Can atheists do "good?"

[Freddy]

Freddy:

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.

Again, we are not talking about denominations but individual Christians.

And there are Christians who not only support the right of women to have abortions but have them themselves versus those who will not allow it in any case whatsoever. There are those who support the death penalty versus those that do. There are those who see nothing wrong with ssm versus those who actually don’t think it exists. There are those who see nothing wrong with gay partnerships versus those who compare it to incest and worse. There are those who use contraception versus those who don’t. There are those who accept basic science versus those who read the bible literally.

I don’t see that you can describe those individual positions as anything other than ‘vast differences’. These aren’t subtle variations in morality but diametrically opposed positions.

And it is accepted and acknowledged that the Catholic church is generally fixed in it’s position on morality and I would suggest that that is in itself a good thing. It would be madness for an individual to one day support abortion and the next decry it depending on which way the wind was blowing. Those would be people you could not trust.

But one must allow for a change in an individual’s views. You must allow for an argument to hold and to be persuasive enough to actually change a person’s mind. That’s the very reason for apologetics - to defend a position, and proselytising - to actively attempt to change someone’s mind.

But people generally stay with their positions and defend them. They (hopefully) can put forward reasonable arguments for holding them in the first place. And this will include people of all denominations within all religions and will also include those with no religious beliefs. So to suggest that atheists are simply following the cause of the day and change their minds at the drop of a hat is nonsensical. Atheists hold to a wide variety of views - as do Christians. Their views may directly conflict with those of other atheists - as do Christians. And it should be accepted that they hold their views as honestly as any Christian.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

Could you point one out, John?

Circular argument Freddy.

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.

It wasn’t an argument. Let alone a circular one.

If you examine your own examples, you’ll see that people have chosen to ignore a command. That says nothing about whether they believe the command to be worth following. It’s like believing that it’s the right thing to do not to drink and drive and then do so. You don’t momentarily believe that it’s ok. You don’t have an internal conversation and think ‘Now I’m going to believe it’s just fine’. You simply break the rules for your own benefit. You still know it’s wrong. You still believe it shouldn’t be done.

But you say it specifically occurs in atheists (notwithstanding that you gave two examples of Christians purporting to have done it). I don’t know any who can do that. I’ve never heard of any who can do that. I’ve never read of any who can do that.

If you have, then perhaps you can let me know. Or else we’ll have to assume it’s unfounded.

 

[Dan_Defender]

I can’t speak for any other atheists on the forum but I have seen zero evidence that any of them have any desire whatsoever to change anyone’s mind about personal beliefs.

But then, why join CAF? I, a Catholic, don’t feel the slightest need to join an atheistic public forum. I suspect most Catholics feel the same way.

 

[Dan_Defender]

I joined because a search on an evolutionary topic led me here and I saw many purported Catholics spreading confusion among the faithful about evolution.

Well, Catholics can believe in Darwinian evolution to a point. I personally admit it as a possibility but have my reservations about the theory. The fact that something as simple as the wheel is only human while something as complex as electricity generation and storage exists in the animal kingdom, has always been puzzling to me. I am more inclined to admit a guided design in the natural world.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

I can’t speak for any other atheists on the forum but I have seen zero evidence that any of them have any desire whatsoever to change anyone’s mind about personal beliefs.

But then, why join CAF? I, a Catholic, don’t feel the slightest need to join an atheistic public forum. I suspect most Catholics feel the same way.

I wouldn’t if I were you, Dan. Most of them don’t take prisoners. It’s a tough gig being a Christian in an atheist forum.

But I have ideas about life. About morality. About how I think people should live. What constitutes a good life. And where better to test those ideas than in a forum where most people will disagree with me. It would be a waste of time debating those ideas with someone who always agrees.

So over the years (and not just on this forum) I’ve put forward my views and have been expected to back them up. Sometimes I have made adjustments to what I believe. Maybe I found that someone else’s argument carried a bit more weight than mine. Sometimes I fine tune mine. Sometimes I find out why I believe something rather than simply feeling that it was right.

