Misconceptions about the athiest.

An Atheist who does not believe in God or the after life, would generally have little sense of morals, as they believe they will not be held accountable for their actions. Atheists tend to be very ego-centric, materialist and hedonistic. It would be ignorant to say they are all debauched, however most are. It's not a misconception, it's a generalization, and does actually have some truth. Most stereotypes actually do.

Atheists also tend to be moral relativists, which practically means, they have no defined morals. It's all fair game. We can argue philosophically that most Atheists do not have a greater purpose to their existence as they see themselves as nothing more than bio-chemical machines.

Most of our youth culture are atheists and they illustrate everything I have said above.

Originally posted by quango
That they are more intelligent and less ignorant, than theists.
That they are not "slaves" to belief systems.
That they are more accepting of others, than those of faith.

Are you speaking as an athiest?

Just because an atheist doesn't believe in Hell, doesn't mean there isn't one. In which case, yes - you would need to be 'saved' from it.

If mother Teresa was an athiest would she go to hell for not believing in god? Wouldn't her just being the caring person that she was be enough for him?
I don't understand how belief is relevent if you're already doing the right thing.

the very fact that someone doesn't believe in God makes them a sinner? To me , that illustrates the problem with religion and its purveyance of ignorance, arrogance, and narrow-mindedness.

But that's what they believe. The above quote is the exact same type of judging and labelling. But instead of "sinner", it's "ignorant".

It's not the same. Ignorance is saying the earth is the centre of the universe.. the bible says it is.. but anyone who believes this is ignorant of the fact that it is not. People calling others 'sinner' simply because they won't convert are making completely baseless judgements on the moral charactor of that person and therefore how they live their lives. The problem with this is they think this judgement gives them thr ight to try and force people to live lives they approve of when it's not their business.

Why should an athiest be annoyed to be called a sinner by a christian?
A sinner is someone who sins. To a christian, sinning means doing something that would displease God. The word "sin" is probably entirely a christian construct. Since athiests are obviously doing something to displease God, they are obviously sinners.

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
An Atheist who does not believe in God or the after life, would generally have little sense of morals,

Baseless assumptions. I care about humanity.. I am not looking to the sky everytime something goes wrong. If someone is unconcious I would try revive them.. I would not wait for divine intervention.
As proven by history.. people who believe in god do not always have admirable morals. Athiests have NEVER caused holy wars.. and we are on the brink of another one. War and Genocide are immoral.. it doesn't stop being immoral when it's done in god's name. :shk:

as they believe they will not be held accountable for their actions.

I hold myself accountable... so I try and do positive things.. the results are usually positive. If I did negative things the results would be negative.. good reward/ bad reward. I'm accountable straight away.. it's a nice deal because I actually get to have a better life while I'm actually alive to see it instead of hoping to put my hand out for an IOU when I'm dead.

Atheists tend to be very ego-centric, materialist and hedonistic. It would be ignorant to say they are all debauched, however most are. It's not a misconception, it's a generalization, and does actually have some truth. Most stereotypes actually do.

Declaring something is not a misconception doesn't make it so.. even if it is made by you.

Atheists also tend to be moral relativists, which practically means, they have no defined morals.

You seem to forget that we are a SOCIAL species and actually have intinctive ethics.. also.. people are raised different way and are taught ethics as well so they may have already have defined morals.. becoming an athiest wouldn't erase all they have learnt in their childhoods.

It's all fair game. We can argue philosophically that most Atheists do not have a greater purpose to their existence as they see themselves as nothing more than bio-chemical machines.

I don't need a god to validate my existance.

Most of our youth culture are atheists and they illustrate everything I have said above.

Teenagers generally are rebellious etc.. and always have been. It has nothing to do with athiesm.

[edit on 5-1-2005 by riley]

I really appreciate how well composed and civil your reply was. Makes for an interesting exchange.

Originally posted by riley
I use my own conscience to guide me.

What composes your conscience? Logic, emotion, instinct, learned behaviour or all four? Maybe something else I didn't include? In any of those, I'd say a person would have to have faith in their conscience to guide them correctly, yes?

