If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out...

[iKotomi]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

People that argue that morality is subjective have to realize that that is an opinion not a fact. If there exists a universal standard of right and wrong, theoretically, an action can be either in accordance to or in violation of the universal law, aka, an objective measure. One possible way for such a universal law to exist is the existence of some God.

This for the most part is absolutely unprovable, but if God existed and if he had a universal measure, for example a set of rules like the 10 commandments, then morality is in fact objective and not subjective. This is why religions tend to insist that you are all bad people doomed to eternal suffering if you don't use your get out of jail free card.

Once you have the premise of a universal measure, there are ways to set up objective means to determining what is immoral. This is pretty much the premise of Kant's Categorical Imperative, which while creating a system of determining immorality through reason, had the necessity of some sort of god given universal law to justify that this reason based morality is actually valid.

I guess the main gist is that, if god exists, which you can't prove or disprove, then morality can in fact be objective. Though I haven't read Kant in a while, so it is probable that one can construct an argument that the Categorical Imperative applies without the necessity for the existence of god.

 

[Felix007]

apologies if this was already stated..

ah, i love this sort of thing. this is a simple competence vs. performance issue as found in linguistics.

acting moral, whatever that means for wherever you happen to find yourself, is really just altering your intrinsic morality to fit some particular situation that your intrinsic morality is somehow incompatible with. you're essentially bending yourself to the will of some kind of consensus. under this consensus-based approach, i find it unlikely that anyone in, say, Canada would object to someone altering or suspending their morality wherein they believe that killing Canadians is, as Wilfred Brimly would say, "the right thing to do".

but anyway, whether or not you judge it ("being moral only because you're afraid of repercussion") to be immoral would depend on your own sense of morality. ;)

Certainly, I'm not arguing that morality is objective, and every person has a different definition of what makes something moral. It's likely a mix between personal judgment and consensus opinion (as an example, try to find someone that finds murdering infants moral), hence the idea of a Moral Zeitgeist.

It's hard to list too many more examples without merely delving into an ad populum argument.

Edit:

This for the most part is absolutely unprovable, but if God existed and if he had a universal measure, for example a set of rules like the 10 commandments, then morality is in fact objective and not subjective. This is why religions tend to insist that you are all bad people doomed to eternal suffering if you don't use your get out of jail free card.

Does that not make God's morality entirely arbitrary? God could say that slavery is just, and you would be required to follow after it.

While I haven't read up on Kant for a while either, I was under the assumption his premises were based entirely on a God enforcing objective morality? I may be incorrect, it's something I haven't looked at in quite some time.

 

[LKV]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

i read an article a while ago where someone theorized that morality might be innate, and that there are universal components to human morality along the lines of there being universal components to human language. i don't remember the details of the paper, but i can try to dig it up if anyone is interested. it might provide some arguments towards a soft objective morality or some such thing.

edit: the guy's name is John Mikhail

 

[JetSetDizzy]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

Wow this thread is totally serious. Thread title had me fooled lol. I completely beleive in God. If everything is just randomly here by coincidence then there's no point in doing anything, because it doesn't matter. I would certainly find it hard to care about my life, other than just enjoying myself as much as possible before i cease to exist?
I also think that its hard to understand free will with an all knowing God (just because he knows whats going to happen doesnt mean it was forced on you?), but its even harder to understand it without God. Surely your reaction to any given situation is purley based on your genetic dispositions and you enviormental stimuli up to that point if you have no soul and are just some coincidence of chemistry. It could probably be boiled down to a science of a million little causes for each effect.

 

[smilingsaint]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

this was an unusual thread title, it faked me out at first.

i am curious though, can anyone in this thread provide an argument that god, zues, allah or whoever is more likely to exist than santa claus or the tooth fairy?

as a side note, has anyone noticed the staggering disparity in the quality or arguments (and posts) on this subject between those supporting religion and those opposing it? some these supporting arguments are barely a step above "i know you are, but what am i".

