Are you an atheist? (10 Viewers)

[Darth Vodka]

I was quoting from a book I read by Arnold Dallimore about George Whitfield. Arnold Dallimore is Brit so we know it has to accurate.

apocryphal at best

 

[Darth Vodka]

OK, correct me if I'm wrong but didn't JC say something about loving each other

no, somebody wrote a story about somebody called Jesus who said that

 

[Rabbie]

I believe he intervened when the sun came up this morning

It didn't take any faith from me to know last night the sun would come up this morning. Now if the sun didn't come up tomorrow I would seriously examine my beliefs about the existence of God.

 

[Mike375]

Ah ha. So you can do whatever you want in this life, and deal with the consequences in the afterlife. Sounds like one of those furniture deals on TV, "Buy now and pay nothing until 2009!".

The belief in God is required. The good deeds alone don't get you over the line.

I think that reasoning gives people more incentive to be immoral. Think about it. What would give you a greater incentive to "behave": If someone tells you, you have only one life to give, make the best of it, because once you do something bad you can never take it back. Or, if someone tells you, you are born with sin, you can never be pure. If you commit more sins, just ask for forgiveness and you can still go to heaven. In fact, it doesn't really matter if you do good deeds, all you have to do is believe me when I tell you there is a god, and you will get to go to heaven.

You need genuine faith in God. Saying you have faith in God, thinking he might be real etc and etc is not the true faith in God. If you can expand your view beyong your 2 +2 views you will see that a genuine belief and submission to God will autmatically bring a lot of other things on board.

If the person has a genuine belief in God and a submission to God then obvioulsy they don't go and do a murder or three. But if they collect money for the poor and anthing else you can think of but lack the genuine belief/faith in God then it is a "no go"

And why would god care so much whether we believe in him or not anyway? If he is all powerful, why would it matter to him whether us puny little humans believe in him? And if it WERE so important that we believe in him, then why wouldn't he use his great powers to MAKE us believe in him?

I have no idea. Again, you seem unable to grasp the simple fact that a mere human can't even begin to understand the ways or motives of a God that can create the universe. This is really simple stuff. Does a small child know why the parent forces it to go to school etc and etc.

Finally, if you really believe that good people are rewarded in the afterlife, then why do we not celebrate on our deathbeds? If there really is an afterlife, we should celebrate at death, not mourn. And yet, at least in the U.S., death is so feared that we can't even get a decent assisted suicide law passed.

Again, "good people" is insufficient. The belief/faith and submission to God has to be there. There is not going to be celebration on the death bed and for two reasons. one is that God has made us so that our instinct to survive is superpowerful. In addition there would be the worry the person has that they might not get over the line.

Likewise, if you really believe that bad people are punished in the afterlife, then why do we take it upon ourselves to punish them in this life. Afterall, surely burning in hell is a far better punishment than being locked up in a nice warm cell with running water and 3 square meals a day.

Prison, death row etc is a human intervention or punishment. God deals in the next life.

 

[Rabbie]

You seem to have trouble grasping the fact that for religious people people the rewards or penalities come in the next life. Actually, it is a belief in God that produces the reward, not deeds done on earth. Good deeds without a belief in God produce no reward.

That statement if true rather undermines any moral authority. I am glad my good deeds are done without thought of a reward in the (non-existant) next life.

 

[CraigDolphin]

So far you have not shown any reason why believers are les unfit (in the evolutionary sense) than other people

Rabbie, I am not contending that religious people ARE less unfit. I am asserting that, if religion is false and leads to them behaving in a way that reduces their knowledge of the real world, then logically that must lead to a decrease in fitness. Such behaviour is demonstrated by the 'pray instead of learn truth about the world' mentality that Alisa asserted.

Are you really suggesting that someone who understands accurately how the world works has no better chance of prospering and passing on their genes than someone who doesn't? If so, then I just flatly disagree with you there.

The actual hypothetical examples of situations where the fitness cost of such irrational behaviour are essentially irrelevant here. They're exactly parallel to the evolutionary 'just-so' stories that are often used to demonstrate how a complex system, like the eye, could have evolved in steps; even though the removal of any one component of that system would remove any adavantage to having such a feature (an eye that can't see is pretty useless). Often, these kinds of arguments are put forward by creationists as a rebutattal of evolution by natural selection. I decided long ago that such rebuttals are, essentially pointless, because no matter what, some clever person will think up a story or scenario that can lead to that outcome using small steps. Whether the scenario is likely is debateable, and whether things actually panned out that way can never be tested. The point made by evolutionary biologists is simply that, conceptually, it /could/ have happened that way.

Likewise, the same logic applies here. I can invent numerous scenarios to demonstrate situations where inaction/prayer replacing sound learning about the way the world really works. In turn this bad information can be a cost to the individual which reduces their chance of producing offspring in exactly the same way that evolutionary biologists invent hypotheses to explain how particular traits (like the eye) could have arisen.

And such a cost does not have to be fatal. It could be long-term poorer nutrition reducing fecundity. It could be reduced social standing due to lack of wealth to attract a mate. Whatever.

The point is not in the scenario itself, it is in the lgoic behind the scenario.

So, speaking of lions. Yes. Once confronted by a lion, brave people may be less likely to flee and trigger thre attack button in lions. Bravery doesn't require religion, although they are not mutually exclusive. But if a religious person depends on their faith in a 'ritual/prayer' to keep lions away, rather than discovering how and where lions find prey (to avoid encountering them in the first place), then IMO that religious person is more likely to encounter a lion in the first place.

So I would maintain that the hypothetical religious brave person is more likely to end up being lion-lunch than a non-religious brave person. Religion-inspired bravery might reduce that chance of being eaten once the encounter is made, but it's not half as effective as avoiding being in that poisition in the first place.

But I repeat, the scenario itself doesn't matter as we can argue about probabilities endlessly without ever reaching resolution.

My contention is only that accurate information about how the world works logically MUST be more advantageous to an individual than inaccurate information. And traits that provide an advantage over other traits tend to increase in a population over time versus the alternatives. IF Alisa's contention is correct, that religion is false and leads to a lack of investigation of the real world, then IMO it's hard to understand why the trait of being religious would have survived back in prehistoric times given our understanding of natural selection.

Ulimately what I am getting at is that religious belief does not necessarily precipitate a lack of interest in learning how the world really works. Certainly some religious people do 'stop thinking' about thew worlld critically. I think the same is true for many non-religious people.

Christianity - belief in a single god who is actually 3. Try and explain that!

Ever seen a shamrock? Three 'leaves' that are part of one structure. How about a die? (singular of dice). Six 'sides' to one object. It's not that hard if you understand that the human mind tends to label everything.

Now if the sun didn't come up tomorrow I would seriously examine my beliefs about the existence of God.

Would you? Why? Wouldn't you rather want to revisit your understanding of astronomy?

 

[Mike375]

That statement if true rather undermines any moral authority. I am glad my good deeds are done without thought of a reward in the (non-existant) next life.

You will find that true believers do not get that way as a ticket to heaven. Instead they form a relationship with God

 

[Rabbie]

The belief in God is required. The good deeds alone don't get you over the line.



You need genuine faith in God. Saying you have faith in God, thinking he might be real etc and etc is not the true faith in God. If you can expand your view beyong your 2 +2 views you will see that a genuine belief and submission to God will autmatically bring a lot of other things on board.

If the person has a genuine belief in God and a submission to God then obvioulsy they don't go and do a murder or three. But if they collect money for the poor and anthing else you can think of but lack the genuine belief/faith in God then it is a "no go"



I have no idea. Again, you seem unable to grasp the simple fact that a mere human can't even begin to understand the ways or motives of a God that can create the universe. This is really simple stuff. Does a small child know why the parent forces it to go to school etc and etc.



Again, "good people" is insufficient. The belief/faith and submission to God has to be there. There is not going to be celebration on the death bed and for two reasons. one is that God has made us so that our instinct to survive is superpowerful. In addition there would be the worry the person has that they might not get over the line.



Prison, death row etc is a human intervention or punishment. God deals in the next life.

Mike you seem to have done yet another u-turn if I read you correctly. Earlier you started out as agnostic with a vague leaning towards a "supernatural who had no interest in us" and were rather dismissive of God as a local area manager for the solar system. Now you seem to be fully signed up as a "born-again believer". I think you should provide details of this pauline conversion so it does not just enter the world of myth.

 

[Mike375]

Mike you seem to have done yet another u-turn if I read you correctly. Earlier you started out as agnostic with a vague leaning towards a "supernatural who had no interest in us" and were rather dismissive of God as a local area manager for the solar system. Now you seem to be fully signed up as a "born-again believer". I think you should provide details of this pauline conversion so it does not just enter the world of myth.

No I have not changed, just answering Alisa as a born again would answer.

Just because I am agnostic with a low leaning to a supernatural does not mean that I excluded other areas from my learning and of course that includes the Stephen Hawking and Co end of town. Many years ago I went right through the Bible classes with the Born Agains. Monday nights

As a side note my teacher is an insurance client and he is a dentist. His wife is also a Born Again and she is a BSc....Batchelor of Science. The other teacher was a private practice gastroenterologist. They tried to recruit me because they thought I had what it takes to spread the word and at that stage I was keen to increase my knowledge and try and find out what these people were seeing.

 

[Rabbie]

Rabbie, I am not contending that religious people ARE less unfit. I am asserting that, if religion is false and leads to them behaving in a way that reduces their knowledge of the real world, then logically that must lead to a decrease in fitness. Such behaviour is demonstrated by the 'pray instead of learn truth about the world' mentality that Alisa asserted.

Are you really suggesting that someone who understands accurately how the world works has no better chance of prospering and passing on their genes than someone who doesn't? If so, then I just flatly disagree with you there.

Understanding how your particular society works is probably more useful. Being branded a heretic in the middle ages was a pretty good way of making sure you didnt breed anymore. I know many christians who believe 100% in evolution including that of eyes so it is false to say that religion and finding out about your environment are imcompatible. In fact a religious person might well feel it is their duty to investigate the wonders of "God's creation". We know from studying eyes of different creatures that eyes did not evolve just once but several times. Different design flaws in them indicate this.

 

[Rabbie]

No I have not changed, just answering Alisa as a born again would answer.

And there I was thinking you were expressing your own opinions not just saying what you thought a born again would say.

 

[Alisa]

The belief in God is required. The good deeds alone don't get you over the line.
You need genuine faith in God. Saying you have faith in God, thinking he might be real etc and etc is not the true faith in God. If you can expand your view beyong your 2 +2 views you will see that a genuine belief and submission to God will autmatically bring a lot of other things on board.
If the person has a genuine belief in God and a submission to God then obvioulsy they don't go and do a murder or three. But if they collect money for the poor and anthing else you can think of but lack the genuine belief/faith in God then it is a "no go".
I have no idea. Again, you seem unable to grasp the simple fact that a mere human can't even begin to understand the ways or motives of a God that can create the universe. This is really simple stuff. Does a small child know why the parent forces it to go to school etc and etc.
Again, "good people" is insufficient. The belief/faith and submission to God has to be there. There is not going to be celebration on the death bed and for two reasons. one is that God has made us so that our instinct to survive is superpowerful. In addition there would be the worry the person has that they might not get over the line.
Prison, death row etc is a human intervention or punishment. God deals in the next life.

ok let me get this straight.
1. The most important thing to god is that we believe in him. Meaning that if Mother Theresa did not genuinely believe in god, she would be in hell right now.
2. If you genuinely truly believe in god, then you might get to go to heaven, but you should still be scared to die because he might change his mind and not let you in after all.

This sort of makes sense from a historical perspective if you are trying to get people to just believe you and not question you. To take your example of the child who doesn't know why you send "it" to school. The child asks why. And instead of explaining that we go to school to learn and make friends, etc., etc., which by the way even a very young child can understand, you just say because I said so.

The benefit of teaching this sort of nonquestioning mindset is that you get blind obedience. Blind obedience that you can then use to get people to commit murder and other crimes that you direct them to commit. This explains a great deal about world history.

Again, if this god you imagine cares so much about what we "believe", and so little about what we actually do, then you can hardly claim religion as a basis for moral action. Moral behavior requires deep questioning. Despite the 10 commandments, everyone knows that to determine the moral action in any given situation can be very tricky. It is much easier to get people to behave immorally if you tell them that they need not examine the situation too closely, but instead should do as you tell them to do. Can you say Nuremberg?

 

[Mike375]

And there I was thinking you were expressing your own opinions not just saying what you thought a born again would say.

They are my opinions on what God requires and of course they are the same as a born again.

A criminologist will have good solid information on the whys, hows etc of criminals and can (and does) answer questions. However, he does not subscribe to the same beliefs as the criminal.

 

[Fifty2One]

I've yet to meet anyone who being granted a holiday sees it as being forced on them anymore than the Yanks when granted public holidays

No just that these 'holidays' are only granted on dates based on the calendar of a certain religion.
Persons of other beliefs must take their dates for observance at their own expense. Or have to turn their backs on their religion and work their days at straight pay rather than premium pay rate and other perks.
Why not just let people chose where to place their 9 or 10 non concurrent statutory holidays so the athiests can put them where ever and people with religious convictions can observe their holy times on their proper schedules.

 

[Rich]

ok let me get this straight.
1. The most important thing to god is that we believe in him. Meaning that if Mother Theresa did not genuinely believe in god, she would be in hell right now.
2. If you genuinely truly believe in god, then you might get to go to heaven, but you should still be scared to die because he might change his mind and not let you in after all.

Now look, youre all wrong it's only the Jehova witnesses who have a guaranteed place in heaven, now by their own figures there aren't going to be enough spaces, so I guess there will be a scrap outside the pearly gates come judgement day, I wonder who'll be the ref.?

 

[Rich]

No just that these 'holidays' are only granted on dates based on the calendar of a certain religion.

No, only Christmas and Easter

 

[Mike375]

ok let me get this straight.
1. The most important thing to god is that we believe in him. Meaning that if Mother Theresa did not genuinely believe in god, she would be in hell right now.

Yes, that is my understanding. Both firm belief and submission to God is the crucial point.

2. If you genuinely truly believe in god, then you might get to go to heaven, but you should still be scared to die because he might change his mind and not let you in after all.

No, he would not change His mind. More a case of the person not being sure if their belief was solid.

This sort of makes sense from a historical perspective if you are trying to get people to just believe you and not question you. To take your example of the child who doesn't know why you send "it" to school. The child asks why. And instead of explaining that we go to school to learn and make friends, etc., etc., which by the way even a very young child can understand, you just say because I said so.

I think that is reasonable. Actually the "becasue i said so" from the parent is becasue the child can't understand the true answer and that would apply to God and us.

The benefit of teaching this sort of nonquestioning mindset is that you get blind obedience. Blind obedience that you can then use to get people to commit murder and other crimes that you direct them to commit. This explains a great deal about world history.

The argument against that would be God is insuring that faith is required.

Again, if this god you imagine cares so much about what we "believe", and so little about what we actually do, then you can hardly claim religion as a basis for moral action.

Again, not just solid belief but submission to God. Just try and think what "submission" to God brings and what the person has to do for their to be submission to God.

Moral behavior requires deep questioning. Despite the 10 commandments, everyone knows that to determine the moral action in any given situation can be very tricky. It is much easier to get people to behave immorally if you tell them that they need not examine the situation too closely, but instead should do as you tell them to do. Can you say Nuremberg?

I assume you are referring to people doing things because of their gov't etc. I think for the born again it comes back to submission to God and what He believes to be submission to God. My view would be that if the soldier was aware of the gas camps etc then submission to God would require that he denounce those actions and suffer whatever penalty. If the soldier did not do that then he would be like Peter who denied Christ.

In other words all earthly things must play second fiddle to submission to God.

 

[CraigDolphin]

so it is false to say that religion and finding out about your environment are imcompatible

Which is what I was getting at all along.

 

[Alisa]

The argument against that would be God is insuring that faith is required.

But you still have not answered the main question. Why would god care whether we believe in him or not? Why would it matter to him?

Again, not just solid belief but submission to God. Just try and think what "submission" to God brings and what the person has to do for their to be submission to God.
I assume you are referring to people doing things because of their gov't etc. I think for the born again it comes back to submission to God and what He believes to be submission to God. My view would be that if the soldier was aware of the gas camps etc then submission to God would require that he denounce those actions and suffer whatever penalty. If the soldier did not do that then he would be like Peter who denied Christ.

In other words all earthly things must play second fiddle to submission to God.

Yes, but god has "told" people all throughout history to murder, to ra**, to plunder, and so on and so forth. If you are brought up to completely submit to god's will, then clearly religion will lead you to immoral behaviour. Hence, religion causes good people to do bad things.

 

[Rabbie]

ok let me get this straight.
1. The most important thing to god is that we believe in him. Meaning that if Mother Theresa did not genuinely believe in god, she would be in hell right now.

Richard Dawkins makes the point in "The God Delusion" that God seems a bit obsessive that people believe in him. This belief seems to be much more importatant to him than their behavour.