For all you atheists

[Belk]

I still don't understand why my awesome posts tend to stay unanswered

Just as a guess it is because anything of substance is difficult to refute with empty assertion. So far this seems to be the bulk of response.

 

[Psudopod]

i believe he is a mythological figure made up by a culture. There may very possibly be a demon that Satan has "assigned" to the "post" of being Zeus.

But if you are asking do i believe in Zeus as the God of gods? Nope. That is the Father of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob only.

God's lightning bolt > Zues' lightning bolt

Thanks for that. Now, why don't you believe in Zeus? What made you decided that God was the right deity and not Zeus?

 

[atomweaver]

If a person worships any god besides God, then no, they don't go to heaven. It's not complicated at all. Everyone will get an opportunity to believe in God or Jesus.

Emphasis mine. That isn't true at all...

He will judge them rightly.

We should be less concerned about generations past and more concerned with our current generation. Everyone in America today that doesn't believe in Jesus, is never going to see heaven. That is what people writing on these forums should be concerned about.

OK, lets talk about current generations, then. Plenty of Middle Eastern cultures raise children within environments that would strongly preclude their exposure to any Christianity at all. Are those kids going to your hell, too?
The question here really is about why, by following your argument, God presumably leaves the opportunity to learn about the One True Path to Salvation for all Eternity as a function of the place and time of a person's birth. Turn that around as well; why is it, andross77, that God gave you easy access to knowledge of the path to heaven, and yet by virtue of geography alone, condemns to hell millions of other people without access to Christianity, none of whom have control over the place of their birth?

 

[atomweaver]

atheism is not playing an angle for a social movement, son. atheism is the ultimate "playing the angle" for ones desire to not have any ultimate accountability for their actions. Yes, there are worldly consequences but as long as you can get away with things and hide other things, you are ok.

Enter God into the picture, and now you are accountable.

Atheism is not about organizing society. In fact, it's logical conclusion does the exact opposite, as you can see from Hitler and Stalin's reigns which were most heavily influenced by Neitzsche and Sarte, respectively.

Here, have a Nazi belt buckle... You've earned it;

Atheism is about self and no-accountability. It also can never answer the why of morals.

If that's true, then why are atheists so much better at living moral lives? They commit fewer crimes, divorce less, have fewer children to single parents, as compared to christians...

 

[Fin12]

atheism is not playing an angle for a social movement, son. atheism is the ultimate "playing the angle" for ones desire to not have any ultimate accountability for their actions. Yes, there are worldly consequences but as long as you can get away with things and hide other things, you are ok.

Enter God into the picture, and now you are accountable.

Atheism is not about organizing society. In fact, it's logical conclusion does the exact opposite, as you can see from Hitler and Stalin's reigns which were most heavily influenced by Neitzsche and Sarte, respectively. Both of them being atheists.

Atheism is about self and no-accountability. It also can never answer the why of morals.

Atheism is about no belief in a god, you think buddhists are self obssessed, as a buddhist I am also an atheist.

Again if athiests are only believing they are atheists so they can do what they want, rather than having evidence against god.


Does that mean that they secretly believe in god and are willing to have a lifetime of earthly pleasure and give up an eternity of godly pleasure for an eternity of pain beyind imagination?

That does not add up, one bit.

Also hitler was a christian, and so was the nazi movement, in fact when the pope failed to condone his movement he set up "the nazi church".

A christian religion. PLus Hitler invokes the name of god several times in his speeches.

The of course "look at stalin", yeah Hitler was a vegetarian, in the same way stalin was an atheist. In the same way that both have nothing to do with their actions. They were totalitarien authority figures.

The "lack of belief in a god", is to small a sentance to condon immoral behaviour, it is merely stating a believed fact.

In order to prove that atheism condons immoral behaviour, you would have to find a point where stalin said "I am doing this becuase their is no god!".

It would have to be a clear cause and effect.

As for atheist regimes, guess what U.S.A is secular so is britain, and sweden.

Now secularism is basicaly passive atheism, I'm sure you'll agree on that one, or if you don't then why is evoloution being taught in schools?

"You can get a way with murder" in no way claims "murder is ethical"

Your getting fear of punishment, and ethics mixed up again andross.




Socio- biology.

Their are plenty of reasons why we behave morally, example if I killed everyone I met.

A: No one would want to have kids with me.

B: Other people would probably kill me in their attempts to save themselves and others.

nd no atheism can't exlpain why their is no morals. Sadly the statment "I do not believe in a god or deity" Doesn't actually cover anything else than "I do not believe in a god or deity" So stop pretending it does.

 

[andross77]

Atheism is about no belief in a god, you think buddhists are self obssessed, as a buddhist I am also an atheist.

Again if athiests are only believing they are atheists so they can do what they want, rather than having evidence against god.


Does that mean that they secretly believe in god and are willing to have a lifetime of earthly pleasure and give up an eternity of godly pleasure for an eternity of pain beyind imagination?

That does not add up, one bit.

Also hitler was a christian, and so was the nazi movement, in fact when the pope failed to condone his movement he set up "the nazi church".

A christian religion. PLus Hitler invokes the name of god several times in his speeches.

The of course "look at stalin", yeah Hitler was a vegetarian, in the same way stalin was an atheist. In the same way that both have nothing to do with their actions. They were totalitarien authority figures.

The "lack of belief in a god", is to small a sentance to condon immoral behaviour, it is merely stating a believed fact.

In order to prove that atheism condons immoral behaviour, you would have to find a point where stalin said "I am doing this becuase their is no god!".

It would have to be a clear cause and effect.

As for atheist regimes, guess what U.S.A is secular so is britain, and sweden.

Now secularism is basicaly passive atheism, I'm sure you'll agree on that one, or if you don't then why is evoloution being taught in schools?

"You can get a way with murder" in no way claims "murder is ethical"

Your getting fear of punishment, and ethics mixed up again andross.




Socio- biology.

Their are plenty of reasons why we behave morally, example if I killed everyone I met.

A: No one would want to have kids with me.

B: Other people would probably kill me in their attempts to save themselves and others.

nd no atheism can't exlpain why their is no morals. Sadly the statment "I do not believe in a god or deity" Doesn't actually cover anything else than "I do not believe in a god or deity" So stop pretending it does.

i would suggest you read up on Hitler's life and Stalin's life a bit more. It doesn't matter one bit if Hitler used God's Name or god's name or set up a church or called what he was doing Christian. All that tells me is that he is smart and knows how to appeal to a religious nation.

If you would actually study their lives you would know that the great influence in Hitler's life was Nietzsche and the greatest influence in Stalin's life was Jean-Paul Sartre. These are atheists.

If you would actually study these guys' lives you would know what their biggest influence was that determined the bloody carnage they brought about. Their biggest influence was NOT meek and humble Jesus, teaching people to love one another. It was atheistic teachers who prophessed that morality did not exist except to be created by whomever had the power.

 

[andross77]

Here, have a Nazi belt buckle... You've earned it;

If that's true, then why are atheists so much better at living moral lives? They commit fewer crimes, divorce less, have fewer children to single parents, as compared to christians...

I would argue that most atheists don't think deeply about their worldview. They just don't like God and want to live how they want to live. Plus, it's hard to argue atheists live more moral lives than others just because they commit less crimes. Atheists are ok with murdering babies inside a womb and fornicating as often as you want. I would consider that criminal and/or immoral as a Christian.

 

[andross77]

If I believe in God will I go to heaven? Even if I am a sinner?

the only way to get into heaven, is to accept Jesus as your Savior and to ask Him for the forgiveness of your sins.

the only types of humans that will be in heaven are sinners,

the only types of humans that will be in hell are sinners,

your entrance or denial into heaven is solely based on if Jesus is your Savior or not.

nothing else.

 

[andross77]

Let me restate your argument..

A) Atheists claim that 'rightness' is 100% arbitrary.
B) All humans feel that items like rape are wrong.
Therefore
C) Atheism is false.

That's your argument correct?

A: Is a difficult one, very much depending on your particular definition of 'rightness', the way you can measure it, etc.

B: Simply not true. There are plenty of people and even entire cultures who found rape to be perfectly acceptable when done to a particular group of people (same for murder, torture, killing people as 'collateral damage', letting people starve to death, etc etc)

C: Does not follow from A and B, even if A and B were true. All humans feeling something, does not make it true. Therefore, there is no contradiction between atheists finding a truth through reasoning, while feeling something else. When flying in an airplane from Los Angeles to Berlin, most people will feel that they've been flying in a straight line, while they've actually made half a circle and are now 'standing upside down' in comparison to their starting point. Does us feeling that we moved in a straight line mean that the earth is flat?

