can u lead a moral life without believing in god and without beliving ur actions will be judged in heaven/hell
442611
Sure, why not?  \n\nSociety determines what is and isn't morally wrong, not the bible. American society says that christians can eat pork, even though the bible forbids it. The bible says that women shouldn't wear jewelry, yet christian women wear it to CHURCH. The bible says you should kill a disobidient child, but we know that to be wrong.\n\nThe bible DOESN'T say that you can't marry an 8 year old girl, but we know it to be wrong. So, we do and avoid things because of social taboos, not biblical.
23376
I did an entire study on this, unfortunately, it is not posted yet.\nYou need to get the scripture right, the term "judge not" means condemning to hell. However, to say to a fellow Christian that they are blowing it morally is commanded of us. Basically, Christians are to be fruit inspectors. \nHowever, we are NOT to judge those OUTSIDE the church. So if a supposed Christian is judging you and you are not a Christian, just give them the following scripture and say NOTHING...\n\n"For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges." - 1 Cor 5:12\n\nBut in our judgement, we are to make sure that we are acting and speaking out of love and concern and not prideful self-righteousness. That's the hard part. What is my motive and attitude?
974132
You pose an interesting question. Your relationship with God is personal, one on one. The kind of person you are and how you live your life will dictate your delivery from an eternal death. God created you as an individual with free will. How you interact with people, animals and most importantly, God will count on judgement day. I do not believe in organized religion. If your heart is good and you treat people with respect and dignity, help out in your community to build a better place for everyone and thank God for his many blessings you are on the right path. Just live your life treating all people and things as you wish to be treated, never judge another person and always understand that we are all the same. God loves you for you and he knows your heart and soul. He will never give you anything more than you can handle and will always comfort you in any situation. You need to have faith and believe in him, and he will in turn deliver you.
778432
I consider myself Christian, born and raised. My family has never been strict about it though. I don't believe that non-believers will go to hell. I do however believe that if you KILL, rape, or lead a life without morals, that you will suffer in your own hell that you caused others.
595625
No one knows. Therefore, why not live your life so that you can call yourself an honest and moral person and have no regrets when you die. Don't expect a last minute ticket out of Hell.
369822
Phil,\n\nJesus lived without sin, and so theoretically, it is possible, but no one else has ever done it. I don’t think you can do it either, but go for it! Let me know how it turns out. (Just kidding – we’re both out of the running because if you have to ask you weren’t able to do it either.)\n\nYou are in the “religion and spirituality” section and your question relates to Jesus, so I guess it’s fair to bring the Bible into the discussion. Paul is highly respected among Christians. As a young man, he persecuted Christians and even killed some. That puts him out of the running for the lifetime achievement award, but he certainly tried to make up for his indiscretion over the remainder of his life. Is it possible not to sin from this point onward? This is Paul’s conclusion:\n\nI do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do – this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. \n\nSo I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God-through Jesus Christ our Lord! \n\nSo then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin. \n\nTherefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. \n\nThose who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. \n\nYou, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you. \n\nTherefore, brothers, we have an obligation-but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live, because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. Romans 7:15-8:14\n\nI’ll try to be brief, and if you have more questions, I will be happy to answer them. Paul’s conclusion is that he was not able to do the good things that he wanted to do nor was he able to stop doing the bad things that he hated. Twice he says, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit
714271
I believe that you can have morals and ethics without religion. For the record true christians live what the bible says theres no justifing it at all The church i go has taught me its not about religion at all it's about a personal relationship with  God and and allowing him to come in and take our mess that we created in return of something wonderful it's all about faith. I know people who are wickian and have morals.
652442
if you believe that there is no God but One to be worshiped you will go to paradise. \n\nbut if you condemend adultry and die without repent. then you will be tortured in Hell (or God forgive you) for a period of time. then you will be taking out from the Hell to paradise. it's like a punishment for a limited time, but do you have any idea how long will you stay in Hell, it could be thousands of years.\n\ncan't remember the hadith but Muhammad (P) mentioned that God forgave a prostituded who saw a thirsty dog and helped the dog to drink. and God said MY Mercy Comes Before My Anger. \n\nand if you just know the mercy of God. you wouldn't ever give up his forgiviness.
