Fortunately for the world, science has successfully undermined the simpleminded religions - the Abrahamic cults, mainly Christianity and Islam.

Christianity and Islam have had a good 2000 year run preying on ignorance and the ignorant. This ended for Christianity in Europe with the development of science. It is now looking for the ignorant and uneducated in Africa and South America.

Islam - a strange combination of ignorance and intolerance - has been picking the lowest lying fruit for a 1000 years as apparent in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Now is the time for science, logic, and deeper & truer spirituality - not supremacist, intolerant cults like Christianity and Islam that proselytize and force their views on others. This results in conflict, violence, and suffering.

Now is the time for Vedanta & Hinduism. After 1000 years of anti-Hindu propaganda, many are not prepared to hear the wisdom or absorb the deep & complex monistic philosophy which is consistent with science. Now is a good time to start; at least some will benefit.

A new age of rational spirituality is again arriving, and Hinduism and Vedanta will lead the way again.

Freestinker wrote:
OK. So even a Christian can be good without god ... just not saved?
That's exactly my point!
--------------------------------
No, you still do not understand, but perhaps it is because you didn't read my previous post. That is understandable. There is a transformational change that takes place when you confront God and realize that you are not Him, repent of your sins, and allow Christ to reign in your soul. This transformation has changed many truly reprehensible beings (John Newton comes to mind) into models of charity and compassion, and made seemingly good people (Mother Teresa) into paragons of virtue. Both would give the honor to Christ.

"Anyone with a good grounding in biology knows that social behavior is hard-wired into the species."

Welcome to the science version of the dilemma of the omniscient god. If behavior is hard wired, then free will is dead.

This Newsweeks On-Faith blog; made -up of Pre-Apocalyptic Jealous [Plagerizing Thieves of Other Peoples Essays etc..] had again Stolen ME STORY (allow to Post; Then if Novel then Delete/Purge in order to Steal Intellectual Property from i [WE] Us APOCALYPTAR-ion Nationals Al over!

Example: On "Guest Voices" via MiTCH ALBOMs imaginary, "Faith Is a True Story"; Book ; that in responce i [WE] posted: [But Deleted in less than 45 Minutes] This:

"Dear Brethren [Sisstar's Too] R.L. KiLLMER et al: [Prison] "Corporal Punishment" is not same as War-Fa(i)re
Punishmnet!

Note: The Friend of [OUR] me enemy is me [our] enemy ....

Note: "Keep Ye frienly's close; but buy Ye Enemies (in Biz Suits or Religious Clothing) even Closer"

-- Said by some Asian Chinese General long ago!

POSTED BY: ONWAPO | OCTOBER 30, 2009 1:35 PM" and Unjustly Deleted soon after.?

--- And [JEALOUSLY Deleted in order to PLAGERIZE +]

oooppppsssa

Civilian Prison] "Corporal Punishment" is not same as War-Fa(i)re Punishmnet!

Pleazzzza. Take-up "R.O.T.C." Training. Please see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_Officers'_Training_Corps

Brethrens, Sisstars: During WAR?, there's no such thing as MR./Ms. Nice Guy!

One has too play the game Cold; NO HOPES & NO-FEARS; ; like playing the 'Stock-Markets (Bourses) in order TO-WiNN! To WiNN! To "S-U-R-V-i-V-E"; no turning cheeks
around during War-Time (not Peace Time)!!!! And

Sometimes; ANY GAME Must GO! Else G-D help YOU!

Not US; The SECULAR-Strong,aka APOCALYPTAR-iON's. Not The RELIGiOUS-SuperStupidStitious Weak!, aka the PREAOCALYPTARYAN's].

Hint: Better THEM, Than US!

POSTED BY: ONWAPO | OCTOBER 30, 2009 1:45 PM. But But Jealpously Deleted by Author & or NEWS CORP. et al!???

Douginmoz wrote: "This is a common misunderstanding mixing Biblical Christianity with other faiths. Christians do not act good in order to earn their way to heaven or to avoid hell. Our acts do not save us, as Paul says, "so that no one can boast." In accepting Christ's nature, we are already saved. The subsequent acts of service are in gratitude for salvation, not to earn it. It is a way to say "Thank You" to God. Of course, God needs nothing from us. What can we possibly give Him in return? That is why Jesus great commandment (singular) had an attachment - "Love God with your whole (being)... and love your neighbor..." What we can't give to God, we pay forward to those in need."

------------

OK. So even a Christian can be good without god ... just not saved?

That's exactly my point!

Of course people can be good without the punitive manipulation of Abrahamic religions. God is in us all. People spend time hunting for God when He is in them all the time.

I like the Toultec tale of the god Brahmin who had everything but was very lonely. He created the goddess Maya who said Brahmin would be happy if he did as she said and created what she wanted him to create. After that, she cut him up into millions of pieces and put a piece into each human and told Brahmin to go find himself.

Perhaps a better question is can people be tolerant, inclusionary and respect diversity while being fanatically religious? When you can find that piece of God in your enemy or in those you judge and condemn, maybe you'll be on your way.

The author asks:

"First, can people be good, in the moral and ethical sense, without being grounded in some kind of faith in some kind of being or animating belief which is greater than they are?"

Yes, they can. I know many people who do this.

This question pertains to a matter of fact, not opinion. The author responded "no" but he is incorrect. You cannot just wave your hand and pretend that morally good atheists do not exist.

The author muddies the issue by adding:

"It's clear to me that the answer to the first question, is no, but that in which someone believes may be far different from the standard personal 'Guy-In-The-Sky' which many people think of when talking about God."

Many morally good people say they do not believe in any form of God. Not Guy-in-the-sky, animating principle, clockwork deity or any other kind, period. Unless the author can show that he knows their minds better than they themselves do, he has no case.

Freestinker wrote:
Do you think that being good for goodness sake is ethically superior to being good in exchange for some personal reward like eternal life or to avoid a harsh punishment like going to hell?
&
Aussiebarry wrote:
only non religious people can be good for goodness sake alone, for religious folk, it is always quid pro quo
----------------------------
This is a common misunderstanding mixing Biblical Christianity with other faiths. Christians do not act good in order to earn their way to heaven or to avoid hell. Our acts do not save us, as Paul says, "so that no one can boast." In accepting Christ's nature, we are already saved. The subsequent acts of service are in gratitude for salvation, not to earn it. It is a way to say "Thank You" to God. Of course, God needs nothing from us. What can we possibly give Him in return? That is why Jesus great commandment (singular) had an attachment - "Love God with your whole (being)... and love your neighbor..." What we can't give to God, we pay forward to those in need.

Raised Catholic as a child, I was for the most part a model student, altar boy, and boy scout; a fact that many of my friends said was just three strikes against me. By the time, I reached college, I had succumbed to the anti-intellectual arguments of college professors that are often repeated here, and walked away from faith in God. In spite of this, I still had a sterling reputation, was called "the white knight" by friends, and when we played "Scruples" everyone always knew that I would take the high road. I was a faithful husband, a good father, and a teacher by profession. I gave to charity, never had a problem with a neighbor, voted in every election, accepted jury duty, and outside of a traffic ticket or two had no offenses with the law. A Christian friend once said of me, "It is a shame that you aren't a Christian because you would make a good one." I took great pride in that statement - and pride was only the first of my sins.

For the truth of the matter is that when the Holy Spirit grabs hold of you, you see yourself for who you really are; and I had to deal with the fact that in hidden parts of my nature, I was a liar, a thief and cheat, full of both lust and pride and selfishness for my own desires. Even if I didn't act on those desires; in my heart, I still wanted to do so.

I returned to Christ and let His standard be my mark. Now I am a missionary for the poor in Africa. I make far less than even my teacher's salary, but give far more to charity. Instead of a nice home and a hot tub, I am more concerned with coaxing my fellow Christians to help create orphanages or to dig wells for communities without water, or buy mosquito nets for villages prone to malaria. I don't say this to brag; but only to show the difference between my self nature and the nature of Christ's Spirit in me. This is, of course, anecdotal; and perhaps there are some out there that can claim similar stories without God as the foundation of a nature being sanctified. I only know that the difference for me was when I gave my life back to Christ.

