Printable View
My faith and values are tested as well all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by macsen rufus
What I meant is that I will never be a situation like the following:
You are in a certain country. A group of soldiers come up to you. They have 30 innocent prisoners. The leader says that he plans to shoot them all.
He then says, "But! You can save 29 of them, if you stab and kill one of them. But if you don't, I will have them shot."
See what I mean?
i was born into a mixed household....my mother is Christian while my father is an Atheist.
During primary school I was sent to a private school run by nuns....during my time there I begin to suspect that this religion thing was kind of a sham....if you asked a tough question they just avoided it, and it seemed to me the only use of religion was to keep people in line....."be a good boy or god will be mad at you".
later on in high-school we began to get more formation in fields like biology and such...this along with reading about various religions and their place in history further marked the point for me that this god business made no sense at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by diablodelmar
the things that are normally considered "wrong" are things that are harmful to the normal functioning and maintaining of a society...
when people started living in groups they noticed that if you engage in certain behavior then the group falls apart....while other actions make the group stronger...
It´s better to work together with the men next to you gathering food for the winter than to kill him
It´s better not to steal another man´s woman because that might lead to fighting that might disturb the group and make it harder for everyone to survive.
the examples go on....
these things can be derived by simple observation and using your head a little bit...no need for a god to come and "put it into your head"....people invented the social constructs of "right" and "wrong" so that things would work out better.
and what better way to make sure that people follow these rules than to make up a story about a magical boogeyman that will punish you if you don´t follow them?
and here we are.....dealing with religion
@diablo: bit of an extreme situation, and one that would test anyone, regardless of their beliefs. Such a situation can only be handled as and when it arises -- any attempt to say "I would do..." whatever is unlikely to be more than wishful thinking.
For my part, what I hope I would be able to do, is to try to defuse the dilemma presented, anyhow I possibly could. The first priority should be to try to save all 30, but I don't think saving the 29 by becoming the killer of the 1 would be ethical.
anyway have to go, sorry can't finish now....
It's more connected to that if God is all-knowing and all-powerful, how exactly can you put him in a category that makes him "good", by the standards he have placed down himself?Quote:
Originally Posted by Proletariat
diablodelmar, do you consider animals to have a concience or is that a speciffic human abillity?
More of the agnostic direction myself. While it might exist beings we would consider divine, I would not worship them. And my life functions very well without needing to bother myself with the question.
The idea of afterlife is fascinating, although there's one idea that have bothered me for a while in Christian theology. Do you have to live forever, even in heaven? Because if you remain too human, this is starting to become worrysome. I cannot comprehend living a 1.000.000.000 years and it's still nothing compared to the eternity. Because in that case, I would chose the void that comes with death, even the one that makes you nothing compared to the whole universe.
Strange because my King James Bible clearly says "Thou shalt not kill". Could it be then that the pens of man have erred? Could it be that the Bible is not an absolute, but rather open to interpretation? Clearly we have two meanings from one sentence here, and a fairly central part of the whole affair it is too. You, who call yourself a Christian, who follows the word of his Protestant Bible will happily join the army? An organisation which, at its most basic, exists to break one of God's Commandments, and organisation which will certainly ask you to break that Commandment, and expect you to obey Man while disobeying your God? And to get around this you claim mistranslation of a book which you have previously claimed to be inviolate? You cannot have it both ways. I call hypocrite.Quote:
Originally Posted by diablodelmar
You shouldnt kill without a morally justifiable reason. God ordered people to be killed for breaking his law.
Oh fantastic. Does that instruction carry more weight than one of the Commandments? Or is it merely used as an excuse for evil men to raze cities and slaughter people? The Bible, it would seem, is more a tool of Man than the Word of God. You yourself are using it as such a tool.
Let me echo what macsen rufus said. Thanks macsen rufus.
