I'm a good person I don't need God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Victorygirl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes if you believe in the Bible. But if you don’t, this is not a compelling argument.
 
Thanks for the clarification. I agree with your explanation of the general sentiment of those who subscribe to that view, I just poorly fleshed it out myself. I have a friend who has an affinity for the r/K-selection universal theory so I’ve heard a lot of this hah it’s certainly compelling, and I don’t think it’s explicitly inharmonious with religious notions of objective morality. I don’t feel any real need to discredit it, as such, I just think it’s somewhat incomplete.
 
Last edited:
Bradski that is exactly what I expect the argument would be and that is a very provocative and compelling argument. Me saying “But the Bible says…” or God must have made us want to be good” are not compelling responses. If I were an atheist I would roll my eyes. Actually as a Catholic I am rolling my eyes.

To say without God right and wrong are subjective only is you don’t believe in God doesn’t ring true to me either. I mean we have Christians vehemently arguing what is right and wrong as well (ie conservative vs liberal.) we have Catholics who think the Pope is evil so that is a false argument to me.

I believe because I believe in Christ.
 
Last edited:
Some of the answers here are “don’t argue just be a good person and represent.”

First, I didn’t say I was going to argue with anyone, but I would certainly want to be able to respond. After all, the Pope comes out with cyclicals. He doesn’t just say “I am going to be nice and hope the world follows because of it.”

Hey, Catholics created universities. I would think we could come up with a sound, intellectual and bullet proof response to those who don’t get it.
 
Last edited:
The response ought to be that no one is good and that we are all sinners. This is why we need God, to forgive us of our sins. Ask them if they have ever sinned.
 
If one is a Catholic, then I see only two ways that that can come about. Either you were born into the religion (i.e. your parents were Catholics and brought you up as a Catholic) or you made a conscious decision to become a Catholic.

If one is a cradle Catholic then what I generally find is that the ‘rules’ of morality are pretty much rusted on. You are told in no uncertain terms from Day 1 that this is what we teach and if you want to remain a Catholic then you don’t get to pick and choose which teachings are applicable to you and which aren’t. They are not subject to personal interpretation.

It is therefore almost compulsory for them to claim that morality is objective. Simply by being a Catholic makes that claim true for them. It makes it a fact. There are no other options. So if you ask them why a particular act is wrong in itself, without reference to God, it is impossible to answer. Because any answer at all would remove the need for God as the basis of morality. There could be morality without God. And Catholicism, and Christianity itself, would be superfluous.

The other type of Catholic is the one that has chosen Catholicism as the way to live his or her life. He or she may have had a belief in God to start but hey, this is the religion for me! And if you ask them why, they will tell you that what the church teaches is true. Which is playing a little fast and loose with the truth of what actually happened. Which is that they personally decided that what the church teaches is true. Which is about as subjective as you can possible get. So in order to deny that fact, it is also compulsory for them to claim emphatically that morality is objective.

Either way, when an obviously subjective example is given, one either gets silence, deflection or a tortuous argument that black is obviously white.
 
Code: 
One thing to understand “good” in an Atheist...
Romans 2, is interesting

12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

Ppl, who are not churched or Atheists, who follow the GOLDEN RULE, are kind& loving,
Have God’s law written in their hearts! Will receive ETERNAL LIFE.
God bless, Tweedlealice
 
CCC 1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: “Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother.” The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

Missing Mass hardly compares to killing, adultery, stealing, lying and dishonoring parents…
 
God is good. i.e. GOODNESS COMES FROM GOD.
God created ALL! THEREFORE, confirms GOODNESS COMES FROM GOD.
All ppl, who do good, have God’s law written in their hearts. Though, they may not know it.
See John Ponte—CATHOLIC PLANET-THE FOUR LIMBOS & MYSTICAL BAPTISM.

If the MYSTICAL BAPTISM THEORY IS CORRECT, GOD IS GREAT! Which He is.
 
draw a circle. tell them this is a circle that represents all of the knowledge in the universe. out of all of this knowledge how much do they know. have them color that amount of space in. (If they color it all in they are lying and just want to argue, cut off the engagement. You don’t need that negativity) if there is any part left open clarify that is the portion of unknown. Now simply say… “So isn’t it possible that in that portion of knowledge is the existence of God?” - because see, the truth is, most of us don’t KNOW we have faith and we believe! The people who don’t, can’t fathom belief on that scale. They need more logic.
 
