Are morals derived from religion/God??

[cool_jannah]

Having good morals and good character is definitely good. But if you are doing it for anything accept for the sake of God, it won't be benifiting you in anyway. This is because your main purpose of existence is to acknowledge the Oneness of God and do every good deed for His love and for His pleasure. Having good morals and good character is a part of human nature and people can superficially claim to have a lot of morals learnt from their surroundings, their experience and so on..it is not rocket science.
As far as proper morals are concerned, the only source of it is Islam.

 

[ranma1/2]

Having good morals and good character is definitely good. But if you are doing it for anything accept for the sake of God, it won't be benifiting you in anyway. This is because your main purpose of existence is to acknowledge the Oneness of God and do every good deed for His love and for His pleasure. Having good morals and good character is a part of human nature and people can superficially claim to have a lot of morals learnt from their surroundings, their experience and so on..it is not rocket science.
As far as proper morals are concerned, the only source of it is Islam.

But what is good morals? Are there bad morals? Like i said earlier i find the word moral to be a pretty useless word. If we want to describe a action as beign good or bad it seems much easier and less vague. And what are proper morals?

I personally can easily see myself performing more good actionsl than many islams, christians, atheists, agnostics etc.. as i can see many other islams, christians, atheists etc.. being better at it than me.

And personally speaking i see more "goodness" in an action thatis done selflessly than an action done selfishly. So if you are doing good deeds to go to heaven and another person is doing good deeds selflessly i trust that person much more to do right.

 

[Trumble]

Having good morals and good character is definitely good. But if you are doing it for anything accept for the sake of God, it won't be benifiting you in anyway. This is because your main purpose of existence is to acknowledge the Oneness of God and do every good deed for His love and for His pleasure.

Moral conduct has a very definite purpose outside any religious framework because it benefits the whole community, and makes everybody's life better. Those lives are still made better whether the conduct concerned is "for His love and for His pleasure" or not. If you make the lives of others better, cause and effect dictates that your own existence will also be enrichened.

I find the idea that good conduct somehow counts for nothing unless it is performed "for the sake of God" (whatever that means) utterly bizarre.

 

[Pygoscelis]

is there any official declaration from Churches ? Pl. write more about ur claim that Christians reject those parts of Bible .

No. There really isn't. I wish that there was. In fact I wish more Christians would actually read their bibles and realize just how horrible much of the book is, and get rid of those parts - keeping only the parts they actually follow and agree with today.

Such a revision may avert future reliance on the nasty bits in the book that HAVE been relied on in the past (stoning people, burning witches, the inquisition, etc) and MAY be again in the future if the book remains as it is and the Christians still hold it as their holy book. Such revision may save a lot of lives.

 

[Pygoscelis]

I find the idea that good conduct somehow counts for nothing unless it is performed "for the sake of God" (whatever that means) utterly bizarre.

I find it the antithesis of morality. Doing something because somebody (including God) demands it of you is obedience, not morality. Morality is doing something because it is the right thing to do.

 

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace ,

Morality is doing something because it is the right thing to do.

how to decide which is the right thing to do ? Is it ok for a step son to have an affair with step mother ? In another forum , an atheist says something like that if they really love each other , then it's ok.

Any believer will say , NO. I guess , answers from Athiests will differ as they don't have any fixed criteria.

 

[aamirsaab]

I find it the antithesis of morality. Doing something because somebody (including God) demands it of you is obedience, not morality.

It is possible to be both moral and obedient. I mean, just look at me!

Morality is doing something because it is the right thing to do.

As long as the action is morally correct (as opposed to 'good' and/or 'bad'*), then yes I agree completely with your statement.


* these two terms I had already discussed in previous posts. Concluded that it was a matter of perception which is not the same as morality.

