Question for christians/jews/muslims

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Sat May 25, 2013 10:35 am

Do you believe that Atheists are without morals and why?

halfway · Post by **halfway** » Sat May 25, 2013 11:18 am

Lon;1428028 wrote: Do you believe that Atheists are without morals and why?

Of course they are not without morals. That would be mean-spirited to even suggest it.

Of course the foundation of those morals may be elusive since EVERY opinion must count. EVERY opinion....age of sexual consent, suicide, human sacrifice, cannibalism, etc.

Atheists are much like die-hard vegetarians. The Tofu must be shaped or painted to match "meat" in order to make it appealing (hot dog - hamburger shaped / grill marks etc.). So too with morals...they must have some basis in order to "appear" natural to human nature.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat May 25, 2013 1:29 pm

Even though I'm not a Christian, Jew or Muslim, I'd like to answer.

Humans are born atheist and without morals. Morals are acquired as one experiences life and as one interprets life during brain development. Morality is also formed through adoption via rites of passage and ritual in many cases by what the society at large has accepted as its mutually agreed upon traditional code of conduct.

Since I've returned to my natural self, and therefore my atheism, the morality that had become part of me to this point is less of a mystery and more clear to me because I've come to understand that I get to choose whether or not I agree with those morals the society informed me with, knowing that the members of that society, who invented these official morals, are no better, smarter or wiser than I. The absence of a godlike authority which demands one blindly accept generally accepted morality removes the conflict that may rage within, due to experience aided by a critical thought process. This is why, I think, critical thinking is suppressed in any society that maintains strong religious fundamental faith and belief.

There is motive (not become criminalized) and obligation to the society at large to obey the morals that are law and also to respect the morality of the other members of society provided their morality does not conflict with mine to a critical extent, such as, say, the torture of animals, or be a conscientious objector to war.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Sat May 25, 2013 2:02 pm

halfway;1428031 wrote: Of course they are not without morals. That would be mean-spirited to even suggest it.

Of course the foundation of those morals may be elusive since EVERY opinion must count. EVERY opinion....age of sexual consent, suicide, human sacrifice, cannibalism, etc.

Atheists are much like die-hard vegetarians. The Tofu must be shaped or painted to match "meat" in order to make it appealing (hot dog - hamburger shaped / grill marks etc.). So too with morals...they must have some basis in order to "appear" natural to human nature.

I am not suggesting that Atheists are without morals, however, there is a body of folk that do make this assumption.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat May 25, 2013 6:27 pm

By definition, atheists have no morals.

That doesn't make them bad people, whatever that means.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Sat May 25, 2013 7:16 pm

tude dog;1428060 wrote: By definition, atheists have no morals.

That doesn't make them bad people, whatever that means.

Where did you find that tude dog? What's the source for atheists having no morals?

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat May 25, 2013 9:22 pm

Some of the people I have found to have the strongest morals are atheists.

Post by **jones jones** » Sun May 26, 2013 3:43 am

Morals are the rules that govern which actions are right and which are wrong. Morals are taught and are certainly not bestowed upon anyone simply because they belong to any particular religion.

Considering the fervour with which Christians slaughtered millions throughout the ages, they should certainly not be the first ones to cast a stone at anyone else.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Sun May 26, 2013 3:52 am

tude dog;1428060 wrote: By definition, atheists have no morals.

That doesn't make them bad people, whatever that means.

So by virtue, morality requires a belief in a God, atheists presumably cannot teach their children right from wrong and they have nothing by which to define their behaviour.

Morality it seems, has only been around for 2,000 years or so, before which, anything went. Maybe there was no description of the meaning about the rules of correct behaviour or conduct untill the existence of Christianity.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sun May 26, 2013 4:35 am

I shouldn't have said atheists have no morals.

Mao, Stalin, Lenin, had morals.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun May 26, 2013 5:28 am

Backslid heathen Baptist here.

Right and wrong can be taught, and can be based on religious dogma and rules, but it doesn't have to be. Social animals will do what they must to remain a member of a group. That which the group finds acceptable becomes "right" and unacceptable becomes "wrong" - the moral code. Studies suggest that even rats have empathy, and will help another rat in distress.

I would say that rats are neither religious nor atheist, yet they demonstrate that they have a sense of right and wrong. I see no reason that humans are different in this respect.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun May 26, 2013 9:23 am

Empathy = morality? Wouldn't that require the rat choosing to help the other rat? I think empathy is an adaptation that assists in species survival. If a rat passes up certain other living organisms when it's hungry but not starving is that also a result of morality or is it because the other is not a part of the rat's natural diet?

As a human my empathy is extended to other living organisms like animals or rodents naturally. However, I can be conditioned not to. Does that conditioning cause me to behave immorally?

