The Threat of Atheism

smidgy

Hi Guys,

I am a Christian and feel threatened by an atheistic society. The reason for this is that I see atheism as destructive force since it enforces the belief that there is no eternal responsibility for ones actions. Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code there is too much responsibility placed on the individual to create a code which is actually moral. I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves. If this ideology is to permeate society as a whole and people feel that they are only answerable to the law (and not the 'truth' or God) then it creates a very dangerous society.


One example of this can be seen in the way Christians and atheists approach abortion. My personal experience is that a person that does not believe in God (Jesus) will immediately assume that an unborn child is not alive. They will act on this and proceed with an abortion. Without any research into abortion they will derive their moral code to suit their circumstances. A Christian on the other hand would be compelled to assume that the unborn child is alive. I don’t want to make this discussion about abortion but just mentioned it to illustrate the weakness of a human being in establishing his own moral code. His moral code will become for him more of a subjective rather than objective creation. I believe that a society based on such subjective moral codes will become a chaotic mess and will eventually lead to its destruction. Do athiests see this danger?



Thanks,

S.

Dinner

smidgy wrote: »

Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code there is too much responsibility placed on the individual to create a code which is actually moral. I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves.

So what your saying there, is that you're afraid that people will have to actually think and use their own judgement rather than blindly being told what to do and what to believe.

I would welcome a secular society that promotes this kind of critical thinking. Much more dangerous is a religious society where people
a) follow the teachings of a very old book.
b) follow the orders of a limited number of men with power

Besides, there are many religions that people will happliy kill each other for, but there would be none of that in a secular society. Giving one less reason for people to kill each other.

Galvasean

smidgy wrote: »

Do athiests see this danger?

No.

Delirium

smidgy wrote: »

Hi Guys,

I am a Christian and feel threatened by an atheistic society. The reason for this is that I see atheism as destructive force since it enforces the belief that there is no eternal responsibility for ones actions.

What about laws, prison etc???

Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code there is too much responsibility placed on the individual to create a code which is actually moral. I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves. If this ideology is to permeate society as a whole and people feel that they are only answerable to the law (and not the 'truth' or God) then it creates a very dangerous society.

you could make that claim about people that follow 'the truth of god' and not the law.

One example of this can be seen in the way Christians and atheists approach abortion. My personal experience is that a person that does not believe in God (Jesus) will immediately assume that an unborn child is not alive. They will act on this and proceed with an abortion. Without any research into abortion they will derive their moral code to suit their circumstances. A Christian on the other hand would be compelled to assume that the unborn child is alive. I don’t want to make this discussion about abortion but just mentioned it to illustrate the weakness of a human being in establishing his own moral code. His moral code will become for him more of a subjective rather than objective creation. I believe that a society based on such subjective moral codes will become a chaotic mess and will eventually lead to its destruction. Do athiests see this danger?

Thanks,

S.

I wouldn't agree with the idea you have put forward. People make bad decisions, commit crime etc. regardless of whether they are religious or not.

Flamed Diving

smidgy wrote: »

Hi Guys,

I am a Christian and feel threatened by an atheistic society. The reason for this is that I see atheism as destructive force since it enforces the belief that there is no eternal responsibility for ones actions. Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code there is too much responsibility placed on the individual to create a code which is actually moral. I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves. If this ideology is to permeate society as a whole and people feel that they are only answerable to the law (and not the 'truth' or God) then it creates a very dangerous society.


One example of this can be seen in the way Christians and atheists approach abortion. My personal experience is that a person that does not believe in God (Jesus) will immediately assume that an unborn child is not alive. They will act on this and proceed with an abortion. Without any research into abortion they will derive their moral code to suit their circumstances. A Christian on the other hand would be compelled to assume that the unborn child is alive. I don’t want to make this discussion about abortion but just mentioned it to illustrate the weakness of a human being in establishing his own moral code. His moral code will become for him more of a subjective rather than objective creation. I believe that a society based on such subjective moral codes will become a chaotic mess and will eventually lead to its destruction. Do athiests see this danger?



Thanks,

S.

Myopic.

