“No longer talk at all about the kind of man that a good man ought to be, but be such.” – Meditations 10.16

I understand there is a certain irony to writing – and thus talking – about something like this, but bear with me. 

Much ink has been spilled throughout the ages on what it means to be a good person, and even into the present age, many would equate “good” with “obedient” before “moral.” This is my primary issue with modern religion. By removing the burden of morality from humans and placing it on an intangible persona, people feel more free to act immorally. Whether or not this is the intent does not matter in this case – it is the result. 

This may seem paradoxical at first. If an all-powerful and all-knowing being is responsible for dispensing commandments for what to do and what not to do, would not its followers be deathly afraid of crossing the line?

Many are, but the reality is that God does not smite with holy fire and lightning like he allegedly did in Biblical times. No matter how fervent one’s belief in an intangible being, the being remains intangible and thus fundamentally disconnected from one’s life. Without a constant reminder of an overseer, it is easy to forget – or disregard – that being’s rules. 

This also begs the question of what constitutes morality. Is killing another person immoral because it is immoral, or because God says it is immoral? I once heard an atheist ask a Christian, “If you need God to tell you not to murder, are you really a good person?”

Now, I am no atheist, but this question struck a chord in me. It was after I had stopped going to church, if I remember correctly, but it gave me much to think about. I came to the conclusion that morality cannot come from a deity – it must be inherent to the human condition, and therefore arise from humanity, to have any real consequence. 

Nothing can force all of humanity to act genuinely moral, but if morality arises from the human condition rather than from an unseen and unseeable outside force, it naturally is much more intrinsically tethered to our everyday lives. My interpretation of this, if it could be distilled into one statement, is that “one’s will ends where another’s begins.”

Let us revisit the original quote from Meditations that inspired this post. Regardless of the origin of morality, there will always be those who adopt that holier-than-thou attitude many are familiar with. These are the people who tell others how to behave, but consciously act contrary to their words. This likely cannot be avoided, but I would think that it would be a much less prevalent issue in a society that understands morality comes from humanity. 

For those who do believe morality comes from God, there are many who say that it is no business of man to judge man, but God’s alone. And yet, most of those people are eager to judge others based on often superficial aspects of their identity. There are some who genuinely do leave the judgement to God, and for those people I have a deep respect, but they are unfortunately few and far between. Those who are so quick to judge others are present at all levels of the church, and this was the first thing that drove me away from the congregation. 

Even so, some judgement must exist in humanity to correct immorality – not aspects of a person’s identity, but actions they consciously take to cause harm to others. When morality is set by an intangible being that does not speak and does not act in any obvious way with our world, its words can be twisted to fit any agenda. If morality arises from humanity, this is much harder to do, and much easier to call out and fight against.