Atheists: A hypothetical question

Originally posted by Hydroman
Historically, snakes and donkeys don't talk.

Obviously. However, Satan spoke through a Serpent, and the Holy Spirit spoke through a Donkey. Neither of these animals can actually talk.

Mathematically, length x hair does not equal physical strength.

What are you referring to? Verse?

A donkey's jawbone would not last long enough to kill 1000 soldiers

Have you seen a Donkey's Jawbone? Just look at this thing. That thing's about as big as your forearm. Hell, give me a rock and I'll introduce you to a guy who can kill a man in a hundred ways with it. I'm sure he can do the same with the Donkey Jawbone.

Geographically, where is the garden of Eden?

Where WAS* the Garden of Eden? Just south of Baghdad, Iraq. Between Najaf and Kufa. It tells you where it is in the Bible.. it gives you the name of the four rivers that flow from it.

Historically and Geographically, there wasn't a world wide flood.

Historically and Geographically, there WAS a world wide flood.

Historically, Mathematically, and Geographically, the earth isn't less than 10,000 years old.

I agree. It's 13,000 years old

Originally posted by Daemonicon
reply to post by Hydroman

 

Historically, and medically, men are not made from dirt. Women are not made from ribs. The Earth is not flat, nor is it the center of the universe.

I'm assuming you meant to reply to me, and not Hydroman?

Oxygen, being the most abundant element on the earth’s crust or on the ground, makes up 65 percent of the human body, and carbon, also abundant on the top soil of the ground, is 18 percent, and hydrogen is 10 percent. The 59 elements found in the human body are also all found in dirt.

As far as ribs, God could have taken any part of a man and created a woman from them; but not only does the rib contain genetic information, but also most likely for a more.. intimate reason.

Third, as far as the "flat" Earth goes, the Bible never claims such a thing. Ever.

..nor does it state that the Earth is the center of the universe. The Catholic Church believed (believes) this, and punished Galileo for it.

Originally posted by DetectiveT
Take for instance those scientists. Let's jump ahead several generations. During the course of their upbringing all the girls are taught that it is considered a great honor to be raped and especially if it is done by someone of high standing and add to that any girl who is raped and bears a child will receive special honors among the tribe. The boys are also taught the same. So is rape still immoral if both parties accept it? After all the boys think they are doing a good thing and the girls see it the same way now. To an outsider the answer is probably still no but that is due to our own pre-established judgments.

If the girls are letting themselves get raped, and consider it an honor to be a part of it, and accept it, can it still even be called rape? What you're describing is consentual.

Originally posted by DetectiveT
Relying solely on a deity or authority for morals, to me, is the most dangerous, malleable and useless form. Let us say that whatever deity it is, in this case, I will use the Bible and in the Bible it is written that rape is o.k. What then? What happens if a specific deity came down and spoke to all its' believers and changed the rules and said now it is ok to rape. There are no lies, no trickery involved, it is the straight up truth from that deity. Is rape now moral?

I've always felt that a major distinction must be made between "immoral" and "sinful". I'd have to say that violating the will of a deity is a sin, whereas morality is our own independent judgement, generally arising out of empathy and other traits. Something that's sinful may not be immoral(Eating shellfish, homosexuality, working on sundays, wearing clothes of mixed fibers, women talking in public or allowing their faces to be shown, divorce, ect.) Also, something immoral may not be sinful(Slavery, cruel executions for petty crimes, online piracy, censorship, brainwashing/indoctrination, forced marriages, ect.)

With this distinction made. Rape would be immoral regardless of whether or not a deity allows it, it's just a matter of if it's 'sinful' or not.

A real life example would be slavery. The biblical god gave laws regarding how to beat your slaves, how to breed them, when they need to be released/when it was ok to keep them captive for the rest of their lives, and when it was permissible to kill them. Some people find ways to interpret those as rules for essentially contracted labor(which I find ridiculous), but even if they were right, it's clear Yahweh never once stopped and clarified that slavery was wrong. So, it can't be considered a sin. Regardless of if it's a sin, it's still horribly immoral.

reply to post by Hydroman


Why label things? What is your conception of God? I believe everybody on earth worships the same God whether they realize it or not, there is One Being that is all yet is nothing and transcends everything.

reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx


It would still be rape because the male would still force themselves upon the women. It may not be something they necessarily like or enjoy but see it as an honor. Just like ritual sacrifice where the participant may not "want" to die but it is a great honor so they go along with it. To an outsider it would still look like rape and murder.




