Apparently, Now I Have Nothing To Live For?

[Cbelle]

Also, apparently I have no basis to say that the Holocaust was wrong, or that murder is wrong, or that stealing is wrong.

 

My brother-in-law, an extremely rigid and negative fundamentalist with a Church of Christ background, has told me that if I am no longer a Christian, I don't have any basis for morality. "Morality started with God. If you don't believe in God, what is the point of being a good person? And even if you are a good person, what right do you have to tell a murderer he has done something wrong?"

 

I can honestly say that I didn't have any clue how to debate with my brother-in-law on this topic. He bombarded me with these questions only a week or so after I had de-converted.

 

So, have I resigned myself to a world without morality? I hate the thought of it. I love being a good person, being kind, petting puppies and kittens, sharing what I have, etc. I think that some things, like taking another person's life, is absolutely wrong, and will forever be wrong. But when I dig really deep into my thoughts, I don't have any proof for the way I think.

 

I guess I am a little scared that I don't have any basis for morality except my own reasoning. That is OK with me, except that I cannot expect other people to view my morals as correct. Do you get what I mean? For example, who am I to say genocide is wrong, if to another person's reason, it is OK?

 

I think I'm making a mess of this. I'm sorry. I hope someone understands what I mean...

[mymistake]

Oh I can relate. I was told the same things your BIL said to you. And worse yet I believed them. Then I woke up one day and didn't have faith anymore. Wow what to do then?

 

I have found that Christians have less morality than atheists and agnostics. Now when I do something good I do it merely because I want to do good. There is no reward to earn. There is no punishment to avoid. There is no Tyrant in the sky for me to apease. If I do something good I do it because I want good to happen. Without the external motive all you have left is your own moral compass. If you continue to do good even when you believe nobody will notice then it really shows what you are made of.

 

Oh and I wouldn't bother trying to explain this to your BIL. If he can't get there on his own he probably won't get it.

[florduh]

Hello and welcome!

 

Your BIL is making what sounds like an argument, but it's nonsense. Tell him that unless he is prepared to admit there is no morality evident anywhere in the world other than among Christians, he is simply full of shit. Some of the most immoral behavior is owned by Christians (read some history and some current newspapers) and many altruistic and moral actions are done by atheists and other non-Christians every day. His assertion is not even worthy of rebuttal as it is not a reasoned argument. Casual observation of the real world clearly indicates he is way off base.

[Cbelle]

Oh I can relate. I was told the same things your BIL said to you. And worse yet I believed them. Then I woke up one day and didn't have faith anymore. Wow what to do then?

 

I have found that Christians have less morality than atheists and agnostics. Now when I do something good I do it merely because I want to do good. There is no reward to earn. There is no punishment to avoid. There is no Tyrant in the sky for me to apease. If I do something good I do it because I want good to happen. Without the external motive all you have left is your own moral compass. If you continue to do good even when you believe nobody will notice then it really shows what you are made of.

 

Oh and I wouldn't bother trying to explain this to your BIL. If he can't get there on his own he probably won't get it.

 

Thank you, mymistake. I also have noticed the things that you notice. But I have no real argument to make. I have no way to defend my belief that there is still right and wrong. It is disorienting and makes me feel like I am being irrational by holding to those beliefs.

[Cbelle]

Hello and welcome!

 

Your BIL is making what sounds like an argument, but it's nonsense. Tell him that unless he is prepared to admit there is no morality evident anywhere in the world other than among Christians, he is simply full of shit. Some of the most immoral behavior is owned by Christians (read some history and some current newspapers) and many altruistic and moral actions are done by atheists and other non-Christians every day. His assertion is not even worthy of rebuttal as it is not a reasoned argument. Casual observation of the real world clearly indicates he is way off base.

 

Thanks, I appreciate your comment! I will have to think about what you are all saying... I think you are saying that because the argument makes no sense, I don't need to worry about it? But I do really want morality to make sense to me... not for my BIL, but for myself. I want to figure things out. It's the way I work.