Originally posted by riley
I see more of a tendancy for believers to have more of an option to be immoral.. their morality is measured by doctrine.. it they want to be immoral they can always look up an escape clause away their own conscience in the bible or Koran..

This is misappropriation of scripture, a form of embezzlement. Assuming God is a fair judge, what would he think of embezzling his word? The phrase that comes to mind is one my parents said when I was a kid, "You should know better".

Originally posted by riley
as illustrated frequently on this site. Athiests only have themselves.. the responsibilty falls on their shoulders alone. I have never seen athiests slamming homosexuality or paganism.. [or saying 150 thousand people deserved to die:shk:]

You'll not hear me slamming people at all. Contradicts what Jesus talked about in love. If I do, please correct me because it certainly is not what is written.

Originally posted by riley
..there is nothing to preach with. God is easily used as a weapon unfortuantly.

Another sad instance. As it says though, "those who live by the sword will die by the sword."

Originally posted by riley
I admit you are definently a more positive example of a christian..

THANK YOU!

Originally posted by riley
I am wondering.. how immoral were you before you became christian? [as in lieing, stealing, abusing etc]

All the time.

Originally posted by riley
Did you already have 'a feeling' things were wrong/'sinful' before you were 'told' so?

Sometimes... when I was told it was wrong, I didn't really comprehend why especially when it didn't seem to harm anyone.

Newsflash: We're ALL sinners.

Originally posted by riley
Depends what constitutes as a sin..

Doing things that are displeasing to God, which ironically, includes thoughts and actions of hate, anger, jealousy, greed, the things we associate with negativity and/or evil.

Originally posted by riley
and I have met handicapped people for instance that I'm sure have never 'sinned' [by biblical standards but that in itself may be considered a sin as well]. I admit everyone can f#ks up.. it's human.. but the word 'sin' obligates someone to be ashamed of EVERY mistake they make and dwell on them.. shame is not constructive. You stuff up, fix it [hopefully], learn, move on, you avoid doing it again.

If I went through every day trying to atone for my own sins, I'd have no time to eat or sleep. It's more of a recognition. I don't feel shame because I know I can change the things I do wrong. It's a growth experience. Matthew 6:25 is a great chapter about 'Do not worry'. Not every mistake is a sin either. I agree that shame is not constructive. In fact, it's very destructive if you cannot absolve it. I think I'm starting to parrot your last sentence there.

Originally posted by riley
No.. I'd be kidding myself. The prospect of death kind of does suck.. but it makes me appreciate, respect and treasure the beauty of life all the more. The inevetability of it has me wanting to make the most of it.. because you only get one go at it. Of course I've had experiences with ghosts and the like but thats a whole other subject and wouldn't immediately prove god.

Ah, well, offer remains on the table. I'd be interested in heard the ghost experiences sometime.

Originally posted by riley
A couple of the replies may not be a good example.. but there's always good in them somewhere. I'll keep faith in humanity.. I just won't turn my back to it.

I'll have hope in humanity, but faith...I feel I've learned my lesson. Humanity cares about my death, not my life. In school, work, the highway, and the grocery store I'm being pushed out of the way by the needy greedy competitors. The bill collectors want my money. If I die, great! They get to vulture my estate. Insurance wants me to stay alive however...that's because they're after my money! People who want it all NOW because they only have one life to live, want to do what's best for them and their own family, new car, bigger house, extravagant vacations. A lot of 'friends' I've had had other motivations that I didn't find out about until much later. When I didn't give them what they were looking for, they left. When I die though, I'm sure there will be people at the funeral who I never knew. I'm here to try to help change this. Do you have faith in me?

[edit on 5-1-2005 by saint4God]

Riley, I said it was a generalization. I did not say all atheists fit this generalization. So stop having a spasm will you.

Baseless assumptions. I care about humanity.. I am not looking to the sky everytime something goes wrong. If someone is unconcious I would try revive them.. I would not wait for divine intervention.

What really is a baseless assumption is that you assume a theist would wait for divine intervention. It's actually a stupid assumption.

