Should a follower of any faith/spiritual person be "better/nicer" than someone who has no belief or is nonspiritual  ?

That seems like a very loaded question. When you say should, are you talking from a religious perspective?

Sprint I saw a poster in the polling booth on saturday with a bible quote about rejecting human understanding in favour of God's command. Or something like that. Do you know what bit it is and what it means?

Hi f/d,

How are you ? No, not from a spiritual perspective. From a general "normal" viewpoint.


ooohhh, I sort of know the quotes you refer to.  had a search under "reject" and "gods law",  could not really find the right quote(s).
I dislike mixing politics in with spirituality.  There should be no "religious" compulsion to vote one way or another.

Anyway, ruddy and johnny are both christians.

One quote is from 1 Corinthians 1:24-25 :


Quote:

but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.

http://news.smh.com.au/forgiveness-has-god-on-its-side-study/20080212-1rq3.html

People who believe in God or a new-age spiritual force are less likely to hold a grudge, a study of Australians has found.

A survey of almost 500 people has confirmed what many always suspected - faith helps believers forgive where secular people continue to hold onto their blame.

The study, published in the journal Australian Psychologist, is the latest to confirm the raft of physical, psychological and behavioural benefits of belief.

Psychologists at RMIT University in Melbourne interviewed people of Christian, Jewish and Muslim faith and compared them to Australians who were non-believers or who had new-age beliefs.

They found that people affiliated with the more traditional religions had a greater tendency to forgive and let go of past wrongs.

But they found that spirituality in the broadest sense, that is belief in any type of higher being, was the strongest predictor of whether you were forgiving or not.

The researchers were unable to compare individual religions due to "ethical considerations", but said there was only "slight differences" between each.

He said the finding was positive given that religions were commonly blamed as a source of much violence in the world.

"We are all aware that religion causes conflict, but it is heartening to see that it also has the ability to reduce conflict and animosity too," the researcher said.

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2008 at 11:25am:

http://news.smh.com.au/forgiveness-has-god-on-its-side-study/20080212-1rq3.html People who believe in God or a new-age spiritual force are less likely to hold a grudge, a study of Australians has found.

Very interesting article, freediver, thanks for posting that.

To topic question-

the answer has to be no!

Oceans - thanks for your direct answer.
I tend to agree.
There is no reason why an athiest should be a "worser" person than someone who is a believer in any faith.
There is no reason why an athiest cannot help an elderley person across a road, or "do the right thing."

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 26^th, 2007 at 8:05am:

Should a follower of any faith/spiritual person be "better/nicer" than someone who has no belief or is nonspiritual  ?

Define "better/nicer". Let's take an example. Let's say you live in a Totalitarian State that regularly tortures people. Neighbour A has his life together. He's involved in helping society through Apex etc. His kids are doing well at school. His garden implements are well maintained. He is a solid law abiding citizen. Neighbour B is a bit of a Hermit. He's a computer geek and his yard is always a bit untidy. His last marriage failed, but he's a well meaning guy.

Which one would you prefer to loan your lawnmower to? (Which is better/nicer?)

If the secret police were coming to arrest you on a trumped up charge, which would you turn to for help (Which is better/nicer?)  

Better/nicer depends on the situation, otherwise we're living in a hazy world of vague meaning.

wrote on Feb 17^th, 2008 at 8:52am:

Which one would you prefer to loan your lawnmower to? (Which is better/nicer?)

You'd have to get to know both of them, because appearances can be deceptive. "Respectable people" (like some clergy) can be habitual child molesters. Untidy, divorced people, might have a "heart of gold" and be honest. On the surface I'd probably lend my law-mower to neighbour A, because most of us judge by appearances at first. This is the problem in determining "better". A respectable, upward mobile, "moral person", might have a problem communicating with, or even shun a child of their own, and be tight with their money (none of it ever goes to charity).  

The other question is, do people with faith in God, or adherence to a religion, do this for self-aggrandisement? Belief and morality can be self-serving, you know, the old "holier-than-thou" approach.
The question is what motivates behaviour? Is this "seeking spirituality" a kind of personal obsession with self-interest at heart? Nothing particularly wrong with that, per se, but I'd say what is "better" comes from within. Fred Hollows was an atheist, but rather than going to spiritual development seminars on weekends, he helped thousands here and abroad in a practical way. That's why it's hard to define "better", but I'd say that overall faith and belief more often than not at least provides a "reason". This description from the researchers seems apt:


Quote:

The researchers were unable to compare individual religions due to "ethical considerations", but said there was only "slight differences" between each.

Musician35 - good query , how to define better/good ?  
Ray_A's  definition is reasonably good, who would I lend my lawnmower to.
Or someone who adds more to society then takes from it ? aka Fred Hollows.


oops, I fit the profile of neighbour B quite well.

I guess strictly speaking I fit into the category of atheist, in that I don't happen to believe in anything for which I have no evidence. However, I recognize that basically many people with a religion think in very similar way to myself and others of the species. I should point out that atheist is not a term that I use to describe myself, because the definition stems from the antithesis of a religious belief. Instead I choose to define myself instead as a rational thinker,  with the goal of self improvement, both physical and mentally.  

What we all have in common is that the subconscious is incapable of processing information (think of it as a cranial hard drive, or CD stacker), and that there is a serious baud-limited bottleneck when it comes to direct perception. For this reason, we all rely on mental models of the universe which may not be entirely correct, and every time we get a direct perception of something, it reinforces our mental model of the universe, whatever that happens to be (in my case, the view that the universe is largely naturalistic and predictable, and devoid of supernatural elements).

In terms of ethics and other areas of self-improvement, I have achieved considerable improvements in my own life, basically using artificial constructs known as personal goals. If other people wish to improve their own lives by using an artificial construct called God, I have no problem with that. They are basically going through a similar process to mine,  and the process of using the power of the brain to improve ones life, can be extremely powerful . They probably don't see it the same way as I do, but the end result is the same.

Basically if we can understand the basics of how the brain functions, we can use this to great effect, because we can use it to inspire others to effect improvements in society. Understand how to control your own brain to change those attitudes that prevent you from attaining our personal goals, and you can then go on to understand what makes others tick.

- You can then go on to understand how to manipulate them, but we shouldn't talk about politics in this thread.  ;)

Actually I should have quoted this reference before. It's a study published in the Journal of Religion and Society - Quite an interesting read.  


http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

"[18] In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion in the prosperous democracies (Figures 1-9). The most theistic prosperous democracy, the U.S., is exceptional, but not in the manner Franklin predicted. "

There are some eye-opening facts presented there. However in many ways it goes against my personal experience  that religious people generally have a higher standard of ethics than the non religious. (Present company excepted)

Fortunately the US brand of highly vindictive Fundamentalist Christianity is not typical of Christianity elsewhere.