[Tzarza]

Hey Cbelle!

 

This is actually something I'm very excited about exploring myself. I deconverted a few months ago. My first phase was something along the lines of, "nothing matters, the world is shit." However after a few months, I came to believe that people are moral with or without religion. Religion and God actually have nothing to do with morality. Now, I feel free and excited to write my own moral code. I find that not much of my thinking has changed from what I believed as a xian. Maybe I think the xian virtue of chastity was way off base, but I have the freedom now to explore why sexuality/chastity might be

 

I think it's a little unfair (yet tactical) of your BIL to bombard you so soon after deconversion. It's a shaky time, and

[Tzarza]

Hey Cbelle!

 

This is actually something I'm very excited about exploring myself. I deconverted a few months ago. My first phase was something along the lines of, "nothing matters, the world is shit." However after a few months, I came to believe that people are moral with or without religion. I still enjoy doing what I think is good/right, and dislike things I think are wrong. Religion and God actually have nothing to do with morality. Now, I feel free and excited to write my own moral code. I find that not much of my thinking has changed from what I believed as a xian in regards to how I operate, and how I treat others. Maybe I think the xian virtue of chastity was way off base, but I have the freedom now to explore why I think what I do about sexuality/chastity, and I can make that decision without the Jesus answer being supplied right out of the gate.

 

I think it's a little unfair (yet tactical) of your BIL to bombard you so soon after deconversion. It's a shaky time. I'm actually in the middle of a conversation with a friend's father about how all of the good in the world can/can't exist without a theistic God. I'm still trying to formulate a fair question, but the first thing I disagree with is the statement/idea that morality began with God. That is something you should research and question before you decide how to answer. It's ok to say, "I don't know, but I'm thinking about it and doing some work on it." It's also ok to just say "I don't know".

 

Christianity really fed me answers, and supplied meaning for every unknown thing. Not knowing is scary at first, but I love it so much now. I can objectively consider different variables for the first time.

 

(oops, I wasn't finished)(edited)

[florduh]

We have evolved to be moral because not doing bad things to other members of the tribe helps us survive and grow as a species. It is a default state that makes evolutionary sense, like our tendency to not jump off cliffs or put our hands in the fire. It makes most people feel good to act morally, much like sex makes us feel good so we will tend to propagate.

[Eugene39]

Anyone who thinks morality comes from God has no knowledge of what the Bible says. They have to make excuses for large parts of the OT, and some things here and there in the NT. However, it's very unlikely that you'll ever win any arguments with your b-i-l, even if you provided him a list of Scriptures to look up. He'll have to figure it out for himself.

[mwc]

My brother-in-law, an extremely rigid and negative fundamentalist with a Church of Christ background, has told me that if I am no longer a Christian, I don't have any basis for morality. "Morality started with God. If you don't believe in God, what is the point of being a good person? And even if you are a good person, what right do you have to tell a murderer he has done something wrong?"

Seems to me your brother-in-law is making an airtight argument that you should kill him and it would be just fine.

 

 

 

 

mwc

[mymistake]

I think it's a little unfair (yet tactical) of your BIL to bombard you so soon after deconversion. It's a shaky time. I'm actually in the middle of a conversation with a friend's father about how all of the good in the world can/can't exist without a theistic God. I'm still trying to formulate a fair question, but the first thing I disagree with is the statement/idea that morality began with God. That is something you should research and question before you decide how to answer. It's ok to say, "I don't know, but I'm thinking about it and doing some work on it." It's also ok to just say "I don't know".

 

Christianity really fed me answers, and supplied meaning for every unknown thing. Not knowing is scary at first, but I love it so much now. I can objectively consider different variables for the first time.

 

I love this:

 

[Sheerbliss]

The book The Evolution of God says that among hunter-gatherers, gods are used to explain natural phenomena. There's no need for gods to be involved in morality since everybody knows what everybody else is up to in a small group. It's when groups grow too large for this that gods become policemen.

 

In any event, even Xtians get their morality from others around them. How many Xtians observe the sabbath, for instance?

 

You might be interested in a series called Sex, Death and the Meaning of Life. It's on Youtube.

[Thurisaz]

Cbelle,

 

1. welcome, greetings from the resident German (well at least, I guess, the most active German) of this place

 

2. if anyone's morality comes from outside then she has no morality. If one bases good and evil, right and wrong, on a book... and that book gets revised, or some "authority" suddenly decides that the book was all wrong all the time... you get it.

 

As others have said already, it's unlikely that there's any use in you trying to reason with your morontheist BIL. Hardcore morontheists' brains (ha!) operate on a different software. To the modern rational person the truth or fallacy of a claim, the reasoning behind a conclusion, is what matters. Morontheists tend to only value the authoritarian origin of any claim (does it come from the correct führer?). In that sense, at best those morontheists have the morality of their führers, and christian führers have changed what they claim their crappy book says about right and wrong quite a few times. The very least they' have to do is prove that their book is somehow more than the work of mere humans, to which I say "good luck morontheist". Given that the entire book is one huge pile of bovine fecal matter, that goal is pretty much unreachable

 

I say unfriend him, to use modern facebookish terms. Depending on how close your relationship is that may be easy or not, but seriously, I don't think there's any way for you and him to get along how that you have *cough* seen the light

[flockoff]

Hi, Cbelle. This post made out to be a bit longer than I intended, but hopefully it helps you.

 

Well, If your BiL is using this as a reason why you should believe in god again, it's not a very good one. I don't know your deconversion story by my guess would be that it was the involuntary result of reaching a conclusion, not something you just decided because you'd be better off. God exists or doesn't exist independently of which answer comes bundled with a list of rules on how to live your life. And I'm not saying you have to believe what I do, but my answer to it is basically this ...

 

Morality is just a statement of how people should live and treat others. I believe morality is subjective; it depends on the individual. Even among people with the same worldview, religion, what have you, there's always going to be some variance (not simply over what's right, but what rules are most important, etc.) Part of the reason people are scared of the notion that morality is subjective is that they misunderstand the word "subjective" to mean "meaningless." Religion and authoritarian thinking makes people believe that if you don't have the eternal, unchanging, unquestionable, indisputable truth right here right now in the simplest and clearest of terms, then your views are meaningless. As you can see, they've applied this to science as well. And instead of giving you something that actually meets their own criteria, they sell you a cock and bull story with ideas that are actually subjective on their own, and people buy into it because it appeals to their want of security.

 

But subjective morality certainly can be and is meaningful. It is worthwhile to persue and apply. That you've taken the time to build your own ideas of morality based on your experiences and the kind of world you want to live in is worth something. It's just not objective. We can say that murder, stealing, etc. is wrong, wrong, wrong till we're blue in the face, but I've yet to be convinced there's any reason to accept that it's objectively so. And that's perfectly fine with me. It does not mean that we can't feel very strongly about our morals, or have rewards and punishments for conduct regarding those morals. I'm glad that morality is something in this world that affects us, but that we can control. I find a rigid moral truth that just is because it is to be a lot scarier.

 

On things like the holocaust and genocide: Let's imagine that I'm arguing with Hitler. Hitler was a Roman Catholic who believed that what he did was objectively right in the eyes of god. According to your BiL, I wouldn't be able to tell him differently, since in my world morals are just opinions and mine are not objectively better than his. But the problem is not that I don't believe in objective morality; the problem is that Hitler does. If Hitler believed that objective moral truth exists and that furthermore he knew what that truth was, I'm not going to change his mind. Is your BiL going to change Hitler's mind because he believes in god? No. Because they each have their own idea of where god would stand on the argument, and the thing of it is, god can't be reached for comment. God isn't going to show up and tell them in an audible voice who's right and who's wrong. All they can do is speculate on what god would want and put their own ideas of god's will ahead of each other's. And now not only are you back to not being able to tell people what's right and what's wrong, but because they're convinced god is on their side, they can't be reasoned with. And, with enough zeal, will fight over it. Sadly this has been the case with religion for thousands of years.

