If you can be a good person without God then why need Him?

[PRmerger]

Never forget that an atheist doesn’t believe in God (I can’t believe that I wrote that).

http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/facepalm/grand/disappointed_gif_44556.gif

Friend, you disappoint grandly.

Haven’t I defended you a multitude of times when you’ve been in discussions with Believers where a Believer tells you, after you’ve presented your arguments, “Well, you don’t even believe in God anyway”? I interject that all of us here understand that atheists don’t believe in God, but that for the sake of argument, the atheist concedes, “IF God exists…[insert argument here]”

It’s a bit cumbersome for an atheist to preface every response with, “I’m an atheist and that means that I deny the existence of God, but for the sake of this discussion I am positing, ‘IF God exists, then…’; please assume that caveat with each and every post I make.”

 

[PRmerger]

JK’s meaning might be better understood in that an atheist might say that IF God exists, then He better be prepared for some very serious one on one discussions about Life, The Universe and Everything come the Day of Reckoning and He better have some very good explanations ready.

Again, this limns a very unlettered idea about God. (And surely even an atheist can have an idea of what God is.)

IF God exists, He is not the same as Zeus or Thor or Isis. If He were simply a super-powerful immortal god, then, yes this god might owe you an apology.

But that is not God. That’s a super hero.

God is the necessary being, who is immaterial, eternal, perfect, has all the “omni-attributes” and is He who is “nothing greater that can be thought”.

If this is who we mean by God (and it certainly is!), then it’s nonsensical to think that God owes anyone an apology.

 

[ready]

A person can not be saved unless he possesses supernatural charity in his/her heart at his/her death, and to possess supernatural charity one must possess supernatural faith, even if only by Baptism of Desire. Our being philanthropic is not enough to save us, only supernatural charity and supernatural grace in our soul can save us. God bless you.

 

[Bradski]

Again, this limns a very unlettered idea about God. (And surely even an atheist can have an idea of what God is.)

No. God is a reflection of the understanding of whoever I happen to be talking to at that particular time. If I’m talking to a Muslim or a Catholic or a Protestant or a Deist then He is not the same thing in every case.

I have a very good idea of what you think God is.

 

[Almagor]

God is the unknowable entity that created all of the universe. I’m not sure we “need” him, in the sense that humans understand “need,” but I’m sure glad he (she/it) created everything!

You have a great and honest answer however I would like to add a little. Everyone will need some help in life that no one can or will give them but God can and will help us with those problems and especially if we ask Him.

I have read that God’s Nature is Love and over the years (I’m 71 ) I have found in my relationship with God He has not only proved to me that He loves me and In have come to love Him. There has never been anyone that didn’t let me down but God has never let me down. I can’t imagine how it would be to live without God and I don’t want to try.

Please forgive me if I have offended you by commenting on your answer. I am new here and this was the only way I could figure out how to get my response on this blog. I meant what I said about your answer being both great and honest. I think it very important for prople to know that we would not even exist if God did not create us. God bless you.

 

[Eternal_One]

Most people who are good without God dont believe masturbation, abortion, cohabitation, fornication, and so forth, are sinful. If you look closely, there is the element of selfishness present in all of these things. I would say this person is as much of a sinner as anyone else, Christian or not.

There is Public Sin as well as Private Sin. Just because a person’s public life looks good, doesnt mean that their private lives are always entirely intact.

 

[PRmerger]

No. God is a reflection of the understanding of whoever I happen to be talking to at that particular time. If I’m talking to a Muslim or a Catholic or a Protestant or a Deist then He is not the same thing in every case.

If you’re going to be arguing for a god who’s the equivalent a super hero, then it’s inutile to be arguing here on a Catholic forum about how this god would owe you an apology. You have the wrong idea of who God is.

That’s like going to a forum for those who oppose immunizations and start talking about how eating turnips makes you have stronger bones. No one on the anti-vaccine forum is arguing for or against turnips. Turnips have nothing to do with vaccines.

So no one here is arguing that a super hero who created the world wouldn’t owe you an apology. Super heroes have nothing to do with God.

I have a very good idea of what you think God is.

Pretty much I think you’re right.

 

[CrossofChrist]

There are many good people who are atheists and agnostics. Some of them are better than Catholics and Christians I have known personally. I just always wonder if you can control your own selfish or evil impulses and you truly love your neighbor as yourself, why would you need God or religion? When I think people who need God, I think those with issues like alcoholism, promiscuity, poor self-esteem, poor, etc. If you are kind, well-put together person, why would you need to believe in God? What difference would it make in your life anyways? Some people can find peace within themselves, they are very independent and self-reliant and kind. Why need God? If we have full control over our decisions, why do we often to choose to sin? Why can’t people simply stop sinning, why do we need Jesus’s redemption or forgiveness at all if it is our own choice? Or are humans so helpless they honestly cannot stop sinning?

