Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but neither would we necessarily understand some of the finer nuances of morality which God says constitutes morality
This was the source of the confusion. I thought you meant without a belief in a god, we couldn't REALLY know what was good, like put forth in that article. What you were referring to are things deemed immoral in your bible which you feel nobody would feel were immoral unless stated in your bible.
Now for anything in your bible, even your objection to premarital sex, an atheist could subscribe to it. The difference is they wouldn't feel it was a command from a god nor feel compelled that because they subscribed to this, they'd have to subscribe to the rest of it.
Quote:
It's not that we believe that atheists don't know right from wrong, rather that because God exists, they DO know right from wrong.
Well as an atheist, I find that cheapening the entire human race. This notion that are greatest accomplishments and greatest thoughts are due to some man in the sky and that are worst acts and darkest thoughts are due to some man in the ground robs us of both responsibility and are rightful glories of achievement and merely infantizes humanity.
Well as an atheist, I find that cheapening the entire human race. This notion that are greatest accomplishments and greatest thoughts are due to some man in the sky and that are worst acts and darkest thoughts are due to some man in the ground robs us of both responsibility and are rightful glories of achievement and merely infantizes humanity.
That's so true...
Ps 103:13 Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him.
14 For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust.
15 As for man, his days are as grass: as a flower of the field, so he flourisheth.
16 For the wind passeth over it, and it is gone; and the place thereof shall know it no more. (AV)
PhillyChief 58:13 Like as the cricket pitieth Dumbo, so doth man pitieth them that credit a dream for their flight or fall.
14 For he knoweth their fears; he remembereth that they are dust
15 As for crediting a god, those days are as grass: as a weed of the field, so it flourisheth
16 For the wind of reason passeth over it, and it is gone; and the place shall know it no more.
Geez, I go to bed for a little while and this thread explodes.
I think I've argued my point on this forum enough on my belief in why man evolved into a moral creature. I have started several posts on it as to how evolution started it, and I have started a post on it that is still going on in this forum from the opinion of the God standpoint.
However, regardless of whether or not God gave me a moral compass (again I stand firm that he did not) the atheist has one major advantage over the theist. I think that most theists will agree that Gandhi did good works. I think they believe he was a good man with a good way of looking at the world. However, I often hear the comment that Gandhi will burn in hell if he did not ask for forgiveness of his sins. The issue here is that regardless of how good a person Gandhi was, he still has that "righteous fury" directed towards him of Christians. They still want to judge. What I'm getting at here, is that the atheist has the grounds to pick and choose his moral standards. The theist typically has a book that is widely controversial, self-defeating, and basically two complete opposites of one another. i.e. One says to kill your children for misbehaving the other says love your children. Ah, but Jesus changed all that didn't he? Well, that's nice because as an atheist I can follow the works of Jesus if I wanted to. I can allow myself to "love thy neighbor." But, I can also follow Gandhi, Plato, Einstein, Voltaire, Bacon, Aristotle, and whoever else I feel is on an even moral compass with myself and yet I will have no fear of repurcussion. What one uses their religion with I use the great thinkers of the world.
Yes, although most theists will agree that some of these men were of great mind, and even of great moral compass, that if they aren't Christians they will perish. This seems to me to be an inherent disregard for their teachings. As an atheist, I have the luxury of following them without the fear of repurcussions. I can pick a quote from Jesus in the Bible because I like the moral compassing of it, but it doesn't make the Bible any more true or any other holy book for that matter. It doesn't mean I believe in it any more than George Orwell's "1984". To me, it's a great work of fiction whose message should not go unheard. At least the New Testament. Yet, it doesn't mean I believe in it. But, I CAN learn from it. The theist assumes that as an atheist it is apparent that we just don't understand God gave us a moral compass. And perhaps, if he did indeed exist, he did. But, the difference here is that to concede that God did give us a moral compass is to concede that God exists. So, to we atheists, the entire premise of the argument is self-defeating in that we DO NOT believe in God. So, therefore, our moral compass must come from somewhere. Again, I have explained my evolutionary thoughts on other posts and most of the people posting on here have already read them anyway.
But, why is it important? Surely the theist could follow the teachings of Gandhi and hold his belief in Jesus as a savior, right? Well, most certainly he could. But given the opportunity to follow the teachings of Gandhi or the teachings of Jesus he will almost most certainly go with those of Jesus. After all, that's what is in his/her holy book. But, this seems so self-limiting. It absolutely does seem limiting. Yes, we can all agree that Gandhi has done great things. But, if you want to follow him, it's kind of like casting out your religion. I don't have that problem. I can follow Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Jesus, the Dali Lama, Buddha, Bacon, Einstein, and Freud if I want to. I am not limited in my moral compass. The theist limits themself to only that of their holy book while agreeing with the great thinkers because they feel Jesus would accept their ideologies (but, if they weren't Christians he will send them to hell). Does this mean that an atheist is more moral than a theist? No, absolutely not. I'm sure there are plenty of atheists out there that commit wrongdoings. (Although I can't think of one that's doing it to promote atheism) And I know there are plenty of religious people out there that commit wrongdoings. Per capita, I would have no idea who committed more crimes. Regardless, it seems to me that the atheist has the luxury of picking only the best parts of the best human minds where the theist must swallow their holy book through the good, bad, ugly, and really ugly.
I think you'd like a book I'm reading now called The Accidental Mind by Dr. David Linden. You can find an interview with him in a podcast from one of Reginald Finley's shows. Google "infidelguy" and you should find your way to the podcast, which is also on itunes I think. Unfortunately the forum rules about advertising I think prevent me from giving you any direct links, so you have to go hunting for yourself.
- note: I post this info because the OP is mentality of an atheist and this goes right to the core, the brain itself, to explain a lot of why and how we think and feel. -
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
