Religion is good because it gives the believer an objective and absolute standard of morality

[Vivacia]

(This idea was introduced in another thread, but it felt like an unfair tangent for that thread to be taking in my humble opinion, but one I'd be interested in discussing).

Firstly, I absolutely disagree with the statement.

Secondly, I feel as an atheist I have an objective morality, if not an absolute one.

Yes there are instances of people being healed without Jesus establishing their faith. What sort of person refrains from healing a sickness in a child that they have the means to unless the parent worships them. That sounds like manipulation to me, nothing honourable.

You think someone wouldn't appreciate being healed from cancer? You think a parent wouldn't appreciate a child being healed from a fatal genetic condition?

This is all victim blaming, it's always the fault of the person with cancer, or a relative, never the infinitely powerful deity.

Guess what cancer victim? You've got cancer because you don't worship/believe God enough. He would love to help only he can't until you accept his help by believing because he's massively into free will, (unless he's drowning you or getting people to stab you, then he's not so concerned.)

I was talking about the miraculous spiritual healing, Jesus performs, documented in the Bible, head, in my last posts.

Doctors today, heal using western medicine. They use physical methods in the main. There are some complimentary psychotherapies.

Generally a patient's permission, their consent, is sought for treatment. If the patient is not deemed responsible enough (a small child for example) to give consent, the next of kin gives consent. If the next of kin is not deemed responsible enough a court order is needed to override this, to the best of my knowledge.

This medical consent is comparable to the profession of faith Jesus established / sought.

I have said, repeatedly, head, that Jesus does not apportion blame to victims of illness or their parents, the account in John 9 shows this.

For me, this is a refreshing change to the modern ideas of the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' sick. I do not like victim blaming either.

Very interesting discussion. Have been reading on and off for a few days now, trying to catch up, finally got to the end!

To go back to the thread title, I think this idea is actually one of the things that makes religion most dangerous. As others have alluded to, if you believe that your morality is an absolute and comes from God, it gives you licence to behave in what is actually by other standards a deeply immoral way. But you can justify anything you do because God wants you to do it.

Not that I'm accusing anyone on this thread of that kind of behaviour! But in history and in the present day there are so many examples of religion being used to justify oppression and persecution, and this common theme is always there. God says it must be this way and God is the absolute standard of morality, so this is right and no one can question it.

Thinking of things like the Crusades, the witch hunts, persecution of different types of Christians by others (protestants persecuting Catholics and vice versa etc), the thorny issue of homosexuality in today's Christian church, the Catholic stance on birth control, and the abuses and murders carried out in the name of Islam currently. The way the Catholic church was indivisibly linked to and complicit with the Nazis, and the holocaust. The architects of apartheid on SA and of slavery in the UK and the USA all insisted that their evil practices were sanctioned by the Bible.

I can see the temptation to hand over moral authority to a Higher Power, to a set of rules and guidelines that have already been worked out for you - life is so very challenging and confusing; there is a great deal of pain and hardship in life for so many. I find the idea of faith very attractive and I do have a kind of faith myself, though it's not one that fits in any established religion (or unestablished one!).

But I still think it's dangerous when people - especially large groups of people - go down the path of saying God tells us we must/mustn't do this, because once you accept that something is God given and absolute, there can be no challenge.

Capsium, you talk about constant self reflection and that's great, I would say that's the bedrock of my life too, and it does have a spiritual aspect although as I say, not linked to any religion in particular. But there are those who engage in self reflection and examination and constant spiritual practices, and yet still commit acts of such utter evil... I'm thinking of child abusing priests, the nuns who ran the infamous Magdalene laundries, the imams who incite murder and propogate FGM.

I'm getting a bit wooly here. There's maybe a difference between evil carried out in the name of the religion, supposedly sanctioned by and an integral part of that religion, and legitimised by the absolute moral authority of the God that religion worships, and evil carried out by hypocritical individuals or institutions in spite of the claims of the religion to be one of love and peace.

The former category is more relevant to the starting point of this discussion. If people really believe that what they are doing is what God wants them to do, and have an organised religion, or section of a religion, that will back them up, then they can justify literally any kind of horror. This is my biggest concern with any group of people who put obedience to God above a kind of basic humanity. I do respect that there are a lot of people for whom obedience to God goes hand in hand with humanity... But not all.

Having said that, it is also my experience that some of those who claim to be Humanists, and have a morality based not on any theology but on love and respect for their fellow human beings, are just as capable of hypocrisy and abuse of power as anyone else. So I think that anyone can be dangerous if they're convinced they're right and everyone who doesn't think like them is wrong!

Not sure where that leaves me as I am of course convinced I am profoundly and inalienably right. About everything.

I think it leaves me eating chocolate. Happy Easter all!

Ps sorry for thread spamming and I realise I'm wildly off where the topic has moved to now, but just had to quote this bit from the Ghanaian Christian FB page that was linked to above:

i. To describe oneself as “gay and Christian” or as “born-again gay” as some do is as deceptive as American football that is played mainly with the hand. One cannot be a Christian and also be gay and vice versa.

I know it's not the point, but really? Whoever wrote this has got a bee in their bonnet about American football? Just bizarre. And yes, homophobic.

Very telling article, basically saying what I was referring to above, that if you're following God's law you don't have to - and actively shouldn't - concern yourself with irrelevant niceties such as human rights. An ethical minefield.

No but the model you are illustrating say's that God wants to heal us but he can't unless we have sufficient faith, although he healed people who demonstrated no faith. So if someone prays for their sick child who doesn't get well then that person doesn't have enough faith.

