Atheists: Why don't you steal, rape, pillage, etc?

[SkyWriting]

As someone who grew up Christian, I seriously disagree.

If I had a nickel for every time I've seen someone who was Christian do something that they completely disagreed with simply because they thought that was what god wanted them to do or that god was watching, I'd have a lot of nickels.

On the flip side, just look at this thread. There are many Christians in this thread that are just "shocked" that atheist don't run around raping and pillaging just because they have no belief in a god. That viewpoint says alot about Christians if you think about it.

I see lots of finger pointing, but no evidence you have ever done as you suggest. As someone who's been through it, I'd think you'd have more insights than accusations. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[SkyWriting]

.

 

[jacknife]

Yeah I'm the same way I just cant get into the whole evil guy thing never could in video games.

 

[SkyWriting]

That viewpoint says alot about Christians if you think about it.

I try not to guess what others think I should be thinking about
when I read what yet another party writes.

 

[dgiharris]

Read the evidence of Armies saying they were doing gods work. Doing all the things you mention. Some claiming god told them too. God has never been shy of killing anyone who upset him.

As a Christian, one of the things that upsets me most is how we Christians seem to have amnesia when it comes to history.

I read something in Heinlien's "Stranger in a Strange Land" that made me rethink my Christianity. I further was able to expound upon it when I got my degrees in advanced Mathematics and Physics.

In Stranger in a Strange Land Heinlien's puts forth the premise that Mathematics, Science, Philosophy and Religion are all different aspects of the same thing. That truth is truth and it is only our feeble human brains that are incapable of comprehended or seeing how everything connects and is the same...

Mathematics and Science is nothing more than figuring out how the universe works, nothing more. Philosophy in a sense can be thought of as the first science since it attempts to apply logic and reason in describing the world (as perceived by humans) though without the concrete math and science. Religion is our attempt to understand and/or come to terms with the entity that created the entire universe (or universes or multiverses...)

I think the mistake that Christianity has made (historically and even today) is to put itself opposite of math and science. That is, a lot of Christians see science as the enemy and use the belief in anti-science as a true litmus test of faith...

However, it is my belief that there doesn't need to be any conflict between religion and science. If God created the Universe and if the goal of math and science is simply to figure out how god created the universe and how the universe works, then if anything math and science should be embraced by religion. And, if Philosophy is nothing more than mankind applying reason and logic to explain the universe from mankind's perspective then again, philosophy should likewise be embraced by religion.

So how does this rant apply to this thread?

I think that morality (whether it be from a secular or non secular source) can be derived from various sources leading to the same truths. There can be multiple paths leading to the same morality. Or put another way, Truth is truth...

 

[lucaspa]

Why don't I do bad things since I have no God to follow?..... Let me say this, if you want to hear something "bad" from a non-believer, here goes. Say I took a trip to Africa, and I stumbled upon a place of worship. I say "Oh, this is interesting, let's go there!" (After all, I'm on "vacation") As I just about get to the door I start to hear a little girl screaming, so I barge in, and the girl is about to have her genitals destroyed because her religion says it should be done. Here's what I'd do, 1) Confirm the act was just about to be done 2) If confirmed, charge the person about to perform it (most likely male) 3) If little girl is unharmed, take her and run 4) If the girl is harmed already, beat the "poop" out of the person performing the "ritual", cut off their genitals and throw it at the followers, take the girl and get her to a hospital. (Yes this is just a made up situation, but that's what I would probably do) You harm an innocent child because of some god that isn't real, you'll feel the real wrath of a real human being.

There are lots of Christians who would say genital mutiliation is bad and it is moral to stop it. So your "bad" behavior is something of a strawman.

I would argue that anyone (including Christians) claiming that people only act well because God is observing them and they fear punishment does not understand Christianity. Jesus set it up so that, no matter how hard we try, we are guilty of bad behavior: because our thoughts count. So it doesn't matter if we are being watched or not: we are going to screw up, and in a way that atheists don't even think about.

We try for the same reason a small child tries to be behave well for its parents: love. We don't want to disappoint God, or at least not any more than we can help. I've raised kids. The real "punishment" for a child is not actual punishment, but the fear of disappointing their parents and (unrealistically) losing their love. No good parent ever stops loving a child because they stole cookies from the cookie jar. The love is unconditional. God's love is unconditional, but we don't want to disappoint God.

So all the arguments about "you are never sure what a Christian will do when not watched, but with atheists you see what you get" is a strawman. It's not the watching. We can reason just as well as atheists to the underlying reasons that God says some behaviors are good and some bad. We can all reason that an assault on a child -- no matter what the motive -- is bad, and moral behavior is to prevent it. But there is an additional incentive for a Christian: not to disappoint God.

 

[lucaspa]

Then please stay a believer. You can't handle atheism.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith. Obviously a different faith from theism, but a faith.

