MassiveAtom Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 First off, I know this is a potential powder keg. Whenever these viewpoints are discussed by anyone -especially all the whacked out folks here on LS ( you all) there are bound to be some ruffled feathers, hurt feelings, or just good ol' fashioned animosity. NOT THE POINT OF THE THREAD. An interesting discussion started elsewhere where the concept of intelligence without higher ed. was paralleled with the concept of morality without institutionalized religion.. Questions are.... ....and feel free to bring out the big theology guns if you want..... Is a belief in a higher deity, subscription to a religious dogma, or adherence to a spiritual belief system required for a person to be a morally upstanding, virtuous individual? How does the existence of such belief affect the way others base their opinions of the one in question? Can one have gleaned a strong ethical construct from "the school of life" without involvement in ANY religion, or even in spite of it, as many would assert one can glean intellectual knowledge from simply living and being ambitious enough to educate oneself without ever having set foot in a classroom? So I think it is entirely possible to exist well within the notions of good, virtuous, upstanding, and moral, even with an absolute dismissal of the belief in god. That it is easy to live a life of good will and character without ever cracking the Bible, Quran, Torah - or any other religious "BOOK" that I can't think of right now. So let's see what the rest of you think.... I'm wholly looking forward to reading your perspectives.... MA
Pocky Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Is a belief in a higher deity, subscription to a religious dogma, or adherence to a spiritual belief system required for a person to be a morally upstanding, virtuous individual? No. That's a misconception of the religious. Can one have gleaned a strong ethical construct from "the school of life" without involvement in ANY religion, or even in spite of it, as many would assert one can glean intellectual knowledge from simply living and being ambitious enough to educate oneself without ever having set foot in a classroom? Yes.
tiki Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by MassiveAtom Is a belief in a higher deity, subscription to a religious dogma, or adherence to a spiritual belief system required for a person to be a morally upstanding, virtuous individual? No, I don't think it's criteria. Not by any stretch of the imagination. How does the existence of such belief affect the way others base their opinions of the one in question? Some have different belief systems. Some want to push their religions onto others. I think that some are out to make others feel 'lower' (inferior) so that it will (psychologically) make them want to be 'higher' (superior). And to get a better 'return', they would need to follow them, and their beliefs. I hope I understood your question correctly. Can one have gleaned a strong ethical construct from "the school of life" without involvement in ANY religion, or even in spite of it, as many would assert one can glean intellectual knowledge from simply living and being ambitious enough to educate oneself without ever having set foot in a classroom? Absolutely! So I think it is entirely possible to exist well within the notions of good, virtuous, upstanding, and moral, even with an absolute dismissal of the belief in god. That it is easy to live a life of good will and character without ever cracking the Bible, Quran, Torah I'm sure you can.
ConfusedInOC Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by MassiveAtom Is a belief in a higher deity, subscription to a religious dogma, or adherence to a spiritual belief system required for a person to be a morally upstanding, virtuous individual? No. You can belong to the Church of Satan and have no morals whatsoever. But my question is "What are you basing your morals on?" What's moral to some may not be moral to others. How does the existence of such belief affect the way others base their opinions of the one in question? Again, to whom or what are you basing your moral beliefs on? Can one have gleaned a strong ethical construct from "the school of life" without involvement in ANY religion, or even in spite of it, as many would assert one can glean intellectual knowledge from simply living and being ambitious enough to educate oneself without ever having set foot in a classroom? Given religion's strong influence on society where would their moral values come from if not of religious influence? So I think it is entirely possible to exist well within the notions of good, virtuous, upstanding, and moral, even with an absolute dismissal of the belief in god. Again, this depends on what one deems as moral. Some good people have extra-marital affairs. They are good people who made bad choices. That it is easy to live a life of good will and character without ever cracking the Bible, Quran, Torah - or any other religious "BOOK" that I can't think of right now. Well if you have nothing to base your values on, then it's completely arbitrary as to what each person will feel is moral or not.
morrigan Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Is a belief in a higher deity, subscription to a religious dogma, or adherence to a spiritual belief system required for a person to be a morally upstanding, virtuous individual? Absolutely not, and it's a crutch if it's the only a reason a person remains 'moral'. A person's faith should be inspired by their sincerity. How does the existence of such belief affect the way others base their opinions of the one in question? You can be religious and a very moral person, but morality is free will, not ingrained into a person's pysche. IMO, it's how a religious person lives their faith in ordinary ways, day by day, not by church attendance or affirmations of belief. If there's no sincerity in it, it's an empty vessel. Can one have gleaned a strong ethical construct from "the school of life" without involvement in ANY religion, or even in spite of it, as many would assert one can glean intellectual knowledge from simply living and being ambitious enough to educate oneself without ever having set foot in a classroom? Yes, I've met some friendly and respectful atheists and satanists (which is more of a philosophy than a religion). An illiterate person can possess intelligence, and can be a true Christian or Muslim without reading the Bible or the Koran.
