God is Love

Peppermint42
atheistSuperfan
Peppermint42's picture
Posts: 170
Joined: 2009-11-15
User is offlineOffline
God is Love

So this thought occurred to me while I was posting in another thread.  I had asked a theist if he only loved his family because God made him love them, and that kind of set off a spark in my brain.  So my question to theists is this:

 

If God is Love, then without him would we all be indifferent to those who currently mean the most to us?  Or worse, would we be actively harming them?

 

Think about it.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Ask them if God told them to

Ask them if God told them to kill their families if they would.

 

They'll answer "no" . I's as if interputation of religion is based on personality. And it's as if religion can't override that.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Big E
Big E's picture
Posts: 129
Joined: 2009-11-05
User is offlineOffline
Well, as an Atheist, I hate

Well, as an Atheist, I hate everybody and go on murderous killing sprees every chance I get. I'd mention some of the other things I do but I'd like to remain pg. If only I had god to tell me not to commit these heinous crimes because he'll punish me for eternity.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13768
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Big E wrote:Well, as an

Big E wrote:

Well, as an Atheist, I hate everybody and go on murderous killing sprees every chance I get. I'd mention some of the other things I do but I'd like to remain pg. If only I had god to tell me not to commit these heinous crimes because he'll punish me for eternity.

Yea, and you are such a pathetic loser because you are an atheist, you served in the military too. Arsehole! How dare you take away the Jesusland Merka "true Christians" fought for so that you could sit at the back of the bus.

Just stick to bbqing kittens and "know your place".

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Peppermint42
atheistSuperfan
Peppermint42's picture
Posts: 170
Joined: 2009-11-15
User is offlineOffline
Well the only answer I could

Well the only answer I could elicit from him was that "I could not know love if I did not know God" and then "If I did not know love there would be no life at all." 

 

I dunnow, I guess in his case, at least, he literally can't (or won't) imagine a world in which God does not exist.  Therefore the question has no meaning to him.

 

 


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Hi gallowsbait

 

In my experience theists maintain that god embodies all the love in the world. Without him there is no love. We've had guys like eXni maintaining that loving acts from unbelievers are actually god acting as a pupeteer and using

the sinner's body as a conduit to deliver his love.

This is obviously total bullshit but that's what many theists really believe. I know you are familiar with gospel teaching so we are understand each other when I say that christians truly believe humans are evil and are incapable

of any good at all without god.

Look at tr1nity's posts. He seems barely prepared to concede he deserves to exist and we both know this mental state is fundamentalist christianity's ground zero.

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
The theist view of morality

 

 

 

eXnihilO wrote:
Atheistextremist wrote:

You are in heaven and god instructs you, on his behalf, to descend to hell and oversee the torment and torture of a group of people.

Would you do it?

Yes or no.

 

eXni wrote

God is the overseer of Hell, I wouldn't be needed and as the Bible clearly affirms: vengeance belongs to God.

 

 

... Atheistextremist wrote:

I believe I know what morality is and dress it up as you will, morality is about not doing harm to others. I believe you understand morality perfectly well and I want you to tell me whether or not the actions of your god sit so comfortably with you that you would agree to be the instrument of god's perfect justice. I want to know if you would disobey your god (which is what I believe you would do) or if you would undertake to kill for him, given he is perfectly just.

What I want to know is if your morals are the same morals as your god's morals. And don't be uncomfortable with me, eXni. I know perfectly well why you won't answer.

 

eXni wrote:

I'm not trying to dodge your question, and I'm not one to make excuses for the behavior of God as many do. All that God does is morally perfect. I will commit to answering you question, with a better answer than simply yes or no...

But before I allow to morally judge the Agent by which we are both observing morality to begin with, I will need your explanation of morality. You don't believe that moral evil boils down to simply doing harm to others and I think I can prove that.

Would it be morally wrong for your employer to commit to pay you $12 per hour and then once you get your paycheck change it to $6?

Would it be morally wrong to race ahead of an old lady on a walker to take her seat on the bus?

Please clarify your meaning of moral good and evil.
 