 

[Felix007]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

Wow this thread is totally serious. Thread title had me fooled lol. I completely beleive in God. If everything is just randomly here by coincidence then there's no point in doing anything, because it doesn't matter. I would certainly find it hard to care about my life, other than just enjoying myself as much as possible before i cease to exist?
I also think that its hard to understand free will with an all knowing God (just because he knows whats going to happen doesnt mean it was forced on you?), but its even harder to understand it without God. Surely your reaction to any given situation is purley based on your genetic dispositions and you enviormental stimuli up to that point if you have no soul and are just some coincidence of chemistry. It could probably be boiled down to a science of a million little causes for each effect.

Free will being incompatible with omniscience is hard to wrap your head around. Imagine that I was omniscient, and I gave you the choice between two arbitrary objects, A and B. Now, if I know beforehand that your choice will be A, do you still retain the option to choose B? No, for if you did, you would be going against my omniscience, and I would no longer retain that quality.

You can even back it up further. To get to that point in time, I have to control every aspect of existence. I must ensure that every part of your life eventually includes you coming to me so that I can present you the options A and B. To do even this, I would have to ensure first that you are born.

That requires that I control every thought and twist of fate that influenced every ancestor and those around you. Every unrequited love, every fiancee killed in battle, every child born of rape, every arranged marriage, all planned to lead to these individuals to influencing you in some way that would lead to this moment in time. Based on this, omniscience and free will seem to butt heads with fervor.

Lack of belief in a God does not lead to nihilism. We give meaning to our own individual existence. I think it's a much grander idea than spending my entire life auditioning for the next.

Credit to DJ on the wording.

 

[KoshTheKoala]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

I think you're taking what I said too seriously. I don't believe that God creates lightning or any of the stupid shit the Bible says that defies all logic, which is a large amount of it. In fact, sometimes I seriously doubt God's existence as well, but I'm not gonna convert to atheism.

You don't convert from theism to atheism. You're already an atheist for the other 11ty billion gods out there, you just believe in 1 more god than the other atheists.

And about me not knowing what truly caused the creation of time, you're right. We'll probably never know what happened and will be restricted to theories, and one possibility, which many others believe in, is that it's God's (or some higher force's) work. That's pretty much the only theory most people can think of at the moment. Even if it sounds ridiculous, it's possible. Again, it's just my opinion.

No it's actually not the only theory people have thought of. I seem to recall universes giving birth to other universes in black holes as one theory... also membranes hitting each other causing big bangs as another.

The scientific community that you speak of, most of them believe in God as well. They, like me, just don't take the Bible as fact. They're not all atheists like you just because they believe in scientific concepts.

No, they don't. They took a survey in both the USA and England, and it shows an overwhelmingly large number are atheist and only a small number believe in some sort of god(s).

Let's just limit this to our personal opinions on the matter. I say this to everyone. Opinions. Because I've found that a lot of people don't know what that word means.

Why would you limit a discussion to opinions when facts exist and are so much better?


This deserves to be quoted as awesome:

If you're not willing to debate your opinion on the matter, why bother posting at all? You refine and expand your ideas by having a discourse with others. You gain nothing by typing your thoughts on the matter and getting upset when someone challenges those ideas.

I just believe that it's nice to think of an all powerful being that is watching you, because it sets a guideline on how to live your life. Want to go to heaven? (which may or may not exist) Be good. (sounds nice right? Cool, i'll be the best person i can.) Want to go to a place of eternal suffering and torment? (which may or may not exist). Errm No thanks (Okay, so i won't be bad.)

Pretty easy to live a good life when you're scared of being tormented and tortured right?

I'm glad you wrote this!

"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."
-Napoleon Bonaparte

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."
-Napoleon Bonaparte

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I'm not a physicist, so of course, I won't be able to fully understand how time can exist without a previous force besides itself triggering it, but I suppose if I look into it, I'll understand it more. Thank you for explaining it.

You're limiting yourself to a single universe of thought. With a multi-verse theory, time can be "born" in one universe, but not in another. Time isn't universal at all, it's not a constant. We know from relativity that moving fast slows time in the perspective of a relatively neutral frame of reference... that's just a fact of the universe that has been proven. You take two people, send one at 0.99C for 50 years (in the relatively motionless frame of reference, compared to the speed of light at least), and when he comes back, he'll be significantly younger.

