Is Atheism/Evolutionism Dangerous? Questions for Unbelievers

by Perry 156 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AuldSoul

  DanTheMan: I'm not an anti-religion crusader, but if people come on this board insisting that they know they're right because God tells them so and thus they are in a morally superior position to the atheist, I'm going to have something to say in response.

  And I'll be right there beside you insisting that religion does not make someone morally superior. Religion can't do that. Morality is not dependent on external factors. I know some extremely moral atheists.

  If they say they are right because God tells them so I will let them have their belief. If they believe their being right makes them morally superior they have proved their moral inferiority in the holding of that belief.

  I do believe certain beliefs can make someone more spiritual. I consider a state of spiritual and physical to be a better state (healthwise) than being purely physical, but I recognize that my opinion is a subjective one based on personal experiences. Since it is subjective, the opinion itself is no better or worse than anyone else's subjective opinion.

  Which is why I say that Atheism/Evolutionism is not dangerous. But intolerance and hubris are dangerous, regardless of belief system.

  I don't accept that this "spirit" inside you comes from a supernatural being, and therefore I don't accept your method of confirming truth as having validity.

  I don't accept that the scientific method is objective, and therefore I don't accept the scientific method of confirming truth as having validity. Judgments arising from use of the scientific method are also not objective. These judgments cannot be good or bad in any absolute sense because we have no way of knowing (for certain) the future cost/benefit of a certain viewpoint, phenomenon, human habit, etc.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Deputy Dog

  LDB

  Who the hell is Perry to say that Dan is depraved (and yes I understand "depraved" in the "spiritual" context of this thread) ? So am I depraved, dishonest, unethical, nasty, evil, blah, blah,blah,...

  I have to wonder if that is true. The fact that you say "NO I'M NOT!" tells me you don't understand or you think you are sinless in the eyes of God.

  "Christians" like Perry disgust me for their conceit.

  As a Christian, do I "disgust you" by confessing my total depravity?
• 

  kid-A

  "I have to wonder if that is true. The fact that you say "NO I'M NOT!" tells me you don't understand or you think you are sinless in the eyes of God."

  Why is it that the x-tian fundies on the board can never resist the temptation to fulfill their own stereotypes? Your comment above perfectly exemplifies the self-righteous arrogance that invariably develops when one purports to have some monopoly on "moral truth" that is "divinely sanctioned".....

  It never ceases to amaze me how the "believers" just dont get it. Your latter question regarding "being sinless in the eyes of god" ??? First, I doubt you could even define a satisfactory definition of "sin" independently of your ancient holy book. Second, you may as well phrase it as "sinless in the eyes of the Tooth Fairy" or "Santa Clause" or "Peter the Rabbit" because to an atheist, your nebulous "god", be it named or not, is on the same cultural plane as these other literary creations.....

  The judgemental mind-sets of Perry et al is INDISTINGUISHABLE from the standard Jehovahs Witness. All you have done is re-named your belief system while the same self-righteous, anti-intellectual, anti-science foundations remain at the rotten core of your fundamentalism.
• 

  funkyderek

  Deputy Dog:

  As a Christian, do I "disgust you" by confessing my total depravity?

  There's certainly something disgusting about it. You're quite happy to declare yourself to be utterly worthless and yet you seem proud of it. I find it hard to imagine a more psychologically destructive belief system. I suppose it largely depends on whether you use your badge of depravity to excuse immoral acts, or merely to explain your inadequacies - although neither is a particularly appealing worldview.
• 

  hillary_step

  Deputy,

  As a Christian, do I "disgust you" by confessing my total depravity?

  I concur completely with Funky. There is something on a psychological level disgusting about referring to yourself in such a manner. The Augustine inheritance, a diachotony of viewing the universe as revolving around the ultimate creation, Mankind, coupled with the acceptance that Mankind has fallen from some imagined position of grace that he once had, is certainly not healthy when taken to the extreme that you note in your post. The world, including the ecology, would have been a far better place had Augustine stuck to the brothels and kept his schizoid revelations to himself.

  What many religionists, especially of the Christian variety, seem unable to comprehend, is that atheists, agnostics and non-Christians do not view themselves as totally depraved and yet seem to be able to fulfil the Christian ethic to 'not judge others' with a far greater ease than do many Christians, including Perry!

