The cost of atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-08-2014, 03:09 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
(27-08-2014 02:12 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(27-08-2014 01:53 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  So since we have established that no one who wrote of jesus knew him...

Even though I agree with you for the most part, I think this statement is maybe a bit too strong. I know traditional Catholics who still claim that Matthew and John were the Matthew and John (apostles of Jesus), and that Mark was some sort of secretary to Peter, and therefore at least a secondhand eyewitness. Now, I know that the consensus of modern Biblical scholarship says this is unlikely (and that is my opinion as well), but it's not an exact science, and I don't know that it has been "established". I will grant the possibility that these gospels were written by eyewitnesses -- I just think it's very unlikely. I think the truth is that we don't know who wrote the gospels. Nobody can prove that they were written by eyewitnesses, but I don't think we can disprove it either. We should be careful about claiming things as facts that we really don't know.

What I can't quite work out is - why it really matters who wrote the gospels? :-)

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2014, 03:14 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
I wasn't going to dip my toes into this pond, I don't have the depth of scholarly backgrounds as many, though I am learning and continually trying to expand my knowledge as I go. As this conversation, which I had seen early emergences of entering the realm of Morality and the Bible, it's like nails on a chalk board. Why?! Why does so many people automatically think that just because you do not buy in to the Bible that you suddenly have a skewed perspective of morality?

Chas made a statement I agree with: Or perhaps their culture? Just like religionists. You don't get your morals from the Bible, you get them from your self and your culture.

Are there not still many under-developed cultures/tribes that do not know about the 'good book' yet have a set of morals based on their culture and their upbringing? It may not agree with what we have as our own, but they have theirs and their culture has been able to survive without the grace of god.

The Euthypho argument a (and please don't quote me as I'm trying to recall from recent discovery of this) isn't this where it is acceptably good only through god but if it is good and doesn't require god, then why is there a need for god?

There will, I believe, always be people that require a god to dictate their life, but it is in dire need of revamping. I personally do not believe that you need god or a bible to dictate morality as there are many values that transcend culture and religion as human rights and there doesn't need to be a dogma that needs to validate that for us, however, it is not the case much of the time.

Perhaps it is me, but I feel as though there is ridgedness in the OP stance and the initial approach though not wanting to pick a debate/fight created one as that to me seems to come into a group with a preconceived notion as many already do. I do my best not to pigeon-hole people but when you keep seeing the repeated appearance of attitudes it makes it very difficult.

I want to learn, from both perspectives to be the best of who we can be no matter, but by entering somewhere knowing you will not change your mind even though you know where you come is to a place of logic and reason seekers, the road will be rocky. We are all one species yet we divide ourselves with these beliefs in so many gods that are 'the chosen one' it is ridiculous to think we share the same DNA at times.

I tend to ask random questions, sometime stupid ones, but I can almost guarantee I'm smarter for asking than not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Kemasyn's post
27-08-2014, 03:24 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
(27-08-2014 03:08 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(27-08-2014 02:50 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  You're not unique. We've seen dozens of your kind here. Maybe you should actually follow the Bible and live with love for all people and ignore their sin as Christ does.

That does seem the better option, short of droppin the whole Bible'n sin routine wholesale...

Wink

I know you're joking, but I don't want to give people the wrong idea.

I very much follow the Bible... it's just... this dude isn't following it as instructed.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2014, 03:25 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
(27-08-2014 12:34 PM)ChristianMan Wrote:  
(27-08-2014 11:56 AM)wazzel Wrote:  Does not help the situation at all, Jesus said you still have to follow the old rules (Matthew 5:17).

No he didn't, He said he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfil it. For example the rules on sacrificing animals are fulfilled in His sacrificial death; so instead of sacrificing animals we now trust in the ultimate sacrifice. Everything in the OT is either fulfilled and now taken up into the person of Christ, or fulfilled and then re-issued through Christ. Fulfilled is not abolished. Standard Christian theology.
And with the first word, "No", you got that wrong. If the old (critical word you left out) law is not abolished, then it still stands and still must be followed (i.e., obeyed). Wazzel is right.

(27-08-2014 01:46 PM)ChristianMan Wrote:  I also have a degree in theology, but thanks for your concern.
Facepalm

By the way, do you even think about what you are saying when you discuss "sacrificing animals" and sacrificing Jesus? Why would any god need animal death or most especially death of himself? Also, are slavery, stoning, cannibalism, and baby killing - you know, those parts of the old law many Christians like to pretend don't exist - fulfilled now too by Jesus? Consider

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2014, 03:27 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
I haven't read through this whole thread but here is an NPR interview with the author of a book called...