Without God, and without belief in Jesus, we can’t attain the fullness of our humanity. Someone might be a “good person”, but they can’t be transformed and receive the gift of God that they were made for.

I would argue that there is some disconnect in your reasoning if you believe in a moral law that provides you with obligations and you don’t believe in God. But we aren’t Catholics only because it makes you a “good person” (per outward appearances); we’re Catholics because we are meant to have communion with the Holy Trinity, which gives the ultimate meaning to our lives and fulfills us as persons.

 

[Bradski]

If you’re going to be arguing for a god who’s the equivalent a super hero…

Not a super hero. But He seems to be all things to all men.

Does He send people to hell or not? Does He send tsunamis and Ebola plagues or not? Does He perform miracles or not? Does He answer prayers or not? Does He think homosexuality an abomination or not? Does He think women should be priests or not? Is He controlling evolution or not? Was there an Adam and Eve or not?

The list goes on. The arguments go on. And so many people have different answers to so many of them. And that’s just among Catholics.

If you get to heaven and the only thing you had gotten right was the fact that there is actually a god, wouldn’t you be just a little irate?

 

[PRmerger]

Not a super hero.

Ok, then. So if He’s God, the being that which no greater can be thought, it’s nonsensical to demand that God owe you an apology.

But He seems to be all things to all men.

I don’t know what this means.

Does He send people to hell or not?

No. He loves us and we turn away.

Does He send tsunamis and Ebola plagues or not?

That is a result of original sin.

Does He perform miracles or not? Does He answer prayers or not?

Yep.

Does He think homosexuality an abomination or not?

Catholicism proclaims it is a disorder. We don’t describe it as an abomination. (Have you been chatting on those weird evangelical/fundamentalist Christian forums again?)

Does He think women should be priests or not?

No, he does not.

Is He controlling evolution or not?

Yes, of course.

Was there an Adam and Eve or not?

Yes, there was.

The list goes on. The arguments go on.

What lists? What arguments? I am confused what point you’re making.

And so many people have different answers to so many of them. And that’s just among Catholics.

The fact that there are so many different answers to so many arguments means, what, exactly?

If you get to heaven and the only thing you had gotten right was the fact that there is actually a god, wouldn’t you be just a little irate?

I don’t understand how you think this would happen. How does one say yes to God without knowing Him intimately?

 

[PRmerger]

Does He send people to hell or not? Does He send tsunamis and Ebola plagues or not? Does He perform miracles or not? Does He answer prayers or not? Does He think homosexuality an abomination or not? Does He think women should be priests or not? Is He controlling evolution or not? Was there an Adam and Eve or not?

The list goes on.The arguments go on. And so many people have different answers to so many of them. And that’s just among Catholics

It* sounds* like you’re proposing that since there are so many “different answers” to religious questions, this means that religion is false?

Not sure this is a good argument. For then you would have to say that since there are so many different answers to these medical questions, this means that medicine is false:

-should we add fluoride to our drinking water or not?
-is watchful waiting a viable option for managing ear infections or should we treat all cases with antibiotics?
-should we unroof blisters or leave them intact?
-is inducing labor on a full term baby safe?
-should a lumbar puncture be done on a 10 week old baby with a fever of 101?

 

[Bradski]

It* sounds* like you’re proposing that since there are so many “different answers” to religious questions, this means that religion is false?

Not sure this is a good argument. For then you would have to say that since there are so many different answers to these medical questions, this means that medicine is false.

I’m not proposing anything. I’m stating a fact. If lots of people have lots of different answers to a set of questions that each have a specific answer, then notwithstanding the fact that they could all be wrong about the initial premise on which the questions are based, most of those people have the answers wrong.

Just take one of your answers: God doesn’t want women to be priests. Let’s say that sometime in the future the church decides that they can. Did God change His mind or were you wrong when you gave your answer?

Does your God approve of communion for those who have been divorced? It’s a yes or no question - He either does or He doesn’t. What happens if it is allowed at some point. Were you wrong originally?

If everyone in the Catholic Church agreed on everything and Catholicism was the only religion, then I wouldn’t have any argument. They don’t and it isn’t so I do.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m not proposing anything. I’m stating a fact.

