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!
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.
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…
you ever wonder… if there is no God and religious morality…wtf is morality? a mechanism of evolution? i dont think so…
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 ?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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
No, the discussion here is whether the implication of such an argument is that the person making the argument is a psycopath:
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.
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?
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.
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.
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!
Saved from what?
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.
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?
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. . .
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.