God is Imaginary
Replies
-
Wow, the world turns and I come back to this:This debate has ranged over many issues with input from many contributors. Some contributors have been dismissive of the views of others and some have displayed remarkable intolerance. There is one issue however which has to be faced by every person who has contributed to the debate. All of us will one day die and will be unable to escape from the consequences of the position which each has espoused. It surely behoves each person to reflect soberly on the certainty of their position. As a committed christian my confidence is based on the person of Jesus Christ and the atonement which he made for my sins at Calvary. I accept that many people do not share my faith and they are free to do so. If those who reject the message of the gospel are correct, and I don't for one moment believe that they are ,then the consequences for me are simply oblivion. If however they are wrong, as scripture solemnly tells them they are, then the consequences for them are too horrible to contemplate. All the side issues raised in this debate pale into insignificance when faced with this simple question, WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOU IF YOU ARE WRONG? There are no second chances.
This is the kind of Christian I truly detest. It's the big bully's mate with the "I'm alright, Jack" attitude with a bit of "Yah boo - you're going to hell and I'm not". Well sod you mate and your pathetic, spiteful little god. If I met your god I'd spit in his eye and tell him where to stick his salvation. Your kind of Christianity is the kind of Christianity that burns people at the stake and thinks what a good job it's doing. This is why you get the "angry atheist" who rails against Christianity. If this is true Christianity then send me to Hell with all the decent folk.
On the other hand, I truly respect and admire Wineplease. I will never, ever agree with a single word she says, but I do respect her. Unfortunately, that probably means that, in the mind of the likes of the above "Christian", she's hell bound as well.0 -
There are so many Christians who give Christianity a bad name. Frustrates me so much!This is the kind of Christian I truly detest.
I bet we will all be surprised when we see who is in heaven and who is not! Jesus was not a fan of the self-righteous.On the other hand, I truly respect and admire Wineplease. I will never, ever agree with a single word she says, but I do respect her. Unfortunately, that probably means that, in the mind of the likes of the above "Christian", she's hell bound as well.0 -
On the other hand, I truly respect and admire Wineplease. I will never, ever agree with a single word she says,
What the??? I think we've agreed in a few points here.
0 -
Lol, doorki, about the calculus comment. Aren't you the one with a degree in religion?
Yessir
Also, my condolences to you and your friend's family, Bahet. That is truly a terrible and tragic situation.0 -
Suicide is a mortal sin. There is no forgiveness possible. Go to hell, go straight to hell. Do not pass Go, do not collect forgiveness. That's one of the big, huge no-nos in Catholicism. I discussed this with a Cardinal (friend of my grandparents) when I was in 9th grade and a classmate killed himself. He said your sins can only be forgiven if you ask for forgiveness. If you kill yourself you cannot ask forgiveness therefore forgiveness cannot be given. You die with a mortal sin on your soul which is a one way ticket to hell.
Not sure what you think I believe, but the God I know would not condemn someone to hell for having a mental disorder (such as PTSD). You obviously don't see God in the sme way I do. May your friend rest in peace.The god you believe in sentenced a friend of mine to burn in hell tonight. B was a great guy, a wonderful husband, and a loyal friend. But he experienced things in Iraq that haunted him every moment of every day for the past 9 years. He went to the VA for help but since he didn't do drugs, wasn't an alcoholic, and wasn't violent they did nothing for him. A large part of his issue was the fact that his stepson enlisted shortly after 9/11 with B's encouragement. When B and my husband were leaving Iraq, D (B's stepson) was just coming in. They were 150 yards apart but B's commander told him he couldn't take the time to see him. D's face was blown off because his unarmored Humvee was hit by an IED 2 months later. B never recovered from that. After 9 years of continuous torment B took his own life today. According to your god he's in hell for committing suicide. Your god didn't help him. Your god took his stepson and let B blame himself. Your god made it so B got no help at all. Your god left B's wife dealing with a Mother's Day week with not only the grief of remembering her lost son but also finding the body of her husband. Your god is a sadistic prick.0 -
Suicide is a mortal sin. There is no forgiveness possible. Go to hell, go straight to hell. Do not pass Go, do not collect forgiveness. That's one of the big, huge no-nos in Catholicism. I discussed this with a Cardinal (friend of my grandparents) when I was in 9th grade and a classmate killed himself. He said your sins can only be forgiven if you ask for forgiveness. If you kill yourself you cannot ask forgiveness therefore forgiveness cannot be given. You die with a mortal sin on your soul which is a one way ticket to hell.
Oh, I understand why it's said that suicide is a mortal sin. However, how do any of us know that the person killing himself did not ask for forgiveness at some point? How do we know for sure there is no thought process that goes on immediately following death?0 -
Wow, the world turns and I come back to this:This debate has ranged over many issues with input from many contributors. Some contributors have been dismissive of the views of others and some have displayed remarkable intolerance. There is one issue however which has to be faced by every person who has contributed to the debate. All of us will one day die and will be unable to escape from the consequences of the position which each has espoused. It surely behoves each person to reflect soberly on the certainty of their position. As a committed christian my confidence is based on the person of Jesus Christ and the atonement which he made for my sins at Calvary. I accept that many people do not share my faith and they are free to do so. If those who reject the message of the gospel are correct, and I don't for one moment believe that they are ,then the consequences for me are simply oblivion. If however they are wrong, as scripture solemnly tells them they are, then the consequences for them are too horrible to contemplate. All the side issues raised in this debate pale into insignificance when faced with this simple question, WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOU IF YOU ARE WRONG? There are no second chances.