Article Title: Goodness must be grounded in faith in something greater _______________________________________________

Goodness is not grounded in any sort of faith. It is a DNA-based impulse we humans, and every other living entity, possess. For us, good behavior is that which forwards species survival. Bad behavior is that which diminishes our odds.

Anyone with a good grounding in biology knows that social behavior is hard-wired into the species. "Goodness" is usually a catch-all description of behaviors which signify "plays well with others", a trait important to social animals. (If you want simple evidence, note the behavior of your canine or feline friends as they go through their life cycles; they don't seriously misbehave unless mistreated, without an ounce of belief thrown in). Aristotle also made this same point in his Nicomachaean Ethics, that virtuous behavior is learned and therefore parents must instill it at an early age; the implication being that reason has nothing to do with conditioned behavior.

As with so many things, science has the answers, but many don't want to hear them because it spoils their conditioned views of religion in a human-centric universe...

Ooooppss. That post was meant for Hir EPESTEIN et al:

Dear Rabbi? Greg M. Epstein & Co; Welcome To REALITY!

When Ye read our "O.U.R." New Book, published in SAMIZDAT Edition Due April.03.2010, called "The Bible Of The Future" & The RELIGION of Everything..." that Ye, Faculty & the Worlds Leaderships will never ever be PRE-APOCALYPTIC insane thinkers again! Note: O.U.R. = O.ne U.niversal R.eligion. aka SINGULARiTY of religion/belief/faith, not PLURALITY of (as if WE [i] must submit falsley to Tolerate someone elsesgodly JEALOUS based man-made Systems). This is our O.U.R. Goal!

Hint: WE [i] , aka "Automatic Citizens/Denizens of S.pace S.hip Earth(S), aka New-APOCALYPTARIAN National, art each "STUDENTS FOREVER OF SOURCE-ONE" and "WE NEVER GRADUATE!" So How about Ye?

Note: There's a Night & Day Difference between a PRE-ApocalyptAryan "HUMANiST"a/o and a APOCALYPTAR-ion "HUe{MATE" thinker.

ANOLOGY: Remember Greg; "GOOD"nes quality, is an inherit but also an innate Consciousness Property of Man/Wom. And awareness, can be seen as being the STATiC-electricity part of G-D , where G-D can be seen as being the ELECTRiC CURRENT part of the HOLYiSM Phenomona-On. Soo

This "PROVES": that GOOD (being the STATIC Part of ONE) is always inseperable from the Parent (Electric CURRENT) and therefore can have "BAD" potential (Hidden/Lurking Component like) when Excited by Mental Forces or Eternal Forces! i.e., LIGHTENING rod (is thin as a Pencil) yet BAD & Deadly when excited after Escaping its main body, Electric Current/SOUL of! You want more "PROOF" that GOODness is inseperable from one's WHOLEiness?? O.K.,

Take the "R" part/component of our O.U.R. "R"-i-S-(E)-P-M-G" philosophy&song. Where innate/Natural letter "R" = RELIGION (no Name; but surely Not a HE nor a SHE). This is Seperate , yet Equal to "i" (Intellectual/Individual) + "S" (Society at Large) + "E" (evolving vis avis Economy) and on the other side of our Equation Yet Inseperable too is "P" (POlitical Machine) + "M" (Military Complex) + "G" (Government). So

WE [i] "R-i-S-E" or (FALL?) via the "P-M-G"! Ye see? Ye See? Oye Vayzmeer!

Dear Brethren Hirschfeild & CO.,

It seems that the Bald-Headed guy from HARVARDS Chaplains Team, Sir Greg M EPSTEIN hath Freudiantly Slippeth and saith, "But this is not the time to debate the question, "can we be good without god?" And frankly, I am disappointed in Rabbi Hirschfield for his assertion that we can't be. [Good w/out god]" So,

Note: Observe [G-D Players] Greg EPSTEIN's acute state of mind having "Double/Triple Standards Psychosis" & a bout of "Religious Jealousy Psychosis" etc.. You See; There are three ways to spell "GOD" or "G-D" or "god" of whom WE [i] art un-seperateable from. There is the Jealous G-D, and there is the Money god and ther's a GOOD god(s) suddenly turned EVIL GOD! So the Question is ; WHICH GOD, god, G-D is the one residing IN & OUT of US ALL?