Pocky Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by ConfusedInOC No. You can belong to the Church of Satan and have no morals whatsoever. You can belong to any church and lack morals.
HokeyReligions Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Man created the Gods. Society defines morals. Sectors of society attribute those morals to the God's they have created. Individual and societal morals and values existed before they were written down and attributed to God. It is not God, or my forced Christian upbringing that tells me not to lie or kill or steal or cheat on my husband. It it my own moral code that tells me these things. I knew these things were 'right' intrinsically before I was ever told they were mandated by the Christian God. The God that man created just happens to have the same morals that I have----and that those who created God had! Mankind continues to evolve and our overall and group and individual morals change in reflection of the socities that we create--including those societies that revolve around a faith or organized religion. As a species we are not wholly savage. There are many who believe that religion and religion only dictates our social values and morals and presents a ruler by which to judge; and that those who, like me, do not believe in God would run naked into the street killing and stealing and fornicating were it not for the laws that society has set forth and which are based on some God's commandments. That is horses*** IMO.
ConfusedInOC Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by Pocky You can belong to any church and lack morals. True.....
tiki Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 I think a lot of it boils down to nature versus nurture too. No. You can belong to the Church of Satan and have no morals whatsoever. COC...just out of curiousity, did you word this wrong? I didn't know if you meant to say 'You can belong to the Church of Satan and have morals'.
Author MassiveAtom Posted May 4, 2005 Author Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by HokeyReligions Man created the Gods. Society defines morals. Sectors of society attribute those morals to the God's they have created. Individual and societal morals and values existed before they were written down and attributed to God. It is not God, or my forced Christian upbringing that tells me not to lie or kill or steal or cheat on my husband. It it my own moral code that tells me these things. I knew these things were 'right' intrinsically before I was ever told they were mandated by the Christian God. The God that man created just happens to have the same morals that I have----and that those who created God had! Mankind continues to evolve and our overall and group and individual morals change in reflection of the socities that we create--including those societies that revolve around a faith or organized religion. As a species we are not wholly savage. There are many who believe that religion and religion only dictates our social values and morals and presents a ruler by which to judge; and that those who, like me, do not believe in God would run naked into the street killing and stealing and fornicating were it not for the laws that society has set forth and which are based on some God's commandments. That is horses*** IMO. I Love you Hoke!
Chris777 Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by MassiveAtom Is a belief in a higher deity, subscription to a religious dogma, or adherence to a spiritual belief system required for a person to be a morally upstanding, virtuous individual? Well This is an interesting question, yet it is sort of flawed. In that in order to define the concepts of "morally upstanding, and virtuous" what do you use as a standard? manners? etiquett, politeness, you could say that these behaviors are all a means to an end. wineing and dineing for example, someone could behave totally gentamnanly for the entire purpose of getting into your pants. so in part I would say yes, it is possible, as a means of acomplishing an agenda of whomever is performing the behavior. Ghandi is held by many to be a good moral person, but the thing is what does it matter if he was mannerly , and non violent, he had an agenda. and he used what he had learned from various sources to acomplish it. But if belief in God were a fantasy, why bother? take the popular religion of "evolution" to the extreme, and what do you think our society would be like then? Al Capone suddenly looks more "evolved" (and yes philosophy is religion) How does the existence of such belief affect the way others base their opinions of the one in question? Can one have gleaned a strong ethical construct from "the school of life" without involvement in ANY religion, or even in spite of it, as many would assert one can glean intellectual knowledge from simply living and being ambitious enough to educate oneself without ever having set foot in a classroom? Again it is politics and behaving in such a way as to gain something, or manipulate something. not because it is inherently moral, or upstanding, or even right. Do you have any examples that would seperate motive from the behavior? otherwise if their are no consequences, other than those imposed by the society in general, why should or would anyone desire to be upstanding? If everything is meaningless, why not indulge? why not take what one wants? And i am not saying everyone would, but can you honestly say that the majority would not? So I think it is entirely possible to exist well within the notions of good, virtuous, upstanding, and moral, even with an absolute dismissal of the belief in god. That it is easy to live a life of good will and character without ever cracking the Bible, Quran, Torah - or any other religious "BOOK" that I can't think of right now. Where would you even define "good, virtuous, upstanding, and moral" What is you reference? How to WIN friends and INFLUENCE people?
