God and Morality???

hey guys. got a ?. assuming that all of us believe in God, what do u think about this question????
Does morality depend on God or not?? in other words, suppose u take action A which happens to be fall into one of the ten commadments from Bible or are from any religious book. that action A{do not lie} is the right thing to do. now my question is this: Is it a right thing to do because God commands it or God commands it because it is the right thing to do?
I personally believe that God commands it because it is the right thing to do. Your opinions may be different.

God commands, but morality can exist without God's guidance. For example: take an atheist who has no belief in God, and no education about what God's teachings are. This person could have their own set of morals and standards, and actually be a better person that the hypocrite that attends church each Sunday.

To answer your question:

Is it a right thing to do because God commands it or God commands it because it is the right thing to do?

I think that the statement is true both ways.

I am a Christian but I don't believe morality depends on God. The 10 commandments were not simply given out as a set of rules so we knew what was right and what was wrong. People already knew the difference. There was a bigger picture that was being painted. The 10 commandments are a good yardstick. The law that saves can also condemn.

^^ :werd:

God gave man free will so we had the right to make our own decisions. We all have a conscience for a reason.

God commands, but morality can exist without God's guidance. For example: take an atheist who has no belief in God, and no education about what God's teachings are. This person could have their own set of morals and standards, and actually be a better person that the hypocrite that attends church each Sunday.:thumbsup:

I agree.

TS out

i dont agree, while some can have there own morals others morals can be out of this world. like kill all who are jewish, and next lets kill all blacks
or lets take over the world so it will be all for japanese
or lets go but in to every other country's bussiness and tell them whats right and wrong.
while some peoples morals can be good others can be horrible.
which is why god gave commandments, not to be controlling, but because these commandments will make the world a better place. if all followed the commandments. it would be, but because lots dont and some never will, those following it sometimes might have to go outside of there commands

that's because we are given free will... we make our own decisions.


consider ourselves children and god the parent... we do what we want and suffer or rejoice later.

Many say God gave us free will. They also say God knows everything. (even the future) How can both be true?

Many say God gave us free will. They also say God knows everything. (even the future) How can both be true?

Just because you know something is going to happen doesnt mean you have to fuck with it.

Just because you know something is going to happen doesnt mean you have to fuck with it.
If he knows what's going to happen then it is preordained and not our choice. To be truly free choice no one can know the outcome beforehand.

why?
your mom knew that if you kept playing on the edge you would fall and hurt yourself. though she knew what would happen she let you learn on your own.

did that kid not have freewill?

explain yourself

why?
your mom knew that if you kept playing on the edge you would fall and hurt yourself. though she knew what would happen she let you learn on your own.

did that kid not have freewill?

explain yourself

Yes he did. But did mom know if I would keep playing on the edge? No, because that is a choice I get to make.

Being a parent, I think it's safe to say that the kid will keep playing on the edge until he gets hurt. That must is usually certain. And comparing mom's knowledge of the future with an omniscient God is not even valid.

assuming there is an omniscient God

True. However, doesn't the title of the thread suggest that, so we're discussing under that assumption already?

so we are the kids and God is the parent. hmmm
Well what happens when we grow up and end up being the parents. Or better yet, what happens to us kids that grow up and disrespect the parent. What of those that put their parent in nursing/retirement homes.
Comparing Us to children and God to a Parent, just doesn't make sense to me.

TS out

If he knows what's going to happen then it is preordained and not our choice. To be truly free choice no one can know the outcome beforehand.

Your putting human limits on an infinite being. We cant say that there is a God then hold him to human standards.

so we are the kids and God is the parent. hmmm
Well what happens when we grow up and end up being the parents. Or better yet, what happens to us kids that grow up and disrespect the parent. What of those that put their parent in nursing/retirement homes.
Comparing Us to children and God to a Parent, just doesn't make sense to me.

TS out

I think the comparison that we, as humans, are as children to God and always will be. As in we'll never grow up.

Your putting human limits on an infinite being. We cant say that there is a God then hold him to human standards.

So if god "knows" I am going to let's say, commit a crime next week, but I have not yet decided that I want to, you don't see any conflict with this? Where is my free choice if he says I'm going to do it?

Again, you're imposing the limitations of the human mind onto a Deity. It's like comparing apples and oranges.

If God were to say, you know, I dont think he should commit this crime. Lets have him adopt a puppy instead. Then that would kill the free will thing. But if God lets you commit your crime then I dont see any problem with it.

There's a whole lot we just don't know and can't understand. Here's a simple example.

Let's have a 1/4 mile drag race, set up the timing lights and get some fans in the stands. You take, oh, the Z06 Camaro. I'll take, say, the Jeep Wrangler. Who wins?

Well, what we don't know is that this 1/4 mile drag race will take place on the beach in 3' of sand. Making the assumption that it will take place on pavement is the human perspective, whereas God knows already that it will take place on sand, while we're completely unaware that the sand even exists.

It's tough as human beings to think that we might not know it all, being the smartest on the planet. But science proves we don't know it all, almost every day.

The knowledge of an event or the outcome of a choice is not the same thing as causing that event or forcing that choice. If knowing the future is the same as controlling the future, does the same rule apply to the past? Sounds silly to me. We think God is restricted by the same rules and constrained by the same realities as we are. However, God is the creator of "time", and therefore cannot be contained within His own creation. To think of God in terms of human time, and to wonder at His knowledge of "the future" is a bit ridiculous. In my opinion, the human timeline, from the creation of the physical universe all the way until the end of forever, is like a 3-d map layed out on a table. We're all inside that map, at some point on the timeline, but the table is only a part of a room in God's house. Flawed analogy I know, but I tried.

Anyhow, here's the main thing. Regardless of whether you believe in the Judeo-Christian God, or any god at all, some basic rules must apply when discussing these things. If you're going to discuss the J-C God, you must discuss Him in context. Do not attempt to discuss the supernatural nature of God, then proceed to place human characteristics and restraints on Him. Example: "If God created everything, who created God?" Don't be stupid. If God created "existence", then he does not, as we understand it, exist. Where is God? Not in this universe. This is becoming too difficult to explain on the internet, so I'm going to stop ranting. If anyone cares, I'll try to elaborate a little on my thoughts later, if not, then ok.

I see no valid comparison of knowing the past verses knowing the future. The past can not be changed. the future can be, depending on what we decide. There is nothing wrong with questioning the "supernatural nature" of any god(s). Everything we know about them is what was written (or said) by man, and all of these theories change depending on where or when you were born. If some supreme being gave us the meager intelligence which we have, then I think he, they or it, expects us to use it, and not to just believe highly questionable explanations on blind faith.

Re-read alert.

I never said not to question the supernatural nature of God, I said not to discuss it if you're going to try to explain/rationalize it using comparisons to human nature. You say there is no valid comparison of knowing the past or knowing the future, however you assume that the restrictions of time apply outside of our universe. This may or may not be the case, no one could say for sure. The point I'm trying to get across is if you are discussing deities, supernatural forces, gods or the like, you have got to learn to think outside of yourself. Consider that your reality is not universal, nor is it uniform. You are attempting to disprove the existence of a supernatural god by arguing human reason and logic. You're comparing apples to freight trains.


Edit: Capitalization error.

You say there is no valid comparison of knowing the past or knowing the future, however you assume that the restrictions of time apply outside of our universe. This may or may not be the case, no one could say for sure.

I agree. That's why this is such an interesting topic.


The point I'm trying to get across is if you are discussing deities, supernatural forces, gods or the like, you have got to learn to think outside of yourself. Consider that your reality is not universal, nor is it uniform. .

I agree again. That's why I will not call someone's question "silly" or say their thoughts are "ridiculous" or ever tell them "don't be stupid". (re-read)


You are attempting to disprove the existence of a supernatural god by arguing human reason and logic.


Human logic is all we really have. That's why it's fun to discuss the possibilities (or not) of supernatural beings with others. Post on thinkers and dreamers!

You are attempting to disprove the existence of a supernatural god by arguing human reason and logic. You're comparing apples to freight trains.

:iagree:

I have to say my point of view is that there is no absolute universal moral standard. Yes it's a copout sitting on the fence, but I believe that is true.

The morality based on "God" whether it be religion or a self contructed belief of an agnostic, is just one type of morality. This morality revolves around that it is moral to do what God says is right.

However, there are many other ideas of morals. These being, "the ends justify the means" argument and "the means justify the ends" argument.

I have to say my code of morals is mostly based on the "ends justify the means" model of ethics. This makes it especially hard since who, or what is the "ends". Is the "ends" society as a whole, or just my family, or even just me? How wide must the benefits ripple before the ends have been justified?

Now when you ask does it mean it's moral is God is satisfied, who really truly knows what God wants? I mean, the Vatican changes "God's" views with each new pope!! I find it hard to listen to what God says when it comes from the mouth of a normal man.

So if the question is if morals and God is linked, what is necessary to ask oneself is what God means to you.

I believe conscience is a big part in it. Because at the end of the day, if you follow what your conscience says, you are at ease with yourself and a man at peace with oneself is at peace with God.

Obviously if you believe in the bible then morality is dictated by what God says is right, not the other way around. This is proven in the instance where, in the old testament, it was "wrong" to eat pork. Yet in the new testament, he apparantly changed his mind and now it's okay to eat pork. Therefore the rule could not have been based on what is right or wrong because the rule changed, and the only option left is that it was wrong just because God felt like it. Same could be said for the "eye for an eye" "turn the other cheek" contradiction.

- Why The Bible Is No Good 101

"Humanity is in a sad state indeed if it needs to depend of threat of punishment and reward after death to keep it in line" - was it Einstein?

"Humanity is in a sad state indeed if it needs to depend of threat of punishment and reward after death to keep it in line" - was it Einstein?

:1:

Obviously if you believe in the bible then morality is dictated by what God says is right, not the other way around. This is proven in the instance where, in the old testament, it was "wrong" to eat pork. Yet in the new testament, he apparantly changed his mind and now it's okay to eat pork. Therefore the rule could not have been based on what is right or wrong because the rule changed, and the only option left is that it was wrong just because God felt like it. Same could be said for the "eye for an eye" "turn the other cheek" contradiction.

- Why The Bible Is No Good 101

"Humanity is in a sad state indeed if it needs to depend of threat of punishment and reward after death to keep it in line" - was it Einstein?

Do you know why eating pork was wrong during the time of the old testament? It was considered a dirty meat. It carried disease. At that time cooking wasn't as refined as it became even during the time of the writting of the new testament. The reason it was wrong was to keep Gods people from dying off from disease. IMO. There are many examples of "The rules changing" from the OT to the NT. A great many of them were mainly for the protection of His people. Others were because we entered the age of grace since Jesus came and died. We are no longer bound by the law that was handed down by God and added to by Priest. These laws became so burdensom because of the added laws that it was impossible to keep them all. We have come out from under these laws as a judgement for our salvation.(our reward)

It may very well have been Einstien who said "Humanity is in a sad state indeed if it needs to depend of threat of punishment and reward after death to keep it in line" and he would be right to say that. Christians however depend on the grace of Christ for it's salvation and the love for Him and their fellow humanbeings to keep them in line.

My:2cents:.

it was einstein.

being an athiest, this is a hard concept for me to wrap my head around, but even if there was a God, i would say morality lies within the person.

i do something God doesnt like, and God says "hey hey...i dont like that, dont do that again"

i say "hey hey, you gave me the tools, ill do with them as i please. didnt want me to do it? then you shouldnt have made me able to."

the judeo-christian-islamic god is fallible. why should i listen to s/he instead of myself?

it was einstein.

being an athiest, this is a hard concept for me to wrap my head around, but even if there was a God, i would say morality lies within the person.

i do something God doesnt like, and God says "hey hey...i dont like that, dont do that again"

i say "hey hey, you gave me the tools, ill do with them as i please. didnt want me to do it? then you shouldnt have made me able to."

the judeo-christian-islamic god is fallible. why should i listen to s/he instead of myself?

You would rather that he gave you no tools? Tools like choice?
What would be the point if there was no choice?

It's your choice who you listen to. It's just very important that you investigate thoroughly all the options before making that decision.
There may be a lot at stake.

im glad that if i was created that i was given the tools of choice and free will. i never said otherwise. i just used that as an example to justify my view that we make our own morality, and it isnt handed down by god, even though god may in fact have created us

im glad that if i was created that i was given the tools of choice and free will. i never said otherwise. i just used that as an example to justify my view that we make our own morality, and it isnt handed down by god, even though god may in fact have created us

I agree. That's why I voted for the second choice. I do however believe that we have a "God conscience" in us. Or to put it in other words...The spirit of God. We can choose to follow that spirit or not. I don't think that if we choose not to then we will become bad people though. I know a lot of people I consider good and moral people that aren't Christians.