TheInquisitor

Thats just ridiculous. Im not going to suddenly go around killing people just because i don't believe in god. Imagine this situation . Is it better to have to stand with your own crimes/ mistakes or be able to walk into church into confession and get all those crimes absolved" in the name of god". People use " the god factor " as an easy way out of bad things they've done. I think atheists will be proved to have better morals those any person that believes in god.

herya

smidgy wrote: »

Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code

False. There are also small issues of so called decency, human rights, humanism. All secular.

I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves.

You don't have much faith in people do you? I'm scared of people like you, who won't be decent with no whip in sight.

If this ideology is to permeate society as a whole and people feel that they are only answerable to the law (and not the 'truth' or God) then it creates a very dangerous society.

Why do you assume that atheists are not answerable to truth? It's offensive. Truth has nothing to do with faith and quite often is the opposite.

bluecell99

Some of the most savage and destructive behaviour inflicted on humans was carried out by zealots working on gods orders as determined by whatever holy men were there at the time.Holy men who are convinced that they are working for a never seen entity .

I would be much happier if children were instilled with a moral sense from an early age without the religious window dressing and the supposition that morality and formal religion are inextricably linked.

As a matter of interest, as an atheist I have a great problem with abortion and would beg a woman not to have one if I was asked my opinion.At the same time however I would not condemn her from a religious perspective in that she will face eternal damnation.I dont believe any of us have the authority to force people to toe the line based on 2,000 year old fairy stories.

Designed for power and control and nothing else.

Gambler

I have huge problems with the whole premise of your post which I am sure will be very well responded to by others but I did want to quote this bit:

smidgy wrote: »

The reason for this is that I see atheism as destructive force since it enforces the belief that there is no eternal responsibility for ones actions. Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code there is too much responsibility placed on the individual to create a code which is actually moral.

and respond with this link

Kold

I fear a religious society a bit more than that to be honest. I really would take the opinions of someone that has sat down and tried to make sense of something, all evidence considered rather than someone referring to a 2,000 year old book filled with nonsensical claims for their guiding light. I don't want to be patronising but when you say 'truth' and 'god', I hear 'percieved truth' and 'nonsense'.

mewso

Without God perhaps:-

- young women might not have suffered appallingly in 'Magdalen Laundries'
- young boys might not have gotten beaten to a pulp by "Christian" Brothers
- people of all ages wouldn't be killing each other over a piece of ground
- altar boys might have just been...well altar boys
- thousands might still be working in two tall buildings in New York
- approx. 100,000 civilians in Iraq might be alive
- George W. Bush might have been laughed at when he claimed to believe in God and hence might never have been president of the USA.
- less South African's would be dying of AIDS
- we might be looking forward to Back to the Future Episode 10 starring a fit and healthy Michael J. Fox.

Who knows?

cavedave

smidgy
Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code there is too much responsibility placed on the individual to create a code which is actually moral. I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves.

You seem to have a bad view of peoples inherent morality. Could you present evidence that atheists carry out more crimes on average then Christians?

A Christian on the other hand would be compelled to assume that the unborn child is alive.

Do you have evidence of this? Catholics have historically thought differently. Evidence here. If the catholic churches views on abortion only stem from the 1880's then no such compulsion could have existed.

smidgy

smidgy wrote: »

Hi Guys,

I am a Christian and feel threatened by an atheistic society. The reason for this is that I see atheism as destructive force since it enforces the belief that there is no eternal responsibility for ones actions. Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code there is too much responsibility placed on the individual to create a code which is actually moral. I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves. If this ideology is to permeate society as a whole and people feel that they are only answerable to the law (and not the 'truth' or God) then it creates a very dangerous society.

I love the part where [some] christians try to reassure us they're moral by pointing out that they see nothing wrong whatsoever with murder, rape, etc and would be quite happily indulging in these acts were it not for their holy book. Yes, wolfsbane, that's what he wrote.

And this is supposed to be a good thing.
/backs away slowly
I'm also worried when people try to argue that the threat of hell is what stops them doing these things, and that they'd see nothing wrong with it otherwise. Seriously, if that's what it takes, I'd be more worried...

One example of this can be seen in the way Christians and atheists approach abortion.

