A good life is something to be desired, this is true.
But, without God being more than a partner, can you or I or anyone else even define good in a fixed manner with anything close to certainty? While as for making a standard for all of humanity…LOL! not me and I doubt you or anyone else can either.
Now Aristotle was a bit like you. But he did not even have the opportunity of looking at the Bible nor meeting any prophet or for that matter anyone else who claimed to know about God, so, what did Aristotle believe after years of observing nature:
He believed that nothing could be moved without some force acting upon it.
This led him to the conclusion that there must be an eternal, unmoved source for the beginning of all temporal things!
Now Aristotle did not believe that this, “Unmoved Mover,” had created the Universe, because Aristotle believed that the Universe was eternal and had no beginning nor end.
While a close study of nature led Aristotle to believe that this eternal being, cared for his creation and was steering his creation towards some kind of predetermined goal. Though Aristotle clearly admitted that he did not know what that goal was.
Now I will also admit that Aristotle seemed to believe that this original Creator God had no real concern for mankind, but he did figure out a lot that does agree with the Bible.
While dare to think on this, any being that could calculate one stable orbit in his head would be how far above most of us. Well, what about such a being that could calculate the mass, orbits and etc. for our entire Universe and then speak and spew it all out to the observable amount that we can observe today?
Would such a being be merely our equal, merely our partner?
While what help could God be to me or you or anyone else if God were no stronger than we are?
No I don’t think it is possible to define a good life in a fixed manner. I think one has to actually live life and see for oneself what is good and what is not. To be handed a script or role for how to enact ‘the good life’ would not be as good IMO, no matter what fixed formula one chose. Life is and to some degree should be messy. It isn’t a performance. If you haven’t recognized and chosen the good, it isn’t really yours.
Well I don’t think God is a being. Rather, what gives rise to god belief is an aspect of something that also includes who we take ourselves to be. But no we aren’t equals, we’re different in kind. But we are co-dependent and each have a role to play, even if we are the more dependent partner. Not that you should agree with me of course, but it does no good to quote Aristotle, Jesus or any other authority. If one can’t ascertain the good without their direction, one will never be in any position to recognize a good teacher.
Let me address your second comment first -
“Well I don’t think God is a being. Rather, what gives rise to god belief is an aspect of something that also includes who we take ourselves to be.”
This is pretty much exactly what an atheist would say, in other words god comes out of us, rather than God being our creator. Now I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure you are splitting hairs to say, that your belief is any different than that of a full blown atheists who would say something like this instead.
Atheist X - “All gods and religions are man made.”
So, do you believe it may be possible for a God who did not come out of us to exist. Not just a concept that you invent, but that existed long before mankind existed?
As for quoting Aristotle, I only prove that such a being can be ascertained by your own investigations of nature and natural processes. But, you cannot even see me, even if I were in the same room with you, if you keep your back to me all of the time.
Now let me address your claim that fixed morality would be wrong. Yes, fixed morality can cost us, all of us and individually, but to do what ever is convenient to self is to abandon any and all morality that might be inconvenient at any given moment of time. Fixed morality cost Niemoller years in a concentration camp. Fixed morality cost Bonhoeffer his life too. But both of these people were opposing Hitler himself. While it was those who would not suffer nor even give up their jobs who too often assisted with the mass killings due to ever drifting, self centered standards of morality.
Lastly let me address your apparent scorn for quoting anyone. When you are your only authority, then in reality you are your own god, heeding only self, obeying only self and with no room in your mind nor heart for any real God.
Can we do that with God? Do we just assume that following the commands of a deity will lead to a good life?
For me, the only way of defining a good life is to ground it in the human experience. Good only makes sense in the context of human emotions and well being.
A deity could be good at math and also give us commandments that don’t lead to a good life. I don’t see how those two are connected.
Of course you will say I am splitting hairs but that is not even close to what I said. I have said that both who we take ourselves to be and that which gives rise to god belief come from the same source. Both are products of the consciousness arising in a human organism. So that is a far cry from saying it is
But if you can’t see that then for you there is no difference. I see no use in continuing a conversation with you when you seem hell bent on squeezing me into your conception of what all atheists must be.
I asked you a question regarding the origin of God and you responded thus, “Both are products of the consciousness arising in a human organism.”