 

[cool_jannah]

Most of the misunderstanding here is caused due to the untrustworthiness and disbelief in a truthful,peaceful,merciful and just Creator. The point was raised by one of the athiest is that good morals hsould be practiced not because it is a command from God, but it is "good" in general to the people. I find this idea utterly dim-witted and senseless. Because the true morality and ethics can only be learnt from the Creator of human beings and since it is coming from One source, it will be uniform uniting people as one one brotherhood.
It all boils down to whether human interpretation of life and its various aspects is more reliable or the One True God's who created these human beings. It is evident not just in theory but in practice when we look it the life of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and his noble companions. These lives were the examples of true morality and justice with no parallel to them ever in the history or in the future.

 

[ranma1/2]

... Any believer will say , NO...its just not based off of theistic religions.​

 

[zoro]

Infants to toddlers learn right vs. wrong (viz., morality) and consequences of their choices from their parents (or other care givers); children learn more about morality and consequences from their culture, including their clerics; teenagers learn still more from their peers and their idols; adults learn still more from considering concepts and evaluating experiences, thereby assigning a value to any act (e.g., from minus ten to plus ten) as a measure of its morality.

Any value, however, has meaning only with respect to some objective. Those of us who identify our prime goals to be own survival and the survival of our families (which for humanists includes all humanity – or even all life) measure moral values relative to those goals. Meanwhile, those (religionists) whose prime goal is gaining “eternal life”, measure moral values with respect to that goal.

For humanists, therefore, the highest moral value (a plus ten on a scale from minus ten to plus ten) is to EVALUATE; for religionists, on the other hand, the highest moral value is to OBEY (i.e., to serve their god as specified in their “holy book”), which in practical terms means obeying their clerics. In my view, that some grownups (not yet adults) still rely on clerics to define right and wrong and alleged consequences (e.g., heaven vs. hell) is sad – as could be demonstrated with many examples.

 

[Sunnih]

Infants to toddlers learn right vs. wrong (viz., morality) and consequences of their choices from their parents (or other care givers); children learn more about morality and consequences from their culture, including their clerics; teenagers learn still more from their peers and their idols; adults learn still more from considering concepts and evaluating experiences, thereby assigning a value to any act (e.g., from minus ten to plus ten) as a measure of its morality.

Any value, however, has meaning only with respect to some objective. Those of us who identify our prime goals to be own survival and the survival of our families (which for humanists includes all humanity – or even all life) measure moral values relative to those goals. Meanwhile, those (religionists) whose prime goal is gaining “eternal life”, measure moral values with respect to that goal.

For humanists, therefore, the highest moral value (a plus ten on a scale from minus ten to plus ten) is to EVALUATE; for religionists, on the other hand, the highest moral value is to OBEY (i.e., to serve their god as specified in their “holy book”), which in practical terms means obeying their clerics. In my view, that some grownups (not yet adults) still rely on clerics to define right and wrong and alleged consequences (e.g., heaven vs. hell) is sad – as could be demonstrated with many examples.

So much talk about the "horrible things" that the religions offer and about the "broadmindedness" and "modernity" of the non religions option. How amazing that for at least one century (a little less) the world has had no religious control and the "human laws" derived from humans and not based on any religious laws have governed the west at least. Well, gues what. It is a mess. So to all you that shout so much against religions: What have you achieved? What have you brought to humanity as a whole? What did you do to make peoples life better? What has come out (and what is comming) from these new age generation? What have you got to offer?

 

[Keltoi]

So much talk about the "horrible things" that the religions offer and about the "broadmindedness" and "modernity" of the non religions option. How amazing that for at least one century (a little less) the world has had no religious control and the "human laws" derived from humans and not based on any religious laws have governed the west at least. Well, gues what. It is a mess. So to all you that shout so much against religions: What have you achieved? What have you brought to humanity as a whole? What did you do to make peoples life better? What has come out (and what is comming) from these new age generation? What have you got to offer?

I'm not an athiest, but I am a secularist, and I think the contribution of secular society and government are fairly profound. No form of society is perfect, but the advances in medicine, science, technology, etc are greatly connected with the rise of secularism in the West. Secularism meaning the rise of capitalism and free market economies, that are obviously not related to religious teaching. There have been many benefits of secularism to the average person, but there has also been a decline in traditional values in general. Like I said, nothing is perfect, but secularism has been far more beneficial than the chain of religious conflict that goes with theocracy and religious fundamentalism.