902923
Mankind does think everyone should by its rules. The reality is that if we do not live by God's moral guidelines then sin brings forth destruction and sin will leads to death which will without a doubt destroy those who continue in sin without guilt or remorse. *(*
273247
I applaud you, this is a good question for philosophical thought. \n\nThe thing is, you cannot be responsible for destroying someone else's beliefs. If someone judgedthe choice to give up on their beliefs, then it is them alone who must suffer for their choice. You cannot decide whether or not someone murders you, but you can decide whether or not to continue in your beliefs.\n\nIn the case of your question; the perpetrator committing the murder would be judged accordingly by God. However, for the person trying to convert, he would be jedged based on whether or not he intentionally lied to the person he converted. Even if the converter's viewpoint is wrong, he will be judged worse if he intentionally lied to send someone to hell than if he, indeed, truly believed he was right.
4379
Being athiest doesn't mean you don't value life, I think if you value life that's enough to base morals off of your conscience.  How much you value life and living is what most laws are based on anyway so in a completely athiest society as long as the majority value life(which most would since the majority of people do) you could base the law off of that value since law isn't based on religious morals it's just based on preserving and respecting life.\n\nI'm athiest and my morals probably do come a bit from my parents, but mostly I just try to do what I feel is right.  The majority of athiests I know wouldn't deny that the morals in most religions are good things to adopt, they just don't want all the other crap that comes with the religion.  I have no problem following the golden rule, but I don't believe that I should have to scare myself into following it because I don't want to go to hell or dissapoint Jesus or whatever.  I believe that morals came before religion and that religion is just one way invented to get people to adopt the morals and to follow laws. If people are made to believe that there are eternal consequences for their actions they'll be more thoughtful before acting.  In the human society there are certain things you have to do to keep alive and to live well and they just happen to be more complicated than in the societies of other animals. The morals most of us have today are a survival instinct, we learned early on in our society that working together would help us thrive and in order to get people on your side you have to treat them a certain way and act a certain way yourself.  I think morals are more of a basis for religion than religion a basis for morals...religion needs morals but morals don't need religion.
639543
If sometimes you don't believe in God, then why do you believe in a hell?  If you believe in hell, then you must have some sort of belief of an afterlife of some sort.  \nJust be the pest person you can be, treat others well, and take every experience as a learning experience, no matter how bad it is.  That's how you can get the most out of life, no matter what you believe.  Then, in the end, if there isn't a god or hell, then you still would have lived a good life, and, if there IS a God, then you would have a good life to show Him/Her.  \n\nIf you want to get closer to God, reach out to people around you, God's love is best seen through the love of others.  Some people also find God in nature, in a peaceful place, in a particular song they like.  Find places or things that are important to you, hold them close, and, if you believe that everything is in a way connected through God, by reaching out to others, you are, in fact, also reaching out to God
1085413
No Gods\nOnce, flipping through a book on child psychology, I came across a chapter about adolescent rebellion. It suggested that in the first phase of a child's youthful rebellion against her parents, she may attempt to distinguish herself from them by accusing them of not living up to their own values. For example, if they taught her that kindness and consideration are important, she will accuse them of not being compassionate enough. In this case the child has not yet defined herself or her own values; she still accepts the values and ideas that her parents passed on to her, and she is only able to assert her identity inside of that framework. It is only later, when she questions the very beliefs and morals that were presented to her as gospel, that she can become a free-standing individual. \n\nI often think that we have not gotten beyond that first stage of rebellion. We criticize the actions of those in the mainstream and the effects of their society upon people and animals, we attack the ignorance and cruelty of their system, but we rarely stop to question the nature of what we all accept as "morality." Could it be that this "morality," by which we think we can judge their actions, is itself something that should be criticized? When we claim that the exploitation of animals is "morally wrong," what does that mean? Are we perhaps just accepting their values and turning these values against them, rather than creating moral standards of our own? Maybe right now you're saying to yourself "what do you mean, create moral standards of our own? Something is either morally right or it isn't-morality isn't something you can make up, it's not a matter of mere opinion." Right there, you're accepting one of the most basic tenets of the society that raised you: that right and wrong are not individual valuations, but