Victorygirl said:
Some people don’t believe in a next life.
Click to expand...
True, that is their choice.
Victorygirl said:
I agree but these arguments would fall flat to an atheist. If you don’t believe in God then this doesn’t make sense. And they also might say that God will judge them in the end. We don’t know who will be saved either.
Click to expand...
You are answering your own questions.
Bradskii said:
So in order to deny that fact, it is also compulsory for them to claim emphatically that morality is objective.
Click to expand...
Here is where you as a Catholic (as I am) depart from the atheist. A code of values derived by choice is what some people call morality. But one can choose incest or libel as a “value” if it suits their need and claim that morality then is actually subjective. That is what is parroted by those who deny the truth that morality is objective. Law, and that includes moral law, must be objective for it to be, for lack of a better word, effective. The idea that morality/law should be subjective would lead to such inanities as race car drivers being able to do 185mph in a school zone. A subjective morality is simply a euphemism for moral chaos.
A law is an objective standard instituted to maintain order in a society. It, by its very definition, can’t be subjective. Just saying I’m moral and I lead a good life, thus justifying everything one does as moral and good, is merely an excuse for a self indulgent lifestyle.
Many atheists and agnostics I have met are good, decent, moral people who live their lives responsibly and respectfully in regards to others. Anyone who condemns all atheists and agnostics doesn’t understand much of what Christ taught. In the end, given what we Catholics believe, God will judge all based on His criteria, not ours. Best to simply stay true to what you believe to be The Truth.
 
Bradskii said:
If one is a Catholic, then I see only two ways that that can come about. Either you were born into the religion (i.e. your parents were Catholics and brought you up as a Catholic) or you made a conscious decision to become a Catholic.
Click to expand...
Victory Girl: Here Bradskii makes a mistake, or possibly an unintentional error. There is another type of Catholic, one who heeds Paul’s words, “examine all things, keep that which is good.” I would agree with his (Bradskii’s) contention that many Catholics fall into one of his two categories, but the third type is that Catholic who takes what is given and examines it thoroughly. One who finds reason for the beliefs and teachings of the church because of one’s own study of the basis of those teachings. One’s own understanding of the true moral nature of the church’s teachings. The thinking Catholic.
To be Catholic to that degree requires something that not many an atheist or agnostic (at least the one’s I’ve met) have, and that is humility. To search for and understand God by use of reason alone, cannot be achieved, at least by the believer. And for the unbeliever, it is impossible. Finite human reason, cannot comprehend the infinite. That takes faith, and humility.

I have read any number of Bradskii’s posts and find in his words, no malice or antagonism, but merely a questioning attitude tempered with respect, that one would expect (or at least hope) to find from someone who claims atheism as his/her structure.
 
I would first understand that they probably don’t believe in God. I would also assume they are educated and base their belief in their education and life experiences.

Then I would go one of two ways. The first would be to just change the subject. You can show them, through your actions, what it means to believe in the Catholic faith.

If, on the other hand, you want to share with them what you believe, you should say “Are you interested in what I beleive? If so, I would be happy to share it with you.” If they say “no”, then change the subject. If they say “OK”, then tell them whatever you want. But don’t argue or fight. No good comes from that.

Ultimately, I would be respectful of others who have beliefs that are different from my own.
 
Last edited:
Morality cannot ever be objective I assume is your perspective
 
Why do you think human reason has it’s limits? I thought reason was the highest order. I still wonder why Christ gave us emotions if they mean very little and contribute very little. More like background noise
 
I thought subjective morality meant that each person defines morality differently. It doesn’t make it more or less right or wrong in the person’s eyes. There is a Bible quote on there is a way that looks right to a man.
 
Jump4Joy said:
Why do you think human reason has it’s limits? I thought reason was the highest order. I still wonder why Christ gave us emotions if they mean very little and contribute very little. More like background noise
Click to expand...
Well, I guess I’d have to say, if human reason was unlimited, there would be no disease, hunger, poverty, etc. We would have it all figured out by now. I mean, look at us, our greatest achievement is that we put a glorified fart into a glorified tin can, and shot ourselves to the nearest heavenly body. Wow, don’t you think the rest of the universe just can’t wait for us to show up?
Love is an emotion, so is hope, trust, respect, belief, faith, joy and all the rest. If they are just background noise, I don’t think I’d blame God for putting it there. They are designed to contribute not only much, but just about everything. Maybe our (as a species) values are a bit off?
 
The issue becomes when emotions blind us from the truth. I guess
 
Jump4Joy said:
I thought subjective morality meant that each person defines morality differently. It doesn’t make it more or less right or wrong in the person’s eyes. There is a Bible quote on there is a way that looks right to a man.
Click to expand...
Subjective morality means just what you said it does. Something each person defines differently. As to right or wrong, morality can be equated to law. Let me ask you this; how comfortable would you be in everyday life, if we just took down all the speed limit signs, all the traffic direction devices, all the lines on the road, and just let everyone do what they thought was right? For the good of society and mankind, morality/law must be objective and not subjective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top