Can atheists do "good?"

[Mrchatsworth]

So it’s like saying can someone love “yes, I live these fries?”
Ok

 

[JohnStrachan]

One doesn’t need a Christian God to understand those moral positions or to agree to them.

I’m not so sure they are that universal. We seem to have a pretty tough time with many of them. Lots of people think killing is pretty ok. The majority of states around the world are pretty okay with the killing of innocents. If the moral code is so clear cut - and I think it is - then why do so many fall short? The moral code is universal , yet so many fall short.

But that’s the easy stuff.

Is it really that easy. If the bar is so low then why do so many trip over it? Why do so many people have trouble with Matthew 25:40. If it’s so “easy” than why isn’t everbody doing it?

But what of the everyday problems we have. Should I stop hunting? Should I only eat free range? How much time should I spend on charity work as opposed to.time with my family? Should we let my MIL die peacefully if that’s her request?

We all have problems, that is the thing of life. In John 10:10 Jesus tells us that he has come that we might have life and live it abundantly. But he didn’t promise us a bed of roses. He did promise salvation for those who are faithful. In the midst of the messiness of life, we have the example of Jesus to follow.

I think some of your questions are pretty clear cut:

Should I hunt? Do you need to for your survival? Are you doing it for a trophy? There is a huge difference in hunting for food or hunting for kicks. I don’t know what side of the fence you are on. First Nations People invoke the guidance of the Creator when they go hunting and they offer a blessing to the dead animal for the gift of food. in that same spirit, when you hunt, would you feel the exercise is a blessing and would you offer thanksgiving to the animal for the sustenance that it is providing? Will you endeavor to use the whole animal and return its remnants to the earth for regeneration?

Should you eat free range? I do. I have a thing about cruelty - i don’t really like it. I try to use my $ in an ethical way. That’s also why I intentionally avoid buying things that are made in certain countries. Time doing charity? You need to find a balance. Deuteronomy commands us to tithe - do you tithe your time? Is it too much? If it infringes on family responsibility, then yes. God know what is in your heart. Why wouldn’t you let your MIL die peacefully? Is there a better way to go? If she chooses to shun life support that is not of your doing.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

One doesn’t need a Christian God to understand those moral positions or to agree to them.

I’m not so sure they are that universal. We seem to have a pretty tough time with many of them. Lots of people think killing is pretty ok. The majority of states around the world are pretty okay with the killing of innocents. If the moral code is so clear cut - and I think it is - then why do so many fall short? The moral code is universal , yet so many fall short.

But that’s the easy stuff.

Is it really that easy. If the bar is so low then why do so many trip over it? Why do so many people have trouble with Matthew 25:40. If it’s so “easy” than why isn’t everbody doing it?

No-one said it was easy to follow. But almost everyone agrees it’s a good idea. Murderers don’t like getting murdered. Thieves don’t like being robbed. It’s that some people take advantage of the rule. But as I said, you don’t need God to understand that it’s worth following.

And your answers on the other matters sound like just that - your answers. Who knows exactly what God would allow? Does he have no problem with allowing people to die for example? Isn’t suffering good for the soul? I’ve been told that God says so. There’s a fine line between not keeping someone alive and allowing them to die. I’d suggest that every single case needs to be thought about individually.

And then who decides? Who knows what God says would be ‘good’ in each case?

It’s us, John. We do. Even if we believe in God we could only do what we think He’d want. It’s up to us.

 

[JohnStrachan]

And then who decides? Who knows what God says would be ‘good’ in each case?

So what’s you point? We seem to be going in circles here? Are you struggling with belief? What God allows? Do you care? I mean I can’t tell. Are you an atheist looking for definitive truth? Why do you struggle with belief? I mean I believe and i don’t think I struggle too much with good and evil and right and wrong. I fail, a lot. But I have faith in God’s infinite mercy. I know with certainty - because he said it - if I am truly sorry for my shortcomings that they will be forgiven.

If in the end I have been deceived I will be no worse off that if I didn’t believe. If in the end belief is confirmed, then I will inherit eternal life and be free of endless darkness. By reason alone, belief is the better choice.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

And then who decides? Who knows what God says would be ‘good’ in each case?