 

[aamirsaab]

Infants to toddlers learn right vs. wrong (viz., morality) and consequences of their choices from their parents (or other care givers); children learn more about morality and consequences from their culture, including their clerics; teenagers learn still more from their peers and their idols; adults learn still more from considering concepts and evaluating experiences, thereby assigning a value to any act (e.g., from minus ten to plus ten) as a measure of its morality.

Any value, however, has meaning only with respect to some objective. Those of us who identify our prime goals to be own survival and the survival of our families (which for humanists includes all humanity – or even all life) measure moral values relative to those goals. Meanwhile, those (religionists) whose prime goal is gaining “eternal life”, measure moral values with respect to that goal.

For humanists, therefore, the highest moral value (a plus ten on a scale from minus ten to plus ten) is to EVALUATE; for religionists, on the other hand, the highest moral value is to OBEY (i.e., to serve their god as specified in their “holy book”), which in practical terms means obeying their clerics. In my view, that some grownups (not yet adults) still rely on clerics to define right and wrong and alleged consequences (e.g., heaven vs. hell) is sad – as could be demonstrated with many examples.

That's pretty much all I had left to say on the topic .

 

[Sunnih]

I'm not an athiest, but I am a secularist, and I think the contribution of secular society and government are fairly profound. No form of society is perfect, but the advances in medicine, science, technology, etc are greatly connected with the rise of secularism in the West. Secularism meaning the rise of capitalism and free market economies, that are obviously not related to religious teaching. There have been many benefits of secularism to the average person, but there has also been a decline in traditional values in general. Like I said, nothing is perfect, but secularism has been far more beneficial than the chain of religious conflict that goes with theocracy and religious fundamentalism.

What a load of nonsense. What contributions:these societies are crumbling. As for the science, medicine, technology they had to happen and don't forget the foundations had been laid down from before during the religious rule. Ah, sorry I forgot. For the Christians indeed it is new as they did hang the scientists in thousands. As for market economies, well they are thriving and blooming in the blood of the cheap labour of the third world countries. The mortgages ensure the new type of slavery. Do you know the meaning of the word mortgage and where it derives from? Ah, yes and indeed the secular systems are indeed thinking about Africa and it's deseases. Great achivements indeed.

 

[Keltoi]

What a load of nonsense. What contributions:these societies are crumbling. As for the science, medicine, technology they had to happen and don't forget the foundations had been laid down from before during the religious rule. Ah, sorry I forgot. For the Christians indeed it is new as they did hang the scientists in thousands. As for market economies, well they are thriving and blooming in the blood of the cheap labour of the third world countries. The mortgages ensure the new type of slavery. Do you know the meaning of the word mortgage and where it derives from? Ah, yes and indeed the secular systems are indeed thinking about Africa and it's deseases. Great achivements indeed.

Secular societies are crumbling? That is news to me. I suppose that is why so many people all around the world want to live there?

 

[Sunnih]

Secular societies are crumbling? That is news to me. I suppose that is why so many people all around the world want to live there?

You will realise it when it falls on your head. Living there? Beter to live in a toilet than in a land mine. The bombs and mines of democracy are aboundant. Even the west is tasting it in the form of friendly fire. :thumbs_up

 

[Keltoi]

You will realise it when it falls on your head. Living there? Beter to live in a toilet than in a land mine. The bombs and mines of democracy are aboundant. Even the west is tasting it in the form of friendly fire. :thumbs_up

Sorry, but that made about as much sense as winged elephant.

 

[Sunnih]

Sorry, but that made about as much sense as winged elephant.

By the time you will realise it, the pigs would fly. Bye now.

 

[wilberhum]

Secular societies are crumbling? That is news to me. I suppose that is why so many people all around the world want to live there?

The sky is falling, the sky is falling. Keltoi, we better find a place to hide.

 

[Sunnih]

The sky is falling, the sky is falling. Keltoi, we better find a place to hide.

You can run but you can't hide. Good luck and good night:thumbs_up