Some christians acknowledge there's nothing in the bible against it (provided an induced miscarriage is followed by a fine being paid to the woman) and there are quite a lot of pro-life atheists.

My personal experience is that a person that does not believe in God (Jesus) will immediately assume that an unborn child is not alive.

If anybody whatsoever religious creed aside believes that living cells are not living, they need to be sent back to biology class.
No philosophy or moral discussion necessary.

They will act on this and proceed with an abortion. Without any research into abortion they will derive their moral code to suit their circumstances. A Christian on the other hand would be compelled to assume that the unborn child is alive.

See above on the subject of "alive".

I quite like Acquinas' view on the soul and the unborn, but I don't know how popular he is these days.

I don’t want to make this discussion about abortion but just mentioned it to illustrate the weakness of a human being in establishing his own moral code.

Still waiting for the illustration.

His moral code will become for him more of a subjective rather than objective creation. I believe that a society based on such subjective moral codes will become a chaotic mess and will eventually lead to its destruction. Do athiests see this danger?

Well, the world hasn't ended yet. So apparently you're wrong.


Is this post a joke or have you genuinely convinced yourself of all this?

Dades

smidgy wrote: »

If this ideology is to permeate society as a whole and people feel that they are only answerable to the law (and not the 'truth' or God) then it creates a very dangerous society.

Just look at those crazy secular Swedes and their godless ways... Saunas? Naked? Well I never!

ScumLord

The worlds been turning secular only within the last 100 years. Before that human society has in a dark age, people meant nothing and the churches abused their power and made peoples lives a living hell.

I'm always astonished how easy it is for religious folks to overlook the part of their religion that tells them to turn the other cheek and love thy neighbor and instead use their religion as an excuse to hate other people.

dvpower

smidgy wrote: »

I see atheism as destructive force since it enforces the belief that there is no eternal responsibility for ones actions.

It doesn't enforce any belief.

smidgy wrote: »

Since an atheist is only binded by his own moral code there is too much responsibility placed on the individual to create a code which is actually moral.

No true, but doesn't this suggest that Christians are only binded by (their interpretation) of God's code? This is also not true. Go and ask Christians if they would like the 10 commandments to be enforced in civil law. Most wouldn't.

smidgy wrote: »

My personal experience is that a person that does not believe in God (Jesus) will immediately assume that an unborn child is not alive. They will act on this and proceed with an abortion.

We get really really bad press.

smidgy wrote: »

Do athiests see this danger?

No. Now I'm off to eat my children.

Borneo Fnctn

smidgy wrote: »

I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves.

The moral codes offered by religions were made to suit the people that made them.


Assume just for a moment that there was no god. Imagine you knew it for a fact and could prove it. I know that sounds ridiculous but here's the question; would you make it known that there was no god or would you keep it to yourself out of fear that people would lose control of themselves?

Galvasean

dvpower wrote: »

No. Now I'm off to eat my children.

Cronos, is that you?

bnt

What was the point of putting that original post in this forum? Unless you thought this was a forum where Christians came to moan about atheists, as opposed to one frequented by actual atheists? We have thought about this stuff, you know, we're not hanging around waiting for someone to tell us we're bad and/or wrong ... :cool:

Orion

smidgy wrote: »

Hi Guys,

I am a Christian and feel threatened by an atheistic society.

I'm atheist I am oppressed in a christian society.

smidgy wrote: »

One example of this can be seen in the way Christians and atheists approach abortion. My personal experience is that a person that does not believe in God (Jesus) will immediately assume that an unborn child is not alive. They will act on this and proceed with an abortion. Without any research into abortion they will derive their moral code to suit their circumstances. A Christian on the other hand would be compelled to assume that the unborn child is alive. I don’t want to make this discussion about abortion but just mentioned it to illustrate the weakness of a human being in establishing his own moral code. His moral code will become for him more of a subjective rather than objective creation. I believe that a society based on such subjective moral codes will become a chaotic mess and will eventually lead to its destruction. Do athiests see this danger

You don't want to make this about abortion but spend the greater percentage of your post about it. Why do you assume only atheists have abortions? I think if you do your research ... or even do the maths ... there is a better chance that more professed christians have abortions in(outside of) Ireland than atheists.