As proven by history.. people who believe in god do not always have admirable morals. Athiests have NEVER caused holy wars.. and we are on the brink of another one. War and Genocide are immoral.. it doesn't stop being immoral when it's done in god's name. :shk:

I have refuted this argument already the last time you brought this up. In a nutshell: It's all politics, baby.

I hold myself accountable... so I try and do positive things.. the results are usually positive. If I did negative things the results would be negative.. good reward/ bad reward. I'm accountable straight away.. it's a nice deal because I actually get to have a better life while I'm actually alive to see it instead of hoping to put my hand out for an IOU when I'm dead.

The truth about subjective human judgement is that it is biased. We all consider our actions right otherwise we will not enact them. Later if we deem those actions to be wrong, we will philosophize and rationalize to make our actions seem less wrong. Example: Hitler did not see his actions as "wrong" but he genuinely believed he was doing right for society and any misgiving he had, he rationalized by the support by his people.

We rationalize all of our wrongs by displacement of blame. It is either the state, parents, peers, objects or god. However, we accure guilt in our unconscious, our darker side. An aspect of our being that we hide from.
This is why a higher intelligence or god that knows us to the core of our being, threatens us.

This is one of the major reasons why there are Atheists. If there is no God, no after life, and no time where they will be held accountable for their actions, then they can do whatever they deem right - which is everything they do. It's a safety mechanism.

It is analogous to children being brought up without parents. As it is our parents who teach us morals and ethics and chide us when we do violate them. The absence of parents, means we do not learn our morals and ethics and there is no one to account for them.

Declaring something is not a misconception doesn't make it so.. even if it is made by you.

It's not a misconception. It's a generalization. It does not apply to individuals but a group. It's something humans are prone to doing to make it easier to process information about others.

There is always some truth to a generalization. For instance, the Indo-US ethnic group are rich technocrats. That does not apply to the Indian cab driver - but it does apply to the group.

You seem to forget that we are a SOCIAL species and actually have intinctive ethics.. also.. people are raised different way and are taught ethics as well so they may have already have defined morals.. becoming an athiest wouldn't erase all they have learnt in their childhoods.

You seem to forget that human society is not a fixed structure with fixed ethics and morals. It varies historically and geographically. The western culture is one predominated by atheism, materialism and hedonism, and this is why western culture is the most morally and spiritually impoverished in the world. The underlying mental cause for this moral and spiritual bankrupty is Atheism.

I don't need a god to validate my existance.

You don't really exist. You are just a fluctuation in space-time, less than a picto second. You yourself state you are nothing more than a bio-chemical machine. You have as much worth as a vacuum cleaner.

Teenagers generally are rebellious etc.. and always have been. It has nothing to do with athiesm.

I am not actually talking about teenagers but our current generation. However, a teenager can only become debauched if there is a system in place that allows that. I don't think anyone can disagree that our current generation is materialist, ego-centric, hedonist and atheist. I should also add violent.

Just think, if there was definite proof of God, how quickly that would change. Because no longer will the universe revolve around them.

[edit on 5-1-2005 by Indigo_Child]

Originally posted by saint4God
I really appreciate how well composed and civil your reply was. Makes for an interesting exchange.

Thankyou.. and yes it does. It also makes it productive rather than devisive.

What composes your conscience? Logic, emotion, instinct, learned behaviour or all four? Maybe something else I didn't include?

All of the above.. and maybe some other factors I can't think of at the moment.

In any of those, I'd say a person would have to have faith in their conscience to guide them correctly, yes?

Yes.

This is misappropriation of scripture, a form of embezzlement. Assuming God is a fair judge, what would he think of embezzling his word? The phrase that comes to mind is one my parents said when I was a kid, "You should know better".

Problem is this was and is being done by the most 'qualified' believers [the pope etc]. I am sure they believe.. but it doesn't make them moral. I think relgious morals have to be mirrored by something already exiting from within.

You'll not hear me slamming people at all. Contradicts what Jesus talked about in love. If I do, please correct me because it certainly is not what is written.

