Then those Christians are defective sociopaths who are only kept in line by the delusional belief that there is a supernatural agency that can punish them for wrongdoing.
I would live my last hours with the people I love, if I knew for sure it would end tomorrow, I wouldn’t waste time on things like paying bills that wouldn’t exist soon. For that matter, I wouldn’t make a dental appointment for after the end-date.
I find it tickling that you thought that was a hard question.
Which, I think you’ll agree, is about the cuntiest thing ever said.
“My family are all, dead. My children…” — Job
“Fuck you, insect!” — God
An omnipotent being doesn’t need to create needless suffering to prove points. He can explain things in a manner that can be understood. [/problem_of_evil]
That’s nonsense. You’re asserting that something can’t be understood, so that you can rationalize a stupid story.
The easier answer is that the men who penned the story had no supernatural agency guiding them, and were in fact, ignorant primitives.
My point is that atheists have no more objective basis for their morality than they say theists do.
If a moral belief is valid if and only if it is based on an objectively proven standard, then an atheist’s moral belief is valid if and only if the standard on which it rests is objectively proven. Thus if
Unless he can demonstrate the objective truth of his opinons, his moral values are no better than those based on the belief that they are the will of God.
Then by the same logic, atheists are even more defective sociopaths, since they cannot give a valid reason for their beliefs at all. And are that much more delusional. Christians, IOW, are acting logically. Atheists are not - they are basing their actions on principles they know to be invalid.
Perhaps that explains some of the fact that most of the great mass murderers in history were atheists.
Regards,
Shodan
Nothing is objective. But atheists have a basis for morality that’s superior to the ramblings of some primitive ignorants from the steamy taint of the Roman Empire.
No, because, in this atheist’s case at least, my moral beliefs are based on empathy and the belief that this life alone is what we get.
I don’t hurt people because I don’t want to be hurt. I don’t steal, because I don’t want things to be taken from me, and I also don’t want to go to jail.
Compare this with some religious person trying to keep people from getting married, because of the prejudice of a stinking primitive’s ignorant scrawls.
Basing your morality on logic and empathy is much better than just following the dictates of some profoundly ignorant guy from the Levant a few thousand years ago.
No. You’re just hitting back without thinking.
If a Christian says that they would rape, murder and steal without God, then they are saying the want to rape murder and steal, but are kept from doing it by fear of supernatural repercussions. That’s them being a defective sociopath.
Compare with an atheist, who doesn’t rape, murder, and steal because he doesn’t want to hurt others. And who fears no supernatural repercussions. That’s not being a defective sociopath.
That you could say the atheist is more of a sociopath, is pure drivel. It’s mindlessly shouting, “NO U!” in response to a criticism.
Christians are acting on what a primitive man from thousands of years ago is telling them right. That primitive man thought some stupid things about the world. So basing your modern life on the thoughts of a man from an ignorant, savage time is absurd. You wouldn’t go to a first century physician for advice on a lump under your arm, you shouldn’t go to him for advice on how to treat gay people, women, or children.
When utterly failing, all you can do is flail around with nonsense. Also, Hitler was a Christian. <3
The ability to do good, just for the sake of doing good is generally innate, and if raised in a loving home, in a good environment, all of these factor in to leading a good and decent life, barring any major mental illness. Many will contribute to society in a positive way.
All the evidence indicates a very natural world without gods and supernatural explanations. Nothing illogical to that, is there? Of all the gods, what pointed you to Jehovah/Yahweh/Jesus, and convinced you this one was the real deal? Where does logic come in to arrive at this conclusion?
Wasn’t aware that was a fact. What credible cite shows this is the case?
According to one book, there once was someone that killed off more than 99.99% of the living creatures on Earth, and he wasn’t an atheist.
Not really. Consider that the Tanakh, the NT and the Qrn were all written in a time period when books were much more precious than gold. Their function was not to speak to the faithful but to serve as reference manuals for clerics. “God’s word” was not only difficult to understand, it was difficult to actually view, you prettymuch had to talk to a religious leader to even hear what was in those books. Hence, the parts that were contradictory were inconsequential because they were not subject to much scrutiny. Religion works better when there are not a lot of people examining its content (cf. Scientology).
Atheism is a large and murky “system of non-belief”. Its contingent is even more divers and varied than that of almost all formalized belief systems. I know I do not even accept the validity of “objective morality”. Every application of ethical interest is unique, the objective standard must be flexible enough to account for this or it is pragmatically useless at best.
In reality, it looks like even for believers, “objective morality” demands situational variation. When believers find themselves in a moral quandary, what do they do but approach a leader or on their own comb through the concordance to find an usable passage that will justify the easy way out (i.e., a loophole).
There is no objective morality, not even for those who believe that there is.’
[Wincing] Dude, stop stabbing yourself, and point the knife at the other guy. This is hurting me to watch.
At least he put some thought into them, which counts for something with me.
“I’m right because God says I’m right.”
“No, He doesn’t.”
And then, the comparisons of objective facts commence, right?