  HS
• 

  Narkissos

  I can't help noticing that this thread is actually helping to narrow down the topic it was meant to counter... how the Christian faith in particular may be dangerous -- especially when it is applied to people who don't need it.
• 

  gumb

  I don't think atheism in itself is dangerous, any more than I think theism is. However, I do believe that where there is unrelenting dogmatism on either side it can be harmful. I am reminded (don't ask me why) of a book I read years ago by John Cleese and a Dr Skinner(?) which discussed mental health, and based on the doctor's own personal experience he came to the conclusion that the happiest people tended to be those who believed in something higher than themselves, in other words those who were spiritual rather than religious. I think the key to whether or not something is harmful is ascertaining its affect on society. Does it tend to promote peace and personal responsibility, and the qualities of love and tolerance?
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Kid-A

  Why is it that the x-tian fundies on the board can never resist the temptation to fulfill their own stereotypes? Your comment above perfectly exemplifies the self-righteous arrogance that invariably develops when one purports to have some monopoly on "moral truth" that is "divinely sanctioned".....

  I'll try to define sin, would you define "self-righteous". As I have said many times on other threads that I have no righteousness of my own, none, zero, zip, zilch. So please tell me how to be self-righteous. When you do something "right" who do you give the credit to? Self, God, or who?

  I doubt you could even define a satisfactory definition of "sin" independently of your ancient holy book.

  What would you call hurting someone for no reason?

  derek

  I suppose it largely depends on whether you use your badge of depravity to excuse immoral acts, or merely to explain your inadequacies -

  How does your lack of depravity explain your "inadequacies"? Assuming you have some.

  ...although neither is a particularly appealing worldview.

  I guess that depends on how you see yourself. For me, I see it as being honest with myself first, and with God.
• 

  Perry

  There seems to be a belief among many of our atheist friends that if you are a Christian, this somehow logicaly, morally ethically...whatever disqualifies you from asking questions, because of Christians' _________________ fill in the blank.

  This thread is about if Atheism is dangerous or not (how they know good and bad). It keeps slipping into questions bout Christianity. When those questions are answered from a testimonial standpoint, then it is paraded before the board as proof that the atheist standpoint of retreiving the knowledge of good and bad from the hordes of humanity through something called social conditioning is somehow more tolerable or desireable by default. Where's the positive proof that's a good thing? Do we have any historical data that can help us determine if that source is a reliable one?

  There is no question that the doctrines of grace, total depravity being but one, goes against every fiber in the mortal man's body. It is the very opposite of the qualities that made me successful in business. Other than the reality of my own moral bankrupcy, there was nothing in my human life that would confirm the truth of it's implications ..... my need to accept God's pardon.

  The reality is that the depravity is so total that I was completely incapable of accepting a pardon from God on my own power... even as I hyprcritically judged others. Even the ability to accept had to come through divine edict. The pinnicle of human existence is man's ability to create illusions to excuse his failures to live up to the rules that he sets for himself. (Which of course is just another moral failure).

  Without God, the best you'll ever get is to imagine yourself surperior to others.... regardless of the agency you employ. With God, you will have the eventual ability to live out ANY standard you set for yourself as well as eliminate any possibility of hypocrisy and failure.

  Can't you guys (my opponents) see that humans are living contradictions of themselves..... even when they set the bar very low? That doesn't bother you about our species? I think it's easy to prove (as I have done) and disgusting about our natures.

  Roman generals would sometimes have an arch erected to comemorate their military victories. In the catacombs below Rome Christians carved an arch on the entrance of their tombs to comemorate their victory over the flesh and over death itself. That's what this all about.... eliminating the cognitive dissonance between what we aspire to and what we actually practice. And, at the end...declaring VICTORY.

  If atheism works for you... more power to you. But make no mistake, any "Christian" who judges himself as superior to you in anyway is not a Christian. He's a religionist. Just another of the many agencies that humans employ to justify themselves.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Nark

  how the Christian faith in particular may be dangerous

  How is acknowledging that its wrong to hurt others, and that I have done so, dangerous?