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Sun May 26, 2013 10:30 am

I think that the basics (no killing, lying, cheating, sleeping with your neighbor's wife, etc.) developed quickly when humans began to get together in villages or encampments. An anthropologist might say that the reasons were inherently selfish, since they protected the safety and functionality of the village and were therefore beneficial to survival.

It is interesting how similar these basics are, despite the differences in location, culture, religion, etc.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun May 26, 2013 10:37 am

Wandrin;1428102 wrote: I think that the basics (no killing, lying, cheating, sleeping with your neighbor's wife, etc.) developed quickly when humans began to get together in villages or encampments. An anthropologist might say that the reasons were inherently selfish, since they protected the safety and functionality of the village and were therefore beneficial to survival.

It is interesting how similar these basics are, despite the differences in location, culture, religion, etc.

I think you are right.

Religion evolved from humans agreement on morals and ethics, rather than morals and ethics coming from religion.

An interesting read:

Moral Origins: The evolution of Virtue, Altruism, and Morals by Christopher Boehm

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun May 26, 2013 10:59 am

David Sloan Wilson makes the argument that the creation of God and religion as a sort of distraction from the focus being on the individual to the group through homogenization. Any moral code designed for the group has to have the ability to transcend the needs of the individual much of the time. God and religion have provided that at a time when knowledge and consciousness couldn't. These day's we're in the process of transitioning.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun May 26, 2013 12:18 pm

Ahso!;1428091 wrote: Empathy = morality? Wouldn't that require the rat choosing to help the other rat?It does, and it did.

A new model of empathy: The rat - The Washington Post

But it is only a postulation at this point. Some disagree.

Rat and ant rescues 'don't show empathy'

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun May 26, 2013 1:00 pm

tude dog;1428060 wrote: By definition, atheists have no morals.

That doesn't make them bad people, whatever that means.

That seems a singularly inane comment. By definition atheist means without god. Religious people have a morality given to them which is one of the reasons people will carry out appalling acts and justify them in the name of their god. Atheists have to think for themselves what is right and wrong. They have morals they just don't follow blindly.

I shouldn't have said atheists have no morals.

Mao, Stalin, Lenin, had morals.

They had reasons for the acts they carried out and didn't pretend to have an imaginary "higher moral authority" giving them guidance. You can hold them accountable for their actions and argue the justification or otherwise for what they did but you will not get it was god's will as a defence.

Hitler, on the other hand was a catholic and believed he was carrying out god's work, every sunday the guards at the concentration camps went to church. Only one nazi was excommunicated from the catholic church during ww2 - his crime was to marry a protestant. The Japanese were not atheists either, and some of their atrocities are on a par if not worse in some instances than the nazis. don't tell me you are going to suggest they believed in the wrong gods.

Religion was created as a way to control people, Read the old testament how moses imposed his rule on his tribe , there is n no other god but me - that means you do what your leaders tell you or go to hell. The christian bible has been cynically edited so that only those books that did not encourage questioning the authority of the priests were included. Your own personal jesus it was not and most christians in america would have been burned as heretics in the middle ages for daring to suggest such a concept.

As a freethinker and atheist when it comes to morality I make my own decision and accept responsibility for that decision I don't need an "authority" to tell me right from wrong or fear eternal damnation if I disobey.

So in other words I am not one of those individuals to whom the OP was addressed. Christians , jews and Muslims are all going to answer no to the question because if they believe that their morality comes from a belief in god to accept that atheists have morals is to question their faith. God tells me so is also why they feel they can try and impose their own moral views on society. Look at the current hullabaloo over gay marriage. How will allowing gay people to marry impact on their freedom to follow their traditions and practices as laid down by their religion. Yet their religious morality gives them the moral right - in their eyes- to discriminate against a sector of society with the same fervour they used to justify slavery.

Why not also add does a religious belief and morality give you the right to dictate how society governs itself?

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Sun May 26, 2013 1:36 pm

Snowfire;1428066 wrote: So by virtue, morality requires a belief in a God, atheists presumably cannot teach their children right from wrong and they have nothing by which to define their behaviour.

Morality it seems, has only been around for 2,000 years or so, before which, anything went. Maybe there was no description of the meaning about the rules of correct behaviour or conduct untill the existence of Christianity.

Au Contraire---------It has been shown that morality existed even in times of Cro Magnon Man----

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Sun May 26, 2013 2:22 pm

Lon;1428131 wrote: Au Contraire---------It has been shown that morality existed even in times of Cro Magnon Man----

Precisely the point of my argument. In response to Tudes post. ( I should have added on or two question marks )

As an atheist myself, I am arguing that I believe morality is innate in us all. Mankind didnt just suddenly discover morality with the dawning of Christianity

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sun May 26, 2013 2:24 pm

Originally Posted by tude dog

By definition, atheists have no morals.

That doesn't make them bad people, whatever that means.

gmc;1428121 wrote: That seems a singularly inane comment.

