The atheist – preacher:

Long before the appearance of modern religions, certain rules of behavior had developed in human society. People wanted to live in safety and not be killed by stronger tribesmen, so there was a social agreement not to kill each other without a good reason. People wanted to protect their personal property while they were hunting or at war, so there was a social agreement not to steal someone else’s. Etc.

These universal rules of behavior were later laid down by the authors of religious writings in their postulates: “do not kill,” “do not steal,” “do not commit adultery,” and so on. Neither the Torah, nor the Bible, nor the Koran are the primary source of universal values. They only reflected on their pages the rules of human behavior that existed at that time.

In the future, due to the strengthening of the role of religion, the importance of the “holy scriptures” in the public consciousness grew. And after several centuries of inquisition and burning out (literally and figuratively) any dissent, religion actually appropriated a monopoly on the formation of morality in most countries of the world. Over the past two millennia, humanity has become so accustomed to associating morality with religion that virtue has practically become synonymous with religiosity. Many modern people have the opinion that religion is the moral code of humanity, that only religion can tell a person the rules of behavior, tell him what is good, what is bad, how to behave and how not to behave.

However, this is a misconception. Moral norms can exist separately from religion. This was the case in many human societies in history, when religion did not play a dominant role in society. For example, many of us remember the “Code of the Builder of Communism”. This is a set of rules that were not prescribed in regulatory legal acts, but were observed by the majority of citizens of the Soviet Union voluntarily, as a moral guideline of behavior.

The listener – believer:

You know, it seems to me that there is no moral code at all in our society right now. People have lost their spiritual guidelines. Young people take an example from negative movie characters. Opinion leaders don’t teach anything good. In such a dashing time, is it bad that there is a religion? Isn’t it good that millions of our young compatriots are joining religion and observing religious commandments. If it were not for religion, many young guys would be on the street, robbed in the alley, killed for pennies. As it is, they fear God, and at least this keeps them from committing crimes. What’s wrong with that?

The atheist – preacher:

Yes, indeed, religion can play a positive role in maintaining discipline and order in society. If religious postulates say the right things, such as “do not kill”, “do not steal” and so on, then such a religion can be supported even by atheists.

But we should not forget that some people interpret the holy scriptures as a guide for combating non-believers and dissent. Therefore, religion can be both useful for social harmony and dangerous. You cannot accept it unconditionally.

The listener – believer:

Tell me, and if there were no religion, and our society would be all atheistic, what would restrain people within the framework of order? It seems to me that such a society would plunge into chaos.

The atheist – preacher:

Look at me. I am an atheist. But do I kill, rob people? Do I do bad things? No. And there are a lot of such good atheist people in any society.

The listener – believer:

So what is holding you back within the bounds of decency?

The atheist – preacher:

My consciousness and understanding of the mechanisms of society. I observe generally accepted moral norms not because I am afraid of God, and not because I am afraid of being in hell, but because I want to live well in this life, I want people around me not to hate me, but to love me; not to despise, but to respect; not to turn away, but to greet; and I am my I understand with common sense that in order for this to happen, I just need to behave decently, that is, to observe those very moral norms.

The listener – believer:

So you’re so decent, good just to make yourself feel good?

The atheist – preacher:

Sure. Everything a person does in this life, he does for himself. The difference between a believer and an atheist is only that a believer is trying to get good for himself from God in the form of an afterlife paradise, and an atheist, knowing that there is no afterlife, wants to get good for himself already in this life from the people around him. And in order to receive these benefits, each person must first give these benefits to others. And he gives these benefits to his loved ones in the form of kindness, friendship, love, and to everyone else – at least in the form of politeness, benevolence and friendliness.

Comments: 0