So what’s you point? We seem to be going in circles here? Are you struggling with belief? What God allows? Do you care? I mean I can’t tell. Are you an atheist looking for definitive truth? Why do you struggle with belief? I mean I believe and i don’t think I struggle too much with good and evil and right and wrong. I fail, a lot. But I have faith in God’s infinite mercy. I know with certainty - because he said it - if I am truly sorry for my shortcomings that they will be forgiven.

If in the end I have been deceived I will be no worse off that if I didn’t believe. If in the end belief is confirmed, then I will inherit eternal life and be free of endless darkness. By reason alone, belief is the better choice

I’m pointing out that the statement below doesn’t allow for the fact that in the vast majority of cases we simply wouldn’t know what God’s standard is. We decide that for ourselves.

Going good by God’s standard is all that matters.

And you can’t choose to believe. It’s not a conscious choice you make.

 

[poche]

When the angels announced the birth of Jesus they said, “and peace to men of good will.” They didn’t say, “and peace to the correct worship of God.”

 

[o_mlly]

So can there be an act that the intention is good, the circumstances are good, but the act is an undefined immoral act? Even if it’s a defined immoral act I thought Catholic teaching was the person still had to be aware of that fact as well, right?

The morality of the act is always objective, independent of the actor. The culpability of the actor is always subjective and dependent on the state of the actor’s knowledge and freedom to act.

So accepting everything you said we have a group who does not apply their own thinking to morality but follows Church teaching …

The Church proposes. The faithful over time integrate the teaching as their own.

So that to me boils down to one question, why Catholicism and not any other religion? Why not be strictly adherent to another faith?

One must follow their own conscience. If one has made the effort but in good conscience cannot accept as their own the truths of Catholic morality then they must follow their own good and certain conscience.

I’m going to put the goalposts back where they were.

The point that was made is that there is a great variety of opinion on moral matters between Christians

No, you put your goalposts where you’d like them to be. Here’s the chain of posts that Dan123 started to claim Catholic morality teaching is determined not by authority but by the believers body count. Wrong.

… there are Catholics who engage in and support homosexuality, gay marriage, premarital sex, birth control, open marriages, even abortion. Pretty much any teaching of the Catholic Church is ignored by at least some Catholics out there.

Even them that isn’t who I’m talking about, I’m talking about all the Catholics walking around.

As I pointed out above, Catholicism is also whatever anyone who calls themselves a Catholic is as well …

 

[kapp19]

Goodness is being as apprehended by the appetitive faculties. There are three kinds of goodness, including in human acts - the useful, the pleasant, and the virtuous. As to the third, it seems the natural rule of reason may theoretically be observed in its entirety without faith, yet only in part (“in some way” and thus not complete virtue) without a will to order all towards God as a last end which would be implied by a lack of belief in God. Only one in charity (supernatural friendship with the Trinity, from Whom all goodness comes) completely fulfills the good life available to humanity and can “do good” in an unqualified sense.

 

[JohnStrachan]

And you can’t choose to believe. It’s not a conscious choice you make.

Yes you can. Atheists choose not to believe.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

And you can’t choose to believe. It’s not a conscious choice you make.

Yes you can. Atheists choose not to believe.

Could you point one out, John? Quote one perhaps? Point me in the direction of one who has claimed such?

What you can do, whatever your final decision might be, is to decide whether to accept or reject evidence for any given claim. And once that decision is made, belief will automatically follow. You will have no choice.

 

[Freddy]

No, you put your goalposts where you’d like them to be. Here’s the chain of posts that Dan123 started to claim Catholic morality teaching is determined not by authority but by the believers body count. Wrong.

Dan123:

… there are Catholics who engage in and support homosexuality, gay marriage, premarital sex, birth control, open marriages, even abortion. Pretty much any teaching of the Catholic Church is ignored by at least some Catholics out there.

Even them that isn’t who I’m talking about, I’m talking about all the Catholics walking around.

As I pointed out above, Catholicism is also whatever anyone who calls themselves a Catholic is as well …

The first two of those quotes are about Catholics. The morality that individual Catholics hold to. Which is wide and varied and quite often does not align with what the church teaches. And other examples have used the term Christian as opposed to Catholic to make the same point.

I would disagree with Dan in his use of the term ‘Catholicism’ in the last quote as it could be construed as meaning that which the church teaches. As opposed to what Catholics believe. Which wasn’t the point being made, as all other examples indicate.