Much eloquently than I could have possibly put it. :bow:
What? I was talking from the viewpoint of when I was still a believer. Really now Proletariat, it wasn't that difficult a read, was it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Proletariat
In a thread on atheism, you're annoyed that your only stated conflict with Christianity (not counting the rest, since you just blanketed them) was commented upon by me, and has nothing to do with the topic. I apologize for this. Please forgive me for going so far off the deep end.
:shame:
I was not trying to imply that Lemur. What I'm saying is that hope cannot come from plain perception when that perception transmits hopeless images? I'll be an atheist in those moments, as much as I'm now, but my hope sometimes doesn't come from science, even if I don't believe it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Since when were science and religion the only sources of hope anyway ? The former rarely tends to be even considered, although that depends on the issue... By what I've read of it what kept many people going in the trenches of the World Wars was neither, but the memory of home and the prospect of getting to see it again...
No, Proletariat, I'm annoyed that you've decided to come to this thread and nitpick, get the nitpick wrong, and completely ignore the topic of the thread which asked if anyone else was an atheist and is so then why. I answered the question posed in the original post honestly and openly. Has nothing to do with the topic? Are you on drugs? Go back and reread the original post. My first post in this thread was completely on topic, yours wasn't. Or are you assuming that the thread title is the topic instead oc actually reading the initial post? Wouldn't surprise me, really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proletariat
And, yes, it was over the line for you to make some erroneous assumption about my post, apparently due to misreading it or just looking to pick a fight. Now, is that clear enough for you to grasp?
Ah. You challenge my reading comprehension, then ask if I'm on drugs. I must be the one looking for a fight. I'd much rather have heard you reconcile the notion of an all-knowing God who's explanations don't satisfy a child's challenges, but I guess this thread was just supposed to be an atheist roster for the backroom.
God doesn't abuse and sexually assault babies- people do. It's called free will- people are free to do horrible things to themselves and each other. It's too bad that your pastor couldnt articulate that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
Well at least you can read medical charts - which is far more then I can do. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Proletariat
At least you're no longer in denial, Redleg. That's the first step to recovery.
Was I addressing you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
But then again I can at least read government data charts....
* picks the dummy up off the floor *
Please play nice kiddies. :yes:
My mistake. Looks like d'Nile is still flowing, just not particularly deep.
Did I miss a meeting? When did that become a requirement in the backroom?Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Ah, yes. But at least I can read and understand them. And unlike some in the present company, I can admit when I'm wrong, too. It's not a very difficult skill to learn. Give it a try sometime.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
And no, you didn't miss a smilie. One didn't escape from you here either; although the point probably did.
Does the wherefore really matter, though?
That was rather easy - would you like a shovel to dig yourself out of the hole you just fell in?.:inquisitive: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
Too funny. You seem to think you've been clever. That never ceases to amuse me. It's like watching monkeys in the zoo. You feel rather sad for them; but you still laugh.
Shhh. Redleg wants to have a micturating contest; but he doesn't understand that he's using defective equipment. :wink: (<-- that was a smilie, in case Redleg was wondering)Quote:
Originally Posted by GoreBag
Its getting even more amusing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
Edit:I can admit when I'm wrong, too. It's not a very difficult skill to learn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Not what I meant. You can keep your schoolyard argument with him to yourself. Everyone around here has done it before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
We're supposed to believe you possess a skill which you never practice? Really now, your comeback was pretty lame. What's the matter, is dictionary.com down or something? I can explain my previous post to you, if it's really necessary. It was multil-levelled too. I expect I wasted it. Ah, well. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Pssst, by the way, it's anonymous not annoymous. :laugh4:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
Since I never claimed to be a big speller, it seems your right on track on showing that you also have a learning disablity along with a rather serious superiority complex
Rather amusing isn't.:inquisitive: :laugh4: :laugh4:
You don't need that shovel anylonger - your up a backhole
Yes, it is amusing. The one who can't spell even after seeing it at the end of post after post is saying I have a learning disability? Definitely amusing. And it's not a superiority complex if one is demonstrably superior. The proper term for that is fact. :wink: