Okay, where does your conscience come from? Evolution, and a desire for group advancement, and some such belief? That is the argument I've heard from other Atheists, and I don't completely buy it.
You don't buy it because you don't know science. What do you know about evolution or neurology? Nothing. You've basically just argue that you believe in god because you don't understand science. Why don't you learn the science? Is it too hard for you to understand?
Maybe that's the root of this problem, and perhaps why smarter people tend to be atheist and dumber people tend to be more religiuos. The real world full of science, which is hard. It has lots of hard math and takes lots of study to understand it. God is easy to understand. Even little babies understand imaginary friends.
Prove me wrong and learn about the science you "don't buy". So far you've been pretty good at demonstrating you don't understand basic logic or the scientific method. Try starting there.
If you talk to anyone I know, they think I'm really smart. I get science, and I get math. I do very well in those subjects, although this is High School, so it's apparently worthless. What I don't buy is that Biology means that people are nice. I've heard the argument that kindness is a biological imperative, that it's the only way for humanity to succeed. But, if you don't believe in God, why care about humanity? An individual can gain more easy happiness by only caring about themselves. I have seen no logical argument for biological altruism. It is human instinct to put yourself first always. Something else gives us the occasional desire to help someone else.
But you forget that Jesus is God. God loves us, and wants us to be in Heaven. If we are sorry, truly sorry, for our sins, and we ask for forgiveness, then he will grant it to us. He can't just let us go to Heaven anyways, because sin is a barrier to God. Having sin prevents God from being near us. Therefore, he provided for us a way to be cleansed when we die, so that those of us who wish to atone can atone and be forgiven.
How do you know that he loves you? Did he touch you in a bad way?
Because he said so, and I choose to interpret those words that say God loves me as meaning God loves me, and everyone. I thought we had already established that when I say things about religion, I am speaking my opinion, my interpretation. I don't claim to know this, it's what I believe. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
But you forget that Jesus is God.
If Jesus is God, than what is special about his sacrifice?
He can't just let us go to Heaven anyways, because sin is a barrier to God.
Why? He is God, he can do anything...right?
His sacrifice is special because he's God. He chose to come down to our level, and then be killed by us, just to help us, even though we are unworthy. That is why it's special, because he is better than us, and it is insane to think that God would die for us. And sin is what God can't defeat. Disobeying him is what he can't stop. Heaven is only for perfection. Anything that disrupts that perfection is not allowed in. That's why he had to send Jesus to forgive us, so that the sin wouldn't infect Heaven.
What I don't buy is that Biology means that people are nice. I've heard the argument that kindness is a biological imperative, that it's the only way for humanity to succeed. But, if you don't believe in God, why care about humanity? An individual can gain more easy happiness by only caring about themselves. I have seen no logical argument for biological altruism. It is human instinct to put yourself first always. Something else gives us the occasional desire to help someone else.
This is why we think you are an evil person. You're basically saying that the only reason you aren't a selfish evil prick is because god tells you not to be.
We are atheists, we don't believe in god. However, we are not selfish evil pricks. It doesn't matter what the evolutionary or biological reasons are for why we are nice. The fact is that we are good people for the sake of being good people. You just admitted that you are only a good person because your imaginary friend told you to be good, and you wouldn't be good otherwise.
That's why we don't like religious people like you. You're very scary. We are all good people just because good is good. You are all bad people who are only pretending to be good because you are afraid of punishment and/or trying to get into heaven, which if it exists, is selfish.
I'll close thread when I get home unless I seem some FSM refutations.
Because he said so, and I choose to interpret those words that say God loves me as meaning God loves me, and everyone. I thought we had already established that when I say things about religion, I am speaking my opinion, my interpretation. I don't claim to know this, it's what I believe. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
Do you understand that this is circular reasoning? Do you understand what circular reasoning is and why it is wrong?
