Morality Without God

24567…13

Comments

  • pandora
    pandora Posts: 21,855
    Byrnzie wrote:
    pandora wrote:
    those who don't believe in God make it all about religion
    because that is easier to shun, ridicule, dissect, understand ... instead of just feel.

    When there are no religions there will still be the power that is God.

    It depends what you mean by 'God'. You say God is a power. Is that as far as it goes? Care to elaborate?

    Nothing complex is ever simple except when it comes to God's love.

    I feel God is a guiding intelligent power based in love.
    Unconditional love that we, as humans, have not yet achieved.

    I know nothing of man made religions, they don't speak to me
    but I respect those who find solace there and admire their commitment.

    I know God and He is great and I am thankful to know him.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    pandora wrote:
    I feel God is a guiding intelligent power based in love.

    I know God and He is great and I am thankful to know him.

    Him?
  • pandora
    pandora Posts: 21,855
    Back to the subject though

    Of course there is good without God.

    Of course people have morals without religion and some with religion have none.

    It is as individual as the individual .. why we should not judge
    and why we should live and let live and love.
  • pandora
    pandora Posts: 21,855
    Byrnzie wrote:
    pandora wrote:
    I feel God is a guiding intelligent power based in love.

    I know God and He is great and I am thankful to know him.

    Him?
    knew that was coming :lol:

    I like that better than IT that is all :D
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    redrock wrote:
    I don't think it's a particularly religious word, though religious writings sure like to use it. For religious purposes it's used for all that opposes 'god' and his ways (except Buddhism). From a 'normal' point of view, evil can represent so many different things - is it a person (someone fundamentally evil - what is that?)? Is it a particular act that is evil (though what may seem evil to one, is not to the other)? Is is just another word for bad? Antonym for good? Whilst some acts may be universally considered evil, would 'common' evil not be defined by one's cultural environment (in the same manner as good or 'moral')? Some cultures don't even have 'evil' in their language - something more like 'out of sync'!

    We then go down the 'morals' route - what is good or what is bad? And for whom?

    Edit: made me look up the etymology for 'evil'. Yep... seems the origin of the word meant nothing more than 'uppity'. Over the millenia, the meaning of it got more and more sinister to it's current most common meaning of "extreme moral wickedness" (from the 18th century). "It seems theologians have had considerable influence upon shaping words to cause us to see according to their doctrines rather than what is plainly written." So maybe, in a way, you are right Steve - the word itself is not religious, but the meaning has been shaped by theology.

    I'm no expert as I didn't study ethics when I did my philosophy degree, but mostly it just seems like common sense to me.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    pandora wrote:
    It is as individual as the individual .. why we should not judge
    and why we should live and let live and love.

    So you'd excuse Joseph Goebbels then?
  • redrock
    redrock Posts: 18,341
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I'm no expert as I didn't study ethics when I did my philosophy degree, but mostly it just seems like common sense to me.

    Even if you didn't focus a bit more on ethics (various cultures, etc.), you know that there are so many train of thoughts anyway that this question of good/evil, morals with or without god has been debated in so many different ways, with each 'school' of thoughts' having the 'answer' (or admitting there is none!).

    I still believe that one doesn't need a 'power above' to guide your life. If one finds a need for this in order to live a 'good' life, then so be it. If some need a 'god' to be good, some can do this of their 'own free will'.
  • pandora
    pandora Posts: 21,855
    Byrnzie wrote:
    pandora wrote:
    It is as individual as the individual .. why we should not judge
    and why we should live and let live and love.

    So you'd excuse Joseph Goebbels then?
    runs to google :lol:

    Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1968-101-20A_Joseph_Goebbels.jpg
    He doesn't look very happy does he?

    When I see people who have lived their life like this man
    I wonder how and why he chose his ways.

    As a small child was he without love?

    Did he learn to hate?

    Was he mentally ill?

    Was he born evil or let evil in?

    It's not up to me or you to forgive but we have an opportunity to learn.
  • Jeanwah
    Jeanwah Posts: 6,363
    redrock wrote:
    I don't think it's a particularly religious word, though religious writings sure like to use it. For religious purposes it's used for all that opposes 'god' and his ways (except Buddhism). From a 'normal' point of view, evil can represent so many different things - is it a person (someone fundamentally evil - what is that?)? Is it a particular act that is evil (though what may seem evil to one, is not to the other)? Is is just another word for bad? Antonym for good? Whilst some acts may be universally considered evil, would 'common' evil not be defined by one's cultural environment (in the same manner as good or 'moral')? Some cultures don't even have 'evil' in their language - something more like 'out of sync'!

    We then go down the 'morals' route - what is good or what is bad? And for whom?

    Edit: made me look up the etymology for 'evil'. Yep... seems the origin of the word meant nothing more than 'uppity'. Over the millenia, the meaning of it got more and more sinister to it's current most common meaning of "extreme moral wickedness" (from the 18th century). "It seems theologians have had considerable influence upon shaping words to cause us to see according to their doctrines rather than what is plainly written." So maybe, in a way, you are right Steve - the word itself is not religious, but the meaning has been shaped by theology.

    Yeah, I prefer the word "ethical" over "moral" myself, since religion has seemed to have adopted the word. And religious folks do tend to use it as ammo a lot when judging others' behavior. It's something I find ridiculous because many people in my experience shout morality when their own behavior shouts hypocrisy.
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,327
    I think your morality is influenced by outside forces, but overall it comes from within. For instance, if you have a negative demeanor, a positive influence can keep evil at bay, but a negative influence could turn a person into a monster.