I tend to agree, in that I did later post

I shouldn't have said atheists have no morals.

Mao, Stalin, Lenin, had morals.

gmc;1428121 wrote: By definition atheist means without god.

OK

gmc;1428121 wrote: Religious people have a morality given to them which is one of the reasons people will carry out appalling acts and justify them in the name of their god. Atheists have to think for themselves what is right and wrong. They have morals they just don't follow blindly.

That quote truly blows my mind.

So atheists who murder and enslave hundreds of millions of people do that with eyes wide open and not following their leaders blindly.

If you say so.

gmc;1428121 wrote: They had reasons for the acts they carried out and didn't pretend to have an imaginary "higher moral authority" giving them guidance. You can hold them accountable for their actions and argue the justification or otherwise for what they did but you will not get it was god's will as a defence.

That makes all the difference in the world.:-2

gmc;1428121 wrote: Hitler, on the other hand was a catholic and believed he was carrying out god's work, every sunday the guards at the concentration camps went to church. Only one nazi was excommunicated from the catholic church during ww2 - his crime was to marry a protestant. The Japanese were not atheists either, and some of their atrocities are on a par if not worse in some instances than the nazis. don't tell me you are going to suggest they believed in the wrong gods.

Yea, Hitler was a regular Alter Boy.:wah:

gmc;1428121 wrote: Religion was created as a way to control people, Read the old testament how moses imposed his rule on his tribe , there is n no other god but me - that means you do what your leaders tell you or go to hell. The christian bible has been cynically edited so that only those books that did not encourage questioning the authority of the priests were included. Your own personal jesus it was not and most christians in america would have been burned as heretics in the middle ages for daring to suggest such a concept.

Your entitled to that view.

gmc;1428121 wrote: As a freethinker and atheist when it comes to morality I make my own decision and accept responsibility for that decision I don't need an "authority" to tell me right from wrong or fear eternal damnation if I disobey.

No different than Mao, Lenin, Stalin, or even Hitler.

gmc;1428121 wrote: So in other words I am not one of those individuals to whom the OP was addressed. Christians , jews and Muslims are all going to answer no to the question because if they believe that their morality comes from a belief in god to accept that atheists have morals is to question their faith. God tells me so is also why they feel they can try and impose their own moral views on society. Look at the current hullabaloo over gay marriage. How will allowing gay people to marry impact on their freedom to follow their traditions and practices as laid down by their religion. Yet their religious morality gives them the moral right - in their eyes- to discriminate against a sector of society with the same fervour they used to justify slavery.

Biggest problem I have is you speaking for all Christians, Jews and Muslims.

gmc;1428121 wrote: Why not also add does a religious belief and morality give you the right to dictate how society governs itself?

Maybe where you live, but here we are governed by a secular government.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun May 26, 2013 6:32 pm

Accountable;1428115 wrote: It does, and it did.

A new model of empathy: The rat - The Washington Post

But it is only a postulation at this point. Some disagree.

Rat and ant rescues 'don't show empathy'That's interesting. Now to try and figure out if the choice is a conscious and deliberate one. I'm not surprised of any living organism being empathetic to some extent. There is plenty of instances where humans have observed animals showing feelings towards others.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon May 27, 2013 1:26 am

posted by tude dog

That quote truly blows my mind.

So atheists who murder and enslave hundreds of millions of people do that with eyes wide open and not following their leaders blindly.

If you say so.

Well yes. "I was just following orders" is not a justification. At the end of the day you and only you are responsible for the actions you take. Just following blindly is a pathetic excuse, being misled might be more accurate but you still are the one that decides. Political dictatorships try to control what people can access in terms if education and information, religious, or would be religious dictatorships ones do exactly the same. Why do you think there is such hostility to the teaching of the theory of evolution and science generally in American schools by religious groups?

As you mature you learn to think for yourself and understand the consequences of your actions that's one of the reasons children who commit criminal offences are recognised as not necessarily being able to understand the consequences of their actions.

Anyone who murders and enslaves hundreds of millions of people, or does anything at all, is responsible for what they do be they atheists or not. Anyone who kills another is responsible for what they do. Religious fanatics do so because they feel their religious belief gives them the right to do so, they have given up their claim to free will and follow blindly. Atheists might have their reasons for committing atrocities but they are responsible for what they do. How could it be otherwise?

Yea, Hitler was a regular Alter Boy.

Have a read of Mein Kampf you'll see what I mean. Do you really think the holocaust was not the result of two thousand years of anti-jewish teachings from the church? It wasn't just germany that wanted rid of the jews, your very own nation took steps to curtail jewish immigration. Prejudice with religion behind it is the hardest of all to fight against.

Maybe where you live, but here we are governed by a secular government.

