# Morality and God (simplified this time). **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 9, 2003, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593 "2003-09-09T19:54:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![juan2003](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@juan2003](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/juan2003)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/41 "2003-09-11T03:24:33Z")
Our actions are not random; they are just not predictable in the long term. There is a difference between chaotic and random. God does know the future absolutely. By introducing free will into the universe, He made the future open-ended. Free Will is a delegation of a small portion of God’s creative power. Collectively, all beings with free will continue to create the future. God sees and knows everythng that is already set. Anyway… this is a hijack of the op. No more! ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/42 "2003-09-11T03:39:57Z")
hehe… so juan1203. He (god) creates the rules… then says we can “bend” or “break” those rules due to free will ? BUT if we break the rules we go to hell ? You call that a choice ? ``` Have you ever had sex in your life ? I think you need to "sin" a bit before calling "thoughts" sins. This all sounds to "theoritical" to me what your saying. I think you need to do some "field research". :) ``` I’ll go with kelly 5068 on this… WHO said God said this to you ? Did you talk to god just to make sure ? Come on… Why make humans so prone to sin and then condemn them ? That meteoroligist sure thought there were sunny days ahead … but its been raining ever since. ---
**Author:** ![MonkeyMensch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@MonkeyMensch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MonkeyMensch)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/43 "2003-09-11T04:06:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Engywook \* > \*\* > IIRC, CS Lewis argued in _Mere Christianity_ that our is a miraculous sense of what God - who embodies perfect goodness and absolute morality - wants us to do. If you take away God, you necessarily lose a moral true north, and where does that leave your moral compass? > > \*\* Ummm, pointing North? I was thinking of starting a similar thread after watching a coule of hours of TBN blather tonight. How come God doesn’t just kill all of His believers and bring them all home? Re the OP: I think God likes it when anyone is killed. Quicker justice is served, or else an eternity of bliss is begun. I guess I have to go spend a weekend with my fundie brother now to make up for this apostasy… ---
**Author:** ![rpkc4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c2a13f/32.png) [@rpkc4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rpkc4)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/44 "2003-09-11T05:08:07Z")
you ever wonder… if there is no God and religious morality…wtf is morality? a mechanism of evolution? i dont think so… ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 10:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/45 "2003-09-11T10:11:05Z")
Morality is derived from rules society creates… be it monkey or human. Chimps dont tear themselves apart everyday. Neither do we. Morality in a sense is an apropiation of said rules. Living in a tribe or group demands certain “sacrifices” and co habitation. Yep its a mechanism of evolution. ``` We make new "morals" all the time too... so if god pre ordained them why do they show up ? ``` ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/46 "2003-09-11T13:47:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kelly5078 \* > **IzzyR** : I can assure you it is correct, if by “sin” one is referring to something for which one is to be punished by God. It is true that the Torah says not to indulge in sinful thoughts, and Jews recognize that sinful thoughts are generally considered something to avoid, but Judaism recognizes that such thought control is virtually impossible. As such, sinful thoughts are considered a desecration of the individual’s mind, but not cause for divine punishment. A punishable sin, and this was what **juan2003** is talking about, is an action. Sorry, but you are wrong, assurances to the contrary notwithstanding. There are many thoughts which are themselves sins, and are punishable like any other sin. These include but are not limited to the type of lustful thoughts described by **juan2003** (based on Num. 15:39 & Deut. 23:9 et al), hateful thoughts towards other people (based on Lev. 19:17), and scheming to acquire others’ possessions (based on Deut. 5:21). See also Prov. 15:26. I would agree with you that your characterization might be apt for someone who has desires to eat a ham sandwich. But to say that the concept that “sinful thoughts constitute sin … is not to be found in Judaism” is blatantly wrong, and ignorant to boot. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/47 "2003-09-11T14:14:24Z")