 

I think a better world is to be had in recognizing morality as subjective. It allows problems to be solved by reasoning. Society and cultures adopt morals based on what is shown to do the most good and least harm to the most people. It's not perfect, but I certainly find it more comforting to live by morals decided on by those who follow them, for their own good, rather than morals chosen by a deity who answers to no one but himself. And it opens up a whole new discussion, but even this god's morals would be subjective.

 

Again, I'm not saying you have to believe as I do. But moral relativism is not as bleak and dangerous as it's made out to be ... quite the contrary. And of course any of this will be lost on your BiL, but I think I would ask him if he really thinks that god is his only reason for not doing bad things to people. Because I doubt that's true. It would be very sad if it were.

[Guest Babylonian Dream]

Also, apparently I have no basis to say that the Holocaust was wrong, or that murder is wrong, or that stealing is wrong.

Christians have nothing to live for, they're all on their death beds (waiting till either the end of the world or the afterlife)! A little extreme, but its a funny twisted but accurate way of looking at their "purpose of life". You live for what you want to live for, what could be better?

 

Christians have no basis to say that the Holocaust was wrong, the Bible says to kill people who follow religions that are "false religions". As for murder being wrong, and stealing being wrong, the Bible was only against Israelites stealing and murdering Israelites. It actually commands more murder and theft than it condemns it. All these would be perfect places to start if your brother inlaw tries to debate you on it.

 

My brother-in-law, an extremely rigid and negative fundamentalist with a Church of Christ background, has told me that if I am no longer a Christian, I don't have any basis for morality. "Morality started with God. If you don't believe in God, what is the point of being a good person? And even if you are a good person, what right do you have to tell a murderer he has done something wrong?"

 

I can honestly say that I didn't have any clue how to debate with my brother-in-law on this topic. He bombarded me with these questions only a week or so after I had de-converted.

According to science, or evolution, good morality forms because we're far better off living in groups than in solitude, so we have to work together for our common survival. Part of that, is working together and treating eachother good, which helps to promote unity and keeps our numbers up. In fact, Christianity does the exact opposite, it has divided people up, and made it at times harder for people to survive. Yes, there are christian charities, no doubt alot of them do good. But there are secular ones doing the same amount of good.

 

So, have I resigned myself to a world without morality? I hate the thought of it. I love being a good person, being kind, petting puppies and kittens, sharing what I have, etc. I think that some things, like taking another person's life, is absolutely wrong, and will forever be wrong. But when I dig really deep into my thoughts, I don't have any proof for the way I think.

 

I guess I am a little scared that I don't have any basis for morality except my own reasoning. That is OK with me, except that I cannot expect other people to view my morals as correct. Do you get what I mean? For example, who am I to say genocide is wrong, if to another person's reason, it is OK?

 

I think I'm making a mess of this. I'm sorry. I hope someone understands what I mean...

Nah, you've written this perfectly! I'd hope I didn't resign myself to such a world either, but I know I didn't. There is actually evidence we're all born with empathy, and empathy is what drives morals. Not religion.

 

Welcome to ex-C! You'll find yourself at home here. We've been out of the fold, some of us just left, some of us left years ago, but by and large, it doesn't seem like we've become these monsters people like your brother inlaw think we've become or will become.

[Kurari]

Morality is your sense of right and wrong, It comes from being a self-aware being. Reasoning is a great basis for morality. Take a moment to think about why you would you would not commit murder. Can you think of some consequences that would stem from that that are not based in the Divine?