So am I. You forget where I am from. Don't be fooled, The church of england is nominally a state religion the reality is actually very different. The vast majority in the UK are not religious, which is more than you can say for the states. Tony Blair waited till he left office before announcing he was converting to Catholicism, he knew damn well what the reaction would be, we don't like leaders who wear their religion on a sleeve or claim to be guided by it in their decisions. It makes us doubt their sanity.

Biggest problem I have is you speaking for all Christians, Jews and Muslims.

If you read what I wrote you will see I never actually claimed to do so - I was offering my opinion on the matter. You don't have to agree with me you know, not being religious I won't condemn you to eternal hell for not doing so. Good grief you might even think I talk a load of rubbish:D

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed May 29, 2013 3:44 pm

Lon;1428028 wrote: Do you believe that Atheists are without morals and why?

I'd say the opposite - that religion is the one force that can persuade othrewise good people to act against the natural moral code of primative societies.

You don't even have to go to the hell of Aztec society where religious belief gave rise to mass human sacrifice, take a look at the religious persecutions of the past thousand years to see what a religion who nominally believe in love thy neighbour and turn the other cheek can do to each other, never mind to those of other religions

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Wed May 29, 2013 4:07 pm

I'll just betcha that the vast majority of people that say that Atheists can have good morals still would not vote for a politician that is an avowed Atheist. I did a Mini Poll a while back on another forum and it was 433 to 18. Those 18 respondents were probably Atheists, I have no way of knowing.

What is it then that the believer finds objectionable to a non believer that would preclude them voting for one?

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed May 29, 2013 4:26 pm

Lon;1428396 wrote: I'll just betcha that the vast majority of people that say that Atheists can have good morals still would not vote for a politician that is an avowed Atheist. I did a Mini Poll a while back on another forum and it was 433 to 18. Those 18 respondents were probably Atheists, I have no way of knowing.

What is it then that the believer finds objectionable to a non believer that would preclude them voting for one?

That might apply in America but over here a candidates religion take a very back seat to their policies, morals and voting history.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Wed May 29, 2013 4:43 pm

Bryn Mawr;1428397 wrote: That might apply in America but over here a candidates religion take a very back seat to their policies, morals and voting history.

Thank God. :wah:

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed May 29, 2013 5:24 pm

Lon;1428396 wrote: I'll just betcha that the vast majority of people that say that Atheists can have good morals still would not vote for a politician that is an avowed Atheist. I did a Mini Poll a while back on another forum and it was 433 to 18. Those 18 respondents were probably Atheists, I have no way of knowing.

What is it then that the believer finds objectionable to a non believer that would preclude them voting for one?
You're probably right. Weird, huh? To hear gmc, it might be just the opposite in Scotland.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri May 31, 2013 2:17 pm

gmc;1428178 wrote: Well yes. "I was just following orders" is not a justification. At the end of the day you and only you are responsible for the actions you take. Just following blindly is a pathetic excuse, being misled might be more accurate but you still are the one that decides. Political dictatorships try to control what people can access in terms if education and information, religious, or would be religious dictatorships ones do exactly the same. Why do you think there is such hostility to the teaching of the theory of evolution and science generally in American schools by religious groups?

OK

My problem is why do you have such hostility towards my religion?

I have no hostility towards atheism, actually as far as it goes, make perfect sense.

gmc;1428178 wrote: As you mature you learn to think for yourself and understand the consequences of your actions that's one of the reasons children who commit criminal offences are recognised as not necessarily being able to understand the consequences of their actions.

Anyone who murders and enslaves hundreds of millions of people, or does anything at all, is responsible for what they do be they atheists or not. Anyone who kills another is responsible for what they do. Religious fanatics do so because they feel their religious belief gives them the right to do so, they have given up their claim to free will and follow blindly. Atheists might have their reasons for committing atrocities but they are responsible for what they do. How could it be otherwise?

Makes sense to me.

gmc;1428178 wrote: Have a read of Mein Kampf you'll see what I mean.

I started once, didn't get far. All in all, I save a lot of time. Nothing for me to learn there.

gmc;1428178 wrote: Do you really think the holocaust was not the result of two thousand years of anti-jewish teachings from the church? It wasn't just germany that wanted rid of the jews, your very own nation took steps to curtail jewish immigration. Prejudice with religion behind it is the hardest of all to fight against.

YUP

I don't see a cause and effect.

Not belief, but fact.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:33 pm

Anyone else ever lost a shoe in the mud?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 8:34 am

This says it all.

Attached files

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 11:56 am

posted by tude dog

OK

My problem is why do you have such hostility towards my religion?

I have no hostility towards atheism, actually as far as it goes, make perfect sense.