    Religion, for the most part, is a positive influence in most people's lives and it sets guild lines and expectations for acceptable behavior. But just because someone isn't religious, it's foolish to think that they don't know the differences between right and wrong, good and evil.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • pandora
    pandora Posts: 21,855
    I did not need God to be good ... I have always been good.
    I do not think that is what God necessarily does for a person.

    I needed God to prove to me His existence because I needed to know.
    I wanted to know my path to true happiness.

    There are many self absorbed judgmental people who do not realize they are so.
    Pick pick pick at others... forever negative, unhappy, unfulfilled.
    They truly do not love others and really don't care to.

    You don't need God to point this out but why do so many not see it or not care?
    not see the lack of love for and the lack of acceptance of others.
    We are all connected... your actions and choices affect mine,
    we are one in the universe.

    This is what having God can do for you if you are in need of it or want it.
    You might see people and life in a very different light.

    Having God with me has enriched my life :D
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    pandora wrote:
    I did not need God to be good ... I have always been good.
    I do not think that is what God necessarily does for a person.

    I needed God to prove to me His existence because I needed to know.
    I wanted to know my path to true happiness.

    There are many self absorbed judgmental people who do not realize they are so.
    Pick pick pick at others... forever negative, unhappy, unfulfilled.
    They truly do not love others and really don't care to.

    You don't need God to point this out but why do so many not see it or not care?
    not see the lack of love for and the lack of acceptance of others.
    We are all connected... your actions and choices affect mine,
    we are one in the universe.

    This is what having God can do for you if you are in need of it or want it.
    You might see people and life in a very different light.

    Having God with me has enriched my life :D

    I still have no idea what you're on about.


    What do you mean 'God' proved to you 'His' existence? What do you mean you have 'God with you'? Are you trying to say that you have some sort of special relationship with a superior being that us lesser mortals have yet to experience in our ignorance?
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    Personally, I have no need of some imaginary transcendental being called 'God'. My allegiance is with the Earth.

    I don't base my perspective on the World on a 2000 year old synthetic Middle Eastern cult. If anything, I see myself as a pagan...of the Earth, and For the Earth.
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Personally, I have no need of some imaginary transcendental being called 'God'. My allegiance is with the Earth.

    I don't base my perspective on the World on a 2000 year old synthetic Middle Eastern cult. If anything, I see myself as a pagan...of the Earth, and For the Earth.

    If you believe the Earth came about because of chance and some giant explosion, then so be it.

    You think believing in God is foolishness, and I think believing that the Earth came about because of some random explosion is foolishness. Each side has to explain the "something came from nothing debate" so that is a draw.

    But this has nothing to do with the subject of your original post.
  • kenny olav
    kenny olav Posts: 3,319
    Is it so wrong to assume that there is a base, innate morality that we all (or at least the vast majority of us) can agree on, and beyond that, morality is an evolving concept, that moves along with the collective wisdom, or in some cases, devolves, due to ignorance?
  • kenny olav
    kenny olav Posts: 3,319
    Well, that's what I would call natural morality. The other kind is trained morality, or religious morality, which doesn't produce the same great results as natural morality. What's worse is that natural morality often appears as immorality to the faithful.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    I wonder how Columbus and other so-called Christians addressed the subject of morality when they were busy butchering hundreds of thousands of native American's in the 15th century?
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    bootlegger10 wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Personally, I have no need of some imaginary transcendental being called 'God'. My allegiance is with the Earth.

    I don't base my perspective on the World on a 2000 year old synthetic Middle Eastern cult. If anything, I see myself as a pagan...of the Earth, and For the Earth.

    If you believe the Earth came about because of chance and some giant explosion, then so be it.

    You think believing in God is foolishness, and I think believing that the Earth came about because of some random explosion is foolishness. Each side has to explain the "something came from nothing debate" so that is a draw.

    But this has nothing to do with the subject of your original post.

    the earth didnt come about by chance. and the big bang was not a random explosion. nothing comes from nothing and humans didnt come from dirt and the rib of a man.

    the so called word of God is very judgemental as i see it written in the bible and i refuse to have anything to do with any morality that derives from it. im not sure how moral an 11 year old is or if i even knew what morals where back then, but what i do know is since then ive lived my life without religion and without a God to guide me. my conscious is my guide and oppression of any kind, be it psychological or physical is against everything i feel within myself and every tenet by which i live my life.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    catefrances wrote:
    the earth didnt come about by chance. and the big bang was not a random explosion. nothing comes from nothing and humans didnt come from dirt and the rib of a man.

    the so called word of God is very judgemental as i see it written in the bible and i refuse to have anything to do with any morality that derives from it. im not sure how moral an 11 year old is or if i even knew what morals where back then, but what i do know is since then ive lived my life without religion and without a God to guide me. my conscious is my guide and oppression of any kind, be it psychological or physical is against everything i feel within myself and every tenet by which i live my life.

    If the Earth didn't come by chance, and the big bang was not a random explosion, are you saying there is a creator? If there is no creator, then the Earth did come about by chance and a massive explosion. There are probably trillions and trillions of events/conditions that had to come together for us to have this debate on this message board. It is equally as tough to believe that everything just happened from a bang as the creation story in the Bible.

    It seems ironic that people easily discount that man was created from dirt and the rib of a man, but instead will believe that we came from a mass of atoms that blew up a trillion years ago. Both seem far fetched to me, but I choose to believe the Biblical version.
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I wonder how Columbus and other so-called Christians addressed the subject of morality when they were busy butchering hundreds of thousands of native American's in the 15th century?

    It was evil. It was greed. It was sin. There are lots of people that say they are Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc... that don't go to church, synagogues, or Mosque, or follow the religion they say they belong to. There are a lot of so-called atheist murderers out there, so does that mean the atheist morality you speak of says it is okay to murder? That is the argument you are making with Columbus.

Categories