Logic, Morality, and Beauty

[Yogi]

The Christian apologetic mantra these days seems to be that God is needed as the foundation of logic, morality, and beauty. I don't claim to understand that argument but I ran across an article which points out the inconsistencies. The Christian God of the Fundamentalists is omniscient and omnipotent. Examples are given of how these qualities are contradictory. This same God is documented in the Bible as being a vengeful, jealous being who allows for cruel and unusual punishment. No sound moral base there. And, as we all know, there are many ugly things all around us which have strong God ties.

The arguments are interesting and the comments after the article are quite revealing. It's worth a read just to get an idea of what the issues are in today's apologetic Christian circles.

http://deityshmeity.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... tions.html

[pilvikki]

it still baffles me that people will spend so time on these themes.

and whenever cornered, i always get the really tiring "but we, as mankind, cannot fothom his wisdom or intent. god works in mysterious ways."

why? why the need to know basis for what i thus far think is my only kick at the can? i mean, the choices of heaven and hell? someone posted a candle on fb for all our dads in heaven. i couldn't really comment as i know father would have politely declined an invitation to that place [- and already had spent 3½ yrs of hell on earth.]

so far things are going to sideways, so i'd really, really like to see the "big picture", the master plan, etc to see the purpose of all this.

not gonna happen methinks...

[Yogi]

The amount of time people spend promoting Christianity and defending atheism is infinite. My opinion is that if you are confident in either system of belief, there is no need to try and change anybody's point of view.

I like the "God can't be understood by mere mortals" argument. People who offer that as a justification obviously are mortal and can't possibly understand the concept of a God. Their reasoning is just as contradictory as that which is pointed out in the article.

My take on the meaning of all this is that there is no meaning. Life is a random occurrence and our meaning, purpose, and direction is simply to respond. Morality comes into play only if you reject the challenges of life or deliberately choose to do less than you can. When you think about it, that's a very difficult stand to take in a world that is full of challenges. That's why God was invented, in my opinion: to ease the burden.

[pilvikki]

naw... i'm more cynical and think monotheism was someone's brainstorm on population control.

when you have a bunch of deities running around, you can call on any number of helpers, but with just the one it'll feel more distant and scary?

[Ice.Maiden]

Interesting to note that in Athens, groups are now celebrating the "old gods" again, which have no Christian or anti-Christian ties. They just believe that there are gods of the trees, water, mountains, etc., and that festivals should be held in their honour. In other words, as far as I can make out, they're just worshipping nature.

[AJRC]

I don't understand how some can say you can only have morals if you're a christian. I guess the christians that murder and rape and molest small children weren't really christians? :roll: You get your morals from your parents, if you need to get your morals from a book that promotes slavery, homophobia and misogyny, then your parents didn't do a very good job.

And the very basis of religion is illogical. There is no proof that god exists. You might as well still believe in the tooth fairy or Santa, why are they make believe and god isn't? Is it simply consensus? Consensus isn't science, consensus doesn't make something right. When a group all think the same and believe the same there is no logic to be had, only blind faith.

But if you need that in your life then I have no problem, as long as you don't try and force feed me your religion and tell me i'm going to hell if I don't believe what you believe. Because if you do i'll lambast your religion with pure hellfire, and as I've found a good percentage of christians love to criticise other religions and beliefs but hate it when you criticise theirs. :bleh:

[Yogi]

The idea of a God or gods is not so much different than scientific arguments that explain mankind's perception of the universe. Both points of view try to answer the same question regarding the root cause of it all. Theists just accept God without an explanation, while atheists search for a "god particle" (which name Higgs was vehemently opposed to, by the way) that unifies all existence. Neither approach successfully explains it all, but the theists are more likely to accept their inability to understand and leave it all in the hands of a Supreme Being.

Morality is a personal thing. Given the chaos that can easily arise from each person on earth following their own sense of morality, it is reasonable to have a universal standard. Theists have their God model and atheists have ... well, from what I can tell, an ill-defined sense of right and wrong. The problem with the atheistic morality model is that it lends itself to conflicts with other moral beings who might have a contrary but equally valid set of values.

While the Bible is often sited as the standard of morality for believers, it is not. And, that is what the article I cited clearly points out. At it's best the Bible is a historical set of documents with a theme suggesting the nature of God. The history of mankind is filled with contradictions, and the Bible's version is no different in that regard. But, the God to which the Bible refers is the quintessential model of morality. There is no such model in the atheistic world.

[pilvikki]

There is no such model in the atheistic world.

that's what is so interesting; the theist concept that all us atheists will somehow be murderers etc. yet i seem to have some built-in compass telling me what is right and what ain't. same as the rest of us heatherns.

when i was 11, the restaurant in the village burnt down and my religiously brought up friend and i were walking through the ruins after school [picture THAT happening today!]. she picked up something and asked what i wanted to take. i said i didn't want anything and she was perplexed, sayning it wasn't like someone was going to miss it. yet i refused, saying it didn't feel right as it just wasn't ours.

needless to say, this was not learned behaviour for either one of us.

around that time [can't remember before or after] she did eventually pressure me into shoplifting some chocolate wafers. well, we got caught in short order, the shop keeper called my parents and well, god has nothing on my mother when it comes to fire and brimstone...

:lol:

[Yogi]

that's what is so interesting; the theist concept that all us atheists will somehow be murderers etc. yet i seem to have some built-in compass telling me what is right and what ain't. same as the rest of us heatherns.

The issue with not having a moral model to follow is that morality becomes highly individualized in that case. Given the differences among us, it may be moral for some middle eastern religious fanatic to murder you (for the glory of their god). Your atheistic morality would not accept that value, and the opposing moral values become mutually exclusive. There is no way to resolve that paradox.

[AJRC]

I don't search for a "god particle", couldn't care less about that or any particle of any given name. I don't feel the need to believe anything to live my life.

But the god model of morality is flawed, why are there so many instances lately of christians committing unspeakable acts on children? As you say morality is a personal thing, what is right for one may be wrong for another. But to use religion as a way of saying believe what we tell you or you can't be moral is the worst kind of group think. Religion and the bible doesn't really affect moral judgement in christians, they've been told it does, but it doesn't really. I've met some really evil christians on my time on talk forums. I know what is right from wrong, I don't need a book to tell me. Well apart from "The Cat in the Hat." ;)

But, the God to which the Bible refers is the quintessential model of morality

So their model is based on genocide, infanticide, murder and rape? Doesn't sound very moral to me. Why do you think they revised the bible? Because in the old testament god sounded pure evil. He doesn't sound that much better in the new testament.

[Yogi]

The image of God as a model for morality is not flawed. By definition it is the ideal. The people who do not adhere to the moral standard of their religion obviously are flawed in their judgement. Every religion on earth has a model. You might argue that those people cannot or are unwilling to think for themselves. The truth in the matter is that there are groups of like minded people who are attracted to one another by their commonality. Even atheists behave in that manner. Like minded thinking does not guarantee that each and every one in the group will see or practice the model perfectly. They can't because no two people perceive it the same way.

A person in the year 2013 who applies their moral values to historical events of 3000 years ago is anachronistic. Morality by definition is individualized and person centered. It is incorrect to say genocide, infanticide, murder and rape are moral issues. They are matters of ethics. An individual may use their concept of what is moral to practice or avoid ethical issues, but the two ideas are distinctly separate. Morality is a personal responsibility, while ethics goes beyond the individual and applies to social behavior. The model for morality may indeed have an impact on ethics within its own group. All Christians, for example, are expected to follow the standard model of morality.

It is short sighted to think that the unscrupulous acts of highly regarded religious leaders is a recent phenomena. The Bible documents such behavior and is thousands of years old. The moral code of the Old Testament is pretty much the same as the moral code of today's Millennium Generation. 10% of all people ever born on this planet are alive today. Why would you not expect a greater occurrence of crimes against society? The ideals and the flaws are human nature, not contradictions. The problem with organized religion, as it is with atheism, is that both groups fail to see the fatal flaw in expecting everyone to act the same way.

[AJRC]

I don't think it's the actual crimes people are angry about, as you say they've gone on for ever. It's the way the church systematically covered up for these crimes and protected the monstrous child molesters by moving them around, usually to molest more kids. If they'd nipped it in the bud then fine, a few bad apples. But to cover up for these crimes makes the whole church look bad. If the whole church can cover up something so morally abhorrent, how can they ever expect anyone to listen when they preach about moral values?

[AJRC]

I was reading an article recently that said most people of religion love to talk to god, but most would be horrified if he answered back. It said that if someone says they've talked to god no one bats an eyelid, but if someone says god is talking to them, they're locked up in a loony bin. So is religion a fine line between sanity and insanity?

I still remember that TV movie a long time ago about a young protestant man who falls asleep in front of the telly, when he wakes the programmes have finished and there is just static on the TV but a voice comes out and proclaims to be the voice of god. The voice tells him to gather as many people as possible to hear god's will. He rushes out and tells his girlfriend, she's protestant herself but is still a little sceptical but still agrees to come. He tells his parents, his friends, his work colleges, all are religious and all are sceptical but they all say they'll come. He tells his pastor, even he's sceptical at first but when he sees how much faith the young man has he starts to believe him and agrees to come.

They eventually all assemble in his living room and all sit down in front of the TV. The young man switches it on and tells them that he'd told them so and to listen to what god has to say. But all they can see and hear is static. The young man can't understand why they can't hear god. The faces of the people there turn from confusion to horror, through blind faith they wanted to believe it was true, but they now know he's a loony and they've all been fools. In the closing scene he's being taken away in an ambulance still telling anyone who'll listen that god really was talking to him.