Why do you assume I am hostile towards your religion? I don't even know what it is although I would tend to assume christian but which particular sect? Sectarianism is christian sects fighting with each other about which version is the true one. That is not a dig at your religion merely an observation. I happen to have grown up with catholic/protestant sectarianism I don't mind religious people - bigots I have little tolerance for. That's not a dig at you either I'm not calling you a bigot, Sometimes I feel you can't make a general comment on religion without someone deciding it's [ersonal and to take offence. If you have faith what anyone else thinks shouldn't matter to you. Before you ask yes I have read the bible started on the Koran and realised where most of it came from, even looked at some of the Sanskrit texts but got distracted by the kama sutra.

posted by tude dog

YUP

I don't see a cause and effect.

Not belief, but fact.

Then what is the origin of anti-Semitism? Just look at the history of the catholic church and what they preached about who killed christ. It wasn't until the 1960's that the pope finally gave orders that all jews were not to blame for the crucifixion of JC only some of them. Even more recently than that

Pope Benedict absolves the Jews: A 'major step forward'? - The Week

Look at the evidence and make up your own mind.

I started once, didn't get far. All in all, I save a lot of time. Nothing for me to learn there.

One of the most influential characters of the 20th century and you don't wonder what he had to say for himself? I read it so I could make up my own mind about what people had to say about him. What made so many millions follow him don't you wonder?

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:12 pm

Morals are cultural. What's right in one culture, say polygamy, is immoral in another. So of course atheists have morals. Most are highly intelligent and are very cognizant and sensitive to cultural norms and traditions of right and wrong.

Unfortunately, for Aetheists, there is no tomorrow. To them, this world is all that exists which tends to make them much more materialistic and less spiritual. Sorry if that stings, but it's true. If you don't believe in any afterlife, then life is all there is and becomes that much more important. Does that make them selfish, since they might be less likely to to commit acts that they think would help them after death? Or that might be mandated by a religion? Not in my experience. They seem just as unselfish and charitable as most of us.

As someone who has died and seen the other side, though, I feel badly for aetheists. I know for a fact that life exists after death, so that colors all my dealings in this world.

Honestly, I can't imagine what it must be like to deal with all life's vagaries and think that there is no meaning and everything is just random chance. How depressing. If nothing else, religion offers consolation for hard times and hope that even the worst times have meaning.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:43 pm

It's difficult for God-believers to empathize with non-believers. OTOH, many, if not most non-believers came out of belief in God, so it's easy for them to empathize with god-believers.

As for the afterlife: you believe you died. Had you died you would not be living. I'd think that would be a rather easy concept to grasp.

Tell me: Why is it you think God spared you and not so many others?

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:49 pm

Saint_;1428758 wrote: Morals are cultural. What's right in one culture, say polygamy, is immoral in another. So of course atheists have morals. Most are highly intelligent and are very cognizant and sensitive to cultural norms and traditions of right and wrong.

Unfortunately, for Aetheists, there is no tomorrow. To them, this world is all that exists which tends to make them much more materialistic and less spiritual. Sorry if that stings, but it's true. If you don't believe in any afterlife, then life is all there is and becomes that much more important. Does that make them selfish, since they might be less likely to to commit acts that they think would help them after death? Or that might be mandated by a religion? Not in my experience. They seem just as unselfish and charitable as most of us.

As someone who has died and seen the other side, though, I feel badly for aetheists. I know for a fact that life exists after death, so that colors all my dealings in this world.

Honestly, I can't imagine what it must be like to deal with all life's vagaries and think that there is no meaning and everything is just random chance. How depressing. If nothing else, religion offers consolation for hard times and hope that even the worst times have meaning.

It's not depressing at all, I live this life as fully as I can and enjoy it and the people within it as richly as possible. I cherish this short time I have and don't take it for granted. It also means that I have no fear. I don't fear damnation, the fire and brimstone. Don't feel sorry for me at all. I have no illusions that tarnish this life and that satisfies me

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:56 pm

Ahso!;1428761 wrote:

As for the afterlife: you believe you died. Had you died you would not be living. I'd think that would be a rather easy concept to grasp.

Nope. The doctors confirmed that my heart had stopped for as long as two minutes. Stopped Dead. And seeing the back of your head from behind yourself, seeing your own body fall to the floor, and seeing the spirits of your entire ancestral family tree is a very real experience, believe me. Besides, I know very well what a hallucination is like... I lived through the seventies. This was no hallucination.

Tell me: Why is it you think God spared you and not so many others?

Easy enough. I still have things to do in the tapestry that is my destiny. Perhaps just telling you this story is a part of that...

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:59 pm

Snowfire;1428763 wrote: It's not depressing at all, I live this life as fully as I can and enjoy it and the people within it as richly as possible. I cherish this short time I have and don't take it for granted. It also means that I have no fear. I don't fear damnation, the fire and brimstone. Don't feel sorry for me at all. I have no illusions that tarnish this life and that satisfies me

So when a tragedy happens how do you process that? Just "$h1t happens?" No greater meaning? No interwoven meaning? All life is just pure luck of the draw?

