Win Prizes Ask an Atheist II

[Gethelred]

Welcome to the Ask an Atheist thread II.

Previous part:

Win Prizes - Ask an Atheist - Shoe's on the other foot now!

Alright, we're going to have a change of tack. As I'm sure you can see, the thread title has been changed to Ask an Atheist. People who have a question to ask of the atheists who populate this thread - more than the christians do - should feel free to ask questions of them. If you've still got...

www.bigfooty.com

Standard board rules apply.

 

[mikey127]

I saw the thread on here ask a communist and I thought as a Christian I would put up a similar thread to answer question as I consider myself a fairly middle of the road Christian.

Before I start answering questions I just wanted to state a few things.

This thread is NOT for a debate between Christian and atheists for that please use another thread
I am here to answer more general questions rather than get into deep theological discussions
I will aim to reply in a timely manner but I work full time and have other commitments so I apologise if I don't reply straight away.
I will be respectful and polite towards people no matter what their views and beliefs are so I would appreciate the same in return.
Please keep it to a maximum of 2 questions per post and wait for those to be responded to before posting more.

Feel free to fire away with any questions.

 

[Seeds]

Arent nearly all of us posting here athiests?

fine if not. Just surprised if it isnt the case.

 

[evolved2]

Arent nearly all of us posting here athiests?

fine if not. Just surprised if it isnt the case.

travelli and GOTHELIONS16 are Christians. The other regulars are atheists/agnostics.

 

[travelli]

Pretty broad question. I won't live in fear and go to religion for solace as I know it's a fantasy. I'll live in the real world by my own ethics and follow the magic of scientific discovery and do what I can on climate change to help future generations and the animal kingdom.

"my own ethics" - how do you decide on those ethics? What influences you to be confident that they are appropriate? Does it even matter if they are not appropriate?

 

[travelli]

Arent nearly all of us posting here athiests?

fine if not. Just surprised if it isnt the case.

It has always been an athiest's thread.

 

[travelli]

To not be a bigot or hater ,to not treat the environment like a toilet, to not defend paedophiles and racists, treat people how you would want to be treated, don't lie ect.
Just simple ethics like that.

Are paedophiles and racists indefensible? Or are they ignorant? Or sick?

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

"my own ethics" - how do you decide on those ethics? What influences you to be confident that they are appropriate? Does it even matter if they are not appropriate?

I think my ethics are prefrable to modern day christian ethics which are based in a lot of hatred, covering up paedophile crimes, voting for racists, attacking minority groups and having little regard for our environment.
The bible says slavery is ok for instance.
My ethics are whatever I feel is the right way to treat people.
I don't want a 1800 year old book read by a possible paedophile to tell me how to live in the modern world under the threat of going to an endless hell. The man made construct of heaven and hell is a tool of fear.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

Are paedophiles and racists indefensible? Or are they ignorant? Or sick?

Not ignorant people, just unethical people hiding behind their perceived superioty and righteousness.
We all know religion is a man made fantasy .

 

[Theseventhhamster]

"my own ethics" - how do you decide on those ethics? What influences you to be confident that they are appropriate? Does it even matter if they are not appropriate?

Reckon you might need to look into the ethics ok'd by your god.

 

[travelli]

I think my ethics are prefrable to modern day christian ethics which are based in a lot of hatred, covering up paedophile crimes, voting for racists, attacking minority groups and having little regard for our environment.
The bible says slavery is ok for instance.
My ethics are whatever I feel is the right way to treat people.
I don't want a 1800 year old book read by a possible paedophile to tell me how to live in the modern world under the threat of going to an endless hell. The man made construct of heaven and hell is a tool of fear.

But your ethics? How did you come to them? How are you confident that they are right?

You don't need to bring up the bible... it's the atheists thread.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

But your ethics? How did you come to them? How are you confident that they are right?

You don't need to bring up the bible... it's the atheists thread.

What do you mean by 'right' ?

 

[travelli]

What do you mean by 'right' ?

In the sense they are the ethics you have chosen

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

In the sense they are the ethics you have chosen

I haven't sat down and chosen any ethics per se.
It's about being a good bloke and treating people well.

 

[peetoo]

Pedophiles working in religions must have made up thor own ethical code.

One sad part of religion is it doesn’t have much accountability apart from demanding loyalty

 

[evolved2]

But your ethics? How did you come to them? How are you confident that they are right?

