An Atheist's Perspective

[Batchfile]

First of all, I wouldn't be sitting with a bunch of Christians in the first place. Second of all, I never do anything based on whether I'll look good to my friends. The friends I have are rightly called so because I don't ever need to worry about "fitting in" or doing something to make me look good.



Are you trying to say that religion is the only reason you wouldn't laugh at a gay person? If so, that's kind of sad. Hopefully you're mature enough not to laugh at someone just because they're have different viewpoints or lifestyles than you.



You're looking at it the completely opposite way. People call themselves Christian because of what you believe in; not the other way around.

You don't call yourself something and then pick and choose what you want to believe in the available spectrum of doctrine.



I use the word "idiot" as a synonym for "religious folk" anyway. Each to his own.

I think you misunderstood me.

My example is not aimed at anyone. It's how the 'average' do things.

----

Religion tells people to, you got it backwards. And since apparently it's 'wrong' they use it to their advantage in the worst possible way.

----

Not exactly. Lets take Christianity for example. It's ONE AND ONLY requirement is to accept Jesus as your savior.

So, technically yes, they can pick and choose when it comes to Christianity.

 

[marthanoob]

It's ONE AND ONLY requirement is to accept Jesus as your savior.

Do you have a source?

 

[The 5th Horseman]

It's ONE AND ONLY requirement is to accept Jesus as your savior.

It's that and to follow the 10 commandments.

 

[Batchfile]

Do you have a source?

Isn't it obvious? -_-

 

[RDK]

You're making an incredible generalization. There are more sects of Christianity than there are of any other religion.

 

[Batchfile]

But only two (Thanks Good Smash) that matter.

- EDIT gave credits to wrong person 0.o

 

[snex]

Different people have their different theories. I wouldn't let Religion control my life. And as far as I know it hasn't had make a harmful decision against myself or others.

by advocating the idea that the use of faith is a good thing, you are necessarily lending credibility to people who use faith to justify bad things.

the use of faith is completely unreliable as a guide to anything and anybody who advocates its use is advocating the use of untruths in decision making.

 

[marthanoob]

Isn't it obvious? -_-

You will have to quote the Bible directly if you want to make a statement like that.

So many people have different interpretations of the Bible between what is meant, what is objective, and what is subjective. I see this as another interpretation that should be given as much credit as all the others. Give me a reason to give it more.

 

[Miller]

I really dont see how the bible can be proof for any argument because its just a over rated novel that apparently "shows you the way". Its built on lies and deception, and from what I remember at school, lies = false.

 

[Byronman]

Its built on lies and deception, and from what I remember at school, lies = false.

Lies and deception? How so? Even though some of the stories may not be true, they teach very important lessons. That is hardly what I would call deception.

 

[Pluvia's other account]

Lies and deception? How so? Even though some of the stories may not be true, they teach very important lessons. That is hardly what I would call deception.

Generally its good messages are lost being all its negative ones.

 

[Byronman]

^^I don't understand. Did you mean "behind" instead of "being"?

 

[Miller]

Lies and deception? How so? Even though some of the stories may not be true, they teach very important lessons. That is hardly what I would call deception.

Let me explain Christianity in a sentence.

Christianity is like the banana phone game, when you tell the next person in line something, and they pass it on to the next person, and it just becomes a clusterf*ck of BS by the end of it.

Also, it doesn't matter if the bible tells you about kindness and all that. I have a million different things telling me whats right or wrong, you really think I need to read something that someone just wrote in his basement 2000 years ago for some extra cash?

 

[Aesir]

Let me explain Christianity in a sentence.

Christianity is like the banana phone game, when you tell the next person in line something, and they pass it on to the next person, and it just becomes a clusterf*ck of BS by the end of it.

Also, it doesn't matter if the bible tells you about kindness and all that. I have a million different things telling me whats right or wrong, you really think I need to read something that someone just wrote in his basement 2000 years ago for some extra cash?

Replace Christianity with Religion and you ht the nail on the head.

 

[Pluvia's other account]

^^I don't understand. Did you mean "behind" instead of "being"?

Whoops.

Yeah, I meant behind.

 

[Steck]

I really dont see how the bible can be proof for any argument because its just a over rated novel that apparently "shows you the way". Its built on lies and deception, and from what I remember at school, lies = false.

Even if the thing you are arguing is about "what it takes to be a Christian"? Even if its facts are wrong I would think one could read it and come to a conclusion about that since the Bible is supposed to be what what the Christian religion. But maybe that doesn't apply anymore since people believe whatever parts of the Bible they want to and disregard with out any Biblical justification. (though there are always areas where there seems to be no correct interpretation. It's a troubling matter but Christians seem to not pay attention to it and simply believe that they or their church gets it right, if there is a right-depends on what verses we are talking about)

or I could have taken you wrong and this was just a general statement about the Bible's validity. In which case okay.

 

[RDK]

Everything you just said was an enormous contradiction.

 

[Steck]

I'm going to guess that it was because I said that people believe whatever they want about the Bible without justification and then i said there were some cases where it was to and so people could believe whatever they wanted.
But In each of these I'm talking about different parts of the Bible. In the first I'm talking about people who don't have a problem with homosexuality even when in both the OT and NT it clearly is not in favor, yet they still claim they are following the Bible. In the second I'm talking about prophecies and symbolic meanings, odd moral actions taken by Biblical characters. And then i say I'm struck by how Christians don't notice these and just believe their Church is right. Is that it?Or am I still missing something?

 

[KING BRISKET]

I reallly don't believe in trying to convince others to join a religion, especially by making them believe that all other religions are absurd and filled with lies. If someone already has a strong viewpint about matters such as divine beings, the after life, etc., I believe you should just let them be. However, if their are individuals who are going through trials and tribulations and feel that their is nothing positive to look forward to, I have no problem with someone introducing a new point of view and a new set of values in their life.

 

[Jam Stunna]

I think I understand why people believe in God. I don't know what's harder to accept: a world where God allows bad things to happen to good people as part of some grand plan, or a world where bad things happen to good people for no apparent reason.

 

[Aesir]

I think I understand why people believe in God. I don't know what's harder to accept: a world where God allows bad things to happen to good people as part of some grand plan, or a world where bad things happen to good people for no apparent reason.

I chose the latter.

Carl Sagan puts it very well I think:

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

 

[AltF4]

Men who believe absurdities will commit atrocities."
- Voltaire.


It is unfortunate that religion has a natural tendency to not peacefully coexist with anything which disagrees with itself. It is the (often explicitly stated) purpose of religions to spread and take over every other religion. They are inherently at war with one another!

I don't think it's valid to just say "If someone already has a strong viewpint about matters such as divine beings, the after life, etc., I believe you should just let them be.".

I don't have a problem with someone believing in something absurd when it doesn't affect others... but when it does, we have a problem. Like, oh, I don't know... if say if a candidate for Vice President happened to be a young Earth creationist, people need to bring that up. That's not okay. That's not something that should be left as "a personal belief". Believing in something so absurd is not acceptable for a person in a position of power.

 

[Reaver197]

For what it's worth, I am of similar opinion to Sam Harris on the subject of belief. What people believe cannot really be held to be a private matter, that other people cannot inquire to or challenge. What people believe is a public matter, something that everyone else has the right to be concerned with if they feel the need to be. Why? Because, people base their actions upon what they believe, and their actions can affect many other people besides just that one person. Therefore, if a person's beliefs can affect many people, why can those people not have a say to or challenge those beliefs?

A great (yet terrible) example of this is suicide bombers. Their belief that somehow your conscious survives the death of your body, and that there is a god who will reward them eternally for killing as many people who do not share your exact same set of beliefs, especially if the person dies "fighting" for his/her god. Clearly, if they were more rationally inclined in what they believed, they most likely would not commit such despicable acts, and many other people would not have to die so unnecessarily. Without those beliefs, I'm fairly sure the Twin Towers would still be standing. By coddling and protecting the idea that no one can question or critique someone's beliefs, we enable people to commit some of the most vicious crimes imaginable.

 

[GI Josh]

Being a pretty devout Christian myself, I NEVER try and force my beliefs on other people. I learned that the hard way when I was younger. I just follow Christianity in the best way that I can. I think that you should follow a belief by free will, not force.

 

[RDK]

You don't think that it's wrong for the President of the free world to believe in a 6,000 year old earth? It boggles my mind how deluded some people are.

Hey Alt, have you seen the recent debate between Dawkins and Lennox at Oxford? It made me laugh, because Dawkins said that "A serious case could be made for a deistic god," and of course every Christian conservative on the face of the earth took it as meaning that believing in the Christian God is perfectly logical and that Dawkins was starting to see the "fallacies of atheism". A few of them on this website that I read then went on to explain how the circulatory (blood) system and the heart are proof against evolution because one couldn't have developed without the other.

Sometimes I literally fear for humanity.

 

[Deleted member]

I read God Delusion at work sometimes when it's slow. What I've read is pretty logical, but I just couldn't take him seriously after I read the chapter "God probably doesn't exist."

For someone as smart as he is, he should realize the probabilities he arbitrarily states are sourced straight from his a**.

 

[TigerWoods]

I myself am an Atheist raised in a strong-Catholic-valued household. I do not try and impose atheism on other people. I just can't believe that what I'm told is law, without proof(I'm fully aware of the Catholic Teaching on this).

I believe the story of a loving God will ease the pain a family with a dying young child. It will console someone who needs it. Excuse me for the lack of a better term, but I think it would be wrong to "rain on their parade."

In my honest opinion I would love to have a powerful entity watching over me. Some days I wish there was an ever present being that would console me. I would kill to become so blissfully unaware as to be so self-assured and happy even at my death. It's just not me though.

 

[Aesir]

You don't think that it's wrong for the President of the free world to believe in a 6,000 year old earth? It boggles my mind how deluded some people are.

Hey Alt, have you seen the recent debate between Dawkins and Lennox at Oxford? It made me laugh, because Dawkins said that "A serious case could be made for a deistic god," and of course every Christian conservative on the face of the earth took it as meaning that believing in the Christian God is perfectly logical and that Dawkins was starting to see the "fallacies of atheism". A few of them on this website that I read then went on to explain how the circulatory (blood) system and the heart are proof against evolution because one couldn't have developed without the other.

Sometimes I literally fear for humanity.

Didn't you know? The Christian God is a Deistic god! I mean clearly he has to be.


But all joking aside I think every atheist at one point before they became an atheist probably was a deist at some point. A Deistic god is likely to exist though I think at least, I always figured Del was a deist in all honesty. Deism is like the exact opposite of what we all hate. They embrace reason, and believe god wants us to behave morally.

 

[TigerWoods]

Didn't you know? The Christian God is a Deistic god! I mean clearly he has to be.


But all joking aside a Deistic god is likely to exist, I always figured Del was a deist in all honesty.

But generally deism is like the exact opposite of what we all hate. They embrace reason, and believe god wants us to behave morally.

I think every atheist at one point before they became an atheist probably was a deist at some point.

Well, I don't know too many other atheists but that is a quote for truth(for me).

 

[Deleted member]

The god I irrationally believe in doesn't come with his own set of moral compasses. I just believe he created us. Or is he an it?

Still thinking about that one.

 

[marthanoob]

I read God Delusion at work sometimes when it's slow. What I've read is pretty logical, but I just couldn't take him seriously after I read the chapter "God probably doesn't exist."

For someone as smart as he is, he should realize the probabilities he arbitrarily states are sourced straight from his a**.

From what I know, he made multiple different arguments in that book. One of the rules of debate is that you cannot rule out the rest of the argument by seeing an inconsistency in a single portion.

 

[Deleted member]

Yes, but the chapter in question is essentially a summary of his main points. While others who have read that tome might bite my head off for that statement, many of his arguments when collectively taken just boil down to that concept. God probably doesn't exist.

Which, of course, is ridiculous.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...ort-for-Londons-first-atheist-bus-advert.html

 

[marthanoob]

Yes, but the chapter in question is essentially a summary of his main points. While others who have read that tome might bite my head off for that statement, many of his arguments when collectively taken just boil down to that concept. God probably doesn't exist.

I haven't actually read the book, I was just blabbering.
I can't trust you until I read the book for myself so OK.

 

[Deleted member]

Just click the link. Dawkins promoted atheist bus ads which literally say "There's probably no God. Stop worrying and live your life."

There's no equivocation here.

 

[AltF4]

Lol, yea! I heard about that! The bus ads. That's hilarious.

Dawkins is a troll. He makes good arguments most of the time, but he's not necessarily the best spokes-person for "atheists in general". He has a tendency to be painted as the "pope for atheists", which just puts himself in a position for a fall.

I haven't read his book, though.

 

[Amide]

His book drags on a lot, and a lot of the time, instead of talking about why god doesn't exist, it talks about the people that think he does. If you have the guts to read the whole thing though, it's a great read. But I don't see a reason for you to read it Alt, just for reassurance.

 

[RDK]

The god I irrationally believe in doesn't come with his own set of moral compasses. I just believe he created us. Or is he an it?

Still thinking about that one.

Then you're essentially a deist. Believing in a deistic god doesn't necessarily mean he has to have any morals at all. "God wanting everyone to behave morally" could merely mean that he wants everyone to utilize reason, which very well may be so for those who believe in a deistic god.

 

[Deleted member]

Well, perhaps, but I think that because I know that the belief is irrational, it's not my most firmly held positions. That's why I'm a agnostic/deist(maybe?) hybrid...perhaps?

This is just way too complicated. And honestly, my stance pretty much depends how I'm feeling that day.