Get Ready To Meet Thy Maker

ketsuko
My husband and I often wonder why atheists don't realize that no one seems more obsessed with God and the Bible than they sometimes tend to be.

Probably for the same reason that christians go on and on about satan and his lies.

ketsuko
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

Who said anything about labeling people as good or evil? Although I'm sure Charles Manson and Jeffrey Dahmer had some redeeming qualities if we try to look, the monstrous things they did far outweigh the good. Were you in the crowd who felt that Tookie Williams should have been preserved for writing a children's book?

Well sure some people can lean more heavily to one side or the other, but like I said they still aren't completely evil or completely good. The reason for this is because of free will. Also despite what the bible says or suggests, angels definitely have free will. How else were some of them able to stage a revolt against God? If angels were all just good beings, then they would be slaves to their goodness and unable to do something evil. By this same reasoning, demons couldn't ever be truly evil because they'd be slaves to their affiliation as well. Demons at one point were angels who fell from grace, so at one point they were considered good.

Regardless, I am talking about actions.

You are talking about moral relativism. Either something is or is not wrong. It doesn't matter if someone else doesn't have a problem with it. Now that doesn't mean you have to go out of your way to stop it or even that you should or can, but that doesn't mean you have to approve of or accept it either.

Adultery is a good example. It's just plain wrong and I've never seen anything good come of it. I don't care when the parties involved don't seem to have a problem with it. It's still wrong, and I won't hesitate to say so. You likely wouldn't go there being far more libertarian than I am.

There are more parties involved in adultery than the two people doing the act. There is the spouse (or spouses if both people are married) who is ignorant of the act as well. This person is being lied to by the adulterer and with the adultery is breaking their trust. One can argue that in this case that this is still a violation of the Golden Rule. The only way that it would be acceptable is if the spouse knew about the act and said it was ok with them, but then it wouldn't be adultery, it would be swinging.

Although, I do agree with you that the majority of the evil in the world is human evil. We choose to hurt each other. That we can do this is part of having the knowledge of good and evil. We know we can do it and we choose to. We are a pathetic species at times. For every truly noble human who chooses to do good things, ten more would rather be selfish or outright evil.

But then the last two are easy and often feel good.

A common flaw of Christianity is that selfishness is supposedly evil. There is nothing wrong with being selfish. Without being selfish, you'd own no property, have no lasting relationships, no happiness, no comfort. You would just be a wonderer, traveling from place to place looking for people to sacrifice your time for and they would all have to be strangers since showing preference towards one person over another due to familiar relations is selfishness. Even Jesus showed selfishness for his life when he begged God not to have him crucified.

So with that being said, how would you define when someone needs to stop being selfish and start helping others? There is always someone in need of help in the world. You could spend all day helping one or two people, only to relax at the end of the day and enjoy some time to yourself, only to have something far more disastrous happen while you are doing this that you could have prevented if you hadn't decided to relax just then.

Many Christian sins are due to selfishness too. Nudity, drugs, gambling, sex, contraception, alcohol, competition, earning a paycheck (greed) are all just different forms of selfishness that Christians frown on as sins, but all of them have been used by people since WAY before Christianity ever came on the scene. So if you decouple the selfishness part of sinning, all you are left with is what amounts to the Golden Rule.

AfterInfinity
Life is 10% what happens to me and 90% how I react to it. That's a lot of control on my part. And that's close enough to say I am my own master. End of story.

I am not sure reaction alone makes an objective difference without action, and even then, what is affected will be limited.

We dont necessarily disagree.

I would just limit it to perspective alone, and even then, without omniscience, we struggle to figure out every component that goes into our individual worldview. And these worldviews are dependent on tools (such as the CNS) that are built on a foundation that we cant control. There are societal memes that get passed down both genetically and as "hidden in plain sight" constants that shape our perspective from the moment we are born.

Most of us know that this planet will not be here forever. The actual end is up for debate until it happens. In a biblical sense, however, it is pretty easy to understand how one could see this particular period in time could be what was written about. It also could be ascribed to other periods in the past (and has been, though obviously incorrectly).

The difference is that currently, things are so tied in globally that even local events can be detrimental to the vast majority of cultures on this planet. An economic crash in the US, say, would be detrimental to the rest of the world in ways we cant really comprehend (because it hasnt happened before with these specific variables). We can model it, but we just cant know the full effects unless it happens. When that is coupled with a conflict hungry society, and inevitable technological and scientific advances.. it raises the possibility that we could be on the brink. Biblical prophecies aside, we could very well be at an important junction in space and time that could lead to our demise.

If it happens in a way that is metaphorically relevant to the bible, then they either might have been on to something, someone is using the bible as an action plan, or our individual perspective has matrixed something into reality that doesnt technically exist in the way we see it (which can apply to anything we perceive). Conversely, if its (the "End of Us") happening in a way that isnt metaphorically relevant to the bible, that doesnt mean our destruction isnt right around the cosmic corner all the same.

ketsuko

Stormdancer777
reply to post by benrl

 

Because lets be honest, if your an atheist than this should fall under such speculative threads as Ghost, Aliens, Big Foot, or just about any speculative topic on ATS. But its Christianity that gets the wild hair up their asses...

I was thinking that myself earlier, for some reason they flock to the Christian topics, that in my opinion shows their true colors.

I really don't mind the debating, but I do dislike the snarky comments, I would never dream of insulting a Buddhist or Hindu or even the atheist.

edit on 013131p://bTuesday2013 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

My husband and I often wonder why atheists don't realize that no one seems more obsessed with God and the Bible than they sometimes tend to be.

To be honest, I don't talk religion at all outside of ATS. If they don't bring it up to me, I won't bring it up to them. Here on ATS is another story, I like to debate and these conversations are always ripe for debate not to mention it is why I'm on the site to begin with.

reply to post by Krazysh0t


Ah, I wasn't talking about you. I was talking about the militant types who like to cherry pick Bible verses in an effort to be as offensive and possible and call themselves clever when they do it.

I haven't seen too many of them here.

There are more parties involved in adultery than the two people doing the act. There is the spouse (or spouses if both people are married) who is ignorant of the act as well. This person is being lied to by the adulterer and with the adultery is breaking their trust. One can argue that in this case that this is still a violation of the Golden Rule. The only way that it would be acceptable is if the spouse knew about the act and said it was ok with them, but then it wouldn't be adultery, it would be swinging.

You call it swinging. I still call it adultery, and I have never seen anything good come of it.

A common flaw of Christianity is that selfishness is supposedly evil.

Selfishness is a temptation, not an evil. You should love others as you love yourself, but if you are too selfish, you love only yourself to the exclusion of all others, and when that happens, you begin to hurt them. So you have always be on guard to temper your selfish whims. You have to keep yourself in balance.

Not to mention you shouldn't love yourself more than you love God or your family or any of the other important people in your life.

ketsuko

Stormdancer777
reply to post by benrl

 

Because lets be honest, if your an atheist than this should fall under such speculative threads as Ghost, Aliens, Big Foot, or just about any speculative topic on ATS. But its Christianity that gets the wild hair up their asses...

I was thinking that myself earlier, for some reason they flock to the Christian topics, that in my opinion shows their true colors.

I really don't mind the debating, but I do dislike the snarky comments, I would never dream of insulting a Buddhist or Hindu or even the atheist.

edit on 013131p://bTuesday2013 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

My husband and I often wonder why atheists don't realize that no one seems more obsessed with God and the Bible than they sometimes tend to be.

Interesting point that I'm not inclined to disagree with. I would, however, like to take a stab at explaining, if not entirely rationalizing, that observation. Thank you for bringing it up.

Something in me wants to suggest that perhaps pitting atheism against theism helps to clarify the mechanics of the human spirit and its manifest components in such a manner that enables the examiner to more deeply understand their own position relative to the tides of global society. More simply iterated, such discussions foster a deeper comprehension of myself, the universe, and our species, and how I might better handle that in respect to my interactions with this reality during my lifetime.

I hope that makes sense.

reply to post by Cor Leonis


I remember you and it has been awhile since I've seen you around here.
The message is positive and true of course but you laced it with all the fear
that while also is very true. It just won't fly around here. But that's no big
deal.

What worries me is you. Do you actually believe you can write a thread like this
and tell people not to reply, or to go read something else ? You can't write this stuff
and not get harassed to high Heaven. Yet you wrote a fine piece but I sense the dread
in you before it was even done. As if you didn't want to stop writing becuse you
knew what would come after that. I write stuff like this all the time Cor. And I love it.
I respond to as many as I can. Your message is worthless if you're not a hundred and ten
percent confident in it and ready to remain that way. What you're doing has the potential
to make God smile. Why are you in agony? You got to be hard as a rock around here.



You have it all sown up but there are still perils and traps to fall into.
Guard your heart !That means your mind.
Because anything can drive you nuts if you let it. Then what
good is any of it ? K? It's ok to rock out once in a while to brotha !
Relax.

I have a serious question. It isn't mockery. What did g or jesus risk with the crucifixion? Weren't both aware of his eventual return and immortality? So if nothing was risked, what was the sacrifice?

reply to post by ketsuko


So that just means you don't partake in it. But to condemn others for doing it even though all parties involved are ok with the action (even the spouse), is wrong. I've heard stories where swinging has saved people's marriages. A little change in partners to spice things up and keep things fresh. But you condemn the whole action. What if one of these couples decide to go your route and try to remain faithful? How long until one starts sneaking behind the other's back and doing the same thing in secrecy? Even if they both remain faithful, if they cannot rekindle that spark, they are doomed to an unloving marriage or divorce (another Christian sin... don't get me started on THAT sin...).

To your other point about selfishness being temptation, there is no defined point where selfishness gives way to being evil. One person partaking in a cupcake could be considered super selfish if there is a starving kid standing next to him, meanwhile someone else could go on a week long drinking binge to pass the time if he is locked in a cabin for a while in the middle of winter with nowhere to go or see. It's all relative. You condemn moral relativism, but in reality we live our lives based off of it, and it is only Christians who try to shun it, but all you are doing is shunning human nature.

Krazysh0t

Many Christian sins are due to selfishness too. Nudity, drugs, gambling, sex, contraception, alcohol, competition, earning a paycheck (greed) are all just different forms of selfishness that Christians frown on as sins, but all of them have been used by people since WAY before Christianity ever came on the scene. So if you decouple the selfishness part of sinning, all you are left with is what amounts to the Golden Rule.

Is it not. all about how you selfishness hurt others. If you want something and it does not effect others (or should not effect others) then you should do it. If it does hurt others then you should not do it.

It is about symbiosis and choosing the people around you that can be around you without being hurt by your desires. For a person who wants to screw around it means be with people who like screwing around. For a person who want a small or even only one partner, they should be with people with similar taste/view.

The problem is that people are for different reasons trying to change behaviour in others to fit them instead of finding people that have the behaviour they are after and people who are greedy and lie about what they want.

There is nothing wrong with nudity if you want to be nude. Drugs can be used by people in the right dose for them (for some the dose is 0). Sex is a natural thing. Contraception is a very wise thing when you want to have some kind of control over your life and not bring a child to this world that will have a hard time since you have not prepared for it.

About greed: You are supposed to get what you deserve without need for manipulation. Parasitism where you take from others to give to yourself is insanity.

crawley
I have a serious question. It isn't mockery. What did g or jesus risk with the crucifixion? Weren't both aware of his eventual return and immortality? So if nothing was risked, what was the sacrifice?

Make no mistake, it is our sacrifice, not God's.

He sent the most precious thing to Him as His Messenger to earth. There was always the choice. It was what humans decided to do to Him for telling everyone He was God's Chosen;

Humans put Him on a cross for it as a criminal.

Humans thought it was the easy way out; it wasn't. The easy option was there all along, so humans' refusal of His Messenger means a day of reckoning and thus the Prophesy of Revelations.

Don't ya get it? Blood on the Alter? The price of Sin! I get it. Jesus paid with His blood the price of Sin. He literally took Sin away from the world on the cross that day. He abolished the blood requirement that all generations had to pay up to that point. The Hebrews paid it with animal blood as a substitute. Pagan people did it with PEOPLE and animals. That is why it is termed GOOD NEWS.

In The Bible it is written that it would take more books than there are in the world to tell of what Jesus accomplished. Go into a Christian Book Shop and see how many books there are in there. They still have only just scratched the surface even after two thousand years.

Krazysh0t
reply to post by ketsuko

 

So that just means you don't partake in it. But to condemn others for doing it even though all parties involved are ok with the action (even the spouse), is wrong. I've heard stories where swinging has saved people's marriages. A little change in partners to spice things up and keep things fresh. But you condemn the whole action. What if one of these couples decide to go your route and try to remain faithful? How long until one starts sneaking behind the other's back and doing the same thing in secrecy? Even if they both remain faithful, if they cannot rekindle that spark, they are doomed to an unloving marriage or divorce (another Christian sin... don't get me started on THAT sin...).

No, I'm sorry, but it's wrong. I've seen it destroy marriages, so I guess our anecdotes cancel.
And if one starts sneaking around behind the other, shall we talk about selfishness?
And there is more to a loving marriage than just sex. Too many people these days get married because of that first rush of passion and then find out that there isn't much left to go on after it fades.

One person partaking in a cupcake could be considered super selfish if there is a starving kid standing next to him, meanwhile someone else could go on a week long drinking binge to pass the time if he is locked in a cabin for a while in the middle of winter with nowhere to go or see. It's all relative.

