PDA

View Full Version : Imagine there was no god......



2 Scoops
01-08-2006, 08:42 PM
If there was no God, how differently would you live your life? I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty. A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.

PatrickDurden
01-08-2006, 08:46 PM
Seeing as how I believe in no god anyways, I would not live it any different.

If the whole world knew there wasn't a god it would be really different though.

Mr Beer
01-08-2006, 08:51 PM
I don't require supersitition to have morals, so no, I wouldn't change my behaviour at all.

xer0xed
01-08-2006, 08:54 PM
If there was no God, how differently would you live your life? I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty. A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.

Pointless question. You wouldn't know the difference either way.

"If there were no God, it would be necessary to invent him." -Voltaire

2 Scoops
01-08-2006, 09:15 PM
huh. If there was no god, what would you live for? I would be looting and rioting and raping and pillaging....... You would live for yourself, with no fear, correct?

Hotbox4life
01-08-2006, 09:17 PM
huh. If there was no god, what would you live for? I would be looting and rioting and raping and pillaging....... You would live for yourself, with no fear, correct?
No. One can still be capable of appreciating the humanity in others, our shared existence. If you would be raping, etc., then you have some problems.

Stinker
01-08-2006, 09:22 PM
huh. If there was no god, what would you live for? I would be looting and rioting and raping and pillaging....... You would live for yourself, with no fear, correct?
No, you are being dishonest. Are you honestly saying that if someone revealed to you tomorow that no gods existed you would begin raping? I highly doubt the answer to this question is yes, and if it is then you need to take some time to consider an objective morality and discard you theistic one, because it obviously isn't doing you any good. At the moment you come off as morally bankrupt.

xer0xed
01-08-2006, 09:32 PM
No, you are being dishonest. Are you honestly saying that if someone revealed to you tomorow that no gods existed you would begin raping? I highly doubt the answer to this question is yes, and if it is then you need to take some time to consider an objective morality and discard you theistic one, because it obviously isn't doing you any good. At the moment you come off as morally bankrupt.

A large percentage of people are like that. Actually, I think most of the general population is. If we didn't have Christianity in this country, it would probably be a considerably more dangerous place to live.

(I'm not trying to convert anyone or anything... I'm not religious)

Oh, and what someone SHOULD do and how they actually are differ considerably. Just saying that everyone SHOULD adopt a more objective view of morality accomplishes absolutely nothing.

2 Scoops
01-08-2006, 09:33 PM
Guys, sorry. I didnt mean i would literally be raping women. But my point was that I would do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, with no fear of consequences.

Stinker
01-08-2006, 09:50 PM
A large percentage of people are like that. Actually, I think most of the general population is. If we didn't have Christianity in this country, it would probably be a considerably more dangerous place to live.
I disagree. Even highly irrational and emotional people have a sense of right and wrong, regardless of religious belief. People subconciously recognise a standard of right and wrong before they are ever told how to be moral. Your claim that people behave "well" because of religion and that society would be more dangerous without it doesn't hold water- people behave well because they know, at least subconciously, that they need to, if they staple religion over the top this doesn't mean that religion gives them morals, it forms a solidified version of right and wrong, the consequence of using religion instead of reason however is dogma.


Oh, and what someone SHOULD do and how they actually are differ considerably. Just saying that everyone SHOULD adopt a more objective view of morality accomplishes absolutely nothing.
You will have to reword this if I am to relate it to the conversation.

xer0xed
01-08-2006, 10:07 PM
I disagree. Even highly irrational and emotional people have a sense of right and wrong, regardless of religious belief. People subconciously recognise a standard of right and wrong before they are ever told how to be moral. Your claim that people behave "well" because of religion and that society would be more dangerous without it doesn't hold water- people behave well because they know, at least subconciously, that they need to, if they staple religion over the top this doesn't mean that religion gives them morals, it forms a solidified version of right and wrong, the consequence of using religion instead of reason however is dogma.


You will have to reword this if I am to relate it to the conversation.

Reason is, in itself, also dogma. The only difference is that is more useful than religion when applied on a higher plane of thought. Many people are not reasonable, or simply are not very intellectual. We're talking totally different frequencies. They know something is right or wrong because Jesus/Allah/Muhammed/Whoever said it. Not everyone's subconscious recognition is of equal effectiveness -- that is an overly-broad generalization. Whether their beliefs are in something truthful or factual is completely irrelevant. The point is they are very useful.

For example, how much do you think the paper that makes up a dollar is really worth? It is simply the belief in that dollar that renders it valuable, and hence useful.

Religion works. People help each other out simply due to Christian influences quite often. And, I don't think such a condescending tone should be used toward people who espouse religious views. Some people are more feeling than thinking, and religion is a very emotional trigger. This pathway would, for them, be most efficient in triggering both comfort and an effective change in behavior. Not everyone has the same brain that you or I do. To expect their brains to metamorph to meet yours in capability/formation/whatever is nothing short of magic and idealism. Ironic, isn't it?

Btw: My point on the "should" comment was that you were being somewhat overly-idealistic in your proposition (esp. when applied to a wide scale).

ApostateAbe
01-08-2006, 10:20 PM
If there was no God, how differently would you live your life? I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty. A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.I don't think you would live your life much differently from how you are living it right now, except that you would do something else on Sunday morning, enhance your sex life, believe more reasonably, and lose a few of your friends. Everyone, generally, acts according to what brings benefit upon their own selves. Right now, you eat, sleep, work, pump iron, obey the law, and masturbate. After you become an atheist, you will eat, sleep, work, pump iron, obey the law, and masturbate. Before and after, you do things to benefit your own life. You will certainly have a lot less hope about living eternally, but the disappointment is only a temporary thing. It is like discovering that you are not really God after a life of thinking that you are God.

MonsterG8r
01-08-2006, 10:27 PM
I don't require supersitition to have morals, so no, I wouldn't change my behaviour at all.

So you have morals? How did you form them/where did you get them?

IceDragon
01-08-2006, 10:34 PM
I wouldn't change at all. I am who I am, and my religion only enhances that, the values and morals I hold, I have always held, even before I found it. It's just added an extra dimension.

It doesn't define who I am, it's just another facet of me. If I knew for sure that there were no deities, I would carry on regardless, even though I love them as my own kin.

CerealKiller
01-08-2006, 11:23 PM
Guys, sorry. I didnt mean i would literally be raping women. But my point was that I would do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, with no fear of consequences.

Seems as though your fear of your god is greater than your love.

Human beings have a moral obligation to avoid harming others, and to live our lives such that the world is a better place for our existence. This holds true whether there is a god or not.

coontang
01-08-2006, 11:30 PM
huh. If there was no god, what would you live for? I would be looting and rioting and raping and pillaging....... You would live for yourself, with no fear, correct?
You'd be doing that huh? Then I guess that's why we need religion around. To keep people like you in line.

Weightaholic
01-09-2006, 02:05 AM
Guys, sorry. I didnt mean i would literally be raping women. But my point was that I would do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, with no fear of consequences.

I would think you would be doing it with no fear of divine consequences. There are always more earthly, tangible consequences to consider. :D

Mr Beer
01-09-2006, 02:18 AM
So you have morals? How did you form them/where did you get them?

Initially, from my parents and after that, from my interaction with society.

Bakira
01-09-2006, 02:25 AM
So you have morals? How did you form them/where did you get them?

I feel the same way as Mr Beer does. No need for a superstition to keep me in line, so I wouldn't change either.

Just because one doesn't believe in a deity doesn't mean he/she is immoral.

Have you not heard of the Golden Rule? Do onto others as you would have them do unto you? I wouldn't want to be murdered, so I'm not going to murder anyone. I don't want someone stealing from me, so I'm not going to steal. I wouldn't want anyone telling me a lie, so I'm not going to lie to anyone.

Understand now? That is where I get my morals from. What ever I don't want done to me, I won't do to anyone else. Otherwise, I would be a hypocrite and I don't like being a hypocrite.

fkn_give_me_abs
01-09-2006, 02:26 AM
So you have morals? How did you form them/where did you get them?

i don't understand. are you saying humans could not create their own morals without a greater being?

so one day we are all pillaging and raping, and then suddenly the 10 commandments come down and we all get "moralised"?

if i am taking your question wrongly, i apologise.

IceDragon
01-09-2006, 03:19 AM
i don't understand. are you saying humans could not create their own morals without a greater being?

so one day we are all pillaging and raping, and then suddenly the 10 commandments come down and we all get "moralised"?

if i am taking your question wrongly, i apologise.
That's exactly how it sounded to me too, but I left it alone out of sheer incredulity. :)

PuRE_FiBER
01-09-2006, 03:41 AM
The only reason there isn't absolute anarchy, people raping, killing, stealing left and right, is because people fear physical and monetary punishment (jail and fines). Has nothing to do with whether or not someone believes in God. In fact, people who claim to be "believers" have been responsible for the most bloodshed and inhumane acts.

AKR
01-09-2006, 05:08 AM
If there was no God, how differently would you live your life? I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty. A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.


well, i'd still have the same morals, as i don't believe in god NOW. but my life WOULD be different: i'd have a large amount of ammo and weapons to kill scary folks such as yourself.

xer0xed
01-09-2006, 09:20 AM
The only reason there isn't absolute anarchy, people raping, killing, stealing left and right, is because people fear physical and monetary punishment (jail and fines). Has nothing to do with whether or not someone believes in God. In fact, people who claim to be "believers" have been responsible for the most bloodshed and inhumane acts.

Only because believers make up such a large relative % of the population. Laws/punishment also have much to do with it (of course.) However, what makes religion so effective is that one is never thought to be outside of the presence of the reinforcer. People can hide from the law.

Flex500
01-09-2006, 09:53 AM
If there was no God, how differently would you live your life? I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty. A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.
I would agree, as much as I hate to say it I would not be near the person I am today. Don't get me wrong I am not an angel by any means but I would live a very very self-centered life if there was no God

Flex500
01-09-2006, 09:55 AM
Guys, sorry. I didnt mean i would literally be raping women. But my point was that I would do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, with no fear of consequences.
I agree, I mean I wouldn't go kill people, but hell you have nobody to answer to if there was no God

JAGERBOY
01-09-2006, 10:57 AM
I agree, I mean I wouldn't go kill people, but hell you have nobody to answer to if there was no God
Um, the police? Jail?

MonsterG8r
01-09-2006, 11:00 AM
I feel the same way as Mr Beer does. No need for a superstition to keep me in line, so I wouldn't change either.

Just because one doesn't believe in a deity doesn't mean he/she is immoral.

Have you not heard of the Golden Rule? Do onto others as you would have them do unto you? I wouldn't want to be murdered, so I'm not going to murder anyone. I don't want someone stealing from me, so I'm not going to steal. I wouldn't want anyone telling me a lie, so I'm not going to lie to anyone.

Understand now? That is where I get my morals from. What ever I don't want done to me, I won't do to anyone else. Otherwise, I would be a hypocrite and I don't like being a hypocrite.

How do you know you're in line. What standards are you using?
Where do you think the Golden rule came from??? You say you don't need a superstition to live by, then quote Jesus. Classic.

1dayIWillBeBig
01-09-2006, 11:20 AM
Where do you think the Golden rule came from??? You say you don't need a superstition to live by, then quote Jesus. Classic.


From what I've learned, the earliest version of the Golden Rule first began in Ancient Egypt around 1900-1600 BC from "The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant".

"Do for one who may do for you, That you may cause him thus to do."



The Bible's version of the Golden Rule is well over 1000 yrs behind. But the most recognized, obviously!

theredshirt
01-09-2006, 11:24 AM
huh. If there was no god, what would you live for? I would be looting and rioting and raping and pillaging....... You would live for yourself, with no fear, correct?
thank god (pun intended) you believe then. Meanwhile, the rest of us atheists will continue to live a normal life, which involves being good people who dont loot steal and become anarchists

A & B
01-09-2006, 01:11 PM
What a farce.

I'm an atheist and I don't kill, rape or plunder.

Without God, people still feel pain, hunger, sorrow and all those things. Why would you inflict harm on others if you felt there was no God? How does that change the damage you do to people?

I'm really sick of hearing this garbage.

xer0xed
01-09-2006, 01:23 PM
What a farce.

I'm an atheist and I don't kill, rape or plunder.

Without God, people still feel pain, hunger, sorrow and all those things. Why would you inflict harm on others if you felt there was no God? How does that change the damage you do to people?

I'm really sick of hearing this garbage.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/biased-sample.html

basement iron
01-09-2006, 01:36 PM
So you have morals? How did you form them/where did you get them?
]

His parents.

A & B
01-09-2006, 01:45 PM
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/biased-sample.html

I don't get it. What's this supposed to mean with respect to my post?

edit: Oh, because I'm an atheist right? Ok......... I get it.

Anyways, my points still stand. All you people who claim that "if there was no God, I'd do whatever the **** I want", that's a crock.

You're telling me that you would feel no wrong in raping someone? Would that woman not feel the pain still without God? Would you not feel like a sick bastard for it?

Get real.

If that is truly your belief, then aren't your reasons for not committing these crimes purely selfish? I mean, if the only reason why you don't kill, rape and plunder, is because you fear the wrath of God, aren't you just completely selfish? Whereas an atheist (like myself) who has no such fear, yet I do not kill, rape and plunder, doesn't that make me more compassionate, more virtuous than thou?

basement iron
01-09-2006, 02:09 PM
huh. If there was no god, what would you live for? I would be looting and rioting and raping and pillaging....... You would live for yourself, with no fear, correct?


You know at first I was gunna say "BS No you wouldn't!"

But then again the world is full of nuts.

If aliens landed on earth tomorrow there would be nuts who went crazy, doing things like you suggested raping, rioting etc.

If there was a comet that was going to collide with Earth there would be nuts who go crazy.

If it was proven that there is no God, again nuts like you going crazy.

The world is full of nuts and you are one of them. I hope your neighbors have guns.

Mr Beer
01-09-2006, 02:11 PM
I think this is a good time to introduce Mr Beer's Word of The Day:

"hu·man·ism

Concern with the interests, needs, and welfare of humans"

You might note that humanism does not rely on religion.

Really, this is an absurd discussion. Someone who needs a father figure looking over their shoulder for their entire life in order for them to behave like a decent person, is someone who has never left childhood.

xer0xed
01-09-2006, 02:22 PM
I don't get it. What's this supposed to mean with respect to my post?

edit: Oh, because I'm an atheist right? Ok......... I get it.

Anyways, my points still stand. All you people who claim that "if there was no God, I'd do whatever the **** I want", that's a crock.

You're telling me that you would feel no wrong in raping someone? Would that woman not feel the pain still without God? Would you not feel like a sick bastard for it?

Get real.

If that is truly your belief, then aren't your reasons for not committing these crimes purely selfish? I mean, if the only reason why you don't kill, rape and plunder, is because you fear the wrath of God, aren't you just completely selfish? Whereas an atheist (like myself) who has no such fear, yet I do not kill, rape and plunder, doesn't that make me more compassionate, more virtuous than thou?

Nope. The point was simply that you can't take a single (or a few) example(s) and use it to represent the whole in this case. I'd be one of the few examples you'd try to use. However, not all people are like us. You made a bit of a strawman mistake on me I think, but that's alright hehe.

A & B
01-09-2006, 04:03 PM
Nope. The point was simply that you can't take a single (or a few) example(s) and use it to represent the whole in this case. I'd be one of the few examples you'd try to use. However, not all people are like us. You made a bit of a strawman mistake on me I think, but that's alright hehe.

Oh, I don't get it then... again.

Where did I use a small sample and represent them as a whole?

Stinker
01-09-2006, 05:15 PM
Reason is, in itself, also dogma. The only difference is that is more useful than religion when applied on a higher plane of thought.
This is nonsensical. Reason isn't a dogma, it's simply the way the mind comes to accurate conclusions. And talkig about higher planes of thought is too mystical and ambiguous to be accepted without some discussion.


Many people are not reasonable, or simply are not very intellectual. We're talking totally different frequencies. They know something is right or wrong because Jesus/Allah/Muhammed/Whoever said it.
This is not true. The human mind is not so puerile as to simply accept things that it is told are true, the subconcious forms behaviors based on reality because it is necesary to do so, it is in the concious where reality is broken down by superstition.


Not everyone's subconscious recognition is of equal effectiveness -- that is an overly-broad generalization. Whether their beliefs are in something truthful or factual is completely irrelevant. The point is they are very useful.

For example, how much do you think the paper that makes up a dollar is really worth? It is simply the belief in that dollar that renders it valuable, and hence useful.
No, there is an objective measurement of the value of a dollar bill. Your example is too puerile, it's not the value of the paper or the ink that gives the dollar it's value. The bill has a market value of one dollar ( where the value of "one dollar" changes based upon the market) and people will be willing to trade goods to the same value for it.
The argument that belief that the dollar is worth a dollar makes it useful does not follow, because if I believe that the dollar is worth 100 dollars then by your reasoning it should be- it isn't, and thats because there is an objective measurement of it's worth, for all the subjective measurements you could make the only measurement that will be "useful" is the objective one.


Religion works. People help each other out simply due to Christian influences quite often. And, I don't think such a condescending tone should be used toward people who espouse religious views. Some people are more feeling than thinking, and religion is a very emotional trigger. This pathway would, for them, be most efficient in triggering both comfort and an effective change in behavior. Not everyone has the same brain that you or I do.
You are right that religion is an emotional trigger, but emotion is not the exclusive property of religion, and what is it a trigger for? There are many atheists and otherwise who are right-brained people.


To expect their brains to metamorph to meet yours in capability/formation/whatever is nothing short of magic and idealism. Ironic, isn't it?
I don't expect people's brains to change. All human minds are capable of logic in various degrees and also emotion in various degrees. It would be pessimistic of me to pander to the lowest denominator and simply not expect anything of anyone. If you don't raise questions to people they have no chance to answer them- I don't expect them to answer them, but I give them the oppourtunity.