And then this alleged weakness inherent in humans in establishing moral codes? Are you serious? I mean really ... ARE YOU SERIOUS! Let me refute that one down the bible route: Abraham; Lot; Dinah; Ruth; etc.
If you don't know what I mean by that then you need to learn more about your own religion. According to your own holy book then rape, human sacrifice, incest and prostitution are perfectly acceptable behaviours.

The bone of the matter is that humans do decide the moral code. Some people use religion as their basis - some don't. At the end of the day the christian commandments #4-#7 are the basis for most societies regardless of their religious background or societal definitions.

Just don't presume that people who don't have the same religious belief as you are child killers and perverts and then we might get along. But for as long as you make these assumptions then I will treat you with the disdain you richly deserve.

Dave!

I agree, atheists are no gooders !

ConmanTheKiller

All I remember from relgion class in school was the golden rule, now since then I have lost all faith in "god" or any supernatural entity for that matter, but I still take heed of the rule, moreso then most Christians.

Secondly how can someone fear a secular socicity when theocracies have caused the most suffering, deaths and the most suppression of free speech and thought. At this moment I remember the quote "Evil men commit evil deeds, but it takes religion for good men to commit evil deeds".

By the way if i was in the situation where my gf had an unexpected pregnacy I would never suggest an abortion, but I would not look down on another person who would.

eoin5

Well I think thats enough for the op to reply to

Orion

eoin5 wrote: »

Well I think thats enough for the op to reply to

If he bothers. Look at his post history - he pops in every now and again to troll. Admittedly he's educated - or at least has a good dictionary - but history is against him.

Overblood

smidgy wrote: »

Hi Guys,

Hi

smidgy wrote: »

I don’t want to make this discussion about abortion but just mentioned it to illustrate the weakness of a human being in establishing his own moral code. His moral code will become for him more of a subjective rather than objective creation. I believe that a society based on such subjective moral codes will become a chaotic mess and will eventually lead to its destruction.

Since religious moral codes are pick n' mixed from the bible, does that not mean that religious people are choosing their own morals also?

You surely don't follow this law:

Leviticus 20:27 (King James Version)

A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

Or this one, which says that you can't keep cows of a different breed in the same field, or sow seeds of a different species in the same field. If you want to take it metaphorically, it becomes a racist law:

Leviticus 19:19 (King James Version)


Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed

If you ignore the above, and adhere to ones like "thou shalt not kill", you're choosing your own morals, aren't you? You're picking the ones that you know are right, that feel right. If you can discern what's good and bad in the bible, you obviously have some moral code of your own, independent of religion.

Anyway I'd rather live without all that confusion and just be a good person because I am actually a good person.

ConmanTheKiller

Lads its a trap, hes drawn us out into the open, DUCK AND COVER!!!!:D:D

Sam Vimes

If everyone followed the christian moral code* the world would actually be a good place because it is quite a good way to live your life but unfortunately that doesn't happen. People who believe in religion do just as many evil things as people who don't, if not more. Your nightmare of people making up their own morals is already happening
. If it wasn't there would be no christians in jail

The way I see it, the only result of removing the religious aspect of ethics would be the excuse "god told me to do it" wouldn't fly anymore

*only the christian one and not the one from the old testament when god was a childish, jealous, sadistic, genocidal, xenophobic nut job as Overblood pointed out

philologos

Overblood wrote: »

Since religious moral codes are pick n' mixed from the bible, does that not mean that religious people are choosing their own morals also?

Pure assumption.

Overblood wrote: »

You surely don't follow this law:

I don't engage in sorcery no. I don't stone people to death as a matter of New Testament teaching which has fulfilled the death penalty of the Old. Jesus died for my sins, I was baptised into his death (Romans 6:3), Jesus has been ressurrected. I am a new creation in Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:17). If I have been forgiven my sins, I am also to forgive the sins of others.

Yes formerly the penalty of sin was death (Romans 6, Romans 1), however due to the role of Jesus Christ there is an option to accept His death as atonement for yours so that you will not be punished come the Day of Judgement.

