to want to kill themselves or other people but they are just feelings of an animal that have no more importance than other animals wanting to do those things, right?

 

[Freodin]

Yes, but that is true only if humans have some intrinsic objective value, according to atheistic evolution we are just another animal of no more value than a cockroach. Of course we have sentimental feelings for our species but that is meaningless in any objective sense. And if one human wants to kill themselves due to certain feelings why do your feelings trump theirs? One persons feelings are no more important or valuable than anothers correct? Just because your feelings make you value all humans some other humans feelings may cause them to want to kill themselves or other people but they are just feelings of an animal that have no more importance than other animals wanting to do those things, right?

Why should any of that not apply because some deity says so? Even more: would your approach not imply that humans, their opinions, their feelings, their thoughts, their reasons... do not have any intrinsic objective value. That they are meaningless, because all that "really" counts is God's will?

 

[Dave Ellis]

This was in response to Quatona only saying that morality is not objective, even with a god.

At this point I understand that you're really trying to say that morality subjective but based on some objective evidence. I agree with that. I was just responding to what you said earlier. You said that actions are morally good, that there are moral acts and you disagreed with Quatona when he said all morality is relative.

The point I was making is that the basis behind our moral judgments (namely the evidence we use to make judgments) is objective.

So while our personal opinions and judgments may indeed be subjective, we can only weigh how good or bad something is by examining objective consequences of our actions.

I think we generally agree on that, I was just clarifying the position so we are on the same page, and the Christians who might be reading the exchange will understand that we do actually have an objective basis to work from.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Yes, but you are acting as if humans are special and deserve concern. But if atheistic evolution is true then humans are just another animal and nothing special.

Depends on how you look at it.

If you look at it from the scope of the grand overall universe, you're right. We aren't anything overly special... we're the most advanced species on a speck of dust in the cosmos.

If you look at it from our perspective on the other hand, humans are incredibly special and deserve concern, because we're human. In order for our civilization, and our own lives to be lived to the fullest extent possible, we should take great concern on these issues.

The consequences of what you do to others and yourself are objective but the reason you are doing them is subjective. It is just based on sentimental feelings for humans.

And what's wrong with sentimental feelings for my fellow humans? (or other living things in general)

There is no real objective reason for you not to kill yourself or other people especially if they hurt your survival which is the whole point of evolution.

Sure there is, it's an objective fact that I enjoy life, and do not want to die. Therefore I have reason to not kill myself.

It is also an objective fact that if people went around killing each other for no good reason, that society as we know it would collapse. It's also very likely I would wind up being killed.

Therefore, I have reason to not do that sort of thing. A strong and peaceful civilization is beneficial to us all.

In fact that is why Stalin killed the aristocracy and the intelligentsia because he thought they were hurting his country and also his surivival. So as you can see there is nothing objectively wrong with what Stalin did if there is no God especially the Christian God.

No, Stalin killed the aristocracy and intelligentsia because they were a threat to his power.

So, he killed millions of people, which is objectively harmful to those millions of people. He did this for selfish reasons, which can not in any way justify his actions. There was no good action that he did that could ever justify the harm that he did. Therefore, his actions were immoral.

It's not that hard. In fact, I'd argue you make the exact same basic moral judgments every day.

If a dog runs out in front of your car, do you slow down because:

A) That's what god wants you to do

or

B) You don't want to see unnecessary harm come to that dog?

It's very likely you'd choose B, and that's good, because that's the only moral answer. A is only blind obedience, which is amoral.

 

[MennoSota]

It's a completely separate topic but the Christian god is the worst thing of all, it's not the source of our goodness or morals.

You're prone to hyperbole as evidenced by your complete lack in grasping history.

Atheists murdered more humans in the 20th century than any other ideology combined.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Atheists murdered more humans in the 20th century than any other ideology combined.

That's not really true.

However, if you want to argue body count, Christianity has a very bloody history as well.

 

[Freodin]

That's not really true.

However, if you want to argue body count, Christianity has a very bloody history as well.

Christianity? Who needs to be that specific?

Just look at all those theist murderers who terrorize the world! Did you know that all of the major terror acts of the 21st century were contrived, organized and executed by theists?

 

[Hikarifuru]

You're prone to hyperbole as evidenced by your complete lack in grasping history.

Atheists murdered more humans in the 20th century than any other ideology combined.

Your bible has stories of your god killing every human on the planet short of one family and says he will burn every human that has ever lived in a stove if they don't believe in him.

You completely disregarded my point, your god sends rapists to rape women, forces women to miscarry, makes women have their babies torn out of their bellies, makes parents eat their kids.... and you're saying this god is the source of morality? Are you insane?

 

[Larniavc]

Yes, but that is true only if humans have some intrinsic objective value, according to atheistic evolution we are just another animal of no more value than a cockroach. Of course we have sentimental feelings for our species but that is meaningless in any objective sense. And if one human wants to kill themselves due to certain feelings why do your feelings trump theirs? One persons feelings are no more important or valuable than anothers correct? Just because your feelings make you value all humans some other humans feelings may cause them to want to kill themselves or other people but they are just feelings of an animal that have no more importance than other animals wanting to do those things, right?

I don't understand. If you can't see how people and their feelings are important without some book telling you then you may be one of the one or so percent of the population who has no empathy for other people.

TOE assigns no moral value to the world or the things in it, any more than Gravitational Therory does.

I think you are conflating change in allele frequency in a population over time with empathy.

 

[Davian]

You're prone to hyperbole

as evidenced by your complete lack in grasping history.

Atheists murdered more humans in the 20th century than any other ideology combined.

Atheism is not an ideology any more than not believing Bigfoot exists is an ideology.

I do wonder, if one were to travel back to the time of the crusades, and offer one side of the conflicts a good supply of modern weaponry and transports, do you think they would accept that offer? And if they did, would they use this new weaponry sparingly, or might they just wipe out the opposition?

 

[Achilles6129]

Your bible has stories of your god killing every human on the planet short of one family and says he will burn every human that has ever lived in a stove if they don't believe in him.

You completely disregarded my point, your god sends rapists to rape women, forces women to miscarry, makes women have their babies torn out of their bellies, makes parents eat their kids.... and you're saying this god is the source of morality? Are you insane?

Just because God uses something as punishment doesn't mean that he condones the behavior. This is something that human beings are doing to human beings. Now, of course God ultimately allows every action but that certainly doesn't mean that he approves of every action. In order to say that God condones rape, etc., you'd have to show where God ever commanded such a thing. Prophesying that such a thing will happen is entirely different from commanding it to happen.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Just because God uses something as punishment doesn't mean that he condones the behavior. This is something that human beings are doing to human beings. Now, of course God ultimately allows every action but that certainly doesn't mean that he approves of every action. In order to say that God condones rape, etc., you'd have to show where God ever commanded such a thing. Prophesying that such a thing will happen is entirely different from commanding it to happen.

If god uses something to punish someone, that is an automatic condoning.

For example, if I tied someone up and beat them with a stick, that means I condone that behaviour. Likewise, if I order people to do that same thing, by default I also condone it.

 

[Achilles6129]

If god uses something to punish someone, that is an automatic condoning.

For example, if I tied someone up and beat them with a stick, that means I condone that behaviour. Likewise, if I order people to do that same thing, by default I also condone it.

No one said God was ordering anyone to do anything. Where'd that come from? Read my reply again.

 

[Dave Ellis]

No one said God was ordering anyone to do anything. Where'd that come from? Read my reply again.

Do you really want to get into all the heinous commands god gave in the bible?

 

[Achilles6129]

Do you really want to get into all the heinous commands god gave in the bible?

I don't think they're heinous at all. There's an entire theology here that you're ignoring.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Just because God uses something as punishment doesn't mean that he condones the behavior. This is something that human beings are doing to human beings. Now, of course God ultimately allows every action but that certainly doesn't mean that he approves of every action. In order to say that God condones rape, etc., you'd have to show where God ever commanded such a thing. Prophesying that such a thing will happen is entirely different from commanding it to happen.

ok... you're clearly making this up as you go. If I send a rapist to rape my neighbor, then i would be condoning rape. Because I would be wanting it to happen and facilitating it.

Read Isaiah chapter 13

A prophecy against Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz saw:
2 Raise a banner on a bare hilltop,
shout to them;
beckon to them
to enter the gates of the nobles.
3 I have commanded those I prepared for battle;
I have summoned my warriors to carry out my wrath—
those who rejoice in my triumph.
4 Listen, a noise on the mountains,
like that of a great multitude!
Listen, an uproar among the kingdoms,
like nations massing together!
The Lord Almighty is mustering
an army for war.
5 They come from faraway lands,
from the ends of the heavens—
the Lord and the weapons of his wrath—
to destroy the whole country.

6 Wail, for the day of the Lord is near;
it will come like destruction from the Almighty.a]">[a]
7 Because of this, all hands will go limp,
every heart will melt with fear.
8 Terror will seize them,
pain and anguish will grip them;
they will writhe like a woman in labor.
They will look aghast at each other,
their faces aflame.
9 See, the day of the Lord is coming
—a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger—
to make the land desolate
and destroy the sinners within it.
10 The stars of heaven and their constellations
will not show their light.
The rising sun will be darkened
and the moon will not give its light.
11 I will punish the world for its evil,
the wicked for their sins.
I will put an end to the arrogance of the haughty
and will humble the pride of the ruthless.
12 I will make people scarcer than pure gold,
more rare than the gold of Ophir.
13 Therefore I will make the heavens tremble;
and the earth will shake from its place
at the wrath of the Lord Almighty,
in the day of his burning anger.

14 Like a hunted gazelle,
like sheep without a shepherd,
they will all return to their own people,
they will flee to their native land.
15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through;
all who are caught will fall by the sword.
16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes;
their houses will be looted and their wives violated.

17 See, I will stir up against them the Medes,
who do not care for silver
and have no delight in gold.
18 Their bows will strike down the young men;
they will have no mercy on infants,
nor will they look with compassion on children.
19 Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms,
the pride and glory of the Babylonians,b]">[b]
will be overthrown by God
like Sodom and Gomorrah.
20 She will never be inhabited
or lived in through all generations;
there no nomads will pitch their tents,
there no shepherds will rest their flocks.
21 But desert creatures will lie there,
jackals will fill her houses;
there the owls will dwell,
and there the wild goats will leap about.
22 Hyenas will inhabit her strongholds,
jackals her luxurious palaces.
Her time is at hand,
and her days will not be prolonged.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I don't think they're heinous at all. There's an entire theology here that you're ignoring.

A command to slaughter thousands of people and take their virgin women as sex slaves isn't heinous?

What theology can possibly justify that?