My original point though, was not that God created the big bang, but that simply, God exists. I used the big bang as an example because it seemed to be the strangest of phenomena I could think of. Now that you've explained it, I (sorta) know how God is not involved in this.

Why does god exist? Why does god need to exist? If god didn't create the big bang, god didn't create the matter in the universe, god didn't create the Earth, god didn't seed it with life, god didn't cause evolution, and god hasn't done any miracles attributed to him/her/it, then what does god do? Why does god exist? If god has absolutely no point and doesn't do anything at all besides cause things like 9/11, the Crusades and genocide all over the world, why would you believe he exists? And if he does, is he really worth worshiping?

 

[BlackDragon37]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

People that argue that morality is subjective have to realize that that is an opinion not a fact. If there exists a universal standard of right and wrong, theoretically, an action can be either in accordance to or in violation of the universal law, aka, an objective measure. One possible way for such a universal law to exist is the existence of some God.

The problem with this is that an objective truth has to be mind independent.

Morality isn't mind independent.

 

[crow_winters]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

Woot for controversial thread!

Seriously though, it is rather humble of you to give thanks and recognition to something that isn't very popular to believe in these days. I myself believe in him, just..a very lazy believer..-_-

Uh, it's only "not very popular" depending upon where you are and who you mingle with. This is a very big world, just because those in your immediate city/social structure/whatever don't adhere to it doesn't mean anything.

I try not to believe in invisible monsters because I realize if I were raised in a different part of the world by a different family, I'd believe in a completely different invisible monster.

 

[LKV]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

The problem with this is that an objective truth has to be mind independent.

Morality isn't mind independent.

i tend to agree with this line of thinking, but if everyone shared at least one moral principle, could this particular principle be considered objective, at least within the domain of humanity?

 

[Manta]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

I'm liking where this thread is going, and that these ideas are amongst us ~ I was going to reply with many points, but you guys have already beat me to most of the good ones =)


-Manta-

 

[Y-Disciple]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

You don't convert from theism to atheism. You're already an atheist for the other 11ty billion gods out there, you just believe in 1 more god than the other atheists.

What's your point?

No it's actually not the only theory people have thought of. I seem to recall universes giving birth to other universes in black holes as one theory... also membranes hitting each other causing big bangs as another.

I already addressed this in another post.

No, they don't. They took a survey in both the USA and England, and it shows an overwhelmingly large number are atheist and only a small number believe in some sort of god(s).

Link?

Why would you limit a discussion to opinions when facts exist and are so much better?

Depends on what you call fact. Since God is not yet proven to exist, the atheists in the thread are gonna be all "It's fact that God doesn't exist because science is responsible for everything," or vice versa, which is not fact, it's an opinion. Show me hard facts that show God doesn't exist, or whatever you're trying to prove. Otherwise, it's an opinion.

Why does god exist? Why does god need to exist? If god didn't create the big bang, god didn't create the matter in the universe, god didn't create the Earth, god didn't seed it with life, god didn't cause evolution, and god hasn't done any miracles attributed to him/her/it, then what does god do? Why does god exist? If god has absolutely no point and doesn't do anything at all besides cause things like 9/11, the Crusades and genocide all over the world, why would you believe he exists? And if he does, is he really worth worshiping?

You know as well as I do that no one knows this. So what are you trying to say?

 

[LKV]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

if you claim that something exists, then then burden of proof is on you. it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something.

part of the problem with these types of arguments is that faith in something intangible or not-yet proven is not arrived at by reason, but by some set of experiences. since it has no logical and empirical motivation, it's almost silly to try to impose reason on a belief that is fundamentally irrational. that is not to say that those who believe in a god are irrational people-- certainly we all have some sort of irrational beliefs-- it's just to say that since this type of belief is at its core not rational, and therefore cannot be defended from a rational or logical framework.

