Do the Atheists have it right: Just Be Good for Goodness' Sake?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PRmerger
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PRmerger

Guest
Apparently there’s been a campaign by a secular/atheistic organization, promoted during the Christmas season, to “Just Be Good for Goodness’ Sake”

Certainly, Christians do not have the market on goodness.

Indeed, an atheist can be a very good person.

So, why can’t we as a society be good just for goodness’ sake? Why do we need God for morality? Why be Christian?

One reason, borrowed from Peter Kreeft, is because it’s true. God exists. Jesus is His Son. He founded a Church. Therefore, we ought to do as God says.

Any other thoughts?
 
If you don’t go by the same morals, how do you know what “Good” is. It might be “good” to not have a family overburdened by another child so abortion is “good” or an aged parent is causing a lot of difficulty for everyone so it is “good” to shorten their life. I remember hearing someone talk on the radio about how he had pushed really hard for the abortion laws because he was a doctor and had seen some awful things happen because of back-street abortions, but now that the laws had passed and he saw the consequences, he was horrified and realized he had been wrong. He definitely was trying to do “good”.
 
HappyRevert said:
If you don’t go by the same morals, how do you know what “Good” is. It might be “good” to not have a family overburdened by another child so abortion is “good” or an aged parent is causing a lot of difficulty for everyone so it is “good” to shorten their life. I remember hearing someone talk on the radio about how he had pushed really hard for the abortion laws because he was a doctor and had seen some awful things happen because of back-street abortions, but now that the laws had passed and he saw the consequences, he was horrified and realized he had been wrong. He definitely was trying to do “good”.
Click to expand...
 
HappyRevert said:
If you don’t go by the same morals, how do you know what “Good” is. It might be “good” to not have a family overburdened by another child so abortion is “good” or an aged parent is causing a lot of difficulty for everyone so it is “good” to shorten their life. I remember hearing someone talk on the radio about how he had pushed really hard for the abortion laws because he was a doctor and had seen some awful things happen because of back-street abortions, but now that the laws had passed and he saw the consequences, he was horrified and realized he had been wrong. He definitely was trying to do “good”.
Click to expand...
I understand what you’re saying, but I think a secularist might respond that there’s a basic understanding that all societies have of what’s good. These things include:
-don’t take what’s not yours
-don’t do harm to another
-try to help those who are in need

etc etc

God is not needed to know these basic goods.

The morality of the things you describe, such as abortion and euthanasia, would be decided by a majority as to whether it would be beneficial to this secularist society.
 
PRmerger said:
The morality of the things you describe, such as abortion and euthanasia, would be decided by a majority as to whether it would be beneficial to this secularist society.
Click to expand...
The majority at certain times thought the way black slaves were treated in America was ok. The way Jews were killed in Germany were fine. And that Aparthied in South Africa was just the way it was done. That Native Americans land could be stolen because Europeans were entitled to it. That the atomic bomb was useful. Et cetera…the reason we need God is because of the majority.
 
Knowing ‘truth’ does not equate with belief in God. A deist for example doesn’t believe God communicates with the world.
 
PRmerger said:
I understand what you’re saying, but I think a secularist might respond that there’s a basic understanding that all societies have of what’s good. These things include:
-don’t take what’s not yours
-don’t do harm to another
-try to help those who are in need

God is not needed to know these basic goods.

.
Click to expand...
But then where did this basic goodness come from? Who or what is the source of this basic understanding, that is not learned in books, but is written on our heart … if not God?
 
PRmerger said:
I understand what you’re saying, but I think a secularist might respond that there’s a basic understanding that all societies have of what’s good. These things include:
-don’t take what’s not yours
-don’t do harm to another
-try to help those who are in need

etc etc

God is not needed to know these basic goods.

The morality of the things you describe, such as abortion and euthanasia, would be decided by a majority as to whether it would be beneficial to this secularist society.
Click to expand...
If it were to stop at the “don’t take what’s not yours”, “Don’t kill” sorts of things then that sounds really nice. However, it never does stop there. We have way too much historical evidence that mob rule (decided by a majority) turns vicious very quickly. Ask Jews how they feel about a majority making the rules during the Holocaust, or perhaps Christians under a Sharia in the Middle East.

I really do understand the secularists ideas and believe they are well intentioned, but unless those in power (even the majority) are constrained by a set of morals that value individual freedoms and life (generally Judaeo/Christian values) then we get into horrible trouble in a generation or two. Our culture, unfortunately, appears to be heading that way. It may not affect my life, but it probably will my grandchildrens’…
 
PRmerger said:
Apparently there’s been a campaign by a secular/atheistic organization, promoted during the Christmas season, to “Just Be Good for Goodness’ Sake”

Certainly, Christians do not have the market on goodness.

Indeed, an atheist can be a very good person.

So, why can’t we as a society be good just for goodness’ sake? Why do we need God for morality? Why be Christian?

One reason, borrowed from Peter Kreeft, is because it’s true. God exists. Jesus is His Son. He founded a Church. Therefore, we ought to do as God says.

Any other thoughts?
Click to expand...
They’ve got a point. But, of course, there is that issue of “What’s good?” and “What’s bad?”

An atheist may think abortion for financial reasons is good; a Christian may think killing some gay dude because God told them to is good. (No offence intended to atheists or Christians.)