fundamental laws of the world. This idea, a holdover from a deceased Christianity, is at the center of our civilization. If you are going to question the establishment, you should question it first! There is no such thing as good or evil. There is no universal right or wrong. There is only you... and the values you choose for yourself. \n\nWHERE DOES THE IDEA OF "MORAL LAW" COME FROM? \n\nOnce upon a time, almost everyone believed in the existence of God. This God ruled over the world, He had absolute power over everything in it; and He had set down laws which all human beings had to obey. If they did not, they would suffer the most terrible of punishments at His hands. Naturally, most people obeyed the laws as well as they could, their fear of eternal suffering being stronger than their desire for anything forbidden. Because everyone lived according to the same laws, they could agree upon what "morality" was: it was the set of values decreed by God's laws. Thus, good and evil, right and wrong, were decided by the authority of God, which everyone accepted out of fear. One day, people began to wake up and realize that there was no such thing as God after all. There was no scientific evidence to demonstrate his existence, and few people could see any point in having faith in the irrational any longer. God pretty much disappeared from the world; nobody feared him or his punishments anymore. But a strange thing happened. Though these people had the courage to question God's existence, and even deny it to the ones who still believed in it, they didn't dare to question the morality that His laws had mandated. Perhaps it just didn't occur to them; everyone had been raised to hold the same beliefs about what was moral, and had come to speak about right and wrong in the same way, so maybe they just assumed it was obvious what was good and what was evil whether God was there to enforce it or not. Or perhaps people had become to used to living under these laws that they were afraid to even consider the possibility that the laws didn&#
729420
Not believing in God is not a crime unless you are born to a certain religious belief.\n\nIts a matter of choice.  Just try to understand the consequence of the absence of faith.
978618
No, Its human nature to want to believe in heaven and hell or other afterlifes but its just not practical to believe in them. The sooner you acpect are fates the sooner you can live your life to the fullest rather than seeing this life as some sort of test
752616
Whether I believed in God or not, my behavior would change very little.  I believe that life is more pleasant when we treat each other with respect, compassion and generosity, and demand the same from our leaders.  It is worse when we seek to comfort ourselves to the detriment of others.  Promises of reward and threats of punishment are not necessary.\n\nIt's not a matter to me of whether I believe God exists but whether God, as presented, makes sense.  If God created us to endure a series of tests or a rule-bound game, with an absolute reward/punishment outcome, I'd consider that God unworthy of the concept.  If God is a co-witness and fellow traveller who values experience over obedience, whose concept of justice is based on compassion rather than rules, and who would never consider abandoning one of his creatures, I could buy into that.  \n\nGod is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent.  They say knowledge is power, then they say power, especially absolute power, corrupts.  Not quite true.  As humans, we can never have absolute knowledge or power, only "more" of each.  It is the remaining ignorance and fear that corrupts us because our grasp is tenuous.  Were someone to have absolute control of all power and knowledge in the universe, that person would be invulnerable and would understand everything.  That person would have no needs or threats, and no obligation to "settle" others' conflicts.  That person would be free to either ignore the problems or to objectively show a better way out of them.\n\nIf you are a parent, you may have had an experience of children fighting among themselves, understanding both of them perfectly while realizing that their dispute is meaningless.  Or you may have comforted a child facing a new experience, or cautioned a child incapable of recognizing a danger.  That's what it would be like for God.  Dispassion, wisdom, and patience would be God's attributes.  Anger, revenge and score-keeping just don't fit the picture.  These are the attributes of weak, fearful, childish humans.\n\nThe omniscience we lack is the reason we are in conflict, because we don't understand each other.  The omnipotence we lack means some of us will be stronger than others and we would likely exploit that for the sake of our own security.  God would transcend all that.  Absolute knowledge is understanding.  Absolute power is compassion.\n\nIf God were presented logically, as a loving creator who calls us out of fear into confidence and sympathy, I could go for it. The petty, capricious autocrat painted by Bible-thumpers doesn't make the grade.
217777
A philosopher said there are four outcomes to not believing in GOD\n\n\n1. You don't believe in GOD and you have a good life, you die there is a GOD you go to hell\n\n\n2. You don't believe in GOD and you have a good life, you die there is no GOD and you just rot\n\n3. You do believe in GOD and you have a good life, you do and you eternally happy living in heaven\n\n3. You do believe in GOD and you have a good life, you do there is no GOD, oh well\n\n\nIt is better to believe in GOD then to die and realize you made a mistake.