Morality without God is impossible

You don't have to 'contend' that, it's an observable fact - humans have the evolved traits of consciousness and empathy which promote beneficial group behaviours. It's got sod all to do with religion - they exist no matter what you believe or who you pray to.

Hi Tangle, If we have evolved to the point we have a conscious, why doesn't everyone have one?There are people who will stop at nothing to get their way or what they want.

Hi Percy, Did the leprechauns you talking about create the universe and everything in it. Including humans in his image and likeness and make all the promises God made. If so yes I would meet him and spend eternity with him.If God exists He created you in His image and since he is an eternal being so are you. And you will meet Him one day when you die. If He does not exist you don't have anything to worry about. But you are entitled to believe whatever you choose to believe.God Bless,
​

I don't think you understand what he is saying.

Unless you're a psychopath - which we consider to be a mental disorder - we are all conscious and have empathy and a conscience.But we also have all the other less lovely characteristics of human behaviours which are also evolved traits that were necessary for survival, mostly based around the need to compete for food and mates and to not become food ourselves. .Our later evolved ability to reason controls both sets of emotions - one way or another, sometimes for good sometimes not. Our secular laws and punishments for breaking them just about keep our baser instincts in check and allows society to civilise. It's a long-term, developmental process with lots of backward steps, precisely the opposite of something that was designed.

The analogy was between God and leprechauns, which are imaginary creatures. I guess you can imagine anything you like about either one, like that leprechauns or God created the universe and everything in it, including humans. You let us know when you meet either one, and especially how eternity is going. And you know this how? I worry about anything that doesn't exist to about the same extent. I choose to believe that which is based upon evidence.Leprechauns Bless.--Percy

Hi Percy, We talk every day. If you did you would not believe in the BBT as it has no source for the material to build the universe. The theory is based on assumptions according to Stephen Hawking.It has to be assumed that the universe was contained in a very small ultra-compact, super-dense state at a finite time in the past that began to expand. There is no thing outside of the universe as it is self-contained.If there is no existence outside of that little speck of a universe where did it come from?You come up with a way that little super-dense speck could begin to exist in non existence. When you do that you can tell me what you believe is based on evidence and I will believe you.Same thing goes for evolution. You come up with a way no life form can produce a life form and that would be evidence. Life had to come from somewhere.You are in the same boat that I am, you think I believe in an imaginary God.
I think you believe in imaginary evidence. Which is based on assumptions.God Bless,

Please explain this.

Unverifiable bullshit

And you know this how?Leprechauns Bless--Percy

It is a strawman of, "believers". I have never argued it and don't know any believers that do and I am around a lot of them in terms of the debate so I don't think my comment being anecdotal is as important as usual.What I have argued is that it seems like there is no precedent to argue anything morally if you are an evolutionist that doesn't believe God exists. All arguments for morals would just represent relative opinions.In this sense there is nothing quite as absurd as a politically correct Godless liberal like say Stephen Fry, SHOUTING at our God, "How dare you", in regards to the ills of the worlds.In other words, even though you are very self-righteous, you are basically a hypocrite for not believing in the implications of your own theory that tell us we are an accident.Under this scenario all moral systems are equal so why do you imply there is one morality that one can know without God?Why would that one morality follow under accidentalism?Yet it is also obvious that if God's morality is the only true morality then it follows that "morality without God" is not really morality, but is a whole STEW of desires, self-deception, misplaced sense of pity or emoting.Also when judging God this can only ever be logically absurd because God is an omniscient being. You can't be more correct than correctness itself. God is correct at all times, about all things, PERIOD. Whereas when we point the finger at God we do so from limited minds and we perform the bodge job mistake of anthropopathism and anthropomorphism.The bible makes some unequivocal comments about God's understanding compared to ours. It always LINKS the futility of the human mind with a rejection of the obvious creation. Especially in Romans where it says, "their foolish hearts were darkened" because you know God is there but won't give Him the credit of being there in your, "wilful ignorance" of the miraculous creation before you.CONCLUSION; As an atheist you can be, "moral" in the sense that some of your behaviours will OVERLAP with what is righteous. The problem is you have a sin nature which also will argue that sin is "moral". In other words, your morality can only really represent you as an individual with all of your various tastes and foibles. It can't be true morality in that you have to be a perfectly moral being. I will only follow a perfectly moral being, and that was Jesus Christ. As for you, you clearly in your prejudice towards people like me and all the things you say to me for no apparent reason other than hatred, are not a moral being but a sinner that tells himself he is so as to comfort his conscience. Why then if you are so moral, are you so hostile towards me when I have not been hostile towards you nor even personal. I make my arguments about the arguments and issues themselves, you make them about hating on me personally.I see no morality in you, atheist.

What are you doing here Mike?You have no interest in sticking around and having an honest discussion. You'll post five or ten times then flutter off claiming victory. You are a repeat offender. You've re-opened a 3 year old thread. Why should I even consider responding to you?Are you prepared to commit to a real, discussion Mike? One where you don't run away after half a dozen posts?

Yet it is religious beliefs in which we find the greater display of fractured opinions. Human morality, by and large, remains fairly consistent everywhere: it is humane at its core.In contrast, a thousand prophets each claim only their God is absolute, and their God requires an arcane suite of rules and behaviors, some of them cruel, many mutually contradictory.We require no absolutes to be moral beings; we need only be seeking the good. We won't formulate perfect moral codes or perfectly follow the ones we devise. Still, our morality will be more grounded than what we get pulling one God out of a thousand hats.

Hi Percy, He answers me.God Bless,

Please elaborate.