Of course you’re proposing something. What you propose follows below.

If lots of people have lots of different answers to a set of questions that each have a specific answer, then notwithstanding the fact that they could all be wrong about the initial premise on which the questions are based, most of those people have the answers wrong.

I don’t disagree with what you’ve proposed.

Just take one of your answers: God doesn’t want women to be priests. Let’s say that sometime in the future the church decides that they can. Did God change His mind or were you wrong when you gave your answer?

The Church can’t change her mind on this, Bradski.

Any more than she could decide that the Blessed Mother is part of the Godhead.

Does your God approve of communion for those who have been divorced? It’s a yes or no question - He either does or He doesn’t.

Yes, Bradski. Divorce is not an obstacle to receiving communion, after one has sought confession.

What happens if it is allowed at some point. Were you wrong originally?

It’s always been allowed.

I think you have some misapprehensions about Catholic teaching, and are confusing the divorced with those who have divorced and attempted re-mariage.

If everyone in the Catholic Church agreed on everything and Catholicism was the only religion, then I wouldn’t have any argument. They don’t and it isn’t so I do.

What’s your argument again? That since so many people have different ideas about religion that none of them are right?

That doesn’t sound very reasonable.

There can be lots of different ideas about religion and **one **of them is right, no? Isn’t that a possibility?

Lots of people have different ideas about vaccinating their children, but it doesn’t mean that there isn’t a correct answer: it’s good to vaccinate your children.

 

[Bradski]

What’s your argument again? That since so many people have different ideas about religion that none of them are right?

No. That most of them are certainly wrong.

And my bad. No communion for those who are divorced…and have remarried. Is the church doing God’s will in this matter?

 

[PRmerger]

No. That most of them are certainly wrong.

I have no argument with you here.

Although I will say that most of them are certainly right about some things. But they are indeed wrong about a lot of things.

And my bad. No communion for those who are divorced…and have remarried. Is the church doing God’s will in this matter?

Certainly.

 

[Bradski]

No communion for those who are divorced…and have remarried. Is the church doing God’s will in this matter?

Certainly.

Now I’m not sure if you would agree that there is a chance that this could change. But there’s certainly a lot of discussion currently going on about it.

I think that if you were honest, you would agree that it could happen. Maybe not soon, but let’s say a new pope in a few decades time said that it was OK.

If you are then still doing God’s will, would it mean He changed His mind, or would you have been wrong in 2014?

 

[PRmerger]

Now I’m not sure if you would agree that there is a chance that this could change. But there’s certainly a lot of discussion currently going on about it.

I think that if you were honest, you would agree that it could happen. Maybe not soon, but let’s say a new pope in a few decades time said that it was OK.

Yes, it could change, as it is canon law and a disciplinary teaching that the divorced and re-married cannot receive communion, not dogma.

If you are then still doing God’s will, would it mean He changed His mind, or would you have been wrong in 2014?

It would no more be problematic than if my DH tell one child: you may drive when you turn 16…

but we tell another child: you cannot drive when you turn 16.

That’s part of our authority to be able to bind and loose.

The children ought to be able to see that the principle (dogma) remains the same: you are given permission to drive when you are legally able to do so as well as responsible enough to handle a car.

Sometimes it’s when you’re 16. Sometimes it’s when you’re 17.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Yes, it could change, as it is canon law and a disciplinary teaching that the divorced and re-married cannot receive communion, not dogma.

So if after next year’s synod, regardless of whether the bishops get 2/3 to agree with each other or not, if Pope Francis wants divorced and remarried to receive and he changes it, then the change is binding on all bishops and priests and Catholics?

 

[PRmerger]

So if after next year’s synod, regardless of whether the bishops get 2/3 to agree with each other or not, if Pope Francis wants divorced and remarried to receive and he changes it, then the change is binding on all bishops and priests and Catholics?

Yes, sir.

 

[PRmerger]

No. God is a reflection of the understanding of whoever I happen to be talking to at that particular time. If I’m talking to a Muslim or a Catholic or a Protestant or a Deist then He is not the same thing in every case.

I have a very good idea of what you think God is.

I just happened to come across a quote by an atheist, BC Johnson: “Such a God, if not dead, is the next thing to it. And a person who believes in such a ghost of a god is practically an atheist. To call such a thing a god would be to strain the meaning of the word.”
books.google.com/books?id=GMPsAwAAQBAJ

This quote applies quite nicely to the “God owes us an apology” assertion.

To call such a thing a god would be to strain the meaning of the word.