You’ve seen it all over the net; the Christian’s definition of what an atheist is. I’ve read it in Christian literature, even the newest books put out to prop up the failing religious dogma in an attempt to “energize the base.” You’ve got us all wrong, but you don’t care because your depiction of us makes you feel better about yourselves.
1) “Atheists do not believe in a god that gives us a moral law. Therefor, atheists are immoral.” You couldn’t be more off point if you tried, you blundering conformist. Atheist simply do not believe in your (or any) god. Morality has nothing to do with your god. In fact, I can find several examples of various “laws” that your so called “loving god” gave his followers that are anything but moral. And don’t give me that crap about how, “That is in the Old Testament. We live under the New Testament now.” You also say that your “god” is the same yesterday, today and forever. So, if stoning a disobedient child was good then, then it should be now. And I should still be able to sell my daughter into slavery. I should be able to have multiple wives. When one of my wives has her period, I should make her leave the city ’cause, after all, she isn’t clean. I should be able to kill those that do not believe in my god too.
The fact of the matter is that atheists who act in a moral and ethical manner, philosophically speaking, are far more moral than you pretentious Christians. We practice altruism. Basically, we try to act morally and ethically due to the fact that it is the right thing to do. We have no belief in an ultimate punishment or reward. We are not “good people” simply because some unseen “sky daddy” told us to be. To be a good person simply because it is required of you is not morality and neither is it moral to do good simply for hope of a reward or fear of punishment. You are simply a suck up at that point. Now, wipe the “holy” brown smudge off your nose and do something expecting NO return. Do it because it is the right thing to do, not because you are commanded to or want to add a wing onto your celestial mansion.
2) “Atheists believe that they can disprove the existence of god.” Wrong again. Atheists simply do not believe in your god. But, if you wish to use that argument, fin. I should be able to safely assert that, by definition, “Christians believe that they can PROVE that god exists.” So…I am still waiting. While it may be fun to spout of this line, it has no merit. We do not believe that we ca disprove your god. We simply do not believe that your side has presented any verifiable proof for your gods’ existence. We no more believe that we can disprove your gods’ existence anymore than you can disprove the existence of FSM or the Invisible Pink Unicorn. After all, the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. You asserted the claim that god does exist well before someone said, “No, it doesn’t.” You have made an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. We have yet to see that evidence and we have been waiting for thousands of years.
3) “Atheists are deceived by the devil.” Please, show me this “devil.” Again, where’s the proof? But, hey, it makes you feel good to say this, doesn’t it? After all, it is just one more out you have to not think for yourselves.
4) “Atheists just brush away and overlook the body of historical evidence that supports the Bible/Koran/Torah.” What historical evidence? Just because a novel has it’s setting in Baltimore, Maryland, a non-fictional place, during the civil war (an actual war) doesn not mean that the novel is completely true. After all, I picked it up in the fiction section at Barnes and Noble. And it had vampires in it. And a leprechaun. And fairies. Many fictional books use historical events to engage the reader further. The fact that many of the events that happen in the Bible, for example, are ONLY found in the Bible is sort of a dead giveaway.
I could go on and on, but what’s the point? You will believe what you want to believe. As for me and MY house, we will serve the GREATER GOOD.
I empathize totally with this response to Christians, but my over forty years of being an atheist\ has convinced me we need to stop “speaking Christian” (an admonition from David Eller, author of “Natural Atheism” and “Atheism Advanced”).
We need to stop debating Christians (or any other religious representation), and simply and patiently and thoroughly state our case. We represent reason, science, logic, and a rational morality. Let’s try just advocating those positions with logic and evidence and ignore irrational claims.
Anyone who makes an assertion of truth with words like “god” or “faith” as evidence should simply be met with “Your terms have no basis in reality and do not belong in any discussion about the nature of reality.” Period.
I agree with Arthur. I just wouldn’t be so eloquent about it.
My reply is typically, “Fairy tales are for children.”
“The fact of the matter is that atheists, philosophically speaking, are far more moral…” This paragraph starts with a gross generalization. As you say, “Atheist simply do not believe in your (or any) god. Morality has nothing to do with your god.”
Atheism has no statements on morality. Atheists can be moral or immoral (and they are). To suggest that atheists are more moral than Christians (or anyone else) is false. Be very careful about making general statements about groups of people (that sounds like racism!).