You don't need to bring up the bible... it's the atheists thread.

Atheists come about their morality much the same way Christians do, albeit with a little less external pressure being applied.

Morality is subjective and there is no right answer. That doesn't change just because we're far more logical than you guys.

 

[Total Power]

In the sense they are the ethics you have chosen

Nope. It's completely subjective. In my view, the framework for morality comes from the collective views of the society an individual lives in. Personal morality comes from an individual's unique perspective on that framework.Slavery was/is moral to those who considered it moral back in the Biblical days. It's certainly immoral to me, and seemingly so to the majority of people in most societies today, which is why it's considered generally immoral in a modern context.

The slave owners had no morals in that regard but nearly all were godbotherers. Some even believe it was their divine right to own slaves. So it basically proves morals do not come from a book or some by birth or they would have them.

It seems to me that the world is just a better place to be when we treat each other with respect and kindness. Plus, I just feel better about myself when I treat others that way.This doesn't seem complicated to me. We should treat each other well for the same reason you don't knock holes in the walls of your house - it just makes things worse for everybody.

If this is false, i am open to being proven wrong. Lets start raping and kill each other and treating everyone with disrespect, look down on people and see where it gets us? FWIW it has been tried many times in here, and hatred just gave us to more hatred. Is the kind of society you wish to live in? if yes, then that's fine but vast majority of the people including myself wouldn't. But i am not judging you for that.

Copious amounts of books have been written about ethics and morality without any reference to metaphysical sources. Perhaps you should read a good introduction to ethics. Or watch The Good Place

 

[peetoo]

Morality is not believing you have the right, even the duty, to try to make others observe your god

Whatever else, religion works best when it is voluntary

This would include atheists who think they need to destroy religion as other peoples personal choice.


Of course call out religious organisations where they are self serving, or seek to become government

 

[Total Power]

 

[travelli]

How is the atheism going these days? Is it about a rejection of the literal interpretation of the bible, or religious dogma, or a complete denial of the possibility of a creator?

 

[Total Power]

How is the atheism going these days? Is it about a rejection of the literal interpretation of the bible, or religious dogma, or a complete denial of the possibility of a creator?

It seems like your thinking pretty linearly, but maybe it’s not that straightforward. A fruit tree doesnt bear all its fruit at once. Maybe the first cause continues to bear fruit and our universe is the result of one of them? Who knows?

The problem with your concept is that creation, by implication, can only occur in the presence of time. Creation is the act of bringing something into existence that did not exist prior to the act of creation. If there was no time during which the universe was 'created', then the universe must have always existed and, by further implication, did not need a god to create it. If you do not experience time, you do not experience creation. Time is a man made concept it actually doesn't exist. Hence i do not buy the whole deductionist argument religious people try to make to suggest there is a creator.

Scientifcally speaking causality breaks down without time. All deductionist arguments religious people make become invalid. But most religious people do not care, hence it's very hard to argue anything them.

The burden of proof is on the theist claiming a particular god, not on anyone else. A unicorn riding a leprechaun on the rings of Saturn could also be difficult to disprove, yet no one is basing their lives upon it or abusing others because of it.

A theist is sadly, a victim of indoctrination. Nothing more. There is no need to believe in an evidence-free claim about some weirdo entity.

What are the odds that we are in a simulation? or some alien entity made us? or just here by chance? abiogenesis has lots of hypotheses. God isn't one of them.

But here is a question for you. Why don't you believe in what Mohammed said? he received his revelation the same way as Paul did or Moses did. So why not believe in Islam? i asked this question in the Bible thread it looks like Christians believe Islam is a false religion. It's my word against yours here, whose revelation is correct? or they are all man made bullshit?

 

[travelli]

It seems like your thinking pretty linearly, but maybe it’s not that straightforward. A fruit tree doesnt bear all its fruit at once. Maybe the first cause continues to bear fruit and our universe is the result of one of them? Who knows?

The problem with your concept is that creation, by implication, can only occur in the presence of time. Creation is the act of bringing something into existence that did not exist prior to the act of creation. If there was no time during which the universe was 'created', then the universe must have always existed and, by further implication, did not need a god to create it. If you do not experience time, you do not experience creation. Time is a man made concept it actually doesn't exist. Hence i do not buy the whole deductionist argument religious people try to make to suggest there is a creator.

Scientifcally speaking causality breaks down without time. All deductionist arguments religious people make become invalid. But most religious people do not care, hence it's very hard to argue anything them.

The burden of proof is on the theist claiming a particular god, not on anyone else. A unicorn riding a leprechaun on the rings of Saturn could also be difficult to disprove, yet no one is basing their lives upon it or abusing others because of it.

A theist is sadly, a victim of indoctrination. Nothing more. There is no need to believe in an evidence-free claim about some weirdo entity.

What are the odds that we are in a simulation? or some alien entity made us? or just here by chance? abiogenesis has lots of hypotheses. God isn't one of them.

But here is a question for you. Why don't you believe in what Mohammed said? he received his revelation the same way as Paul did or Moses did. So why not believe in Islam? i asked this question in the Bible thread it looks like Christians believe Islam is a false religion. It's my word against yours here, whose revelation is correct? or they are all man made bullshit?

"There is no need to believe in an evidence-free claim about some weirdo entity"

There's a fair bit of truth there. It is weird, definitely. But what happens if you have experienced it? What happens if you know it is irrational, but you have had some connection? Do you try to deny it, or do you reach for the books of your people who have been trying to explain similar experiences over the last 5000 years?

 

[travelli]

It seems like your thinking pretty linearly, but maybe it’s not that straightforward. A fruit tree doesnt bear all its fruit at once. Maybe the first cause continues to bear fruit and our universe is the result of one of them? Who knows?

The problem with your concept is that creation, by implication, can only occur in the presence of time. Creation is the act of bringing something into existence that did not exist prior to the act of creation. If there was no time during which the universe was 'created', then the universe must have always existed and, by further implication, did not need a god to create it. If you do not experience time, you do not experience creation. Time is a man made concept it actually doesn't exist. Hence i do not buy the whole deductionist argument religious people try to make to suggest there is a creator.

Scientifcally speaking causality breaks down without time. All deductionist arguments religious people make become invalid. But most religious people do not care, hence it's very hard to argue anything them.

The burden of proof is on the theist claiming a particular god, not on anyone else. A unicorn riding a leprechaun on the rings of Saturn could also be difficult to disprove, yet no one is basing their lives upon it or abusing others because of it.

A theist is sadly, a victim of indoctrination. Nothing more. There is no need to believe in an evidence-free claim about some weirdo entity.

What are the odds that we are in a simulation? or some alien entity made us? or just here by chance? abiogenesis has lots of hypotheses. God isn't one of them.

But here is a question for you. Why don't you believe in what Mohammed said? he received his revelation the same way as Paul did or Moses did. So why not believe in Islam? i asked this question in the Bible thread it looks like Christians believe Islam is a false religion. It's my word against yours here, whose revelation is correct? or they are all man made bullshit?

I don't disbelieve what Mohammed said either. I'm not focussed on the "rule book". I just look at the attitudes of the people who understand the concept the idea of a creator

 

[peetoo]

"There is no need to believe in an evidence-free claim about some weirdo entity"

There's a fair bit of truth there. It is weird, definitely. But what happens if you have experienced it? What happens if you know it is irrational, but you have had some connection? Do you try to deny it, or do you reach for the books of your people who have been trying to explain similar experiences over the last 5000 years?

Do you sign up to weird rituals from self serving organisations which seem to have decided spirituality was surplus a long time ago?

 

[travelli]

Do you sign up to weird rituals from self serving organisations which seem to have decided spirituality was surplus a long time ago?

Yes. But I disagree with your premise that they are not about spirituality. The rituals are triggers to encourage a person to explore spirituality

 

[Total Power]

I don't disbelieve what Mohammed said either. I'm not focussed on the "rule book". I just look at the attitudes of the people you understand the concept the idea of a creator

It's rather self-aggrandizing to assume us humans have discovered the metaphysical secrets of the universe, and it conveniently happens to be one of our most popular faiths. Perhaps one of our ancient long-dead religions was correct. Perhaps we will only discover the correct religion in ten thousand years. More likely, we haven't stumbled on the right one, and we never will.

The concept of creator has changed, from the earlier times. The concept of personal god was alien to human beings before the Abrahamic religions came by. That's why older religions still worship the forces of nature, it's kind of pantheism. The concept of personal God came with Judaism.

what you're asking is, "could god himself convince you of god?" The question itself is very silly and ironic at the same time." i felt god in my heart," or, "i felt god's presence," or worst of all hear voices are simply credulous and/or ignorant of their own psychology.