Question for atheists: What governs how you live your life?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that "believers" should understand that something like:

"Where you realize it or not, your morality (and that of your mother) was formed by religion not an innate ability to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil."

Is every bit as insulting to non-believers as a non-believer who calls (what he believes) a non-existent diety a "make-believe diety." Or "imaginary god" or what have you.

Can you explain how it is insulting? We can't control the way we were/are raised and how the way we were raised shaped our thoughts and actions.

[Anonymous]

And religious morality was articulated by people. Morality came first. Religion just codified it.

[Anonymous]

Another question for atheists: Do you think we are all here by chance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the most morally corrupt people I have met consider themselves "good Christians". Some of the kindest, most philanthropic people I have met are agnostic/atheist.

For me, my morals came from my mother. Her morals came from her parents and to her parents from their parents and so on. My family is Jewish, but my Mom raised me pretty much without religion and was able to instill in me good morals and values. Perhaps religion molded her, but I believe it was mostly from watching her parents do good, be kind and treat others with the same respect that they expected for themselves.

I think a lot of it is socially driven as well. I am pretty sure that the morals and values in Congo differs from what we believe to be morally acceptable here, regardless if they have religion or not.

Where you realize it or not, your morality (and that of your mother) was formed by religion not an innate ability to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil.

In my opinion, humans created religion. Someone at some point in time felt that we needed to stop acting like cavemen and start acting like a civilized society...or at least the primitive version of it. So, someone way back when did have the ability to distinguish right from wrong and good from evil. Unless of course you take the bible literally. Then we must agree to disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another question for atheists: Do you think we are all here by chance?

Of course. Lucky us!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
No, many Christians do what is pleasing to God by obeying his commandments. Has nothing to do with prayer, Bible study, etc. Just obeying his commandments. Which are really the same "laws" dictated by society.

So, they are not the same. The bible says "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". But we don't kill witches.
Similarly:
Neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee. - Leviticus 19:19
or:
When a woman has a discharge of blood, which is her regular discharge from her body, she shall be in her impurity for seven days, and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening

You see, there is some stuff from the bible we follow, and some we reject. Many of our laws have no basis in religion at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And religious morality was articulated by people. Morality came first. Religion just codified it.

Yup. And the idea that "we are just following the 10 commandments doesn't really answer the question "Why?" Why not follow all of the pre/proscriptions of Leviticus? Ah, because we've interpreted the Bible as having surpassed those edicts. How? Why, by interpreting the Bible of course!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
No, many Christians do what is pleasing to God by obeying his commandments. Has nothing to do with prayer, Bible study, etc. Just obeying his commandments. Which are really the same "laws" dictated by society.

So, they are not the same. The bible says "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". But we don't kill witches.
Similarly:
Neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee. - Leviticus 19:19
or:
When a woman has a discharge of blood, which is her regular discharge from her body, she shall be in her impurity for seven days, and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening

You see, there is some stuff from the bible we follow, and some we reject. Many of our laws have no basis in religion at all.

FYI: Most Christians follow the New Testament. Many things mandated in the Old Testament were done away with with Jesus' birth, death and resurrection. He made the "ultimate sacrifice" and, as such, we are no longer bound by OT laws. Jewish people, who don't believe in Jesus, follow the OT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that "believers" should understand that something like:

"Where you realize it or not, your morality (and that of your mother) was formed by religion not an innate ability to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil."

Is every bit as insulting to non-believers as a non-believer who calls (what he believes) a non-existent diety a "make-believe diety." Or "imaginary god" or what have you.

Can you explain how it is insulting? We can't control the way we were/are raised and how the way we were raised shaped our thoughts and actions.

No, but there's a significant difference between saying "I believe X that you do not believe" versus "whether you realize it or not, what you believe is wrong and what I believe is right" particularly when you don't even bother to put forth am argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And religious morality was articulated by people. Morality came first. Religion just codified it.

Yup. And the idea that "we are just following the 10 commandments doesn't really answer the question "Why?" Why not follow all of the pre/proscriptions of Leviticus? Ah, because we've interpreted the Bible as having surpassed those edicts. How? Why, by interpreting the Bible of course!

See 11:24

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that "believers" should understand that something like:

"Where you realize it or not, your morality (and that of your mother) was formed by religion not an innate ability to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil."

Is every bit as insulting to non-believers as a non-believer who calls (what he believes) a non-existent diety a "make-believe diety." Or "imaginary god" or what have you.

Can you explain how it is insulting? We can't control the way we were/are raised and how the way we were raised shaped our thoughts and actions.

No, but there's a significant difference between saying "I believe X that you do not believe" versus "whether you realize it or not, what you believe is wrong and what I believe is right" particularly when you don't even bother to put forth am argument.

That is not what was said at all. You are looking to take offense where none was meant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, but bees have no concept of good and evil (I guess, I don't really know). Humans have this concept. Why? What originally dictated what is good and what is evil? To simply say that society dictates it speaks to the product, not the creator.

Do you understand that good and evil are not constant - that different societies interpret them differently? So how is this compatible with one creator determing what they were?

Actually, they are. Can you name acts that were once totally good that are now totally evil?

Yes. Thousands. Slaughtering children to appease the rain god. Good for the Aztecs, now, not so much.

I said totally good (meaning for all mankind), not just for "some".

OK, so if not slaughtering babies is not "totally good", then what use is your universal morality? It is meaningless.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your question.

Let me make it very simple. You said that good and evil are constant. I said that they are not. You said that I should name one thing that was totally good that is now bad. I gave an example. You said that it doesn't count, because not everyone thinks slaughtering children is good or bad. I pointed out that if your constant morality does not allow you to determine whether slaughtering children is good or bad, then it is not a very useful guide to life.

Do you understand now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
No, many Christians do what is pleasing to God by obeying his commandments. Has nothing to do with prayer, Bible study, etc. Just obeying his commandments. Which are really the same "laws" dictated by society.

So, they are not the same. The bible says "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". But we don't kill witches.
Similarly:
Neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee. - Leviticus 19:19
or:
When a woman has a discharge of blood, which is her regular discharge from her body, she shall be in her impurity for seven days, and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening

You see, there is some stuff from the bible we follow, and some we reject. Many of our laws have no basis in religion at all.

FYI: Most Christians follow the New Testament. Many things mandated in the Old Testament were done away with with Jesus' birth, death and resurrection. He made the "ultimate sacrifice" and, as such, we are no longer bound by OT laws. Jewish people, who don't believe in Jesus, follow the OT.

And this is the part that is every bit as much human interpretation as an atheist consulting their own moral sense of right v wrong.

[Anonymous]

I treat others the way I would like to be treated.

That pretty much covers everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that "believers" should understand that something like:

"Where you realize it or not, your morality (and that of your mother) was formed by religion not an innate ability to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil."

Is every bit as insulting to non-believers as a non-believer who calls (what he believes) a non-existent diety a "make-believe diety." Or "imaginary god" or what have you.

Can you explain how it is insulting? We can't control the way we were/are raised and how the way we were raised shaped our thoughts and actions.

No, but there's a significant difference between saying "I believe X that you do not believe" versus "whether you realize it or not, what you believe is wrong and what I believe is right" particularly when you don't even bother to put forth am argument.

That is not what was said at all. You are looking to take offense where none was meant.

I'm referring to the person who wrote:

""Where you realize it or not, your morality (and that of your mother) was formed by religion not an innate ability to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil."

If that's not you, I apologize. If so, you're making a distinction w/o a difference.