   

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
It's not much of an answer

 

But there you have it. Theists wouldn't actually kill you gallows but they'd be happy to stand by while their god employed his perfect sense of justice to torment you for eternity.

I think I've harped on about the lobotomisation of irony that christians suffer during the conversion process but their ability to meld love and hatred is unprecedented. 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Gallowsbait wrote:Well the

Gallowsbait wrote:
Well the only answer I could elicit from him was that "I could not know love if I did not know God" and then "If I did not know love there would be no life at all."
The unthinking theist's love of meaningless words. Come to think about it, plenty of thinking theists also love meaningless words.


 

Gallowsbait wrote:
I dunnow, I guess in his case, at least, he literally can't (or won't) imagine a world in which God does not exist.  Therefore the question has no meaning to him.
Meaning isn't as important as sounding good. Emotively, "god is love" feels wonderful, binging the warm fuzzies in droves since everyone wants to be loved, and the idea of something that does nothing but love is a happy thought.

Though I'd bet he wouldn't even be able to define "love", other than in purely emotive and selfish terms.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Just ignore those last

 

Two posts of mine, people. I'm not sure how I managed to go off in that direction given the original post.

Satan must have pulled the wool over my eyes...

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Peppermint42
atheistSuperfan
Peppermint42's picture
Posts: 170
Joined: 2009-11-15
User is offlineOffline
I'll be honest with you, AE

I'll be honest with you, AE I'm really just glad people are responding to my posts in the first place.  Laughing out loud


Inferno
Posts: 39
Joined: 2009-11-22
User is offlineOffline
If god in the bible is love

If god in the bible is love then Hitler is 3x love.

 

Or maybe Hitler was a conduit for god's love as well....

A better question would be whether hate and murder comes from God as well. If it comes from Satan, does god love him too much to prevent him from causing so much harm? And what about acts of god? Are those meant to make us love him? If so, I have a community in Guyana that you'd just love.

 


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:I

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Ask them if God told them to kill their families if they would.

 

They'll answer "no" . I's as if interputation of religion is based on personality. And it's as if religion can't override that.....

 

 

 

Actually, when I was a church-attender most people would regularly be asked this and conditioned to say "yes".

 

They taught it to us from age..6? 7? upwards that if your god told you specifically to kill a family member, that you would have to in order to be a good christian.

 

The lesson of sacrificing your own son was ingrained. Sometimes sacrifices are necessary for faith is what the lesson always was.

 

It's okay because you don't belong to you anyways, you belong to God. So God is just calling you back if you are going to die, or he is calling back the person you are going to sacrifice for him.

 

The story of Abraham being told to sacrifice Isaac. The story of Job's suffering for faith. There were many many stories used to support and re-enforce this to us at sunday school.

 

 

 

 

I always found the thoughts a bit disturbing, and got in trouble for asking questions and not being "faithful" enough. Everyone else was fine with it, including the parents. We even sang songs about willingly being sacrifices to the congregation.

 

It was quite morbid in my opinion when I look back on it. Not that there is anything wrong with that...I'm just saying. If you were not raised in that atmosphere it is easy for you to discount, but being raised in that I would say many people would indeed do what they were trained to in church. If they thought their god was telling them to do it, and they have been prepared for that, then...well...I don't have the best hope for their family member. Sorry.

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Crikey Clockcat

ClockCat wrote:

We even sang songs about willingly being sacrifices to the congregation.

 

That's altogether weird. What church was this one?

Hey - maybe Children of the Corn was deeper than we all thought.

"He wants you too, Malachi..."

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Peppermint42
atheistSuperfan
Peppermint42's picture
Posts: 170
Joined: 2009-11-15
User is offlineOffline
Oh, man, that's crazy!!! 

Oh, man, that's crazy!!!  It's a wonder nobody offered to actually be sacrificed, though.  How exactly would these "sacrifices" be carried out, if one were to occur?  And to what end?  Would it make the rains come?


Rationale
Posts: 12
Joined: 2009-08-04
User is offlineOffline
Gallowsbait wrote:How

Gallowsbait wrote:

How exactly would these "sacrifices" be carried out, if one were to occur?  And to what end?  Would it make the rains come?

 

Well...we know god likes the smell of burnt offerings

 

 


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Gallowsbait wrote:Well the

Gallowsbait wrote:

Well the only answer I could elicit from him was that "I could not know love if I did not know God" and then "If I did not know love there would be no life at all." 

 

I dunnow, I guess in his case, at least, he literally can't (or won't) imagine a world in which God does not exist.  Therefore the question has no meaning to him.

 

 

 

I guess it depends on what he means by love.  Does he mean love, like, the feeling we get?  Or our actions that help others?  Or does he mean the concept of love could not exist without God?

The first two options I can disprove here...I feel love, and I act in a loving fashion to help others without belief in God.  The last option is not falsifiable though because to test you would need a reality without God, and since his concept of God is probably not falsifiable we cannot create an experiment he would accept.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:3

Gallowsbait wrote:

Oh, man, that's crazy!!!  It's a wonder nobody offered to actually be sacrificed, though.  How exactly would these "sacrifices" be carried out, if one were to occur?  And to what end?  Would it make the rains come?

 

Actually, we did. We had to sing offerings of being sacrifices. For the lord. As well as speak them later, saying we would die for the lord.

 

I just did what I was told, it was just theatre for me. Actually, a lot of things like this growing up were theatre for me.

 

/shrug

 

At least it wasn't like the crazy churches that handle snakes here. Also, the church didn't pray in tongues..where almost every church here does. So it was probably the most liberal church in the area.

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:o

Oh yeah, and all this crap about "armor of blahblahblah, sword of truth, helmet of salvation"..and how we were soldiers for the lord, waging a war against satan and all the forms satan takes.

 

You know, like atheists. And people that follow other religions. Is this not familiar to many of you?

 

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


MrPal
Superfan
MrPal's picture
Posts: 67
Joined: 2009-11-30
User is offlineOffline
Gallowsbait wrote:So this

Gallowsbait wrote:

So this thought occurred to me while I was posting in another thread.  I had asked a theist if he only loved his family because God made him love them, and that kind of set off a spark in my brain.  So my question to theists is this:

 

If God is Love, then without him would we all be indifferent to those who currently mean the most to us?  Or worse, would we be actively harming them?

 

Think about it.

I don't disagree with your sentiment in the least, and it's a good observation, but there is a kind of fallacy in the question that I noticed.  I'm also having trouble understanding what factual answers you desire to know.  (You want something out of your ponderings and what is it that you yearn to learn?)

 

Anyway, to a theist, God is the basis of all creation and so without God there would be a void of creation and we wouldn't exist.  I used to believe this myself actually.  What I'm getting at is that in the minds of most theists, "without God" there would be not only be no love but there would be nothing at all, so things like indifference and meaning wouldn't exist either.

 

I'd love it if you posed another question aimed towards the knowledge you desire because I don't see exactly what you want to acquire with your thoughts.  Am I making sense?  I don't mean to be rude at all either, btw.

I never thought there were corners in my mind until I was told to stand in one.

I have learned so much, thanks for keeping it real RRS.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I'm so glad I didn't grow up

I'm so glad I didn't grow up a christian. Look what it did to ClockCat!
Worst I had is a vague memory of some lady getting pissed in maybe grade 2 to 4 because I couldn't come up with a higher power. She wouldn't shut up until I said nature. I thought she was nuts then, and now even more so. I really don't like the idea of being surrounded by such people constantly. Bad things would happen.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


fishpaste. (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
I think the mods here

I think the mods here dislike it when I answer questions posed to theists as an atheist and the answer happens to be in favor of theism. For some reason they find non-partisanship weird, but I feel that anyone with a sufficient knowledge of god and logic could answer your question. The answer is no, obviously not. If god did not exist, there would be no good, no love, and also no people, seeing as he is eternal.

 

 


Rationale
Posts: 12
Joined: 2009-08-04
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:I'm so glad I

Vastet wrote:
I'm so glad I didn't grow up a christian. Look what it did to ClockCat! Worst I had is a vague memory of some lady getting pissed in maybe grade 2 to 4 because I couldn't come up with a higher power. She wouldn't shut up until I said nature. I thought she was nuts then, and now even more so. I really don't like the idea of being surrounded by such people constantly. Bad things would happen.

 

What does higher power even mean anyway? I mean if you take it literally, what does it designate?

 

Higher....power. It could mean so many things or nothing.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5883
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
fishpaste wrote:I think the

 

fishpaste wrote:

I think the mods here dislike it when I answer questions posed to theists as an atheist and the answer happens to be in favor of theism. For some reason they find non-partisanship weird, but I feel that anyone with a sufficient knowledge of god and logic could answer your question. The answer is no, obviously not. If god did not exist, there would be no good, no love, and also no people, seeing as he is eternal.

Since actual knowledge of a God and its nature and motives is not possible, even if such an entity actually existed, I presume you are referring to the Theology of some religion or other.

The typically infinite/omni attributes assumed for God make the application of logic to God of limited use.

You are really just reduced to trying to apply logic to the basic assumptions about God that the religion in question makes.

 

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Peppermint42
atheistSuperfan
Peppermint42's picture
Posts: 170
Joined: 2009-11-15
User is offlineOffline
MrPal wrote: I'd love it if

MrPal wrote:

 

I'd love it if you posed another question aimed towards the knowledge you desire because I don't see exactly what you want to acquire with your thoughts.  Am I making sense?  I don't mean to be rude at all either, btw.

 

Well, I suppose it's not really facts I'm after.  I guess I assumed that theists in general would at least be able to imagine the world without God, because for me even when I was a believer I could.  Granted, it was uncomfortable for me to imagine it, but it wasn't at all beyond my grasp. 

Anyway, I just wanted to make some people think a little bit.  A lot of the discussions in here are really involved and there's a lot of logic and it takes some good effort (for me, anyway) to read through it all.  I figured this would be one of those simpler threads for people to discuss on a less sophisticated level.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Rationale wrote:Vastet

Rationale wrote:

Vastet wrote:
I'm so glad I didn't grow up a christian. Look what it did to ClockCat! Worst I had is a vague memory of some lady getting pissed in maybe grade 2 to 4 because I couldn't come up with a higher power. She wouldn't shut up until I said nature. I thought she was nuts then, and now even more so. I really don't like the idea of being surrounded by such people constantly. Bad things would happen.

 

What does higher power even mean anyway? I mean if you take it literally, what does it designate?

 

Higher....power. It could mean so many things or nothing.

I think that's why she got mad. I didn't understand, and she wasn't able to explain it to me so I could understand. I was like 6 or so at the time, so she probably thought I was being stupid, even though it was herself who failed on that mark.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Gallowsbait wrote:MrPal

Gallowsbait wrote:

MrPal wrote:

 

I'd love it if you posed another question aimed towards the knowledge you desire because I don't see exactly what you want to acquire with your thoughts.  Am I making sense?  I don't mean to be rude at all either, btw.

 

Well, I suppose it's not really facts I'm after.  I guess I assumed that theists in general would at least be able to imagine the world without God, because for me even when I was a believer I could.  Granted, it was uncomfortable for me to imagine it, but it wasn't at all beyond my grasp. 

Anyway, I just wanted to make some people think a little bit.  A lot of the discussions in here are really involved and there's a lot of logic and it takes some good effort (for me, anyway) to read through it all.  I figured this would be one of those simpler threads for people to discuss on a less sophisticated level.

 

When you believed, what would you imagine a world without God would be like?

I was a believer for a long time, but I never thought about that particular question, so I am having trouble putting myself into the proper perspective.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:o

Vastet wrote:
I'm so glad I didn't grow up a christian. Look what it did to ClockCat!

 

Yes, look at what it did...wait

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


GENESIS
GENESIS's picture
Posts: 46
Joined: 2010-01-01
User is offlineOffline
Point of Reference for Morality

A world without God, renders moral anarchy and ethical chaos. There is no up down left. Can we be moral people without believing there is a God? Yes. But is there an objective moral framework? No. The fact that you even raise such an issue of love and hate subconsciously suggests the existence of God.

Intent is prior to Content.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
What bothers the mods

fishpaste. wrote:

I think the mods here dislike it when I answer questions posed to theists as an atheist and the answer happens to be in favor of theism. For some reason they find non-partisanship weird, but I feel that anyone with a sufficient knowledge of god and logic could answer your question. The answer is no, obviously not. If god did not exist, there would be no good, no love, and also no people, seeing as he is eternal. 

 

Is that you're not registered. Register and say whatever you want. 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
This position

GENESIS wrote:

A world without God, renders moral anarchy and ethical chaos. There is no up down left. Can we be moral people without believing there is a God? Yes. But is there an objective moral framework? No. The fact that you even raise such an issue of love and hate subconsciously suggests the existence of God.

 

Which is very much the same as Fishpaste's, is alien to me. Without god there would be moral and ethical chaos? But there is no god Genesis and behold, there is morality...

 

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


geirj
geirj's picture
Posts: 719
Joined: 2007-06-19
User is offlineOffline
Gallowsbait wrote:So this

Gallowsbait wrote:

So this thought occurred to me while I was posting in another thread.  I had asked a theist if he only loved his family because God made him love them, and that kind of set off a spark in my brain.  So my question to theists is this:

 

If God is Love, then without him would we all be indifferent to those who currently mean the most to us?  Or worse, would we be actively harming them?

 

Think about it.

And, as usual, most theists do not respond.

Nobody I know was brainwashed into being an atheist.

Why Believe?


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Gallowsbait wrote:So this

Gallowsbait wrote:

So this thought occurred to me while I was posting in another thread.  I had asked a theist if he only loved his family because God made him love them, and that kind of set off a spark in my brain.  So my question to theists is this:

If God is Love, then without him would we all be indifferent to those who currently mean the most to us?  Or worse, would we be actively harming them?

Think about it.

Think about it. If God is love, then it logically follows that love would not exists if God did not exist.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Think about

Paisley wrote:

Think about it. If God is love, then it logically follows that love would not exists if God did not exist.

 

But "Love" doesnt exist... therefore... ?

What Would Kharn Do?


Marquis
atheist
Marquis's picture
Posts: 776
Joined: 2009-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:If God is

Paisley wrote:

If God is love, then it logically follows that love would not exists if God did not exist.

 

You relate to logic much like N.A.M.B.L.A. relates to love.

"The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind." (Alphonse Donatien De Sade)

http://www.kinkspace.com


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Marquis wrote:Paisley

Marquis wrote:

Paisley wrote:

If God is love, then it logically follows that love would not exists if God did not exist.

 

You relate to logic much like N.A.M.B.L.A. relates to love.

 

National Association of Man-Boy Love Affairs... if my South Park is up to snuff!

What Would Kharn Do?


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
The Doomed Soul

The Doomed Soul wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Think about it. If God is love, then it logically follows that love would not exists if God did not exist.

 

But "Love" doesnt exist... therefore... ?

That probably explains why you identify yourself as an atheist.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
This contention is outrageous

Paisley wrote:

Gallowsbait wrote:

So this thought occurred to me while I was posting in another thread.  I had asked a theist if he only loved his family because God made him love them, and that kind of set off a spark in my brain.  So my question to theists is this:

If God is Love, then without him would we all be indifferent to those who currently mean the most to us?  Or worse, would we be actively harming them?

Think about it.

Think about it. If God is love, then it logically follows that love would not exists if God did not exist.

 

God is human love? God is the glue that binds people together? I think not. Let's all try an experiment. Let's go home and get squelchy with our partners all night long and again in the morning. Is there any one out there prepared to deny that physical love has a very odd way of creating a closer mental bond, a stronger feeling of love, with another human being??

God is oxytocin, more likely.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Unrepentant_Elitist
Science Freak
Unrepentant_Elitist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2009-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Hello again, GB (if you

Hello again, GB (if you don't mind the abbreviation);

Your question hints at the fundamental essence of human morality: what is it that guides our instinct, our urge, our intent, etc.? Is it a divine influence that draws us towards the greater good or is it merely the learned years of evolutionary beneficence that impel us to a socially cognitive state that recognizes the needs of others as being inextricably wound within our own primordial desires? I would submit that you have asked a question that hints at a metaphysical conundrum for which neither theists nor atheists have a sufficiently rigorous answer. I suppose my response would run along the lines of a thought experiment: with whom would you rather be marooned:

1.) A theist whose only concern is for the afterlife, thereby negating his or her interest in fully engaging in society, thus leading to a life lived (ironically, considering the numerous adages in his or her holy book) solely in the interest of self-righteous preservation (keep in mind that I am referring strictly to the maintenance of the christian self in accordance with the innumerable laws of the bible in order to guarantee one's self a place in heaven). 

...or...

2.) An atheist who recognizes that the improbable reality of our existence is a cause for celebration; that the cooperative effort of marginally selfless people in pursuit of a common utopia is not a hypothetical construct but a a necessary goal for a species interested in long-term survival. 

Not to draw unnecessary slings and arrows (pardon the Shakespeare), is it not possible that theists reign supreme as the prime abrogators of human achievement in the hopes that "god" will address all concerns in re morality? I believe that to take such a position, to assign the primacy of moral judgment as concerns humanity, is impossible to assign to a "god" who so obviously cares little for his creation.  


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Think about it. If God is love, then it logically follows that love would not exist if God did not exist.

 

God is human love? God is the glue that binds people together? I think not. Let's all try an experiment. Let's go home and get squelchy with our partners all night long and again in the morning. Is there any one out there prepared to deny that physical love has a very odd way of creating a closer mental bond, a stronger feeling of love, with another human being??

God is oxytocin, more likely.

God is divine love which human beings experience.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 699
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:God is divine

Paisley wrote:

God is divine love which human beings experience.

 

What if you're a little off and god is divine bowel movements?   I've had some near life-changing shits.   (damn you, habaneros...i WILL respect you)


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Unrepentant_Elitist

Unrepentant_Elitist wrote:

Hello again, GB (if you don't mind the abbreviation);

Your question hints at the fundamental essence of human morality: what is it that guides our instinct, our urge, our intent, etc.? Is it a divine influence that draws us towards the greater good or is it merely the learned years of evolutionary beneficence that impel us to a socially cognitive state that recognizes the needs of others as being inextricably wound within our own primordial desires? I would submit that you have asked a question that hints at a metaphysical conundrum for which neither theists nor atheists have a sufficiently rigorous answer. I suppose my response would run along the lines of a thought experiment: with whom would you rather be marooned:

1.) A theist whose only concern is for the afterlife, thereby negating his or her interest in fully engaging in society, thus leading to a life lived (ironically, considering the numerous adages in his or her holy book) solely in the interest of self-righteous preservation (keep in mind that I am referring strictly to the maintenance of the christian self in accordance with the innumerable laws of the bible in order to guarantee one's self a place in heaven). 

...or...

2.) An atheist who recognizes that the improbable reality of our existence is a cause for celebration; that the cooperative effort of marginally selfless people in pursuit of a common utopia is not a hypothetical construct but a a necessary goal for a species interested in long-term survival. 

Not to draw unnecessary slings and arrows (pardon the Shakespeare), is it not possible that theists reign supreme as the prime abrogators of human achievement in the hopes that "god" will address all concerns in re morality? I believe that to take such a position, to assign the primacy of moral judgment as concerns humanity, is impossible to assign to a "god" who so obviously cares little for his creation.  

If a theist believes that a "divine influence draws us towards the greater good" (to use your words), then why would you believe that he or she is not guided to build a better world?

 

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Unrepentant_Elitist
Science Freak
Unrepentant_Elitist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2009-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Paisley

Paisley wrote:

Unrepentant_Elitist wrote:

Hello again, GB (if you don't mind the abbreviation);

Your question hints at the fundamental essence of human morality: what is it that guides our instinct, our urge, our intent, etc.? Is it a divine influence that draws us towards the greater good or is it merely the learned years of evolutionary beneficence that impel us to a socially cognitive state that recognizes the needs of others as being inextricably wound within our own primordial desires? I would submit that you have asked a question that hints at a metaphysical conundrum for which neither theists nor atheists have a sufficiently rigorous answer. I suppose my response would run along the lines of a thought experiment: with whom would you rather be marooned:

1.) A theist whose only concern is for the afterlife, thereby negating his or her interest in fully engaging in society, thus leading to a life lived (ironically, considering the numerous adages in his or her holy book) solely in the interest of self-righteous preservation (keep in mind that I am referring strictly to the maintenance of the christian self in accordance with the innumerable laws of the bible in order to guarantee one's self a place in heaven). 

