Does morality exist without God?

[Hakan101]

All you told me what you thought the answer ISN'T. So, what is the answer then?

Now to be clear, the question is whether we can do good outside of our social and biological desires and "programs." We either can do this or we can't. If we can do it sometimes but not all the times, then the answer is still "We can." So, what's the answer?

A mother created her child, has healed him, befriended him, sacrificed herself for him. Why shouldn't the child worship her?

Because, from what I understand, your claim is your morality comes from your deity who you understand through the Bible. If the Bible is unreliable, then maybe you don't really understand your deity as well as you claim you do and thus maybe your morality is based on incorrect premises.

I don't know...are you purposely generalizing the situation? From what I have seen, I would have thought you are well aware that God does those things on a far greater, supernatural scale than a mother could ever do. And so it still looks like you're dodging around.

A mother conceived her child's physical body, but she did not create his soul. A mother can take care of a child when he has a fever, but she cannot cure him of cancer, or cleanse him of sin. A mother may befriend her child, but she cannot always be there for him. What is the result of a mother sacrificing herself for her child? The child lives in this world that much longer. But compare this to Jesus, who sacrificed himself so that we may all receive eternal life without sin.

The child should not worship his mother because his mother is infallible and full of sin, like everyone in this world. She is able to do good things because she was created by the Lord, who is love. So the one who should be worshiped is He who created all these good things, and is without evil. It just seems quite obvious when you read the Bible that the things God does for us are things a mother simply could never do. She is an earthly mother, while He is our heavenly father. In fact, He is her heavenly father too, and needs him just as much as we need him.

 

[sandwiches]

Is nature responsible for psychopaths, or nurture? You have your answer.

I don't. Is it possible to do good outside of one's biology and societal conditioning?

One person =/= all of mankind.

I'm assuming you're YEC or you'd worship our last universal ancestor.
At any rate, of all the things you mentioned the only one that a human hasn't done is created humanity itself and it seems that, in the end, that's the only reason left for ONLY worshiping your deity over any other entity. It is your prerogative, of course, to worship whatever you want but I still wonder if you think there's a point to worshiping. Maybe a prize or special place in heaven?

My claim is that morality comes from knowing the Bible, yes, but this does not mean that this morality is unchanging. Three hundred years ago slavery- the beating, selling, and dehumanization of Africans and other people groups- was deemed moral based on a very limited understanding of the Bible due to situations where slavery was an accepted fact in those cultures and those situations being seen as moral guidelines rather than cultural norms. Now we understand far more about the Bible and it is readily apparent that dehumanizing, beating, and owning people isn't loving your neighbor (one could argue that it should have been readily apparent, but that's another matter).

The Bible's reliability has been tried and tested over and over throughout history and found to be accurate. This leaves two options: Either it is true, or it isn't. All the non-spiritual claims of the Bible have proven true: The locations existed, the people and places were real. Do you then say that it was lying about the spiritual stuff, or do you decide it is entirely consistent?

So, in other words, morality has changed DESPITE of the Bible not BECAUSE of it. Our understanding and interpretation of it has changed to adapt to the morality and not the other way around. Well, I agree with that.

 

[sandwiches]

I don't know...are you purposely generalizing the situation? From what I have seen, I would have thought you are well aware that God does those things on a far greater, supernatural scale than a mother could ever do. And so it still looks like you're dodging around.

A mother conceived her child's physical body, but she did not create his soul. A mother can take care of a child when he has a fever, but she cannot cure him of cancer, or cleanse him of sin. A mother may befriend her child, but she cannot always be there for him. What is the result of a mother sacrificing herself for her child? The child lives in this world that much longer. But compare this to Jesus, who sacrificed himself so that we may all receive eternal life without sin.

The child should not worship his mother because his mother is infallible and full of sin, like everyone in this world. She is able to do good things because she was created by the Lord, who is love. So the one who should be worshiped is He who created all these good things, and is without evil. It just seems quite obvious when you read the Bible that the things God does for us are things a mother simply could never do. She is an earthly mother, while He is our heavenly father. In fact, He is her heavenly father too, and needs him just as much as we need him.

To be perfectly candid, it is my belief that the need to worship comes from your indoctrination as Christians and you merely look for justifications to rationalize it. I used to have it when I was a Christian, as well.

 

[Hakan101]

To be perfectly candid, it is my belief that the need to worship comes from your indoctrination as Christians and you merely look for justifications to rationalize it. I used to have it when I was a Christian, as well.

So you think the need to worship comes from Christianity? But virtually all people worship something: false gods, idols, celebrities, fictional superheroes. All these things are glorified and admired by someone. Heck, some people even worship science, or worship nature. There once was a people who worshiped the sun. Surely this was not because of Christian indoctrination?

Really, I believe the need for worship comes from our innate desire for God. As one pastor said it, "When someone asks me if I'm a Jesus Freak, I say, 'Precisely! And whose freak might you be?' Because we are wired to be worshipers, people."

 

[chris4243]

So you think the need to worship comes from Christianity? But virtually all people worship something: false gods, idols, celebrities, fictional superheroes. All these things are glorified and admired by someone. Heck, some people even worship science, or worship nature. There once was a people who worshiped the sun. Surely this was not because of Christian indoctrination?

Define worship.

 

[sandwiches]

So you think the need to worship comes from Christianity? But virtually all people worship something: false gods, idols, celebrities, fictional superheroes. All these things are glorified and admired by someone. Heck, some people even worship science, or worship nature. There once was a people who worshiped the sun. Surely this was not because of Christian indoctrination?

Really, I believe the need for worship comes from our innate desire for God. As one pastor said it, "When someone asks me if I'm a Jesus Freak, I say, 'Precisely! And whose freak might you be?' Because we are wired to be worshipers, people."

I agree with you and I don't think that this is a unique aspect of Christianity by any means. However, I can't speak in much detail about other religions having never been anything other than a Christian and having had personal experience with this idea.

However, I don't believe that we're all wired to worship. I had this discussion with another Christian and he kept trying to convince us that football, video games, gambling, etc are all "gods" to some people. I think that the use of the word "god" like that only dilutes and muddies the issue. Not everything people enjoy is worshiped and not everything people worship are gods.

Now, I can't speak for other atheists but I don't feel the need to worship and I fail to see why anyone, let alone a perfect being, would desire to be worshiped.

 

[Zebra1552]

I don't. Is it possible to do good outside of one's biology and societal conditioning?

Is it nature or nurture? Which one? It's got to be one or the other, it can't possibly be both.

I'm assuming you're YEC or you'd worship our last universal ancestor.

Your assumption is incorrect on both counts. I don't know nor do I care how God created the earth and all in it, it doesn't really matter to me. I wasn't there. It doesn't affect my life save that I'm here, living.

At any rate, of all the things you mentioned the only one that a human hasn't done is created humanity itself and it seems that, in the end, that's the only reason left for ONLY worshiping your deity over any other entity. It is your prerogative, of course, to worship whatever you want but I still wonder if you think there's a point to worshiping. Maybe a prize or special place in heaven?

It's irrelevant to this conversation. You asked why I worship and if God demands it. He doesn't, thereby excluding worship from any discussion on morality. End of subject.

So, in other words, morality has changed DESPITE of the Bible not BECAUSE of it. Our understanding and interpretation of it has changed to adapt to the morality and not the other way around. Well, I agree with that.

That is incorrect. Our understanding and interpretation of it has changed to apply the principles of morality given to us in the Bible. It flows logically that the more we know about the Bible, the more our morality becomes in line with the principles given in the Bible. Here, of course, I'm treating the word 'morality' as being what we do about the 'principals' of the Bible, 'principles' being the general guidelines the Bible gives for what is important. I daresay that if you stripped away the spiritual nature of most of these principles the principles would still be applicable even to an atheist.

The dietary laws of the OT are founded in the idea of being healthy and treating our own bodies with respect. One can't live very long without that and self preservation demands we do something about that.

Many of what I would call cultural laws in the OT are founded in further applications of respect- don't covet your neighbors animals or their spouse. They didn't have supermarkets where you can just buy a pack of that angus beef you like. Desiring stuff that isn't yours and can't be yours (without causing a good deal of trouble) isn't particularly healthy psychologically speaking. Causes cognitive dissonance where you either accept that you can't have it and stop desiring it one way or another- accepting it the easy way or the hard way, that is- or you take it. Taking things that aren't yours generally causes problems for you and the people around you, so you respect them by nipping it at step one.

And yes, I just called one of the Decalogue a cultural law.

Those are just two examples of principles that are readily observed in OT Law that are easily applicable today.

 

[Hakan101]

I agree with you and I don't think that this is a unique aspect of Christianity by any means. However, I can't speak in much detail about other religions having never been anything other than a Christian and having had personal experience with this idea.

However, I don't believe that we're all wired to worship. I had this discussion with another Christian and he kept trying to convince us that football, video games, gambling, etc are all "gods" to some people. I think that the use of the word "god" like that only dilutes and muddies the issue. Not everything people enjoy is worshiped and not everything people worship are gods.

Now, I can't speak for other atheists but I don't feel the need to worship and I fail to see why anyone, let alone a perfect being, would desire to be worshiped.

I'm sure he meant "gods" as a figurative term, because they aren't really gods of course. But I see his point, how people are willing to dedicate their lives and glorify things like football of videogames. Their lives revolve around these things, so much that they practically worship it. You understand what I'm saying? I don't think it really muddies the issue, it just shows that people don't always worship an individual entity.

Quite interesting, what Jaws has said about the dual-nature of the origins for our goodness!

 

[sandwiches]

Is it nature or nurture? Which one? It's got to be one or the other, it can't possibly be both.

The question I am making is: Can it be just one in any case, yes or no?

Your assumption is incorrect on both counts. I don't know nor do I care how God created the earth and all in it, it doesn't really matter to me. I wasn't there. It doesn't affect my life save that I'm here, living.

It's irrelevant to this conversation. You asked why I worship and if God demands it. He doesn't, thereby excluding worship from any discussion on morality. End of subject.

Not really, if your entire morality is based on your need to worship your deity.

That is incorrect. Our understanding and interpretation of it has changed to apply the principles of morality given to us in the Bible. It flows logically that the more we know about the Bible, the more our morality becomes in line with the principles given in the Bible. Here, of course, I'm treating the word 'morality' as being what we do about the 'principals' of the Bible, 'principles' being the general guidelines the Bible gives for what is important. I daresay that if you stripped away the spiritual nature of most of these principles the principles would still be applicable even to an atheist.

I think this is an important point here you've made. So, we can have morality without spirituality, presumably the Bible or God.

The dietary laws of the OT are founded in the idea of being healthy and treating our own bodies with respect. One can't live very long without that and self preservation demands we do something about that.

Many of what I would call cultural laws in the OT are founded in further applications of respect- don't covet your neighbors animals or their spouse. They didn't have supermarkets where you can just buy a pack of that angus beef you like. Desiring stuff that isn't yours and can't be yours (without causing a good deal of trouble) isn't particularly healthy psychologically speaking. Causes cognitive dissonance where you either accept that you can't have it and stop desiring it one way or another- accepting it the easy way or the hard way, that is- or you take it. Taking things that aren't yours generally causes problems for you and the people around you, so you respect them by nipping it at step one.

And yes, I just called one of the Decalogue a cultural law.

Those are just two examples of principles that are readily observed in OT Law that are easily applicable today.

Some of those principles are indeed applicable today, as you noted, but that's irrelevant to the point of this thread. Can we acquire and apply those same moral guidelines without the Bible or God?