I know you haven't and wouldn't.. the philosophy of compassion Jesus taught however is pretty useless if people use the OT as an out. It's a nice philosphy actually.. smilar to buddhism. I don't know why it has been corrupted so badly. Even on this thread people have quoted Jesus [for moral athority I assume] and have spewed biggotry in the same posts. It perplexes me that they can't even see their own hypocricy.

Originally posted by riley
Did you already have 'a feeling' things were wrong/'sinful' before you were 'told' so?

Sometimes... when I was told it was wrong, I didn't really comprehend why especially when it didn't seem to harm anyone.

But if you harmed someone [even inadvertently].. would you feel remourse?

Doing things that are displeasing to God, which ironically, includes thoughts and actions of hate, anger, jealousy, greed, the things we associate with negativity and/or evil.

So things that are not distructive.. that would be good for people anyway.

If I went through every day trying to atone for my own sins, I'd have no time to eat or sleep. It's more of a recognition. I don't feel shame because I know I can change the things I do wrong. It's a growth experience.

Thats a very healthy attitude.

Ah, well, offer remains on the table. I'd be interested in heard the ghost experiences sometime.

Yeah- I might post them in the spookie forum.

I'll have hope in humanity, but faith...I feel I've learned my lesson. Humanity cares about my death, not my life.

Man that sounds a bit harsh.. why would they care [as in want] about your death?

In school, work, the highway, and the grocery store I'm being pushed out of the way by the needy greedy competitors.

Yeah- kill or be killed. I try just walk my own path so they don't get in the way [or vice verser]

People who want it all NOW because they only have one life to live, want to do what's best for them and their own family, new car, bigger house, extravagant vacations.

Hmm.. it's quality of life that counts.. not quality. Many people find that when they have accumiliated everything the TV and magazines tell them they should want.. they realsie they didn't want it in the first place and feel empty. Most people are after fulfillment I guess but they don't spend enough time getting to know who they truly are.

A lot of 'friends' I've had had other motivations that I didn't find out about until much later. When I didn't give them what they were looking for, they left.

Really sounds like you should find some friends that are not just opportunists.. hard to find but my philosphy is it's better to be alone than lonely. I went a while without friends as if they are not friends they are just catering to an illusion. Now I have very genuine friends who are there for the friendship. Feels good.

When I die though, I'm sure there will be people at the funeral who I never knew. I'm here to try to help change this. Do you have faith in me?

Of course.. but thats irrelevant. It's more important that you have faith in yourself.
[Yeah I know how corny that sounded..]

apologies for all the ### spelling mistakes. I type fast -am slightly dislexic [well I used to be] and I keep typing atheist wrong which is frustrating the hell out of me.

[edit on 5-1-2005 by riley]

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Riley, I said it was a generalization. I did not say all atheists fit this generalization. So stop having a spasm will you.

A generalisation needs to be based on some sort of fact. Generally.. the morals of athiests isn't up for discussion.. only condemnation.. and they may usually argue with logic so the subject doesn't come up. The stereo type of an atheist is someone who takes scientific fact above all.. his/her morals are not usually mentioned.. it is an assumption to decide they haven't got any.

What really is a baseless assumption is that you assume a theist would wait for divine intervention. It's actually a stupid assumption.

It was off the top of my head.
I'll use another one.. and athiest would not wait for judgement day and Jesus coming back so he can fix the human race. An athiest would try to prevent it self distructing. [not that atheists make up much of the population.. I guess that means we're doomed]

I have refuted this argument already the last time you brought this up. In a nutshell: It's all politics, baby.

You never refuted it.. and you triggered the same argument last time. And as I recall.. we ended up talking about athiests and morals last time as well.. so why did you reply if I've already discussed this with you and knew the same stuff would get repeated?

The truth about subjective human judgement is that it is biased. We all consider our actions right otherwise we will not enact them. Later if we deem those actions to be wrong, we will philosophize and rationalize to make our actions seem less wrong. Example: Hitler did not see his actions as "wrong" but he genuinely believed he was doing right for society and any misgiving he had, he rationalized by the support by his people.

Were the crusades and witch trials wrong? Was slavery wrong? Was the pope announcing "it is a scientific fact that condoms don't prevent the aids virus" wrong? [that is genocide to me]. The bible and the like have always been biased toward those with power.. Christianity is an organisation run by biased human being.. for it to be misinterprited so badly it MUST have flaws so looking to it for moral guidance won't work unless the person is actually moral themselves.

We rationalize all of our wrongs by displacement of blame.

An aspect of our being that we hide from.

I try not to hide from it.. if I did that I wouldn't grow as a person.

This is why a higher intelligence or god that knows us to the core of our being, threatens us.

This is one of the major reasons why there are Atheists. If there is no God, no after life, and no time where they will be held accountable for their actions,

1. I have answered this already. Hate begets hate. Love begets love.. every action has a reaction. Why is this so difficult to understand?
2.You can be a moral person without threat of accountability. Some people just are naturally 'good'.

then they can do whatever they deem right - which is everything they do. It's a safety mechanism.

And you consider the bible a failsafe against immorality?

The absence of parents, means we do not learn our morals and ethics and there is no one to account for them.

I guess you missed where I said some of it is instinctive.

The underlying cause for this moral and spiritual bankrupty is Atheism.

No.. and really there would probably be alot less athiests and unbelievers if there weren't priests getting done for child molestation. Were they believers? Were they moral?

You don't really exist. You are just a fluctuation in space-time, less than a picto second. You yourself state you are nothing more than a bio-chemical machine.

A machine with self awareness. Big difference.

You have as much worth as a vacuum cleaner.

I don't need validation from you either.

I am not actually talking about teenagers but our current generation.

"Back in my day.."
Man you sound old and bitter.

Just think, if there was definite proof of God, how quickly that would change. Because no longer will the universe revolve around them.

Look.. I really can't be bothered discussion every factor that contributes to wayward youths.. but I do know it's not due to athiesm. It is the enviroments in which they are raised.. children need to be nurtured not given a gameboy to shut them up. Violent ones probably come from a violent home.. their believing in god isn't going to stop them copping a thrashing every night or prevent them going to beat someone up because that thrashing made them angry.

[edit on 5-1-2005 by riley]

Originally posted by riley

What composes your conscience? Logic, emotion, instinct, learned behaviour or all four? Maybe something else I didn't include?

All of the above.. and maybe some other factors I can't think of at the momemt.

These things can lead you down stray paths though. Following instinct, as one example, can lead to a lot of harm to others or yourself later on.

In any of those, I'd say a person would have to have faith in their conscience to guide them correctly, yes?

Originally posted by riley
Yes.

Hm, interesting. Faith in something you cannot prove exists...

Originally posted by riley
Problem is this was and is being done by the most 'qualified' believers [the pope etc]. I am sure they believe.. but it doesn't make them moral. I think relgious morals have to be mirrored by something already exiting from within.

I can see where you're coming from. Christians believe God gave man a conscious. That whole Adam and Eve thing.

Originally posted by riley
I don't know why it has been corrupted so badly. Even on this thread people have quoted Jesus [for moral athority I assume] and have spewed biggotry in the same posts. It perplexes me that they can't even see their own hypocricy.

Yes, we should all be blowing the whistle when we see this.

Originally posted by riley
But if you harmed someone [even inadvertently].. would you feel remourse?

Again sometimes. If it was positive gain for me or hurt someone I didn't like, then I didn't feel remorse. My thinking was "they had it coming" and survival of the fittest. Also the phrase "I don't care" and "it doesn't affect me" blinded me from truth.

Originally posted by riley
Man that sounds a bit harsh.. why would they care [as in want] about your death?

To get me out of the way, to keep me silent, to get my money, to get my spouse, to get my position at work. You name it, I've seen it.

Originally posted by riley
Yeah- kill or be killed. I try just walk my own path so they don't get in the way [or vice verser]

I've been 'getting out of the way' of other people my whole life and making my own path but the fact is sometimes these paths physically, mentally, and emotionally intersect. Making way for everyone all the time can harbor deep resentment and frustration. Communication is key here I think. I'll give, but I have just as much right to the space I stand in as the person standing next to me. I'm not going to be ashamed of existing and bow to the wants of people around me all the time. I will however help them with their needs.