quankanne Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Is a belief in a higher deity, subscription to a religious dogma, or adherence to a spiritual belief system required for a person to be a morally upstanding, virtuous individual?How does the existence of such belief affect the way others base their opinions of the one in question? no. But as a believer, I see people who have reject all forms of theism, yet still uphold a strict moral code. And I wonder how they formulate that code if they reject the vehicle (religion) that traditionally introduces a moral code – is my relationship with God just gravy on a really good chicken fried steak, or are these folks unknowingly responding to a call God gives, i.e., superflous? I tend to believe that it's the latter, that people are responding to God's call but either don't know how or choose not to acknowledge his part in the equation. Can one have gleaned a strong ethical construct from "the school of life" without involvement in ANY religion, or even in spite of it, as many would assert one can glean intellectual knowledge from simply living and being ambitious enough to educate oneself without ever having set foot in a classroom? again, yes, but how can someone absorb something like positive morals without somehow being touched by God? Their role models may be someone who is a good, non-religious person who has a role model that is also a good, non-religious person who has been inspired by a believer. It's very hard for me to fathom there NOT being some kind of God-basis there, whether it's here and now or from a distance. So I think it is entirely possible to exist well within the notions of good, virtuous, upstanding, and moral, even with an absolute dismissal of the belief in god. That it is easy to live a life of good will and character without ever cracking the Bible, Quran, Torah - or any other religious "BOOK" that I can't think of right now the real question is, why would you want to? You're not compelled to be good when you're not stuck trying to live up to some religious belief or tenet. Does it make life easier to adopt a certain set of morals because you're dealing with people who ARE religiously inclined? Or is it because somewhere at a very primal, instinctive level, you're following God's call but just cannot see it? It it my own moral code that tells me these things. I knew these things were 'right' intrinsically before I was ever told they were mandated by the Christian God but what makes these behaviors right? Who has the authority to say what is right and what is not, when you're not a believer? Wouldn't those moral codes be arbitrary at best, simply because everyone's doing their own thing? What is the pay-off when you're not bound by your beliefs? Life everlasting in heaven? I'm not trying to pick a bone here, just honestly curious because I've met people who adhere to a moral code much more consistently than I've seen someone who claims to be religious-minded, but I don't know why they feel the need to do so. As a Catholic, I can tell you that guilt is a wonderful motivating factor when it comes to being good!
tanbark813 Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by quankanne I've met people who adhere to a moral code much more consistently than I've seen someone who claims to be religious-minded, but I don't know why they feel the need to do so. I think you'll get a lot of different reasons for this, but personally, I feel fulfilled when I behave in a good or moral way (not that I always do, of course ). It's similar to the feeling when you get home from a day of work during which you accomplished a lot. IMHO, behaving in a way one would consider moral is more righteous when done out of one's own motivation, rather than out of fear of some God who may not even exist.