> [@](#): > > Everytime I see an attractive woman and get a boner, I’ve sinned, and in God’s view, it is no different than had I raped and killed her. This is possibly the single stupidest thing I’ve ever seen posted on a message board. Lust is a natural. organic and involuntary biological urge. Sexual desire is not subject to free will and so cannot be a “sin” unless God is a total asshole who punishes people for exhibiting traits which **HE** implanted. It would be like calling _hunger_ a sin or left-handedness (or [ahem] homosexuality). If free will means anything then sin has to be _chosen_. If one can sin without choice then free will means nothing and God is simply a capricious, irrational thug who cannot be said to be good or just. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/48 "2003-09-11T14:32:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Engywook \* > \*\*This might be an example of sloppy-minded people, poorly expressing a point of view that is actually really interesting. Perhaps your friends are insisting that conscience cannot exist without divine inspiration. > > IIRC, CS Lewis argued in _Mere Christianity_ that our is a miraculous sense of what God - who embodies perfect goodness and absolute morality - wants us to do. If you take away God, you necessarily lose a moral true north, and where does that leave your moral compass? > > Note that this is _not_ the same as saying that we would all be out eating babies if God didn’t exist. It only means that there would be nothing cosmically wrong with eating babies. > > Some of us might still feel that it’s wrong. > IMHO, conscience _might_ be the whisper of God in our ear. But there are other explanations for conscience. I for one feel that it’s no miracle that I’m repulsed by the idea of slaughtering children. **Mangetout’s** friends, perhaps, feel otherwise… according to some, any goodness in mankind - heart or deed - is proof of the grace of God. It’s a rather dim view of man, but it’s got a long history. \*\* One obvious problem with Lewis’ argument is that it does not identify _which_ God embodies “true moral north.” There is (to extend the metaphor) a veritible galaxy of gods and deities to choose from including some pretty violent ones. Our choice in gods would have to be grounded in personal morality, would it not? What god seems to _me_ to be the most “good” is the god that we choose. This would necessitate a preexisting moral sense that would not derive from God. Another gaping hole in the argument is that it is such self-evident bullshit. It is utterly contradicted by the _reality_ millions of people who don’t believe in C. S. Lewis’ god (or _any_ god) who still clearly have a sense of morality and personal ethics. In fact, that _innate_ moral sense is far more valuable than simple religious prohibition. It’s more effective and more honest. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/49 "2003-09-11T14:44:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > Lust is a natural. organic and involuntary biological urge. Sexual desire is not subject to free will and so cannot be a “sin” unless God is a total asshole who punishes people for exhibiting traits which **HE** implanted. It would be like calling _hunger_ a sin or left-handedness (or [ahem] homosexuality). If free will means anything then sin has to be _chosen_. If one can sin without choice then free will means nothing and God is simply a capricious, irrational thug who cannot be said to be good or just. Disagree. Obviously, to the extent that you are subjected to thoughts that are beyond your control, God would be expected to be understanding and give you a pass (much like actions that are beyond your control). But to suggest that lust - or any other thoughts - are completely involuntary and not subject to free will is absurd and at odds with reality. People have some level of control and influence over their thoughts and feelings, and to the extent that they fail to control them they can be held responsible. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/50 "2003-09-11T14:55:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by IzzyR \* > \*\ ***Mangetout** , > > I don’t see anything in your second or third quote to suggest that the writer might be a psychopath. All the writers are saying is that if your heart should happen to desire some immoral act there will be nothing to prevent you from doing it. Even the first quote is merely a hyperbolic version of the same. There are actually people out there who do “sick evil things” to children, and surely there must be a lot of other people who would want to do them but hold themselves back on moral grounds. > > Again, the argument is that for many people there are _some_ acts that they would want to do but restrain themselves on moral grounds. In the absence of any morality people would engage in them. In the course of making this argument people tend to gravitate to the worst examples of what might happen. This is a common feature of people making arguments of any sort. There is nothing in this to suggest that someone making this argument is any different than anyone else in terms of their natural desires. \*\* We’re not talking about an absence of morality but an absence of belief in God. The OP is describing the attitude expressed by some that morality is impossible without faith or that those who lack religious faith would necessarily lack self-control. I have no religious belief but I restraiin a lot of my baser impulses for reasons ranging from empathy (an innate distaste for the thought of hurting others), fear of _human_ consequences (I’d get out out of my car and ring that guy’s neck who cut me off but I fear the legal repurcussions…plus he might be bigger than me), love (I am faithful to my wife because I love her not because I fear God) and selfishness (my life works out better if I follow the rules). Of all the above “moral” restraints on my own behavior, love and empathy are the strongest. It makes me feel good to treat people well and it makes me feel bad to hurt people. I don’t need God to hold me back and, like the OP, I am leery of those who would suggest that a lack of belief in God should necessarily lead to depraved, hedonistic or arbitrarily violent behaviors. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/51 "2003-09-11T14:56:11Z")