Because he said so, and I choose to interpret those words that say God loves me as meaning God loves me, and everyone. I thought we had already established that when I say things about religion, I am speaking my opinion, my interpretation. I don't claim to know this, it's what I believe. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
Do you understand that this is circular reasoning? Do you understand what circular reasoning is and why it is wrong?
Yeah, I do. I know it's illogical. I get it. Thanks for pointing that out again.
And why do you do good things? Is there any reason? Any at all other than you just feel like it? Because that sounds a lot like biology to me.
And yeah, I do good things because God says so, and I believe he's always right. If there was no God, I wouldn't be evil, however. I'd probably be just like you, because of the way culture has developed. Culture is what creates a desire for good, and altruism.
Also, I'm not posting on the forum anymore. I've gotten 3 topics closed now. Yay me. I'll still listen to the podcast, but I don't think you really care anyways.
His sacrifice is special because he's God. He chose to come down to our level, and then be killed by us, just to help us, even though we are unworthy.
How does us killing God help us? It's not like he sacrificed anything. Oh sure, he spent half a day or so in pain, but that's nothing to an eternal being who has existed forever. Besides, that pain is nothing compared to the eternal torture I'll receive if the only thing I do wrong is not accept a story from an illiterate area of the world 2000 years in the past that STILL hasn't reached every part of the world. A story that is so poorly written that it contradicts itself multiple times and promotes unethical behavior.
And sin is what God can't defeat.
So God is not omnipotent? Then why call him God? He's just a flawed being then.
16As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."
Axel, one of the problems here is that you're trying to explain things that even the Church can't explain. I mean, "That's why he had to send Jesus to forgive us, so that the sin wouldn't infect Heaven." Really? I'm pretty sure the Church teaches that Christ's death is a mystery but I could be wrong here. I do know I never heard anything about sin infecting Heaven in my years taking Theology in school, though.
What I don't buy is that Biology means that people are nice. I've heard the argument that kindness is a biological imperative, that it's the only way for humanity to succeed. But, if you don't believe in God, why care about humanity? An individual can gain more easy happiness by only caring about themselves. I have seen no logical argument for biological altruism. It is human instinct to put yourself first always. Something else gives us the occasional desire to help someone else.
Yikes, there's so much to that that I disagree with. If atheists didn't care about humanity as a whole, or feel compassion for their fellow man, where did the theory of secular humanism come from? Your statement about individual happiness is, I believe from personal experience, incorrect. Have you ever heard of enlightened self-interest? Humans have empathy, and can put themselves in the position of those around them. So what if empathy is a product of our highly evolved, imaginative human brains? Truly compassionate people would be kind regardless of whether or not they were afraid of punishment or whether they were told it was the right thing to do. Not only are atheists not all violent hedonists, but a great portion of them are incredible humanitarians and loving people.
It does not matter from whence consciousness comes. It exists.
So, would you say an AI with an exact replica of the processes of a human brain, and which was for all intents and purposes sentient and possessing of emotion, could it go to heaven? Does it have an immortal soul?
I'm sorry, I heard from an Atheist that the argument for kindness was a biological imperative for group cooperation in order to succeed in life. I didn't realize that he was different from all other Atheists.
I wasn't laughing at the point the atheist made, sir. I laughed at your thoughtsEDIT: Let me rephrase that, I laughed at your lack of individual thought, you hivemind, you.
An individual can gain more easy happiness by only caring about themselves.
Defend yourself from a dozen armed men, two dozen, three dozen, are you seeing where the argument is coming from? You can't survive by your self, and thus you cannot gain happiness. You're also forgetting that there are 6 BILLION people on earth, we as a species have long since outgrown the reaches of evolution (i.e. we barely evolve as a species anymore), thus we are left with what our species currently is, including our hard wired survival instincts. Give humanity some more time and we'll have uncovered all of the secrets of the brain, we will then point you to the location where your conciousness resides.
I have seen no logical argument for biological altruism.
Reciprocal altruism. Man is a social animal. We share with the herd because the herd protects. We're not the only ones that do it. You're a blind idiot, and if you can't understand why, there's no hope for you.
Religion broke your legs and then handed you crutches. Go get them fixed. Only then will you be able to walk.
Also, Satanists haven't started wars because there aren't a lot of them. I mean, why have faith in a Devil, one whose entire purpose is to destroy and harm things, and to corrupt you and give you eternal punishment?
Reinforcing again, you don't know what Satanism is.
Axel, do you think god is ethical? Your argument seems to be that ethics stem from the godhead, but even according to his handy-dandy textbook, god is a debased jerk. He is not a good being. Do you understand this? Let's explore some things your "awesome" and "ethical" deity promoted:
- God ordered kids to be stoned to death in Deuteronomy 21:18-21. - God gave rules in Exodus 21:7 for how to properly sell your daughter into slavery. - God's messengers were so proud of the Levite in Judges 19:22-29 for offering to prostitute his daughters. - God says in 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 that he's chosen some people to be eternally damned just because he wants to. - God condoned wartime rape in Judges 21:10-24. - And the kicker: god says in Deuteronomy 22:23-24 that rape victims get the death penalty. - Amos 3:6 says god is the source of evil. - God ordered his chosen people to kill soldiers, women, babies, and animals in 1 Samuel 15:3. Genocide, yum! - Numbers 16:16-49 details the deaths of 14,950 people who god killed because they complained. - Judges chapter 3 tells the story of Ehud, the assassin god sent to kill Eglon, the puppet dictator god installed in power.
You have to understand this: God is not moral. It's a good thing he doesn't exist.
Here's my favorite: 2 Kings 2:23-24: And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
God sends bears to maul children for making fun of a dude's bald head FTW!
What happens when two sects of a certain religion clash because their holy texts are unclear or hypocritical on a given moral point? For instance, one side cites a passage that their God or gods condone the death penalty for certain crimes and the opposing side cites a passage that states that killing another is sin? Are both sides right? Is one side right? If so, which one? More importantly, how can anyone have a complete and cohesive moral/ethical philosophy based solely on religion? Even if a religious text existed that was so comprehensive that it covered all current moral/ethical dilemmas and was in no way hypocritical, what happens when social morals change and adapt (like they did with slavery, prostitution, the role of women, etc.)?
Axel, it seems that you keep citing the Bible as the primary source of your moral and ethical code. Can you tell me which version of the Bible you are referring to as it has been heavily edited and has several varying translations that to this day are disputed? Perhaps more importantly, why are the moral codes in that book any more or less valid than the moral codes presented in the Qur'an, Bhagadavita, or the writings of any person/group that claim they have spoken to a divine source?
There are many, many ethical philosophies that neither rely on nor dismiss the divine. I highly recommend that you take an intro to ethics class and read up on the subject of morality in the context of history and religion.
Whatever happened to the right-wing extremist violence? Hijacked, much?
Religion has killed far more people than any other single source in the history of humanity, which is reason enough for me to hate organized religion (with the exception of the Buddhists, who don't really hurt anyone and are fairly pragmatic, reasonable, and non-theistic). My thought is that if the teachings of the Bible/Koran/Torah/whatever aren't enough to keep their followers from committing heinous crimes against humanity, what worth do they have? Aside from the USSR, I can think of no time when atheists ever committed genocide, or crusades, or shot up their offices, or molested little boys in confessionals, or what have you, and atheist societies (think Scandinavian countries) are some of the happiest, longest-living, and peaceful nations on Earth.
So, religious folks are responsible for the Holocaust, the Crusades, most terrorism in the world, and countless millions of deaths throughout history, whereas secular folks are happy and peaceful. If that doesn't prove that you can be good without religion, and that you can be evil with religion, I don't know what can.
Religion has killed far more people than any other single source in the history of humanity, which is reason enough for me to hate organized religion (with the exception of the Buddhists, who don't really hurt anyone and are fairly pragmatic, reasonable, and non-theistic).