I can see how you separate sinfulness and morality and that makes sense. However, most followers of religious texts use that as their compass to morality and do not differentiate between the two like you did. Let's take it another step though. What if it demands this action? You must kill, rape etc. How would one then choose? Do they follow the law of their god or of their own morality? You also prove the point that religion isn't needed for moral guidance which is the point of the thread.

I still say that there is generally no universal moral and immoral only our mutual agreements as people upon acceptable behavior. This makes the acts neither right or wrong only our perceptions of those acts.

Several things here:

1. While there may exist many culture differences in the world, the simplest way to view this" right" or" wrong" thing is to say, anything that is forced upon a person against their will is wrong (ie rape, torture, death, etc). Other things are up to the society (circumcision, ok to eat cats?, etc. ). Certain truths are" self evident". I think we know instinctually it is wrong to harm another.

2. Many different animals have displayed something similar to what you describe as morals, particularly mammals. Some mate for life, care for their young even if it means putting themselves at risk, and grieving for each other in death. Al without jesus.

3. Even if there are unanswered questions about human nature, its no reason to immediately jump to" well it must be god". Its the equivilant of that guy on ancient aliens with the messed up hair saying" it must be aliens" to every unanswered question.

reply to post by Lionhearte


Not to get too bogged down in detail here...but
There is no mountain where you can stand and see all the kingdoms of the world circa 30ad. Nope...the world is not flat, therefore this is false.


You said something interesting. Science explains the how, and religion (god, whatever term you used) explains the why.

This I respect about personal faith. Many/most are seeking out a sort of greater reason of existance beyond breeding to make more. They know how the machine works, and now just understanding why the machine is here to begin with is a respectable and noble journey each individual (should) take.

The issue is -religion- destroys both the personal journey aspect, making it impersonal..and more full of fail, they pretend to answer the how..which is laughable in all instances so far.

When you defend a religion, you defend ignorance and removal of any personal connection, enforcing instead a sort of corporate logo deity that must be stamped on everyone head, regardless of any and all information showing its flaws.

As far as how it pertains to this thread...

If religion was a perfect guidance of morality and society, then we wouldn't have had crusades, honor killings, endless wars for thousands of years, witch burnings, etc...

Religion is flawed. Principles and personal spirituality is all thats needed..and the spirituality part is actually just a bonus..not necessary for principles...but it will make you feel life has more meaning than beer and pizza.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

Not to get too bogged down in detail here...but
There is no mountain where you can stand and see all the kingdoms of the world circa 30ad. Nope...the world is not flat, therefore this is false.

The actual scripture, at least the one from Luke 4:5 states - And he led Him up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.

Even if there were a mountain large enough (impossible), you couldn't see that far, much less see it all at once like that. More than likely this was shown in a vision.

As far as the "world is flat", again- nowhere in the Bible does it state this.

You said something interesting. Science explains the how, and religion (god, whatever term you used) explains the why.

This I respect about personal faith. Many/most are seeking out a sort of greater reason of existance beyond breeding to make more. They know how the machine works, and now just understanding why the machine is here to begin with is a respectable and noble journey each individual (should) take.

Right. Man can understand everything there is to know about the universe, but the only possible way to get an answer for the "why" is if there is a creator. If the universe was happenstance, there is no why.

The issue is -religion- destroys both the personal journey aspect, making it impersonal..and more full of fail, they pretend to answer the how..which is laughable in all instances so far.

When you defend a religion, you defend ignorance and removal of any personal connection, enforcing instead a sort of corporate logo deity that must be stamped on everyone head, regardless of any and all information showing its flaws.

I agree. Religion is a tool, used by those who desire power to kill and destroy, not necessarily with flesh and blood, but with powers and principalities (as the Bible says - Ephesians 6:12)

As far as how it pertains to this thread...

If religion was a perfect guidance of morality and society, then we wouldn't have had crusades, honor killings, endless wars for thousands of years, witch burnings, etc...

Religion is flawed. Principles and personal spirituality is all thats needed..and the spirituality part is actually just a bonus..not necessary for principles...but it will make you feel life has more meaning than beer and pizza.

I agree 100%

Originally posted by Iason321
Logic goes out the window when you say God doesn't exist.

Every question atheists ask and secular scientist marvel over can be answered with God, yet seeing they do not see and hearing they do not hear.

Good questions though.

I would like to know what logic that is? I was very religious, and I was raised in a house of religion. However at the age of 5 years old I remember being afraid of this cult called religion. I watched an old woman cry in the middle of church and kept kissing the feet of a statue. I thought to myself-they really have these people brainwashed don't they? I even thought about how things are embedded in our DNA. I didn't need any church to tell me that taking something that didn't belong to me was wrong. I can see that in the animal kingdom (the one in which you and I live) there are many similarities such as only fighting when girls are involved, or protecting yourself, or you're just down right hungry. But this is what you don't see because people do it for you. You are an animal-an intellectual-part of the universe. Whether or not you would like to believe it there is chaos all around us because none of us agree, and so we do not work together.

Are you saying that if the church didn't tell you not to steal you would? If you commit to your girlfriend and cheat on her would you feel bad? You feel bad because you made a verbal commitment. Religion is man made, and there are thousands of different religions, but you don't believe their religion. Why? Because your religion is the only one that's right. Right?

I am pretty sure that scientists search for information, and religion closes their eyes and "hopes". I wonder how much of NASA's funds go into hoping they will make better products and innovations for us all?

Please sir do tell me some "Logic" (in magical quotes) about religion. Not that I am pestering you, just pretty sure their are more science believing individuals on this site waiting to say the same.

Morality comes from the same place that religion comes from, an awe and respect for nature, after a relationship with nature and experience with cause and effect. It's a learning curve of taking personal responsibility.

Whoever answered that preacher's question with a statement about democracy creating morality was, indeed, unprepared. And the question doesn't address morality it addresses group psychosis, creating a problem that needs to be handled by law, not morality but ethics.

Why do they need to rape, seduction didn't work? Surely, these scientist understand that they don't have to replenish the deserted island and that they need cooperation to survive. So why rape? Urges?

Morality can't be taught, ethics are, laws are enforced. Morality is a personal journey, that is always being updated.

There's an interesting quality in the debate of whether or not there is a God. I won't take the time to involve the evidence for or against, nor will I attempt to persuade anyone (with ample evidence) to believe in the God of The Bible, I'd just like to point out an interesting thought. The argument is a case of "is, or is not". An example to illustrate: If I were to tell you that there were absolutely NO gold in all of China, what would I have to do to know for sure? I'd have to scour every square inch of the country, every nook & cranny, dig billions of holes, etc. to make sure that there was NO gold. That's the only way I could be sure. But if I told you there WAS gold in China, what would I have to do to know for sure? Well I'd only have to look until I found a single piece of gold. This is also true for whether there is or isn't a god. To know for sure that there isn't, I'd have to search the entire universe, seen and unseen, this dimension and every other dimension... but to know for sure that there IS a god, I'd only have to look until I'd found him. Just a thought for all the "avid unbelievers" out there.

There really is no simple answer to this, or any question regarding morality for that matter.... for one because it's more complicated than God. There are many humans out there who you would take for not having a soul at all. Psychopaths in particular defy the idea that morals are inherent in everyone; although they can comprehend morals in order to mesh into society, the base of morality holds no intrinsic value in their minds.

Just take a look at our history & all the acts justified by "morals" derived from "God's will". In the middle ages, in the Tudors period for example, people were tortured and executed mercilessly for committing heresy. The Catholic church did so for the longest, leaving a trail of dead Protestants, Lutherans, and other denominational Christians throughout the time. Literally, because you may have wanted to read the Bible in your own home; you could be burned at the stake.