**IzzyR** , Mangetout was _not_ saying that the person who wrote that is a psychopath. He’s saying that this person’s argument is flawed. If god is the only reason that he’s not eating children, then he is at the core a psychopath. Since we all admit that he is not a raving psychopath, then his argument must be wrong. And **Malacandra** , your refutation of Plato’s analysis doesn’t work. “God existed before the world, therefore he can’t be a tyrant”? Is that what you’re saying? I find Plato’s analysis quite compelling. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/52 "2003-09-11T15:16:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > We’re not talking about an absence of morality but an absence of belief in God. The OP is describing the attitude expressed by some that morality is impossible without faith or that those who lack religious faith would necessarily lack self-control. No we are not. I believe that you - and pretty much everyone else who has posted to this thread - have missed the point of the OP. It is not to discuss whether morality is possible without religion, as he specifically writes: > [@](#): > > OP > Now I don’t want to get into a discussion of whether you can have an objective morality without basing it on God, or whether there is any such thing as objective at all. No, the discussion here is whether the implication of such an argument is that the person making the argument is a psycopath: > [@](#): > > OP > No, my issue is a lot simpler; these statements frighten me because, unless this is always just sloppy thinking at work (and maybe that is all it is after all), what we’re looking at here is a bunch of religious people whose inner mindset consists of something like “I really want to murder, steal and violate, but God won’t like me if I do, so I’d better not”. > > In other words the religious person in question would be some kind of psychopath, restrained solely by the fear of being caught in the act and punished. Two choices are being given here - either psychopath or sloppy thinking. As I said earlier, I personally do NOT agree that an absence of belief in God implies an absence of morality. But I maintain that a person who does make that argument is not implying that that he is a psychopath or a sloppy thinker - he is merely someone who disagrees with me about the absence of God implying an absence of morality. And if he happens to chose an example of child killing he is likely seizing on the most extreme and dramatic example available, rather than revealing any hidden desire on his own part. **CurtC** , I believe this (along with my previous posts) deals with your objections as well. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/53 "2003-09-11T15:52:58Z")
I guess I didn’t read it that way. I read it as his reducing the argument to an absurdity (that they’re psychopaths if their argument is true), and if frightened that they have such poor thinking skills that they can’t see this. Mangetout, did I read it wrong? Are you really asking whether they’re psychopaths? ---
**Author:** ![kelly5078](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/6f9a4e/32.png) [@kelly5078](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kelly5078)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/54 "2003-09-11T16:09:49Z")
**IzzyR** : I will concede that there are varying interpretations concerning the punishability of sinful thoughts, that my characterization of Jewish thought was too broad, and that my example in my earlier post is thereby weakened. While all of the people (Conservative, Reform) I’ve talked to on the matter have held that the harm in sinful thoughts is that they lead to sinful actions, my statement was far too inclusive. In practice, I don’t run into very many Jews tearing themselves up inside over what they’re thinking, the way Christians do, although Jews do beat themselves up a lot over what they’ve done/should have done/didn’t do. I’ve been on both sides of the fence, and the difference is striking. [/hijack] Back to the subject of the thread, **Diogenes** summed up the way the way my motivations work pretty well, except that I’m not so leery of people who think that religion (if not a belief in a god) is necessary to maintain morality. I personally think that participation in a religion is more likely than not to lead people to a more moral life (with some glaring exceptions), but that that is the result of associating with a group of moral people with stated values. If they want to believe that a deity is responsible for their morality, it doesn’t scare me off. ---
**Author:** ![juan2003](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@juan2003](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/juan2003)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/55 "2003-09-11T18:08:23Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Rashak Mani_ > **hehe… so juan1203. He (god) creates the rules… then says we can “bend” or “break” those rules due to free will ? BUT if we break the rules we go to hell ? You call that a choice ?** God purposely makes Himself transparent so that we can freely choose wheter or not to believe in Him. If God were too obvious, we’d live in fear of Hell. Because God is only apparent to those who choose to have faith, those who love Him can choose His way. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic_ > **I restraiin a lot of my baser impulses for reasons [including] … love (I am faithful to my wife because I love her not because I fear God) … Of all the above “moral” restraints on my own behavior, love and empathy are the strongest.** Atheists can create their own moral systems, but they won’t necessarily match up God’s plan. Furthermore, one doesn’t become saved by following a moral system, but only by accepting the love and forgiveness of Jesus Christ. The love of God transforms people. A psychopath may want to murder and eat babies, but if he were to accept Jesus into his heart, he would repent and change not only in his actions, but also in his innermost thoughts and desires. Jesus is better than therapy! ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2003, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/56 "2003-09-11T19:07:04Z")
> [@](#): > > Atheists can create their own moral systems, but they won’t necessarily match up God’s plan. Furthermore, one doesn’t become saved by following a moral system, but only by accepting the love and forgiveness of Jesus Christ. Saved from what? ---
**Author:** ![FairDink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ed8c4c/32.png) [@FairDink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FairDink)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2003, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/57 "2003-09-12T05:13:35Z")
> [@](#): > > Note that this is not the same as saying that we would all be out eating babies if God didn’t exist. It only means that there would be nothing cosmically wrong with eating babies. Chicken & egg scenario. What came first God or morality? I think morals are ingrained in us through experience. Some of us may need that extra bit of incentive. ---
**Author:** ![FairDink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ed8c4c/32.png) [@FairDink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FairDink)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2003, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/58 "2003-09-12T05:53:27Z")
> [@](#): > > God gave us “Free Will”, which created the potential for sin. Man himself created sin by disobeying God. Whaaaa?? In difining what is ‘good’ you are by default defining what is ‘bad’ and vice versa. By your logic, “it doesn’t exist untill man discovers it”. How did you ever get past school? ---
**Author:** ![theauctionboard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@theauctionboard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theauctionboard)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2003, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/59 "2003-09-12T06:25:04Z")
> [@](#): > > In other words the religious person in question would be some kind of psychopath, restrained solely by the fear of being caught in the act and punished. > > I never thought I’d say this, but I really hope it is just sloppy thinking on their part. I’ve often wondered what keeps me walking the “straight and narrow” myself, even though I wouldn’t really consider myself a religious person. I do believe there’s something out there larger than myself that ultimately controls the universe. I don’t believe in Heaven & Hell (well, I don’t really know if I do), but I do believe in Karma. Some people call it empathy. For example: I don’t do things to people that I wouldn’t want done to me. I’m afraid that Karma will come back and kick me in the ass (can we say ass here?). I also try to put myself in someone else’s shoes and think “How would I feel if it were me?” It’s not about being caught doing something and having to face the consequences, it’s more about not wanting to be the person responsible for making someone else feel bad–especially because “what goes around comes around.” Or maybe I am afraid of getting caught, but not by God–just something else. I don’t know. . . ---
**Author:** ![FairDink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ed8c4c/32.png) [@FairDink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FairDink)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2003, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593/60 "2003-09-12T07:47:50Z")
**juan2003** From my perspective, if all I had was god, what the hell would I have to live for? Waiting for death is not exactly my cup of tea. Science gives me areason to live, science gives me a reason to admire (a moral powerhouse), science gives me the ability to put myself in other peoples shoes, and science helps me appriciate everyone as equal. God, well… he doesn’t do any of that for me. But if God does for you what science does for me then can’t we assume they are the same thing? - just a different interpretation? If I was to kill you now, then am I doing you a favour? If you have not done any sins up till now, you will go to heaven right? So i’m helping you, especially if I thought that you were going to have sex on your date tonight. In other words, the shorter your life is, the better chance you have of going to heaven? Pleeeeeaaaasssseeee! You think that I am going to hell. Well, I reckon you are waisting your life. You have not left yourself much room to grow or learn dude. The only sin here is you trying to speak on behalf of a god you know nothing about. The way you are presenting your argument seems as if you may have heard this first-hand. If god spoke to you personally and told you all these things, then next time you speak to him, ask him if he could come and explain it to me (he knows where I live). Sarcasm will get me nowhere, I know. But its God that gave it to me. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/morality-and-god-simplified-this-time/200593.md?page=4)