 

I'm certain you can. Frankly, the very real Earthly consequences of murder are enough for me not to attempt to harm other people.

 

Personally, I don't think your brother has a very solid sense of morality. The question of "What right do you have to tell a murderer he has done something wrong?" shows a profound lack of understanding of what morality even IS. It's a very stupid, STUPID question. If he has to ask, then he's not really understanding morality. He's just parroting back what he's been told and following a rote he has put no thought into.

[Vigile]

Ironically, christian morality is one of the least moral paths a person can take in their lives. It makes no sense, follows a rigid set of rules and changes with the tide about 50 or so years after the rest of society gets their heads screwed on a bit better (e.g. slavery, civil rights, etc...)

 

Unless pissing god off by thinking bad thoughts (unquantifiable) really is somehow worse than harming your fellow human beings by denying them basic rights (quantifiable harm), such as the right to marry who they love, then your brother in law hasn't a clue what morality is.

[Llwellyn]

Humans love things that contribute to human flourishing, survival, and reproduction. That is where right and wrong come from. It is called Darwinian Ethics. Hence, humans love politics, socialization, compromise, cooperation, honesty -- all of the things that made our species successful and sexy.

 

By contrast, there are certain people out there who do not have normal human desires. For them, there is no such thing as good and evil because they lack love. A human born without love is like a human born without a limb or only one lobe of the brain. You can call them psychopaths, or moral strangers. The Christian reveals a lot about himself when the Christian says that "If you take God out of the equation, there is no such thing as right and wrong." What he reveals is that his own personality is defective. He relies on external sources for moral labels because his own affections tell him nothing.

 

The rest of us love life and love each other -- and this is enough to inform our judgment about good and evil. But when you take away the idea of "God" from a Christian, he is left unable to know anything about good and evil.

[Apostate called Jimmy]

Why, how can you possibly be a good person unless you believe in a giant, invisible, magical white man who lives in the clouds?

 

Furthermore, how can one be a good stock broker unless one believes in the Lochness monster?

 

Makes about as much sense, what the fuck does one have to do with the other?

[Raul]

[midniterider]

Also, apparently I have no basis to say that the Holocaust was wrong, or that murder is wrong, or that stealing is wrong.

 

My brother-in-law, an extremely rigid and negative fundamentalist with a Church of Christ background, has told me that if I am no longer a Christian, I don't have any basis for morality. "Morality started with God. If you don't believe in God, what is the point of being a good person? And even if you are a good person, what right do you have to tell a murderer he has done something wrong?"

 

I can honestly say that I didn't have any clue how to debate with my brother-in-law on this topic. He bombarded me with these questions only a week or so after I had de-converted.

 

So, have I resigned myself to a world without morality? I hate the thought of it. I love being a good person, being kind, petting puppies and kittens, sharing what I have, etc. I think that some things, like taking another person's life, is absolutely wrong, and will forever be wrong. But when I dig really deep into my thoughts, I don't have any proof for the way I think.

 

I guess I am a little scared that I don't have any basis for morality except my own reasoning. That is OK with me, except that I cannot expect other people to view my morals as correct. Do you get what I mean? For example, who am I to say genocide is wrong, if to another person's reason, it is OK?

 

I think I'm making a mess of this. I'm sorry. I hope someone understands what I mean...

 

So the 2.1 billion Christians are kind, moral and ethical people while the other 5 billion non-Christians are killing, burning and pillaging right this very minute? No, I dont think so. My parents taught me right from wrong without the need to be afraid of Jesus or Hell to be a good person. Let your brother know you've starting stealing candy bars from the grocery store.... just kidding. Jesus doesnt raise children. Jesus doesnt tell people when they are bad. Jesus doesnt seem to say anything at all...People get their morals from their parents or other people who raise them.