In short, I find out more about myself.

 

[Pattylt]

But then, why join CAF? I, a Catholic, don’t feel the slightest need to join an atheistic public forum. I suspect most Catholics feel the same way.

I’ll just add that I joined CAF to better understand the Catholic position on a variety of topics of interest to me. While I have a pretty good grasp on most Protestantism…al least as much as one is able…I wasn’t as certain as to the teachings of the Church. I’m also fascinated at the certainty of believers. I lost my belief and was unable to regain it and why that happened has eluded me ever since.

Since Christianity in general tends to be the most influential on our system of government and often pushes that agenda in making laws, I need to understand my opponents views and where they are going with them. Once I got here and got to know some regulars, I found out I liked many of them and can consider them as virtual friends…we all need all the friends we can get in this life! :hugs:

I stay because I haven’t been asked to leave.

 

[Freddy]

I stay because I haven’t been asked to leave.

I think there’d be uproar if that were to ever happen.

 

[Pattylt]

I think there’d be uproar if that were to ever happen.

Awww, aren’t you sweet! I wouldn’t assume 100% in that, though!

 

[Dan123]

Well, Catholics can believe in Darwinian evolution to a point. I personally admit it as a possibility but have my reservations about the theory. The fact that something as simple as the wheel is only human while something as complex as electricity generation and storage exists in the animal kingdom, has always been puzzling to me. I am more inclined to admit a guided design in the natural world.

And to be clear I fully respect your right to have reservations, or to completely disagree with evolution as an explanation for the diversity of life. There’s the old saying though, “you’re entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts”. That was what I joined because of, misstated, misunderstood, or possibly even intentionally misleading ‘facts’ being spread.

It’d be the difference between someone not being Catholic because they’re convinced Islam is correct, vs someone not being Catholic because they think you all worship the Pope as a deity. There’s not being convinced, and then there’s falsehoods being spread.

 

[o_mlly]

Their views may directly conflict with those of other atheists - as do Christians. And it should be accepted that they hold their views as honestly as any Christian.

No one has questioned the honesty of atheists.
Moral truths are singular and independent of anyone’s views, atheist or Christian.
The Catholic Church has an external 2,000 year old rational umpire on issues of morality.
The atheist’s calls all the plays by himself.

If a Catholic openly rejects the moral truths of the Catholic church then he is excommunicated.
If an atheist rejects the moral beliefs of another atheist then … what? “You may feel that is true for you but not for me”, which violates the singularity of truth claims.

So there is no point in arguing with another whose personal feelings underpin their morality. You’ve heard the Catholic position many times and you reject it. OK. Why keep beating that horse in these forums. We’re not going to change. We will not by reason and cannot by canonical law. You can but you will not.

 

[Dan123]

The Catholic Church has an external 2,000 year old rational umpire on issues of morality.
The atheist’s calls all the plays by himself.

Did someone else decide that you would follow the teachings of the Catholic Church, or did you decide that for yourself?

 

[o_mlly]

Did someone else decide that you would follow the teachings of the Catholic Church, or did you decide that for yourself?

No one can “decide” for another.

 

[Pattylt]

While I’m sure there are atheists that want to make up their own rules, by far the majority of atheists view morality as a social construct of the society they reside in. It isn’t what’s best for me…it’s what’s best for us. We have developed and changed and modified our morality on many subjects and morality needs to develop and change as the societies themselves develop and change.

I’m always baffled when I’m accused of making up my own morality and just changing it at a whim. Ones morality develops over a lifetime of interacting with all of society. You can accuse society of changing its moral foundation over time but not an individual. It wasn’t one person deciding slavery was evil…it was society deciding and pushing the stragglers along with them.

 

[Dan123]

Dan123:

Did someone else decide that you would follow the teachings of the Catholic Church, or did you decide that for yourself?

No one can “decide” for another.

I figured we’d be on the same page there. So you came to the conclusion that the Church was a reliable teacher of morality. You’re hardly alone in that, but…

there is no point in arguing with another whose personal feelings underpin their morality.

