Is God the source of morality?

Well in modern man there is the don't steal and don't murder. But in reality even these are fuzzy. There have been several societies that view theft as a gray area, and many that even consider murder a gray area. So really I think morality is a shifting thing that alters itself with the times.

Theft can be a grey area at certain point. Say, a woman who is too poor that if she does not steal then she would die. I would say theft in such condition is ok, because her right to life trumps over the rich man's right to private property. But if the rich guy is stealing/exploiting money from the poor woman I wonder what kind of society would say it's grey. I think every society would say it's not at all a virtue. By the way, even to say that a particular action is grey, I think we need a moral standard to judge. Only when we judge on the basis of some moral standard can we then say that a particular action is grey or white or black. The world has seen so many cases of rape. And even if few people, the rapists, say rape is ok the other people will say rape is immoral. And I think we all ought to say rape is immoral. I think it would be a mistake to say rape is grey. So I see some aspect of moral teaching as evolving, but I don't think every aspect of morality is changing or should change. Anyway, thanks for the discussion.

I also think that morality is 'hardwired' in our system. It is something we cannot shake of. And I think human being, therefore, cannot be free from guilt completely. And I would see God as the source of that. Because from purely naturalistic phenomena morality to have evolved I find it little hard to believe. And so I would say that God is the source of it. But having said that I think we then need to go a further step in identifying the 'giver' of that moral nature. And so as I examine the religious systems I found the God of the Bible to be most believable one. You may disagree with me here. What do you think are those basic guidelines everyone agrees? Something which has never changed over time... or would you say that all guidelines or moral law have changed over time?

So it is some kind of evolutionary convergence!!! Oh, I wonder if it is true to say that God is the creation of human thought. There have been people who say like that, but I really find it hard to believe. Can you elaborate you arguement little more? Anyway, thanks for the response.

Well, it all comes down to if you believe in God as a real God, or if you think God is a human creation. There is no evidence at all that God exist ouside the human mind

well, if we push the logic of your argument further we may as well say that the universe is all there is. There is no transcendent reality. Would you say that? Also I see that if morality is our creation, and not given, then the one who is in power defines what it right and what is wrong. So we cannot really argue that morality is objective, which means that morality is relative. Is that what you would say?

Well, the story of Cain murdering Able is a good example to show that human being is not all perfect. And that was a point the author of Genesis wanted to convey. I think most religious adherents would say that they do what their 'God' told them to do, not because they are fearful of him , but because they honour him. However, your point is well taken. By the way, outside of religious ideas or outside of appeal to a higher law how would you derive moral laws for the international community? Thanks.

Eehh... I would not like to think so badly of those religious guys. After all there are lot of good guys too. Regards, headhunter525

Hi again headhunter, A very interesting question, and one that I'm not sure that I can answer adequately. We are different from others in the animal kingdom, in that we can think and make decisions. We should be able to figure our that which would be best for everyone. I know we still haven't done that, even today or there wouldn't be wars. In regard to the other part of your comment, I believe that the idea of a devil and hell were invented by religious leaders to instill fear in people, so that they would be more willing to follow what they were told. It isn't working as well today because people are starting to think for themselves, hence the decline of religion. Blessings.

No defence for those priests:-) but regarding the other point where you said each individual must define for themselves don't you think it amounts to a situation where a murderer's choice is as valid as someone who loves. Someone may murder to become rich whereas someone may give and share his riches with the poor. And if each chooses then both the choices are equally valid. But that is a dangerous philosophy. Because in such situation virtue will no longer be there, crime also will no longer be there. I see human being killing each other in that kind of situation. Might then will define what is right!