This is the kind of Christian I truly detest. It's the big bully's mate with the "I'm alright, Jack" attitude with a bit of "Yah boo - you're going to hell and I'm not". Well sod you mate and your pathetic, spiteful little god. If I met your god I'd spit in his eye and tell him where to stick his salvation. Your kind of Christianity is the kind of Christianity that burns people at the stake and thinks what a good job it's doing. This is why you get the "angry atheist" who rails against Christianity. If this is true Christianity then send me to Hell with all the decent folk.
On the other hand, I truly respect and admire Wineplease. I will never, ever agree with a single word she says, but I do respect her. Unfortunately, that probably means that, in the mind of the likes of the above "Christian", she's hell bound as well.
Ditto - to both of MAB's paragraphs. If your reason to believe is to save your own *kitten* that's not much of a faith. You said if you are wrong the consequences are simply oblivion. True - if atheists are right. What if Hindus are right? Or Jehovah's Witnesses? Or any of these: http://www.religionfacts.com/big_religion_chart.htm ? I've already said if when I'm dead I am faced with the Christian afterlife and shown God I will drop to my knees and acknowledge that I was wrong. Ditto if it's Zeus or a giant rat god or some alien race. Will you? If when you die you are shown that the True Way is something with a giant rat god will you deny your Christian god and accept the giant rat as your savior? Or will you hold tight to your completely disproven beliefs and rot in hell rather than admit you were mistaken in life?0 -
I discussed this with a Cardinal (friend of my grandparents) when I was in 9th grade and a classmate killed himself. He said your sins can only be forgiven if you ask for forgiveness. If you kill yourself you cannot ask forgiveness therefore forgiveness cannot be given. You die with a mortal sin on your soul which is a one way ticket to hell.
This is also what I was taught growing up. As I've gotten older, I realize that this statement without any "howevers" is pretty cruel. None of us knows God's final judgment. None of us should ever proclaim to know who will and won't go to hell.0 -
I was just looking through this website: http://godisimaginary.com/index.htm
I can't make any better argument than this site does.
Why do people believe in a Fairy Tale that has no proof? The Bible? Faith?
Reminds me of the Ghost Hunter shows and Bigfoot shows on TV. They might be going into their 5th season and still haven't produced a ghost or a bigfoot.
Wake up. You can';t travel in time. You don't have a Guardian Angel. There is no proof that a god exists. It's a fairy tale.
Is believing in God anymore crazy that believing matter/energy can just pop into existence on it's own?0 -
So you are saying that a maladjusted species is part of a greater cosmic plan? This just seems to be a cop out answer.
There are so many questions I have about God's plan. Why do we have maladusted species? Why do we have diseases, starving children, pedophiles, rapists, homeless, poverty? These things that all seem so horrible to us should be "fixed" by someone who is all powerful. Right? So, I try to wrap my brain around this as best I can.
My children help me do this. My daughter said when she's an adult and has her own money, she will buy all the junk food she can. She doesn't understand why parents, who have the ability to buy whatever food we want, would buy healthy foods. My son says when he has kids, they'll never be punished, they'll be able to watch whatever they want. There will be no "mean" things like grounding and punishments. He doesn't understand why parents who have all the control in the house would want their kids to be miserable.
Then I think about the good in this world that comes from all the seemingly bad things. How would we be grateful for good health if there were no bad health? How would we have charity in our hearts if there was no one in need? What would this journey on earth be like if everything was perfect? Why have schools because God can just make everyone educated. Why have jobs when God can just make everything free? Why have homes when God can make the weather so perfect that we don't require shelter?
Because I can't grasp all of God's plan/intentions, as my children cannot grasp mine, I have to trust. I trust God to know what's best for this journey, just as I ask my children to trust me in what's best for them.
The part in bold may be where we differ in world view. I explain why I make these decisions to my children rather than tell them to just trust me. I want my children to question and to understand. If we are God's children, why give us brains to contemplate these issues when he is just going to punish us if we come to the "wrong" conclusions? Seems kind of sadistic at worst and poorly conceived at best.
God gave man free will to do as he pleases. He can follow the moral guidelines God gave in His word, or man can reject them.
God didn't want robots blindly following HIm, that is why He gave us a choice. I don't see why grasping why bad things happens is so hard once you understand this concept.
It also depends on your view of God. Are His rules meant to protect us in the long run, or did He just having fun making us miss out? I believe it's the former.
If there is no God, then there is no reason to not live for yourself and do whatever it is that you want, even if it hurts others.0 -
So you are saying that a maladjusted species is part of a greater cosmic plan? This just seems to be a cop out answer.
There are so many questions I have about God's plan. Why do we have maladusted species? Why do we have diseases, starving children, pedophiles, rapists, homeless, poverty? These things that all seem so horrible to us should be "fixed" by someone who is all powerful. Right? So, I try to wrap my brain around this as best I can.
My children help me do this. My daughter said when she's an adult and has her own money, she will buy all the junk food she can. She doesn't understand why parents, who have the ability to buy whatever food we want, would buy healthy foods. My son says when he has kids, they'll never be punished, they'll be able to watch whatever they want. There will be no "mean" things like grounding and punishments. He doesn't understand why parents who have all the control in the house would want their kids to be miserable.
Then I think about the good in this world that comes from all the seemingly bad things. How would we be grateful for good health if there were no bad health? How would we have charity in our hearts if there was no one in need? What would this journey on earth be like if everything was perfect? Why have schools because God can just make everyone educated. Why have jobs when God can just make everything free? Why have homes when God can make the weather so perfect that we don't require shelter?
Because I can't grasp all of God's plan/intentions, as my children cannot grasp mine, I have to trust. I trust God to know what's best for this journey, just as I ask my children to trust me in what's best for them.
The part in bold may be where we differ in world view. I explain why I make these decisions to my children rather than tell them to just trust me. I want my children to question and to understand. If we are God's children, why give us brains to contemplate these issues when he is just going to punish us if we come to the "wrong" conclusions? Seems kind of sadistic at worst and poorly conceived at best.
God gave man free will to do as he pleases. He can follow the moral guidelines God gave in His word, or man can reject them.
God didn't want robots blindly following HIm, that is why He gave us a choice. I don't see why grasping why bad things happens is so hard once you understand this concept.
It also depends on your view of God. Are His rules meant to protect us in the long run, or did He just having fun making us miss out? I believe it's the former.
If there is no God, then there is no reason to not live for yourself and do whatever it is that you want, even if it hurts others.
Yet plenty of atheists live compassionate lives helping others and morals and empathy have been seen in the animal kingdom where no religion exists.0 -
Science has not yet been able to prove the total absence of Intelligent Design so there is no proof a god does not exist either.
Ah Intelligent Design...
Here's how you handle that.
Do you believe that aliens could have seeded Earth with the necessary components for life to arise on our planet? Because that would be intelligent design.
If you just believe God created everything then say you're a religious person who believe in the creation story from the Bible and stop hiding behind pseudo-scientific terminology.
And who planted the seeds to create the aliens? And then who created the creators? Until you can provide a believable theory/evidence that physical matter(much different than supernatural) can create itself, you cannot claim your beliefs are more reality based than those who hold a certain faith.0 -
So you are saying that a maladjusted species is part of a greater cosmic plan? This just seems to be a cop out answer.
There are so many questions I have about God's plan. Why do we have maladusted species? Why do we have diseases, starving children, pedophiles, rapists, homeless, poverty? These things that all seem so horrible to us should be "fixed" by someone who is all powerful. Right? So, I try to wrap my brain around this as best I can.
My children help me do this. My daughter said when she's an adult and has her own money, she will buy all the junk food she can. She doesn't understand why parents, who have the ability to buy whatever food we want, would buy healthy foods. My son says when he has kids, they'll never be punished, they'll be able to watch whatever they want. There will be no "mean" things like grounding and punishments. He doesn't understand why parents who have all the control in the house would want their kids to be miserable.
Then I think about the good in this world that comes from all the seemingly bad things. How would we be grateful for good health if there were no bad health? How would we have charity in our hearts if there was no one in need? What would this journey on earth be like if everything was perfect? Why have schools because God can just make everyone educated. Why have jobs when God can just make everything free? Why have homes when God can make the weather so perfect that we don't require shelter?
Because I can't grasp all of God's plan/intentions, as my children cannot grasp mine, I have to trust. I trust God to know what's best for this journey, just as I ask my children to trust me in what's best for them.
The part in bold may be where we differ in world view. I explain why I make these decisions to my children rather than tell them to just trust me. I want my children to question and to understand. If we are God's children, why give us brains to contemplate these issues when he is just going to punish us if we come to the "wrong" conclusions? Seems kind of sadistic at worst and poorly conceived at best.
God gave man free will to do as he pleases. He can follow the moral guidelines God gave in His word, or man can reject them.
God didn't want robots blindly following HIm, that is why He gave us a choice. I don't see why grasping why bad things happens is so hard once you understand this concept.
It also depends on your view of God. Are His rules meant to protect us in the long run, or did He just having fun making us miss out? I believe it's the former.
If there is no God, then there is no reason to not live for yourself and do whatever it is that you want, even if it hurts others.
Yet plenty of atheists live compassionate lives helping others and morals and empathy have been seen in the animal kingdom where no religion exists.
Animals don't have a sense of right and wrong, they act on instinct.
I'm not saying I atheists are not good or compassionate people. What I'm saying is they're wasting their time in doing so. If you have no afterlife, might as well do what you can to get ahead in this life even if it means stepping on someone to get there.0 -
So what you're saying is that if you do a good deed then it's not actually to help another human being, it's just for the reward that you're hoping for.I'm not saying I atheists are not good or compassionate people. What I'm saying is they're wasting their time in doing so. If you have no afterlife, might as well do what you can to get ahead in this life even if it means stepping on someone to get there.0 -
So you are saying that a maladjusted species is part of a greater cosmic plan? This just seems to be a cop out answer.
There are so many questions I have about God's plan. Why do we have maladusted species? Why do we have diseases, starving children, pedophiles, rapists, homeless, poverty? These things that all seem so horrible to us should be "fixed" by someone who is all powerful. Right? So, I try to wrap my brain around this as best I can.
My children help me do this. My daughter said when she's an adult and has her own money, she will buy all the junk food she can. She doesn't understand why parents, who have the ability to buy whatever food we want, would buy healthy foods. My son says when he has kids, they'll never be punished, they'll be able to watch whatever they want. There will be no "mean" things like grounding and punishments. He doesn't understand why parents who have all the control in the house would want their kids to be miserable.
Then I think about the good in this world that comes from all the seemingly bad things. How would we be grateful for good health if there were no bad health? How would we have charity in our hearts if there was no one in need? What would this journey on earth be like if everything was perfect? Why have schools because God can just make everyone educated. Why have jobs when God can just make everything free? Why have homes when God can make the weather so perfect that we don't require shelter?
Because I can't grasp all of God's plan/intentions, as my children cannot grasp mine, I have to trust. I trust God to know what's best for this journey, just as I ask my children to trust me in what's best for them.
The part in bold may be where we differ in world view. I explain why I make these decisions to my children rather than tell them to just trust me. I want my children to question and to understand. If we are God's children, why give us brains to contemplate these issues when he is just going to punish us if we come to the "wrong" conclusions? Seems kind of sadistic at worst and poorly conceived at best.
God gave man free will to do as he pleases. He can follow the moral guidelines God gave in His word, or man can reject them.
God didn't want robots blindly following HIm, that is why He gave us a choice. I don't see why grasping why bad things happens is so hard once you understand this concept.
It also depends on your view of God. Are His rules meant to protect us in the long run, or did He just having fun making us miss out? I believe it's the former.
If there is no God, then there is no reason to not live for yourself and do whatever it is that you want, even if it hurts others.
Yet plenty of atheists live compassionate lives helping others and morals and empathy have been seen in the animal kingdom where no religion exists.
Animals don't have a sense of right and wrong, they act on instinct.
I'm not saying I atheists are not good or compassionate people. What I'm saying is they're wasting their time in doing so. If you have no afterlife, might as well do what you can to get ahead in this life even if it means stepping on someone to get there.
Studies by Frans de Waal et al. are showing that animals, especially higher mammals do exhibit empathy and altruism.
Your view of humanity is very dark and I don't share it. I think, as being evolved from pack/troop/gregarious animals, we have empathy and compassion because it is for the good of the group rather than for some perceived reward after they die.0 -
Studies by Frans de Waal et al. are showing that animals, especially higher mammals do exhibit empathy and altruism.
Your view of humanity is very dark and I don't share it. I think, as being evolved from pack/troop/gregarious animals, we have empathy and compassion because it is for the good of the group rather than for some perceived reward after they die.
Humans don’t hold animals morally culpable for their behavior since they do not exhibit the kind of understanding, deliberation and free choice that humans do. I certainly don’t want to belittle the incredible and moving things that animals do. I would insist, though, that their empathy and altruism are governed and directed by instinct rather than intellectual reflection. Because of this, we would think it silly to hold a lower animal morally responsible for its actions.
I don’t see how this view of humanity is “dark.” I believe human beings are made for eternal happiness with God. I believe that human nature is made for a good purpose (although we often misuse it). I believe humans have the power of freedom to choose to love and do what is truly good and just. Regarding your view, how does an impulse in us that is the result of a blind, meaningless evolutionary process to protect our “herd” result in a more satisfying view of human actions and human nature? For instance, what if someone has an impulse to act against the “herd instinct”? What if someone has an impulse to be selfish, self-serving and even sadistic? Is that morally “wrong”? Is it “objectively evil”? Why? By what standard do you say that one set of actions is “better” (besides a merely pragmatic usefulness for the herd) than another?0 -
So what you're saying is that if you do a good deed then it's not actually to help another human being, it's just for the reward that you're hoping for.I'm not saying I atheists are not good or compassionate people. What I'm saying is they're wasting their time in doing so. If you have no afterlife, might as well do what you can to get ahead in this life even if it means stepping on someone to get there.
Before I go further, I don't want to give off the impression that I think of myself as a perfect person who does the right thing all of the time. I am far from perfect.
To answer your question: no, some people of faith may have that motive, but not for me personally. If a Christian is doing good deeds only to get into heaven, they then have a misunderstanding of what it is that actually saves their soul. It is not good works, no amount of charity or helping little old ladies across the street will allow you to enter heaven. The only thing that can save a person is for them to repent of their sins, believe in Christ and what He did for man on the cross. That is it, and this is what separates Christianity from all other religions. Its promise of eternal life doesn't rely on what you do, rather on what you accept. We are to be good people because we are representatives of Him, we are commanded not to cause another person to stumble. When you accept Christ, you are also making a commitment to Him and to live by His rules.
I follow God and try to live my life the way He has instructed(again, I fall short of this quite often) because I love Him and owe it to Him for saving me from eternal hell. I have a desire to live my life according to His plan because of this love.
Now this doesn't mean a person can do whatever they want and live in defiance of what God commands us to do when they accept Christ. Even though we accept Christ, we still have the free will He gave us to continually make the decision if we still want to have a relationship with HIm. By doing what He commands, we are affirming this desire to continue are relationship with Him.
Further, we accept the way He wants usto live because we believe He is perfect, and He knows what is best for us. Think about it, if you believed in an loving, omnipotent and perfect God, would you not also believe what He tells you to do is the best for you?0 -
So you are saying that a maladjusted species is part of a greater cosmic plan? This just seems to be a cop out answer.
There are so many questions I have about God's plan. Why do we have maladusted species? Why do we have diseases, starving children, pedophiles, rapists, homeless, poverty? These things that all seem so horrible to us should be "fixed" by someone who is all powerful. Right? So, I try to wrap my brain around this as best I can.
My children help me do this. My daughter said when she's an adult and has her own money, she will buy all the junk food she can. She doesn't understand why parents, who have the ability to buy whatever food we want, would buy healthy foods. My son says when he has kids, they'll never be punished, they'll be able to watch whatever they want. There will be no "mean" things like grounding and punishments. He doesn't understand why parents who have all the control in the house would want their kids to be miserable.
Then I think about the good in this world that comes from all the seemingly bad things. How would we be grateful for good health if there were no bad health? How would we have charity in our hearts if there was no one in need? What would this journey on earth be like if everything was perfect? Why have schools because God can just make everyone educated. Why have jobs when God can just make everything free? Why have homes when God can make the weather so perfect that we don't require shelter?
Because I can't grasp all of God's plan/intentions, as my children cannot grasp mine, I have to trust. I trust God to know what's best for this journey, just as I ask my children to trust me in what's best for them.
The part in bold may be where we differ in world view. I explain why I make these decisions to my children rather than tell them to just trust me. I want my children to question and to understand. If we are God's children, why give us brains to contemplate these issues when he is just going to punish us if we come to the "wrong" conclusions? Seems kind of sadistic at worst and poorly conceived at best.
God gave man free will to do as he pleases. He can follow the moral guidelines God gave in His word, or man can reject them.
God didn't want robots blindly following HIm, that is why He gave us a choice. I don't see why grasping why bad things happens is so hard once you understand this concept.
It also depends on your view of God. Are His rules meant to protect us in the long run, or did He just having fun making us miss out? I believe it's the former.
If there is no God, then there is no reason to not live for yourself and do whatever it is that you want, even if it hurts others.
Yet plenty of atheists live compassionate lives helping others and morals and empathy have been seen in the animal kingdom where no religion exists.
Animals don't have a sense of right and wrong, they act on instinct.
I'm not saying I atheists are not good or compassionate people. What I'm saying is they're wasting their time in doing so. If you have no afterlife, might as well do what you can to get ahead in this life even if it means stepping on someone to get there.
Studies by Frans de Waal et al. are showing that animals, especially higher mammals do exhibit empathy and altruism.
Your view of humanity is very dark and I don't share it. I think, as being evolved from pack/troop/gregarious animals, we have empathy and compassion because it is for the good of the group rather than for some perceived reward after they die.
Who decides what is best for the group? Man is imperfect, for that reason, any morality that came as a result of his own thoughts cannot be called true or right. It negates the ability to tell someone what they did is wrong.0 -
Studies by Frans de Waal et al. are showing that animals, especially higher mammals do exhibit empathy and altruism.
Your view of humanity is very dark and I don't share it. I think, as being evolved from pack/troop/gregarious animals, we have empathy and compassion because it is for the good of the group rather than for some perceived reward after they die.
Humans don’t hold animals morally culpable for their behavior since they do not exhibit the kind of understanding, deliberation and free choice that humans do. I certainly don’t want to belittle the incredible and moving things that animals do. I would insist, though, that their empathy and altruism are governed and directed by instinct rather than intellectual reflection. Because of this, we would think it silly to hold a lower animal morally responsible for its actions.
I don’t see how this view of humanity is “dark.” I believe human beings are made for eternal happiness with God. I believe that human nature is made for a good purpose (although we often misuse it). I believe humans have the power of freedom to choose to love and do what is truly good and just. Regarding your view, how does an impulse in us that is the result of a blind, meaningless evolutionary process to protect our “herd” result in a more satisfying view of human actions and human nature? For instance, what if someone has an impulse to act against the “herd instinct”? What if someone has an impulse to be selfish, self-serving and even sadistic? Is that morally “wrong”? Is it “objectively evil”? Why? By what standard do you say that one set of actions is “better” (besides a merely pragmatic usefulness for the herd) than another?
The point is that our empathy may also be run by instincts or at least rooted there.
Your view and Angryguy's view are different. He appears to espouse that people need rules and laws in order to prevent us from all acting for our own interests. This implies that humans are self-centered by nature. Your appear to be stating that humans are naturally good but act against this at times.
The search for truth is not the search for satisfying results. While it may not be satisfying to you that we are all just bald monkeys flying around on an organic spaceship, it is not far from the truth.
You can see the answer to your questions in today's world. The group decides what is good and bad for the group. If someone acts against the group's interest, they are punished by the group. Morals and mores are determined by the group. This is where local customs and dietary rules come from. Obviously, there appear to be universal rules that multiple groups have deemed "evil" such as murder but if you look deeper, there are differences there as well. While one culture may see all killing as evil another may be against murder but support capital punishment and yet another see's honor killings as completely moral and valid.0 -
So you are saying that a maladjusted species is part of a greater cosmic plan? This just seems to be a cop out answer.
There are so many questions I have about God's plan. Why do we have maladusted species? Why do we have diseases, starving children, pedophiles, rapists, homeless, poverty? These things that all seem so horrible to us should be "fixed" by someone who is all powerful. Right? So, I try to wrap my brain around this as best I can.
My children help me do this. My daughter said when she's an adult and has her own money, she will buy all the junk food she can. She doesn't understand why parents, who have the ability to buy whatever food we want, would buy healthy foods. My son says when he has kids, they'll never be punished, they'll be able to watch whatever they want. There will be no "mean" things like grounding and punishments. He doesn't understand why parents who have all the control in the house would want their kids to be miserable.
Then I think about the good in this world that comes from all the seemingly bad things. How would we be grateful for good health if there were no bad health? How would we have charity in our hearts if there was no one in need? What would this journey on earth be like if everything was perfect? Why have schools because God can just make everyone educated. Why have jobs when God can just make everything free? Why have homes when God can make the weather so perfect that we don't require shelter?
Because I can't grasp all of God's plan/intentions, as my children cannot grasp mine, I have to trust. I trust God to know what's best for this journey, just as I ask my children to trust me in what's best for them.
The part in bold may be where we differ in world view. I explain why I make these decisions to my children rather than tell them to just trust me. I want my children to question and to understand. If we are God's children, why give us brains to contemplate these issues when he is just going to punish us if we come to the "wrong" conclusions? Seems kind of sadistic at worst and poorly conceived at best.
God gave man free will to do as he pleases. He can follow the moral guidelines God gave in His word, or man can reject them.
God didn't want robots blindly following HIm, that is why He gave us a choice. I don't see why grasping why bad things happens is so hard once you understand this concept.
It also depends on your view of God. Are His rules meant to protect us in the long run, or did He just having fun making us miss out? I believe it's the former.
If there is no God, then there is no reason to not live for yourself and do whatever it is that you want, even if it hurts others.
Yet plenty of atheists live compassionate lives helping others and morals and empathy have been seen in the animal kingdom where no religion exists.
Animals don't have a sense of right and wrong, they act on instinct.
I'm not saying I atheists are not good or compassionate people. What I'm saying is they're wasting their time in doing so. If you have no afterlife, might as well do what you can to get ahead in this life even if it means stepping on someone to get there.
Studies by Frans de Waal et al. are showing that animals, especially higher mammals do exhibit empathy and altruism.
Your view of humanity is very dark and I don't share it. I think, as being evolved from pack/troop/gregarious animals, we have empathy and compassion because it is for the good of the group rather than for some perceived reward after they die.
Who decides what is best for the group? Man is imperfect, for that reason, any morality that came as a result of his own thoughts cannot be called true or right. It negates the ability to tell someone what they did is wrong.
I am just going to cut and paste my answer to Wine's similar question here:
You can see the answer to your questions in today's world. The group decides what is good and bad for the group. If someone acts against the group's interest, they are punished by the group. Morals and mores are determined by the group. This is where local customs and dietary rules come from. Obviously, there appear to be universal rules that multiple groups have deemed "evil" such as murder but if you look deeper, there are differences there as well. While one culture may see all killing as evil another may be against murder but support capital punishment and yet another see's honor killings as completely moral and valid.0 -
So what you're saying is that if you do a good deed then it's not actually to help another human being, it's just for the reward that you're hoping for.I'm not saying I atheists are not good or compassionate people. What I'm saying is they're wasting their time in doing so. If you have no afterlife, might as well do what you can to get ahead in this life even if it means stepping on someone to get there.
Before I go further, I don't want to give off the impression that I think of myself as a perfect person who does the right thing all of the time. I am far from perfect.
To answer your question: no, some people of faith may have that motive, but not for me personally. If a Christian is doing good deeds only to get into heaven, they then have a misunderstanding of what it is that actually saves their soul. It is not good works, no amount of charity or helping little old ladies across the street will allow you to enter heaven. The only thing that can save a person is for them to repent of their sins, believe in Christ and what He did for man on the cross. That is it, and this is what separates Christianity from all other religions. Its promise of eternal life doesn't rely on what you do, rather on what you accept. We are to be good people because we are representatives of Him, we are commanded not to cause another person to stumble. When you accept Christ, you are also making a commitment to Him and to live by His rules.
I follow God and try to live my life the way He has instructed(again, I fall short of this quite often) because I love Him and owe it to Him for saving me from eternal hell. I have a desire to live my life according to His plan because of this love.
Now this doesn't mean a person can do whatever they want and live in defiance of what God commands us to do when they accept Christ. Even though we accept Christ, we still have the free will He gave us to continually make the decision if we still want to have a relationship with HIm. By doing what He commands, we are affirming this desire to continue are relationship with Him.
Further, we accept the way He wants usto live because we believe He is perfect, and He knows what is best for us. Think about it, if you believed in an loving, omnipotent and perfect God, would you not also believe what He tells you to do is the best for you?
How is God perfect?
He is guilty of murder - in Genesis and Exodus - he even commits genocide on multiple occasions.
Guilty of pride - Job
Guilty of jealousy - "no gods before me"
These do not appear to be the acts of a "perfect being."0 -
How is God perfect?
He is guilty of murder - in Genesis and Exodus - he even commits genocide on multiple occasions.
Guilty of pride - Job
Guilty of jealousy - "no gods before me"
These do not appear to be the acts of a "perfect being."
God is “perfect” because he is completely actualized. God transcends the category of change and “becoming.” (If God did not transcend these categories, he would be part of the changing, imperfect world.)
The Bible describes God in terms that humans can understand: human categories. The Bible insists that “as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than yours,” God says. No human words can perfectly grasp God. This is important to keep in mind because of the temptation to treat God as just a little “bigger” human.
Regarding murder, God, by definition, can’t murder since he cannot take anything that doesn’t belong to him. We “murder” someone when we illicitly take the God-given gift of life from another person. God can give and take whatever he wants since he is the Lord of all creation.
Regarding pride, God cannot have an “overly high opinion of himself” (definition of pride) since he is infinite perfection; can’t get any greater than that.
Regarding jealousy, God is “jealous” in the sense that it “angers” God for his creatures to worship as God created things. God is not jealous in the sense that he has human emotions based on limited knowledge and emotional reactions to things that were previously unknown.
If you think that God’s perfection means that he must submit to the standards of being a creature made by God, that is simply ludicrous.0 -
How is God perfect?
He is guilty of murder - in Genesis and Exodus - he even commits genocide on multiple occasions.
Guilty of pride - Job
Guilty of jealousy - "no gods before me"
These do not appear to be the acts of a "perfect being."
God is “perfect” because he is completely actualized. God transcends the category of change and “becoming.” (If God did not transcend these categories, he would be part of the changing, imperfect world.)
The Bible describes God in terms that humans can understand: human categories. The Bible insists that “as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than yours,” God says. No human words can perfectly grasp God. This is important to keep in mind because of the temptation to treat God as just a little “bigger” human.
Regarding murder, God, by definition, can’t murder since he cannot take anything that doesn’t belong to him. We “murder” someone when we illicitly take the God-given gift of life from another person. God can give and take whatever he wants since he is the Lord of all creation.
Regarding pride, God cannot have an “overly high opinion of himself” (definition of pride) since he is infinite perfection; can’t get any greater than that.
Regarding jealousy, God is “jealous” in the sense that it “angers” God for his creatures to worship as God created things. God is not jealous in the sense that he has human emotions based on limited knowledge and emotional reactions to things that were previously unknown.
If you think that God’s perfection means that he must submit to the standards of being a creature made by God, that is simply ludicrous.
So it is back to "do as I say and not as I do." How is this different than a dictator?0 -
The point is that our empathy may also be run by instincts or at least rooted there.
Your view and Angryguy's view are different. He appears to espouse that people need rules and laws in order to prevent us from all acting for our own interests. This implies that humans are self-centered by nature. Your appear to be stating that humans are naturally good but act against this at times.
The search for truth is not the search for satisfying results. While it may not be satisfying to you that we are all just bald monkeys flying around on an organic spaceship, it is not far from the truth.
You can see the answer to your questions in today's world. The group decides what is good and bad for the group. If someone acts against the group's interest, they are punished by the group. Morals and mores are determined by the group. This is where local customs and dietary rules come from. Obviously, there appear to be universal rules that multiple groups have deemed "evil" such as murder but if you look deeper, there are differences there as well. While one culture may see all killing as evil another may be against murder but support capital punishment and yet another see's honor killings as completely moral and valid.
On empathy, instinct, etc., it seems to me that one must stick his head in the sand to avoid seeing that human intellectual and moral activity are of a very different sort from what we find among the lower animals. I don’t see any monkey carrying on a conversation remotely similar to ours right now. If one cannot see that as a clear sign of a qualitative difference of intellectual powers, I’m not sure what would prove the point (I’m not even mentioning the countless other things we do that the others don’t. Just think about computers, cell phones, space travel, sciences, architecture, mathematics, religion, etc.)
Of course humans act against the “good” nature that we possess. We need “rules and laws” to help us develop the virtues we are capable of developing. We can easily become confused or lose moral direction and therefore need guidance. I just don’t see how a human can live very long in this world and not understand that we need moral reinforcement, guidance, good role models, etc. Just look at statistics and testimony about the state of things in our school system, especially those with high levels of broken homes, crime rates, etc. Do you really think it is a good idea to get rid of all moral principles and guidance? Do you really think that eliminating all such guidance would result in an unchanged morality in our world? This seems staggeringly naïve to me.
The search for truth is the search for understanding. Sometimes what we come to understand is not what we wanted to know but this does not change the basic definition of the power of the intellect. That we are “just bald monkeys” is not only insulting but strikes me, I must confess, as willfully blind and misguided. Just make a list of all the things we do that monkeys don’t and I think you’ll see a massive difference.
So you like the idea of a “group morality”? So I suppose the “group” of Nazi’s had the right to determine the morality for Germany? What if the majority wants to kill the minority? There are too many real-life examples to treat this as far-fetched. I think anyone reading this should see how bankrupt, depressing, and hopeless such a moral approach really is for building a principled civilization. Have you really thought about the implications of a civilization growing up learning your explanation of morality in your final paragraph?0 -
So it is back to "do as I say and not as I do." How is this different than a dictator?
No, that is a misunderstanding. We are to do what is good for human nature. God does what is good for the divine nature. Humans, for instance, receive their existence (ultimately) from God. God receives his existence from no one. Rules against taking what is given to someone by another (either murder or theft, for instance) would not apply to God since God stands in a radically different relationship to “possessions” than we do. Consider, for instance, what is in my house right now. If you walk in my house and steal my property, you have done something wrong. If I walked in my house and take something, I’ve done nothing wrong. “Stealing” doesn’t apply to what you already own. This is not a double-standard, it is simply acknowledging reality. To repeat my earlier point, God can’t steal or murder simply because he has a different relationship to creatures than creatures have to one another. If we were “Gods” then it might make sense to talk about “do as I say, but not as I do.” We are not and therefore it doesn’t make sense.0 -
The point is that our empathy may also be run by instincts or at least rooted there.
Your view and Angryguy's view are different. He appears to espouse that people need rules and laws in order to prevent us from all acting for our own interests. This implies that humans are self-centered by nature. Your appear to be stating that humans are naturally good but act against this at times.
The search for truth is not the search for satisfying results. While it may not be satisfying to you that we are all just bald monkeys flying around on an organic spaceship, it is not far from the truth.
You can see the answer to your questions in today's world. The group decides what is good and bad for the group. If someone acts against the group's interest, they are punished by the group. Morals and mores are determined by the group. This is where local customs and dietary rules come from. Obviously, there appear to be universal rules that multiple groups have deemed "evil" such as murder but if you look deeper, there are differences there as well. While one culture may see all killing as evil another may be against murder but support capital punishment and yet another see's honor killings as completely moral and valid.
On empathy, instinct, etc., it seems to me that one must stick his head in the sand to avoid seeing that human intellectual and moral activity are of a very different sort from what we find among the lower animals. I don’t see any monkey carrying on a conversation remotely similar to ours right now. If one cannot see that as a clear sign of a qualitative difference of intellectual powers, I’m not sure what would prove the point (I’m not even mentioning the countless other things we do that the others don’t. Just think about computers, cell phones, space travel, sciences, architecture, mathematics, religion, etc.)
Of course humans act against the “good” nature that we possess. We need “rules and laws” to help us develop the virtues we are capable of developing. We can easily become confused or lose moral direction and therefore need guidance. I just don’t see how a human can live very long in this world and not understand that we need moral reinforcement, guidance, good role models, etc. Just look at statistics and testimony about the state of things in our school system, especially those with high levels of broken homes, crime rates, etc. Do you really think it is a good idea to get rid of all moral principles and guidance? Do you really think that eliminating all such guidance would result in an unchanged morality in our world? This seems staggeringly naïve to me.
The search for truth is the search for understanding. Sometimes what we come to understand is not what we wanted to know but this does not change the basic definition of the power of the intellect. That we are “just bald monkeys” is not only insulting but strikes me, I must confess, as willfully blind and misguided. Just make a list of all the things we do that monkeys don’t and I think you’ll see a massive difference.
So you like the idea of a “group morality”? So I suppose the “group” of Nazi’s had the right to determine the morality for Germany? What if the majority wants to kill the minority? There are too many real-life examples to treat this as far-fetched. I think anyone reading this should see how bankrupt, depressing, and hopeless such a moral approach really is for building a principled civilization. Have you really thought about the implications of a civilization growing up learning your explanation of morality in your final paragraph?
Obviously humans have a more evolved mental capacity than other primates but the fact that it is visible in their behaviors as well as ours can show how the basis for morality is rooted in instinct.
I am not insulted by the bald monkey line because while slightly crass (I did steal it from Joe Rogan) it is true that we are hairless primates. How is reaching this point in evolution insulting.
The Nazi party did seize control of Germany and most of Europe and did terrible things. How were they defeated? The majority of the rest of the world got together and put a stop to it. It was regulated by the group. Our current society is a principled society. People are safer now than they have ever been in the history of civilization. Our country is built on the basis of group morality where laws are set by the group in order to maintain an orderly society. So, while I agree that people need laws, these laws do not require divine origin. Also, people are currently learning this type of morality and we are doing fine.0 -
So it is back to "do as I say and not as I do." How is this different than a dictator?
No, that is a misunderstanding. We are to do what is good for human nature. God does what is good for the divine nature. Humans, for instance, receive their existence (ultimately) from God. God receives his existence from no one. Rules against taking what is given to someone by another (either murder or theft, for instance) would not apply to God since God stands in a radically different relationship to “possessions” than we do. Consider, for instance, what is in my house right now. If you walk in my house and steal my property, you have done something wrong. If I walked in my house and take something, I’ve done nothing wrong. “Stealing” doesn’t apply to what you already own. This is not a double-standard, it is simply acknowledging reality. To repeat my earlier point, God can’t steal or murder simply because he has a different relationship to creatures than creatures have to one another. If we were “Gods” then it might make sense to talk about “do as I say, but not as I do.” We are not and therefore it doesn’t make sense.
But since there is punishment if we do not do what God wants, isn't implied that our purpose is to do God's will?0 -
But since there is punishment if we do not do what God wants, isn't implied that our purpose is to do God's will?
It's quite fascinating to me that you have degrees in religion and philosophy, but lack the understanding of the fundamentals of Christianity. The "reward" for doing God's will is to live in union with him for eternity. The "punishment" is being separated from Him for all of eternity (heaven and hell). He allows us to make this choice. He does not force us. He does not make us love Him and want to be united with Him.0 -
Obviously humans have a more evolved mental capacity than other primates but the fact that it is visible in their behaviors as well as ours can show how the basis for morality is rooted in instinct.
I am not insulted by the bald monkey line because while slightly crass (I did steal it from Joe Rogan) it is true that we are hairless primates. How is reaching this point in evolution insulting.
The Nazi party did seize control of Germany and most of Europe and did terrible things. How were they defeated? The majority of the rest of the world got together and put a stop to it. It was regulated by the group. Our current society is a principled society. People are safer now than they have ever been in the history of civilization. Our country is built on the basis of group morality where laws are set by the group in order to maintain an orderly society. So, while I agree that people need laws, these laws do not require divine origin. Also, people are currently learning this type of morality and we are doing fine.
First, yes, we can find things similar to humans in lower animals. Saying that “morality” is simply and nothing more than an increase in quantity of those things is, to my mind, wrong. Humans exhibit new powers, including moral freedom.
I think all humans should insulted by the suggestion that we are “nothing more” than a bald monkey. That ignores the unique capacities and powers we exhibit. We are even categorized as “homo sapiens,” man-the-wise, to identify what sets us apart. I do resist reductionistic thinking, something I see all-too-frequently in atheists.
You have a pretty optimistic view of the state of things. We live in country where 3 million people are currently housed in prisons. The list of social ills, growing crises in education, families, etc., is alarming. We are in debt far over our heads. I don’t want to be a pessimist, I’m certainly not that, but I don’t think it is fair to look at the world from a comfortable chair in the USA (a country of nearly 90% who identify themselves as Christians) and say that this is solely the product of a “group morality.” What about the millions of parents teaching their kids moral principles based on their religious convictions? What about the great evils that exist when good role models and good education are lacking? Show me a nation in the world devoid of religious influence where atheist principles have yielded a “good” society and healthy civilization. The only ones I can think of are communist systems (since they are committed to atheism) and they don’t look very encouraging or supportive of your view. Your view strikes me as incredibly unlikely and misguided.0 -
But since there is punishment if we do not do what God wants, isn't implied that our purpose is to do God's will?
It's quite fascinating to me that you have degrees in religion and philosophy, but lack the understanding of the fundamentals of Christianity. The "reward" for doing God's will is to live in union with him for eternity. The "punishment" is being separated from Him for all of eternity (heaven and hell). He allows us to make this choice. He does not force us. He does not make us love Him and want to be united with Him.
Your definition of hell is quite a liberal one. Where do you think the whole "burn in eternal damnation" come from? Hell is not simply absence from God in Christian doctrine but rather a real place that is the realm of Satan where sinners are punished. Is there truly a free choice when the repercussions of one choice are burning in eternal damnation? Would you give your children a "free choice" and then punish them with violence once they make their decision?0