Originally posted by riley
Hmm.. it's quality of life that counts.. not quantity. (edited for spelling - s4G)
Many people find that when they have accumiliated everything the TV and magazines tell them they should want.. they realsie they didn't want it in the first place and feel empty. Most people are after fulfillment I guess but they don't spend enough time getting to know who they truly are.

If only others followed your example... Interesting that Jesus says the same thing Matthew 6:19 and other places.

Originally posted by riley
Really sounds like you should find some friends that are not just opportunists.. hard to find but my philosphy is it's better to be alone than lonely. I went a while without friends as if they are not friends they are just catering to an illusion. Now I have very genuine friends who are there for the friendship. Feels good.

I agree. Thing is I've found most of them in the Christian community rather than work and other activities. Also, I'm not afraid to correct them if they're starting to go down a wrong path. I often get a lot of hostile spew from non-Christians when I try to help (even when I don't mention God).

Originally posted by riley
Of course.. but thats irrelevant. It's more important that you have faith in yourself.

[Yeah I know how corny that sounded..]

Would you give me $1000 and trust me to return it in a week?

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
An Atheist who does not believe in God or the after life, would generally have little sense of morals, as they believe they will not be held accountable for their actions. Atheists tend to be very ego-centric, materialist and hedonistic. It would be ignorant to say they are all debauched, however most are. It's not a misconception, it's a generalization, and does actually have some truth. Most stereotypes actually do.

Atheists also tend to be moral relativists, which practically means, they have no defined morals. It's all fair game. We can argue philosophically that most Atheists do not have a greater purpose to their existence as they see themselves as nothing more than bio-chemical machines.

Most of our youth culture are atheists and they illustrate everything I have said above.

One third of my religious moral and philosophical education class at school (last year woohoo) are atheists (including me) and they are all moral people which act in the exact same way as the class�s theists and agnostics. In my experience you could not tell them apart by there moral choices.

Originally posted by Elfwood
One third of my religious moral and philosophical education class at school (last year woohoo) are atheists (including me) and they are all moral people which act in the exact same way as the class�s theists and agnostics. In my experience you could not tell them apart by there moral choices.

Athiest is a big term. It contains intentionally moral as well as intentionally amoral people. There are some actions which can clearly be defined as athiest though. If somone were to write a book titled "Believe only in yourself", there would be no other way to classify that. If someone were to break into an art museum and carve into a priceless painting "God does not exist!", that too would be from an athiest. I know you can say a Christian can commit abhorrent acts, but the point is they are not supposed to. Is there anything that an athiest isn't 'supposed' to do? Not really, so one could expect just about anything.

Originally posted by riley

Just because an atheist doesn't believe in Hell, doesn't mean there isn't one. In which case, yes - you would need to be 'saved' from it.

If mother Teresa was an athiest would she go to hell for not believing in god? Wouldn't her just being the caring person that she was be enough for him?

Like it or not, I believe the answer is yes.
The Christian belief states that NO MAN is without sin - to believe in, and to have a loving relationship with God, is what earns one the forgiveness to be welcomed into Heaven.

the very fact that someone doesn't believe in God makes them a sinner? To me , that illustrates the problem with religion and its purveyance of ignorance, arrogance, and narrow-mindedness.

But that's what they believe. The above quote is the exact same type of judging and labelling. But instead of "sinner", it's "ignorant".

It's not the same. Ignorance is saying the earth is the centre of the universe.. the bible says it is.. but anyone who believes this is ignorant of the fact that it is not. People calling others 'sinner' simply because they won't convert are making completely baseless judgements on the moral charactor of that person and therefore how they live their lives.

Same thing here - NO MAN is without sin.
Someone already said that "sin" is a Christian concept. It has no meaning to an atheist. To a Christian, we are all sinners. And to not believe in God, is the greatest sin because it automaticallly excludes you from Heaven.


[edit on 5-1-2005 by quango]

A generalisation needs to be based on some sort of fact. Generally.. the morals of athiests isn't up for discussion.. only condemnation.. and they may usually argue with logic so the subject doesn't come up. The stereo type of an atheist is someone who takes scientific fact above all.. his/her morals are not usually mentioned.. it is an assumption to decide they haven't got any.

Well, it is based in fact. I am not going debate the obvious with you. Not only have I recounted a fact to you. I have also explained the psychology.

And no, an atheist is not someone who takes scientific fact above all - that's a scientist. An atheist is someone who does not believe in God. At least know what you're talking about.

It was off the top of my head.
I'll use another one.. and athiest would not wait for judgement day and Jesus coming back so he can fix the human race. An athiest would try to prevent it self distructing. [not that atheists make up much of the population.. I guess that means we're doomed

Well, this goes to show you don't actually think about what you say. You just say it. Which is ignotant.

Yet, it's much more damaging to say say one stupid thing, admit it, and then say another stupid thing. The opposite of an atheist is a theist. A theist can subscribe to many modalities of religion.

You're single minded approach, which is now in infamy after two threads, of seeing religion as synonymous with Christianity is not only wrong but shows how childish your thoughts are. In Sikhism for instance, the adharants are expected to contribute to society through work and charity.

It does not seem like you know but some of the greatest scientists and inventors were not atheists. You are making it sound as if Atheists are the pragmatists, benefactors and saviours of this world. How stupid is that. You need to get yourself an education.

You never refuted it.. and you triggered the same argument last time. And as I recall.. we ended up talking about athiests and morals last time as well.. so why did you reply if I've already discussed this with you and knew the same stuff would get repeated?

I've devoted several paragraphs to refuting your prejudiced and ignorant argument that religion is the cause of all that is wrong and evil in our society.

Were the crusades and witch trials wrong? Was slavery wrong? Was the pope announcing "it is a scientific fact that condoms don't prevent the aids virus" wrong? [that is genocide to me]. The bible and the like have always been biased toward those with power.. Christianity is an organisation run by biased human being.. for it to be misinterprited so badly it MUST have flaws so looking to it for moral guidance won't work unless the person is actually moral themselves.

Did you actually read what I said. I don't remember ever questioning if any of the aforementioned were right or wrong. What I illustrated to you that subjective judgement is biased.

I try not to hide from it.. if I did that I wouldn't grow as a person.

I don't see you growing as a person. It's been a few months apart that we had this same debate and all your points were refuted. You are still regurgitating the same. We saw in your past post alone, how you just made a blanket statement that religious people would wait for divine intervention to revive the unconscious, then admitted it, and rationalized "It was of the top of my head"

In other words you illustrate pefectly what I said. That we commit mistakes, and then rationalize them later, to make them seem less wrong. You have not addressed that part of your personality that made that statement. This is why your judgement is biased and inherently inaccurate.

No matter how much we think we know. We know nothing.

This is why a higher intelligence or god that knows us to the core of our being, threatens us.

1. I have answered this already. Hate begets hate. Love begets love.. every action has a reaction. Why is this so difficult to understand?
2.You can be a moral person without threat of accountability. Some people just are naturally 'good'.

1: I have no idea what you just said.
2: We are naturally "good" it is beliefs, expectations and attitudes that form our personality that make us less good.

And you consider the bible a failsafe against immorality?

No, I don't. However, a devout Christian will have greater sense of morals than an Atheist, simply because they believe they will be held accountable. However, the truth is, the bible does this by fear and that can be counter-productive.

I guess you missed where I said some of it is instinctive.

Do you consider murdering your parents, moral? In a certain culture, murdering your parents is considered "moral" and "divine" because it is believed the they are sent to heaven and it the childrens duty to send them there.

No.. and really there would probably be alot less athiests and unbelievers if there weren't priests getting done for child molestation. Were they believers? Were they moral?

How many priests molest childs? I can assure you much less than atheists do.

A machine with self awareness. Big difference.

An ant could be self-aware, but what is their purpose of existence, to work or be treaded upon? There is no difference in the grande scheme of things. As I said you are nothing more but a fluctuation in space-time. It makes no difference whether you existed or not.