Christian morality has some wonderful parts and some distasteful parts. The biggest problem is that, because of its source (invisble, magical man who lives in an invisible, magical place) it is highly resistant to change. However, rational, philosophical, secular morality is fluid and can evolve leading to progressive moral change. Atheists are free to reject Christian morality (or accept it without fear of god!) but they can also reject secular morality.
Humanistdad says:
September 7, 2008 at 8:41 am
“Atheism has no statements on morality. Atheists can be moral or immoral (and they are). To suggest that atheists are more moral than Christians (or anyone else) is false. Be very careful about making general statements about groups of people (that sounds like racism!).”
I disagree with this. Atheists are more moral than Christians by default, because Christianity itself is pretty damn immoral. So someone with no specific moral code is starting with a leg up on Christianity.
“Atheists do not believe in a god that gives us a moral law. Therefor, atheists are immoral.”
You know, this makes us (Christians) want to beat our heads against a wall more than anything else. I don’t know why y’all consistently misunderstand our position on this.
We do NOT say atheists are immoral. We say the word “immoral” is meaningless without a god.
It is not an attack on atheists personally; it is an attack on a philosophical position that says “look at all the evil in the world” and yet can’t explain what is meant by the word “evil.”
And I would say that the act of doing that which is right simply because it is right is far more a testament of moral character than the man who does what is right simply because of fear of hell or with the expectation of heavenly rewards. As a christian, you are simply submitting to a fear or greedily taking a bribe. Neither is an acceptable reason for making a correct decision given a choice.
Christians are supposed to do what God wants because we love Him. He created us. He let His Son die to save us. “act of doing that which is right simply because it is right”
But you see, “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” – Proverbs 14:12
You have a presupposition to Christians. Maybe being able to know more about what true Christians believe and what the Bible says will help you in discerning why you think we are wrong.
Who is to say murder is wrong? The Bible. Our government. I mean come on, morality wouldn’t exist if not for religion. If atheism was the majority rule, people would be dying all the time. And our laws come from religious texts. If these texts never existed, our views on “morality” would be very different.
I’m pretty sure that even without religion we would have said “hey, let’s not kill each other off, it really sucks” “I really like some of these people so let’s cut it out.”
I don’t know where you live but the laws in The States most certainly have no religious grounds, the founding fathers being deists and critics of the church.
In any case, who’s to say that one religion is the true religion among a thousand others… only people indoctrinated from birth who haven’t thought to question ridiculous claims, or the fact that myths have guided human life since before the days of ancient egypt. We dispel these older beliefs for newer beliefs. In another 1000 years, i predict that religions will be altered (hopefully exterminated) and even morality will be different.
I think you should travel some…Your perspective seems very centered on the U.S. There are places still in existence where beliefs have been formed outside of religious texts, and there are clear evidences that your ‘moral’ understanding, whether you want to believe or not, has been influenced by Christianity. If you want to be a ‘purist,’ you probably need to leave America in order to be able to truly start from ground zero to form a morality ‘untainted,’ as you say, by Christianity.
I have lived many places with different moral standards than the country you are from…I have also met hundreds of people who have a desire to change their concept of morality when they have decided to follow what is true. It’s something you can never understand, unless you decide to follow Him by faith and faith alone. Believe me, I’ve been on your side. All that I have experienced has only furthered my opinion that the way of Jesus IS truth.
Places like China that are communistic and thus no religion is sanctioned still have moral laws such as a law against murder, and stealing.
1. People die all the time. Surprise.
2. Murder was acceptable before the bible? I’m mistaken. I forgot people cannot think for themselves, and need a divine being to differentiate right and wrong. I have been told since I was young things that are right and wrong. Moreover, I will focus on murder as you exemplified. I was told murder was bad as a child, like most. But I am a skeptical person, and I make my own ethical and moral decisions. Disregarding previous understandings of murder, I thought, -don’t be frightened- on my own, about murder. I decided for myself that it is wrong to kill someone based on my acquired morals and ethics through my lifetime, with no help from the bible, and not because I would go to jail for murder. Through rational, logical reasoning.
Ironically to your claim, my uncle was murdered by a religious person. The reason: this mother fucker, who my uncle was friends with, wanted his laptop. A 600 dollar laptop. So I can establish my own morals, this religious fuck can kill my uncle, and morals don’t exist without religion.
sad and sad
** we give our rights (and duties) to each other **
Xian ethics is irrational, otherworldly, and impractical. It promises much, and delivers nothing. Jesus’ “interim ethic” couldn’t outlast one generation of true believers. The fideistic irrationality of Paul of Tarsus with its anti-intellectualism, misogyny, and revenge seeking has poisoned the West for 2,000 years.
