What If God Were Disproved?

I’m not your target audience, but my experience is the same as yours. As I put it to a Christian friend: now I have a little more free time on Sunday morning.

The theistic argument is self-refutting: “But without God-given morality, society would collapse in a self-destructive orgy of mayhem, and we don’t want that, do we?” But, since we can see intuitively that a lawless world is an unpleasant place, without reference to any Holy Book….what exactly do we need the Holy Book for? The very appeal to bad consequences contains its own answer!

This is a great topic and question for all walks of faith. This is the sort of thing that /should/ be asked in Sunday school. Good for you Daniel.

I’m not the target crowd (i never believed in any gods), but i did find where my own morality is coming from.

I must admit it took me a lot of thinking, but the result was nice, crisp clean and easy to work with.

I will not do stuff to others that i don’t like them to do to me.

Um……doesn’t Comfort basically deny people can be good? Isn’t he the one who says telling one lie makes you a “liar”?

Seems like believing in God makes no difference to Ray, all people are evil to him.

I learned most of my basic morals from my teachers growing up. They often structured their classrooms to help kids get along. I remember playing on the playground or being on the bus and seeing kids getting bullied (or being bullied myself) and thinking that the bully was a bad person. I never even considered being a bully.

Most moral systems (Eastern and Western) have some form of the golden or silver rule (Do unto others/ do not do unto others). This rule incorporates the desire for self protection with compassion for others. It is based on experience and observation. For this reason, there is absolutely no need for god to be a moral person.

I was your target audience when I was a believer. You just caught me a few decades too late, ha!

Neither a born atheist or a “born” (raised) xian, I felt the pull and believed in my teens. Started going to church, etc. There was the fear of eternal punishment, but that got worse after going to church, and it caused not only the fear that it is designed to cause, but also lots of cognitive dissonance.

There was more, a deep feeling of wanting to feel a bond with whatever life or mind that might exist in the universe. Xianity has no monopoly on that. Christianity was around me in my culture, so it became the outlet for my feeling that life was more than just short-lived material. Christianity has NOTHING to do with that, but I think many people latch on to it because it’s there.

As far as what I would do if the Christian God were disproved: I never found “him” to be proved in the first place. (The Christan God is male, though no Christian ever pulled up “his” robes and looked. This also gave me nasty cognitive dissonance.) I could not deal with the preachers who said you had to KNOW – I knew that that was impossible. I was NEVER able to say “I know he’s in my heart” – what I DID know was that that was a belief and only a belief, one which died due to lack of evidence, and serious cognitive dissonance.

(This is why I can call fundie posters on their beliefs. I’ve BEEN THERE.)

I think that due to the unproven structure of choosing to believe something, everyone has doubts, though I am beginning to wonder if some xians have too few brain cells to be aware of theirs.

So I would go on doing what I had already been doing. And that’s what I have done! And since I had innate ethics and a deep feeling for life (or is that redundant?), I didn’t need the Christian God. The simpleton notion that someone who doesn’t believe in the Christian God is amoral or immoral is breathtakingly idiotic, nonsensical, obtuse, half-witted, moronic, simpleminded, deluded and wrong.

I didn’t get my ethics from an external source, not even my parents. They certainly didn’t teach me ethics I didn’t know already! A capacity of feeling for life, empathy – and what the hell else is ethics but that? – can be inborn and doesn’t have to be enforced from outside.

I’m trying not to be long-winded, but it’s quite the experience and I’m having a hard time condensing it so far that it loses conveying what I went through.

I can tell you from a very honest perspective because I experienced this only a year ago. After being a Christian my entire life, it became undeniably obvious that the Bible is too flawed to be a valid record. Without the validity of scripture, there is no validity to Jesus. And with the evidence that prayers aren’t answered, miracles don’t happen, bad things happen to good people, and evil things are done by Christians throughout the world, I couldn’t be a sheep any longer.

Step one:
I felt a bit lost and went through a short phase of sadness. It leaves a big hole when you discover something you’ve based your entire life on is false. I recently looked back at a jounal entry from a year ago where I wrote: “what do I do now?”

Step two:
I entered a frustrated phase. I was extremely angry for allowing myself to be so weak and blind. I met good friends and helped many people through my Christian experience. But I had wasted so many hours in prayer and bilbe study that should have been spent in more productive ways.

Step three
Where I am today. I’m happier than I have been in my entire life. I feel very free from the distraction of an imaginary god. I am not sad because I no longer believe there is life after death. I’m actually relieved. What is the point in fearing death? We all will die one day, but only some of us will choose to fully live.

I can now focus on what is truly important: loving my family, loving this amazing planet we live on, helping those in need and truly enjoying every day I have on this earth.

I call it my “BE attitude”:

the BEattitude (2 t’s) – Happy to just BE. Finding joy in every day. Always searching, asking questions and seeking answers.

Michael’s answers early on in the string indicate a possible reason why there is a positive correlation between religious societies and higher crime rates.

Ray Comfort’s opinion is (as usual) contradictory to known evidence. The most godless societies in the world (Denmark and Sweden) have the lowest crime rates. If Ray were correct, the opposite would be true. Rather, the most god-fearing countries have the highest crime rates. In the US, the most religious states also have the highest crime rates.

Comfort’s thinking is bass ackwards. He begins with a conclusion, and skips the analysis and the facts.

Just a thought, but.

Those who do think that without God, that means go bat shit crazy… it may also have to do with what heaven actually represents.

They’ve been lead to believe that nothing in this world is good, except serving God. Without God, there’s nothing in this world worth saving or living for. Without God, and thus without Heaven, then screw it.

Of course, that’s very easy to say, but I’m confident that those with families (wives, husbands, children, mothers, fathers, anyone close to them) wouldn’t actually be able to go through with that. They’d draw strength from each other, and purpose to live and do well from each other.

I do agree that a lot of evil would enter the world at the moment that God was disproven, but the good news is that that CANNOT be done like we imagine. If you take a step back and look at the evidence, it’s already been proven that the Bible had it wrong, but people still stubbornly cling to their beliefs. Atheism is on the rise. By all accounts, it certainly seems that within the next couple hundred years, religion will be bred out of the “norm”.

Of course, then we’d have the new religions like alternative medicine. ;)

Although I’m not a Christian myself, here’s the answer of a fairly famous Christian:

“He, then, is an enemy to righteousness who refrains from sin only through fear of punishment… For the man who only fears the flames of hell is afraid not of sinning, but of being burned.”

–Augustine of Hippo (Epistle 145)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102145.htm

Of course, this makes our good friend Ray Comfort “an enemy to righteousness.” (Augustine also took up the issue in Sermon 161, although Augustine formulates it in terms of “what if God wasn’t going to punish you” rather than “what if God doesn’t exist.”)

Considering the amount of posts this site gets from Christians, i wonder how many will make any attempt to answer it honestly……

Only 1 so far a made any attempt, good job Micheal!

Great question and fantastic posts from people who had made some really touch personal journeys. Thanks for sharing. I have never been a believer so i find stories like Janet’s interesting and amazing.

Monogamy or polygamy? I am trying to imagine polygamy. I love my wife. I don’t know how she will feel if I suggest the her I have an intention to take a mistress.

Now, where can I look to find another love? Is it possible? I am now thinking if my marriage has driven me for another alternative? But if yes, is it possible to love two women with one heart or just been naughty when no one is watching?

Better don’t imagine too much for I don’t want to wake up with a swollen ear.

To Mr. Florien:

I must say you have very interesting blogs/messages on your site, causing people to think. Christians certainly should be learners and critically think.

While your question today is to pretend God is disproved (which is quite impossible), have you contemplated the opposite- what if it were proven there is a God. How would you live differently.

Now, I hear many on here claim that God does horrible things in the Bible (surely they can only refer to the OT for most of that), but I would challenge that based on thoughts of some apologists such as Norm Geisler, CS Lewis, Frank Turek, Ravi Zacharias….They have some interesting thoughts regarding God as assumed in the OT.

However, realizing that you nor I have infinite knowledge or discernment, is it plausible to say we don’t fully understand some of the things found in the Bible. Also, are we to assume that in order for God to be God, and that includes all-loving, omnipotent, etc. that our definitions are the litmus.
Thus, how would you define “love?” If there is evil in the world, who defines it, and should there be any punishment for crimes (if we can call them such)?