 

[lucaspa]

They are no different than believers sins.

I would submit that atheist sins are different. For an atheist to sin, he must behave in an immoral fashion. He must actually assault someone or murder someone or rape.

But a Christian's sins are also what he/she thinks. According to Jesus, if we get angry with another person, that is equivalent to assault and murder. Never laid a hand on the other person, but we have the sin. As a male, if I have a passing desire for a good-looking woman, I am committing adultery (rape?) Never even spoke to her, much less touched her.

The atheist gets a pass that Christians don't.

The God-chip in the head does not exist in action. Christian are not "controlled" in any way. Following Gods will is always a choice and very few are even mildly accomplished at it.

So true. God is not a puppet-master. Just like atheists, we get to choose. It's just that our rules are a LOT stricter than theirs.

 

[Ken-1122]

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith. Obviously a different faith from theism, but a faith.

The ole "Atheism is a faith" thing huh? It would actually be funny if you weren't serious!

K

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist.

Depends on the god. Most god concepts are logically contradictory. Logically contradictory things can not, and by extension, do not exist.

I am 100% certain, for example, that there is no 'all loving god' in a universe rife with suffering, just as I am 100% certain there are no married bachelors. Same goes for a god that everyone knows to exist but denies it by 'suppressing the truth', as the presuppositionalists argue, because I am aware of at least one person for whom that assertion is not true - me. These are just a few examples.

Other god concepts are more vague and nebulous, often intentionally so, as an apologetic tactic to save them from scrutiny. I am agnostic atheist in regard to those concepts.

After all, atheism is a faith.

I dare you to substantiate that assertion.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Heck, we've got the Op of this thread as a wonderful example

I'm really hoping that person lives far, far from me...

 

[nonbeliever314]

I would argue that anyone (including Christians) claiming that people only act well because God is observing them and they fear punishment does not understand Christianity.

Ok but.... Then you said...

God's love is unconditional, but we don't want to disappoint God.

It seems like you fear god to me. You don't want to disappoint god for a reason. If you disappoint him too much we all know what most likely happens then... Like I said before, you have to simultaneously absolutely love and absolutely fear god at the same time. Love him, because if you don't you'll be punished. Punishment invokes fear, therefore you actually do fear god. And if you don't fear god, you're not worrying as much about disappointing him, which means you probably love him less.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith.

I don't have faith that leprechauns don't exist. I simply don't have any good reasons to believe that they do exist, or even might exist. There is no faith involved. It is just a lack of belief.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[JGG]

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith. Obviously a different faith from theism, but a faith.

And what does this faith entail, pray tell?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith. Obviously a different faith from theism, but a faith.

Hey hey settle down there, fella. The negative or null position requires no faith.

 

[Cute Tink]

Yeah I'm the same way I just cant get into the whole evil guy thing never could in video games.

Neither can I. Even though they are just collections of pixels, I can't take the thought of being evil toward them.

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith. Obviously a different faith from theism, but a faith.

Lack of faith = faith? I find my not-collecting-stamps to be a very fulfilling hobby...

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith. Obviously a different faith from theism, but a faith.

No faith is necessary to reject a claim for which there is no good evidence.

 

[muichimotsu]

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith. Obviously a different faith from theism, but a faith.

If one isn't 100% sure, it's not faith anymore. Not sure how you can spin it any other way. Atheism is a faith in the way black is a color in the technical sense. I don't disbelieve in God to the extent you believe in it, I merely don't believe because I'm not convinced.

 

[bhsmte]

Of course. Atheists are not 100% sure God doesn't exist. After all, atheism is a faith. Obviously a different faith from theism, but a faith.

Atheism is a lack of faith, in a being they see no reason to believe exists.

Do you need to have faith that all the other Gods man has come up with don't exist?

 

[muichimotsu]

Seems like the OP has gotten derailed, but that'll happen when we get into generalizations about atheists as a whole.

If we're going to focus the discussion again, we have to start with 1 esp. important qualifier: atheists are not unified in all things besides a disbelief in God. There can be atheists who are conservatives, liberals, or otherwise, and other variations in other areas, like metaphysics and epistemology. And ethics/morality is no different. There are atheists who can be nihilist and hedonists, but that doesn't mean we have to conclude all atheists must be obligated to do so.

The argument not only appeals to nature in general, but also commits the naturalistic fallacy. We don't murder, steal and rape as atheists who have a general moral sense because it's not conducive to overall coexistence and peace. Self interest is not always opposed to shared interests of a group.

Empathy is the big crux of why we don't do immoral things: we consider whether we'd like to have such things happen to us and when we conclude the negative of that, we apply it overall and regard those actions as immoral because they hurt others in the same way we'd be hurt.

There's no need for divine mandate to consider that murder hurts people's feelings. What restricts that thought is whether you lack empathy to begin with or not.