PS: It was the Jealousy of Epstein & CO., at HARVARD's HUMANIST 'Chaplain" whom Hijacked Alot of our O.U.R. APOCALYPTIC Philosophys, ideas etc.. includes plagerizing our 'Creative' Writing for themselves and had a POW WOW, with Episcopilian turned CATHOHOLIC, TONY BLAIR into conspiring with Harvards Theologians Dep't to Capitalize off others peoples Movement!

Note again: Mr. Epstein, the so called "HUMANIST" (Whatever that means?) fails to recognize that "G-D", aka "IT" (not a HE nor a SHE) is Innate & therefore unseperatable.

COMMENTARY: If GREG inadvertly or Unjustifiably Killed another Human (Not Us HUe{MATEs); this [Behavior/Act like ABEL slews Cain) "PROVES" that one has LEFT or Jumped away , seperated (for a split second/moments) from their own sane "Innate but GOOD, Hailo, essence, Soul. Yet

Once One Sees or Discovers what HE/SHE hath done themsleves [NOT G-D] then to contemplate in Logic the matter at hand is one thing; but to MEDITATE ('listening' to Ye innate G-D within; unlike PRAYING which is to 'Talk' to G-D out))on rectifying/Correcting, if any such a "SIN" (BAD} is another.

Fact: On an individual MEMEtic bases, Each of US have a relationship with "IT" {not a HE nor a SHE as G-D) and when i [not WE, in this case] each do the Bio-Finite "POOF-TiME" agonna that in ye TRANS{FINITY Ye art ALL Alone again. In Essence, Only G-D can Help Ye! THEREFORE:

Don't loose Ye Templars; Justly "TRY" Try to Be-Good, Think-good, Do-Good, Say-Good! doing the MITZVAH [EMPATHY] is KOSHER, & no-Mitzvah [APATHY] is not Hallal. PS: Some Acts are UN-FORGIVENABLE!

"Goodness must be grounded in faith in something greater"

Oh, really?

What does "faith" have to do with "goodness"?:

FAITH, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.

-Ambrose Bierce's DICTIONARY (1911)

I agree with WMARKW, but would like to throw in this caveat: the question 'What is good?' must always be understood as 'What is good for whom (or what)?' Serving a chicken dinner to a starving person is doing good, but not to the chicken. The spread of Christianity through Scandinavia may seem to many to have been good, but not to the pagans who worshiped dear old dad. Even if one could cure of all human diseases (seems like a 'good' thing), one still needs to weigh that in the light of the result: increases in the human population which would certainly not be good for animal populations, and may lead to further human suffering in future generations.

Atheist Pat Tillman walked away from a multi-million dollar salary in the NFL to put his life on the line for his country. I know of no god-fearing, believing, religious player in the NFL--or any other pro sports league--who did the same.

We see plenty of pro and college football players thanking Jesus for their touchdown, and plenty of pro and college baseball players thanking Jesus for their home run, and some with Biblical citations painted on their faces. They are all old enough to enlist.

How many of them answered their religion-grounded morals and ethics and followed Pat Tillman? None.

Actions speak louder than words.

I think that Jesus said it all in the fifth chapter of Matthew. The first 12 verses are known as The Beatitudes. The word, beatitude, means to be happy or blessed.

Jesus goes on and outlines how we should live our lives and how we should treat others. This chapter is a MUST read. Jesus finishes the chapter with the following statements:

Matthew 5:43-48 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

So, yes, we can be good without knowing God. But that is a relative statement. We are usually "good" when we are treated well. But if we are wronged, watch out! That's when our human nature rears it's ugly head. We all experience this almost on a daily basis. If someone compliments us or treats us with respect, we will most often like that person. But if they criticize us or behave badly towards us, we generally will not like that person nor say good things about them. I would even go so far as to say we will begin to hate that person.

What does God have to say about the heart of Man? It's found in Jeremiah:

Jeremiah 17:7-10 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is. For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not see when heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit. THE HEART IS DECEITFUL ABOVE ALL THINGS, AND DESPERATELY WICKED: WHO CAN KNOW IT? I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.

Ask the soldier in the heat of battle who throws her/himself onto that grenade if s/he did it out of "goodness"? The fact of split-second self-sacrifice that is indeed a basic instinct, seen even in a mother animal's, you name the animal, protection of her young, proves that inherent "goodness" exists, apart from a human's belief in a "higher power". Is it not enough to understand that human goodness exists as a basic building block of human nature. Now, given the chance to reflect on my own inherent goodness, and taking in my cultural environment, I choose to believe that there is a higher presence that put that into me, and I can then be very much thankful, expressing it in prayer or song or dance, and share my belief with others of like mind and spirit. I'm sure atheists get together and experience community celebrations of thankfulness, even if not attaching it or directing it to "god", but still know that "good" happens amongst themselves in their lives, and sing and dance in joy. Seems my Bible says several places that "God is love" and "God is good". Forget the genocide, blood sacrifices, stonings, etc. Those are all obivously not good things, not things done oout of love. Maybe "Good is god" or "Love is god" is the way we should put it? At the end of the day, the majority ofd people indeed have a predisposition to love and goodness.

"It suggests, in precisely the way that pro-God groups with names like "union for decency" and "coalition for American values" suggest that atheists are amoral, un-American, or indecent, that atheists are reasonable and theists are not."

-----

Rabbi,

Do you think that being good for goodness sake is ethically superior to being good in exchange for some personal reward like eternal life or to avoid a harsh punishment like going to hell?

If so, then you agree with Epstein. If just being good for any reason is the standard, then you contradict the position you took in your essay.

In either case, you failed to explain why being good for goodness sake is ethically inferior to being good for any other reasons, religious or otherwise.

I'm not sure what you mean by "...faith in some kind of being or animating belief which is greater than they are," but I have to disagree with the idea that you need this to be good to others. All you need to be good to other people is the understanding that if you do harm, those you harm will suffer, and that their suffering is just like yours. Empathy and a bit of imagination.

A greater power may or may not be real, but the suffering you can cause through carelessness or cruelty IS real, no doubt about it. If the "greater force" is that reality, the awareness of our interconnection then I guess his essay makes some sense, but only some. As Wmarkw pointed out, an understanding of the golden rule requires no belief in anything beyond the material world.

I could go with Rabbi Brad's answers, and maybe even expand on them a little, covering at the same time his first three paragraphs about somebody named Greg Epstein.

I think every human's introduction to goodness is from his mother. Mother's are usually good to their babies. Mothers might be Jews or Christians or Muslims or Hindus or Atheists; and being one of these they might be amoral, un-American, indecent, or reasonable or unreasonable. Still, the first goodness a person experiences is usually from these mothers, whatever they are.

Indeed, we see this same goodness from the cat to her kittens, as well as from the bird to her hatched eggs.

So, we might say there is a first goodness on this earth. Mothers are also the first higher power, in most human's experience.

It seems to have to do with a species' survival prospects, this mother goodness. Science certainly makes a case for the desire of the genes. Creationists certainly make a case for how the genes got started.

One of these cases is as good as the other, where the goodness of mothers is concerned. And, since that is the start of goodness, every other goodness follows.

WMARKW wrote:

"A person can be good if they believe in the Golden Rule, for instance. Or the social contract. Or the Rights of Man. One doesn't have to believe in a being higher than oneself, if one believes in the equality of the 6 billion other beings with oneself."

wiccan stands and applauds enthusiastically. You have nailed it, sir.

Mankind has a history of creating laws, community values and moral codes which become foundatoins for civilizations. Inherently, these values are given to a higher being or god which not only exemplifies those values but calls on us to act in accordance. The human values are personified in a diety, not the other way around. The evocation of a god or diety is a reminder to uphold these values, but not a true source.

"First, can people be good, in the moral and ethical sense, without being grounded in some kind of faith in some kind of being or animating belief which is greater than they are?"

I'm not sure what an "animating belief" is, but if it means a source of moral principles greater than one's self, that sounds like the answer to the original question.

A person can be good if they believe in the Golden Rule, for instance. Or the social contract. Or the Rights of Man. One doesn't have to believe in a being higher than oneself, if one believes in the equality of the 6 billion other beings with oneself.

only non religious people can be good for goodness sake alone, for religious folk, it is always quid pro quo