There is no real God along the path you have chosen to believe, for either God is before us and apart from us, or there is no real God.
The only real issue is does god come out of us, or did God design and create us, all other issues of life flow from the courage to address this one question!
One final word, though I doubt you will even listen. If I owned a Ford car, how smart would it be to listen to Henry Ford and or the designers of that car?
Fwiw, Christian theologians tend to argue that God doesn’t simply do good, but is in his nature goodness personified. Therefore, the commandments he gives to humanity flow out of, and are an expression of his intrinsic goodness.
The atheist reply is to ask how would we know that God’s nature is goodness presonified. In reality, each of us judges a religion based on our own internal sense of morality which is why we don’t approve of things other religions do, such as some of the aspects of Sharia law. Throw in a bit of Euthyphro’s Dilemma to round it out.
Oh sure. Any reasonable theologian who answers your question will (should?) admit that the answer is a little circular:
We believe that God is goodness personified because that is how he is revealed in the bible.
We believe the bible can be trusted in its information about God because God is good (and reliable, and etc.)
To my knowledge, I’ve not seen anyone satisfactorily square that circle. Instead it tends to lead to very dry debates about whether the doctrine of God or the doctrine of scripture should be addressed first in Systematic Theology textbooks.
I also recognise that the above argument isn’t all that rationally satisfying, which is probably where the more personal, experiential nature of religion comes into focus: I know that God is good becomes I have come to know him as such. Christianity, as I am sure you know, is not simply a set of rational proportions to make mental assent to, but an invitation to enter a dynamic friendship with the Living God. In that sense, some of its beliefs will have an inherent ‘come and see what I have seen’ element to them.
Personally, I thought your post about the god of maths was a good point. I was simply trying to provide a Christian take on it.
The best explanations that I have seen is that humans do have an internal sense of morality, but due to our fallible nature we need guidance from God. To me, that is the most consistent and credible approach to the bigger moral questions.
In this case, it would be our own internal sense of goodness that allows us to recognize God’s goodness.
Thank you, and your comments are most appreciated. I really do think there is a lot of common ground between the moral views of atheists and theists. However, we sometimes hold back on agreement in the name of foolish culture wars and tribalism.
Nope. Christianity is only one of many religions who say they are trying to follow the teachings of Christ.
Nonsense. That is exactly what you are doing same as everyone else. This becomes rather obvious when others see the limitations of your wisdom in what you say.
There are lots of answers to that question other than someone’s guesses about origins. Such as…
Reality is what we can measure and demonstrate.
Reality is what we experience.
Reality is a set of space-time events.
Reality is a set of infinite possibilities.
Reality is fundamentally unknowable.
One of the worst answers however is
6. Reality is what my book says it is.
Books can say anything. Books can say and have said that the moon is green cheese. The whole question of reality arises in response to the diverse and absurd claims of different books.
There is no objective evidence for God… no evidence which everyone is required to accept as evidence. There is only subjective evidence for God… evidence which is all about their personal participation in life and what they want from it.
Millions have sought God in the Bible and found millions of different things there.
Certainty is nothing but the hot air of a person seeking to push themselves and their thinking on other people, and “God” is often one of the words in the rhetoric they use to do so.
Those with the least good sense to back them up tend to resort to the immature rational of “do so because I say so” which is only appropriate for toddlers who haven’t yet developed much reasoning capabilities. Of course it is possible that some people never get beyond toddler stage to develop significant reasoning capabilities and thus they need a God like that themselves.
But others can see reasons why some things make for a better life and thus they seek a different role for God than a source for arbitrary dictation. They tend to see a God who seeks to convince rather than command, and who promises love in a relationship rather than simply manipulating others with threats and rewards.
That would depend on what this being seeks, and unfortunately the ideas of what this being seeks tends to reflect what is sought by the people whose idea it is.
It is people who value power and control who cannot imagine being who doesn’t put power and control above everything else.
Those who paint God as one who dominates with fear reflects their own desire to dominate and inspire fear in others.
Those who want glory and profit imagine a god who does everything for his own image and advantage.
Those who value love and freedom tend to think God created others for a relationship in which there is free will and a choice whether to love.
No this is what you say an atheist would say. If you can divide the world in to those who agree with what you imagine and say everybody else is atheist, so can other people. That just reduces the meaning of the word “atheist” to other people. People identify themselves as “Christian,” or “atheist,” or whatever by their own definition of what these words mean.