Chris777 Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by HokeyReligions Man created the Gods. Society defines morals. Sectors of society attribute those morals to the God's they have created. Individual and societal morals and values existed before they were written down and attributed to God. Are not all of the above statements opinion, or at the very most your theory on how they came about? It is not God, or my forced Christian upbringing that tells me not to lie or kill or steal or cheat on my husband. It it my own moral code that tells me these things. I knew these things were 'right' intrinsically before I was ever told they were mandated by the Christian God. The God that man created just happens to have the same morals that I have----and that those who created God had! "It it my own moral code that tells me these things." From an atheistic prespective IF everything were the result of random chance how would you formulate your code? and in responce to your code; It may be good for you, but what about those in society who formulate their own moral codes, such as sexual predators, murderers, and the inflatedly popular homosexuals. Who choose their own paths, and their own morals, and rules and regulations? Mankind continues to evolve and our overall and group and individual morals change in reflection of the socities that we create--including those societies that revolve around a faith or organized religion. As a species we are not wholly savage. If we are evolving then why do we still have crime? why are the problems mentioned in the bible still existant in the same forms as they were back then, if we are somehow evolving? Why Do we still have all of the problems we have always had? (and before you turn it around on me I will also pre suppose a responce) All Beliefs are not true, All religions cannot be true, since they all oppose each other in some points. You may Doubt them all, Which is your perogative. But I believe the Bible, when it says that this world will be destroyed, and only those who believe(d) in Christ Will be spared. So therefore It is not the Christians mission to Provide , or Impose morality on the world. It is our mission to sheperd the flock to Christ. Their are many that call themselves christian that will dissagree, but I ask they find scripture stating otherwise. There are many who believe that religion and religion only dictates our social values and morals and presents a ruler by which to judge; and that those who, like me, do not believe in God would run naked into the street killing and stealing and fornicating were it not for the laws that society has set forth and which are based on some God's commandments. That is horses*** IMO. their are always going to be people that believe differently. Look at our President their are many people within our own country that disagree with him and his actions vehemently, yet to the rest of the world he is representing all of america, it is not right, but it is true. The same way you lump anyone who is not an atheist into the same camp of thinking that you would be totally running wild if it werent religiously dictated to you. Government is just as big an influence on morality as religion. Now granted many Governments are based in their respective religions, but being a christian ,I Think they have no value, other than holding back utter anarchy, in the areas they govern. But if as you assume Religion is Government, why is it they have seperated? the assumption that religion is the result of imposing morality on society, in order to govern it, or enslave it , is on the surface valid. Yet if that were the true cause, and the only reason, why do people worship in their homes when no one is looking? Jesus very Explicitly says Not to do good to be seen by men, but to be seen by God. He was neither part of the Government or part of the religious establishment, yet he said this. Why , what purpose does it serve? Unless he believed it.
HokeyReligions Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 So I think it is entirely possible to exist well within the notions of good, virtuous, upstanding, and moral, even with an absolute dismissal of the belief in god. That it is easy to live a life of good will and character without ever cracking the Bible, Quran, Torah - or any other religious "BOOK" that I can't think of right now the real question is, why would you want to? You're not compelled to be good when you're not stuck trying to live up to some religious belief or tenet. I believe that individuals have their own moral code, and humanity has it’s own moral code as well. Individual morals are an off-shoot of the species and the societies that we create. I don’t have to be a member of a religious faith to be a member of society and affect changes in that society and live within the boundaries and laws that are part of my society. Does it make life easier to adopt a certain set of morals because you're dealing with people who ARE religiously inclined? Or is it because somewhere at a very primal, instinctive level, you're following God's call but just cannot see it? Easier? Yeah, it’s easier to live within the boundaries of the society in which I am a part, whether I take an active or passive role. Why would I want to kill someone? There are social punishments to consider and also I simply could not do it unless it were in defense of self or family. I don’t want someone to take the life of a loved one, so why would I take the life of another? The easiest and most recognizable way to explain it was first written in a religious context, so I’ll use it: Do Unto Others as You Would Have Others Do Unto You. I just don't believe that it was GOD who first created that sentiment, but that it is part of the human species. I also don’t think we necessarily adopt our morals—but are born with them. They are species-formed first and then developed and defined and accepted by society. Like sexual orientation and sexual lifestyle and acceptance of sexuality. It it my own moral code that tells me these things. I knew these things were 'right' intrinsically before I was ever told they were mandated by the Christian God