moral and not belief in God?

Humanity encompasses all aspects about exemplification of life and the utmost being. The origin of man is detrimental to the subsequent behaviours and codes of living among these human beings. In most cases, many researchers have shown that human existence is based on the origin and existence of God. God is regarded as a supreme being who gives and takes life. Nonetheless, human behaviour and character is dictated by what takes place in the multilingual conglomerates and thoughts within the human mind. In fact, humanity is obviously inexistent without the existence and intervention of God. Nonetheless, I support the opinion that believing in God changes human characters and behaviours. The impairment of morals and sensible approaches of handling life come with assurance of living in the presence of God. With God being an assurance to a moral sustenance of human life, one can be moral and never belief in God (Mosser, 2010).

Proposition

Morality exists within the concept of right and wrong, good and naughty in the society. The existence of morality is an intervention from God. God is moral and attributes all believers to be in unison as they venture into virtuous life in the world. Nonetheless, it is not always the case that man practices virtues because of believing in God. God is perceived to be the originator of morals and good values among human beings. Nonetheless, it rests upon the decisions and intentions of man either remain moral or engage in immorality without love of God. Essentially, morality rules that failure to love God is a true way of saying that that person is immoral. With sound doctrines, one can live within the morals of the society even without having a single glimpse of a loving God (Smith, 2010). As far as morality is an intervention of God, it does not take one to love God in order to be moral in the society. Many people love God and yet engage in immoral acts. With this consideration, it is possible to love morals and practice them even without having to be in love with God (Dorff, 2007).

The human society is full of morals and immoral acts. Immoral acts dwell within human beings inclusive of those who love God. Moreover, the society has laws and regulations that dictate human behaviours in relation to self, the environment, and one another. Nonetheless, God is mentioned to have a ceremonial effect on these connotations of human interventions. Nonetheless, it does not take one to love God in order to stand ascribed to these rules and regulations. Obedience to rules and regulations is not tantamount to obedience to God. Moreover, the art of a loving God is innate to a person. It does not have to be stated within a sufficient evidence of the law and order in place. Therefore, believing in God is far much separate from being moral in the society. One can love God and yet be immoral. The judgement that dictates the difference between the two individuals is the fact that God is not physically available. The unavailability does not separate people who love God and those who love morals (Mosser, 2010).

Many people in the world have innate morals that do not have directive adherence to the fear of God. Religion is a basic facet that has stood strong in guiding human interventions in the world. In the present world, it is possible to believe in religion no matter its origin. The existence of ancestors and their beliefs does not reflect positivity or negativity with believing in God (Fuchs, 1983). On the other hand, humanity is known to love morality as a basis of life in order to usher in the love of God. For instance, the existence of traditional morals and codes of conduct is not a complete statement of existence of God among the people. Therefore, the exceeding; love for morals like laws and regulations does not stem from the love of God. God’s principles are spiritual in nature. They do not have physical touch as ascribed by laws and regulations that dwell within humanity (Mosser, 2010).

Many theories can derive the origin of morals without having to ascribe them to the existence of God in the society. For instance, utilitarian theory states that behaviour can be termed as valuable and moral if its products are satisfactory to the majority in the society. Much preference has been given to the ultimate effects of behaviour. If it brings increasing pleasure and happiness to a majority of the people, then a virtue should be treated with the utmost respect. Nonetheless, there is no mention of God within this theory. On the other hand, morals are thought to have consequences attributed to the maker called God. The existence and triumph of morals among people is a direct attribute to human embrace of them and not an immediate love for God (Sapontzis, 2012). Many attributes within morality do not have adherence to the existence and influence of God. For instance, the traditional standards of living and relating with human nature are based on the assumptions that were made and ascribed by the ancestors in the society. Nothing can be related to such morals other than the first people in the world. God has not been mentioned in such theories and statements.

Man is central to the existence and practice of morality in the world. For instance, many laws and regulations that govern human existence are ascribed to human beings and not God. The laws and regulations are supposed to be assumed and followed by the entire human fraternity without getting influence from one’s love for God. In every moral, there exist human sentiments on the existence of good and inappropriate or right and wrong. God does not have to emphasise on the existence of wrong since he is treated as a supreme being who does not do anything dishonourable. Therefore, the love for God is all attributed to the existence of morals. Acts that are not moral are in the world dominated by people who love God and those who do not have sentiments on love for God (Fuchs, 1983).