"Myth of the Muslim Tide" by Doug Saunders ...

which debunks much of what has been discussed here.

It's about 33 minutes long and I encourage you to listen to it.


http://www.npr.org/2012/09/19/161168231/...uslim-tide

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2014, 03:28 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
(27-08-2014 03:09 PM)phil.a Wrote:  
(27-08-2014 02:12 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Even though I agree with you for the most part, I think this statement is maybe a bit too strong. I know traditional Catholics who still claim that Matthew and John were the Matthew and John (apostles of Jesus), and that Mark was some sort of secretary to Peter, and therefore at least a secondhand eyewitness. Now, I know that the consensus of modern Biblical scholarship says this is unlikely (and that is my opinion as well), but it's not an exact science, and I don't know that it has been "established". I will grant the possibility that these gospels were written by eyewitnesses -- I just think it's very unlikely. I think the truth is that we don't know who wrote the gospels. Nobody can prove that they were written by eyewitnesses, but I don't think we can disprove it either. We should be careful about claiming things as facts that we really don't know.

What I can't quite work out is - why it really matters who wrote the gospels? :-)

Phil

From an apologetics standpoint, it makes an enormous difference whether the gospels are eyewitness accounts or merely hearsay. That's why it matters who wrote them and when they were written.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
27-08-2014, 03:37 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
Quote:Chas made a statement I agree with: Or perhaps their culture? Just like religionists. You don't get your morals from the Bible, you get them from your self and your culture.

It's not quite a given. I think this is a really important point, where morals arrive from is a function of an individual's level of psychological development.

Specifically - people at rational levels of psychological development can ethically discern (derive moral judgements from scratch to meet the situation), whereas pre-rational thinkers need an external morality authority. They can't ethically discern for themselves, they have to follow the rules.

The reason for this is a capacity for objectivity and impartiality is required to step back from subjectivity, if you can't do that, it's not really possible to look outside of your own self-interest and consider the broader ethics.


(27-08-2014 03:14 PM)Kemasyn Wrote:  Why does so many people automatically think that just because you do not buy in to the Bible that you suddenly have a skewed perspective of morality?

Simple - to someone who can't ethically discern, the bible is an essential part of their moral toolkit. It therefore appears to them that anyone who does not have such a book is "morally adrift" because that individual's potential ability to ethically discern without the rule book is out of sight to him.

You need to be able to ethically discern, before you can spot capacities of ethical discernment in others. Pre-rational thinkers have no way of seeing that rational thinkers have that capacity.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes phil.a's post
27-08-2014, 03:41 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
(27-08-2014 09:58 AM)ChristianMan Wrote:  Ask an Islamic woman if she is suffering and she will say no. Islamic women were on the streets of London calling British women whores for how they dress etc.
Here's a perfect example of the incorrect claims you make. In fact, some Islamic women will say no. Others won't say no only because they fear what will happen to them if they do even though "no" is their true answer. Still others will say no and have done so.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
27-08-2014, 03:43 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
(27-08-2014 03:41 PM)Impulse Wrote:  
(27-08-2014 09:58 AM)ChristianMan Wrote:  Ask an Islamic woman if she is suffering and she will say no. Islamic women were on the streets of London calling British women whores for how they dress etc.
Here's a perfect example of the incorrect claims you make. In fact, some Islamic women will say no. Others won't say no only because they fear what will happen to them if they do even though "no" is their true answer. Still others will say no and have done so.

Quiet, you.

Your mere facts are no match for his feels!

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
27-08-2014, 03:43 PM
RE: The cost of atheism
(27-08-2014 02:32 PM)ChristianMan Wrote:  tally up insults in this thread see how the atheists come out. Anyway, by inconsistent I meant that atheists have no universal standard of right and wrong. So each does what is right in their own eyes, or that of their peer group.

Since when have Christians ever had a problem with throwing morals aside to benefit themselves? The number of Christians that have done immoral crap in the name of their religion (the crusades, the holocaust, etc.) is more than anyone could ever count. The Bible is chock full of so much immoral crap and contradictions that Christians have never had a problem with cherry-picking which ones they want to use to justify their cause. Slave owners in the southern U.S. did it when they made arguments against emancipation for African-Americans.

Atheism is only the lack of belief in a god. Atheists still follow laws against killing, robbing, or causing physical harm to people, because they still consider it to be amoral to commit such acts. Your religion didn't invent morality, and if you feel like everybody needs to believe in some invisible sky daddy (specifically yours) that will doom them to eternal torture if they do not follow his rules in order for them to do good, then that's pretty damn sad. The whole notion that people only do good to cover their own ass for some afterlife is depressing and pathetic.

“Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool.” - Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WindyCityJazz's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: