If the supernatural claims of your religion were refuted, would you still adhere to the ethics?

[LuisDantas]

I don't welcome supernatural beliefs in any circunstances.

Meanwhile, I think of Ethics as one of the main reasons for being of religions.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Your conclusion rests on the premise that we humans are morally guided by the code of ethics we accept. I doubt that premise because Christians, like atheists and agnostics, have abolished legal slavery and accepted the equality of women even though neither of those positions is supported in their Bible.

I think the moral advances we humans make are conscience-driven; and conscience is a moral guidance faculty we all share that is unaffected by our beliefs.

I didn’t have either of those examples in mind. I agree that they’re not really found in the Bible.

I was getting at more general concerns, not the specifics of any belief system.

For instance, say the question is whether it’s morally acceptable to kill another person. The circumstances when the answer might be “yes” could depend on factors like:

- whether a legitimate authority has prohibited (or commands) the killing: e.g. Does God exist? If so, what does he say about the matter?
- the consequences for the other person: e.g. does he go to Heaven? Hell? Neither?
- the consequences for the killer: e.g. is he rewarded in Heaven? Punished in Hell?
- the consequences for others: e.g. does the family of the person killed starve on the streets or will the Holy Spirit provide for them? Is the killer’s family “punished to the seventh generation?”

Proper ethical judgements have to take the consequences of our actions into account. What we believe about the supernatural affects how we perceive these consequences and therefore affect our ethical judgements.

 

[joe1776]

I didn’t have either of those examples in mind. I agree that they’re not really found in the Bible.

I was getting at more general concerns, not the specifics of any belief system.

For instance, say the question is whether it’s morally acceptable to kill another person. The circumstances when the answer might be “yes” could depend on factors like:

- whether a legitimate authority has prohibited (or commands) the killing: e.g. Does God exist? If so, what does he say about the matter?
- the consequences for the other person: e.g. does he go to Heaven? Hell? Neither?
- the consequences for the killer: e.g. is he rewarded in Heaven? Punished in Hell?
- the consequences for others: e.g. does the family of the person killed starve on the streets or will the Holy Spirit provide for them? Is the killer’s family “punished to the seventh generation?”

Proper ethical judgements have to take the consequences of our actions into account. What we believe about the supernatural affects how we perceive these consequences and therefore affect our ethical judgements.

Let's assume that we know the facts involved in a killing. We know exactly what happened. So, the only question is: Was the act morally justified or not?

It's universally recognized that this judgment is best done by a jury of minds with no relevant bias on the issue. So, if you're saying that religious doctrine can create biases capable of throwing judgment off its correct course, that's obviously true.

For example, we know that if the killing that interests us here is a case involving a woman who claims self-defense in killing her husband she is unlikely to get a fair trial in many countries.

So, if I'm reading you right, and you're saying that what one believes about the supernatural is capable of creating biases, I'd agree.

 

[1AOA1]

So, what say you about this? Would the Parable of the Good Samaritan be any less meaningful and poignant to you if the supernatural claims of Christianity were conclusively refuted? Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you? Turn the other cheek? The least among all of you is the greatest? The humble should be exalted and the exalted humbled? It is better to serve than to be served etc.?

If these are kept then the supernatural cannot be considered to have been refuted.

Depending on the version, your Bible contains 600 to 800 thousand words. So, even non-believers like me can cherry-pick some good moral advice in it like the Parable of the Good Samaritan you mentioned. But, overall, your Bible has given terrible moral advice over the centuries. The older versions are worse than the newer because the obviously bad advice has been edited out.

The biblical source has never given advice that would further lead man into naturalistic bondage.

 

[syo]

I will speak for Orthodox Christianity. If Jesus wasn't resurrected, will it negate his teachings? No, love is universal. So, no.