Since those times Christianity (the general mindset) has matured enough to get past the need for violence and oppression (although bigotry & intolerance still remain).

As for the question about the majority deciding what morals fit best, that's clearly not always the case. One example being the drug prohibition, and the fact that millions of lives have been directly ruined by the judicial system; not the drugs themselves. On top of that, these laws breed ruthless gangs that increasingly pose a threat to the stability of society. Mexico is truly becoming a monstrous result that's now spilling over into the US and even Canada.

Truth is, the collective often makes decisions that are bad moral policy, and when you get the government involved they'd be more than happy to oblige increasing their power scope. Over time the will of the people becomes less apparent & a handful like to take the reins; using propaganda to influence the moral compass of the masses.

Lastly, the basis for morals between humanity should be the golden rule: do unto others..... this means no tolerance for rape, murder, torture, assault, other forms of violence, robbery, etc. Putting people in prison for smoking or growing a plant is completely asinine & the fact we still have these drug laws is testament to the majority's lacking of logic or sound moral fiber.

reply to post by Hydroman


Majority rule is exactly what democracy is. If you want real justice a Republic is the only form of government that can really work. That is why I admire the american constitution.

Once you realize how the human mind actually works you will understand that logic and reason are the result of human mutations which used these abilitys to survive long enough for the mutation to continue to be valued and esculate.
You may call it your pre frontal lobes. Sick a sharp stainless rod into these( which the medical profession actually did at one point) and you will return to your animalistic reactive state, which is what most male dominated organized religions and governments want you to stay in.

Humans individually have changed little. Collectively we have evolved to become our own createst threat.

Another illustration using so many peoples' favorite topic (aliens/ufo's)... There are many people who believe in aliens without having ever seen or met one. They say things like "the universe is SOOO big, there HAS to be intelligent life out there." I will say, there is evidence (ufo pics, vids, sightings) that suggest intelligent life, but there are many alternate explanations. However, even with ample evidence, millions of first hand experiences, and the universe still being SOOO big... people don't WANT to believe in God. Maybe it's because choosing to believe in God means accountability for our lives in a way we don't want to accept... and believing in aliens doesn't. Just another thought.

That's not a gap, they just didn't know how to explain these situations back then, but they were never really wrong to begin with. Note: not talking about Egyptians. Obviously they were wrong. However, if you could show me a section in the Bible that is wrong (historically, geographically, mathematically, etc), please do.

Sun stop

I guess what Joshua meant so say was: Oh Lord Stop the earth and moon.

Does the bible mention dinosaurs; where Cain got his wife from; besides talking, a snake walking?
But we are talking about God, and God can do anything. God is omnipotent.
Speaking of omnipotent, can God make a rock that he can't lift?

But all this is off topic.

reply to post by closerseemsfurther


to Closerseemsfurther,
I ask of God one thing, I would like to know you for the truth is no one can know what is believed for in truly knowing it, it could no longer be belief.

I respect your beliefs, please respect my knowledge.

Originally posted by Lionhearte

Historically, Mathematically, and Geographically, the earth isn't less than 10,000 years old.

I agree. It's 13,000 years old

LMAO.
The amount of face palms needed for this line would cause severe brain damage.

www.sciencedaily.com...

I have a better question:

All or most of our US Presidents have professed to be Christians of some denomination or other.

All of our US Presidents, as far as I know, have ordered men to their deaths and/or ordered people to be killed for whatever reason.

How does this jive with 'THOU SHALT NOT KILL'?

Are all our deceased Presidents now in Hell? Or does the Christian god give special dispensation for supposedly special circumstances?

Corollary to First Question: Why is it seen to be impossible for an atheist to be President? I guess because they're not seen as being quite so moral as the other bunch of lying, sinning killers?

reply to post by Hydroman


This would be easier if you follow the rule "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Then again 3 or 4 of those 14 guys probably would like to get raped... Or better yet switch it to 7 guys 8 girls.