Morality is codified within the Human Heart: no god required
Where this argument specifically addresses charges posted by cerenziam, that Morality and Charity can only come from a belief in god and Christianity, it is a response to Christian CHAUVINISM in general. ( See original posts here: http://www.bigthink.com/faith-beliefs/9116 )
The argument that Morality is based upon belief in god; that Morality is born of the Christian faith; that NO-GOD = Nihilism: these are falsehoods learned in Christian schools. Morality is codified within the Human Song, the genetic and cultural programming that makes us Human. Some of it is instinct and some we learn at our mother’s knee.
The argument that belief in god is the wellspring of Morality actually boils down to Fear-of-god or Fear-of-damnation = Morality, an extension of our approach to criminal justice. But when we look back into the wellspring of history we see Morality has always been coded.
Long before the times of Yahweh Jesus or Mohammad, we find law which codifies human Morality. The oldest writings so far discovered and deciphered contain the moral code that later was appropriated by Yahweh. (The story of Noah is older than the Hebrew people and is in fact repeated by mythologies around the world, including North American Coyote mythology.)
In fact Charity as a part of Morality is so old that it predates our species. The latest in Neanderthal anthropology has revealed that this species did not walk hunched over as previously assumed. The incorrect assumptions were based upon the examination of found skeletons, which were found because they were ritually buried.
The skeletons were bent over from old age, calcium loss, and arthritis. These people had survived because their culture loved them and cared for them so that they could survive to old age. The bodies are often found with the remains of flowers and trinkets indicating, not only love, but a belief in the afterlife.
It is now understood that the Neanderthals did not die off as previously assumed, but were killed off in warfare with our species, Cro-Magnon, as our forefathers spread across the planet. In fact this could be seen as the Original Sin: that a more violent and competitive (and perhaps less moral) human animal arose. And where did this genetic change come from? All our mythology, including the Bible, informs us that ‘the sons of god’ are to blame. Coyote mythology informs us that Coyote is our father (or mother), and that this is the source for all that ails human morality, but I digress. (It’s our mother’s fault.)
….
So, where it is admitted that Christianity has influenced our Morality, to argue that Christianity is the SOURCE of Morality or Charity, is Christian chauvinism, and false. For example the Pentateuch codifies specific ancient acts of charity which are NOT followed by todays Christian culture.
Morality is codified within the Human Song, the genetic and cultural programming that makes us Human. We have seen that those who feel rejected by their culture often turn to immoral behavior such as crime. What is interesting is that those in positions of power also seem to abandon moral code, as if the holding of power necessitated immoral behavior as per Machiavelli.
So where the Catholic Church for centuries exhibited immoral behavior because of its power, Charity as acts-of-cultural-change did not appear until Christian rebels Protestants threw off the mantle of the ancient Church. And where Protestantism rose to power, such as the Bush administration, again we see that Morality and Charity is cast aside as unbecoming to power.
And where Christianity raises up a new Moral Hero, as in Senator Obama, he is castigated for adhering to a Christian minister that radicalizes the issue of moral standards and criticizes the moral behavior of white American culture. Again, I digress.
The idea that Human Morality is codified within humanity’s heart is NOT a purely secular idea. In fact the old prophets of the Bible said the same thing: that god admits that a written code based upon the fear-of-god DOES NOT WORK, and that god would ‘write his laws upon the hearts of men and women.’ Morality comes from within Humanity and not from god; even the Bible tells me so.
…
Now lastly, this idea that NO-GOD = Nihilism. The common definition of nihilism is ‘the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless.’ Now where this applies to Islamist terrorists who reject the moral code of their own faith in order to justify murder to gain their place in the next world, this does NOT INDICATE a lack of belief in god. The Islamists are religious fundamentalists, and as our own Evangelicals, they pine for the end-of-this-world (i.e: the belief that life is worthless).
In fact Nietzsche’s definition is different and he saw belief in god as leading to nihilism. And this is where Christians pick and choose among the multiple meanings that best suits their accusations against atheists. Most words have multiple meanings and it is dishonest for Christians to ignore Nietzsche’s while suggesting that what he meant was NO-GOD = Nihilism.
NO-GOD = no-Platonist-ideas-of-the-IDEAL. Where Plato argued that we could never have a proper ‘chair’ in this world, because the ideal of ‘chair’ could never be realized, so as with Morality. The Ideal-of-Morality was god; if you remove god, then morality supposedly ceases to exist.