...or...

2.) An atheist who recognizes that the improbable reality of our existence is a cause for celebration; that the cooperative effort of marginally selfless people in pursuit of a common utopia is not a hypothetical construct but a a necessary goal for a species interested in long-term survival. 

Not to draw unnecessary slings and arrows (pardon the Shakespeare), is it not possible that theists reign supreme as the prime abrogators of human achievement in the hopes that "god" will address all concerns in re morality? I believe that to take such a position, to assign the primacy of moral judgment as concerns humanity, is impossible to assign to a "god" who so obviously cares little for his creation.  

If a theist believes that a "divine influence draws us towards the greater good" (to use your words), then why would you believe that he or she is not guided to build a better world?

 

Hi Paisley,

I don't believe that I intimated that a theist could not be "guided to build a better world." I would argue that the "divine imperative" may be likewise interpreted as a biological exigency among non-believers. This leads us to the inevitable sticking-point for me in particular: why is god necessary?

Regards,

UE


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Unrepentant_Elitist wrote:I

Unrepentant_Elitist wrote:

I don't believe that I intimated that a theist could not be "guided to build a better world." I would argue that the "divine imperative" may be likewise interpreted as a biological exigency among non-believers. This leads us to the inevitable sticking-point for me in particular: why is god necessary?

I believe you did intimate that when you stated "a theist whose only concern is for the afterlife, thereby negating his or her interest in fully engaging in society." And now you are changing the terms of your argument from "whom would you rather be marooned" to "why is God necessary." The fact is that you have already made an argument that a theistic interpretation of the "categorical imperative" is as valid as the atheistic one of biological exigency.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Unrepentant_Elitist
Science Freak
Unrepentant_Elitist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2009-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Paisley

Paisley wrote:

Unrepentant_Elitist wrote:

I don't believe that I intimated that a theist could not be "guided to build a better world." I would argue that the "divine imperative" may be likewise interpreted as a biological exigency among non-believers. This leads us to the inevitable sticking-point for me in particular: why is god necessary?

I believe you did intimate that when you stated "a theist whose only concern is for the afterlife, thereby negating his or her interest in fully engaging in society." And now you are changing the terms of your argument from "whom would you rather be marooned" to "why is God necessary." The fact is that you have already made an argument that a theistic interpretation of the "categorical imperative" is as valid as the atheistic one of biological exigency.

Perhaps I did not do a sufficient job in explaining my contention: to clarify, while a theist is not constrained solely by the precepts of immediate existence (given the promise of "after" life), an atheist is necessarily relegated to the present condition. As such, even the most casual view of societal intricacy requires the admission of immediacy on the part of the atheist; the theist has no such restriction. Likewise, given the preponderance of biological arguments for the preservation of the species, it is no wonder that atheist and theists alike are in favor of that which perpetuates the human race? To wit, that is the essence of my shift into argument concerning the necessity of god: has not another layer of complexity thus been added to an already convoluted landscape? 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3442
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
GENESIS wrote:Can we be

GENESIS wrote:

Can we be moral people without believing there is a God? Yes. But is there an objective moral framework? No.

there is no such thing as objective morality period.  there are plenty of good explanations, both at the evolutionary biological and the historical economical level, as to why many humans have a consensus on certain morals, i.e., don't kill, don't steal, etc., that do not involve objectivity, much less god, in any way. 

there are many people on this site more qualified to speak to that than i am.  i'm pretty sure hamby is one of them.

GENESIS wrote:

The fact that you even raise such an issue of love and hate subconsciously suggests the existence of God.

no, it suggests humanity's tendency to polarize certain phenomena into opposing concepts--often with one "good" (i.e., generally pleasant) and one "bad" (i.e., generally unpleasant)--in order to make sense of the world.  i'd wager that very few of us here believe in "love" and "hate" in any sort of "objective" or "universal" or platonically "formal" sense.

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Unrepentant_Elitist

Unrepentant_Elitist wrote:

Paisley wrote:

I believe you did intimate that when you stated "a theist whose only concern is for the afterlife, thereby negating his or her interest in fully engaging in society." And now you are changing the terms of your argument from "whom would you rather be marooned" to "why is God necessary." The fact is that you have already made an argument that a theistic interpretation of the "categorical imperative" is as valid as the atheistic one of biological exigency.

Perhaps I did not do a sufficient job in explaining my contention: to clarify, while a theist is not constrained solely by the precepts of immediate existence (given the promise of "after" life), an atheist is necessarily relegated to the present condition. As such, even the most casual view of societal intricacy requires the admission of immediacy on the part of the atheist; the theist has no such restriction. Likewise, given the preponderance of biological arguments for the preservation of the species, it is no wonder that atheist and theists alike are in favor of that which perpetuates the human race? To wit, that is the essence of my shift into argument concerning the necessity of god: has not another layer of complexity thus been added to an already convoluted landscape? 

Why do you believe that most atheists will live unselfishly and place their hope in some kind of utopian dream (a dream that quite honestly smacks of religious messianism)?

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Peppermint42
atheistSuperfan
Peppermint42's picture
Posts: 170
Joined: 2009-11-15
User is offlineOffline
Oh hey!  Someone

Oh hey!  Someone resurrected my thread!  :D  

 

Unrepentant, you are so eloquent.  Thank you for your posts! 


Dragoon
Dragoon's picture
Posts: 170
Joined: 2009-05-27
User is offlineOffline
I've always enjoyed a good

I've always enjoyed a good resurrection Smiling

 

I'm a follower of Jesus Christ, and I believe in the Bible as the revealed word of God to mankind. On a biblical Christian basis, I'd say you're hitting the mark pretty well.

I've always considered the image of hell as 'eternal fire' as perhaps a bit overly literal. On of the basis of texts like t 2Thessalonians 1:9 (They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power...) it is possible that 'hell' is either final destruction (which is not what the death of our mortal bodies is- from a Chistian perspective of course) or simply eternal separation from God. Even the traditional 'fiery pit' definition of hell would include this separation from God though.

If God IS love, then that would mean eternal separation from ALL love.

 

Thought; in many respects isn't this what Buddhism has always offered as a 'goal'; the cessation of caring. An end to the duality of good/bad, love/hate... and simply 'indifference'?

 

This ends your fundy moment. We now return you to your regularly scheduled Atheism...


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
GENESIS wrote:A world

GENESIS wrote:

A world without God, renders moral anarchy and ethical chaos. There is no up down left. Can we be moral people without believing there is a God? Yes. But is there an objective moral framework? No. The fact that you even raise such an issue of love and hate subconsciously suggests the existence of God.

 

Which god?


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3442
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Dragoon wrote:Thought; in

Dragoon wrote:

Thought; in many respects isn't this what Buddhism has always offered as a 'goal'; the cessation of caring. An end to the duality of good/bad, love/hate... and simply 'indifference'?

 

no.  buddhism is about ending dukkha, which is usually translated as "suffering."  the buddha taught that dukkha is caused by tanha, which is variously translated as "thirst" (probably the most literal), "clinging," or "craving."  i like "clinging" the best as it brings the best approximation to the mind of the native english-speaker.  tanha is the desire to cling to impermanent things (maya).  it is not just "caring" about things in general.  a buddhist, even an arhat, can experience any range of emotions, he just cannot "cling" to these emotions as ends in themselves.  it is certainly possible for him to care about the world.  after all, the highest ideal in the mahayana is the bodhisattva, who delays his own enlightenment in order to help the rest of the world reach enlightenment.  this certainly is not "indifference," unless it is indifference toward illusory things.  like a bloodthirsty desert god, for example.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen