Do Morals Come From God?

[Dunemeister]

So far, people have ignored what I've had to say, but I honestly think what I've said would help the discussion. The issue isn't where people learn their morals. They might learn them from all sorts of ways, with or without holy books, with or without reason, with or without instinct, with or without Google Ethics (TM).

We need to get clear first about what we mean by "morals." What sorts of beasts are we talking about? Just as with the question of God, we need to have SOME clarity in terms. So far, my suggestions have been ignored, but then again, nobody has offered alternative analyses. I can only suppose that nobody thinks the question is relevant. Weird.

I have argued that moral statements (in the fullest sense of "moral") only make sense if we presuppose the existence of God. Therefore, there are only two positions to take (with lots of variant colors on these positions). The first is that there are no moral truths so there's no need to have a discussion about whether such truths prove the existence of God. The second is that there are such truths with God as a foundation or ultimate origin of them. The second position needs lots of fine-tuning with respect to the content of "moral truths" and "God" of course, but the project can proceed (and has done with some thoroughness).

 

[ChristineES]

You are right. Nevertheless, we see many in RF using the argument that atheists, too, can be moral as evidence showing belief in God is unnecessary. Little do they realize that Paul in his letters addressed this and today is called "general revelation."

People will use anything to prove to themselves there isn't a God. Atheists having morals can be a good reason to some of them that there is no God, but it doesn't disprove God to theists.

It is easy to disprove God to an atheist, but it would be a lot harder to disprove God to a theist.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

So far, my suggestions have been ignored, but then again, nobody has offered alternative analyses. I can only suppose that nobody thinks the question is relevant. Weird.

I think it's rather expected: theists need no explanation or suggestion, atheists have no answer so they beg the question.

 

[ChristineES]

As a theist, I do believe that morals do come from the existence of God, that He implanted them into His people whether they knew this or not- I think that most theists believe that. But people can forget their morals-- if they didn't, there wouldn't be murder, rape, larceny, and whatever. If you have a need for someone, you would be less likely to harm him or her than if you didn't need him or her. Even a psychopath/narcissist wouldn't kill someone they had a need for, unless there was another person to do the job.

Tribal people, as I mentioned in my other post, have more of a need for each person so there is less violence and we have less a need for each person, so there is more violence. But if someone has no need for a person but still chooses not to harm said person, then that would be moral.

 

[painted wolf]

If they do, than humans don't have a special one way with God.
"Morality" is found in plenty of other species than humans.

wa:do

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Yup. And as an atheist, you have to keep God out of it if you want to make sense. You should have said something like, "Such proof is impossible because there is no God."

No. I said exactly what I meant to say. Your inability to read and digest such a basic statement is not my problem - it is yours.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

... atheists have no answer so they beg the question.

Apparently, there is no bottom to this well ...

 

[Rolling_Stone]

No. I said exactly what I meant to say. Your inability to read and digest such a basic statement is not my problem - it is yours.

So, you want to insert something you don't believe in into a discussion. Fine, but don't define for the believer what he believes. And stop begging the question. If the answer to, "Do morals come from God?" is "no" because there is no God, then say so. The answer "Morals exists outside of God" is simply incoherent of you don't believe in a God.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

People will use anything to prove to themselves there isn't a God. Atheists having morals can be a good reason to some of them that there is no God, but it doesn't disprove God to theists.

It is easy to disprove God to an atheist, but it would be a lot harder to disprove God to a theist.

Yup. In fact, it serves as evidence for the theist. The more things change, the more they remain the same. You'd think that if Paul answered the atheist's argument about morality almost 2000 years ago, by now they have something new, or at least a little more sophisticated response than "evolution did it." Such an answer, drawn from inductive reasoning (see post # 30 here), leads to an endless series of questions that, ultimately, beg the question of where morals come from.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

So, you want to insert something you don't believe in into a discussion. Fine, but don't define for the believer what he believes. And stop begging the question. If the answer to, "Do morals come from God?" is "no" because there is no God, then say so. The answer "Morals exists outside of God" is simply incoherent of you don't believe in a God.

I keep listening for the pebble to hit the bottom, but there is no sound ...

 

[painted wolf]

The answer "Morals exists outside of God" is simply incoherent of you don't believe in a God.

yet perfectly in keeping with an Agnostic.

wa:do

 

[Rolling_Stone]

yet perfectly in keeping with an Agnostic.

wa:do

I don't see how. It still defines as finite (something having an outside) the very thing the agnostic says he doesn't (or can't) know.

 

[painted wolf]

An agnostic says they can't know the existence of god... maybe yes/ maybe no...
Physical things and concepts like morality are knowable.

If god gave us morals, then he was handing them out to more than just us.

and just to be clear, just because God is unknowable.. that doesn't make it infinite.

wa:do

 

[Rolling_Stone]

and just to be clear, just because God is unknowable.. that doesn't make it infinite.

wa:do

It doesn't make him finite, either.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

This is tautology. You are, like the dilemma, assuming a finite God.

- and -

It doesn't make him finite, either.

This is proctology.

 

[scottb]

I have argued that moral statements (in the fullest sense of "moral") only make sense if we presuppose the existence of God.

I have to disagree. Moral statements do not require that we presuppose the existence of God. Morals, even in the fullest sense, are completely natural. (What is the "partial sense?")

We have a built-in sense of natural morality. (Google "natural morality". There is at least one group studying exactly this.) We also have cultural knowledge which appears to be the source of the rest of morality. No divine intervention is required for morality.

Some morals are memes. They evolve darwinistically over time.

Some are natural morals. They come from genetic programming.

I've yet to see any substantial reason to believe that God needs to whisper Truth into the ears of prophets, or to come visit humanity in person to straighten us out, or to program us in our dreams.

If there is a God-given moral requirement, it is to support the survival of one's tribe. Survival of the fittest group is the law we live by, like it or not. If we don't follow this law, we die and our beliefs die with us. Beliefs that are contrary to the survival of the group eventually die out when the group that holds them die out. People evolve, and so do morals. God is only necessary as the "musical conductor" behind all this.

 

[Hyzenthlay]

How could anyone prove morals come from God?

I don't believe it is possible to prove that morals come from God. I'm unaware of any valid attempts that have been made, but I'm guessing they have been inconclusive or proven the opposite. Statistics such as divorce rates and such have not proven that the Christian community (for example) is more moral. The Protestant divorce rate in the U.S. is higher than non-Protestants, and I believe informal polls done of the prison community have often shown that the prisoners are religious or come from a religious background. Those behaviours might not accurately demonstrate a lack of morals, just a disinterest in following moral dictates, but I don't think anything can be used to prove that morals are the sole domain of the religious, or of monotheists, or of individuals within a particular faith.

Long story short - no. :no:

 

[ChristineES]

Long story short - no.

But the question asked was if morals come from God, not if morals come from religions (semantics, I know). BTW, welcome to the RF.

 

[kai]

How could anyone prove morals come from God?

does anyone think he is a good role model? really?

 

[Hyzenthlay]

Thanks!

Well, first we would have to get down to the business of proving whether God exists or not, before the question of whether or not morals come from God can be answered, so I'm still going with no, proof is not possible.