[falemon]

Hmm, every human being has various capacities. Some are simply more charitable than others, some are more territorial, some are more patient. The bible itself tries its best to impart a selection of virtues, which in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. The problem is that the bible fails to impart virtues and morals because it was written by flawed men who were just doing their best to create a new world and society (amongst goals we may never know of).

 

It sounds to me like you are exactly what you want to be, caring, empathic and I would imagine affectionate. As you continue on your journey of self discovery you may stumble across other morals and virtues you already have, might want to adopt or some you just don't care too much for because it's just not within you to do so. And unlike christianity there's no need to pretend you have qualities that you don't, because I've rarely seen christians exhibiting the fruits of the Spirit anyway, and all the people who did just happened to come from families with those virtues, so it had nothing to do with God.

[RipVanWinkle]

Morality? A Xtian says atheists have no morality> The god of the Bible is the most immoral being that could ever be conceived! How hypocritical can one be? bill

[ExCBooster]

Hoo, boy. I love these kinds of arguments.

How aggressive you get is, I suppose, a function of how much you'll have to deal with the person later. My reply to my very Christian room mate in college was: I'd rather do what's right because it's right, than because some book says so, and I'm scared of some kind of eternal punishment. Your brother's position is nakedly selfish fear, by that standard. How do you know what's right? Oddly, the "don't be an a-hole" rule seems darn near a cultural universal.

Maybe it would help, to give you something to work with, to look into selective pressure in favor of altrusim, and explore the ethics of other cultures and religions. Even among animals, such as vampire bats sharing meals, or

, being nice to others has some advantages. So, maybe you get a gut feeling that something is right to do, because you're biologically geared to help people, and socially primed as to the specifics. If you wanted to go for the kill: arguably, a vampire bat has a better basis of morality than a biblical literalist.

You're smart, courageous, and obviously compassionate. How is that not moral? Don't let anything they say get you down! Hold your head high: there is moral relativism, but plenty of proof that there's lots of common ground for all of us to stand on, from eusocial wasps to ourselves.

P.S. I found a nice documentary on Allied pilots stranded in Borneo (occupied by Japan) during WWII that illustrates the point rather well. The airplane crews were hidden among the non-Christian tribes, because they were afraid that the Christian ones would be so indoctrinated against "lying" that they'd be turned over to the Japanese. The reason the tribes joined the rebellion was moral outrage against the Japanese occupation, sparking a debate over the ethics of headhunting in wartime, rather than in properly observed ritual raids.

Definitely popcorn worthy.

The Airmen and the Headhunters.

[Voice]

Also, apparently I have no basis to say that the Holocaust was wrong, or that murder is wrong, or that stealing is wrong.

 

My brother-in-law, an extremely rigid and negative fundamentalist with a Church of Christ background, has told me that if I am no longer a Christian, I don't have any basis for morality. "Morality started with God. If you don't believe in God, what is the point of being a good person? And even if you are a good person, what right do you have to tell a murderer he has done something wrong?"

 

I can honestly say that I didn't have any clue how to debate with my brother-in-law on this topic. He bombarded me with these questions only a week or so after I had de-converted.

 

So, have I resigned myself to a world without morality? I hate the thought of it. I love being a good person, being kind, petting puppies and kittens, sharing what I have, etc. I think that some things, like taking another person's life, is absolutely wrong, and will forever be wrong. But when I dig really deep into my thoughts, I don't have any proof for the way I think.

 

I guess I am a little scared that I don't have any basis for morality except my own reasoning. That is OK with me, except that I cannot expect other people to view my morals as correct. Do you get what I mean? For example, who am I to say genocide is wrong, if to another person's reason, it is OK?

 

Your brother makes his arguments based on the premise that his christian definition of god is the only right definition. You're now in a position to explore other belief systems and discover how much more of God there is, if you choose to believe in God. Think of your brother's interpretation as a slice of a pie.

 

You will build your own systems of morality based on your experiences, on self-exploration, on voices within. He tries to invalidate these things for you. They're valid.

 

You don't have to debate with him.