but what makes these behaviors right? Who has the authority to say what is right and what is not, when you're not a believer? Wouldn't those moral codes be arbitrary at best, simply because everyone's doing their own thing? What is the pay-off when you're not bound by your beliefs? Life everlasting in heaven? I give myself the authority to say what is right and wrong for me. Individual morals fit within broader boundaries of society’s morals. I understand your viewpoint – my mother and husband are of the same POV. All things stem from God – the creator; and for people of faith I don’t think it would be possible to accept another definition because it would be like denying God. I'm not trying to pick a bone here, just honestly curious because I've met people who adhere to a moral code much more consistently than I've seen someone who claims to be religious-minded, but I don't know why they feel the need to do so. It’s social and part of our species genetics and our society---which we create and develop. As a Catholic, I can tell you that guilt is a wonderful motivating factor when it comes to being good! Guilt isn’t just for Catholics! Those Baptist’s can sure lay it on thick too---but they sing about it more!! Hubby used to say he chose the Baptist Church because the others were full of sadness and repentance and were just sorrowful and guilt-ridden; and the Baptists were always partying---he knew they were sinning somehow, but no one could catch them at it because they removed the guilt factor! Let me see if I can give more of a basis for my discussion about morals and ethics. Politeness and manners have nothing to do with morals. The dictionary doesn't make a lot of distinction between ethics and morals, but like most synonyms, if there weren't at least fine shades of difference in meaning, we shouldn't have two words. So, I'm going to play Noah Webster and define the two: Ethics is the philosophical attempt to define an objective guide for human behavior. Morals are the currently accepted, subjective rules that we use to judge human conduct for the society in which we live. The difference is one of viewpoint. Ethics are generally debated in intellectual tones, by those seeking to find a rational basis on which to make important decisions. Virtually every important philosopher in any society has written extensively about ethics looking for or defining principles from which we can develop an objective recipe for living in the best possible way. Morals tend to be dogmatic -- rules passed on to us by authority figures. In our youth, parents, teachers, and religious leaders spend a lot of energy impressing upon us some particular set of rules which they believe leads to a proper life. Often there is no attempt to prove that these morals are socially useful and correct. They are simply to be accepted as a requirement of living in a society. They tend toward absolutism. A moralist declares that there is only one correct response to a dilemma, while an ethicist examines all the possible responses, looking for the best compromise when none of the solutions is completely satisfactory. But even the ethicist needs a basis from which to operate. My friend Donna puts it this way: Over time, we can observe in general that properly devised ethics are considerably longer lasting in acceptance and usefulness than morals, since as societies change, morals become outmoded, and lacking fundamental principles as a basis, they can be replaced by something else. This is not to say that people don't attempt to hang on to morals. In fact, every generation laments the disregard of proper morality of the younger generation. Dire predictions of the downfall of society through loss of moral fiber have been the staple of demagogues, politicians, religious leaders, and anyone else seeking power since we have had civilizations. Fear of change is a powerful weapon for those skilled in manipulating it to their advantage. PS: I'm not an athiest - I'm agnostic. There is a difference
RecordProducer Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Originally posted by MassiveAtom So I think it is entirely possible to exist well within the notions of good, virtuous, upstanding, and moral, even with an absolute dismissal of the belief in god. I believe that all people should be good, generous, helpful, moral, and altruistic, as much as they can. In my opinion, I am an even better person for trying to live my life according to my inner codex, because I do it for myself, for what I feel in my heart; because I want to make others happy and don't want to hurt anyone. Not because I was brain washed that I MUST be like that, because some terrible punishment will bust me.
moimeme Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Not because I was brain washed that I MUST be like that, because some terrible punishment will bust me. As usual, the irreligious love to perpetrate completely bogus myths about religion and the followers of religious practice. Try this one on for size: Christ's message of love and forgiveness appealed to people because it appeals to the inner sense of 'rightness' that humans already have. Therefore those who follow gladly don't do so out of fear of punishment (yes, some do, but absolutely not all nor, I daresay, do the majority). In fact, it was when I realized that a loving God would NOT punish sinners He made; humans who have flaws and are flawed - that I could fully accept Jesus and faith in general. Humans, you see, can forgive sins and errors and God has to be by definition better than humans; therefore He (she, it, they, whatever) must love better and forgive more than I can - or than Mother Theresa can or the best human you've ever known can. And none of that involves fear or terror or lack of intellect. As for the basic questions of ethics, a heckuva lot of philosophers spent chunks of their lives debating this very topic - there's a few thousand books you can read if you are really intent
Craig Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Morals evolve and are necessary for our survival. Even if there were no religions, no books or schools, morals and ethics would exist.
Author MassiveAtom Posted May 5, 2005 Author Posted May 5, 2005 Of course a just and loving God wouldn't punish his creations, he'd only drown them in a watery deluge saving only those he thought were worthy, however imperfect. Sounds GREAT! But this thread wasn't about arguing that point you all. It was a dialog between two different viewpoints. Let's have the dialog without getting our noses all out of joint. You've all made some very excellent points. And Moi, if I wanted to reread Kant, Buber, Neitszche, et al, I would've, but new perspectives do emerge as new minds perceive the question. Let's let the dialog continue without the animosity. It's just text on a screen for pete's sake. excellent point Craig..... That's one to think about.
moimeme Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 new perspectives do emerge as new minds perceive the question. Page me when that happens
HokeyReligions Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Originally posted by RecordProducer I believe that all people should be good, generous, helpful, moral, and altruistic, as much as they can. In my opinion, I am an even better person for trying to live my life according to my inner codex, because I do it for myself, for what I feel in my heart; because I want to make others happy and don't want to hurt anyone. Not because I was brain washed that I MUST be like that, because some terrible punishment will bust me. That's similar to what I said. It's part of our inner moral code and does not come from some forced religious perspective. How many of us have heard "I'll put the fear of God into 'ya" in our lives? Many religions preach love, but they also preach fear and that is how some churches first 'snare' people. I know because I've seen it. Fear God's wrath. Fear eternal damnation. Accept a loving God and you won't have to fear anymore. I think a lot of it is done out of honest love and concern for people's souls, but many people and churches twist it so that it becomes off-putting to some they want to save. If there IS a God, or Gods I don't hold Him responsible for the actions of His people because I do believe that people have free will. But free will doesn't translate into no morals. I don't think its possible for believers in God to grasp that morals don't come from God because it would contradict their faith. If I were of a religious bent I would accept that others believe it, but I would probably feel sorry for them and think that they do not understand my God's love and might. But I certainly do understand your statement about being brainwashed. People have a moral orientation the same as they do a sexual orientation and they are NOT the same for everyone, but its something that we are born with and identify and clarify as we mature.
PatientOne Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Originally posted by moimeme Try this one on for size: Christ's message of love and forgiveness appealed to people because it appeals to the inner sense of 'rightness' that humans already have. Therefore those who follow gladly don't do so out of fear of punishment (yes, some do, but absolutely not all nor, I daresay, do the majority). I can live with that. Originally posted by moimeme In fact, it was when I realized that a loving God would NOT punish sinners He made; humans who have flaws and are flawed - that I could fully accept Jesus and faith in general. Humans, you see, can forgive sins and errors and God has to be by definition better than humans; therefore He (she, it, they, whatever) must love better and forgive more than I can - or than Mother Theresa can or the best human you've ever known can. And none of that involves fear or terror or lack of intellect. Now this is important to me, moi. I've abandoned religion over this one concept. To a degree, I felt exactly the way you do- i.e. If I can forgive, God would be able to do so a billion-fold. There would be no room for Hell. However, as some of the hard core Christian contingent here (as in my own life) have helpfully pointed out, you can find God and redemption only the way their version of Christianity dictates. Being a good Catholic wasn't enough, you had to "accept Jesus as your personal saviour". Or else your good deeds and decency mean naught. Way too unforgiving to me. Now my question to you is, how or when did you "realize that a loving God would NOT punish sinners He made;" What insight helped you feel this way? If it's too personal, please PM me, I'm very interested in your story here.
Moose Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 I don't think its possible for believers in God to grasp that morals don't come from God because it would contradict their faith.Well, EVERYTHING comes from God. But, morals are taught and learned throughout our lifetime experiences. It is our goal, however, is to strive to be more like Christ......including His definition of morals. We just happen to have a written guide in which to study, and learn. It's not that God automatically instilled them into us.
Firesqueak Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 What a wonderful thread- I really enjoyed reading it and also everyone's responses. It was very refreshing! I also think that humans have an innate sense of "rightness," and perhaps we just attribute what we consider "perfect" qualities onto God (whether he/ she exists is something I'm not even going to try to tackle) It's nice to know that there are other people who feel like I do- that you can be moral and not go to church, or believe as they (church goers) do. The reason I'm sort of anti-religion at the moment is that no one could answer the questions I had re: the bible, or religion. Originally, I thought that God himself had written the bible (when I was very little) but when I realized it was written by men who sin just like I do and did, it made me doubt the authinticity of the bible itself. After all, the men who wrote it likely had their own agendas in mind, and with the name of God himself backing you, you could promote almost anything.
Moose Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 After all, the men who wrote it likely had their own agendas in mind, and with the name of God himself backing you, you could promote almost anything.I'm sorry that you feel this way, most people do now and days.......that's you're choice. I choose to believe that yes, man did write the Bible. And I make no mistake..... nothing would be in that Bible unless God wanted it there.
Recommended Posts