Basis of morality?

Question

Why do many Christians believe that faith must be the basis of morality, despite the fact that the vast majority of atheists are upstanding citizens? How do they reconcile this apparent paradox?

Answer 1

Many (not all) spew misinformation and lies. It's how theism works. Discredit those with differing beliefs in any way possible to elevate the status of your own religion in the eyes of yourself, and others if possible.

Answer 2

The Basis of morality is the word of GOD.
There is no argument with atheist being upstanding citizens
The Ten Commandments are the basis for all our laws the paradox come when it is said there is no God but His laws are the foundation or not (some are in jail) of atheists that are upstanding citizens.

Answer 3

There is a dimension to 'morality' that seldom gets discussed, but I (and many philosophers) believe it is the most important part...

It clarifies ones mind.

Furthermore, 'morality' can be divided into two parts; good habits (based on your family, culture, your own efforts…) and conscious effort (ethics, 'Gods laws’, ‘social contracts’, etc)….

It is a cycle, conscious effort creates a habit and the habit ends up clearing the mind.

So, the *goal* of morality is to have a clear mind. The *methods* are your conscious efforts...

You are right in that anyone can make those efforts, they need not be tied to a religion, but the criticism atheists should take seriously is what efforts are they *really* making and are they enough to clarify all aspects of their mind? You are depending on your own mind (which evolved to make only quick and dirty sketches of the world) to understand things it did not evolve to understand. Buddhists call this the ‘monkey mind’, and if you don’t recognize it, it is very difficult to make a lot of progress in understanding the more subtle aspects of your mind.

This is where ‘atheists’ (in my experience) usually fall short.

Answer 4

I dont believe that faith is the basis of morality but I do believe that society many times is and in a society that was extremely influenced and shaped by religion and religious values I think it is fair to say that religion has shaped many atheists concepts of morality becasue it has shaped society's concepts of morality.

You can be non religious and completely moral, but if you live in a predominately christian nation, then your concept of morality has been shaped by the majority's concept of morality, which would be their religions value system.

Answer 5

"Faith" is not the basis of morality. The teachings of Jesus are. Get your facts straight.

Anyone can be a good citizen if he or she wants to, it is not a paradox. Christians are just taught to be imitators of Christ--serving others and helping out when others are in need. Unfortunately many "Christians" do not do this.

Answer 6

Apparently the only way one can guarantee morality is through the Bible, which is, of course, a bunch of horse ****.

Through natural selection, organisms that care more about their community or group have gone on to dominate organisms which care mostly about themselves. It's a slow, subtle process but evolution is evident.

For example, butterflies in industrial areas where there is a lot of dark black soot on the trees are black. Butterflies in rural areas where white-colored lichen grows are white. The butterflies that were black were eaten by predators because they could not camouflage themselves.

The world needs more atheists right now.

Answer 7

Atheists draw back from words like reliable and evil, because of the fact it would be a subjective selection based upon a individual's perception. because of the fact they're self-governing and decide to not work together in immorality because of the fact of a few form of inner barometer or social greater, it would insinuate that mankind is inherently sensible. regrettably, this would not seem to be the case, yet i'm grateful for people who're or think of they're.

Answer 8

It is no paradox.

God's morality is universal considering that it was God who determined what is right and what is wrong in the first place, so it is not even remotely unreasonable that even people who won't believe in Him, will know what is right and wrong inherently. It's why a child caught red handed, will lie to our face and say they didn't do it. Our children must be "taught/made" to do what is right by focusing on the consequences that they will understand, not because they do not know what they are doing is wrong. It is because wrong behavior is easier and comes naturally to us as we are all bound under sin from birth.

We must "teach" our children to "adhere" to morality, to right conduct, even if it is harder, and even if there is a perceived negative result when doing so. We teach them this because we all understand that what is Right, is an absolute.

Why would an Atheist do so? They do not believe in an unchanging and absolute Right and Wrong because they reject the Only One who could establish such a thing as True absolute morality. So why would they adhere to a teaching that promoted doing right even if there was a negative consequence for doing so? They will abstain from an act that is wrong because of the negative consequence it brings upon them or their relations, because I assume, it causes harm in some way. So would they also abstain from doing what is right if the consequences were equally negative for doing right? I say they would. If for some reason they decide to do what is right, and accept the negative earthly consequences which could also cause their relations harm by way of emotional and physical pain, then it is specifically because what is Right is Right and what is Wrong is Wrong, and any person who wishes to live a "truly moral" life in accordance to what is Right and Good, will inevitably be led straight back to the Universal truth of God's Law.

Atheists think that morality is simply some side effect of social instinct.

Morality: The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct.

A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct:

Right and Wrong.

In order for true morality to exist, there must be a "set dictate" of right and wrong that is "absolute/unalterable without compromise," by which the standards of right conduct and wrong conduct are measured. It also requires that there "always" be "negative" consequence for doing wrong, otherwise there is no differentiation between Right and Wrong.

Here's an example. Right conduct: A person buys some food and gives it to the poor. Wrong conduct: A person steals food and gives the food to the poor.

If no one witnesses either act, the result would seem to be the same positive end. However, if someone does witness both acts, then rightfully the person who stole the food for whatever reason, will be punished because their actions were inherently wrong.

An Atheist could say that since the person stole the food to give to the poor, they are justified by their intent...some may not, but Atheists must believe in "relative" morality, not absolute morality. That right and wrong are dependent upon the situation and a person's upbringing/culture, or even their "faith?" If a person from another culture who was raised to steal...steals from someone...is this wrong? My opinion is absolutely yes. An Atheist may disagree.

Right and Wrong is universal. There is no relative Right and Wrong. Abortion is the deliberate killing of a child...premeditated, and is therefore absolutely wrong. But many will use relative morality when trying to defend this act. They may say "It's not wrong because the child isn't really a person...or the child is still dependent upon the mother," etc etc...Rationalization only.

Murder, rape, theft, lying, extortion, assault, molestation, kidnapping, adultery, burglary, vandalism, etc etc...is all wrong.

Blasphemy, idolatry, sexual immorality, gluttony, sloth, lust, greed, wrath, pride, envy...the catalysts/triggers/sources of all these sins/crimes we commit.

By God's Law morality is established, with morality our human laws are established according to what is absolute and unchanging. With God we also have the guarantee of justice when we die. Atheist morality offers no guarantee of peace, or justice to anyone since all people will inevitably cease to exist according to their faith.

The only law or morality without God, is amoral, or immoral chaos and anarchy, which it seems would describe very well the time before the flood, when God wiped the earth clean of immoral man, before God gave His Law to the world through Moses. That was a time when everyone did what was right in their own eyes...a relative morality.

Now what is even more singular about God given "True morality," is that often, there will be "negative" consequences in this world when doing what is "Right." Yet regardless of the negative consequences, doing what is right is always the correct choice if God is the source of that morality. For example:

A person witnesses a crime, and tells the truth, thereby allowing the prosecution of the wrongdoer according to the law, but then the person who did what is right is threatened with death by members of the wrongdoer's family, organization, etc.

When it is true morality, the adherence to what is truly "Right," becomes more important than even one's own earthly life, because it is adhered to out of Love for God and for the light of truth.

This is the difference between Atheist morality that is relative, and true morality from God, which is unchanging and absolute.

Answer 9

They can't rationalize that atheists can have morals without following the christians archaic, arcane scripture....

There is no "basis" for morality. We all know the difference between right and wrong.....no matter our religion or lack thereof.

Answer 10

Can you prove "the vast majority of atheists are upstanding citizens"?

(Do you catch the irony here?)