No, they'd both be wrong.

If the child is starving, and you're not, it's the height of uncaring selfishness to eat the cupcake yourself. You certainly aren't loving others as yourself.

And while no one could see you and you couldn't hurt anyone in the cabin, you could hurt yourself with the drinking binge. It's your responsibility to yourself to temper your urges and maintain some measure of good sense. Going on a drinking binge endangers you and isn't very respectful to your body. That doesn't mean you can't drink, but you shouldn't be going on a binge.

reply to post by crawley

I have a serious question. It isn't mockery. What did g or jesus risk with the crucifixion? Weren't both aware of his eventual return and immortality? So if nothing was risked, what was the sacrifice?

His innocent life was most definitely sacrificed. The wages of sin are paid in full.

Thanx for asking.

reply to post by LittleByLittle


I hope you are agreeing with me, because those are all points that I've made. You know being that I agree with the Golden Rule and all.

I don't see how resurrection qualifies death as a sacrifice. Especially if you knew beforehand that you wouldn't stay dead. Especially if you knew that your second life would be a million times more permanent and invincible than your first life. I don't see how that's a sacrifice.

If you die as a human and come back as something like that, you didn't actually give anything up. So that's not really a sacrifice. That's an evolution. So his absorption of all of sin resulted in his evolving into SuperJesus. To be perfectly honest, he got the best deal out of all of us. He should be happy with what he got and not instantly demand that we all swear fealty or die.

ketsuko
No, I'm sorry, but it's wrong. I've seen it destroy marriages, so I guess our anecdotes cancel.
And if one starts sneaking around behind the other, shall we talk about selfishness?
And there is more to a loving marriage than just sex. Too many people these days get married because of that first rush of passion and then find out that there isn't much left to go on after it fades.

You've seen swinging destroy marriages or adultery? Because the second sentence of that paragraph seems to suggest you are talking about adultery. I agreed with you that sneaking around on your partner without their knowledge is wrong. It violates the Golden Rule. But like I said earlier, I've seen instances where swinging has saved people's marriages (though NOT adultery, that almost always destroys the relationship or at the very least strains it considerably).

No, they'd both be wrong.

If the child is starving, and you're not, it's the height of uncaring selfishness to eat the cupcake yourself. You certainly aren't loving others as yourself.

And while no one could see you and you couldn't hurt anyone in the cabin, you could hurt yourself with the drinking binge. It's your responsibility to yourself to temper your urges and maintain some measure of good sense. Going on a drinking binge endangers you and isn't very respectful to your body. That doesn't mean you can't drink, but you shouldn't be going on a binge.

Why? What is so wrong with drinking to excess? If one is hurting themselves with it, so what? They are getting enjoyment out of it. They aren't hurting anyone else, so what is the problem? Not everyone HAS to live to old age. Some people like to enjoy their life while they are young. I'm one of them. Just because YOU disprove of the action and value your health doesn't necessarily mean that everyone else should.

Krazysh0t
reply to post by LittleByLittle

 

I hope you are agreeing with me, because those are all points that I've made. You know being that I agree with the Golden Rule and all.

I agree that the Golden Rule should always be followed and any deviation from it is immoral. The problem is that some people use moral relativism one step to far and break the golden rule and uses moral relativism as an excuse for their behaviour.

AutumnWitch657
NASA again. What about all the other people looking at outer space? Oh they are all in on it. (Worlds biggest conspiracy )When we can't even get an agreement on where to go for dinner we can get everyone with a telescope to hide the "truth" from us. This is beyond dumb. Just what is NASA hiding honey pot? I have a telescope. Not a big one. It's more toy than not but it's shows me the sky. What should I be looking for ? I promise if it's there I won't pull any punches. I'll tell the real truth.

With all the eyes on the sky, from amateurs to the Vatican, they still miss things heading right at us all the time.
If something were found, by those with the greatest resources most likely, if it were a grave danger would they notify the public? the Vatican built their new larger observatory, were they told where to look?

I personally believe they have abilities we are unaware of to observe distant space.

LittleByLittle

Krazysh0t
reply to post by LittleByLittle

 

I hope you are agreeing with me, because those are all points that I've made. You know being that I agree with the Golden Rule and all.

I agree that the Golden Rule should always be followed and any deviation from it is immoral. The problem is that some people use moral relativism one step to far and break the golden rule and uses moral relativism as an excuse for their behaviour.

Moral relativism requires the presence of empathy in order to function as a rational argument. If you're breaking the golden rule, you're basically giving empathy the middle finger, which sinks the argument.