Chinese culture was far luckier. From that very rational, this worldly, and practical book, The Analects, attributed to Confucius (500 years before a myth encrusted Jesus):
6:20 Fan Ch’ih asked what constituted wisdom. The Master said, “To give one’s self earnestly to the duties due to men, and, while respecting spiritual beings, to keep aloof from them, may be called wisdom.”
15:23 Tsze-kung asked, saying, “Is there one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one’s life?” The Master said, “Is not ‘reciprocity’ such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.” [trans. S.R. McIntyre 2003]
No god is needed to police human behavior. All ethics is irreducibly social, but not utilitarian. Harming others can not be generalized; otherwise, no culture could exist.
bipolar2 ©2008
** Ignorance of the genealogy of morals is no excuse **
The truth of a wide separation of the origins of morality and religion receives a masterful summary by E. R. Dodds (The greeks and the irrational. Berkeley. 1951. pp. 31-32).
What you find impossible, Dodds finds commonplace:
“I need hardly say [sic!] that religion and morals were not initially interdependent, in Greece or elsewhere; they had their separate roots. I suppose that broadly speaking, religion grows out of man’s relationship to his total environment, morals out of his relation to his fellowmen.”
After considering the close intertwining of once separate domains in Sophocles and Eurpides — Dodds gives a generous explanation of a new ‘guilt culture’ demand for divine justice.
“But sooner or later in most cultures there comes a time of suffering when most people refuse to be content with [the separation]. Man projects into the cosmos his nascent demand for social justice; and when from the outer spaces the magnified echo of his own voice returns to him, promising punishment for the guilty, he draws from it courage and reassurance.”
** Ignorance is no excuse **
The truth of a wide separation of the origins of morality and religion receives a masterful summary by E. R. Dodds (The greeks and the irrational. Berkeley. 1951. pp. 31-32).
What you find impossible, Dodds finds commonplace:
“I need hardly say [sic!] that religion and morals were not initially interdependent, in Greece or elsewhere; they had their separate roots. I suppose that broadly speaking, religion grows out of man’s relationship to his total environment, morals out of his relation to his fellowmen.”
After considering the close intertwining of once separate domains in Sophocles and Eurpides — Dodds gives a generous explanation of a new ‘guilt culture’ demand for divine justice.
“But sooner or later in most cultures there comes a time of suffering when most people refuse to be content with [the separation]. Man projects into the cosmos his nascent demand for social justice; and when from the outer spaces the magnified echo of his own voice returns to him, promising punishment for the guilty, he draws from it courage and reassurance.”
Xianity, however, took its moralized universe directly from judaism which had absorbed zoroastrian notions of a war between good and evil on a cosmic scale.
Xian mythology, like other big-4 monotheisms zoroastrianism, post-exilic judaism, and islam, posits a moral world order which never existed. No more can be found in that fiction than the ancestors put into it.
Some of that *meaning* derives ultimately from Sargon I’s imperial propaganda starting about 5,500 years ago when the very first violent yoking together of disparate city-state cultures occurred in what is now Iraq. He is shown in a low relief sculpture as a god receiving a legal and moral code directly from a greater god enthroned above him. (Your myth of divine origin of morality turns out to be ancient political “spin.” Still works today, doesn’t it?)
Today’s distant heirs of long dead imperial Akkado-Sumerian political spin still espouse a hierarchical, moralized, androcentric, universe now widely perceived as empty. What nonsense! The universe is neither meaningful (natural theology) nor meaningless (existentialism). Neither just nor unjust. Neither moral nor immoral.
“The universe is neither meaningful (natural theology) nor meaningless (existentialism). Neither just nor unjust. Neither moral nor immoral.”
I agree completely. The ideas found in Taoism are much like what you describe here, which is why I like that philosophy the best.
“Atheists are free to reject Christian morality (or accept it without fear of god!) but they can also reject secular morality.”
Exactly! Isn’t one of the great things about being an atheist or not prescribing to one single religion/ system of beliefs is that an atheist can choose to believe in whatever set of principles he sees fit? Einstein said that the religion of the future (if there is to be one) “…will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity.” Coming from a man who had a better understanding of the universe than most, I think his words hold great wisdom. Wouldn’t atheists who meld philosophies and religions to have a moral code that is applicable to any situation and based purely on altruism, with no juvanile guilt trips or other worldly rewards involved, be the creators of such a cosmic ‘religion’ or philosophy of the future?
