Expressing Atheism

[Cyrus]

Not "prevents". It just doesn't help. However, it's my very personal opinion, and if someone can prove the opposite statement, he's welcome.

exactly what I expected from a brain-washed "believer" who got indoctrinated by their parents/upbringing/etc.

Well, maybe I'm kind of brainwashed, who knows  , but some atheists have the same diagnosis, atheism doesn't always mean freedom from predjuce. For example, look at the history of USSR.

-I'm free of sin, looking forward to an eternity in paradise, but I'm not allowed to kill myself to get there sooner? Even though my earthly live is infinitely shorter, which rids it of all relevance?

I've already mentioned it. It's a sin because you make people who love you suffer.
And let's stop using such analogies as that one about the cancer. I'm not superstitious but such metaphors border on threat.

[Khris]

On the contrary, it does help.
Because if somebody is good and an atheist, there's a pretty good chance that he is honestly good. A believer might only do it to get into heaven; with an atheist, you can rule out that possibility*.

Citizens of the USSR were required to be atheists, so what? That doesn't prove anything.
Being an atheist doesn't include believing in an economical system that's bound to fail.

Why would people who love me suffer? Shouldn't they be happy for me, knowing that I'm in paradise now? Plus, shouldn't they kill themselves, too, so everybody can enjoy an eternity in paradise together?

Any how are my analogies bordering on threats? That's not superstitious but paranoid.


*To elaborate a bit:
Most modern Christians around the globe agree that times have changed and many rules introduced by the bible are outdated or barbaric. No sane person would honestly suggest that it's ok to stone homosexuals to death just because the bible says so.
On what grounds do they base that decision?  On what basis do they pick which rules of the bible are to follow and which aren't? The answer is simple: there's a set of universal or humanist morals the average, modern person agrees to.
This completely negates the belief that our modern morals are based on the bible's.

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

Come on, KhrisMUC, everybody knows you're planning to go to his house and force him to smoke 5 packs a day, thus giving him lung cancer. Most obvious threat I've ever seen.

[Khris]

Yeah, guess I should have lumped some ;)s in there to avoid my posts from being seen as threats when they were everything but that

[voh]

If you buy the packs of cigarettes myself, you can book a flight to the Netherlands as soon as possible, because I'd love to smoke for free

Best threat ever! (just not 5 packs a day, please )

[paolo]

What a fascinating thread. There are some excellent arguments being posted here.

Here is some further reading from Wikipedia that people might find interesting. I haven't had time to read the whole of this thread (just the first and last pages) so these subjects might have been mentioned before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie-to-children
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clockmaker_hypothesis

There are plenty more articles on atheism and related subjects in Wikipedia, but I think these are most likely to be of interest to people contributing to this thread. Oh, and I'm not affiliated with Wikipedia or trying to plug it - it's just a very useful and interesting resource.

[Cyrus]

Yes, that threat line was an exagerration. It's just, in my personal opinion, a VERY bad comparison.

[voh]

I'll just quote myself from a different topic.

"I'm understanding of the fact that people believe, but I react harshly whenever a religious person tries to tell me I'm bad because I don't believe, or that I'm worth less in the world than them due to it. Really harshly. I don't go out of my way to tell religious people that God doesn't exist as far as I'm concerned or that I think they might be wrong, so where do they get the right to tell me he does exist, and tell me in no uncertain ways that I am wrong?"

Yeah.

[Khris]

Cyrus: It was just meant to illustrate my point, and I still think it does that well.
If the example is too radical, look again at the door-analogy.

Or forget all analogies, just look at the original: burning in hell for eternity vs. ceasing to exist.
If you really prefer the former, please explain why. (Using rational terms, preferably, not quoting the bible or else.)

(IMO, believing in an afterlife is a perfect example of wishful thinking when the fragile human being is confronted with how unimportant, short and easily ended his own life is in the grander scheme of things.)

[Cyrus]

Maybe it's just my own interpretation, but repentance seems a key to the soul's rescue. Even in Hell. God can force all the sinners to suffer, but the penitent ones have a chance to overcome it. And I don't think atheists are bad, there are many noble and honest people among them. There's much more of pity than blame.

