Morality with God?

Is possible to be a genuinely good person when you are doing it with the expectation of an eventual reward for your goodness?

When you are trusting ancient fictions and history for the basis of your morality, are you making the most humane decisions?

Even buddhism is open to criticism as it channels energy into solitary meditation when hard work may do more for your fellow man (again, just a possible example). [/qoute]You'll have to try a lot harder than that to piss off any real buddhists!

Quote:

Finally, the reason religions survive is that they mostly follow natural human behaviour anyway. Killing was taboo long before "Thou Shalt Not Kill"

Good point. Most religions would have you believe that your human nature is somehow flawed, and that you must follow external rules, some of which may conflict with your own conscience, in order to save your soul, or whatever. That can't be healthy.

Hep, I understand what you are saying and I mostly agree. What I'm really suggesting is, that while christians generally assume that being a christian inevitably makes you a better, more moral person....that in fact the opposite may be true.

As an example, I consider it wrong to allow your child to die when a simple blood transfusion can save them. JW's have entirely the opposite opinion because of their religion....for absolutely no other reason. Examples can be found in every religion. Even buddhism is open to criticism as it channels energy into solitary meditation when hard work may do more for your fellow man (again, just a possible example).

So, from an entirely human point of view, religion MAY make you a worse person, at least in some situations, than you would otherwise be.

Yet, people ask "How can you be a good person without religion?" My response is "Can you really be a good person with religion?"

To me, you are a better person WITH religion ONLY IF all the tenets of that religion are TRUE in an absolute sense.

For example, if there really IS a god who requires me to pray facing mecca so many times a day, then I am a bad person for not doing so. If that god DOES NOT exist, or if he does but DOES NOT require me to do that, then my time would be more productively spent elsewhere.

Does that all make sense?

Finally, the reason religions survive is that they mostly follow natural human behaviour anyway. Killing was taboo long before "Thou Shalt Not Kill"

Is possible to be a genuinely good person when you are doing it with the expectation of an eventual reward for your goodness?

When you are trusting ancient fictions and history for the basis of your morality, are you making the most humane decisions?

Eorl wrote:

Is possible to be a genuinely good person when you are doing it with the expectation of an eventual reward for your goodness?

No, according to conservative Christians who believe in an inerrant Bible. There are, however, Christians who do not believe in hell or parts of the Bible that they find offensive. Just as you have Jack Mormons you may also have Jack Christians.

Erol wrote:

When you are trusting ancient fictions and history for the basis of your morality, are you making the most humane decisions?

I would say not in the case of slavery. Slavery was supported by God in the Bible and the Southerners used the Bible and its God to justify their particular institution. They believed Christians who rejected slavery were not good Christians. Kind of like today when Christians support homosexuals; they are not in line with the Bible. You can almost smell their smoking bodies.

are you making the most humane decisions?

How does a person determine if they are bad? Are there acceptable shades of bad? If you realize that you are bad .... how do you convert, assuming that good is the desired state?
In every religion that comes to mind, death is a requirement for qualification of eligibility for reward. Does this mean another life of worship to qualify for, you got it, another life of more worship?
Where is the up side?