You feel the church is correct. That doesn’t magically make your path there less subjective.

 

[Freddy]

While I’m sure there are atheists that want to make up their own rules, by far the majority of atheists view morality as a social construct of the society they reside in. It isn’t what’s best for me…it’s what’s best for us. We have developed and changed and modified our morality on many subjects and morality needs to develop and change as the societies themselves develop and change.

I’m always baffled when I’m accused of making up my own morality and just changing it at a whim.

S’got me beat as well. It might be valid for someone to accuse me of that if I’d changed my mind over certain matters over the few years I’ve been on the forum. But gee, apart from matters regarding homosexuality (I was a child of my times and adopted my parents attitudes) and race to a certain extent (see previous feeble excuse) I’ve stuck mostly with what I was taught. And taught as a child of kind and generous parents (who had the same problems and would have used the same excuses as I did) and brought up, as a Christian (Anglican), to uphold certian values. Which remain with me today.

But when I was about 13 or 14 I distinctly remember my mother saying of some action someone had taken that it was ‘not a very Christian thing to do’. And I remember thinking that it wasn’t a very nice thing to do - period. And nominating it as specifically un-Christian sounded odd. It might have been the first moment I started to realise that you didn’t need to be Christian to do good.

And about that time I started taking confirmation classes which would have allowed me to take communion. It was theology-lite if you will. And again I remember thinking ‘Hang on, is all this meant to be taken seriously?’ As they say, to make a man an atheist, send him to a seminary. To make a boy doubt his Christian upbringing, send him to confirmation classes.

So combine the two and it didn’t take long for me to realise that I didn’t need Christianity to live a moral life. And that my parents weren’t good people because they were Christians. They were good people and they were Christians.

So off into the big world I went and discovered that some of the things I believed were wrong. Not just because of ‘feelings’. But because I actually understood the arguments I’d been given weren’t accurate representations of reality. And that’s what everyone does.

I’m sure that if I sat down and wrote Freddy’s Catechism then it would match what a lot of other people would write. If we started a religion would that make them more valid? If some of them believed in a god would that grant their views - exactly the same views, more validity? If someone says - hey those views are the same as my god tells me, does that grant them greater validity?

Don’t they stand or fall on their own?

 

[Dan123]

I would assume the reason you were able to adjust your opinions on race and sexual orientation were because your values were rooted in foundational principles and not just your thoughts of the day.

 

[o_mlly]

You feel the church is correct. That doesn’t magically make your path there less subjective.

No, Dan, I think the church is correct. Feelings have little to do with what I believe. If my feelings are in accord, I embrace them. If not, I dismiss them.

 

[Freddy]

Dan123:

You feel the church is correct. That doesn’t magically make your path there less subjective.

No, Dan, I think the church is correct. Feelings have little to do with what I believe. If my feelings are in accord, I embrace them. If not, I dismiss them.

Notwithstanding that the differences in meaning between ‘think’ and ‘feel’ are debatable, I should point out that neither of them equate with ‘know’. A term that you didn’t use.

You can clarify if you like.

In the interim, some clarification: I feel the church is wrong on some aspects of morality. I also think they are wrong on some aspects. But I don’t know that they are.

Your view?

 

[GLam1761]

Here we have it, the righteous doing good to PLEASE the Lord, and in FEAR of God, meritoriously overcomes evil by doing GOOD.
The harder it is to do the right the greater the reward!! We who are Children of the Blessed One does this to please the Lord and to make the Gospel attractive to unbelievers,
The atheist does good for all the Wrong reasons, just like creatures w/o sight, they do not know what they are doing and whether they “believe” in karma or out of pity, the Bible says “the compassion of the wicked are cruel while the righteous cares for his animals”Prov. 12:10

 

[o_mlly]

Notwithstanding that the differences in meaning between ‘think’ and ‘feel’ are debatable, I should point out that neither of them equate with ‘know’. A term that you didn’t use.

In order to understand your position, please define your understanding for the definitions of the words “feel”, “think” and “know”.