Is this your "awesome post"?

Firstly, you have only picked up a side argument that has begun and not my main point. The main point that still no one has given a good answer. This point is that from an atheistic worldview, a person cannot call one moral code better than another moral code.

Secondly, you messed up the moral argument. You did not state the argument correctly.

 

[Fin12]

i would suggest you read up on Hitler's life and Stalin's life a bit more. It doesn't matter one bit if Hitler used God's Name or god's name or set up a church or called what he was doing Christian. All that tells me is that he is smart and knows how to appeal to a religious nation.

If you would actually study their lives you would know that the great influence in Hitler's life was Nietzsche and the greatest influence in Stalin's life was Jean-Paul Sartre. These are atheists.

If you would actually study these guys' lives you would know what their biggest influence was that determined the bloody carnage they brought about. Their biggest influence was NOT meek and humble Jesus, teaching people to love one another. It was atheistic teachers who prophessed that morality did not exist except to be created by whomever had the power.

I spent two years studying nazi germany in history I'm quite clued up on that one.

Also I'd like to point out hitler was an evoloutionist, and a proponent of the science of eugenics, which I think we can both agree is an evil idea.
And I have absoloutlly no problem stating that, science provides facts, it doesn't tell us what to do with those facts.

As far as I am considered Hitlers movement was a christian movement, misguided in the same way that an atheist choosing to kill religious is misguided. You also fall flat on your face with "atheistic teachers", you'll find that they were atheist, however that does not mean they were atheistic teachers, the works of Neitzsche and Sartre go far deeper than "their is no god/s"

Atheism is a statement of opinion on the exhistance of a deity, it doesn't extend further than that.

You've still to establish a cuase and effect between atheism and immoral behaviour.

Yes Stalin and Hitler may well of enjoyed the work of atheist philosiphers, but I still can think of plenty of monstrous people who were christian.


So atheism = immorality has not been proven.

 

[andross77]

I spent two years studying nazi germany in history I'm quite clued up on that one.

Also I'd like to point out hitler was an evoloutionist, and a proponent of the science of eugenics, which I think we can both agree is an evil idea.
And I have absoloutlly no problem stating that, science provides facts, it doesn't tell us what to do with those facts.

As far as I am considered Hitlers movement was a christian movement, misguided in the same way that an atheist choosing to kill religious is misguided. You also fall flat on your face with "atheistic teachers", you'll find that they were atheist, however that does not mean they were atheistic teachers, the works of Neitzsche and Sartre go far deeper than "their is no god/s"

Atheism is a statement of opinion on the exhistance of a deity, it doesn't extend further than that.

You've still to establish a cuase and effect between atheism and immoral behaviour.

Yes Stalin and Hitler may well of enjoyed the work of atheist philosiphers, but I still can think of plenty of monstrous people who were christian.


So atheism = immorality has not been proven.

you admit they are atheists but deny they were atheistic teachers

Nietzsche and Sartre were atheists, atheistic thinkers and atheistic teachers. You can't be an atheist and a Christian teacher. You could be an atheist and comment on Christianity. But the main works of these two men were to promote or at the least summarize the views of an atheistic worldview.

Hitler and Stalin grabbed hold of these, and then killed millions believing there would be no accountability to God (atheistic).

 

[Belk]

the only way to get into heaven, is to accept Jesus as your Savior and to ask Him for the forgiveness of your sins.

the only types of humans that will be in heaven are sinners,

the only types of humans that will be in hell are sinners,

your entrance or denial into heaven is solely based on if Jesus is your Savior or not.

nothing else.

If that is all that is required why on earth would I need to deny the existence of God in order to continue sinning? I am going to sin anyways, as a flawed human being it is impossible for me to not sin. If all I have to do is acknowledge Jesus as savior and ask for forgiveness why not do that instead of damning myself for eternity?

This will come as a shock to you Andross77, but I'll let you in on a little secret. The reason I and other atheists are atheists is because we do not believe there is a god. Apparently this is hard for you to understand because no matter how many times we say it, you come back on here and claim to speak for us and tell us what our true motivation is. You are not the God you worship. You can not see me thoughts. Kindly stop telling me what I believe and why I do things.

 

[Mystman]

Is this your "awesome post"?

Firstly, you have only picked up a side argument that has begun and not my main point. The main point that still no one has given a good answer. This point is that from an atheistic worldview, a person cannot call one moral code better than another moral code.

Secondly, you messed up the moral argument. You did not state the argument correctly.

Mind stating it properly then?

--

As for the 'main point': people have already answered (some 300 posts back..) that they agree with the fact that yes, it's impossible to objectively call one moral code better than another, if only because 'better' is such a vague concept. But I don't see that as some kind of 'problem' that needs to be answered, I just see it as one of those weird things of reality. Just like light sometimes behaves as a wave and sometimes as a particle; it might seem weird, but it's just the way it is and we'll have to accept it.

So my question would be: now knowing that some atheist accept your point that an objectively 'best' moral code doesn't exist, what do you want from this thread?

 

[andross77]

If that is all that is required why on earth would I need to deny the existence of God in order to continue sinning? I am going to sin anyways, as a flawed human being it is impossible for me to not sin. If all I have to do is acknowledge Jesus as savior and ask for forgiveness why not do that instead of damning myself for eternity?

This will come as a shock to you Andross77, but I'll let you in on a little secret. The reason I and other atheists are atheists is because we do not believe there is a god. Apparently this is hard for you to understand because no matter how many times we say it, you come back on here and claim to speak for us and tell us what our true motivation is. You are not the God you worship. You can not see me thoughts. Kindly stop telling me what I believe and why I do things.

atheists understand that the wonder of Creation points to a Higher Being. they deny this understanding for a desire to not be held accountable for their actions. It seems hard for you to understand that atheism provides the most convenient and simplistic way to free oneself from moral accountability, or an objective moral law.

 

[andross77]

Mind stating it properly then?

--

As for the 'main point': people have already answered (some 300 posts back..) that they agree with the fact that yes, it's impossible to objectively call one moral code better than another, if only because 'better' is such a vague concept. But I don't see that as some kind of 'problem' that needs to be answered, I just see it as one of those weird things of reality. Just like light sometimes behaves as a wave and sometimes as a particle; it might seem weird, but it's just the way it is and we'll have to accept it.

So my question would be: now knowing that some atheist accept your point that an objectively 'best' moral code doesn't exist, what do you want from this thread?

the point of this thread, if you would go back and watch the video from the first post, is to show that atheists cannot answer moral questions in life. They all come up with their own. The point of this thread was to say that atheists don't have an answer for the morality written on our hearts and Christians do. God put it there.

 

[Belk]

atheists understand that the wonder of Creation points to a Higher Being. they deny this understanding for a desire to not be held accountable for their actions. It seems hard for you to understand that atheism provides the most convenient and simplistic way to free oneself from moral accountability, or an objective moral law.

Are you a mind reader? Are you God? Why would I need to deny this in order to not be held accountable for my actions? According to you the only way I will be held accountable for my actions is by denying it.

 

[TeddyKGB]

atheists understand that the wonder of Creation points to a Higher Being. they deny this understanding for a desire to not be held accountable for their actions. It seems hard for you to understand that atheism provides the most convenient and simplistic way to free oneself from moral accountability, or an objective moral law.

I don't know if you had any credibility before this, but you surely have none now.

 

[andross77]

Are you a mind reader? Are you God? Why would I need to deny this in order to not be held accountable for my actions? According to you the only way I will be held accountable for my actions is by denying it.

i am not a mind reader. i am a societal observer.

Everyone is held accountable for their actions by God.

People who have a relationship with Jesus will have their sins forgiven and entrance into heaven.

People who do not have a relationship with Jesus will not have their sins forgiven and will be granted their desire to stay away from God for eternity (hell).

 

[andross77]

I don't know if you had any credibility before this, but you surely have none now.

the last thing i hope for on these forums, is an atheist's approval

i am here to tell people truth. i am not here to tell people what their itching ears want to hear.

I know i have an audience because you all keep commenting in this thread. if you didn't think i was credible enough, you wouldn't continue writing your thoughts here....

 

[b&wpac4]

the last thing i hope for on these forums, is an atheist's approval

i am here to tell people truth. i am not here to tell people what their itching ears want to hear.

I know i have an audience because you all keep commenting in this thread. if you didn't think i was credible enough, you wouldn't continue writing your thoughts here....

You keep responding. You must think we are credible too.