[Stupot]

Such things as repentence being a key to the soul's rescue, and penitent sinners overcoming God's torture are all very poetic ideas.  And it's understandable that someone brought up under this cloud of bible-speak would follow such powerful words in their daily lives.

But what of those who didn't have a religious upbringing... or those whose logic can't bring them to believe a word of it (like myself)?  Just because someone doesn't live by the words of a big book doesn't make them any less of a person.  It doesn't make them bad.

To avoid sinning because one is afraid of God forcing them to suffer is selfish and isn't a true measure of goodness.
To avoid sinning because one cares about the world and other people and doesn't give a monkeys what God thinks or whether he even exists is surely a truer measure of a good person.

[Cyrus]

No, I don't mean that. If you are selfish and seem noble to get to the Heaven, that's Sisyphean. In fact, the God always reads your mind and you will never be able to fool Him. Atheists, if they are good people and can admit and repent of their sins, can also save their souls.

[Stupot]

I don't want God to read my mind, and I'm not trying to fool him... and I don't want to repent my sins.  I'd rather just not sin in the first place if I can help it.  But that's because I don't like hurting anybody or causing any grief, not becasue I'm scared of what God might do to me.

[Cyrus]

The God knows everything about you, no matter if you wish it or not. But doing good things just because you're scared of Him is useless, if your essense is evil good behaviour doesn't count. So here your position is right.

[Khris]

There's much more of pity than blame.

Oh my, this is so arrogant and ignorant at the same time.

Atheists, if they are good people and can admit and repent of their sins, can also save their souls.

Save my soul? From what?

Your posts are textbook parroting the people who brought you up. Rid of all personal thought.
Childhood indoctrination at its finest.
You'd no doubt believe in forest ghosts, had you been born in some jungle, or in Brahma and Vishnu, had you been born in India.

Here's a quote that sums it up nicely:

I would wager that you don't believe in any of the thousands of gods that humanity has dreamed up throughout human history â€" except for the one you were brought up to believe in â€" so you're more than 99% on my side of the question. I simply believe in one god less than you do!

[Cyrus]

No, I was born in civilization and I'm not from Asia. My posts are my personal thoughts, not parroting. By the way, are you a "calm" atheist or a militant one?

[Khris]

I'm not here to teach grammar, but note my use of "you'd" and "had".
If you were born elsewhere, you would believe in some other god(s).

It is your own personal conclusion, based on your observations of the world around you, that there's an omnipotent "guy in the sky" who reads your every thought? Gee, really? Please elaborate.

I'm a "calm" atheist, but reading posts like yours wakes up the militant one.

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

Apparently, you're the militant religious person.

I don't really care what you believe, Cyrus, same as I don't think anyone cares what I believe - I explained, earlier in this thread, what I believed in, and why, and I think for a couple of posts later I discussed it. Then it was over. I was careful not to thread on anyone's toes, not to go in tricky ground.

Then you come along and start saying that "atheists have a chance to save their souls", and I go, WTF?

I concur with KhrisMUC - if you can provide something logical, or rational, or ANYTHING other than "He justs exists, and you're all wrong, and I pity you" to support everything you're saying, you're parroting (loved that word) what you were taught. And missing his point aboung being born elsewhere was extremely obtuse of you.

[Creed Malay]

One upon a time, there were two sisters.

One was called Topsy, and the one who wasn't called Topsy was called Henrietta. Topsy and Henrietta had a pet cat, and the cat was called Tuesday. Tuesday was a flighty, nervous, independent sort of a cat, and wouldn't let either Topsy or Henrietta near it.

Henrietta thought that Tuesday was a boy, while Topsy thought that she was a girl. Since Tuesday was too jumpy and quick, it was impossible for the girls to ever get hold of it, and so they could never find out for sure whether Tuesday was a boy or a girl.

Tuesday obviously had to be either one or the other, but they could never ever know which it was. Neither Henrietta or Topsy ever stopped believing that their view was right, and they never stopped arguing constantly about it, either.

Eventually, Tuesday got fed up with the constant squabbling, and moved in with the old lady next door.

[space boy]

I wish answering this big question was as easy as looking at a cats genitals.