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:08 pm

Saint_;1428767 wrote: So when a tragedy happens how do you process that? Just "$h1t happens?" No greater meaning? No interwoven meaning? All life is just pure luck of the draw?

I dont process it by imagining its part of a creator's plan. Why does it have to involve a greater meaning ? So God allows a few children to die in a tornado but allows others to live and thats a miracle ? Thats Gods wish ? Not for me. If it helps you and gives you comfort, fine. I need no such comfort.

We are all atheists about most of the gods humanity has believed in. I just choose an extra god to not believe in than you do

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:45 pm

Saint_;1428766 wrote: Nope. The doctors confirmed that my heart had stopped for as long as two minutes. Stopped Dead. And seeing the back of your head from behind yourself, seeing your own body fall to the floor, and seeing the spirits of your entire ancestral family tree is a very real experience, believe me. Besides, I know very well what a hallucination is like... I lived through the seventies. This was no hallucination.

Easy enough. I still have things to do in the tapestry that is my destiny. Perhaps just telling you this story is a part of that...It doesn't matter how long your heart stopped for, you didn't die, you're alive.

You conveniently left out the part of why not others.

You're not special. Nobody is. That's what is most disturbing for believers and why they come up with rationalizations for a God and creation, as you did. Not being the special child a very difficult concept to grasp and a scary thought, isn't it? Look at the fly buzzing around your head: your life is no more important than that fly's to any other entity except other members of your own species, and you. The universe and no occupant thereof even knows you exist and couldn't care less. You simply can't conceive that fact.

The hardest part of coming out of religion and the lies it informs us with is that we're no more significant than any other organism. We have to get over ourselves.

I often think that I wish I had not learned what I have because living a myth is so much easier than becoming conscious of reality and truth.

Stay where you are, Saint, life is less of a challenge there and you'll no doubt be happier. For me, there's no unringing the bell. I know what I know.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:49 pm

Snowfire;1428769 wrote: So God allows a few children to die in a tornado but allows others to live and thats a miracle ? Thats Gods wish ?

Absolutely! The Universe is infinitely complex. Perhaps some of the children who survived will grow up to do other critically important things, or just have children who will have children who will change the future. Perhaps those who died will have grieving parents who will comfort another who is going through the same thing and convince them to have another child who will alter mankind's future.

If you only look at the surface event, you can't see any of the ripples in the immense pond of life, crossing and recrossing each other creating billions of probabilities and possibilities. It's like looking at a medieval tapestry and seeing only one thread, never the fantastically complex portrait itself. Of course, if you said that I cant' see that picture either, you'd be right...

...but that's what faith is for.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:02 pm

Ahso!;1428771 wrote: It doesn't matter how long your heart stopped for, you didn't die, you're alive.

No...I died...then came back to life. That's a big difference. The difference being, of course, I got to see the other side.

You conveniently left out the part of why not others.

Why not others what?

You're not special. Nobody is.

Actually, I believe that everyone is special. Especially you, Ahso! Each human being is a one-of-a-kind, never to be repeated creation. How special is that?

your life is no more important than that fly's to any other entity except other members of your own species, and you. The universe and no occupant thereof even knows you exist and couldn't care less. You simply can't conceive that fact.

I know why I believe there is a Creator. I died and saw that there is more to reality than this existence. What evidence do you have that there is no God?

The hardest part of coming out of religion and the lies it informs us with is that we're no more significant than any other organism. We have to get over ourselves.

I often think that I wish I had not learned what I have because living a myth is so much easier than becoming conscious of reality and truth.

So sentience has no value to you? Dogs and humans are equals despite the fact we are sentient and they are not? Dog = God? (haha.. couldn't resist that one!) Isn't it obvious that, since intelligence is the optimum evolutionary trait for survival that the entire Universe was created to grow and support intelligent life? Doesn't that imply a plan and a Planner?

Stay where you are, Saint, life is less of a challenge there and you'll no doubt be happier. For me, there's no unringing the bell. I know what I know.

Well as a scientist, I understand atheists...I really do. Of course you could never believe something that couldn't be proven to you scientifically! You'd have to see it for yourself. (As I did!) So I have no hope to persuade you, and I don't really wish to try. In this case, as it has been for millennia, we just have to agree to disagree.

I will say one last thing though for you to ponder. Certainly by now, you have seen things in life that are trillions-to-one coincidences. Things that defy logical or scientific explanation. Doesn't that give you a reasonable doubt?

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:34 pm

Saint_;1428774 wrote: What evidence do you have that there is no God?

You cant prove a negative and besides the burden of proof as a believer, is yours

The trillion to one chances are just how evolution works. You believe in evolution, don't you ? You're a scientist. As for reasonable doubt, When I see a billion galaxies with a billion stars, I ask why a creator would create a billion galaxies that we cant even see let alone visit, so Why ? Can't be for us.

