Religion is necessary, but not sufficient, for morality

[Ken-1122]

They both held to utopian ideology that justified the brutality and totalitarianism.

Yeah; but if that were the point he were making, I would not have objected to what he said.

 

[Ken-1122]

But no successful society was ever built by atheists, while good religions of the past did build successful societies. If you believe in objective reality, this should be meaningful.

Actually when you look at the most successful societies, they were built by the religious as well as the atheists. And the theists who are a part of the society know better than to attempt to make it a theocracy, because that always leads to disaster; the most successful societies are secular.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

As the title of this thread says - religion is necessary, but not sufficient, for [good] morality. You are correct that there is little difference between atheists and modern Christians, both are a disaster. But no successful society was ever built by atheists, while good religions of the past did build successful societies. If you believe in objective reality, this should be meaningful.

I disagree totally with this assessment. And like I said, atheism is just a negation and not a worldview or philosophy and can never serve as the foundation for a proper society. I agree that no successful society has been built by atheists and I would add that no successful society has ever been built by theists. But I would also say that no successful society has ever been built period because there has never been a society built on a fully integrated set of ideas. I include America in that. I certainly think that America came the closest but it's only been 230 years since America's founding and it's falling apart at the seams. And that's the best case in my opinion.

I define a successful society as one that is fully consistent with the rights of man, rights not determined by other men but by man's nature which is objective.

The founders nailed the political idea: man, every man, has an inalienable right to his life
and the pursuit of his own happiness. The dominant moral idea then and now, held by both theists and atheists alike is that no, man has no right to live for his own sake, he must live for others, society or the collective for the secular left and God for the right. No one ever came along to say that it is right, it is proper for a man to live for his own sake and to integrate this political idea into a fully integrated philosophical system that is consistent both internally and with the facts of reality. That is brand new. That system is Objectivism. The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of subjectivism. The two can not exist together in any man's mind or in any society. Now to your second point.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

I follow the Old Testament which is largely in agreement with your Objectivism as you described it.

Not in any way shape or form are they in agreement. Objectivism explicitly and self-consciously affirms metaphysical objectivism, the idea that reality exists independent of consciousness, of any consciousness. The old testament explicitly affirms metaphysical subjectivism, the belief that reality is the product of and dependent on consciousness, i.e., the consciousness called God. They are diametrically opposed in every way. It's a shame there is not an active philosophy subforum here where we could discuss this separately.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

Hitler and the Nazis were religious, Stalin and the communist were an atheist state the direct opposite. An attempt to conflate the two this way does not work.

Not in terms of their basic ideas. In terms of essentials, they are in lockstep with each other. all three denied objectivity. All three held self-sacrifice as a moral virtue. They only differ on who is to be the collector of the sacrifices. The atheistic Stalin regime held that the collective society is to be the collector of the sacrifices. The religionists hold that God is the collector of sacrifices. All three rejected reason. All three rejected individual rights. All three sanctioned the initiation of force as a virtue. all three were authoritarian. All three were collectivist. The differences are trivial and superficial.

 

[stevevw]

Both Christianity and Islam have produced successful cultures. But today, both fail. Islam failed some time ago and Christian nations are in obvious decline today. So what changed? The religious texts and early writings have not changed. I believe that intelligence and morality has dropped for both cultural and genetic reasons.

Someone with a good heart but a dysfunctional brain is not able to distinguish between good and evil. And religion cannot fix this. One needs intelligence to properly apply religious teachings. And one needs a moral sense to even care. Modern culture promotes stupidity and immorality both through how children are raised and through dysgenic selection which lowers the quality of the human gene pool.

I have written about these issues at length on my Arkian website. I have posted about this to a Mennonite forum and a Muslim forum. Now I hope to get general Christian feedback here.

Therefore its like what Christ said about religion with the Pharisees who pompously paraded their righteousness but were corrupt on the inside. Christ was referring to our state of the heart and that this was the source of morality and not what looks good on the outside.

We all know about right and wrong. You could say we are born with this knowledge regardless of religion. Its not a case of intelligence as no amount of analyses can work this out. In fact that I think is half the problem in that modern society rationalizes morality away.

WE have a conscience and it tells us what is right and wrong and we react that way regardless of what we say. We just have to stop and listen to it and we will know the truth.