Btw: My point on the "should" comment was that you were being somewhat overly-idealistic in your proposition (esp. when applied to a wide scale).
It wasn't applied in a large scale, I was talking to one guy on the topic of morality; I bring up the concept of an objective morality (which seems quite necesary if we are going to generally discuss the topic of morality) and you are off on some witch hunt to accuse me of idealism. Alright, if accusing me of idealism gets you off you can keep it up, but I'm not going to debate with you if this is the goal of your participation. I could have accused you of idealism in your last post, but it wouldn't be a productive way to debate.

Dr Triceps
01-09-2006, 05:17 PM
What do you mean by 'God'? One of reward and punishment or one of simply creation?

Stinker
01-09-2006, 05:20 PM
Here's a woth while note- If there were no laws would you be happy to go outside under the protection of you belief that religion brings out the best in people? OR if there were no religion would you be happy to go outside under the belief that the law protects you?

Personally I take the second option.

We might also note that the prison population has the highest saturation of theism than any other sample.

JBDW
01-09-2006, 05:22 PM
Here's a woth while note- If there were no laws would you be happy to go outside under the protection of you belief that religion brings out the best in people? OR if there were no religion would you be happy to go outside under the belief that the law protects you?

Personally I take the second option.

We might also note that the prison population has the highest saturation of theism than any other sample.

Excellent point.

NicVJ
01-09-2006, 05:25 PM
Here's a woth while note- If there were no laws would you be happy to go outside under the protection of you belief that religion brings out the best in people? OR if there were no religion would you be happy to go outside under the belief that the law protects you?

Personally I take the second option.

We might also note that the prison population has the highest saturation of theism than any other sample.

It's a good example to illustrate how most people are practical than anything else, how human nature supercedes everything else. And what? This is quite natural for a realistic conception of society.

xer0xed
01-09-2006, 10:17 PM
This is nonsensical. Reason isn't a dogma, it's simply the way the mind comes to accurate conclusions. And talkig about higher planes of thought is too mystical and ambiguous to be accepted without some discussion.




3 entries found for dogma.
dog·ma P Pronunciation Key (dōgm, dg-)
n. pl. dog·mas or dog·ma·ta (-m-t)
1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
2. An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.
3. A principle or belief or a group of them: “The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present” (Abraham Lincoln)

Check out #2.
Source: www.dictionary.com

Hah, actually there are different levels of thinking. Here is some more info on planes of thought/logical levels: http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/methodology/frames2.shtml


This is not true. The human mind is not so puerile as to simply accept things that it is told are true, the subconcious forms behaviors based on reality because it is necesary to do so, it is in the concious where reality is broken down by superstition.

Really? Since you don't believe in religion, I'd suppose you'd believe in science, instead:
http://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/soc_psych/asch_conform.html
http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/normative_social_influence.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment


No, there is an objective measurement of the value of a dollar bill. Your example is too puerile, it's not the value of the paper or the ink that gives the dollar it's value. The bill has a market value of one dollar ( where the value of "one dollar" changes based upon the market) and people will be willing to trade goods to the same value for it.
The argument that belief that the dollar is worth a dollar makes it useful does not follow, because if I believe that the dollar is worth 100 dollars then by your reasoning it should be- it isn't, and thats because there is an objective measurement of it's worth, for all the subjective measurements you could make the only measurement that will be "useful" is the objective one.

It is subjective. It is a subjective phenomenon which is simply measured through objective means for quantification. Just because lots of people agree on a value doesn't make it anything otherwise. That is, unless of course, you'd take the opinion of organized religion over your own. ;)

Anyhow, the degree to which people WANT the money and that they TRUST in the government's ability to ensure its rarity is what allows the economy to work right. If people lost all faith in the rarity of the dollar and in the market, you can't tell me there wouldn't be a decrease in the dow jones. If someone made a newspaper article entitled "DOW WILL CRASH TOMMORROW" or something else rather ridiculous that would hint at that, investor faith would go way down and you can bet people would be screaming "sell" and jumping out of office windows.


You are right that religion is an emotional trigger, but emotion is not the exclusive property of religion, and what is it a trigger for? There are many atheists and otherwise who are right-brained people.

A trigger is intended to initiate. In this case, positive behaviors/emotions would be triggered by religion. And, did I state that religion was the sole source of emotion? No. However, it is more efficient than means an atheistic populace would have left to use in that it allows for omniscience of the reinforcer.


I don't expect people's brains to change. All human minds are capable of logic in various degrees and also emotion in various degrees. It would be pessimistic of me to pander to the lowest denominator and simply not expect anything of anyone. If you don't raise questions to people they have no chance to answer them- I don't expect them to answer them, but I give them the oppourtunity.

All you'll do to many folks is confuse them and generate negative feelings/behaviors.

And is it really pandering the "lowest denominator" or adjusting to the world around you? Since you apparently like using mathematical terms, allow me to introduce you to an additional phenomenon which occurs in our reality:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution


It wasn't applied in a large scale, I was talking to one guy on the topic of morality; I bring up the concept of an objective morality (which seems quite necesary if we are going to generally discuss the topic of morality) and you are off on some witch hunt to accuse me of idealism. Alright, if accusing me of idealism gets you off you can keep it up, but I'm not going to debate with you if this is the goal of your participation. I could have accused you of idealism in your last post, but it wouldn't be a productive way to debate.

The problem is much of that which you've argued isn't consistent with reality. I don't know why you hold such views, but it makes me wonder if some premeditated Randian rhetoric isn't being rationalized...

If you wish not to continue and you'd like that to be your reason, then that's fine by me and I'll ask no additional questions about it.

Stinker
01-09-2006, 11:10 PM
If you wish not to continue and you'd like that to be your reason, then that's fine by me and I'll ask no additional questions about it.
Are we going to get anywhere? I have my doubts. Let's not do this again, it wasn't worth the time last time, nor this time. All I get is accused of idealism while what I try to preach is realism and accused of Randism while you have probably read far more Rand than I have. I don't see the point, it's just not a productive use of time.

loins
01-10-2006, 02:02 AM
huh. If there was no god, what would you live for? I would be looting and rioting and raping and pillaging....... You would live for yourself, with no fear, correct?

Humans evolved social functions (ethics and morals) so that we could live in tribes to fend off predators in groups when we lost the ability to quickly climb into the trees for safety (because our legs were then suited to walking, not climbing). If we didn't have ethics, we wouldn't live together because we'd have a better chance of surviving alone. Last time I checked, atheists weren't raping and pillaging the good-natured, all-loving Christians. I've heard of Christians helping the poor; and I've heard of Christians raping children in churches; And, I've heard the same of religionless people (well, maybe not the 'in church' bit). I'm only using Christianity as one example, but there are horrible people and good people in any denomination.


So you have morals? How did you form them/where did you get them?

They're partially built into our genetics . Things like the tendancy to reciprocate gifts, and guilt (which is essential for morality) have been observed in all cultures and even in very young children who could not possibly have any concept of religion. We also learn what's "right" and "wrong" from our society (parents and friends especially).

I personally beleive that the people who have their own set of morals are the strongest and most mentally stable of us all. Without a higher power, we are faced with the anguishing thought that no single authority is controlling things in this reality that we live in; that we are in control. It's easy to say 'this is gods will' and sit on your arse and do nothing about the injustices of our world, but it takes a special type of person to take total responsibility for his/her own reality instead of attributing everything to a god who may or may not exist. I'm not saying that all theists use god as a scapegoat and an excuse to do nothing, but a whole lot of them do.

theredshirt
01-10-2006, 02:04 AM
Humans evolved social functions (ethics and morals) so that we could live in tribes to fend off predators in groups when we lost the ability to quickly climb into the trees for safety (because our legs were then suited to walking, not climbing). If we didn't have ethics, we wouldn't live together because we'd have a better chance of surviving alone. Last time I checked, atheists weren't raping and pillaging the good-natured, all-loving Christians. I've heard of Christians helping the poor; and I've heard of Christians raping children in churches; And, I've heard the same of religionless people (well, maybe not the 'in church' bit). I'm only using Christianity as one example, but there are horrible people and good people in any denomination.
what he said

Fifth Column
01-10-2006, 02:34 AM
huh. If there was no god, what would you live for? I would be looting and rioting and raping and pillaging....... You would live for yourself, with no fear, correct?Uh, no. We have these things called laws for that. :rolleyes:

Pretty scary that some of you guys wouldn't know fundamental right from wrong without the belief of an invisible man in the sky.

Fifth Column
01-10-2006, 02:52 AM
A large percentage of people are like that. Actually, I think most of the general population is. If we didn't have Christianity in this country, it would probably be a considerably more dangerous place to live.

(I'm not trying to convert anyone or anything... I'm not religious)

Oh, and what someone SHOULD do and how they actually are differ considerably. Just saying that everyone SHOULD adopt a more objective view of morality accomplishes absolutely nothing.Yeah, this country would be such a dangerous place without Christianity. Thank goodness for all the born again, fundamentalist Christians we've had as leaders of this country over the last few decades - as they've all been such moral, upstanding people. Dumping billions of your nation's tax dollars into going overseas to bomb poorer nations into the ground, and calling it a "war" is precisely what Jesus had in mind, I'm sure.

Anyone from the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster care to comment on this?

loins
01-10-2006, 03:09 AM
How do you know you're in line. What standards are you using?

You're thinking in terms of ethical absolutism, when the person you're asking questions to is thinking in terms of ethical relativism. With a god that defines what is "right" and "wrong" (absolutism) there is only one line/standard. But if morals are slightly different for each culture/person (relativism), then there is no single line/standard. Assuming ethical relativism, what's moral depends on who you ask.


Where do you think the Golden rule came from???

It's largely a product of the social functions built into our genetics. We need in-built impulses that stop us from hurting others for pesonal gain (the golden rule) so that we can live together. Take crocodiles for instance. If you were a crocodile and you swam into the territory of another adult crocodile to say hello, it would try and rip you to pieces so that it has more water to hunt in and more females to mate with. Not very ethical, is it? That's why you don't see crocodiles sharing food and hunting together. If you see a mob of crocodiles, it's normally because they are all going for the same piece of food, and even then they fight so they can get more for themselves. No ethics = no living together.

Diesel66
01-10-2006, 05:31 AM
i don't understand. are you saying humans could not create their own morals without a greater being?

so one day we are all pillaging and raping, and then suddenly the 10 commandments come down and we all get "moralised"?

if i am taking your question wrongly, i apologise.
Nope. Humans can create all the moral laws they want, but they are worthless. It used to be a horrible social crime to have sex before marriage and now you are almost ostracized if you wait until you are married.

The Bible's version of the Golden Rule is well over 1000 yrs behind. But the most recognized, obviously! The Bible was an oral tradition for untold number of years before it was written down, so using that as a timeline is not the best idea.

JBDW
01-10-2006, 06:54 AM
[QUOTE=Diesel66]Nope. Humans can create all the moral laws they want, but they are worthless. It used to be a horrible social crime to have sex before marriage and now you are almost ostracized if you wait until you are married. /QUOTE]

And the laws of the OT were considered to be rendered irrelevant by the NT. It's not like Biblical laws never underwent change, themselves.

Diesel66
01-10-2006, 06:58 AM
And the laws of the OT were considered to be rendered irrelevant by the NT. It's not like Biblical laws never underwent change, themselves.
Only the cultural laws, not God's laws.

JBDW
01-10-2006, 07:00 AM
Only the cultural laws, not God's laws.

How do you distinguish between the two?

And if you accept that cultural influence seeped into the writing of the Bible, can you consider it credible anymore?

xer0xed
01-10-2006, 07:19 AM
Yeah, this country would be such a dangerous place without Christianity. Thank goodness for all the born again, fundamentalist Christians we've had as leaders of this country over the last few decades - as they've all been such moral, upstanding people. Dumping billions of your nation's tax dollars into going overseas to bomb poorer nations into the ground, and calling it a "war" is precisely what Jesus had in mind, I'm sure.