No. Its the natural evolution of the universe.

I still see the beauty. I'm still awe struck. It still blows my mind but I'm not arrogant enough to think its for our benefit. It just is ! It's about time. Its about space and the expansion thereof. I have the peace of mind to accept that without the necessity of a God

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:41 pm

Saint_;1428774 wrote: No...I died...then came back to life. That's a big difference. The difference being, of course, I got to see the other side.No you didn't. When we dream we believe we see ourselves also. Are we dead when we sleep?

Saint_;1428774 wrote: Why not others what?Why are you so special and so many others not?

Saint_;1428774 wrote: Actually, I believe that everyone is special. Especially you, Ahso! Each human being is a one-of-a-kind, never to be repeated creation. How special is that?Besides being patronizing (though I understand you don't intend it that way, it's just you), this sentence is incorrect. Every organism is unique in it's existence and structural DNA makeup.

Saint_;1428774 wrote: I know why I believe there is a Creator. I died and saw that there is more to reality than this existence. What evidence do you have that there is no God?I know you think you know why there's a creator. However, that doesn't make anything true. My evidence that there is no creator is - you, life and this challenge I've offered before. Bring me your God and I'll expose it as a fraud.

Saint_;1428774 wrote: So sentience has no value to you? Dogs and humans are equals despite the fact we are sentient and they are not? Dog = God? (haha.. couldn't resist that one!) Isn't it obvious that, since intelligence is the optimum evolutionary trait for survival that the entire Universe was created to grow and support intelligent life? Doesn't that imply a plan and a Planner?Sentience has value for those who experience it, not those who don't. So, sentience has value to me and you. The universe and this little, tiny planet within that universe did just fine prior to any sentient being existed. You're not special because you're self-aware. Get over yourself.

Optimum evolutionary trait? WTF is that? No such thingie, Saintie.

Saint_;1428774 wrote: Well as a scientist, I understand atheists...I really do. Of course you could never believe something that couldn't be proven to you scientifically! You'd have to see it for yourself. (As I did!) So I have no hope to persuade you, and I don't really wish to try. In this case, as it has been for millennia, we just have to agree to disagree.I hope you realize your only bullshitting yourself. nobody else really gives a flying f%$k anymore.

Saint_;1428774 wrote: I will say one last thing though for you to ponder. Certainly by now, you have seen things in life that are trillions-to-one coincidences. Things that defy logical or scientific explanation. Doesn't that give you a reasonable doubt?Just because something or an event defies my ability to understand it doesn't make it magical or spiritual or any other supernatural phenomena. Believe it or not, Saint, you're not capable of understanding everything, the fact that you're a sentient being notwithstanding.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:52 pm

Saint_;1428758 wrote: Morals are cultural. What's right in one culture, say polygamy, is immoral in another. So of course atheists have morals. Most are highly intelligent and are very cognizant and sensitive to cultural norms and traditions of right and wrong.

Unfortunately, for Aetheists, there is no tomorrow. To them, this world is all that exists which tends to make them much more materialistic and less spiritual. Sorry if that stings, but it's true. If you don't believe in any afterlife, then life is all there is and becomes that much more important. Does that make them selfish, since they might be less likely to to commit acts that they think would help them after death? Or that might be mandated by a religion? Not in my experience. They seem just as unselfish and charitable as most of us.

As someone who has died and seen the other side, though, I feel badly for aetheists. I know for a fact that life exists after death, so that colors all my dealings in this world.

Honestly, I can't imagine what it must be like to deal with all life's vagaries and think that there is no meaning and everything is just random chance. How depressing. If nothing else, religion offers consolation for hard times and hope that even the worst times have meaning.

An atheist is someone who does not believe in a god or put another way atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist. We are all spiritual beings what is not necessary is the belief in a god controlling everything and to whom we must give due obeisance.

I can't imagine what it is like to deal with all life's vagaries and live with the fear that god may have forsaken you or that when life takes it toll and you watch loved ones die or suffer console yourself with the belief that god has some master plan that you can't understand and misery and suffering has a purpose and it is god's or look at another human being and feel sorry for them because they are damned and you (not you specifically I use the word in a general sense for any monotheistic religions) are going to heaven. I can't imagine hating or despising anyone because of their lifestyle and religion and feeling justified in denying them the same liberty and tolerance and respect I demand for my beliefs and lifestyle.

Being materialistic and selfish is not a good tactic to get on in the world atheists being rational people are more likely to be generous and giving because it's common sense to be that way. A sense iof justice, right from wrong all religion does is twist the perception to justify repression and

Monotheistic religions are by their nature selfish, they demand obedience and deny the right of any differing beliefs to co-exist. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Where is the tolerance in that? The selfish god wants everything, even it seems those that believe he does not exist, believe or the followers will come get you.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:49 pm

gmc;1428742 wrote: posted by tude dog

Why do you assume I am hostile towards your religion? I don't even know what it is although I would tend to assume christian but which particular sect?

