Deity Existence

[Hraesvelg]

I think we have certain social instincts, as do a lot of social animals. But a particular system of ethics or morality is a societal construct.

[Ivramire]

But don't you agree that morals, laws, and society behaviors all stem from religious beliefs.

Hrae's moral beliefs look a lot like what is in the Bible. Treat others like how you would like to be treated.

If we really want to shed off religion in all its forms should we not also shed off the moral beliefs that stem from them?

at work cant see videos.

But aren't morals learned not inherent?

We aren't born with a moral compass but are taught what is right and wrong by those around us. Your own moral compass is influenced by your parents, grandparents, friends, and the society around you.

Thus why there is still hatred, bigotry, and intolerance.

Morality is not a genetic trait that can be changed, but is a societal constraint.

thus why in some parts in the world and in some times in history things like slavery, murder, human sacrifice, rape, and many other activities now considered morally wrong were common and accepted.

Is that a slight revision of opinion?


Because they don't seem to mesh in my head.

[Manzcar]

Is that a slight revision of opinion?


Because they don't seem to mesh in my head.

Why... Religions are taught by family, friends, and society.

[Ivramire]

I must have misread somewhere.


The only reason I popped-in was to answer Jik's inference that morality came solely from a deity. Guess that's done with.

[Vasu]

You missed the whole point of my post. i was saying you wouldnt CARE if you were raped, as animals most certainly dont and see it only as reproductive or recreational activity. That's where it doesnt fit with darwinism.

Many animals do shy away from sex and try to avoid it. They don't keep doing it mindlessly. And the reason we find rape wrong is because it has been ingrained into us by the environment around us. I won't deny that most morality today has stemmed from religion. I am merely saying it can exist full well without religion.

And being benevolent, he follows the rules of the universe.

Rules which make him behave malevolently. He set the rules, he can abolish them if he really wants to do good.

And you're asking me to prove the unprovable; i have neither the tools nor the knowlege to answer that. it's like giving someone a glass of water and asking them to use it to show what it's made of.

I'm only saying that faith isn't "something higher". It's just some poppycock invented by man.

It's not God that's bad- it's humans that use his name to cause death that are bad.

Yeah, when good is done in the name of God, hurrah, because God and religion have done something good. When bad things are done, it's just the individual people.

But don't you agree that morals, laws, and society behaviors all stem from religious beliefs.

Hrae's moral beliefs look a lot like what is in the Bible. Treat others like how you would like to be treated.

If we really want to shed off religion in all its forms should we not also shed off the moral beliefs that stem from them?

Like I said earlier, most of morality today is because of religion, but that doesn't mean morality is completely dependent on religion. It can be practised just as well without a deity, as I showed.

And you are not the first to assume that the Bible was the progenitor of the Golden Rule. It wasn't. Regardless of who proposed it, then rule can be reached by common sense, and not necessarily by fear or religion.

[Jikanu]

At this point, perhaps it can. However, i'm not fully convinced that it could before laws existed. Regardless, i concede the point.

And the reason that only Good things can truly be credited to God (in Christianity, at least) is because Greed and Hate, the main causers of sin, are products of Original Sin.

[Vasu]

And the reason that only Good things can truly be credited to God (in Christianity, at least) is because Greed and Hate, the main causers of sin, are products of Original Sin.

Pretty convenient isn't it?

Anyway, you didn't say what you thought of his malevolence.

[Hraesvelg]

Like I said earlier, most of morality today is because of religion, but that doesn't mean morality is completely dependent on religion. It can be practised just as well without a deity, as I showed.

I don't concede that point. I think it's a chicken/egg situation. I think the rudimentary ethics were in place before the idea of a deity was constructed in order to codify the morality. The thought of all humans having similar social instincts is much more plausible than being inspired by a multitude of deities. We've always used stories to explain what we can't understand. I don't see why a sense of right and wrong would be any different.

[Jikanu]

Pretty convenient isn't it?

Anyway, you didn't say what you thought of his malevolence.

I did, acctually. i said i dont believe he is.

You forget that, in Catholic doctrine, at least, The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all one. It wouldnt be malevolent to sacrifice himself for us. We dont know the rules of the game by which God plays, so it would be impossible to call him malevolent.

Once again, i must call into question the need for this discussion. it's impossible to prove or disprove God's existence, or to understand any kind of being on a higher plane.

[Vasu]

I did, acctually. i said i dont believe he is.

You forget that, in Catholic doctrine, at least, The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all one. It wouldnt be malevolent to sacrifice himself for us. We dont know the rules of the game by which God plays, so it would be impossible to call him malevolent.

It's not just the Jesus incident. It's also the host of battles started with his blessing.

Once again, i must call into question the need for this discussion. it's impossible to prove or disprove God's existence, or to understand any kind of being on a higher plane.

Then why does religion claim to be able to?