If it makes no difference whether you existed or not, then again; you get the freedom to do whatever you want. Who cares about morals and who cares about the value of life? We are still talking about morals here.

Look.. I really can't be bothered discussion every factor that contributes to wayward youths.. but I do know it's not due to athiesm. It is the enviroments in which they are raised.. children need to be nurtured not given a gameboy to shut them up. Violent ones probably come from a violent home.. their believing in god isn't going to stop them copping a thrashing every night or prevent them going to beat someone up because that thrashing made them angry.

Well, Einstein(please, it's sarcasm) the environment is influenced by the beliefs, expectations and attitudes of the society. And violence, is not because of a violent home, but a violence that is prevalent in our society. To illustrate further, the generations of today, do not even respect their own parents and viz versa is true too. Again, we are absolving all accountability as we have done by absolving the universe, the world, or even our immediate community. This is because our society today is too self-absorbed and too ego-centric.

Again, how quickly their worlds would evaporate before their eyes, if definite proof of a god was produced. This is what atheism does to our society. If there was a genuine belief in a positive god, it would not be so bad.

[edit on 5-1-2005 by Indigo_Child]

This thraed will never go anywhere because atheists and theists see fromm differnet perspecitive. For example Indigo Child you said thta there is a large spiritual loss in western culture due to atheism. Atheists dont see this because we dont believe in god so we dont see a loss in spirtuality. And just because may theists may do the right thing more, does that make them better peple. NO!!! If you do it out of fear of how god will punish you, and that you may not get into heaven, your are not a better person.

Originally posted by SmokeyTheBear
This thraed will never go anywhere because atheists and theists see fromm differnet perspecitive.

All the more reason to have this thread.

If all we're doing is making threads where everyone agrees with everyone, we may as well shut down the site.

your rgith please excuse that sentence from my statement, i was thinking all weird wehn i types that.

If theists follow the mroals they get from god and the bible so taht they can go to heaven is this not different then a kid doing what his parents say because his parents said they'd buy hoim ice cream. that doesn't make the kid good.

I don't know where the idea of a Christian that MUST do right, help other people, fear and be ashamed to get into Heaven. The price of admission is in John 3:16. Everyone has heard of the verse, but when was the last time it was read? Does it include any of these things? Nope. Giving and helping are acts of love, which are centric to Christian beliefs thematically throughout the Bible but will not save you.

As far as the thread being non-progressive, I'd like to disagree. I think riley as some interesting things to say, which encourages exploration and thinking. An atheist and Christian having a meaningful conversation, imagine that . Can we all take the boxing gloves off and open our ears?

I'm personally unsure if there is a god or spiritual world or not.

I hold my own values but most would reflect those of the Christian faith to various degrees. There are some i agree with entirely and others i disagree with entirely.

I try not to be self-centred, and do take other people into account when i live my day-to-day life, and try not to offend them.

If it turns out that after my death there is an afterlife, a heaven and a hell, why should i be barred from heaven and be sent to hell to suffer with rapists and murderers?

I love my family and try to live a decent life.

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by Elfwood
One third of my religious moral and philosophical education class at school (last year woohoo) are atheists (including me) and they are all moral people which act in the exact same way as the class�s theists and agnostics. In my experience you could not tell them apart by there moral choices.

Athiest is a big term. It contains intentionally moral as well as intentionally amoral people. There are some actions which can clearly be defined as athiest though. If somone were to write a book titled "Believe only in yourself", there would be no other way to classify that. If someone were to break into an art museum and carve into a priceless painting "God does not exist!", that too would be from an athiest. I know you can say a Christian can commit abhorrent acts, but the point is they are not supposed to. Is there anything that an athiest isn't 'supposed' to do? Not really, so one could expect just about anything.

I think very few if any people would do that. also a theist could do the same thing to a member of a diffrent religens paints. You will say they are not follwing there religen and i will say the person who recket the painting was not thinking strate and probley needed to be on medication.

Originally posted by TPL
I hold my own values but most would reflect those of the Christian faith to various degrees. There are some i agree with entirely and others i disagree with entirely.

Can you provide some examples or specifics? I'd be interested in hearing.