Fair enough. Should not have said 'my religion'. While on the subject, I am a religious Jew, of the Conservative persuasion, as opposed to Orthodox, Reform.

gmc;1428742 wrote: Sectarianism is christian sects fighting with each other about which version is the true one. That is not a dig at your religion merely an observation. I happen to have grown up with catholic/protestant sectarianism I don't mind religious people - bigots I have little tolerance for. That's not a dig at you either I'm not calling you a bigot, Sometimes I feel you can't make a general comment on religion without someone deciding it's [ersonal and to take offence. If you have faith what anyone else thinks shouldn't matter to you.

Pretty well put.

gmc;1428742 wrote: Before you ask yes I have read the bible

OH NO!

gmc;1428742 wrote: started on the Koran and realised where most of it came from, even looked at some of the Sanskrit texts but got distracted by the kama sutra.

Funny, I spent more time reading the, Communist Manifesto Das Kapital ,

Really true.

Commie Manifesto was good reading.

Das Kapita, as interesting as slogging through Leviticus.

gmc;1428742 wrote: Then what is the origin of anti-Semitism?

For starters

Mark 15:6-15

King James Version (KJV)

6 Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.

7 And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

8 And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them.

9 But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?

10 For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.

11 But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them.

12 And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews?

13 And they cried out again, Crucify him.

14 Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.

15 And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:45 am

posted by tude dog

Funny, I spent more time reading the, Communist Manifesto Das Kapital ,

Really true.

Commie Manifesto was good reading.

Das Kapita, as interesting as slogging through Leviticus.

I've read them as well - OK das caoital I chucked half way through because by then I had decided marx had got it wrong and it was really boring. People always get in the way of would be political theorists by not behaving as predicted. The sanskrit texts are interesting, many think they influenced the bible. People travelled around in ancient times more than we give then credit for and the middle east must have been a conduit for ideas as well as trade.

I find this kind of thing endlessly fascinating and it's fun when you can discuss it with someone you don't agree with but who also doesn't throw the dummy out the pram because they think no one should criticise religion or discuss it unless they accept it's "truth" in the first place.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Jun 04, 2013 7:15 am

TD: "While on the subject, I am a religious Jew, of the Conservative persuasion, as opposed to Orthodox, Reform."

Gasp.

Lantzman!

Are there enough of you to form a minyan in rural Kansas?

Well, well. You can knock me over with a feather.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Jun 04, 2013 8:58 am

I can't get this out of my mind. A bit obsessed, actually. I'm pretty sure, but not positive, that a few months back, you--td--mentioned that you belonged to a church. Practicing Jews can go to church, of course, but don't 'belong' to a church. You're not a Jews 4 Jesus member, right? Or, worse yet, not a convert to Judaism who is a member of a Jews 4 Jesus?

Forgive me in advance if I'm wrong about having these questions. Not that you should mind if you are sincere.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:49 pm

gmc;1428814 wrote: posted by tude dog

OK das caoital I chucked half way through because by then I had decided marx had got it wrong and it was really boring.

Must confess, didn't make it nearly halfway, not even.

I don't feel so bad though as it seems nobody ever understood it anyway.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:25 pm

AnneBoleyn;1428832 wrote: I can't get this out of my mind. A bit obsessed, actually. I'm pretty sure, but not positive, that a few months back, you--td--mentioned that you belonged to a church. Practicing Jews can go to church, of course, but don't 'belong' to a church. You're not a Jews 4 Jesus member, right? Or, worse yet, not a convert to Judaism who is a member of a Jews 4 Jesus?

Forgive me in advance if I'm wrong about having these questions. Not that you should mind if you are sincere.

First of all, I can't imagine ever saying I belonged to a church, and I abhor the Jews for Jesus crowd.

Plenty of Jews in the major cities of Kansas, not so much here. Then again, I am not a Kansas native.

It was bound to come out. I am a native of the formerly Great State of California. Most of my life in the Los Angeles county area.

Wifey and I owned a house for lots of years and sold it. Moved to a depressed area of Kansas, bought house. No more mortgage payment.

We gave up a lot, but then we gained a lot.

I was born in rural California, and I embrace rural Kansas.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 2:10 pm

1. "First of all, I can't imagine ever saying I belonged to a church,

2. and I abhor the Jews for Jesus crowd."

1. I did say I wasn't positive

2. What a relief.

Yes, my dad always said about even the most rural of places..........."there's always a Jew in the act." When I lived in rural Wisconsin, I was the lone wolfette. The first time I visited Zurich, Switzerland, a man drunkenly stood up, pointed at me & shouted in German "Juden!". We became best friends.