 

[VCR-2000]

It seems like the Christians modern interpretation of Christianity, if not the theological fundamental itself, lends them to be content with being cultural losers, but hey, at least they still get to be with Jesus for eternity.

 

[fschmidt]

It seems like the Christians modern interpretation of Christianity, if not the theological fundamental itself, lends them to be content with being cultural losers, but hey, at least they still get to be with Jesus for eternity.

Thankfully there are still sane Christians among the Anabaptists. For example this Mennonite forum.

 

[Hawkins]

Both Christianity and Islam have produced successful cultures. But today, both fail. Islam failed some time ago and Christian nations are in obvious decline today. So what changed? The religious texts and early writings have not changed. I believe that intelligence and morality has dropped for both cultural and genetic reasons.

Someone with a good heart but a dysfunctional brain is not able to distinguish between good and evil. And religion cannot fix this. One needs intelligence to properly apply religious teachings. And one needs a moral sense to even care. Modern culture promotes stupidity and immorality both through how children are raised and through dysgenic selection which lowers the quality of the human gene pool.

I have written about these issues at length on my Arkian website. I have posted about this to a Mennonite forum and a Muslim forum. Now I hope to get general Christian feedback here.

It is a universal trend all the times that humans are walking further and further away from God. That's actually why at some point a New Covenant must be in place to identify who shall be saved, as under the older covenants all humans are identified as "dead" or not being able to be saved.

The New Covenant on the other hand, is already the final covenant as God's Grace has already been maximized. There will be no more covenant coming to deal with the situation when humans determine (which is under the influence and control of the devil) to go further away from God.

As a result, the world leans more towards the devil day by day. This is not unexpected. That's one of the reasons why Jesus said that only those (Christians) endure shall be saved at the end.

How fast we slide away from God. Here's an indicator,

Before 30s, perhaps only 1% humans are able to get in touch with porn photos and porn movies. In today's world, perhaps only 1% humans never got in tough with such porns. It is a flip from 1% to 99% within the past 100 years.

 

[VCR-2000]

If humans shouldn't determine anything, then what is the point of free will? Also, if it was up to me or if God can negotiate it, I'd prefer to live in a carbon-copy of this universe but with some scenarios turning out differently.

 

[Ken-1122]

It is a universal trend all the times that humans are walking further and further away from God. That's actually why at some point a New Covenant must be in place to identify who shall be saved, as under the older covenants all humans are identified as "dead" or not being able to be saved.

The New Covenant on the other hand, is already the final covenant as God's Grace has already been maximized. There will be no more covenant coming to deal with the situation when humans determine (which is under the influence and control of the devil) to go further away from God.

As a result, the world leans more towards the devil day by day. This is not unexpected. That's one of the reasons why Jesus said that only those (Christians) endure shall be saved at the end.

Is God more powerful than the Devil? If so, how come he hasn't gotten rid of him already? Why hasn't he sent him to hell where he can't do any harm? Why does God allow the Devil to have influence and control of his people?

 

[VCR-2000]

Is God more powerful than the Devil? If so, how come he hasn't gotten rid of him already? Why hasn't he sent him to hell where he can't do any harm? Why does God allow the Devil to have influence and control of his people?

The answer is that God allows the Devil to continue existing and to tempt people for now because he seemingly wants to only glorify how great and awesome he is.

But don't attack me, I'm just the messenger.

 

[Ken-1122]

The answer is that God allows the Devil to continue existing and to tempt people for now because he seemingly wants to only glorify how great and awesome he is.

I would think by defeating the devil and sending him to hell where he cannot bother anyone would do more to glorify how great he is than allowing himself to be consistently defeated by the devil when it comes to influence.

But don't attack me, I'm just the messenger.

I wasn't attacking you; perhaps the logic required to believe what you believe; but definitely not you.

 

[Kylie]

Both Christianity and Islam have produced successful cultures. But today, both fail. Islam failed some time ago and Christian nations are in obvious decline today. So what changed? The religious texts and early writings have not changed. I believe that intelligence and morality has dropped for both cultural and genetic reasons.

Someone with a good heart but a dysfunctional brain is not able to distinguish between good and evil. And religion cannot fix this. One needs intelligence to properly apply religious teachings. And one needs a moral sense to even care. Modern culture promotes stupidity and immorality both through how children are raised and through dysgenic selection which lowers the quality of the human gene pool.

I have written about these issues at length on my Arkian website. I have posted about this to a Mennonite forum and a Muslim forum. Now I hope to get general Christian feedback here.

You say you believe religion is necessary. What exactly is it that you think makes religions necessary? What is it that human society needs that only religion can provide?

 

[fschmidt]

You say you believe religion is necessary. What exactly is it that you think makes religions necessary? What is it that human society needs that only religion can provide?

Good morals. Please note that if you are an atheist from the West, then our morals are almost opposites.

Also I agree with Aristophanes' criticisms of Euripides, and I think Bertrand Russel was a fool (having read some of his books). That two and two are four is based on the axioms of math, and axioms are essentially taken on faith.

 

[stevevw]

Both Christianity and Islam have produced successful cultures. But today, both fail. Islam failed some time ago and Christian nations are in obvious decline today. So what changed? The religious texts and early writings have not changed. I believe that intelligence and morality has dropped for both cultural and genetic reasons.

Someone with a good heart but a dysfunctional brain is not able to distinguish between good and evil. And religion cannot fix this.

Though we cannot fix those with disabilities we can care for them and help them live a reasonable life. The government pulled out of helping those in need and now its up to charities and that's where religion comes to the rescue.If it wasn't for the many religious organizations that help in these situation we would be in an even worse position.

One needs intelligence to properly apply religious teachings. And one needs a moral sense to even care. Modern culture promotes stupidity and immorality both through how children are raised and through dysgenic selection which lowers the quality of the human gene pool.

I have written about these issues at length on my Arkian website. I have posted about this to a Mennonite forum and a Muslim forum. Now I hope to get general Christian feedback here.

I agree that modern society has moved away from God. I think this is due to post modernist ideology where self proclaimed truth is the only truth and there is no greater authority to answer to.

 

[fschmidt]

Though we cannot fix those with disabilities we can care for them and help them live a reasonable life. The government pulled out of helping those in need and now its up to charities and that's where religion comes to the rescue.If it wasn't for the many religious organizations that help in these situation we would be in an even worse position.

Yes, if just some people can't think, then in a good religion, those who can think can guide those who can't think. That works. The problem is that today, practically no one can think.

I agree that modern society has moved away from God. I think this is due to post modernist ideology where self proclaimed truth is the only truth and there is no greater authority to answer to.

Modern society is not significantly different from every decaying society in history. All decaying cultures lose their religion. See Ecclesiastes 1:9-11. I would like to try to solve this general problem of societal decay.

 

[Kylie]

Good morals.

Why do you claim that religion is the only possible source of good morals? How do you define "good morals"?

Please note that if you are an atheist from the West, then our morals are almost opposites.

I don't recall ever interacting with you before, so it's almost certain that you know nothing about me. On what basis do you claim that our morals are "almost opposites"? And what do you mean by "almost opposites"? I assume you believe you have good morals. What aspect of my morality do you believe is bad?

Also I agree with Aristophanes' criticisms of Euripides, and I think Bertrand Russel was a fool (having read some of his books). That two and two are four is based on the axioms of math, and axioms are essentially taken on faith.

You make it sound like we can just make up whatever nonsense we want and declare it to be an axiom, like I could declare that when you add a colour to a number you get an emotion. Axioms don't work that way. They aren't just, "somebody said it, so we just have to accept it." We don't have to take two and two are four on faith - we can get two things, put another two things with them and then count the total and we'll get four every time. I don't see how that is "taking something on faith."

 

[Kylie]

Yes, if just some people can't think, then in a good religion, those who can think can guide those who can't think. That works. The problem is that today, practically no one can think.

Somehow, I get the feeling that you believe that you are one of those people who CAN think. And I also get the feeling that you hold the opinion that those who don't think the way you think are those people who can't think.

But that's just a feeling I get from the way you phrased things.

 

[Astrid]

It seems like the Christians modern interpretation of Christianity, if not the theological fundamental itself, lends them to be content with being cultural losers, but hey, at least they still get to be with Jesus for eternity.

What is modern about that? Slaves, serf, peasants,
the plankton of society were who took up just that
hope and still do.