Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe

Epstein confirmed some things I’ve felt since I was a child: you don’t need to believe in God to be a decent human being. I grew up in a small, almost all-Catholic town. Thinking for yourself was not encouraged. It was “accept the Bible as moral law or else burn in hell”. Not a good way to raise a child. I did find that the book strongly supports Humanism. While I agree with about 90% of Epstein’s ideas, Humanism kind of feels cult-ish, and that turned me off, if only a little. Overall, a very informative book.

If your an atheist, you know what you DONT believe. but this book will help show you what you do believe. An amazing read. gives you something to think about

I just finished Good Without God this evening. I've been changed. I've known I was an atheist since I was 18 and always felt as if there was something missing. I felt a disconnect from the amazing women in my family (all strong Christians) as if I could not be as "good" as them. Now I know where to begin changing that feeling! It's like I knew there was a way and Mr. Epstein showed me a map. It was also nice to read something not quite so "us vs. them" in tone as Dawkins etc. The resources in the back were helpful too. It was the first "atheist" book I've read that left me feeling really excited and hopeful.

Harvard's Humanist Chaplain, Greg Epstein, has performed an enormous mitzvah for not only the humanist/freethinker/atheist/agnostic minority, but also for majority/believer/religious folks who are curious enough to read this important and positive work -- Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe Whether one is a person wallowing in negativity, having internalized the majority's stereotype of those whose beliefs fall outside the norm, or a person who cannot fathom how a "non-believer" can possibly aspire to lead an ethical life, one can benefit from reading Epstein's cogent exploration of what non-religious people do believe, and where the beliefs of "infidels" and the faithful may intersect to provide heretofore untapped opportunities for social progress.

The release of a Greg Epstein's book, Good Without God, is a welcome resource for anyone who wishes to have more than just a superficial idea of what it means to be a humanist. In his discussion, Epstein reaches out to a wide range of people: nonbelievers, nonreligious, atheists, agnostics, anyone who do does not feel that their morality is derived from a belief in a god. Even the progressively religious can be humanist, or at least friendly allies, since the basic framework for being a humanist is to seek the best in yourself and others, and to believe in your own ability to make a positive difference in the world. Good Without God does not focus on criticizing faith based beliefs; rather it seeks to bring an understanding of the natural goodness of humanity. It emphasizes the need for humanists to carve out a space in society in which like-minded, concerned, nonreligious citizens can come together to share their beliefs, celebrate life, and collaborate in making the world a better place for everyone. As a group, we should look for and expect more than simply toleration from society. Rejecting and refusing to accept alienation from religious communities and making our collective voices heard is an important theme in the book. As Epstein emphasizes "being a good person in a vacuum is not a very satisfying experience". We too, crave fellowship with people in a forum that is inclusive, supportive, and one in which we can grow together. Morality is not about sinners and saints, heaven and hell, damnation and punishment. It's about alleviating unnecessary suffering and promoting human flourishing and dignity. As the Author emphasizes, "Not a single version of the golden rule requires a god". The time has long since come for the creation and recognition of a common forum in which nonreligious people can together mark life's events - marriages, births, deaths and a shared understanding of life. As Epstein emphasizes, within this forum we can "develop aesthetically powerful rituals and a sense of engagement with culture, serve the community with uncommon bravery and measureable success; and play a leading role in the most urgent social struggles of the age." This book leaves no doubt that "Being Good" is a characteristic that is not solely derived from living in awe and fear of a god. Being good blossoms from the hearts of people who feel the awe of nature, are energized by the bonds of love, sympathize with the plight of those in need, and are moved to action to make the world a better place. The sincerity of these emotions and the virtues they evoke do not depend upon an outside force. They come from within.

Epstein espouses Humanistic judaism. He explains that Jewishness is a cultural thing and not necessarily a religious belief, hence, one can be a Jew without believing in god. He also explained that Humanism is about "Dignity" and the idea of living our lives well, in pure altruistic fashion, which is an end in itself; and more importantly, that we can do so without believing in gods of any kind. Non-religious people can and are good people. He pointed out that if they weren't good without god, why are they not out marauding and killing people. He also explained why we can and are good without god, and added a clear chapter on how this can be achieved. Humanism has a dash of existentialism in it, as he says, "like it or not, we are responsible for what we do about it all in this life". Referring to Rick Warren's "Purpose Driven Life" he says that "it is the height of arrogance to be so openly prejudiced against those who agree with him about the need for purpose but prefer Islam, Judaism, or simply the Humanist faith in our ability and responsibility to build a healthier world for the sake of our loved ones and all humanity." Warren believed and wrote that Christianity is the only way to a higher purpose in life and detractors face tan eternity in hell. So much for Christian love. It appears clearly from this book that the popular Christian retort that atheism, Darwinism (and Humanism) are also religions is erroneous in that religion is only a semantic turn of phrase. The crucial issue is not whether one's beliefs are necessarily religious, but whether we believe that there is such a thing as god, and whether we can be good without believing in that being. This was a very lucid, enlightening book, written in the most humble, unprovocative language.

A lot of books have been written in the last few years exploring whether or not there is a God. This is not one of them. Refreshingly, Greg Epstein starts a step further down along the line of debate. His premise, stated simply, is this; However they got there, there is now a significant portion of the population who simply do not believe in God. And yet most of them (including himself)live what would be thought of by most as perfectly "good" lives, raising their children, taking care of their parents, helping out in the community, and the like. They are people you would like to have as neighbors. So if they don't believe in God, why do they act in this way? Why aren't they all out marauding, looting and pillaging? If not God, what do they believe in? Of course, there is no one answer. But in a straight-forward, learned, yet conversational style, Epstein takes us on a brief tour of the history of non-religious based thought and ethics (which extends back as far as religious history.) He then turns to explaining a simple, rational, functional basis for exploring morality and ethics in society, and how one can do this by synthesizing the lessons of history and human experience, aided by science and research. But Epstein's emphasis is on the story of the human experience. He recognizes there are needs beyond cold rationalism to find out what is important in life. There is a place for a sense of awe, for humility, for art and nature. But he finds it in places other than a belief in God. Epstein knows that atheism is a negative statement, that is to say, a statement of what is not believed rather than what is believed. This leads him to spend the later chapters in an explanation of Humanism, a "lifestance" (his word, which I like immensely) rather than a religion, encompassing a view of life in which compassion, joy, service and human interaction is lived and celebrated for its own sake. One of the strengths of the book is that this Lifestance is not presented in a confrontational mode. He does not shape this explanation in terms of "this is better than religion" although it is clear it makes more sense to him. Rather, it is presented as a "here is what I believe, and more importantly, why it makes sense to me" fashion. He is quick, and even eager, to point out that many of the ideas that shape Humanism are recognizble in religious traditions as well. These lessons are not to be tossed out just because one doesn't believe in God. Some still make sense, some do not. His emphasis throughout is that the important thing is what people do and how they behave to each other. The books of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hitchens argue that belief in God makes no sense. If your question is whether there is a god, then read those authors (and their religious counterparts.) But if you are now at a place where that question is settled, the question that then presents itself is- how do I live