Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The atheists monopoly of true morality....

page: 5
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by randomname
you can choose, out of your own free will to be right with God, or as atheists do, ignore that little hiccup to their plans, and believe they are capable of determining what is wrong or right.


If you can find books on it, game theory explains this without much requirement for religion.

The fact of the matter is, co-operating makes a species successful. Species who do not co-operate generally die or have other odd traits such as birthing many children at once. As a general rule, animals who produce off spring slowly co-operate.

There is no dolphin bible. There is no elephant bible. There is no monkey bible. Yet they share food and assist one another. Further amusing reading


Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Furthermore, the notion that we are not in relationship with and to the Source as the Absolute Godhead and Creator is also absurd.


I consider it absurd that the parent of an entire species created them then took a 100, 000 year odd break, and then returned very briefly to hand over a pile of cryptic passages explaining that the world is maybe 5000 years old and finally hand over morals in the form of a book to people who have no efficient form of passing on information other than word of mouth.

Not to mention that during the creation process it decided to put the same hole I use for breathing just above my stomach so I can choke and am not even going to go into what it did with my sex organs.

If such a being exists, it's either incompetent, useless at parenting, or we're not important at all to it. It could be having a titantic wrestling match with Djinn or Satan or whichever big bad actually exists but I doubt it.

Lets face it, if God was a human parent we would have an ATS thread discussing how their children were turning homosexual because of their bad upbringing.


Originally posted by OMsk3ptic
Science can only explain how, not why. Maybe there is no why, but I find that to be an even stranger conclusion than a creator.


It isn't just science vs ...

There are two schools of thought on that. The first one is that science should be finding more evidence than it is ie ... if the world is created there should be evidence for that and there isn't ergo ...

The other is actually pure philosophy which seems to be held onto like morals by religions. Philosophically speaking I think trying to understand a creation mechanism (or being) through logic like ... stuff exists, therefore something made the stuff and that something has to be intelligent ... it just seems so primitive!

The billions or empty planets and dead stars tell me that this creator is either beyond human understanding and couldn't be held to such logic in the first place, or it simply doesn't exist.

Edit: As a side note ... awesome notes by theists above me. I believe it would be logical to assume God inserted moral codes biologically rather than be so absent completely if we want to believe that morality has any religious connection at all other than religion writing it down.
edit on 15-11-2012 by Pinke because: Edit




posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 

Christianity, properly understood and integrated (grokked) is about the liberation of the human being to reach his full stature and to fulfill his destiny in the creation, which is to be in relationship WITH God as co-creator. In truth, as consciously aware beings we are like a chip off the old OLD block made to explore a domain of limitless possibility as an inheritance prepared for us from the time before time.

"Our liberation is God's compulsion."
~ C.S. Lewis

"Love, and do as you will."
~ St. Augustine


Set free for the sake of freedom and righteousness, to freely and ever more fully love, as we are and were first loved by God who it pleased to share his eternal kingdom of life, light and love with all his children.

This is the good news of the Gospel (which means "good news") - that we were not abandoned or left orphaned by the first father of all creation and that a provision was made, in anticipation, that's the funny part is the degree to which God was well ahead of everything and everyone from the very get go, so far reaching is his love a love matched only by his eternal wisdom.

See the twin pillars of justice and mercy with the love of God blowing through it like the wind, and laugh again like a child.

Think of the death and resurrection of Christ (even if he "merely" threaded the needle) as an evolutionary principal of life meeting life in eternity, like some sort of cosmic clamshell by which the grain of sand, at first an irritant, is eventually transformed over time until it becomes a prescious pearl fit to the adorn the gate as a point of attraction for others to see and recognize.

Understood - there is humor there, along with our humor restored, and our joy, with him, made complete.

He was all about "US" don't you see.

"If I seek only my own glory then that, is no glory at all."
~ JC

I tell you, if people had even the faintest clue what's being presented in the high art of God in the person of Jesus Christ, they would fall in love and in so doing, rediscover and fall in love also with the very VERY best part of themselves, and then, with us in him and him in us, there is nothing and no one who can oppose us because it's a treasure of the heart and soul, beyond corruption, beyond entropy and therefore even death. To know God through Jesus Christ IS to enter into the kingdom by the gate and find new pasture wherein we are free to freely come and go!