Talking I think my post on Friday, below, relates to what you are saying:

^Add message | Report | Message poster capsium Fri 03-Apr-15 19:17:34
It is true there are different understandings and interpretations within the Christian church, Out. What is more it is also true is that Church unity should be sought, according to the Bible,^

^"5 Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus:
6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
7 Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God." (Romans 15:5-7King James Version KJV)^

Added to this, according to Christian belief, we are also called to remember our own limitations and acting in love, towards one another, is seen as the most important priority.

^"11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity." (1 Corinthians 13:11-13King James Version KJV)^

So, whilst not straightforward, Christian belief requires to us to accept we will not know everything there is to know in this life, regarding God and what is good, but to seek at all times to act in love towards one another. I like this.

So I believe things can be done in God's name which are not His will. Acting out of love (charity) is seen as the most important priority.

head there is mystery present within Christian belief. Looking at the subject from an eternal perspective, God's idea of healing might be different from ours. When Jesus appeared to His disciples, after He rose from the dead, He showed Thomas His wounds. Thomas put his hand inside them. The wounds had not completely gone. So you cannot say because a sick child did not recover, when their parents prayed for them ,that it is because the parents did not have enough faith. I would not and am not saying that.

I would not and am not saying that

"This suggests to me faith is instrumental for receiving the blessings of God. It is like any gift, a person has to acknowledge, accept it, in order to fully receive it. Otherwise is would be left there acknowledged, unused, unappreciated."

So how is that not suggesting that faith = healing, lack of faith = no healing, even though we see jesus healing people without consent in the NT

gods idea of healing might be different to ours

And God didn't realise that the reader would ascribe the meaning they had to the words in the bible, instead of gods meaning? Shouldn't he have written it in our language? So that parents of sick children couldn't be left feeling that they were preventing their child being healed? And if it takes the prayer of someone with faith to get things done, why don't we get someone who has a trail of miracles behind them, and get them to pray for every child dying of cancer?

Which bits of the NT are you referring to, head?

Just because I believe faith is instrumental in healing, does not mean if someone has not received healing, there is a lack of faith on their's or their loved one's parts. John 9, shows that Jesus is not interested in apportioning blame in this way. Added to this, I believe we as human beings are not qualified to judge another person's ability in exercising their faith, only God truly knows their hearts, according to my Christian belief.

There are people who spend a lot if time praying for others head. There are accounts of miracles. Some Roman Catholics also ask for the intercession of the Saints in this way, to the best of my knowledge.

However I suspect it would take some of sort scientific evidence, for you to believe in a miracle. Yet there can not be evidence for a miracle because it involves the supernatural ( ie. it is attributed to a force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature).

Who could ignore all the children with cancer in the world being healed? The media would go into overdrive!

cannot be evidence

A complete limb regrowing would be hard to ignore.

But how on earth are parents with children dying of cancer supposed to know which group they are in? The 'God wants to but your faith isn't good enough' or 'God just can't/won't. So cruel. It's heaping pain on pain.

head a lot of people find strength and comfort in their Chistian faith, myself included. So they do not see it as, 'heaping pain upon pain'. Would you deny them this?

The bits where people were healed without consent.

That's a really sloppy argument from popularity and does nothing to address the point I have made. Even if every christian found emotional strength in their faith it says absolutely nothing for the truth of those beliefs. Otherwise everything anyone believes in, that gives them strength, is true, like that magical purple badger in my attic that loves me. And anyway, so no christian was ever left feeling inadequate because they or their child wasn't healed?

Outwith’s Fables

This is how I feel the meeting of Jesus and the Canaanite woman might play out in modern society. I know this is not in keeping with the teachings of the Christian Church - but this is my sincere view of how matters would look to God, should he exist, and the message of universal inclusivity he would wish us to receive from him.

The Love of a Canaanite Woman 2.0

21 Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon.

22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is mentally ill and suffering terribly.”

23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”

24 He answered, “I was sent to all the lost sheep of the Earth.”

25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said. “I have no hope! I have no faith! I am here because I am desperate and willing to try anything, however little I believe in it!"

26 He replied, “My father’s table has many loaves upon it. There is bread enough for all his children. What sort of father would he be, if he reserved his assistance for those of his children who believed him capable of helping? ”

27 “Yes, thank you, Lord,” she said. “For my ailing daughter I will eat the crumbs that fall from the table, as my lack of faith makes me less deserving than the faithful.”

28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great love for your daughter and your perseverance and humility impress me! Yet, my father requires these as little as he requires faith. His love for his children is unconditional. You will sit at his table as an equal with all his children - those of faith and those without. Your request for your daughter is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.

Would I deny them this?

More emotional pleading. Is it up to me if they have it or not? I wouldn't deny people comfort, and support, but you can't deny the downside to superstition. Like the other poster who is terrified of the second coming for example. Or a person believing they have a demon in them. Or that if only they could pray hard enough God would spare their child.

It's simply real or it isn't. And to coin a phrase 'the truth shall set you free'

I am not here to argue head, 'non-sloppily' or otherwise. I am here talking about my beliefs and experiences, in order to connect with other people.

Take from this, what you will.

how matters would look to God, should he exist

We don't have any reason to think any such God exists though do we. A God who cared about inclusivity and non-discrimination would not be so utterly uninterested in the third world as we see with the yawning discrepancies in life quality.

Is it unfair for someone to point out obvious flaws in your reasonings though? As I have said before, we are both here voluntarily, we are choosing to answer each other's questions, I'm not heckling a vicar in the pulpit.

Head, as you know I'm an atheist - I was only trying to reframe the passage in question to harmonise more with modern secular morality.