And that's just religion; think of all the smiting god's done in his own name. Even if you only count the ones specifically notated in the bible, that's still millions.
And that's just religion; think of all the smiting god's done in his own name. Even if you only count the ones specifically notated in the bible, that's still millions.
But I was talking about actual events caused by actual things, independent of doctrine.
And that's just religion; think of all the smiting god's done in his own name. Even if you only count the ones specifically notated in the bible, that's still millions.
Aaarghh. I have exams on three consecutive days (one more to go still) and I've missed most of the fun...
Also, I'm not posting on the forum anymore. I've gotten 3 topics closed now. Yay me. I'll still listen to the podcast, but I don't think you really care anyways.
I, for one, am sorry to see you go. I hope you read this... Scott might have decent reasons for closing topics, but the fact is that this topic has gotten a lot of posts because it's something a lot of people want to talk about.
If you do stay, and I hope you do, then stop whining about how everyone hates you. We don't. If we hated you, we'd just ignore you. If you're leaving because you think you're causing trouble, then get over yourself; closing topics is Scott's problem, not yours. If you don't like this topic, well, here's a simple thing you need to learn about Internet forums: only post in the topics you enjoy! If you listen to the podcast, you're probably interested in something on these forums - just post in those sections.
What I don't buy is that Biology means that people are nice. I've heard the argument that kindness is a biological imperative, that it's the only way for humanity to succeed. But, if you don't believe in God, why care about humanity? An individual can gain more easy happiness by only caring about themselves. I have seen no logical argument for biological altruism. It is human instinct to put yourself first always. Something else gives us the occasional desire to help someone else.
Watch Richard Dawkins' Nice Guys Finish First. As a short response, I'll tell you this: to your biology, your happiness is not the end goal, just a tool. Your genes just want to make more genes. However, cooperation is not isolated to humans. Shit, bacteria cooperate. In any case, the biological basis for altruism is simple. By cooperating, everyone benefits, which is clearly the kind of thing that natural selection would favor.
On the general topic of tolerating religious belief: Like most people here, I respect a person's right to hold the beliefs they wish to hold. However, those beliefs should be subject to criticism. In particular, I hold that all religions that present eternal life are highly immoral, because they infinitely devalue the present life.
Technically everyone that dies since the beginning of humanity would be gods fault, why didn't he make us immortal :-p
Axel,
Stop being a drama queen, no one actually knows you so how can we hate you, in fact we want you to understand some of the illogical arguments you've made. That means on some level we care about you. Stick around or don't but don't go "Oh I'm going to leave" or "I'm not going to post anymore" because that's just drama queenish, I'd just keep posting if i were you and keep getting threads closed. I think it's a stupid rule of Scott's anyhow.
Stick around or don't but don't go "Oh I'm going to leave" or "I'm not going to post anymore" because that's just drama queenish,
In other words: get off the cross. You're not a martyr and we're not trying to martyr you. If someone puts forth a weak position on anything, we tear it apart. Can't defend your favorite type of muffin? That's a reamin'.
Stick around or don't but don't go "Oh I'm going to leave" or "I'm not going to post anymore" because that's just drama queenish,
In other words: get off the cross. You're not a martyr and we're not trying to martyr you. If someone puts forth a weak position onanything, we tear it apart. Can't defend your favorite type of muffin? That's a reamin'.
Stick around or don't but don't go "Oh I'm going to leave" or "I'm not going to post anymore" because that's just drama queenish,
In other words: get off the cross. You're not a martyr and we're not trying to martyr you. If someone puts forth a weak position onanything, we tear it apart. Can't defend your favorite type of muffin? That's a reamin'.
When did a topic about Rise in Right-Wing Extremist Violence turn into one on the merits of religion. Also last time a check their are some people on the left that are religulous has well.
When did a topic about Rise in Right-Wing Extremist Violence turn into one on the merits of religion. Also last time aI check checked theirthere are some people on the left that are religulousreligioushasas well.
Probably owing to the fact that some extremists tie their desire for the death of abortion doctors to their religious beliefs. It derailed the thread a bit. Religion isn't a left or right issue per se, but certain religious beliefs inform certain political stances.
There is a correlation between right-wingers and fundamentalist Christianity in this country (they are one of the largest bases of support for the Republican party, and one of the stronger lobbies in Washington). There is also a correlation between right-wing violence and religion (those who are more extremist tend to be more religious).
Also last time a check their are some people on the left that are religulous has well.
Face it: In the U.S., the right is much more prone to violence than the left. Furthermore, as you demonstrate, those on the right are much more likely to possess very poor writing skills.
Comments
What I don't buy is that Biology means that people are nice. I've heard the argument that kindness is a biological imperative, that it's the only way for humanity to succeed. But, if you don't believe in God, why care about humanity? An individual can gain more easy happiness by only caring about themselves. I have seen no logical argument for biological altruism. It is human instinct to put yourself first always. Something else gives us the occasional desire to help someone else.
I thought we had already established that when I say things about religion, I am speaking my opinion, my interpretation. I don't claim to know this, it's what I believe. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
His sacrifice is special because he's God. He chose to come down to our level, and then be killed by us, just to help us, even though we are unworthy. That is why it's special, because he is better than us, and it is insane to think that God would die for us.
And sin is what God can't defeat. Disobeying him is what he can't stop. Heaven is only for perfection. Anything that disrupts that perfection is not allowed in. That's why he had to send Jesus to forgive us, so that the sin wouldn't infect Heaven.
We are atheists, we don't believe in god. However, we are not selfish evil pricks. It doesn't matter what the evolutionary or biological reasons are for why we are nice. The fact is that we are good people for the sake of being good people. You just admitted that you are only a good person because your imaginary friend told you to be good, and you wouldn't be good otherwise.
That's why we don't like religious people like you. You're very scary. We are all good people just because good is good. You are all bad people who are only pretending to be good because you are afraid of punishment and/or trying to get into heaven, which if it exists, is selfish.
I'll close thread when I get home unless I seem some FSM refutations.
And why do you do good things? Is there any reason? Any at all other than you just feel like it? Because that sounds a lot like biology to me.
And yeah, I do good things because God says so, and I believe he's always right. If there was no God, I wouldn't be evil, however. I'd probably be just like you, because of the way culture has developed. Culture is what creates a desire for good, and altruism.
Also, I'm not posting on the forum anymore. I've gotten 3 topics closed now. Yay me. I'll still listen to the podcast, but I don't think you really care anyways.
It does not matter from whence consciousness comes. It exists.
So, would you say an AI with an exact replica of the processes of a human brain, and which was for all intents and purposes sentient and possessing of emotion, could it go to heaven? Does it have an immortal soul?
thoughtsEDIT: Let me rephrase that, I laughed at your lack of individual thought, you hivemind, you. Defend yourself from a dozen armed men, two dozen, three dozen, are you seeing where the argument is coming from? You can't survive by your self, and thus you cannot gain happiness. You're also forgetting that there are 6 BILLION people on earth, we as a species have long since outgrown the reaches of evolution (i.e. we barely evolve as a species anymore), thus we are left with what our species currently is, including our hard wired survival instincts. Give humanity some more time and we'll have uncovered all of the secrets of the brain, we will then point you to the location where your conciousness resides.Religion broke your legs and then handed you crutches. Go get them fixed. Only then will you be able to walk.
- God ordered kids to be stoned to death in Deuteronomy 21:18-21.
- God gave rules in Exodus 21:7 for how to properly sell your daughter into slavery.
- God's messengers were so proud of the Levite in Judges 19:22-29 for offering to prostitute his daughters.
- God says in 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 that he's chosen some people to be eternally damned just because he wants to.
- God condoned wartime rape in Judges 21:10-24.
- And the kicker: god says in Deuteronomy 22:23-24 that rape victims get the death penalty.
- Amos 3:6 says god is the source of evil.
- God ordered his chosen people to kill soldiers, women, babies, and animals in 1 Samuel 15:3. Genocide, yum!
- Numbers 16:16-49 details the deaths of 14,950 people who god killed because they complained.
- Judges chapter 3 tells the story of Ehud, the assassin god sent to kill Eglon, the puppet dictator god installed in power.
You have to understand this: God is not moral. It's a good thing he doesn't exist.
And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
God sends bears to maul children for making fun of a dude's bald head FTW!
Are both sides right? Is one side right? If so, which one? More importantly, how can anyone have a complete and cohesive moral/ethical philosophy based solely on religion?
Even if a religious text existed that was so comprehensive that it covered all current moral/ethical dilemmas and was in no way hypocritical, what happens when social morals change and adapt (like they did with slavery, prostitution, the role of women, etc.)?
Axel, it seems that you keep citing the Bible as the primary source of your moral and ethical code. Can you tell me which version of the Bible you are referring to as it has been heavily edited and has several varying translations that to this day are disputed? Perhaps more importantly, why are the moral codes in that book any more or less valid than the moral codes presented in the Qur'an, Bhagadavita, or the writings of any person/group that claim they have spoken to a divine source?
There are many, many ethical philosophies that neither rely on nor dismiss the divine. I highly recommend that you take an intro to ethics class and read up on the subject of morality in the context of history and religion.
Religion has killed far more people than any other single source in the history of humanity, which is reason enough for me to hate organized religion (with the exception of the Buddhists, who don't really hurt anyone and are fairly pragmatic, reasonable, and non-theistic). My thought is that if the teachings of the Bible/Koran/Torah/whatever aren't enough to keep their followers from committing heinous crimes against humanity, what worth do they have? Aside from the USSR, I can think of no time when atheists ever committed genocide, or crusades, or shot up their offices, or molested little boys in confessionals, or what have you, and atheist societies (think Scandinavian countries) are some of the happiest, longest-living, and peaceful nations on Earth.
So, religious folks are responsible for the Holocaust, the Crusades, most terrorism in the world, and countless millions of deaths throughout history, whereas secular folks are happy and peaceful. If that doesn't prove that you can be good without religion, and that you can be evil with religion, I don't know what can.
If you do stay, and I hope you do, then stop whining about how everyone hates you. We don't. If we hated you, we'd just ignore you. If you're leaving because you think you're causing trouble, then get over yourself; closing topics is Scott's problem, not yours.
If you don't like this topic, well, here's a simple thing you need to learn about Internet forums: only post in the topics you enjoy! If you listen to the podcast, you're probably interested in something on these forums - just post in those sections. Watch Richard Dawkins' Nice Guys Finish First. As a short response, I'll tell you this: to your biology, your happiness is not the end goal, just a tool. Your genes just want to make more genes.
However, cooperation is not isolated to humans. Shit, bacteria cooperate.
In any case, the biological basis for altruism is simple. By cooperating, everyone benefits, which is clearly the kind of thing that natural selection would favor.
On the general topic of tolerating religious belief:
Like most people here, I respect a person's right to hold the beliefs they wish to hold. However, those beliefs should be subject to criticism.
In particular, I hold that all religions that present eternal life are highly immoral, because they infinitely devalue the present life.
Technically everyone that dies since the beginning of humanity would be gods fault, why didn't he make us immortal :-p
Axel,
Stop being a drama queen, no one actually knows you so how can we hate you, in fact we want you to understand some of the illogical arguments you've made. That means on some level we care about you. Stick around or don't but don't go "Oh I'm going to leave" or "I'm not going to post anymore" because that's just drama queenish, I'd just keep posting if i were you and keep getting threads closed. I think it's a stupid rule of Scott's anyhow.