Anyone from the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster care to comment on this?

Interesting opinion. Kind of unfocused, though. Of course the leaders aren't going to run the country like Jesus would. We'd never get anything done. It works better for people to have their religion on an individual level, with some encouragement. Attacking other countries/etc. is sometimes necessary for our economic and political well-being, as well as for gaining a strategic upper hand on our enemies.

http://www.gftforex.com/resources/commentary/weekly/weekly-5232005_files/image014.gif -- Can you think of something that happened in 2003? ;)

Oh, since you're making statements with assumed truths embedded in them, you might want to check this out: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html

You'll LOVE their example. All wrapped up and pre-packaged on a skeptic site to boot.

That was a well-written angsty tirade, at least. Can't say much else for it. =)

Diesel66
01-10-2006, 07:42 AM
How do you distinguish between the two?

And if you accept that cultural influence seeped into the writing of the Bible, can you consider it credible anymore?
You misunderstood me. I do not mean cultural laws as in man made and they were written in the Bible. The Jewish society laws are like minor traffic regulations and housing/business codes.

xer0xed
01-10-2006, 01:32 PM
Are we going to get anywhere? I have my doubts. Let's not do this again, it wasn't worth the time last time, nor this time. All I get is accused of idealism while what I try to preach is realism and accused of Randism while you have probably read far more Rand than I have. I don't see the point, it's just not a productive use of time.

Haha, that's fine man. You should investigate some of the links I posted at least. Interesting stuff. :)

MonsterG8r
01-11-2006, 11:54 PM
Uh, no. We have these things called laws for that. :rolleyes:

Pretty scary that some of you guys wouldn't know fundamental right from wrong without the belief of an invisible man in the sky.

Yeah, you just "evolved" with a moral compass built in. lol

Mr Beer
01-12-2006, 12:29 AM
Yeah, you just "evolved" with a moral compass built in. lol

Yeah, we evolved intelligence, but are just unable to use it to form a functional society. LOL!

This stuff is covered earlier in the thread, if you want to drop by to make sarcastic remarks, you should read what's going on before you do so.

Weightaholic
01-12-2006, 01:37 AM
Yeah, you just "evolved" with a moral compass built in. lol

Yeah, you just got created and given a set of rules by an invisible man in the sky. lol

Yes, that makes heaps more sense... as Charlie Brown would say, Good Grief!

Have people (esp the God-botherers) ever considered that the whole 10 commandments, which underpins much of the Christian ethos, and the moral ideals of much of the western world, is actually a common sense blue print for a small community (and most were small in those days) to survive and prosper.

Break those 10 commandments, and you have discord, violence, people working against each other instead of doing their part in the community, to help the community propser.

I'd say that it's not a God-given sense of right and wrong, just common sense.

Postman Pat
01-12-2006, 07:55 AM
If there was no God, how differently would you live your life? I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty. A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.
Well i guess if there was no god then none of us would exist and everything else wouldn't exist either. Thankfully he does exist!

aiwass
01-12-2006, 08:16 AM
Yeah, you just got created and given a set of rules by an invisible man in the sky. lol

Yes, that makes heaps more sense... as Charlie Brown would say, Good Grief!

Have people (esp the God-botherers) ever considered that the whole 10 commandments, which underpins much of the Christian ethos, and the moral ideals of much of the western world, is actually a common sense blue print for a small community (and most were small in those days) to survive and prosper.

Break those 10 commandments, and you have discord, violence, people working against each other instead of doing their part in the community, to help the community propser.

I'd say that it's not a God-given sense of right and wrong, just common sense.


Exactly. Morals are just the guidelines by which a society can function.

coontang
01-12-2006, 09:47 AM
Exactly. Morals are just the guidelines by which a society can function.
Bingo.

MonsterG8r
01-12-2006, 11:55 AM
Yeah, we evolved intelligence, but are just unable to use it to form a functional society. LOL!

This stuff is covered earlier in the thread, if you want to drop by to make sarcastic remarks, you should read what's going on before you do so.

I've been following this thread since it was first posted. I didn't just drop by. I posted on page one. Perhaps YOU should look before popping off.You say this on page two? Wow, it's not like a 60 page thread and I just came out of nowhere. Get your facts straight.

MonsterG8r
01-12-2006, 12:02 PM
Yeah, you just got created and given a set of rules by an invisible man in the sky. lol

Yes, that makes heaps more sense... as Charlie Brown would say, Good Grief!

Have people (esp the God-botherers) ever considered that the whole 10 commandments, which underpins much of the Christian ethos, and the moral ideals of much of the western world, is actually a common sense blue print for a small community (and most were small in those days) to survive and prosper.

Break those 10 commandments, and you have discord, violence, people working against each other instead of doing their part in the community, to help the community propser.

I'd say that it's not a God-given sense of right and wrong, just common sense.

Let's see....Living from non-living,Everything from nothing, consciousness from unconsciousness, conscience from no conscience by randomness. Wow.
If common sense was so common, why don't more people have it. Good sense isn't all that common.

Mr Beer
01-12-2006, 02:21 PM
I've been following this thread since it was first posted. I didn't just drop by. I posted on page one. Perhaps YOU should look before popping off.You say this on page two? Wow, it's not like a 60 page thread and I just came out of nowhere. Get your facts straight.

Actually, you dropped in to go "LOL! Moral compass evolved! LOL!". You totally ignored the fact that the explanation for the existence of a moral compass outside divine origin has already been covered earlier in the thread.

Yes, I noticed you posted in the thread earlier twice. From the tenor of your remark though, I assumed you'd given up debating.

theredshirt
01-12-2006, 03:41 PM
Let's see....Living from non-living,Everything from nothing, consciousness from unconsciousness, conscience from no conscience by randomness. Wow.
If common sense was so common, why don't more people have it. Good sense isn't all that common.
hey, your the one claiming these things. this reads like what you think god did. which is a lot easier then trying to scientifically explain something. that is whyu the idea of god is so appealing, its sooooo easy.