If God is before us and apart from us then it is for God to say whether He will put Himself on the path that people have chosen. Unfortunately that basic truth doesn’t serve the interest of those who use religion for power and domination of others. Thus they speak with forked tongue to say God is apart from us only as a way of shooting down the choices of others and then they turn around and say that God is owned by their own choices so they can dictate a path as a measure of the worth of others.
I think that is looking for God in entirely the wrong place. Not only can we make machines that do better designing than any human engineer, but all that design will ever create is machines. Thus by seeking a God in this way you reduce both God and ourselves to nothing but clever machines. But if you believe that living things are more than just machines then you might seek God in a different direction entirely… in those who create not by design but by relationship – farmers, shepherds, teachers and parents… the creators of living things.
Mitchell your #4 made me think of something I’d read today on Facebook.
My right hand has written all the poems that I have composed.
My left hand has not written a single poem.
But my right hand does not think, “Left Hand, you are good for nothing.”
My right hand does not have a superiority complex.
That is why it is very happy.
My left hand does not have any complex at all.
In my two hands there is the kind of wisdom
called the wisdom of nondiscrimination.
One day I was hammering a nail and my right hand was not very accurate
and instead of pounding on the nail it pounded on my finger.
It put the hammer down and took care of the left hand
in a very tender way, as if it were taking care of itself.
It did not say, “Left Hand, you have to remember that
I have taken good care of you and you have to pay me back in the future.”
There was no such thinking. And my left hand did not say,
“Right Hand, you have done me a lot of harm—
give me that hammer, I want justice.”
My two hands know that they are members of one body;
they are in each other.
~ Thich Nhat Hanh
At first I thought of it in terms of how believers and atheists are like our two hands, where no jealously or resentment is necessary. But then it occurred to me that it also works to contrast two concepts of the kind of relationship that God Himself might seek. Perhaps God wants a relationship in which his creation honors, obeys and worships Him. But perhaps God would have chosen the kind of intimacy enjoyed by our two hands, where He isn’t constantly reminded of the gulf between the two. Or maybe He himself doesn’t dwell on that gulf either?
That resonates with me. One of my brothers and his wife are heavily involved in Cru (i.e. campus ministries) and I tell them both I am very proud of them. I think it is wonderful that they can pursue their passions together, and I don’t see why it would be weird for an atheist to think that. There is absolutely no need for resentment or jealousy.
Nor do I. The many atheists I bang heads with online just need to get out more, I think.
Well I’m jealous. My especially religious brother has heard of this site but has no interest in it. I guess that says something about his approach. Nice guy even so. To his credit he is all for separation of church and state and has been critical of his minister over this.
I’ve met many who are like that also. Christians who are to afraid to consider the bible in a different light. Not even on the level of contention we bring up in here between science and a literal reading of some parts of the Bible.
The great commission says to share your faith with the lost and baptizing those into Christ who repent. So I bring yo my faith to everyone I meet at least once to open that door. Then if they reject it, I don’t push the topic and most of the time they will bring it up themselves on and off and we will have short or long discussions and then I wait until they bring it up again.
But even with other self professed believers who say they study the Bible I often hear them say they don’t go to church and don’t believe its necessary or they will say they study the Bible and when I bring up well what if we go through it over a few months to see what you believe, see what I believe, and see how we present that case in scripture. Many just say no, and they don’t want too. They know what they believe and that’s what they want to believe and it’s hard for any evidence to change it.
So I imagine that feeling is intensified even more about science and faith. If a believer is not interested in studying baptism or what role church should play in our lives they probably have even less interest to start considering we are just the next level of evolution for dry nosed apes.
Even among those that make it that far, it’s hard to hold long term conversations then on how does that play into revelation. Does God actually ever hold a white throne judgement where the living and dead are judged. Does evolution stop then, and the only ones alive are resurrected beings and so on. I still have no answer. I may never have one until I’m dead and then whatever happens happens. That’s where faith comes in.
I do feel many labels just come with too much baggage. Even phrases like I’m a preterist or a partial preterist seems to have to much baggage. Or if I say I go to the Churches of Christ dislike disagreeing with many of their core beliefs but still consider their theology closer to what I see in scripture than anyone else.
