Morality and Belief in God

[Logician Man]

I am sure you reject the truth, but that is the truth. You make claims, but I remember what is written in Jeremiah 23:16

ALL holy texts are claims only...Not 'proof' of anything...(debating 101)...(edit) this post was meant for Logicman

 

[Logicman]

I am sure you reject the truth, but that is the truth. You make claims, but I remember what is written in Jeremiah 23:16

Try Jeremiah 23:5-6

David's descendant would be called "The Lord (Jehovah) our Righteousness."

 

[ataraxia]

Nope. There's a lot more Christians who believe than there are atheists who don't. So the problem is on your end.

Atheists might comprise up to 5% of the population. You put that on a Bell Curve and it falls into the abnormal range of beliefs.

In many parts of the world, Christians are far less than 5% of the population. Definitely not a “normal” belief. Does that make it false?

 

[RAMOSS]

Try Jeremiah 23:5-6

David's descendant would be called "The Lord (Jehovah) our Righteousness."

And??? That does not make your claims true.

 

[Logician Man]

Nope. There's a lot more Christians who believe than there are atheists who don't. So the problem is on your end.

Atheists might comprise up to 5% of the population. You put that on a Bell Curve and it falls into the abnormal range of beliefs.

Correction: 5% doesn't make it 'an abnormal belief." 5% makes it a 'minority' belief.BIG DIFFERENCE in the two!!!

 

[Logicman]

Correction: 5% doesn't make it 'an abnormal belief." 5% makes it a 'minority' belief.BIG DIFFERENCE in the two!!!

Atheism is a small percentage of the world's population. You guys aren't doing so good.

 

[blarg]

a god exist would not add a deeper purpose to life things still just are the way they are because

there is not how you ought to act beyond your owns feelings god or no god

 

[Logician Man]

Atheism is a small percentage of the world's population. You guys aren't doing so good.

Atheists aren't trying to convert or convince anyone of anything.We are the happiest humans on the planet...free of the shackles of fear and mythology.Many atheists are former theists including myself....We couldn't care less about your meaningless statistic..critical thinkers scoff at your 5% remark.

 

[Logicman]

Atheists aren't trying to convert or convince anyone of anything.We are the happiest humans on the planet...free of the shackles of fear and mythology.Many atheists are former theists including myself....We couldn't care less about your meaningless statistic..critical thinkers scoff at your 5% remark.

You don't know what happiness is until you get the Holy Spirit.

That's the one very important thing in Christianity atheists know very little or nothing about, because they don't do their homework.

 

[Logician Man]

You don't know what happiness is until you get the Holy Spirit.

That's the one very important thing in Christianity atheists know very little or nothing about, because they don't do theProve your claim please ( and use logic).Let's see how just logical you are.

 

[Logician Man]

You don't know what happiness is until you get the Holy Spirit.

That's the one very important thing in Christianity atheists know very little or nothing about, because they don't do their homework.

Don't know why that glitch happened...Can you prove your god claims are reality? If so,please do so now. What convinced you that your faith is truth is derived from the same data that convinced skeptics it's bronzed age mythology. Also you need to take off the blinders and acknowledge many non-theists were once theists and are as knowlegeable about biblical scripture as people of faith.

 

[Angel]

a god exist would not add a deeper purpose to life things still just are the way they are because

there is not how you ought to act beyond your owns feelings god or no god

"Blarg! Come back!"

The other thread calls to you across the prairie.

 

[Angel]

Well. now seems like a good time to quote the OP in full.
Folks, try to stay the course, yes?
We are about two concepts here, theistic morality and non-theistic morality, their difference, and the advantage of the former over the latter.
Thank you.

Morality and Belief in God


6 minutes

"A morality based on belief in God is very different from a morality that is not based on belief in God,
"and the root of that difference is the belief in whether there is a purpose or goal in the existence of the universe
"and particularly whether there is any goal for human beings.
"Is there a way human beings ought to live whatever they think?
"Is there a goal that is proper for them and possible for them to aim at whatever they think.
"A non-theistic morality cannot say there is such a goal."
Keith Ward​

"I am, by nature and conviction, an Idealist philosopher, somebody who believes in the supremacy of Spirit or Mind, and who thinks that the material universe is an expression or creation of a Supreme Mind. I see religions as very ambiguous but probably necessary ways of giving humans some awareness of this Supreme Mind. I am a Christian, and became a priest of the Church of England in 1972. But I have an interest in the many diverse ways in which humans have sought spiritual truth, and in trying to understand what these various paths may have to teach. I think the main task for religious believers today is to ensure that their beliefs are conducive to human flourishing and, so far as is possible, to the flourishing of all sentient beings; to relate ancient religious beliefs to the modern scientific world view; and to see their own faith in a truly global context."
https://www.keithward.org.uk/about/


Keith Ward, FBA (born 22 August 1938) is a British philosopher, theologian, priest and scholar. He is a fellow of the British Academy and a priest of the Church of England. He was a canon of Christ Church, Oxford until 2003. Comparative theology and the relationship between science and religion are two of his main topics of interest. He was Regius Professor of Divinity at the University of Oxford from 1991 to 2004.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Ward

Questions

Is belief in God or in a Transcendent Spiritual Reality a necessary condition for a universal and universally binding morality?

Is non-theistic morality anything more than temporary ad hoc moral agreement susceptible to the changing whims of time and place?
​

NB

This thread is a spinoff from gfm7175's currently active thread

Does Objective Morality Exist? & The Moral Argument
https://www.debatepolitics.com/beli...exist-and-and-moral-argument-w-222-829-a.html


Professor Keith Ward is the keynote speaker (post#202) in Angel's currently active thread

Understanding Religion
https://www.debatepolitics.com/beliefs-and-skepticism/322293-understanding-religion.html

Namaste​

 

[ataraxia]

Question:

In the theistic view of morality, your current moral ideals are the will of God, therefore eternal, immutable, sacred, and unquestionable. But often, as we learn more, we DO begin to think we may need to change our views on certain of these ideals.

For example, the wisdom of the ages, for millennia, all around the world, to paraphrase the Bible, was "spare the rod, spoil the child". Physical punishment of children was seen as indispensable for raising disciplined, responsible, adults: "put the fear of God into them", "break their strong will", etc.... I once knew someone who remembered as a child playing quietly with her siblings and neighbors, and her mom would sometimes just come over and beat the tar out of her. Between blows, she would ask why she was getting beaten. The mom would answer that she wanted to be sure she wouldn't grow up spoiled and disrespectful. This was the wisdom of the ages.

But it wasn't until the 1960s when very large, detailed, systematic child psychology studies showed that this practice was not raising disciplined children, it was harmful. It taught them that might makes right, and it created fearful, hateful, and angry adults with lots of emotional and psychological problems. Other methods were found to be far more effective for discipline and child-rearing.

So the child psychology community has started to condemn physical child abuse. But a child psychologist once confided in me that the people they have the most trouble convincing to stop beating their kids are the religious people, who keep quoting them the "spare the rod, spoil the child" quotes, and continue with this dysfunctional practice, creating a lot of further problems for themselves and their children.

Now I don't want to get into a scientific debate here about whether child abuse is really a good method of child rearing or not. My point is that the facts, as best we currently know them, can guide the ethics. If further results come out that show that physical abuse of children is, indeed, a good method of child rearing, then we may change our mind yet again. It's like what we get with diet recommendations. The facts, as best we know them, can be a guide for the recommendations for what we should be doing, ie, the ethics.

But if you say you know the eternal, unquestionable, immutable truth, aren't you short circuiting this whole process? Aren't you closing your eyes, and mind, and ears, to any new information? Yes I know it feels better to feel like you can rise above all the contingencies and errors and blind alleys of trying to figure things out and learn more and growing. These are messy processes. But even if it helps you feel better, does it really lead to better outcomes? Should we be going back to trials by ordeal and witch burnings? Physical abuse of children? Looking to Biblical instructions on how to own and treat slaves? Telling women they should stay quiet in the churches because it is shameful for them to speak there?

So yes, I know the non-theistic morality is always contingent, open to questioning, and humble in its ethical recommendations and claims. I know the theistic position creates far more confidence and pride- you look on the poor, pathetic masses who don't know the final answer like you do. You must feel like the student who has gotten a hold of the teacher's answer book, and is watching all the other poor students struggling to figure out the problems on their own. But is that really the final answer book, or just something another student just made up based on their own best anwers at the time? Are the results necessarily better? Is the comfort you achieve from thinking you know the ultimate answers worth not wanting to put in the hard work of learning more and maybe trying to do better yet?

 

[Daisy]

Atheists aren't trying to convert or convince anyone of anything.We are the happiest humans on the planet...free of the shackles of fear and mythology.Many atheists are former theists including myself....We couldn't care less about your meaningless statistic..critical thinkers scoff at your 5% remark.

If, and that is a big if because I am not convinced, why let what believers think/believe occupy so much of your mind and time? That makes no sense...

 

[Atheist 2020]

There is no morality to be judged. There was a morality with killing Jews, and a morality not to kill Jews -- they are both equal to each other.

 

[devildavid]

Even lifelong "self-labeled" Christians, such as I, don't truly understand until they are filled with the Holy Spirit. I had an awakening a couple years ago and realized just how "off-base" I really was, even though I called myself Christian. I was just "going through the motions" instead of actually being filled with the Holy Spirit.

What you speak of is real; I've experienced it first hand.

This is your personal criteria for being a christian. It is in no way objective or definitive. Being a christian is up to the individual, and there is no requirement of being filled with the holy spirit. In other words, you are no more a christian than those who don't claim to be filled with the holy spirit.

 

[devildavid]

I would think that the advantages should be supported in objective reality if it's indeed a superior mode/source of morality. Otherwise we are just talking about the feelings of the believer, which are by definition subjective.

I think the point in your 3rd sentence is a truism, so I cannot disagree.

But his third sentence is a HUGE if. So it changes the argument from one of it being a good idea to being a fact, thus making god based morality authoritative. But authoritative does not mean better.

 

[Logician Man]

If, and that is a big if because I am not convinced, why let what believers think/believe occupy so much of your mind and time? That makes no sense...

One doesn't have to be religious to enjoy discussing religion.Many here are retired or have other reasons for debating religion or any other topic,such as politics.We (religious skeptics) discuss religion for many reasons, At the top of the list is to keep religion out of our public,tax funded public institutions.Otherwise,the way our Constitution is written,if one religion is taught in public schools....all religions must be allowed equal time.That would include Satanism also.We don't want our children poisoned with mythology and conflicting religious doctrines in our secular learning institutions.There are churches and home schooling for that...Have a good day

 

[devildavid]

With Satan...

Where did Satan originate?

 

[Logician Man]

Where did Satan originate?

Man's imagination

 

[Daisy]

One doesn't have to be religious to enjoy discussing religion.Many here are retired or have other reasons for debating religion or any other topic,such as politics.We (religious skeptics) discuss religion for many reasons, At the top of the list is to keep religion out of our public,tax funded public institutions.Otherwise,the way our Constitution is written,if one religion is taught in public schools....all religions must be allowed equal time.That would include Satanism also.We don't want our children poisoned with mythology and conflicting religious doctrines in our secular learning institutions.There are churches and home schooling for that...Have a good day

Well, that is just weird...I don't waste my time discussing things I'm not interested in or don't love...I don't like to argue, never did, I guess because it was en-grained in me as a child not to argue but to walk away...if the other person gets the last word, so what...there's just no point in it...I taught my children the same thing...arguing leads to altercations and worse...there are better things to spend your time in doing...

 

[Daisy]

Where did Satan originate?

https://www.debatepolitics.com/beli...morality-and-belief-god-5.html#post1068823103

 

[Logician Man]

Well, that is just weird...I don't waste my time discussing things I'm not interested in or don't love...I don't like to argue, never did, I guess because it was en-grained in me as a child not to argue but to walk away...if the other person gets the last word, so what...there's just no point in it...I taught my children the same thing...arguing leads to altercations and worse...there are better things to spend your time in doing...

You are making the assumption that non-religious people aren't interested in religion ( which is not true.) If/when you get past that fallacy,hopefully you will better understand why people debate these issues.Funny thing is you chastise and call us weird for discussing religion,claiming it is a waste of time....then you waste your time worrying about what we do with our time.Do you see the irony in that? p.s. also debating doesn't have or need to be 'argumentative'.If both sides debate with an open mind civily,I consider that a good thing. After all,at the end of the day,the religious and non-religious have more in common than they have differences.

 

[devildavid]

https://www.debatepolitics.com/beli...morality-and-belief-god-5.html#post1068823103

God created Satan. Ok.