In the same way, if we kill Plato, then NO OBJECTIVE TRUTHS could exist. This does not mean that Truth ceases, but that all truths are subjective to human experience culture and instincts (genetic). Nietzsche did not say that if we kill god and Plato that humanity would abandon Morality; what he said was that those that cling to Plato would DESPAIR of this world, even as we see in Islamist terrorism. Nietzsche despaired that humanity would fall because we are addicted to god-belief and that we would never be able to rise to the next level of awareness.
Proof that Objective Truths DO NOT exist and that the Subjective is more REAL is in the Placebo experiment. A patient receives pain relief from a saline injection believing that he was receiving pain medication. It does not matter so much what is REAL, as what we believe to be real.
So the Christian argument boils down to: we don’t need a REAL GOD, we just need to BELIEVE in a god to be moral human beings. And that is what cerenziam was arguing as a Christian wanna-be, and that is proved false.
< Previous Idea from Mary
The Human Logos.Next Idea from Mary >
Arianna Huffington's Huffington Post is a THUGGISH JungleSpreading good ideas with someone you know is one of the simplest things we can do to improve the conversation.
- BUZZ
-
DELICIOUS
- DIGG
-
FACEBOOK
-
LINKEDIN
-
EMAIL
-
John McCain on NAFTA NAFTA has created millions of jobs, says McCain. -
Thomas Cooley: How Can You Make The Most Of Technological Revolution? The Dean of the NYU Stern School of Business, Thomas Cooley, on how technol
-
Letterman Writer Gives Full Frontal Nudity the OK
-
Geithner Answers Questions on His Financial Plan
-
Eleven Technologies That Will Revolutionize Business
-
Having Sex With Lolita in Tehran
-
How to Be a Smart Adopter
-
Ricky Gervais on Religion
-
Michael Bloomberg Action Plan
-
Ray Kurzweil on Living Well Forever
-
Eight Ways Microblogging Will Transform Your Company
Original content is for Non-commercial use under 
Nice add to it sciencesaves.
Many thanks for a comprehensive post!
Cz... pause for thought?
G'day to Bryan.
please also ready a study of ecclisastes... there is very much talked about the human condition and the meaningless of things suchas riches,pride, etc...
eat, drink, and be merry
christian...
(this conclusion is inherent from the body of my argument)
'So the Christian argument boils down to: we don't need a REAL GOD, we just need to BELIEVE in a god to be moral human beings. And that is what cerenziam was arguing as a Christian wanna-be, and that is proved false.'
(comment) I mean this explicitly. That if we distill the Christian argument for morality -that a god is necessary for moral behavior in humanity- it becomes 'we just need to BELIEVE in a god to be moral human beings.'
Christians cannot explicitly argue that the existence of god CAUSES moral behavior, because that rejects free will. It is the belief that god exists, or as I posted above, the FEAR of punishment that gives substance to the Christian argument.
And that was the position taken by cerenziam, who was a Christian-in-the-closet and not ready to come out yet. She was falling back to her (probably) Christian school roots upon being disillusioned with her life-experience. (At least that was how I saw it.) She was trying to find a place for belief-in-god in her life; trying to justify her growing belief in the existence of god.
Now cerenziam was attempting to argue for the importance of Judaeo-Christian
thought in western civilization, but she failed to properly make those arguments. For example the idea of looking for god inside one's self instead of in outside objects; the idea that forgiveness displaces damnation; and that love was more important than retribution -these can be seen as the foundations for our civilization.
Of course if you make these arguments, and if we examine mythologies around the world (for example stories of gods teaching humanity survival and civilizing skills, from fish gods emerging from the sea to feathered serpents admonishing human sacrifice), then we may begin to see a pattern of an invisible hand guiding human evolution. But where Christians point to Yahweh, I would argue that Yahweh is just another mask as worn by Coyote, the god-who-walks-this-planet, our mother and the manager of the property rights of this creation.
My explanation of god is just as valid as any Christian's.
There are many differnt christian doctrines so be careful about grouping them
Do you know about Christ's death and ressurection?