It's the one thing that, although it appears to good to be true IS true.

I looked again (I was an atheist at one time), I found (his character, wisdom and charm) and on finding fell in love, and now the best part of me, is him where it may be said that

there is no amount of Christ capable of ruining a personality!

I tell you that it's the joke and the humor and the joy that just keeps on giving, even at the expense of all of our prior ignorance, it's hilarious and magnificent! I cannot be the only one to see it and grok of it, no way.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Maybe I'm not crazy at all.

Maybe YOU are, or perhaps I should say, were.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by Toadmund
 


ETA: It's fun goning to brunch on Sunday and passing all the packed church parking lots. I smile an exclaim, "Wow look at all the guilty feeling people!"
edit on 15-11-2012 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)


Sounds like something a sociopath might say.
edit on 10/01/11 by Wonders because: To add.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 


I don't feel blackmailed by my religion. Never have. Not sure why some people feel that religion is blackmail... If you were brought up around roman catholics or babtists I can understand why you have such an outlook on it.

from my perspective athiest are pretty immoral and bad people. Look at mao and stalin. it would be unfair to say all athiest have such bad morals since there are many religious figures in history have been just as bad.

religion is not about morality. You can have good morals without religion. Every time i hear athiest begin this whole YOU DON'T NEED TO BE RELIGIOUS TO HAVE GOOD MORALS. i want to bang my head on a wall..

You miss the point of religion.

religion is not about guilt it is not about blackmail... since you are athiest you will never get it so just leave it alone.
edit on 15-11-2012 by votan because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-11-2012 by votan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Stalin Pol Pot and Mao to name just a few moral atheists



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
it's sad people need morals.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   
An atheist claiming to have a monopoly on morals? Wow!!

Atheism is void of right and wrong. An Atheist can change his or her mind on morals, based on feelings and popularity. Morals have to originate from outside ones self. If not then the whim of the person is of the greatest consequence.

Morality is different actions or intended actions taken by a subject based on the assumption of these being right or wrong.

It's almost absurd, to me, atheists even claim they have morals. The problem I see is; an athiest who doesn't believe in the supernatural, suddenly believes there's this extraordinary "factor" that keeps them from lying, stealing, killing, or sinning in general. Doesn't that seem odd?

If America went into an economic meltdown and gas became too expensive to buy, food prices soared, the police officers quit because they weren't being funded, and everybody had to scavage or survive in an anarchist society, what would the morals of the atheist be then? In this situational America, if I was passing a hungry person with a cart full of food, whose family was hungry and he needed to feed them, would an atheist do the right thing? What would the right thing be?

The Bible says do not steal. A Christian should ask for food from me, but not steal it. An atheist is bound by no moral code. The societal code would have gone out the window, when the whole thing started. An atheist could lie to get me in a dark alley, kill me, and then steal my food with no moral codes broken. He could just say this is how it is now, I'm adjusting to the changing world. A lot of Christians in this example, would do the same thing the atheist did. The difference is the Christian has a moral duty not to do that. An atheist doesn't have the same moral duty.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 


I wrote the following a few months ago:

I personally believe that many religious people lack the ability to feel empathy, therefore they require external sources to teach them morality because they lack the individualism to discern those philosophies from within.

That's why religious people can often appear so nice and gentle on the outside, but on the inside they are capable of committing the most horrendous acts, even against little children. This lack of empathy points to a common type of sociopathy which can be found in many religious people. They simply behave how a book tells them to behave because they don't know how to behave without being told. And then they think everyone else has a brain that works just like them; often arguing we all need a book to teach us morality otherwise they think everything would just descend into anarchy... in fact the only people who would descend into anarchy are those who can't function without a book to guide them.
edit on 15/11/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   
I have written on this a few times as an atheist, i wouldn't say we have true morality,
even though the irony there is i have used that analogy, after thinking on it for
a long while now a few things seem to stand out.

In the argument of say religious morality vs an atheists morality there is an inherent
desire to say one is superior to the other, i disagree on one issue, its not that
our morality is superior in any way, its that we are allowed to tell the truth at all times,
it all comes down to honesty, when we see that something is wrong, provided with
evidence that our morality is lacking one could say, we have the ability right then
and there to change said morality to be correct.

