Difference between revisions of "Debate:If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Yes)
(Yes: - Really "NO" Responding to the argument of a "Yes")
Line 10: Line 10:
  
 
::Ummm.... no?  Might makes right is a little over simplistic.  Look back in to the origins of religion and you will see that the moral code was based on how best for a community to survive.  Fragile communities fragment when people steal, murder, commit adultery, lie, etc.  God telling people what is right and wrong... that is might makes right.  Morality ''not'' from God is people deciding what is best not just for themselves, but for the community. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 16:59, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 
::Ummm.... no?  Might makes right is a little over simplistic.  Look back in to the origins of religion and you will see that the moral code was based on how best for a community to survive.  Fragile communities fragment when people steal, murder, commit adultery, lie, etc.  God telling people what is right and wrong... that is might makes right.  Morality ''not'' from God is people deciding what is best not just for themselves, but for the community. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 16:59, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
::: Your view that "God telling people what is right and wrong... is might makes right" reveals a very limited view of God and implies that His motives are those that a selfish man would have were he to be given infinite power.  Who would be better qualified to inform creatures who are limited in understanding and moral character than the infinite God who created them?  Surely His wisdom is far superior to ours and although He is indeed mighter than we shall ever be, His credentials for informing us of what is right and wrong flow not primarily from His infinite power but rather from His infinite knowledge and perfect moral purity.  We would do well to listen to Him.  God (I am talking about the God of the Bible here, not the god of one's own understanding or definition) is by definition Holy, Right and Good.  These things cannot be defined or have meaning apart from the Creator of the universe.  --[[User:HSDad|HSDad]] 17:41, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
  
 
In the absence of God's morality, what incentive does a man have to do anything other than that which gratifies himself? Why should anyone care about the good of the community?--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 17:11, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 
In the absence of God's morality, what incentive does a man have to do anything other than that which gratifies himself? Why should anyone care about the good of the community?--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 17:11, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 21:41, April 4, 2007

NO

Aside from God, might makes right. God dictates morality. --BenjaminS 16:18, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

It really depends how you define morality. If morality is what is right and wrong, as set down by God, then of course no morals exists if God does not exist. However, many people would give morality a broader definition. For example, most atheists would say they attempt to hold to some set of morals which they believe to be right. ~ SharonS Talk! 16:30, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Yes

Man is still answerable to his fellow man. A morality dictated by God is replaced by a morality dictated by the community. Myk 16:29, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

In other words majority rules... might makes right. --BenjaminS 16:44, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
Ummm.... no? Might makes right is a little over simplistic. Look back in to the origins of religion and you will see that the moral code was based on how best for a community to survive. Fragile communities fragment when people steal, murder, commit adultery, lie, etc. God telling people what is right and wrong... that is might makes right. Morality not from God is people deciding what is best not just for themselves, but for the community. Myk 16:59, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
Your view that "God telling people what is right and wrong... is might makes right" reveals a very limited view of God and implies that His motives are those that a selfish man would have were he to be given infinite power. Who would be better qualified to inform creatures who are limited in understanding and moral character than the infinite God who created them? Surely His wisdom is far superior to ours and although He is indeed mighter than we shall ever be, His credentials for informing us of what is right and wrong flow not primarily from His infinite power but rather from His infinite knowledge and perfect moral purity. We would do well to listen to Him. God (I am talking about the God of the Bible here, not the god of one's own understanding or definition) is by definition Holy, Right and Good. These things cannot be defined or have meaning apart from the Creator of the universe. --HSDad 17:41, 4 April 2007 (EDT)


In the absence of God's morality, what incentive does a man have to do anything other than that which gratifies himself? Why should anyone care about the good of the community?--BenjaminS 17:11, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Examine the golden rule and you will see some form of it in almost every religion and philosophy from Aboriginal beliefs to Zoroastrianism. Life is not necessarily defined by personal hedonism. --Mtur 17:25, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
It doesn't take much intellect to realize that that which benefits the community benefits the members of that community. Including your straw man hedonist. Myk 17:33, 4 April 2007 (EDT)