If gods will is to be reconciled with his creation, that is the way it will be, we can both have free will(us and God) and still someday be fully unified
kinda like when a anxious young boyfriend pursues his love long enough and she relaises how much they belong together that they marry??
christian theology is a whole other topics i guess... just wanted to squeeze it out of you who/what/if anything you followed
thanks
Jesse
Being written on our hearts come from him being the creator- so while there is not some father figure spewing morailty into our souls it is in fact in our basic makeup as creation to be this way-
Fear of God is not ness. fear of some big father spanking you for eternity, but it is in recnongizing the authority that not only should rule us but that IS A INGREDIENT in our creation- and to deny it is like denying food- for man shall not eat by bread alone but every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God> Matt.something
the end of this world does not indicate the worthlessnes of life- it is the fact that this life or this WORLD is in fact determental towards life- i.e- death, pollution, sin, etc. And we simply desire a new world where the things that end life are conqoured and life is what it was meant to be-
we desire an idol- but God will always crush those idols- God is not the man in the sky nor is he made inthe image of us- we are in fact made in the image of him- his whole creation is
- does this have anything to do with the mirrors in our corner expirment- what can you place in them that is objectivly and subjectvly singular?
Fear of God (while recognizing eternal damnation) ...is in recognizing the (ruling) authority ...that IS AN INGREDIENT in our creation.
-and to deny it is like denying ... every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.
(I am sure you can agree that this is a fair summery of your argument)
Or, rephrased:
-Fear of god recognizes the authority of the creator.
-But, to deny 'the authority' of god is equivalent to denying the word of god. (Logos, or the commandments that gave rise to -or the Song of- the universe, plus the Bible)
-So denying god is akin to denying the universe's existence. Which is kind of what philosophical discussions often do -demanding Objective Proof of the universe and finding none- such as here:
http://www.bigthink.com/faith-beliefs/10136
Therefore, your religious argument states that, if the universe cannot be objectively proven, then neither can god be. So, since we are having a damned of a time attempting to prove that this is all real, this obviously indicates that god is not.
Again, we could interpret your argument as saying:
the 'word that proceeds out of the mouth of God' ... 'is an ingredient in our creation.'
Which we agree entirely upon; I said the Logos (word) that (proceeds) screams out of the mouth of the SUN (god) is the source of (an ingredient in) our creation.' As in here:
http://www.bigthink.com/faith-beliefs/9020
Your source: an imaginary Yahweh; mine: a very real Sun. ( I acknowledge that your god claims to have created the sun, but my viewpoint is based on our scientific understanding and does not attempt to overreach by staking claim to the entire universe in some child's game of one-up-man-ship. See: http://www.bigthink.com/faith-beliefs/9101)
musycks says it succinctly: God is the extra shoe, the model works perfectly well without 'him'.
if so i have some info. for you, but first let me know if this assumption is correct.
coyotesaid
"Therefore, your religious argument states that, if the universe cannot be objectively proven, then neither can god be. So, since we are having a damned of a time attempting to prove that this is all real, this obviously indicates that god is not"
what?????? I dont think we can prove that God exists other than knowing that he does.... not being able to prove anything doesnt in it and of itself prove that God is not ....
-'every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God'
This is logos. Logos gave rise to the universe and Christians consider the Bible to also be a part of Logos, or the word-of-god.
-you said that to deny Logos or god's authority is to deny creation or the universe's existence.
Thus it follows that if we cannot PROVE the universe's existence, if we cannot prove that creation exists, then god, Logos and god's authority also do not exist.
That was YOUR argument; that was what YOU said. Of course you couched it within religious language that perhaps has a special meaning for you, but when examined, your argument actually offers evidence that god does not exist.
Of course the argument assumes that the universe DOES exist, and therefore god also MUST exist, but in light of the arguments posted in the below posted thread, that is not so.
Understand?
As to the creation of our solar system I ascribe to the current accepted scientific model. I have oft posted that my religious thoughts are built upon the foundation of our best scientific understanding. By that I include anthropology and cultural studies, including mythology.
As to proving god exists, go outside and look up into the face of the sun. There is our creator as even the most basic understanding of reality reveals that EVERYTHING that we have and need to be alive comes from there. Rather than insulting our knowledge, we start with a foundation built upon our understanding adding only a very minute amount of faith to give this all-encompassing source godliness, or super-consciousness.
See:
http://www.bigthink.com/faith-beliefs/902
Your logic is fine.. it's just that Jesse's god is beyond logic and reason..
mythologogy is part of our poetry, our song if you like. I enjoy the concepts even if I'm sceptical of those who claim such forensic detailed knowledge of same.
The natural world is far more beautiful and enticing abd beguiling than anything that can be found in the stilted hermetic garden the monotheists dwell in... you're speaking a different language.
here comes the sun... here comes the sun, it's alright...