 

[Archangel]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

if you claim that something exists, then then burden of proof is on you. it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something.

part of the problem with these types of arguments is that faith in something intangible or not-yet proven is not arrived at by reason, but by some set of experiences. since it has no logical and empirical motivation, it's almost silly to try to impose reason on a belief that is fundamentally irrational. that is not to say that those who believe in a god are irrational people-- certainly we all have some sort of irrational beliefs-- it's just to say that since this type of belief is at its core not rational, and therefore cannot be defended from a rational or logical framework.

Best post in thread. It should end the argument, but of course it won't.

 

[BlackDragon37]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

i tend to agree with this line of thinking, but if everyone shared at least one moral principle, could this particular principle be considered objective, at least within the domain of humanity?

I think if everyone shared at least one moral principle, then it would be collectively subjective, not objective. This is because regarless of whether or not everyone agrees to it, it is still a created truth rather than a discovered one. It still relies on experinces and preferences as its foundations.

If the one principle is mind-independent, then it's not a moral. It's an instinct. Because then it's dispositional, unlearned, and inherited. Therefore no one would question it. Morality gives leeway to question.

 

[Codemaster92163]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

Sad thing is I actually sold my soul to a friend last year for a snapple *Wrote in blood and everything since my finger was actually already cut at the time. I had to do it on a napkin though since we were in lunch*

 

[iKotomi]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

Does that not make God's morality entirely arbitrary? God could say that slavery is just, and you would be required to follow after it.

While I haven't read up on Kant for a while either, I was under the assumption his premises were based entirely on a God enforcing objective morality? I may be incorrect, it's something I haven't looked at in quite some time.

Yes, for all intents and purposes, if God existed and had a universal measure for morality, it would be arbitrary to us whether or not they are moral, though said god figure might have had some reasoning of his own for establishing such laws. You either broke the law or you didn't, which from a purely objective standard makes it prohibitively difficult to be moral with laws given by the likes of religion.

For example, say for example that we have two universal laws, do not lie and do not kill. If a murderer came to your door and asked you where his target was, if you lie, you break one law, if you tell the truth, you effectively break another. Whatever you do, from an objective standpoint you have committed an immoral action, though one action will have a more desirable outcome than the other. If you're going to be judged without your get out of jail free card, you're probably doomed just because you were not capable of super-humanly not lied and saved the victim. Objective standards can exist, they just trap people into accepting that they are immoral and imperfect beings which is hard for a lot of people to swallow.

Religion tends to get around this point by saying you're a bad person, but you will have your sins forgiven if you do such and such things. Otherwise there wouldn't be any point in people being religious since you're doomed either way in the after life if it exists.

The problem with this is that an objective truth has to be mind independent.

Morality isn't mind independent.

Here's an objective truth. 1+1 = 2. Naming conventions aside, the concept of 1, and the concept of 2 exist regardless of whether or not you believe it or recognize it. You may disagree with that fact, but in the end of the day, you were either right in accepting it or you were wrong in denying its legitimacy.

The same applies with arguments for the existence of God. His existence or non-existence, and the establishment of any laws that are universal is a priori...Nothing you think or argue can change the fact, and you would either be wrong or right depending on if you accepted what was in fact the reality. You're arguing that there are no objective truths. I'm arguing that if there was an objective truth, there's nothing that you can do about it, as I hope is clear with the 1+1 argument.

 

[BlackDragon37]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

Objective truths aren't based on choice. There are objective truths, like the example you've put up.

My point is that you cannot choose to disobey objective truths, whether you like it or not.

So maybe we're on the same page here.

 

[KoshTheKoala]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

Link?

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3506.asp (links to the same article, but it's from a website dedicated to defending Genesis...)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2111174/Intelligent-people-less-likely-to-believe-in-God.html

Depends on what you call fact. Since God is not yet proven to exist, the atheists in the thread are gonna be all "It's fact that God doesn't exist because science is responsible for everything," or vice versa, which is not fact, it's an opinion. Show me hard facts that show God doesn't exist, or whatever you're trying to prove. Otherwise, it's an opinion.