Many people in the world have existed and triumphed love and adoration or moral laws without having to consider their faiths in existence and influence of God. God attributes his sentiments and teachings to the existence for a good life that does not have to be moral in nature. Not all morals are attributed to God. In such a case, human love for morals is a directive that befits equitable human interaction and not a direct love for God. The society is full of many morals and attributes of good that were formulated by ancestors who had no belief in God. Nonetheless, the sovereign existence and purity of God has shifted people to attribute every moral to originating from God. On the other hand, it does not have to be a standoff chance that loving God must begin with loving all morals. Consequently, loving morals do not make one be in love with God. One has to consider other specifications and theoretical approaches in order to get assurance of a loving God. The existence of the spiritual nature of God does note reiterate more on the love for morals as a basic item towards loving God (Mosser, 2010).

Opposition

Many religions hold the belief that God is the foundation of every moral. Indeed, the existence of God is marked by the attributes of goodness and rightfulness in human conduct. Religions like Christianity attribute anything with human good to be originating from God. On the other hand, everything inauspicious and wrong is attributed to the worker of the devil. With such profound such beliefs, religions find it easy to refrain people from wrong and indecent acts since it resembles love for the enemy or devil. On the other hand, love for God is attributed to exemplification of positive ad good acts in the name of morals. Therefore, God is the source of morals, and love for God is a direct respect to love of God. In many societies, God is the source of everything that can be embraced by man. In such circumstances, man is sentimental to teaching younger generations on the importance of morals and God. Belief in God is as good as believing and practicing the existence morals and teachings. In the modern society, morals are a sure way of embracing the love of God (Sapontzis, 2012).

Life would not be in existence without existence and dominion of morals. Every concept that declares the existence of God starts with thoughts and teachings of morals. Now, imagining a world without God is like a world without morals. On the other hand, existence of God is a sure way of existence of morals in the society. God is the source of morals. He gives every direction and perspective that is required of man in order to have a cordial relationship with the environment and fellow man. In a more moral society, it is easy to have a solid foundation of morals in existence of God. On the vice versa, the existence of God marks a solid foundation for the existence of morals (Mosser, 2010.

My position

With and without love for God, one can be moral in the face of humanity. Existence of morals is a facet that can be attributed to the existence of man and God. God can be termed as the source of morals in the society. Nonetheless, the origin of morals is also a supposed origin of immorality in the human phase. The two facets are concurrent and cannot be differentiated. Likewise, human beings can exist in a moral society without having a single attribute of the existence and teachings of God. Referring to God qualifies one to be moral from the perspective of those who have had imperial evidence and practice of love for God. Nonetheless, to some people, morals are the source of everything and it does not necessarily have to be God (Moreland & Craig, 2004).

Human belief in God is attributed to an establishment of morals in the society. In fact, human judgement on morality is increased or boosted with love for God. In the world, many people are perceived to be in love with morals and good behaviour because of having cordial relationship with God. God is treated as the source of all morals and good behaviours. Therefore, any individual who is in love with God is expected to exemplify every moral behaviour human judgement on love for God is attributed to restrictions based on what is moral and what is immoral in the society. God can never be perceived to be immoral. He is the source of every moral and love for him is directed at love for morals. Nonetheless, everything that is immoral is negative in the phase of the living God.

In God are morals and in morals is God. The two can never be separated as dictated by many religions. Human involvement in wrongful acts is a direct manifestation that he is not in love with God. Therefore, having morals rules one to be in love with God. Nonetheless, loving God does not guarantee one a practice of morals. Therefore, it is not necessary that one be in love with morals in order to embrace the love of God. Humanity can love morals without having to reference God in their actions (Dorff, 2007).

Conclusion

With God being an assurance to a moral living, one can be moral and never belief in God. Believing in God is a separate entity of love as loving the existing morals. This comes the human way since human love for God is attributed to love for morals. Nonetheless, equated love for morals is not a true love for God. Human love for God is a separate entity that can be manifested in various ways. Religion states that there are various parameters of love and human existence attributed to the love of God. For instance, the spiritual nature of God depicts spiritual love from a man. Not all morals can be attributed to spirituality. Moreover, people who are in love with God cannot be depended to thrive in love for morals. Morals are traditional and Godly in nature. Therefore, the existence of morals does not necessitate the existence of God. Although God is treated as the origin of all morals in the world, human life, as guided by law and order, can exist without having firm considerations of the morals ion the society (Fuchs, 1983).

References

Dorff, E.N. (2007). For the love of God and people: A philosophy of Jewish law.

Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.

Fuchs, J. (1983). Personal responsibility and Christian morality. Washington, D.C:

Moreland, J.P., & Craig, W.L. (2004). Philosophical foundations for a Christian worldview.

Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press.

Mosser, K., (2010), A Concise Introduction to Philosophy, Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/books/AUPHI208.11

Sapontzis, S.F. (2012). Subjective morals. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Smith, DH (2010). Religious giving: For love of God. Bloomington, Ind: Indiana