So yes, the Jewish Torah was written before this happened so it isn't likely to reflect what the New Testament has fulfilled concerning it. It isn't picking and choosing it's merely accepting that Jesus Christ superseded elements of the Torah.

Christians have explained this to you time and time again on boards.

Overblood wrote: »

Or this one, which says that you can't keep cows of a different breed in the same field, or sow seeds of a different species in the same field. If you want to take it metaphorically, it becomes a racist law:

Ceremonial law, not moral. Although if I had a farm I don't think it wouldn't be possible to do that. Anyhow, as I don't own a farm, therefore that law isn't really applicable to me anyway.

Overblood wrote: »

If you ignore the above, and adhere to ones like "thou shalt not kill", you're choosing your own morals, aren't you? You're picking the ones that you know are right, that feel right. If you can discern what's good and bad in the bible, you obviously have some moral code of your own, independent of religion.

No, I amn't. I'm following the New Testament understanding of the Torah which is written clearly.

Overblood wrote: »

Anyway I'd rather live without all that confusion and just be a good person because I am actually a good person.

If you believe you are good it doesn't necessarily follow that you are good.

Macros42 wrote: »

I'm atheist I am oppressed in a christian society.

Hogwash, there is as much freedom for you as there is for me.

Macros42 wrote: »

You don't want to make this about abortion but spend the greater percentage of your post about it. Why do you assume only atheists have abortions? I think if you do your research ... or even do the maths ... there is a better chance that more professed christians have abortions in(outside of) Ireland than atheists.

You're probably right on this one. Although Christianity from it's source text seems to discourage this.

Macros42 wrote: »

And then this alleged weakness inherent in humans in establishing moral codes? Are you serious? I mean really ... ARE YOU SERIOUS! Let me refute that one down the bible route: Abraham; Lot; Dinah; Ruth; etc.
If you don't know what I mean by that then you need to learn more about your own religion. According to your own holy book then rape, human sacrifice, incest and prostitution are perfectly acceptable behaviours.

The Bible depicts acts of sinfulness so that humans can learn from them. It's not because they are acceptable. Infact it makes it rather clear that they aren't.

Macros42 wrote: »

The bone of the matter is that humans do decide the moral code. Some people use religion as their basis - some don't. At the end of the day the christian commandments #4-#7 are the basis for most societies regardless of their religious background or societal definitions.

I'm not sure if we do.

Macros42 wrote: »

Just don't presume that people who don't have the same religious belief as you are child killers and perverts and then we might get along. But for as long as you make these assumptions then I will treat you with the disdain you richly deserve.

You and others have made plenty of assumptions about Christianity and Judaism on this thread.

ScumLord wrote: »

The worlds been turning secular only within the last 100 years. Before that human society has in a dark age, people meant nothing and the churches abused their power and made peoples lives a living hell.

I'm always astonished how easy it is for religious folks to overlook the part of their religion that tells them to turn the other cheek and love thy neighbor and instead use their religion as an excuse to hate other people.

I agree. Simple as.

Have to say the OP did have some serious balls to post what he did in here though . I do get concerned about excessive liberalism, but I think one can safely conclude excessive liberalism != atheism in all cases. Sometimes they interrelate and at other times they don't.

Orion

Jakkass wrote: »

Hogwash, there is as much freedom for you as there is for me.

I was being sarcastic. I don't actually think I'm oppressed

Jakkass wrote: »

The Bible depicts acts of sinfulness so that humans can learn from them. It's not because they are acceptable. Infact it makes it rather clear that they aren't.

I know that the OT is allegory but I remember being taught in school that it was fact. And as pointed out above the god in the OT was a malicious child who probably pulled the legs off spiders too. So when you've children taught that half of the book as fact is it any wonder they grow up to question the morality of it?

Jakkass wrote: »

You and others have made plenty of assumptions about Christianity and Judaism on this thread.

I've made no assumptions about Christianity. I was merely refuting the OP that atheism is a destructive force and using examples to back it up. I don't attack religions - I do defend my own (non)belief system.

Jakkass wrote: »

I do get concerned about excessive liberalism, but I think one can safely conclude excessive liberalism != atheism in all cases. Sometimes they interrelate and at other times they don't.

Atheists can be extremely conservative also. Just as there are ultra-conservative christians and liberal ones. I don't think there's a link between conservatism/liberalism and religion at its root level - despite people using religion to defend/reinforce their views.

the_syco

smidgy wrote: »

My personal experience is that a person that does not believe in God

In my experience, those who believe in God run into crowded places, and blow themselves up, amongst other wacky things.

My tarring brush is extra big today :P

philologos

Macros42 wrote: »

I was being sarcastic. I don't actually think I'm oppressed

Ah right

Macros42 wrote: »

I know that the OT is allegory but I remember being taught in school that it was fact. And as pointed out above the god in the OT was a malicious child who probably pulled the legs off spiders too. So when you've children taught that half of the book as fact is it any wonder they grow up to question the morality of it?

I don't consider the Old Testament to be allegory in most cases. As for the God of the Old Testament he waited entire generations to give people a chance to stop their sin before He punished them. I don't think that it is cruel that people can be punished for their wrongdoing in any sense. Just as much as I don't think that it is cruel that hell exists. God had a different relationship with the Jews than He has with the Christians, the Bible (even in the Old Testament) makes this crystal clear.

Macros42 wrote: »

I've made no assumptions about Christianity. I was merely refuting the OP that atheism is a destructive force and using examples to back it up. I don't attack religions - I do defend my own (non)belief system.

You and Overblood have both made inaccurate assumptions about the Jewish and the Christian belief system throughout this thread.

Macros42 wrote: »

Atheists can be extremely conservative also. Just as there are ultra-conservative christians and liberal ones. I don't think there's a link between conservatism/liberalism and religion at its root level - despite people using religion to defend/reinforce their views.

I'm sure there can be. I do that people who follow Abrahamic religions are more likely to be socially conservative than those who aren't. Note socially conservative because I don't think that being fiscially conservative has anything to do with religion.

the_syco wrote: »

In my experience, those who believe in God run into crowded places, and blow themselves up, amongst other wacky things.

In my experience atheists enjoy killing millions of Jews, Muslims and Christians and burning down synagogues, churches, and mosques and other horrific things

the_syco wrote: »

My tarring brush is extra big today

Mine can be too

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

In my experience atheists enjoy killing millions of Jews

If you're referring to Hitler, there is very little to suggest that he was an atheist and just as much to suggest that he wasn't

http://richarddawkins.net/article,1417,Hitler-Was-an-Atheist-Who-Killed-Millions-in-the-Name-of-Atheism-Secularism,Aboutcom

philologos

No, if it was just Hitler I was referring to we'd be getting off very lightly. His private memoirs and Nazi documents from the Nuremburg Trials indicate that he wanted to destroy Christianity too, but if we begin to talk about his Soviet colleagues, or his colleagues in the Far East and the Balkans we start to get an idea. Anyhow, like the_syco I merely made the tarring in jest. I don't believe that all atheists support mass murder.

Dades

Jakkass wrote: »

Yes formerly the penalty of sin was death (Romans 6, Romans 1), however due to the role of Jesus Christ there is an option to accept His death as atonement for yours so that you will not be punished come the Day of Judgement.

I just have to say, that old chestnut seems loopier every time I hear it.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

smidgy wrote: »

I am a Christian and feel threatened by an atheistic society. T

Why would you give a shít? You've eternal bliss to look forward to in heaven. What happens down here is inconsequential.

It's us atheists that have to make the most of it.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

No, if it was just Hitler I was referring to we'd be getting off very lightly. His private memoirs and Nazi documents from the Nuremburg Trials indicate that he wanted to destroy Christianity too,

Not considering himself a christian does not automatically mean he's an atheist

Jakkass wrote: »

but if we begin to talk about his Soviet colleagues, or his colleagues in the Far East and the Balkans we start to get an idea. Anyhow, like the_syco I merely made the tarring in jest. I don't believe that all atheists support mass murder.

Oh I know it was in jest, just wanted to clear up the common misconception that Hitler was an atheist

Flamed Diving

Jakkass wrote: »

As for the God of the Old Testament he waited entire generations to give people a chance to stop their sin before He punished them.

And God's hands are entirely clean in this period? He seemed to break many of his own sins many times over in this text.

philologos

Flamed Diving wrote: »

And God's hands are entirely clean in this period? He seemed to break many of his own sins many times over in this text.

God isn't accountable to a law that He created for human kind. I have yet to understand what you are referring to though. He is the one with the authority who will be punishing us for violating the law which He has given us so that we can be protected from evil, and that we can live honourably towards Him and to one another.

Zombrex

smidgy wrote: »

I am a Christian and feel threatened by an atheistic society. The reason for this is that I see atheism as destructive force since it enforces the belief that there is no eternal responsibility for ones actions.

So does Christianity?

Under Christian belief everyone is heading to hell since everyone sins (and thus deserves eternal destruction in a lake of fire). You were going to hell the first time you had improper thoughts about a woman or said God's name in vain.

You can be saved from this punishment by accepting Jesus as your saviour. But your actions are not relevant to this, simple that you genuinely believe this.

So under Christian belief there is no difference between having pre-marital sex and shooting up a school. You aren't going to be more eternally destroyed when you get to hell for doing the latter.

So if someone has already figured they are heading to hell anyway what stops them from going completely nuts? They have nothing to lose, they might as well enjoy this life with all the raping and killing they can fit in before they die.

smidgy wrote: »

I personally wouldn’t trust any individual from coming up with their own moral code because more often than not they will design it to suit themselves.

Under that logic every Christian is only a Christian because it suits themselves, otherwise they would not believe in Christianity and would instead believe in a different religion that again suited their own desires and wants.

If humans, in general, cannot decide something is correct without being influenced by their own desires, then surely this applies to Christians as much as anyone else?

smidgy wrote: »

My personal experience is that a person that does not believe in God (Jesus) will immediately assume that an unborn child is not alive. They will act on this and proceed with an abortion. Without any research into abortion they will derive their moral code to suit their circumstances. A Christian on the other hand would be compelled to assume that the unborn child is alive.

Why?

There is no clear instruction in the Bible about the status of unborn children, there are passages that can be (and have been) used to support either case, and for a long time Christians subscribed to the idea that the unborn foetus was not a person until well into the pregnancy, or even till after birth when it takes it first breath.

smidgy wrote: »

I don’t want to make this discussion about abortion but just mentioned it to illustrate the weakness of a human being in establishing his own moral code.

It could also be used as a good example of the weakness of human beings trying to interpret the unclear writings of holy books such as the Bible.

Personally I put very little weight in a moral code that cannot be explained in detail so that all its points can be made clear. You don't have to agree with the moral code but it should be at the very least possible to understand the details of it.

"Because God says so.." as a moral justification for something is deeply flawed, particularly if it cannot be established properly that this is actually what God is saying or not.

All the flaws and biases you attribute to atheists surely apply to Christians as well, and this will shape how they interpret your holy books and what message they are supposed to be taking from them.

At the very least one atheist explaining a moral decision to another atheist is expect to actually explain his position, the logic and rational behind it. A Christian just says "God says so here.." and then goes on about how no one can prove their interpretation is wrong. Hardly an improvement is it.

CerebralCortex

Jakkass wrote: »

God isn't accountable to a law that He created for human kind. I have yet to understand what you are referring to though. He is the one with the authority who will be punishing us for violating the law which He has given us so that we can be protected from evil, and that we can live honourably towards Him and to one another.

That he created.

Flamed Diving

Jakkass wrote: »

God isn't accountable to a law that He created for human kind. I have yet to understand what you are referring to though. He is the one with the authority who will be punishing us for violating the law which He has given us so that we can be protected from evil, and that we can live honourably towards Him and to one another.

I am referring to the countless times that he commanded people to kill each other, children included. Stonings, maimings, etc, etc.

I thought that God was imposing his morals on us because he hates sin? He is pure and never sins? Is commanding people to kill not a sin?

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

God isn't accountable to a law that He created for human kind.

Surely the logic that God is holy would dictate that he is.

Flamed Diving

Wicknight wrote: »

Surely the logic that God is holy would dictate that he is.

Doublethink, Wicky. Doublethink.

The favourite word of malevolent psychological-dictatorships.

philologos

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I am referring to the countless times that he commanded people to kill each other, children included. Stonings, maimings, etc, etc.

That's divine punishment. Murder = unlawful killing is a sin. However God killing people for their sins and their transgressions is not unlawful. As I said the penalty for sin is death, but because we can accept Christ's death as our own we can be saved from divine punishment.

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I thought that God was imposing his morals on us because he hates sin? He is pure and never sins? Is commanding people to kill not a sin?

God revealed laws upon us because He has created the world He knows how it operates, and He knows what we can do to protect ourselves from evil influences. God doesn't need these laws to determine what is righteous as God is righteousness itself.

Orion

Jakkass wrote: »

God isn't accountable to a law that He created for human kind. I have yet to understand what you are referring to though. He is the one with the authority who will be punishing us for violating the law which He has given us so that we can be protected from evil, and that we can live honourably towards Him and to one another.

Do as I say not as I do? So you're saying god's a hypocrite. Cool

Nodin

Jakkass wrote: »

In my experience atheists enjoy killing millions of Jews, Muslims and Christians and burning down synagogues, churches, and mosques and other horrific things

You'd find in the case of AH that a great many protestant, catholic and eastern orthodox were the ones doing the killing, often with the idea of 'christ killers' at the forefront of their motivation. As ever, oversimplification tends to undermine a case.

Flamed Diving

Jakkass wrote: »

In my experience atheists enjoy killing millions of Jews, Muslims and Christians and burning down synagogues, churches, and mosques and other horrific things.

In my experience, people with moustaches have commited some of the most horrible examples of mass murder in the 20th century.

For some reason, I'm not short-sighted enough to believe that their moustaches were the reason they did it, though...












(Oh, I nearly forgot the smiley face to somehow distract attention from how silly my comment is... )

philologos

Flamed Diving wrote: »

In my experience, people with moustaches have commited some of the most horrible examples of mass murder in the 20th century.

For some reason, I'm not short-sighted enough to believe that their moustaches were the reason they did it, though...

That's my point!

You should be applying this same logic to what people allegedly do in the name of Christianity or other religions.

When people note the relation between atheism and these things, people get all on the defensive. It's quite humorous actually. If you don't want this to be raised, don't use the same fallacious reasoning for Christianity.

herya

Jakkass wrote: »

When people note the relation between atheism and these things, people get all on the defensive. It's quite humorous actually. If you don't want this to be raised, don't use the same fallacious reasoning for Christianity.

So tell the Christians who commit atrocities not to quote God and religion as their reasons. Unfortunately they do. There's your relation, not the irrelevant fact that they were baptised many years ago.

philologos

herya wrote: »

So tell the Christians who commit atrocities not to quote God and religion as their reasons. Unfortunately they do. There's your relation, not the irrelevant fact that they were baptised many years ago.

What do you think the purpose in the mind of Stalin for persecuting people of religious faith was? State atheism clearly. However just because Stalin was an atheist doesn't mean that all atheists support religious persecution.

Likewise, the purpose in Pope Urban II's mind for the First Crusade was to destroy the Islamic threat to Christian Europe. However, just because Pope Urban II sanctioned it doesn't mean that it is advocated by Jesus Christ, or that all Christians support slaughtering Muslims and Jews.

All I ask is that you recognise that this reasoning against Christianity is fallacious just as the reasoning of blaming atheism for persecuting Christians, Muslims and Jews is fallacious. Not that hard is it?

Flamed Diving

Jakkass wrote: »

That's my point!

You should be applying this same logic to what people allegedly do in the name of Christianity or other religions.

When people note the relation between atheism and these things, people get all on the defensive. It's quite humorous actually. If you don't want this to be raised, don't use the same fallacious reasoning for Christianity.

Because when someone actively kills someone in the name of God, it is easy to tell why they are doing it.

Why?

Because they said 'God told me to kill'

I rest my 2,090,000 cases.