So, back to the question, What if God were proven? How would you live?

Yahweh

OMG! Every time I stop by here you have something that echoes my life!! Once I dumped Christianity I found that I had SOOOOO much more time for my family, friends , myself and REALLY living life!! I did not realize how much the “Heavenly Father” was taking me away from my own life. The demands of being part of a church. The stress that I used to feel when they would expect so much of and from me on Sunday’s. It was SUCH a relief when I got out of it all. I could finally live an enjoyable and abundant life.

I love your blog and especially what you write and the service that you are doing for society!! Thank you.

Okay, now deep down, Comfort must know (the way believers “know,” y’know?) that there’s no such thing as hell. Because that little paragraph at the beginning of your post is a DIRECT VIOLATION of the commandment against bearing false witness. He is not only painting all atheists with the same brush, but it is a SLANDEROUS brush. So, obviously he’s not afraid of eternal damnation, which, if the Bobble were true, he’d be a leading candidate for.

Ring-ring-ring-ring-ring-ring-ring… Banana Phony!

For the record I just want to say that I think God will be disproved. It will probably take 10,000 more years but it will happen. Our universe will be shown to be one of an infinite number of universes, all in a medium that was never created but simply, always was, or timeless, as far as our puny brains can comprehend timelessness. When these universes collide, they generate a new universe via a very big bang like thing.

Yahweh is not the Jewish God; in the Bible he is the GOD – long before the Jews came to be, God was. God is the God of all people and desires for all of us to know God. We can throw out a lot of cynical questions, because I gather that most of the comments are from people who got burned from false churches and religion, both of which Jesus himself came to dissolve. Understanding that God is about doing rituals, going to church, etc etc, is to miss the mark completely.

“How would it affect your life and morality?”

Wouldn’t affect my morality, but it would affect most people’s to be sure. Most people are like animals waiting to be unleashed.

I have to say, I don’t agree with the Ray Comfort guy. Morality is a derivative of religion–whether it was anthropogenic or divinely inspired (though I believe it was the latter.) I don’t actually see most of my atheists friends committing any serious offenses, other than a little heavier drinking, the occassional sleeping around and swearing. But all people, whether they believe in God, a god, many gods, or none at all, have grown up in the shadow of religion. So whether we mean to or not, most people still act as though bound by some unknown set of rules, many of which are actually counter-evolutionary. Honestly, think up one other species that will “waste” as much of its resources on the less fit individuals, ie, mentally or physically handicapped, the diseased, lazy, etc. Even Darwin pointed that out. Yet we all drop our pocket change in the Salvation Army bucket at Christmas and praise the nuns who went into leprosy-ridden Calcutta to care for the sick.

If God were “proven” unreal, I have no doubt I would live at least little differently, trying to make up for feeling let down. I’d probably do whatever I wanted and have as much fun as I could down here since I would know there was nothing coming next.

I guess I would have to put up a Dawkins like stiff upper lip and continue my life as a simple ethical humanist. I could continue to be a moral person, but I have my concerns for society at large. I also would have concerns as to future generations as to their ability to avoid sinking into a social malaise. This is all academic as there are enough theists out there who will continue to believe no matter what evidence you threw at them.

@Bringo

It is Judeo-Christian faith with the emphasis on the Christian, all of the passages that you mention are all old testament, if you can give me a parallel passage in the new testament in anything that Christ says then I will concede. These are all events that happened for sure but are more for historical reference. This is not what is being taught in churches! I mean seriously, can find me a church or synagogue that actually teaches slaughter or murder currently? I would be very surprised. Obviously there are some that will twist the word of God, this is a given, you know it and it know it. I can take passages quite literally and it would sound very horrible, but there is the letter of the law and the spirit of the law, in what context is it being said or applied?

I’m an atheist, but I’d like to venture a guess and say… It wouldn’t make a lick of difference. There’s plenty of stuff that’s been proven already (*cough*evolution!*cough*, *cough*the Earth is older than 6000 years!*cough*) that many religious nuts still deny. If it were actually proven that god didn’t exist, they would just force themselves to believe that the “proof” was put there simply to test their faith. If anything, proof that god doesn’t exist would only strengthen their faith. Or it should, anyway, if they really do believe what the bible/Koran/whatever tells them….

What does No True Scotsman men?

Never heard of this Ray Comfort fellow, but it’s very stupid of him to think of Atheists like that.
I am not an Atheist per se, but I try to keep an open mind-
And, well, I know some Christians who are complete and total idiots, no offense intended.
They do some unbelievably disrespectful things to anyone of the fairer sex, and when they’ve “sinned” so much that everyone’s giving them flak for it, they go to God and repent.
Maybe cry for a while.
And then they’re all “on fire” for Jesus for a little while-say a week, and then they go back to their old patterns.
I’ve seen this disgusting behavior continue for three years, now.

How’s that for beliefs affecting your morals? o_o

Thanks for your “no-bs” answer, Michael.

Do you think the main reason you are moral now is because God will punish/reward you?

You say you’d be good because of social consequences and jail time. I agree those are good incentives. But wouldn’t you also want to be good because it makes you feel good, makes life more pleasant, and benefits those you love as well as society? And because you’d want other people to be moral so they don’t hurt you?

I would like to make a quick comment here from my own life. When I was a christian, I was driven by fear of external punishment. I didn’t break the law because I didn’t want to go to jail; I wasn’t a jerk to people because I didn’t want to be a social outcast. Since I dropped christianity and became an atheist, I am now motivated by my conscience. I am nice to people because that’s how I want to be treated; I don’t break the law because if everyone did that, nobody would feel safe (and I want to feel safe). I have so much more love for people because I’m not motivated by external punishment or reward – I do good things for people because they make me feel good. The whole christian idea that without the bible all morality would crumble is completely unfounded. (Just look at non-christian societies like Sweden – less crime, less inequality, etc. – better functioning society). Also, if you look at the “red” (christian) states in the United States, there is far higher rates of crime than “blue” (non-christian) states. Why do you suppose that is?

Hi Mike – I think the point is that none of us really know whether or not there is a God. If there is a God, we do not know if it is the christian god, the muslim god, or some other god. We absolutely cannot know about the truth of Jesus. None of us know what happens after we die. Anyone who does claim to know these things are lying to themselves. I don’t mean to be rude Mike, but I used to be a staunch christian myself and I fought tooth and nail for my position then. But even while I was doing that, I realized that I was losing ground. Dogmatism in the absence of evidence is the height of arrogance (I’m talking about my former self, not necessarily you).

“Do you think the main reason you are moral now is because God will punish/reward you?”

– I have to say that it is partly why I try to be moral. Like I sold a house a couple of years ago together with a co-broker. I could’ve taken the whole commission as it was wired to my bank account. But I thought then that such blatant dishonesty would undoubtedly come back to haunt me via divine justice. In retrospect, If I were an atheist, I’d have completely different reasons for having been honest then – maybe fear of being beaten to a pulp since my co-broker was 6′2 250.

“But wouldn’t you also want to be good because it makes you feel good, makes life more pleasant, and benefits those you love as well as society? And because you’d want other people to be moral so they don’t hurt you?”

– This is already a big reason why I try to act morally. But honestly, I wouldn’t see any reason to be ‘good’ to anyone I didn’t know, or would have any future dealings with. I do not earn much, but I try and donate to charity as much as I can because I’d like to please God – honestly if I believed there was no God, I wouldn’t see any reason to do these things anymore.

Eamon “Ammonite” Knight, I agree.

“But without God-given morality, society would collapse in a self-destructive orgy of mayhem, and we don’t want that, do we?”

My long story here of how it was for me to be a believer didn’t begin to capture the pain and harm caused by Christian belief premises. The one you mention here is based on the belief that people are born evil. “Born in sin” is the most common term.

It is a premise, a foundation belief, on which the other beliefs are built. If you don’t accept the premise that people are born evil, then the belief that society would collapse in a self-destructive orgy without God-given morality becomes baseless.