Fifth Column
01-12-2006, 06:03 PM
Actually, you dropped in to go "LOL! Moral compass evolved! LOL!". You totally ignored the fact that the explanation for the existence of a moral compass outside divine origin has already been covered earlier in the thread.

Yes, I noticed you posted in the thread earlier twice. From the tenor of your remark though, I assumed you'd given up debating.Mr Beer, you seem like an educated man. I wouldn't even bother "debating" with someone who's willing to be instructed by a book of fairy tales, bro.

MonsterG8r
01-12-2006, 07:02 PM
Actually, you dropped in to go "LOL! Moral compass evolved! LOL!". You totally ignored the fact that the explanation for the existence of a moral compass outside divine origin has already been covered earlier in the thread.

Yes, I noticed you posted in the thread earlier twice. From the tenor of your remark though, I assumed you'd given up debating.

With four kids, job, school etc. it's hard to keep up with all the threads everyday. I know you can understand.

Mr Beer
01-12-2006, 07:05 PM
With four kids, job, school etc. it's hard to keep up with all the threads everyday. I know you can understand.

Sounds pretty hectic.

MonsterG8r
01-12-2006, 07:07 PM
Mr Beer, you seem like an educated man. I wouldn't even bother "debating" with someone who's willing to be instructed by a book of fairy tales, bro.

Yes, like Robert Dick Wilson, Charles Spurgeon, Oswald Chambers, Simon Greenleaf, Ravi Zacharias, William Lane Craig, Norman Giesler, Billy Graham, Josh McDowell and Dr. John MacArthur et al. What a bunch of idiots.

MonsterG8r
01-12-2006, 07:09 PM
Sounds pretty hectic.

Yes, and I just walked in the door from work with enough time for a 30 minute rest then off to the gym to train two people plus myself. These boards actually help relieve stress if that makes any sense. Have a good night.

Mr Beer
01-12-2006, 08:44 PM
Yes, and I just walked in the door from work with enough time for a 30 minute rest then off to the gym to train two people plus myself. These boards actually help relieve stress if that makes any sense. Have a good night.

Strangely, it does. Good night.

AntonToo
01-12-2006, 08:49 PM
Actually, I think most of the general population is. If we didn't have Christianity in this country, it would probably be a considerably more dangerous place to live.

NUH - Religion is an excuse for morality, not a source of it.

xer0xed
01-12-2006, 08:59 PM
NUH - Religion is an excuse for morality, not a source of it.

It's not a source, but an activator.

Weightaholic
01-13-2006, 01:03 AM
Let's see....Living from non-living,Everything from nothing, consciousness from unconsciousness, conscience from no conscience by randomness. Wow.

Sigh....

You seem to be missing the point.

If mankind didn't live by this set of rules, society would not exist. Your evolving ancestors would have wiped each other out eons ago. Morals didn't come about by the big pixie in the sky, they came about because without them, YOU WOULDN'T BE HERE TO DISCUSS THEM!

SPAM
01-13-2006, 01:06 AM
i would live in hell because there would be no hope for me beyond my capabilities. if I was in a tough spot, there would be no one higher to turn to. I might kill myself.

theredshirt
01-13-2006, 02:03 AM
Sigh....

You seem to be missing the point.

If mankind didn't live by this set of rules, society would not exist. Your evolving ancestors would have wiped each other out eons ago. Morals didn't come about by the big pixie in the sky, they came about because without them, YOU WOULDN'T BE HERE TO DISCUSS THEM!
this is a good point. up until moses, we only knew not to eat fruit off trees. that doesnt get us very far as a society. something is obviously prevalent for a working society which was later written into law to make in official

Ruhanv
01-13-2006, 03:35 AM
this is a good point. up until moses, we only knew not to eat fruit off trees. that doesnt get us very far as a society. something is obviously prevalent for a working society which was later written into law to make in official

Which makes it interesting because the 10 commandments etc were all most probably developed around 600 BC after the Babylonian enslavement when the newly formed Israeli leadership needed a set of laws to control the people.

Obviously people have had civil laws long before any Judaic laws or even the Jewish nation ever existed.

Diesel66
01-13-2006, 06:32 AM
Exactly. Morals are just the guidelines by which a society can function.
Then you have no right to judge anyone because they view their actions as moral.

WillBrink
01-13-2006, 07:29 AM
If there was no God,how differently would you live your life?

As we have exactly zero proof there is any God, I live my life as if there is none.


I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty.

Anyone who needs the shadow of a god looking over them to prevent them from doing "what ever I wanted" and act like decent human being needs help. I need no god looking over me to know right from wrong or do the right thing. No god required.


A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.

Thank goodness you have an old book convincing you to act like a decent human being as according to you, without it you would be a real a-hole.

Borntobebad
01-13-2006, 09:51 AM
If there was no God, how differently would you live your life? I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty. A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.

I could care less either way if there is no lord who cares make this life count. If there is then there is love awaiting us all. Either way it doesn't really matter. I have yet to see really any proof of existence besides just something out of a book. But if he did exist he surely must be suffering. Because most people are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. That justify there own actions in the name of god. I could use more examples but whats the point.

Mr Beer
01-13-2006, 12:00 PM
Then you have no right to judge anyone because they view their actions as moral.

Of course you can. What they're doing is immoral, according to your understanding of what morals are.

aiwass
01-13-2006, 04:18 PM
Then you have no right to judge anyone because they view their actions as moral.

Did you miss my point?

What I'm getting at, is that morals aren't subjective. Humans are social animals, and for a society to function, there are certain rules that must be made, most of which ensure that people do not harm each other. These are morals. Ever wonder why different tribes around the world have very similar moral 'blueprints'? Give me one civilization in which it is accepted to randomly slay one's peer...

frankenstein
01-13-2006, 05:37 PM
The biggest thing for people to understand is that morals still exist in absence of religion. Funny isn't it that probably 10% of Americans are atheist or agnostic. That's about how many will admit it at least, as there shame given to agnosticism and atheism. It's a higher rate in Europe.

According to 2 scoops (who is a scary individual that makes Islamic terrorists seem like pot smoking hippies in his statements) the world should be in total chaos with tens of millions of people around the world not believing in a deity. But it is not. According to 2 scoops and plenty of other people I've seen on these boards us atheists should be raping and cutting off random people's heads, for we don't have fear of punishment in hell. If being a giving and good person in an attempt to buy your way into your heaven or paradise is the only reason you are good, you need to sit down and have an honest discussion with yourself about who you are.


You are clearly already an extremely selfish person if heaven vs. hell is the only thing that keeps you in line.

You don't have to believe in karma to see that bad things come around to the person who does them. People get what they give because of the negative energy they give off. If you treat people like dog****, you will get it back in spades, as your behavior will not be rewarded by other people. If you are kind and friendly to people you will almost always be received as such, and unless an outside force is changing the dynamic of the situation, people will treat you the same way in return.

There are plenty of reasons to be good without the belief in God or religion. For yourself, the ones you love, and the bettering of society as a whole. Heck, that last part acts like an umbrella over the first two. If you are able to better society as a whole, the ones you love will benefit and so will you eventually.

Morals existed before the ten commandments obviously. Religion does have a good intended purpose, for it gets people together as a group to help out others less fortunate. The unfortunate thing is that people generally don't volunteer to help others outside simply because it's the right thing to do. I'd have to say many people who help out others have in the back of their minds a reward they deserve- like getting into heaven.

Being a good person takes self discipline, common sense, and observations of life experience. None of those requires belief in a deity.

AntonToo
01-14-2006, 12:54 AM
It's not a source, but an activator.

Nuh - that activator part is the ufortunate side effect that at strong doses gets people to slice planes into tall buildings.

xer0xed
01-14-2006, 07:50 AM
Nuh - that activator part is the ufortunate side effect that at strong doses gets people to slice planes into tall buildings.

That's extremism. Using the outliers to evaluate the mean isn't a very good way of doing things.

AntonToo
01-14-2006, 09:21 AM
That's extremism. Using the outliers to evaluate the mean isn't a very good way of doing things.

Yes that is an extreme example but when instead of expressing your morality via religion you start to make up (or "activate") new morality - waky ideas come about.

Would an atheist blow himself up for 72 virgins?

xer0xed
01-14-2006, 10:26 AM
Yes that is an extreme example but when instead of expressing your morality via religion you start to make up (or "activate") new morality - waky ideas come about.

Would an atheist blow himself up for 72 virgins?

The "whacky ideas" of extremism make up a rather small percentage of overall religion worldwide. That's like charging someone $19.00 and being mad that you have to give them change back when they give you a $20.00. There's still a net gain.

An atheist would blow himself up for other reasons, if he really felt like it.

AntonToo
01-14-2006, 11:18 AM
An atheist would blow himself up for other reasons, if he really felt like it.

Yet for some reason they do not feel like it.

theredshirt
01-14-2006, 12:01 PM
The "whacky ideas" of extremism make up a rather small percentage of overall religion worldwide. That's like charging someone $19.00 and being mad that you have to give them change back when they give you a $20.00. There's still a net gain.

An atheist would blow himself up for other reasons, if he really felt like it.
the whacky ideas of extemeism are at a low in this worlds history. prior to the enlightenment, this "wacky"ness was more of the norm. Bible traditionalists use to take the bible a lot more literally in the old days, and the OT wasn't just merely what the jews followed as what it is commonly referred to today, unless its to condemn gays

mlc82
01-14-2006, 12:39 PM
the whacky ideas of extemeism are at a low in this worlds history. prior to the enlightenment, this "wacky"ness was more of the norm. Bible traditionalists use to take the bible a lot more literally in the old days, and the OT wasn't just merely what the jews followed as what it is commonly referred to today, unless its to condemn gays

Gotta love that don't you? All the bits of the OT about stoning your children or your neighbors, sacrificing animals, etc are "changed" now, but the homosexuals are an abomination part is still A-OK.

delta9
01-14-2006, 12:52 PM
If there was no God, how differently would you live your life? I for, would be alot more self centered (why not, i would be the nucleas of my life). I would probably do whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted, and not care about the penalty. A life with no Lord would be a life without hope, so thank goodness for Jesus.

lol YOU are doing what you WANT! whenever you WANT!

you want to believe in the christian view of "god" and because you believe in that you also believe the penalty but these are things that you WANT.

Diesel66
01-14-2006, 02:52 PM
Yes that is an extreme example but when instead of expressing your morality via religion you start to make up (or "activate") new morality - waky ideas come about.

Would an atheist blow himself up for 72 virgins?
Lots of atheists have been used on suicide missions in the past.Tell them it is for the good of the nation/race/family etc.....



Gotta love that don't you? All the bits of the OT about stoning your children or your neighbors, sacrificing animals, etc are "changed" now, but the homosexuals are an abomination part is still A-OK.
??????????? Homosexuality is condemned in the NT as well.

theredshirt
01-14-2006, 04:12 PM
Lots of atheists have been used on suicide missions in the past.Tell them it is for the good of the nation/race/family etc......


i do agree with you here. i am sure that some of the kamikazees were atheist. but i am basing that on nothing then i feel there would be at least one.ill say anyone brainwashed will do suicide missions. id say atheists at a lower rate though, because they dont believe in a special place afterwards that they live in forever. when doing gods will, you most certaintly will go to heaven and live for ever. atheist feels he will just cease to exist. less temptation

??????????? Homosexuality is condemned in the NT as well.
the most cited verses are from the OT. plus there is always a push to get the commandments posted, but there are other laws before and after that arent being pushed to be posted up in public areas, i wonder why? because they sound way too animalistic

Diesel66
01-14-2006, 04:36 PM
the most cited verses are from the OT. They are dumb for doing that because the easiest counter is asking them why they do not follow all the other Jewish laws.
plus there is always a push to get the commandments posted, but there are other laws before and after that arent being pushed to be posted up in public areas, i wonder why? because they sound way too animalistic
?