Religion preaches from a standpoint of non adaptation, and as evident in every
religion in the world, if they refuse to adapt they will fail and become extinct,
the gay rights issue is where, in modern times, this becomes very apparent,
they don't have any proof at all that there is a moral problem with the issue of
a civil union, it is simply because their book says so, that is not enough in
the eyes of those who use honesty and reason to say its immoral, it gives no
reason for it being immoral other than gods word.......

Our morality tends to be based on facts and well thought out reasons.
Religious morality is sometimes based on facts others times on fantasy.

addygrace: I must reply to this idea, those accusation are unfounded, I would
not kill or steal from you because i am an honest person, i do not need the
threat of eternal torture to be an honest person, you are specifically saying
that you have to have fear to be moral, fear of some profound punishment.
then from there you just jump into a conjecture about how all atheists are
immoral simply because they have no fear of long term punishment, I would
argue that allows us to address reality with the weight it actually deserves.

We do not get to cop out of our morality and say we are forgiven by someone
who is not even involved in a situation, IE if a christian were to steal someones
food all they have to do is ask forgiveness and it will be granted, by that logic
you could rape, murder and steal then on your death bed accept jesus as your
savior and you get a "get out of hell free card".

The point we try to make is you live in reality, deal with reality on real terms, there
are direct consequences for actions, the idea that someone is going to reward
or punish us after death actually leads to dangerous morality. it gives us the idea
that if we follow a certain "moral" god then all is ok, even if he asks us to do immoral
things. that's the very reason most christians don't follow isalm, or other religions that
have just as much "evidence" as they do, they believe their gods idea of morality
is superior and those other fanatics are dangerous because they use their
god to justify bad things...........
edit on 16-11-2012 by bloodreviara because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
Saying that atheist "do good" because they know it's the right thing to do?
Atheists don't even recognize anything divine in each other, themselves or the world.
So explain why they "know" it's the right thing to do?
and don't say the golden rule since we all know where that came from.

As usual people only see the extremes and then overgeneralize.
Kind of like racists do since some __________ people do _______ they must all be _________.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 




and don't say the golden rule since we all know where that came from.


Do tell! Where did it come from?



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 



So explain why they "know" it's the right thing to do?

We don't "know"... we "feel". It's called empathy... and the feeling of empathy leads straight to the golden rule. We feel empathy when we see another living being harmed or taken advantage of, because we can put ourselves in their shoes and understand the suffering they might be feeling. Through this empathy we can develop a sense of morality and learn to treat others in a way we would like to be treated.

On the other hand... how can I "know" the book of Christianity and its rules are correct? Answer: I can't, and all evidence indicates it's simply a man made religious text made from a concoction of older myths and tales.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


I love addressing this issue, for what you say to be true, there cannot be a
natural means for morality to develop, that's what your saying, however
you are not considering that morality in itself is natural.

The way morality most likely developed was this: In the olden days, and
i do mean a long time ago, when we all lived in very small tribes or
communities however you wanna say it, morality would have been a simple
idea, if we kill one of our own then things get harder, if there are more of us,
then we seem to succeed more, safety in numbers would have also come
into play, these ideas then could have slowly, as evidence by history itself
been molded into what we call morality today, now religion has played a part
in that shaping of morality, but it cannot be said to be the origin.

Let me be clear, im not saying i know for sure that's how it happened, that's
just what the evidence we have leads me to believe. also i would like to
point out that religion has changed its definition of morality over the ages,
that alone would say it was molding itself to mirror a "better" form of morality.
As evidence to that, we no longer accept human sacrifice as moral.

Also here is a mind bender for ya, if god were to say its moral to murder people,
would that make it moral? the typical answer to this is, well he never would,
thats not an answer really its just avoiding the question because he has
very well changed his mind on what is and is not moral many times, so if
he were to say that, i would still think its immoral to murder, however you
would have a HUGE problem, if you go against god then your on your
way to the bad place, if you follow his new command then you are immoral.........
edit on 16-11-2012 by bloodreviara because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 

Although I am an Agnostic...I too have never understood why people believe that a person can only have Morality if they believe in a specific Religion that has at it's core a Monotheistic...GOD that either Rewards or Punishes.

Another area of Great Confusion that one of these Self Proclaimed Persons of Moral Aptitude will encounter is when I ask them...If a person is EVIL and a so called DEVIL oversees Punishment of this persons acts of evil...then isn't this DEVIL doing GODS WORK?

They give me the look of confusion and the 1000 Yard Stare as most have never looked at it from that perspective before. Split Infinity



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
That's why religious people can often appear so nice and gentle on the outside, but on the inside they are capable of committing the most horrendous acts, even against little children.
You are describing most people in the world. Everybody sins. I'm sure you have skeletons, too.

This lack of empathy
Are you saying everybody lacks empathy? I agree sometimes everybody lacks empathy.

points to a common type of sociopathy which can be found in many religious people.
Do you mean everybody on the planet?

They simply behave how a book tells them to behave because they don't know how to behave without being told.
As an atheist; Do you think it's ok to lie? If not, why? Do you think it's ok to kill? If not, why? Steal? Cheat?

And then they think everyone else has a brain that works just like them; often arguing we all need a book to teach us morality otherwise they think everything would just descend into anarchy... in fact the only people who would descend into anarchy are those who can't function without a book to guide them.
edit on 15/11/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
Christians actually believe morals are written on mans heart. The reason people know right from wrong is because it's written on their heart. We still has free will. That's why man feels guilt. True guilt, not forced guilt.
When I was a kid I lied on my brother, and he got a whippin'. At the time it seemed valid, but afterward i felt really bad about it. Not because the Bible said I should, not because my parents taught me that, but because it truly hurts my feelings that I actually did that to my brother. He was hurting because of me. I should have been honest and more loving.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 


True morality ? What else could morality be, if not true ? I suggest to you that Atheists aren't very bright people at all, if they think there is no model for morality. There is only moral and immoral. A man doesn't have any idea what a crooked line is, until he sees a straight one. The only way you know of any morals is by way a model Pal ?

How pompous can someone be to say we all invent morality in our minds ? You even have people agreeing with you ?

What a hokey thread !
edit on 16-11-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 


Being an agnostic aka the confused about religion one day or just don't care about it the next. I'm more into science and the similarities between the stars and the atoms in our bodies, but morally....I just don't care what religious people have to say. They can be a tad bit annoying by placing everything that happens in their life on God. (The automatic door opened, Thank God) I just don't find morality that interesting. I'm a Golden Rule or I kick your butt type of person. You either do the right thing or you don't in my book.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 


I wrote the following a few months ago:

I personally believe that many religious people lack the ability to feel empathy, therefore they require external sources to teach them morality because they lack the individualism to discern those philosophies from within.

That's why religious people can often appear so nice and gentle on the outside, but on the inside they are capable of committing the most horrendous acts, even against little children. This lack of empathy points to a common type of sociopathy which can be found in many religious people. They simply behave how a book tells them to behave because they don't know how to behave without being told. And then they think everyone else has a brain that works just like them; often arguing we all need a book to teach us morality otherwise they think everything would just descend into anarchy... in fact the only people who would descend into anarchy are those who can't function without a book to guide them.
edit on 15/11/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)


One of the most extreme religious people I know is a sociopath/R.A.D baby. For those that don't know what that is, basically he was never held his first 6 months of life so he never learned to bond with other people. He strictly basis his morality on biblical principles. We had a discussion once when I was trying to explain that you could feel love physically, and he argued back that love was deeds and behaviors, he couldn't grasp the concept of feeling constriction in your chest because someone you cared about was suffering.
I think is person is a perfect example of what you said.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 

A Human Beings Biological Imperative to breed...which is a construct of our Animal Instinctive Drive to have SEX with anyone that is attractive to us...thus Multiple Partners...Forget Monogamy...and these go against many Religious Doctrines are only considered IMMORAL if it is a Human Being doing it as apposed to an Animal.

Morality is a thing of Social and Religious Indoctrination and has nothing to do with a persons real reasoning behind what they are Genetically disposed to do. Split Infinity






top topics



 
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join