” So yes I get support and consolation. Now if I realized that it was all just a delusion – heck yeah that would suck. ”

mark: Dont you think that an all power and loving god should provide more than moral support and consolation to prove his existence.
Dont you think your god should provide a benifit for believing in him that is based on more than how god makes you feel.

Michael why is your all powerful god who wants all of his children to love him bieng so mysterious and coy about his intentions?

Since these things are very personal, it’s hard to give good examples. But I think what I had in mind was how, for example, Christians think masturbation is a sin. It’s something you do in private, that doesn’t hurt or affect anyone else. You might not find it immoral at all, in which case it’s a bad example, but do you get what I’m trying to explain? How do you morally justify or condemn something that isn’t applicable to the Golden Rule?

@ mark

“I could’ve taken the whole commission as it was wired to my bank account. But I thought then that such blatant dishonesty would undoubtedly come back to haunt me via divine justice. ”

mark: Not taking the commission would fall under the golden rule which some posters have already pointed out is a principle of many other non christian religions.

“But honestly, I wouldn’t see any reason to be ‘good’ to anyone I didn’t know, or would have any future dealings with. ”

mark: Golden rule baby covers this. Have you ever had someone in line behind you at a corner store (mom and pop) loan you the money (usually change) when you came up short 10 or 50 cents. It happens all of the time in my neighborhood.

Say for instance if I went to the store with 7 dollars and god a six pack but he price came up to 7.50 cents. It would not be strange at all if someone I didnt know even offered without me asking how much I needed and then gave it to me. I would then thank them (because it would beat having to run back to the house and get the money) and tell them next time I say them Id give them thier money back.

This type of thing happens all of the time.

Michael – FWIW, I find more reasons to contribute to charity in absence of the Bible God. The reason being that now I no longer think that God will take care of it. I realize that if *we* don’t make it better, then nobody else will.

“- I have to say that it is partly why I try to be moral. Like I sold a house a couple of years ago together with a co-broker. I could’ve taken the whole commission as it was wired to my bank account. But I thought then that such blatant dishonesty would undoubtedly come back to haunt me via divine justice. In retrospect, If I were an atheist, I’d have completely different reasons for having been honest then – maybe fear of being beaten to a pulp since my co-broker was 6′2 250.”

Fear motivated you.

Not because you entered into a partnership with someone.?Not because, compensating someone for their knowledge and experience when they helped you with a task was the right thing to do?

If you only do the right thing out of fear, I don’t think it’s very moral, just sad

Ah.. those kind of “crimes”.

I think it’s part of human nature to feel sexually fullfilled, so i don’t think masturbation is a crime at all.
More people should do it so there wouldn’t be as much sexual tension ;)

On things like cursing.. well.. if it makes people feel relieved if they curse.. than do curse.

Screaming and cursing is always better than hitting other people.

Though when someone always screams when they need to let go of something, maybe a good talk with a psychologist is in order ;)

Besides my easy and simple rule.. i do have a quite complex inner moral compass though, but that would take me quite some time to type out all the little rules i hold myself to.
I would love to keep the whole world to those, but allas, not many people are as moral as i am ;)

Thanks RB, I’m looking forward to seeing the new site!

“Screaming and cursing is always better than hitting other people.”

I agree. However, there are some subtle ways in which swearing can have victims. Imagine entering a social or work situation and someone suddenly swears or commits what some people might consider blasphemy. It’s a kind of passive-aggressive situation: the swearer is challenging the….erm…swearee… to endorse a particular set of rules for the conversation that they have not explicitly or even tacitly agreed to. The swearee doesn’t have any right to disagree without attacking the swearer’s right to say what he or she wants to, which would be priggish at best.

Personally, I couldn’t give a fuck of course.

Well, masturbation in public wouldn’t necessarily be “victimless”. Other people might take offense, even if they themselves have no moral problems doing the same thing at home, in privacy. I wouldn’t consider it immoral, but I wouldn’t do it either, out of respect for others. In this case, I guess the Golden Rule does apply.

I very much agree with that responsibility thing.

I feel responsible and take responsibility for everything i say, and every action i do.
I’m a pretty smart girl, so i do think in advance how my actions play out in a bigger world. Every action.
And i decide before hand if this is what i want as a result, and if it goes wrong, if i can still look myself in the eye about it and take responsibility.

the frase “i didn’t know this could happen” is not one i will ever utter, unless i completely miscalculated other people’s responses to my actions (which doesn’t happen often luckily).

In the end, i need to be able to live with concequences of what i do and say.. both good and bad.

Welcome. You will find many like minded people here.

Bravo (& wow!)

What a moving piece of writing. I am very happy that you have dug yourself out of the mire of organised religion and sympathise with you over the difficulty of dealing with parents who you don’t want to offend or refute.

And yes, I agree, any respectable reading of the bible should lead a rational person to a terrible revulsion at the frequently unbearable evil of the ‘god of love’

Like others have mentioned, well said!

I find what you wrote about your parents interesting. When I was a believer I used to worry about people that, for whatever reason, I believed would go to hell. It was an absolutely awful feeling. I wouldn’t want to push that feeling on anyone else either, especially my parents.

I think you are right. Using rational argument, it is clear that christianity (and other religions) are ridiculous. There is no proof of God; let alone a specific God; virgin birth, resurrection, etc. They will say it is based on “faith”, which means that no matter what evidence is before them, they will not change their minds.

Imagine if we based the rest of our lives on “faith” and threw out evidence? I go to the doctor – doctor gives me a prescription. I ask about side effects. Doctor says – no tests were done on this medication – we don’t know if it works, or if it has side effects – just have “faith” and it will be fine. Or if we had “faith” in the contractor building our house – would we not want assurance that the house would not collapse?

So why is it that when it comes to religion, “faith” is a good thing when it is clearly ridiculous in any other context?

Are you actually suggesting that Stalin’s or Pol Pot’s morality represents a viable option? Of course there are people like them in every major society but do you really think following in their footsteps could be a healthy personal step?

Morality doesn’t come gift wrapped. It emerges out of the evolutionary process and resultant complex cultural systems. We all have to make our way with less security and sureness than we would like.

Such as?

I think that was the point Barry was trying to make, that without an eternal purpose, there is no reason for personal improvement. I disagree with that. In practical terms, there are still lots of oughts – just not the one ought he finds most reassuring – the eternal ought. So Pol Pot, the Conquistadors and CS Lewis are all in the same place right now. I don’t think that is a big deal in terms of how I live my life, but theists apparently hate that thought.

I wonder about the types of people that are drawn to Christianity. The rigidity, the punishing their children, the autocratic mindset, the absolute certainty of being right… this would, I think, be a base for less openness, less tolerance (gee, ya think?), more abusive people, more crime.

Seems like you made a fairly easy transition. If so, good for you. People who are moving out of a faith system, especially if that system is deeply conservative or fundamentalistic, should consider researching what it is like to leave a cult. Many of the emotional experiences may be very similar. They certainly were for me: floating feeling; high anxiety when being with loved ones, friends; etc. I was surprised I didn’t experience much depression but rather found more day to day experiential happiness. My ability to experience compassion went through the roof which really, really surprised me after all the brainwashing.

One other very interesting personal experience with coming out was that a seeming cyclical pattern of depression that I had for all of my adult life faded away.

“After being a Christian my entire life, it became undeniably obvious that the Bible is too flawed to be a valid record. Without the validity of scripture, there is no validity to Jesus. And with the evidence that prayers aren’t answered, miracles don’t happen, bad things happen to good people, and evil things are done by Christians throughout the world, I couldn’t be a sheep any longer.”

This is the most to-the-point, clear-cut path to atheism I have ever read. I just wish more people would have less blind faith, and question even the things they take for granted, or really want to take for granted. They do it with every other part of their lives, except their faith.

I hope you don’t mind if I ever quote you on this sometime.

[...] the golden or silver rule [...] [are] based on experience and observation.

And on rationality as well, Id’ like to add… ;-)

Excellent suggestion. Rick Ross and Margaret Singer are just two excellent cult researchers. (I found them after attending an est-spinoff called Lifespring, getting my money back, and looking into the harm it does.)

The similarities are certainly there.