That's where you're wrong. If you truly believe in the scientific method, you would never say "it's a fact that god(s) do not exist." You would say "here is all the proof against the existence of a god and here's all the proof for the existence of a god. From all this data I can conclude that gods probably do not exist, but since we do not know everything, it is possible." Unlike religion, science absolutely delights in realizing they've gotten something wrong and fixing it. For example, the discovery that the Earth revolves around the Sun was fantastic to scientists and painful to theists... look up Galileo. This who idea that science seeks to learn is what makes it so powerful. Religion wants to maintain the status quo and looks at any divergence as heresy.

The problem with "showing you facts that god doesn't exist" is that the ball isn't in the court of atheists. It's in the court of the theists... show them proof god exists. Oh right, there isn't any that is verifiable, which means personal revelations and "feelings" don't count as proof.

Honestly, how do you ever have hard proof that something does not exist? Look up the Flying Spaghetti Monster... give me hard proof that he isn't your god. According to the FSM scriptures, he is very adept at hiding himself, just as your god is. But this has been covered by a previous poster.

You know as well as I do that no one knows this. So what are you trying to say?

What I'm trying to say is, why do you believe in a god? What's the point if he's been basically proven to not have done anything except possibly create the big bang, then left the universe forever? Since praying doesn't do anything and the chances are that he really doesn't care about humanity, why live your life with god on your mind?

As Manta said earlier, belief in god has caused most of the world's most evil acts (with Stalin being one of the very few exceptions). A world in which no one can say "god told me to" to defend themselves after killing dozens or hundreds or thousands of people would be a much better world. What if, after 9/11, the entire Arab world condemned Al-Qaeda for the terrorists they are and actively hunted them down? What if there was never a Biblical excuse for slavery or racism or any other hate-crime?

 

[Y-Disciple]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3506.asp (links to the same article, but it's from a website dedicated to defending Genesis...)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2111174/Intelligent-people-less-likely-to-believe-in-God.html

Interesting. Okay, I'll give in to that.

Religion wants to maintain the status quo and looks at any divergence as heresy.

That's generalizing a bit. It all depends on how you interpret the Bible (or whatever book you choose). What I see is that God would want us to be accepting of others regardless of race, sexuality, beliefs, etc. Religion can condradict science or it can agree with it, depending on who you ask.

What I'm trying to say is, why do you believe in a god? What's the point if he's been basically proven to not have done anything except possibly create the big bang, then left the universe forever? Since praying doesn't do anything and the chances are that he really doesn't care about humanity, why live your life with god on your mind??

Why would anyone believe in God? Because it gives me hope and rests my mind. Think about this- if a loved one dies, would you prefer to believe that they're gone for good and you'll never see them again, or would you rather believe that they're now in a state of happiness and someday you will be with them again in the same way? There's a good chance that in reality, it's the former, but the question is, which one would comfort you more?

Or think about this: Hitler lived a life of luxury, killing and torturing innocents, and he died a quick death by his own hands. Wouldn't you prefer that he pay the price in Hell for his crimes than to have died without being properly punished?

And I'll tell you, some weird shit has happened when people pray. Yeah, it could just be a coincidence, but we won't know for sure.

Don't tell me I'm in a make-believe world and giving myself false hope for believing in this because there's a chance that not of this is true. Like I said before, you'd have to tell that to every theist on the planet.

As Manta said earlier, belief in god has caused most of the world's most evil acts (with Stalin being one of the very few exceptions). A world in which no one can say "god told me to" to defend themselves after killing dozens or hundreds or thousands of people would be a much better world. What if, after 9/11, the entire Arab world condemned Al-Qaeda for the terrorists they are and actively hunted them down? What if there was never a Biblical excuse for slavery or racism or any other hate-crime?

Sure, I'll give you that. But what point are you specifically trying to prove? Are you trying to say that because of these atrocities, it's wrong to believe in a god? I want to make sure you're not looking upon believers as inferior to you in any way, because we're all equals, just with different beliefs.


And just so everyone's clear, Heaven is not a "place" where you are fated to live for the rest of eternity, but rather just a state of happiness. It's not like you're doomed to immortality or anything like that.