Well, we’re asking the wrong questions, here. We should be asking “What’s logical?” or “What’s a reasonable action in this situation?” Other times, it’s also helpful to list pros and cons and their importance.

It’s best to be a good (and logical) person because it is the right thing to do.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood
 
Blade_and_Blood said:
It’s best to be a good (and logical) person because it is the right thing to do.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood
Click to expand...
If you are a seeker, and I’m guessing you are, then this answer is a bit tepid.

The essence of the Atheists’ slogan is that if one does not need God to be good, why believe in God?

The response for any seeker is: because it’s True. As CS Lewis points out in the essay cited above: Christianity claims to give an account of facts—to tell you what the real universe is like. Its account of the universe may be true, or it may not, and once the question is really before you, then your natural inquisitiveness must make you want to know the answer. If Christianity is untrue, then no honest man will want to believe it, however helpful it might be: if it is true, every honest man will want to believe it, even if it gives him no help at all.
 
PRmerger said:
If you are a seeker, and I’m guessing you are, then this answer is a bit tepid.

The essence of the Atheists’ slogan is that if one does not need God to be good, why believe in God?

The response for any seeker is: because it’s True. As CS Lewis points out in the essay cited above: Christianity claims to give an account of facts—to tell you what the real universe is like. Its account of the universe may be true, or it may not, and once the question is really before you, then your natural inquisitiveness must make you want to know the answer. If Christianity is untrue, then no honest man will want to believe it, however helpful it might be: if it is true, every honest man will want to believe it, even if it gives him no help at all.
Click to expand...
The key word was “if.”
 
elliejanba said:
The majority at certain times thought the way black slaves were treated in America was ok. The way Jews were killed in Germany were fine. And that Aparthied in South Africa was just the way it was done. That Native Americans land could be stolen because Europeans were entitled to it. That the atomic bomb was useful. Et cetera…the reason we need God is because of the majority.
Click to expand...
Hello elliejanba,

All those atrocities you mention were committed by baptized Christians. Allow me to repeat that: All those atrocities you mention were committed by baptized Christians. Obviously, I don’t think they were being good for goodness’ sake when they committed those acts. More than likely they were being Christian for Christianity’s sake.

I think the lesson we can take from these historical events is that without goodness in the form of humanism, Christianity is morally bankrupt. That much appears certain.
 
Blade_and_Blood said:
The key word was “if.”
Click to expand...
I’m assuming, then, that you’re denying that you’re a seeker. Interesting. Yet quite peculiar that you visit this forum.

Again, to quote CS Lewis in the above essay: One of the things that distinguishes man from the other animals is that he wants to know things, wants to find out what reality is like, simply for the sake of knowing. When that desire is completely quenched in anyone, I think he has become something less than human
 
crowonsnow said:
Hello elliejanba,

All those atrocities you mention were committed by baptized Christians. Allow me to repeat that: All those atrocities you mention were committed by baptized Christians. Obviously, I don’t think they were being good for goodness’ sake when they committed those acts. More than likely they were being Christian for Christianity’s sake.

I think the lesson we can take from these historical events is that without goodness in the form of humanism, Christianity is morally bankrupt. That much appears certain.
Click to expand...
Humanism, if it were an organized institution, could be pointed to as a source of goodness, perhaps, but as it’s really just a philosophy which suggests a belief in the goodness of humans-or of some humans anyway- regardless of whether they are atheist or religious, the term really doesn’t mean much. This is so because there exist other humans, whether atheist or religious, who demonstrate in no uncertain terms that evil can reside within mans’ heart.

In one sense the only thing Christianity does is to definitively condemn the latter behavior - to claim that goodness is at the foundation, so to speak, of our universe, and that we are compelled to be part of that goodness because any other way of being goes against our very natures, even as we have the freedom to go against them.
 
When I was an atheist, I believed all the same beliefs I believe now, minus the spirituality. Same moral beliefs concerning abortion, etc. Always treated people with respect.

I don’t think you have to be a Christian to be a morally upstanding person, but I’d prefer everyone was.
 
PRmerger said:
I’m assuming, then, that you’re denying that you’re a seeker. Interesting. Yet quite peculiar that you visit this forum.

Again, to quote CS Lewis in the above essay: One of the things that distinguishes man from the other animals is that he wants to know things, wants to find out what reality is like, simply for the sake of knowing. When that desire is completely quenched in anyone, I think he has become something less than human
Click to expand...
Satan represents man as just another animal–the most vicious of them all.
-Anton LaVey​

I’m not a Satanist-- I promise! But that’s what Lewis’ quote reminded me of.
 
Blade_and_Blood said:
Satan represents man as just another animal–the most vicious of them all.
-Anton LaVey​

I’m not a Satanist-- I promise! But that’s what Lewis’ quote reminded me of.
Click to expand...
:confused:

So are you saying that CS Lewis also says that man is an animal, therefore Lewis and Lavey are in agreement?
 
PRmerger said:
:confused:

So are you saying that CS Lewis also says that man is an animal, therefore Lewis and Lavey are in agreement?
Click to expand...
Not really, but now that I look at it, maybe a little.

One big difference, of course. Lewis suggests that mankind can grow out of being animals due to the ability to be educated. LaVey claims mankind is the most vicious animal *because *of the ability to be educated.

There are similarities in statement, but differences in reason. I just found that funny.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top