Deferring to an outside authority. The outside authority having lots of control over you. The cognitive dissonance: cramming and stuffing your intuitive or natural responses because the outside authority says different. The overwhelming new belief that seems to make sense of life when you first go in (if you ever buy it fully). The dissonance of the others’ beliefs and behavior. Pulling out. Rejection for not being “one of us”. The cringe that comes when you first disagree with the authority. Having to overhaul your belief system.

@ Jim

“The most godless societies in the world (Denmark and Sweden) have the lowest crime rates. If Ray were correct, the opposite would be true. Rather, the most god-fearing countries have the highest crime rates. In the US, the most religious states also have the highest crime rates. ”

What source are you basing this on, or is this just your opinion?

Using your example, society based.

How do you condemn a society that has a different set of morals? That’s very easy, the same way that you condemn those with a different set of morals than what’s in the Bible.

In a society where it was moral to eat children, then you’d know that that would be a very small society with a low chance of survival in the long run. Logically speaking, your society wouldn’t last very long at all, the first natural disaster to come through would probably wipe them out. We’d all consider it horrible, and I’m confident that some extremists would go to try to change their savage ways, but as a whole, the nation would just talk about it over drinks with other like minded individuals. Very similar to what we have now with religion, except without “God” (through the church) telling us how to think and feel.

Simply put, morality is a tool of community survival. It has been glorified to be greater than it is through the Bible, but in the end, it’s nothing more than a set of rules that’re required to make a society work. It is not God given, it’s just that someone very smart 6000 years ago wrote down these rules that were already in place, and then claimed that they came from God. It’s akin to if I told you “Don’t put your hand on the stove. Do not hit your wife. Do not juggle knives when drunk and blindfolded.” These commandments (probably) were not on paper (or stone tablets) before the Bible said they were, but they were also probably self-evident for any society of any size.

“What would you do if the Sun did not exist.”

Nothing. The solar system would not exist, life would not have evolved, I wouldn’t be writing this post.

Disproving all gods on the other hand, will not result in such dramatic results.

Please choose you analogies a little more carefully next time ;)

To answer your question:

Morality is based on three pillars: neural hard-wiring, learned behaviour, and, as I already mentioned, rationality. You can take away the second rather easily (think for example of the Concentration Camp personell in the Third Reich). You may also be able to remove the first factor through some sort of genetic defect, perhaps caused by inbreeding. But the third pillar will never go away. Being immoral is equal to being irrational. On those grounds it is always possible to judge someone else’s moral standards (as has been the case)

Oh, and btw, if they eat all children except the oldest, they would die out very fast… See, immorality and irrationality go hand in hand!

To clarify, imagine that a person ate his children. When asked why he says, “My moral beliefs allow me to do this.” What is your response, by what standard do you judge him if there is no absolute standard of morals.

The first step in answering this question is to acknowledge that religionist and atheist alike are very likely to find this sort of thing to be appalling and horrible. Instinctively, you probably know this about atheists, because I doubt very much that you know of any who think that baby-eating is okay. If you don’t know any atheists, ask us what we think – we will all tell you that it is morally wrong.

So the next step is figuring out *why* we would think it’s morally wrong. For religionists, at least to go by your comment above, the answer is “because God said it’s wrong.” Which is fine as far as it goes, but it’s rooted in a very debatable premise, which is that everything the God of the Christian Bible does is moral and good. We have examples of God committing genocide and other horrific acts against innocent people all through the Bible, acts which should repulse anyone with a developed sense of right and wrong – but don’t seem to repulse Christians strictly because we’re talking about God, who can do no wrong.

For atheists, it’s a bit different. I think you would find that most atheists (well, the moral ones, anyway – there are immoral atheists, just as there are immoral religionists) tend to think along the lines of “if it is harmful to someone else, then it’s probably not *right* to do it.” Naturally, though, there are situational circumstances to consider. Killing someone does harm to another person, so in general it is wrong. But what if that person is trying rape and/or strangle your grandmother, for example? My perspective tells me that it is a moral imperative to try to stop that from occurring, up to and including killing the would-be rapist/murderer.

And I know at least a few Christians who would agree with me on that, as well as one or two who might say that even then it is wrong to kill another human being. So even there, there isn’t any *absolute* standard of right or wrong.

Just because someone says “my society believes this is moral behavior” doesn’t necessarily make it true. But if that behavior is harmful to others, it’s not likely that the society will last very long anyway, and those people will then be punished for their wicked, sinful ways. ;)

That’s easy. If God showed up and was proven to exist, I’d worship. It’s not that difficult of a question. ;)

If God presented himself to me, I’d first check myself in at the nearest mental institution. If he then managed to prove that he wasn’t just hallucination, I’d believe he exists.

Did you expect a more complicated answer? Well, there isn’t one. Atheists don’t deny God because they want to, they do because they see no reason not to deny something that, by any practical means, doesn’t exist. If he did exist, we’d of course believe he did. Worship is a whole different story, however. I don’t think I could worship someone like the biblical God, no matter how omnipotent he is. And if I still did, it would be more to save my own ass from hell, than any real reverence.

Forcing respect and love by means of physical threat is the most surefire way to achieve the absolute opposite.

@Devysciple – another thing about the “heaven” belief – heaven is supposed to be “perfect” (which i believe is silly & childish black & white thinking – there is no perfection anywhere) don’t people in heaven mourn those they love who are burning in hell? I guess jesus gives them all amnesia so they can keep on playing harps in blissful ignorance….

xian-x, claidheamh mor: you guys fucking ROCK!!!

Martin: I’m actually basically thinking along the same lines as you. My point: It is actually far more likely for me to be barking mad, for being a character in an advanced computer program of someone else who merely wants to fuck with my head or something completely different.

We are by all means not capable of proving whether something that claims to be a god actually is… So Occam’s Razor again saves the atheist’s day :D

And as another OT (I really should stop, or Daniel will soon throw me out… but I can’t help, there are so many thoughts in my head. Kinda annoying sometimes):

I would love to see Banana Man refute this!!!

On the other hand, his answer would only make my brain hurt so much more. Ohhh, the stupidity.

[The Atheist] thinks that nothing made it (it just happened), which is a scientific impossibility.

Ray “Banana Man” Comfort

Kurt, FYI, there was a book recently written about that: Society without God. From my understanding, Jim’s claim is correct.

Hi Jane
Really encouraging reading about your deconversion and that you went through all that but things have gotter better and better.

“But I thought then that such blatant dishonesty would undoubtedly come back to haunt me via divine justice.”

Who are you quoting?

No, he simply wanted not to be that sort of person. I’ve never heard god mentioned at all in the story, and always found that interesting.

I don’t mind at all.

I agree. Ethics/morality/compassion/empathy/generosity – I beileve that these are traits within humans unless something happens to inhibit them. Back when I was a christian, I was motivated by fear. Now I am motivated by these moral values.

It reminds me of my cats. We are mammals, just like them. I have treated my cats with love and respect their whole lives. They are sooooo gentle and loving now. They do not need fear to do “good” – why should we? When children are abused (I consider fundie christianity abuse, actually, because of how I was raised by an evangelical preacher) then “natural goodness” is inhibited. When children are treated with love and respect, and appropriate consequences (but NO abuse), then they become empathic, loving people. With few exceptions. External morality (from the bible, christianity, god, etc.) is useless. If it does not come from within you, it is not really morality. Doing good out of fear is not morality at all, and it’s chilling to me that people can be that cold and robotic.

“Unbelievable. I am drop-jawed. As either a believer or a nonbeliever, you clearly state that you have no ethics and would do an ethical thing out of fear of punishment, either by God or by a large man beating you.

I am afraid – very afraid. I can’t even comprehend this soulless amorality, this lack of internal ethics.”

- I lack internal ethics now? If you want to do good and you say because it is in adherence of the “golden rule” then that means your ultimate reason for doing good is so that ‘good’ may also be done to you. How is that different from wanting to do good for God that he may bless you – which is, essentially, for ones own benefit too.

Be that as it may, Christians also do ‘good’ for goodness sake (ofcourse I would be lying if I said this is only the reason). We believe every person is a creation of God – thus important and sacred. It is wrong to assume that all the ‘good’ Christians do is merely so that God will give us something in return. Just read the life stories of some of the Christian saints.

God said that whatever you do to the least of your brothers you do unto him. True Christians do good because they love God, and the best way to show this love is by genuinely loving others. It isn’t wholly for our selves.

“I’ve done things which took energy and money from me, and not to get a reward. It arises from FEELING for a person or an animal.”

- And the reason you do them is because you have a certain “feeling”? What is the distinction between this “feeling” and, say, an animals instinct?

“I’m pissing into the wind. You don’t have it. You just don’t and won’t get it.”

- Why don’t you explain it to me then? I am genuinely interested. Saying “you don’t get it” therefore ‘I’m not going to explain it’ doesn’t answer or refute anything.

“I don’t know why you ASSume that feeling has to be different form animal instinct. What does it matter whether it’s different? What is wrong with animal instinct being empathy? That non-sequitur is called a “red herring”. ”

- Ok then. If its merely instinct. By your admission, you like being ‘good’ because it is your instinct. But can you tell me why it is important to follow your instinct? Are you truly being good now, or are you merely following ‘instinct’?

Is the ultimate motivation for following such instinctive behavior the perpetuation of our species? I’m not being sarcastic here seriously, I really want to know.

the idea of endless monogamy make very little sense if nature is our guide.

Monogamy is common in species whose young take a lot of caring for (of which human babies are the exemplar). It ensures that fathers can devote resources to children that they know are their own. Indeed, erotic love is almost certainly an adaptation designed to encourage us to form lifelong monogamous relationships.

Pair-bonding and monogamy in humans almost certainly predate marriage by several millennia, and they make a great deal of sense, given the amount of care that our young need.

@liankinnon – I believe that our morality has evolved. For example, humans are a comparitively weak mammal. But we have intelligence. It makes sense that we “band together” so that we are stronger. In a tribal sense, we are also kind to others so that they will reciprocate, to protect members of our family or tribe, because we feel like “good people” when we give, or, honestly, sometimes to feel superior to others (and prove that we are the “alpha”). You see this in the animal kingdom too. They often are kind to each other, protect each other – are even altruistic. Check out this interesting article on that topic:

http://tedeboy.tripod.com/drmichaelwfox/id52.html

I don’t think there is much of a relationship between christianity and morality, other than the fact that religion often makes good people do terrible things.

No, I did not have debates with non believers. In fact I would have avoided a debate even if I had the chance. I’m embarrassed to admit the only way I remained faitful in Jesus was to ignore huge parts of the bible. When you’re indoctrinated into this belief system at birth, you’re programmed to feel guilty questioning anything.

I believe biblical illiteracy is the reason many people remain Christian today. Jesus wasn’t a big fan of “lukewarm” believers, but there are plenty of them out in the world.

Sock – Love your posts! Keep them coming! Sock it to ‘em!

” neural hard-wiring, learned behaviour, and, as I already mentioned, rationality. You can take away the second rather easily (think for example of the Concentration Camp personell in the Third Reich). You may also be able to remove the first factor through some sort of genetic defect, perhaps caused by inbreeding. But the third pillar will never go away.”

Actually learned behavior is difficult to extinguish (assuming the person isn’t brain damaged). And the first factor (neural hardwiring) is a matter of genetics, environment, and (in some cases) brain damage. Neural hardwiring is easy to take away, just damage someone’s brain. I really don’t understand your statement about the third pillar (rationality) never going away. Seriously, I was a special education teacher, and it is very clear to me that the health of people’s brains relates directly to their ability to be rational. I think you put too much stock in people being rational. After all, observing people in the world tells us that this isn’t so.

What–it took me umpty-ump years to find the first one and you want me to go looking for a second?

My wife and I have discussed various forms of marriage. She’d go for polyandry right now, provided sauce for the goose were liberally applied to the gander.

Some scientists actually claim humans are serial monogamists.

I read that the infatuation/puppy love period lasts close to three years, and that it developed so that people would pair off just long enough to raise a child through its most vulnerable period. Then they would be off to spread their genes again.

Consequently, there is usually a ‘rough patch’ in a relationship between 3-7 years in, which is where lots of long term relationships fail if they are going to. If you make it past that period however, the bond is reformed as a different kind of love, closer to familial love.

Our societies generally hold the latter ‘long haul’ kind of love in higher regard because it’s more fulfilling, and so we are pressured to make it into that period.

*some people grow apart

And that’s okay.

However, the bible would have you suffer through a miserable and abusive relationship until the day you die. It obviously values the quixotic concept of marriage higher than the individuals in it.

Thank you for your comment. I used to feel guilty for not missionizing to my friends – every lost opportunity (to preach the gospel to them) meant that they may go to hell and it would be my fault. What a horrible burden to put on a child! I raised my son non-christian, and he is a gentle, well-adjusted young man now.

I loved Dan Savage’s response to the Mormon Church’s backing Prop. 8 here in California. It was something to the effect of:

“Mormons should love gay marriage, they’re polygamists after all. They’re going to need somebody to soak up all those extra Mormon boys.”

Ha ha.

I totally agree. If people knew the kind of horrors are really in the bible, they would not believe it. God is responsible for massive tribal genocide, murder, rape, and bashing babies heads in. These are not EVIL PEOPLE in the old testament – these are commands by God! It’s truly incredible. Check out http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ for lists of the horrors taken directly from the bible.

Janet – JC will tell you to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Jesus is IN you – that’s all ye little petty mind need know. Don’t worry about what’s written in that pesky bible.

I am translating it to Spanish, can I?

Of course, that’s very easy to say, but I’m confident that those with families (wives, husbands, children, mothers, fathers, anyone close to them) wouldn’t actually be able to go through with that. They’d draw strength from each other, and purpose to live and do well from each other.

I am a cancer survivor. During the process I had to face the possibility of going through a period at the end of my life that could be extremely painful physically. I considered the pros and cons of self inflicted euthanasia and decided against availing myself of such. The primary reason for the decision was that I choose not to send any message to my children about giving in to things that appear hopeless since not all such things that appear so are in fact hopeless. That does not mean that I would judge harshly anyone who decides differently. It’s a pragmatic decision based on the sum of one’s life, experience and reasoning capacities.

Seconding this, hard. If God/Jesus were proved to exist I still wouldn’t worship them. They would have a LOT of explaining to do.

In Romeo and Juliet’s time, I think people married at 15 and lived until about 22, so “until death do you part” only had to last 7 years.

The median age of marriage in the Medieval period was a little over 20, perhaps as high as 22. There were a very few child-marriages, mostly very high status individuals whose marriage can be used to cement political alliances, but most people amrried at abou the same age they do today.

And the idea that people only lived to be 22 is laughable. The life expectancy was (at its lowest) somewhere around 45, but that includes the one in three that died in their first year. Of the people who lived long enough to get married, they reached an average age in their 60’s.

claidheamh mor: Can you refer me to a work by Aquinas?

Yes. Aquinas argued this position in the Summa Theologica (Suppl. Q. 94). You can find it online here:

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/5094.htm

What I think Aquinas does is drive home the full implications of there being a hell of the sort many Christians believe in, namely, that it might involve enjoying the suffering of your loved ones. In other words, believe in your hell, but understand where it leads: to rejoicing in the torture of your own children.

While your question today is to pretend God is disproved (which is quite impossible)

I wish it were impossible to see people who assume that their question hasn’t already been asked and discussed in the very same thread.

I think this is a good question, and I’ll probably do a post on that soon.

My answer is simple. If God were proven, I’d believe in him. And my life would change in whatever way he saw fit.

The only exception would be if the god was truly evil. If he killed people, watched women be raped and did nothing, asked people to kill themselves and others, etc, then I would have to be against him, though I would believe in him.

Do you believe it is a moral absolute to kindly read the thread before assuming your ideas are new to the discussion/thread?

You have no idea what we “know”. In the sense of innate knowledge that is not taught to us by others, but instinct and something we’re born with. It’s impossible to say that we “know” murder and theft are wrong, unless you were to raise a child in a box, and then let it out of the box when it turned 21, and ask it about these questions. Assuming it could understand you (and that’s a BIG assumption, about as big as it is actually living that long and remaining sane), it would have concept of any of these concepts that come with society.

So, let’s broaden it. Let’s take a society that has lived without God, the folks still living in tribes in deserts and jungles around the world. People who have never seen a car, much less heard of the Bible. And you know what? Their societies are all VERY similar to ours. Absent from the Church, from God, and from Christians, these people live more primitive lives than we, but they still have a very strong sense of what we would call “morality”. They work together, they live in their tribes and war with other tribes who live differently than they do.

Morality was an evolutionary development. It came about so that we could survive and thrive. Other species have their own forms of morality, from packs of lions that let the leader of the pack eat first (and they never kill part of their own pack) to elephants that protect their young. Morality is nothing more than the glorified basic instinct all social creatures have to survive by working together, given a name.

Nah. If I go with a war god, I prefer Mithra. Yahweh was way to whiny and jealous.

@Sock

That’s a cop-out. If god really existed he would have to explain why he has allowed so much evil to occur within his creation. He didn’t know about it, couldn’t stop it, or didn’t care. In any case he wouldn’t be much of a god. Why worship that?

Good point. Unless they are “christian”, they would all go to hell. The murderer and the person who sacrificed their whole life for the poor, for another example. They will both burn in eternal damnation (hell). Does this sound like justice? What kind of loving God would do that? It makes absolutely no sense. And once the clouds clear (that is the brainwashing that most of us are exposed to about christianity) we can see further than we ever thought. It is so obvious to me now that christianity is a farce, and worse; it’s incredible to me that I ever believed it. I really appreciate your comments, Cello.

Thanks. And I like your comment about Yahweh being jealous. What kind of perfect god is JEALOUS? Does that not infer insecurity? I remember being told growing up that we are put on this earth to worship God. Again, what kind of God is so insecure that he CREATES PEOPLE just so he can be worshipped??? It’s quite incredible, really. I so regret all the time I spent in church, bible study, religious music, etc. when I could have been doing something useful and productive.

Which (whose) narrative were you referring to?

By “work things out” I mean figure them out. Not magically fix them, but understand them.

My kingdom for a preview/edit function!

Thanks!

I’ve scanned it so far. He also says:

To rejoice in another’s evil as such belongs to hatred,

Which does a good job of calling BS on Christian hatred. Other words come to mind, like “perverse”.

What is God jealous for? He is jealous for us, for our hearts to be re-united, restored in innocence, in fellowship as it was before His creation (us) were marred, before our memory of the paradaisical was impaired, before the divine sensitivities were lost.

We have forgotten who we once were, who he created us to be, in Him. Restoration to the glory, the beauty when all was right in the world, before the division, the great striation was made.

The church is more of an impediment, a hindrance to this reconcilliation. Love is jealous for you…

Janet…

Your story is all too common, thx for sharing. I applaud your wisdom to discard “religion” which I define as external rule keeping dogma devoid of the motive of love and the absence of a change of nature within. When “religion” is forced upon one accompanied by a climate of fear, the result is often toxic, even evil. Mankind has witnessed its ugly fruits all too often throughout history.

Fortunately this has nothing to do with Christ’s true message and offer which is more closely tied to an internal change of nature, even a pre-empting of our (old, inherited, ancestral, temporal) life in exchange for His uncreated, resurrected life within. The result is an internal metamorphosis where love is the motivation for all things God-toward, man toward.

There is so much more to this “Christ” than the world knows, and we cant find Him in organized religion. He is not external, but Christ IN you is the “mystery of the ages”. In you and as you…this is the liberating truth.

The journey continues.

Yep, might be. Might as well be that the burden of proof and so on and so on…

It’s always the same old story.

I have sufficient scientific evidence behind me to support my view, whereas the theist…

Sorry, I’m really tired (its around midnight here and I got one whole hour of sleep last night *yawns*

(btw, not being a native speaker myself, could you please add some synonyms for ’snarky’, as I’m not familiar with that particular expression. And my dictionaries are a bit ambiguous on that one. It’s all about the learning :D )

Which god? There are lots of different ones with very different requirements. So which one specifically?

If Thor were proved to exist I would have trouble becoming all war like and aggressive but on the other hand I wouldn’t want to get on His bad (sword) side…. :)

Oh sure, but Ted Haggard doesn’t sure, because he’s supposedly *not a REAL Christian*.

Yes, if you only accept the evidence that confirms the position you originally held, then why should you even really bother looking at evidence?

I agree and was thinking of that at the time of my posting. A less simplified way of evaluating it might be asking what kinds of people struggle with it and get out of it, like the posters here; what kinds of people are moderate, easygoing people who just privately turn to Christianity for comfort (I know some); and what kinds defend it with pigheadedness and hostility?

Do, Godsmack, do you have any ideas to prevent “missing the mark completely” on religion?

Who is closest to the mark?

The Baptists? The Methodists? The Lutherans? The Roman Catholic? The Orthodox? The Presbyterian? The Anglican? The Unitarian? The non-denominationals? The charismatics?

Annihilationism or eternal punishment? How many sacraments? What is required to get to heaven? What part of Jesus is man, what part is a god? How are the OT and the NT consistent? Is the Bible literal? Is it compatible with evolution?

Which of these views are correct? Which of these denominations are correct?

You have no more idea what “understanding god” is about than any of your Christian cohorts, do you?

Are you the be-all and end-all of Christianity? Do you know everything?

“Cynical questions”, sure. Cynical questions that have led to the burning of heretics, the cataclysms of religiously motivated war, and the persecution of religious minorities for many hundreds of years.

How is this message supposed to be divinely inspired? Could you please explain that for us?

The only reason that Christianity probably doesn’t have a god-awful track record is because there probably isn’t a god.

The only exception would be if the god was truly evil. If he killed people, watched women be raped and did nothing, asked people to kill themselves and others, etc, then I would have to be against him, though I would believe in him.

To me, that would be true innate ethics, or true morality. I think one of the highest forms of being truly and fully human is to stand for what helps the health, happiness and well-being of life.

(The long way of defining what people use verbal shorthand to say “dong what’s right”.)

Taking a (well-reasoned) stand against people is courageous enough, but I could see taking a stand against God if God were anti-life.

“The only exception would be if the god was truly evil. If he killed people, watched women be raped and did nothing, asked people to kill themselves and others, etc, then I would have to be against him, though I would believe in him.”

Even the demons believe! (of course an evil god would call thinkers evil and then complain about how they believe but don’t obey…. hmmmm…. kinda like the bible god!)

Sí usted puede.

@John – you are twisting the word “jealous” quite a bit – but I understand christians have to spin a lot. And you are assuming that we were “innocent” in a previous life. We are what we are – we have evolved from lower life forms. We were never innocent, and we are not fallen. We are just human – imperfect like everything else in the universe. Perfection is a childish ideal. We are not human without flaws. Perfection is an unhealthy ideal. We should strive to be the best we can be – fully human. That’s it. Religion and Hollywood – both unhealthily obsessed with perfection. The only reason you could possibly think that things used to be “perfect” is if you believe in genesis. Evolution proves that genesis is a myth, a fairy tale. So where can you possibly get the idea that we used to be “innocent” and now we need “restoration?”

I don’t believe in hell despite my Baptist fire-and-brimstone upbringing, so I would assume that issue wouldn’t arise. As for my murderer, I’d hope that if God truly is love — not the Biblical God, necessarily, but more what Sanskrit calls That — He or She would prepare each person an afterlife in which they are at peace. So if I was hypothetically murdered, I doubt that I would ever “bump into” my killer in my afterlife.

To be honest, I rarely think about the afterlife in much detail because I can’t know anything about it until after I die, even if it does exist. So pondering questions about who’s there and who’s not doesn’t really interest me, since I’m not going to find out until I’m dead–and since there’s no proof it exists anyway.

As for the saints, I suppose it’s a bit like why I’d miss the closest thing I do to praying: it’s comforting to speak to someone about my problems who is, frankly, invisible and incapable of actually doing anything. Like I said, without prayer I’d continue talking my problems out. However, I wouldn’t talk them out with God or the saints, but with myself.

uh I beg to differ. This guy is god. As he puts it “I am the embodiment of god. I am divinity and humanity combined.”

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/inside-a-cult-3401/Overview?#tab-Videos/05168_00

I agree with markbey – thanks for addressing this. Religious phrases like “missing the mark” are words I heard all my life and it really bugs me.

lucidmystery,

I disagree that morality is strictly a derivative of religion. Why?

If we examine all of the cultures of the world, and all of the individual cultures’ contrasting religious dogma, these cultures’ morality is still constructed in similar ways, despite the religious difference amongst different societies. One could argue that, perhaps, religion could very well be at least in part a by-product of particular societies’ conceptions of morality.

The argument from morality causes me to scratch my head sometimes. I wonder if the Christian god is true, what precise mechanism would have been used to propagate this inherent moral understanding which is supposedly derived from this god’s divine character?

People who are exposed to Buddhist religion in their cultures are still “moral”. Is it because they got their morality from the Christian god but not their belief system?

The only way to be consistent is to say that morality must be inherent in all individuals as the gift of a Creator. That’s the only way to account for Buddhist and Muslim and Hindu and Confucian morality in environments apart from Christianity if Christianity’s claims are valid.

However, if this were true, then why would it matter if people believed in the right religion or not, when determining their sense of morality?

Of course, we know that there are serious differences in how individuals and different cultures assess morality. Just look at the debates over abortion, homosexuality, slavery, euthanasia, capital punishment, and other complex moral issues.

Do all people have the same inherent moral standards or priorities when it comes to these issues? No. I suggest that they do not, as is evident from the controversies which have been evoked as societies have struggled with these moral issues over the centuries.

But maybe morality isn’t inherent, but it is still a byproduct of religion. Perhaps this is the case. However, then we must acknowledge religion’s role as a social construct, and that is to venture into difficult territory for many theists. For if religion can be accounted for as a social and psychological construct, what then?

I don’t pretend to have the answers to difficult questions about morality or the origins of religion. But the basic patterns of our existence strongly suggest that morality is not the inherent derivative of any one particular religion. I wish that theists would acknowledge the role of societies in shaping the moral paradigms of their ages, and I wish that atheists would acknowledge the role of religion in shaping these moral paradigms, many times in a positive way for those involved.

As for living without a god or gods, this is a relevant issue for me, as I just deconverted from Christianity within the last year. I have found that I adhere to roughly the same moral standards as I have previously, though my opinions have changed on a few issues.

I have found that much of my morality is separate from religious instruction. My psychology, my family, my country, my friends, my social traditions — all of these things contribute to my sense of what is moral and what is not. I have much to learn about morality, but it seems to me now that part of it is objective, and part of it is subjective. As anyone who has read this far has learned, I love talking about these things.

@lucidmystery

Morality is a derivative of religion

*snort*

You READ all the post here by atheists saying that they couldn’t and wouldn’t act unethically, and still have the goddamn nerve to say that?

Well, Kant can claim to be a universalist all he wants. I think his arguments stem from the argument from sentience (although he would be the first to admit to the empirical aspect of his rule, as it would be synthetic a priori).

Tele…

So young, so bright…stay open to the entrance of Truth in the inward man. No religion, no belief structure…Christ (Himself) within…the indwelling.

You desire Truth in the inward parts. Ps 51:6

The Light Path

Hey science girl…how are you???

My fav “A” LRA!! lol

Obviously I’m no Kantian. I’m too pragmatic for that.

And God has split personalities. He can’t decide if he is a mountain god named El Shaddai or a familial god named Yahweh.

Just FYI Gerardo:

Leviticus 20:13: “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”

They were commanded by the judeo-christian god to KILL gay people. If they were killed by stoning or some other method is beside the point.

The bible is a mass of contradictions. No wonder there are so many different denominations in christianity.

BTW, the whole love your neighbor and your enemy only apply if these are within your ethnic group. If you were a amorite or an amalekite, no love for you. Only god commanded genocide.

Deuteronomy 7:1-2, “When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you may nations…then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy.”

Deuteronomy 20:16, “…do not leave alive anything that breaths. Completely destroy them…as the Lord your God has commanded you…”

Regarding selling ones own daughter just read this: Exodus 21:7-11. It is self explanatory.

WTF?????

@marcion

Wouldn’t affect my morality, but it would affect most people’s to be sure. Most people are like animals waiting to be unleashed.

Ah yeah. That old Christian saw about people being born evil. Don’t tell me you “don’t believe that crap” – it’s an essential premise in order to believe that people need to be “saved” or “redeemed”; the belief that they are “born in son”; the belief that children need to be punished and “taught” morals; the belief that “people are like animals waiting to be unleashed”.

ALL of that is your unproven crap premise that people are born evil.

I admit I was shocked at the Christian posting here who said he would feel no compunction about doing unethical things if he found his god weren’t true. A word for that kind of people is “sociopaths”.

Read all the atheist responses in THIS blog showing that they couldn’t and wouldn’t violate other people, and other life – like that creep would.

Read the posts here in this blog about the godless societies having less sociopathic conditions.

And then try (and fail) to tell me that people really “are animals waiting to be unleashed” (ignoring and insulting the natural lovingness of many animals when treated well!), and that Christianity is that leash.

Admittedly, it is, for the sociopath Christian posting above. But try (and fail) to tell me that “most people” are sociopaths.

Try (and fail yet again) to tell me that Christianity doesn’t perhaps cause this kind of sociopath by conditioning people from birth that they are born evil.

“Self-fulfilling prophecy” and “vicious circle”, anyone?

And you gotta love the baby-killing parts of the bible, or where God murders people for no apparent reason.

1. After God has sufficiently hardened the Pharaoh’s heart, he kills all the firstborn Egyptian children. When he was finished “there was not a house where there was not one dead.” Finally, he runs out of little babies to kill, so he slaughters the firstborn cattle, too. Exodus 12:29

2. In the cities that god “delivers into thine hands” you must kill all the males (including old men, boys, and babies) with “the edge of the sword …. But the women … shalt thou take unto yourself.” Deutoronomy 20:13

3. “But of the cities … which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.” Kill the old men and women, the sick and the dying, the blind and the lame, pregnant mothers, nursing mothers, infants, toddlers, and babies. Deut 20:16

4. Joshua, at God’s command, kills everyone and everything that he can find (including babies and little children)– or, as the Bible puts it, he “utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord commanded.” Joshua 10:28-32

5. God will “fill the places with dead bodies” of heathens. Psalms 110:6

6. God is praised for slaughtering kings, nations, and little babies. Psalms 135:8, 10

7. “To him that smote Egypt in their first born: for his mercy endures forever.” Psalms 136:10

(There are so many verses like this I have to stop – don’t want to take up so much space)

@ sarah

” I would assume that issue wouldn’t arise. As for my murderer, I’d hope that if God truly is love — not the Biblical God, necessarily ”

mark: Where do you get your concept of god from.

Sara, I am an atheist but I like your god description. I too believe in something bigger than us – I call it the Universe – God to me might be the combination of all the energy there is – As John Shelby Spong says, the Ground of all Being. This is a bit of a Pantheist belief, maybe? Which I would not disagree with. I certainly respect your belief.

*typo* born in sin

Sara “consider me a believer in an infinite source of love that has no ability to change or impose anything on anyone. A passive force of love, if you will.” that is beautiful. Sorry if i sounded a bit harsh. thanks for sharing. it is appreciated. Your idea of god sounds a bit like the ‘god is everything’ idea, which if i was to subscribe to a belief in god I would probably opt for that one.

Janet! The phrase “baby-killing” caught my eye immediately! That’s what so many Christians call people who are pro-CHOICE on the OPTION to abort a fetus.

THAT goes against God, but he (no one’s pulled up his robes and looked, but he’s gotta be a ‘he’) can slaughter ‘em wholesale AFTER they’re born.

“In this administration, life begins at conception and ends at birth.’
-Rep. Barney Frank, ~1981

“You honestly don’t see the inherent value in trying to make life better even for perfect strangers in need? Are you really saying that the only reason you do these things is because you think God is keeping score?”

- It’s easy to say that you do good because you see the “inherent value in trying to make life better even for perfect strangers” Its easy to say that you are always moral because you just love being good for goodness sake, and all those other warm fuzzy emotional stuff.

But essentially, why do you do good? Golden rule? doesn’t that simply mean you do good because you want ‘good’ to be done to you?

What I meant with that statement is this: If God was disproved, ok, I’m not a bad guy (honest!) I probably still would do good, but eventually I would think – If we are created by randomness and chaos, then we essentially have no purpose but subjective purpose. These feelings of compassion are just a bunch of chemical reactions in my brain. Why are they important? Yes I may feel deep compassion and love for my neighbor, but are these feelings important since his feelings of despair are also a bunch of chemical reactions in his brain? Why is it important?

I’m not saying that atheists are incapable of morality, NO. What I’m saying is, these feelings of compassion and love are simply an evolutionary trait that helps in the perpetuation of our species. These feelings are no different from an animals instincts, why is it important? Why is it important that we perpetuate our species? We will all get consumed by the sun in a billion years time anyway assuming we don’t destroy the earth and kill our race first, so what is the use of perpetuating our species or our planet?

This is an interesting point that is often absent from the argument from christians that you must have God to have morals. Personally, I can see why people who grew up christian are more screwed up – I was one of those people for many years! If you’re interested, check out Celia Murray Dunn’s “Religion that Harms, Religion that Heals”. She is not an atheist, in fact, I think she calls herself a christian (not a fundie though). But she clearly outlines how belief in christianity creates mental illness. Very, very interesting analysis.

You cannot genuinely love others on command. Ofcourse you have to make an effort to get to know them, spend time with them, be compassionate etc. You cannot go in the street and immediately love the homeless person there. You spend time with the homeless, the poor, get to know them, be compassionate – you’ll find that it is easy to feel love for the same people after doing so.

The same way with God. You have to know him thru reading the bible, praying having a ‘relationship’ with him. Real Christians love God, No, their not pretending. It is not some ‘fake’ love that we feel. Again read the lives of the saints and tell me these people had fake love.

” REALLY AM now empathic and loving to others. these feelings are a by-produce of happiness. There is no happiness with fear. For me, that meant no happiness with christianity (hell, rapture, Revelations, murderous god etc).”

– Yes happiness is also what gets Christians to love others. Happiness because of the “good news” which is Jesus Christ.

Agreed. I just don’t understand this need for a “why?”

Why on earth would anyone need a justification for doing something good?

The very concept of morality is based on what the majority of us happen to think is the proper way to behave, so it’s hardly surprising that most of us behave (more or less) that way, even in the absense of retribution for transgressions.

I just wish the religious would get the message that nobody needs a *reason* to behave in a moral fashion.

latsot – I’m responding to your comment “It seems to me that a crime is an execution of an injustice so by definition there cannot be a crime without a victim.”

I would take issue with that because it is people who decide what crime is and what crime is not. Often the rules are made to benefit the wealthy and oppress the poor. For example, there is a law against panhandling in certain areas. However, when wealthy corporate types break the law, it’s usually not criminal law, it’s “regulatory” law which carries lesser sentences.

I used to be a criminal defense lawyer, and it was incredible how stupid our criminal laws can be. Crimes are whatever the powers-that-be say they are. So there is no reason to think that all crime has to do with injustice.

Paul condemns homosexuality in the NT. So it’s not quite as OT vs NT as you think.

However, it doesn’t say to kill them, which is an improvement.

Whoa! Barney Frank (the gay guy with a speech impediment) is a REPUBLICAN??? Really?

Holy crap, I could’ve sworn he was a democrat. Especially given the gay thing (not trying to be insensitive toward gay people!!! Not at all! I have plenty of gay friends and I am PRO gay marriage. I’m straight… and married… but I usually have a pretty good gaydar!)

Google is your friend!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

You have just referred to Pascal’s Wager, which is discussed in depth by various atheist writers (Dawkins, Harris, etc). I would say that is like saying “There may be an invisible Pink Elephant circling the earth waiting for you to die and torture you forever unless you believe in him”.

I guess I would just have to be tortured, because I cannot force myself to believe something that is simply not believable to me. I believed in christianity for many years; but once the truth was exposed, I could never go back to living a lie again.

In reply to Ty’s comment below … I wasn’t trying to project anything on to anyone. Apologies if you thought I was.

As regards evidence, I am a molecular and cellular biologist by initial training and having gone through several crises if faith I have been brought back to faith by looking at the evidence. What evidence? For me, the complexity of life -and in particular the complexity of cellular biology – is evidence enough. The way in which living cells are ‘constructed’ is, in my opinion as an enquiring scientist, too complex to have happened by accident. [But I believe evolution may have happened on a small scale later. And then there is the evidence around the death and resurrection of Jesus. While at university I challenged the top biochemist in our year [a truly amazing scientist who scored more than 100% in his exam!!] to look at this – and he became a Christian.

What I also don’t recognise is the stereotypes of Christians in this blog. Maybe that is because many are North American. As a British Christian, my church doesn’t fit those sort of stereotypes. And nor do I. So please don’t project stuff on to me. I’m a thinking, compassionate, and hopefully fairly moral person.

@eric beach – it’s interesting to me that you are a european christian. I think north american christians tend to be much more fundie and extreme (bible literalists for example). But I’m curious as to how you can be a scientist and still believe in god/jesus/christianity. You know more than most of us, probably, about evolution and natural selection. You know the earth is approx 14 billion years old (which negates the entire book of genesis, which negates original sin, because if adam and eve did not sin (no “fall”) there is no need for a saviour etc. As a scientist you should be more critical than most about the ridiculous and violent stories in the bible. And you may be a “liberal christian”, but I don’t get that either. You either believe in the bible, and the premise of salvation, or you don’t. I just don’t get it.

@isnessie – were you responding to me? (said “Jane”) – yes, my deconversion was mostly thrilling but sometimes terrifying. I was very brainwashed by christianity, having grown up the daughter of an evangelical pastor. Until I was in my mid-30’s, it never occurred to me that christianity wasn’t true. It was an interesting process, but christianity didn’t work for me. Now I don’at know what happens after we die, so this life is all I know and I want to milk it for all it’s worth. The odds of us even existing are astronomical, and I feel that life is such an incredible gift. And the world makes so much more sense. No more wondering why life is unjust (why was I born into a rich country and others live all their lives in war-torn countries knowing nothing but fear, violence & loss) – now I know it’s mostly chance. I do believe that to a large extent we can create our own lives – it’s not about pleasing god, it’s about finding out who we are and creating who we want to be. We make our own meaning out of life. I find the bible and other “holy books” very evil, personally. I expose myself to books that inspire me to be a better and happier person now. Books like “religion that harms, religion that heals” by Celia Murray Dunn, and “christianity must change or die” by John Shelby Spong really changed my life – helped me think outside the box, and were so positive about life. Then I went to Greta Vosper, Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris. Good luck with your journey.

@sock – thanx for the response. If god had “created” us, he/she would know that we would have intelligence and critical reasoning. It makes no sense that he/she would expect us to live our entire lives on a belief system with no rational basis.

I believe in an uncaused cause or a prime mover. That’s about it. I guess I qualify as a deist, but that “faith” has been dead for many years. I can’t say that god is personal or good. I can say that I’m afraid to not have some kind of ultimate purpose (although I may change this at some point in my journey). I’m a deconverted Christian so I’m the first to admit that I may just be hanging on to old ideas. Also, I would never criticize atheists for their position.

:)

@claidheamh mor – thanks for the info about China. Another reason to boycott is because people are abused and taken advantage of to make cheap items for international consumption.

Re animals, I am considering becoming a vegetarian (almost there now – don’t eat red meat, rarely chicken, but love fish) because I see more and more how much we are alike – same emotions etc. Other mammals, especially, are able to feel love, fear, surprise, happiness, joy, etc. Just like us. One reason I could not believe in a loving god is because nature is so violent – the food chain. If god was truly good and loving, he/she would have found a better way for animals to survive that did not include ripping apart another animal. (Sometimes I like animals a lot better than people ;)

Anyone who thinks that people are beasts waiting to be released (if they didn’t have religion) has no intrinsic morality, empathy or ethics. We assume in others what we are ourselves.