 

[sandwiches]

I'm sure he meant "gods" as a figurative term, because they aren't really gods of course. But I see his point, how people are willing to dedicate their lives and glorify things like football of videogames. Their lives revolve around these things, so much that they practically worship it. You understand what I'm saying? I don't think it really muddies the issue, it just shows that people don't always worship an individual entity.

Quite interesting, what Jaws has said about the dual-nature of the origins for our goodness!

I'm afraid we have a different definition of worship, then. What's 'worship' to you?

 

[quatona]

Say someone were to show me the movie How To Train Your Dragon before it began production. Would that mean I and the person showing me made the movie happen?

No, unless you were the alleged creator of that movie.

 

[Zebra1552]

The question I am making is: Can it be just one in any case, yes or no?

Oh, good gracious. Is it possible that a pink unicorn exists?

Not really, if your entire morality is based on your need to worship your deity.

I just said that it isn't. The Bible doesn't demand it. Those of us who adhere to it choose to worship. Therefore, worship is not part of this conversation. Ergo, end of subject.

I think this is an important point here you've made. So, we can have morality without spirituality, presumably the Bible or God.

Ah, but it is the Bible that contains the principles which guide morality.

Some of those principles are indeed applicable today, as you noted, but that's irrelevant to the point of this thread. Can we acquire and apply those same moral guidelines without the Bible or God?

Actually, it's quite relevant. Without God (A), no Bible (B). Without Bible, no principles (C). Without principles, no morality (D). You wanted my argument? You just accepted C and D, thereby accepting A and B.

 

[Zebra1552]

No, unless you were the alleged creator of that movie.

And who makes this allegation?

 

[sandwiches]

Oh, good gracious. Is it possible that a pink unicorn exists?

This would be a lot simpler, if you'd just answer the question instead of evading:
Is it possible to do good outside of one's biology and societal conditioning?

Ah, but it is the Bible that contains the principles which guide morality.

So, natives in the middle of Amazon are not moral?

Actually, it's quite relevant. Without God (A), no Bible (B). Without Bible, no principles (C). Without principles, no morality (D). You wanted my argument? You just accepted C and D, thereby accepting A and B.

You're using the logical fallacy know as "affirming the consequence." In other words, you're doing it backwards.

 

[Zebra1552]

This would be a lot simpler, if you'd just answer the question instead of evading:
Is it possible to do good outside of one's biology and societal conditioning?

I already answered it. If you are unable or unwilling to recognize the answer I gave you, it is not upon me to repeat said answer.

So, natives in the middle of Amazon are not moral?

Is the Bible just a book?

You're using the logical fallacy know as "affirming the consequence." In other words, you're doing it backwards.

That would indeed be the case if A and B were missing. Quite familiar with the fallacy, thanks though. Perhaps you can find something more fitting to apply it to.

 

[AGODBELIEVERlove1stfaith2]

doctrine of GOD requires obedience


truth is shown through thought unseen and by the action seen

 

[sandwiches]

I already answered it. If you are unable or unwilling to recognize the answer I gave you, it is not upon me to repeat said answer.

Is the Bible just a book?

Now even more games instead of answering questions?

It seems you're done with this conversation. Good luck.

 

[AGODBELIEVERlove1stfaith2]

the BOOK OF BOOK

Now even more games instead of answering questions?

It seems you're done with this conversation. Good luck.

 

[quatona]

And who makes this allegation?

Last time I checked Christianity made the allegiation that god was the creator of everything.
Now, you for one may have a differing god concept, but now that you have spent post after post deconstructing every Christian god concept that I have ever come across it might be a good idea to present your positive personal god concept - if you want the discussion based on it, that is.

 

[Zebra1552]

Now even more games instead of answering questions?

It seems you're done with this conversation. Good luck.

If you are unwilling to look at your own questions with a different perspective then I guess the conversation never really went anywhere in the first place. You cannot receive an answer from another perspective unless you understand that perspective and why that answer, from that perspective, is right.