Another good point someone made is that we don’t even need religion to have morals or rules governing society. I think religions don’t really need to exist. People turn to religions from the animalistic fear and awe they have of the world around them. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. The real true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self, and the measure in which they help and care for the needs of the world. While I abhor dogma, this is the reason why I don’t shut out all of christian morality… If everyone was commited to excellence, commited to the truth, and shared in a fraternal love for others then this world would be as perfect as it could get.
How can a world not be meaningful and meaningless at the same time? Just and unjust? moral and immoral? Do we live in a gray area for our entire lives?
I believe in God. I believe He as created us for a reason. I believe in a meaningful world.
You seem to not believe in God. So, you would be only living for this life. Everything you do in this life is all that there is. Everything you work for and achieve will be gone after you are dead. Maybe not right away, but eventually everything you have earned, created, or done will be gone. So in essence, your life is meaningless.
I don’t understand how the world could be not meaningful nor meaningless.
Well, of course everything is a gray area – that is life. Whether your life is meaningful or meaningless depends on what you, relative to everyone else, find fulfilling.
Of course all that we achieve and do in this life eventually fades – nothing is forever, each moment passes away and everything dies eventually. While I can see the draw in believing that there were some grand plan behind each individual’s existance, that doesn’t make it so. And what’s wrong with finding meaning in the moment, in you experience? Wwhat’s wrong with dying and having it all pass away eventually?
It seems simply egomaniacal to want to have one’s deeds and soul live forever and it takes a great deal of deliberate ignorance to latch onto silly explanations that fit what we want. Much better, and much more meaningful, to embrace and work within reality – it’s really quite wonderful!
I believe I can fly, I believe I can touch the sky” was that the back street boys?
You really can “believe” whatever you want. lol
Logic or Faith hmmm. I’d like to see ppl get over the left and right brain disputes and evolve a little. Heres a question, regardless of your beliefs how do you propose helping ppl unwilling or incapable of helping themselves? Furthermore when said ppl come into positions of power (Politically or Economically) what would you recommend (sp?) us as individuals do? In my opinion stabilizing the world economics and disarming the fear factors resulting in global and/or internal conflicts would be at the heart of the matter. However how does one really go about that as an individual not wanting to be taken advantage of or have their efforts misused?
Perhaps we will always be a Barbaric race, even wearing suits and ties and talking with silver tongues. Perhaps then some of us need these fairy tales because we have not faith in our fellow man. I don’t really give a shit personally. The human race is disappointing even with its many achievements throughout history I’ve seen little evidence of any perfect society, just pipe dreams and empty promises. So with no God/leader to follow ppl find themselves lost, lol, welcome to the real world.
By the way, if anyone has a wourthwhile answer to any of the questions I mentioned please email me, I would enjoy hearing your thoughts.
Believe in Nothing, Everything is Permitted.
All i can say is its the biggest load of bull**te ever heard in history.
Science now proves thousands of times over that we evolved from Space dust and gases not from some long heared crap talking idiot that fooled thousands of people for thousands of years.
Will give him his due bloody good salesman though!
The sooner religion dies in all forms the better for everyone, then we can concentrate on the real problems in life, the population explostion, global warming, destruction of the planet, crime, death and famine.
Where is the bearded bullshitter in Africa where its needed, no where because he doesn’t exist and never did!
Just one thing you seem to have forgotten- Evolution is not science. Science must be observable and repeatable. Also, science cannot prove anything- only disprove.
Just one thing YOU seem to have forgotton, evolution IS observable.
microevolution of the human eye, finches beaks in regard to seed hardness, birds that use tools (crazy, I know. try google, love google), the fact that the frontal lobe of the human brain has grown much larger than any other animals which gives us many of our cognitive functions that allow us to understand morality, etc. Evolution — the change in a species to adapt to environmental stimuli.
Science can only disprove, true. Such as, science has disproved that any current scientific methods can explain the way that humans have developed — save for the theory of evolution. Essentially, science has disproved that you can disprove evolution using current scientific methods. (yes double negative.)
“Jesus” (lol) if Darwin is “not science” who the f***! is?
Just like to say something: Everyone got their morality from religion. See atheists learned morality from their parents, who learned it from their parents, etc. Somewhere down the line, one of your family members believed in God. plus, most of our laws, particularly morality laws, come from the Bible. Therefore, if you are “moral” because it is against the law not to be, then you are being influenced from religious text. Who is to say that murder is wrong? The Bible. The Koran. Buddhism. Most religions in general. And those who do believe in murder e.g. cannibalism, that is also a religion of some kind. Religion is the overall effect on the humans act, whether it is right or not.
Based upon your supposition, please explain the fundamentals of morality observed among other animal species. Surely you do not believe that Bonobos read from the Bible or the Koran and impart this knowledge to their offspring.
Wow. Well, as asserted in my previous comment, morality does exist without religious intervention. For you to assert that there would be no morality without religion or religious texts is to say that we would not be here right now. After all, in the grand scale of time, religion (at least those that we know that have existed and currently persist) is quite new on the scene. Written word is newer still. So how in the world did man survive with no texts and no religion some 100,000 years ago? (By religion, I mean organized. Not to say that there was not some belief in something greater than ourselves.)
It is far more likely that humans practice “morality” for the same reason that we have such a strong drive to have sex: to perpetuate the species. It hardly benefits the species if we were to go around just killing each other willy nilly, now would it? Keep in mind that there are societies in the world today were atheism is the “majority rule,” as you put it. Norway would be a great example and I would ask you to compare it to the United States, a predominately theistic country. Compare crime rates, educational status, incarceration rates and general well being of the people.
I’m a ‘devout’ atheist and I have no use for the word or concept ‘moral’. In my opinion, the M word has been so debased and sullied by religious connotations that it is of no value whatsoever to an atheist. Christians who say that atheists are ‘immoral’ are being typically moronic, only insofar as their alleged opinion derives from the murk that is their faith-brain. Those that say atheists are ‘amoral’, on the other hand, have (lucked onto) a point.
It’s better to do away with the terminology altogether. ‘Ethical’ seems a reasonable alternative to me as it originates in philosophical thought. While philosophy and philosophers through the ages have hardly been infallible (how could they have been anyway?), at least they (generally speaking) don’t give it all up to some extraterrestrial father christmas lookalike who spends his time guarding an orchard and granting victories to Christian athletes who then plug him at the medal ceremony.
Religion. Religion. Religion! What an over rated, outdated and useless word. We should strive for “Relationship” not religion. It should be about getting to know someone. To truly know them. Not just what we have heard all our lives. Or what has been said or handed down through the generations. When your dating someone and you start to fall in love with them, you become consumed in your mind and your thoughts with them. Your passionate about learning everything you can about them. You don’t listen to gossip or even what those closest to you have to say about them. Because in your heart of hearts, in that deepest place in your soul when all is quiet and your all alone, you know that you know that there’s more then the nay sayers are seeing. So you stand your ground and you truly spend time getting to know them. Who they really are. Their personality. Their likes and dislikes. Then you’ll know it’s not about rules, morals, laws, or even about you at all. But about Love. An Everlasting Unending thru out Eternity Forever Forgiving Love.
religion is outdated let’s call them relicolous
I just think they should leave Atheists alone. After all, they will burn in hell, right?
Mark 3:22-30 states:
…”he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”…
Luke 19:27
“But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me”
I wouldn’t want a God like that anyway. One who predestines people for hell. All sins are forgivable besides the one stated first. The God I would believe in would create people to live their lives. And one not asking for worship, but to live their lives to the fullest as given by Him. One shouldn’t have to worship to ‘gain’ themselves a place in heaven. To fear a God is to live in hell.
its such a load of bull.
because mary was DEFINITLEY a virgin who “GOD” knocked up with the “HOLY SPIRIT”
Hang an atheist by his balls or by her boobs over a tall building and I bet they’ll plead: God help me!
…and God willing, he will ignore there blasphemous pleas and leave them to their well-deserved doom.
boobs and balls. What a starting point for an atheist but a unthinkable place for a religious person lol
awesome job of censorship these moronic admins provide, grats on losing an interested party with an educated background in this subject. Obviously this is why atheism fail as a popular concept. people like me try to discuss things with stupid and ignorant people who believe in something only because its their gut feeling. as an atheist with a deep study in philosophy and history I say fuck this shitty little site
jesus loves you
batman loves you
superman loves you
mickey mouse loves you
what’s different.
mickey mouse mighty mouse jesus: All human fantasy…
Hoax on a free people of a free world.