There is certainly an argument to be made that the church has varied it’s position over time on certain matters, but that is not the argument being made.

 

[o_mlly]

I would disagree with Dan in his use of the term ‘Catholicism’ in the last quote as it could be construed as meaning that which the church teaches.

? There is no other construal possible. We have to take people at their word. Dan is wrong.

 

[Victoria33]

Albert Camus, the French writer was said to be an atheist. I think his writings were certainly moral.

 

[Dan123]

No, you put your goalposts where you’d like them to be. Here’s the chain of posts that Dan123 started to claim Catholic morality teaching is determined not by authority but by the believers body count. Wrong.

I did not say moral teaching was determined by believers body count. There was this exchange:

If one’s reference point for the good can be anything then it is no thing.

Damian243:

only if you don’t bother to ask the atheist what their reference point of the good is.

Why bother? If the reference point could be anything then the point de jour will be different tomorrow.

You feel Catholic teaching is rooted in God’s teaching and so it’s less ‘fickle’ than secular morality system. I countered that when you look at Christians/Catholics/people of any faith really you see as varied opinions on pretty much any moral issue as any other group. You narrowed your definition to faithful Catholics, which seems to be a circular definition as it’s basically “the Catholics who are following all Catholic teaching are following all Catholic teaching”.

But more importantly then we get here:

Dan123:

So that to me boils down to one question, why Catholicism and not any other religion? Why not be strictly adherent to another faith?

One must follow their own conscience. If one has made the effort but in good conscience cannot accept as their own the truths of Catholic morality then they must follow their own good and certain conscience.

You’ve made the point I was trying to make oh so many posts ago. You want to stigmatize secular morality systems as being fickle and subject to change at any time; but here you admit it’s your own thoughts and exploration of conscience that brings someone to or away from the church.

 

[Dan123]

I would disagree with Dan in his use of the term ‘Catholicism’ in the last quote as it could be construed as meaning that which the church teaches. As opposed to what Catholics believe. Which wasn’t the point being made, as all other examples indicate.

? There is no other construal possible. We have to take people at their word.

Actually Freddy understood my intent perfectly, so there is more than one way to construe what I said. It was sloppy language, it happens. Look at all the threads that conflate ‘communism’ with specific locations around the world. There’s the idea, then there’s the play it manifests. In that particular quote I was referring to the way it manifests, that is, the Catholics I interact with and their beliefs.

 

[o_mlly]

Actually Freddy understood my intent perfectly …

Freddy:

I would disagree with Dan in his use of the term ‘Catholicism’

I admit, I am not much of a mind reader. However, you and Freddy often tell me what I think, what I mean and what I feel. I take you at your word, please give me the same courtesy. You’ll save considerable straw that way.

 

[Dan123]

I will aim to do a better job. That said it was a statement in a very long chain, while that may have been unclear there’s plenty in our conversation to establish my point.

 

[Freddy]

Dan123:

Actually Freddy understood my intent perfectly …

Freddy:

I would disagree with Dan in his use of the term ‘Catholicism’

I admit, I am not much of a mind reader. However, you and Freddy often tell me what I think, what I mean and what I feel. I take you at your word, please give me the same courtesy. You’ll save considerable straw that way.

You took one word out of about a dozen examples offered to make the point being made. Which could have been construed differently in isolation. But not in context. But I note you are ignoring the point being made by being selective.

Could you adddress the point? That there is a vast difference in individual moral positions within Christianity.

 

[o_mlly]

Could you adddress the point? That there is a vast difference in individual moral positions within Christianity.

I agree, there are differences. But “vastly” different, not so much. The non-Catholic Christian religions have many of the same but not identical tenets on morality. Generally, in areas of difference, history shows that the liberal Protestant religions changed their moral codes while the Catholic Church did not.

 

[JohnStrachan]

Could you point one out, John?

Circular argument Freddy. God has bestowed on us the gift of free will. Read the story of Buridan’s ass:

Loading…

en.wikipedia.org

We can ignore God or follow God. As an example, 79% of so-called Christians do not attend church on a regular basis. They are choosing to ignore the 4th Commandment. Women who get abortions are choosing to ignore the sixth commandment. If we didn’t have freedom of choice then there would be no need for the sacrament of confession. By that reason there is no need for Jesus.