For this, um, “debate” to go anywhere, you’re going to have to stop repeating yourself and address the arguments of the people on the other side. Like, for instance, when they offer up their reasoning for their moral stances, and you respond with “they cannot give a valid reason”.
You may want to make a note of this one: Ignoring the other person’s argument does NOT count the same as refuting it. In fact, it earns negative points.
I understand that being able to have a rational debate isn’t particularly necessary at church, but in this forum, if you’re goal is to achieve anything other than looking foolish, you’ll need to do some listening to the other side during the breaks between your homilies.
That is to say, we couldn’t come up with an objective authority for our moral beliefs, so we made one up.
Admittedly, it’s a queer sort of logic…and you have to turn your head just the right way in order to see it.
I’m not kidding. Hold the knife so that the blade faces AWAY from you.
-VM
This example doesn’t count, because–not to put too fine a point on it–they were *asking *for it.
-VM
If I ever figure out what the hell this means, I’ll probably agree with you.
I just can’t figure out how it all depends on how people enter the water.
-VM
That’s what Robert Anton Wilson Called The Oliver Hardy Defense: “Now look what you made me do!”
Really?
:dubious:
I can prove the Bible is pro-slavery from cover to cover without torturing its words at all!
So Christians main purpose wasn’t to be saved, even back then? Concentrate on today’s Christians. Is not one of their main purposes to be saved? That seems to be one of the main themes throughout the NT. And the way to get to know him better and to know what is required is to read about him through the bible, find out what one must do to be saved, which also means and accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. Take away any hope of an afterlife, and see how many still cling to it.
I admit that this topic fascinates me a little. It seems that the goal is to generate convenient “gotcha” questions for Christians. And there have been a lot of good ones posted. However, the things that really offend me in the Christian faiths are ones that take some context to express. So, on the off chance that anyone here might find it useful, here is how I think about the subject:
Popular understanding of our universe seems to be that the Big Bang was a singular explosion that happened billions of years ago, and everything we see is what came after. But that’s not quite right. The explosion is still happening, and we’re living inside it. Just let that sink in a bit. Time as we understand it starts at the beginning pop and effectively ends when nothing is burning and entropy reigns.
In my imagination, it’s like a fireworks show, and the stars and galaxies are the sparkly bits that you see expanding into the sky. They burn for a time, and then fade into darkness. The whole thing is amazing and terrifying, and the overall feeling it gives me is best described as awe.
As a thought experiment, I’m willing to consider that some God Being is causing this to happen on purpose. Of course, such a Being is generally unfathomable to me, and Its motives mysterious. I’m not sure of any positive statements I would be comfortable making about It. Nonetheless, it seems perfectly natural to make any number of negative assumptions, including
[ol]
[li]It doesn’t give a rat’s ass whether I believe in Its existence or try to worship It. It’s not living for my gratitude.[/li][li]It’s not particularly interested in having me continually harrass It for favors. If It has some grand plan, It’s not likely to suddenly change it because I asked for an exception.[/li][li]It doesn’t expect me to live my life based on cryptic notes It passed to desert nomads several thousand years ago.[/li][li]If it were to give birth to an Only Son and send that Son to live among us, It would not give the human species an opportunity to have an eternal reward in return for killing Him.[/li][/ol]
I don’t believe that this represents any great insight on my part–it just means I’m not quite that fucking stupid. And it’s that last one that blows me away about the Christian faiths. How anyone could think that this notion might represent God’s position completely mystifies me.
Seriously, let’s review some of the highpoints of the story as given:
[ul]
[li]God drowns most of Its creation.[/li][li]A human earns God’s trust by demonstrating his willingness to kill his own child.[/li][li]Humanity earns an opportunity for everlasting reward through events that hinge on humans killing God’s child.[/li][/ul]
In sum, of all the myriad species God has put on this planet, it seems that we are special to It in large part due to our proven capacity and willingness to kill our own kind.
I try to ask the question in many different ways, but at the end of the day it boils down to this: I understand that the narrative is fascinating as a dark, morbid tale, but how can anyone take it seriously? How can you think that this is really represents the universe God would create?
Put another way: Given this idea you have of an all-knowing, all-powerful God, how can you possibly think so little of Him to allow you to believe that He might work this way?
-VM
Did Doubting Thomas go to Heaven? He got the opportunity to check the evidence and draw his own conclusions; whereas, I am expected to go along based on faith and the say-so of people I never met. How fair is that?
-VM
If Jesus came back to life after 3 days, how can you say He gave His life for me? It’s not a gift if you take it right back. At most, it was a short-term loan?
-VM
If Jesus could resurrect Himself from the dead, why do you think His dying was such a major sacrifice? If He had stayed dead, it would have been a little more meaningful, but three days dead…so what? Some people have to live their whole lives in a swamp.
-VM
He gave his Earthly human life for you. What more do you want free slurpees and french fries?
Can you describe Heaven in a way that doesn’t make it sound dreadful?
-VM
Count: he was strung up on Friday evening, he was out of the tomb on Sunday morning – 3 days?