MY Atheist view is right but yours is not!

joseph brand

I'm joking of course.

After watching many debates on Atheism vs Theism, it seems that the Theists have an uncanny ability to be able to see other theists as being wrong. "My view is the right view", they might say. Here they display a sort of blissful ignorance and smugness.
Theists all have their own way of interpreting biblical text according to their morals. That's assuming that they've read the bible. Otherwise they are just believeing what they are told to believe. (the flock, aka sheep)

I know catholics who hold as much, if not more, contempt for protestants than those damn know-it-all-Atheists. The same is true between the different denominations of christianity and between the other faiths which I'm sure I need not explain.

One thing that is for sure, is that all atheists share the same view on religion. There may be different approaches to tackling theists (there's the thread on bad atheism arguments), but none of us can claim to be better Atheists than the next. We all know it's insidious and of course, absolute boll*x.

Theists talk about 'truth'. It's hard to see their 'truth' when they differ so much amongst themselves, due to their morals getting in the way and causing them to interpret the bible differently from the next theist. This happens even without the mass (no pun intended), of contradictions within the 'holy' text.

In summary, Atheism is far more truthful and grounded than the myriad of interpretations of a 2,000 year old collection of stories, written by goat herders, which have been translated to death and contain moral teachings which most of us find repulsive. And even those who subscribe to it's teachings quarrel over it's meanings.

Why is the bible true? Cos it just is.

Kivaro

joseph brand wrote: »

In summary, Atheism is far more truthful and grounded than the myriad of interpretations of a 2,000 year old collection of stories, written by goat herders, which have been translated to death and contain moral teachings which most of us find repulsive. And even those who subscribe to it's teachings quarrel over it's meanings.

I agree Joseph Brand, I agree.

jank

joseph brand wrote: »

I'm joking of course.

After watching many debates on Atheism vs Theism, it seems that the Theists have an uncanny ability to be able to see other theists as being wrong. "My view is the right view", they might say. Here they display a sort of blissful ignorance and smugness.
Theists all have their own way of interpreting biblical text according to their morals. That's assuming that they've read the bible. Otherwise they are just believeing what they are told to believe. (the flock, aka sheep)

I know catholics who hold as much, if not more, contempt for protestants than those damn know-it-all-Atheists. The same is true between the different denominations of christianity and between the other faiths which I'm sure I need not explain.

One thing that is for sure, is that all atheists share the same view on religion. There may be different approaches to tackling theists (there's the thread on bad atheism arguments), but none of us can claim to be better Atheists than the next. We all know it's insidious and of course, absolute boll*x.

Theists talk about 'truth'. It's hard to see their 'truth' when they differ so much amongst themselves, due to their morals getting in the way and causing them to interpret the bible differently from the next theist. This happens even without the mass (no pun intended), of contradictions within the 'holy' text.

In summary, Atheism is far more truthful and grounded than the myriad of interpretations of a 2,000 year old collection of stories, written by goat herders, which have been translated to death and contain moral teachings which most of us find repulsive. And even those who subscribe to it's teachings quarrel over it's meanings.

Why is the bible true? Cos it just is.

Very easy to hold a view when that view is nothing. Nihilism is rife these days.

smokingman

jank wrote: »

Very easy to hold a view when that view is nothing. Nihilism is rife these days.

Not "believing" in magic and faeries does not equal nihilism. You'd think you'd understand that by now.

lynski

jank wrote: »

Very easy to hold a view when that view is nothing. Nihilism is rife these days.

It is not easy. It involves regular questioning and thought. For example a friend and I were talking yesterday about our fears for the future for our children and how to help them cope. We were discussing how as children and teenagers we were taught that you did not engage in sexual activities because it was against god's will or church teaching. and it was a sin. how easy an argument is that?
We have to now teach or children actual responsibility for their own actions, logical reasons for their morality. The challenge of atheism makes religious people, IMHO, look like wimps.

Improbable

Not necessarily. There are many different flavours of atheists. You can be an atheist and still think that religion is a wonderful thing or you can be an atheist and think that religion is a bad thing. You can be an atheist who thinks that it would be nice if there was a god and you can be an atheist who thinks that it would be bad if there was a god. The only thing atheists have in common is a lack of belief for the existence of deities. Their reasons for such can be many and varied as can their views on religion.

Ellis Dee

Improbable wrote: »

Not necessarily. There are many different flavours of atheists. You can be an atheist and still think that religion is a wonderful thing or you can be an atheist and think that religion is a bad thing. You can be an atheist who thinks that it would be nice if there was a god and you can be an atheist who thinks that it would be bad if there was a god. The only thing atheists have in common is a lack of belief for the existence of deities. Their reasons for such can be many and varied as can their views on religion.

I agree. What all atheists have in common is that we don't believe the unbelievable.

The myriad ways in which we express it, actively or passively, reflects Chairman Mao Dezong's famous dictum: "Let a hundred flowers blossom".

Tonyandthewhale

joseph brand wrote: »

I'm joking of course.

After watching many debates on Atheism vs Theism, it seems that the Theists have an uncanny ability to be able to see other theists as being wrong. "My view is the right view", they might say. Here they display a sort of blissful ignorance and smugness.
Theists all have their own way of interpreting biblical text according to their morals. That's assuming that they've read the bible. Otherwise they are just believeing what they are told to believe. (the flock, aka sheep)

I know catholics who hold as much, if not more, contempt for protestants than those damn know-it-all-Atheists. The same is true between the different denominations of christianity and between the other faiths which I'm sure I need not explain.

One thing that is for sure, is that all atheists share the same view on religion. There may be different approaches to tackling theists (there's the thread on bad atheism arguments), but none of us can claim to be better Atheists than the next. We all know it's insidious and of course, absolute boll*x.

Theists talk about 'truth'. It's hard to see their 'truth' when they differ so much amongst themselves, due to their morals getting in the way and causing them to interpret the bible differently from the next theist. This happens even without the mass (no pun intended), of contradictions within the 'holy' text.

In summary, Atheism is far more truthful and grounded than the myriad of interpretations of a 2,000 year old collection of stories, written by goat herders, which have been translated to death and contain moral teachings which most of us find repulsive. And even those who subscribe to it's teachings quarrel over it's meanings.

Why is the bible true? Cos it just is.

So what's your point really? That theism isn't a unified approach? I don't think the fact that all theists (or even theists who are nominally members of the same sect) don't agree undermines their argument all that much since for the most part it's built on personal faith or arguments that are beyond crazy anyway (I'm looking at you young earth creationists).

Obviously, inconsistencies within religious organisations and belief seems can make them look less credible from the outside and can sow the seeds of doubt but I don't agree that atheism is better simply because we all basically agree on the same thing (no god). I mean you could just as easily say that all theists basically agree that there is at least some form of god.

joseph brand

Improbable wrote: »

Not necessarily. There are many different flavours of atheists. You can be an atheist and still think that religion is a wonderful thing or you can be an atheist and think that religion is a bad thing. You can be an atheist who thinks that it would be nice if there was a god and you can be an atheist who thinks that it would be bad if there was a god. The only thing atheists have in common is a lack of belief for the existence of deities. Their reasons for such can be many and varied as can their views on religion.

It would be foolish of me to try to speak for all Atheists, concerning their views on the existence of a god. Whether they would like there to be a god or not.

Saying that, I'm pretty certain all Atheists know that the religions of the world are all equally false, divisive, regressive and pervasive. Theists don't actually know that there is a god, they hope there is. It's their comfort blanket and the thought of having to let go of it and grow up scares them. If this isn't childish and immature, I don't know what is.

I can't help but think of us Atheists as being similar to the freed slaves in the US. Obviously the slaves had it a lot worse, but the emancipation is just as delicious. Some Atheists liken it to the liberation of the LBGT community (coming out as an Atheist), but I don't think it works as well, when talking to theists who still have contempt for gays and hope that they can be cured through prayer and reading the bible.

Listening to theists argue the case for religion sounds like slave owners trying to argue for slavery. In all the debates I've watched I have not heard one good point from the theists side. Not one. This is why I believe Hitchens relished these debates so much. It was just too easy. Theists are basically flogging a dead horse.

When the slaves were freed they would have been delighted (to put it mildly), but I'm sure they were also very angry. They would have demanded apologies and equal rights. If an Atheist carries on likewise they are labelled 'Militant Atheist'. It's as if they are expected to shut up and keep quiet, don't wake any of the other sleeping, indoctrinated sheep followers. "Go away, you're making a racket".

joseph brand

Tonyandthewhale wrote: »

So what's your point really? That theism isn't a unified approach? I don't think the fact that all theists (or even theists who are nominally members of the same sect) don't agree undermines their argument all that much since for the most part it's built on personal faith or arguments that are beyond crazy anyway (I'm looking at you young earth creationists).

Obviously, inconsistencies within religious organisations and belief seems can make them look less credible from the outside and can sow the seeds of doubt but I don't agree that atheism is better simply because we all basically agree on the same thing (no god). I mean you could just as easily say that all theists basically agree that there is at least some form of god.

That's a very simplified way of amalgamating all the worlds religions together. Let's not forget that they've been kicking the sh1t out of each other for centuries, because their god is right and the others worship a false god. I can't imagine Atheists at war with themselves over their Atheist beliefs. If we stopped indoctrinating children into the RCC there would be a very very small number who would join a religion later on in life. The church knows this.

You mentioned personal faith. If it were only personal, who would complain? The Vatican doesn't look very personal to me. They have their own sovereign state for jaysus sake. How convenient.

They are 'The Untouchables'. They can't be touched but their priests have been known for eh. . . .