by abiather 38 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
What profound words of wisdom.
What I had in mind loosely, you put it very BEAUTIFULLY, with crisp CLARITY.
You certainly belong to the genus of great preceptors!
Meeting ones like you makes others lives FULFILLED!
When the reader catches MORE THAN the writer, it makes the writer feel HONOURED!
I feel HIGHLY HONOURED to have you commented on my humble posting--REALLY, I mean it.
Thank you--a billion times!
..so Abiather - you realise you now look completely foolish? You tried and failed to promote an argument (atheism and theism are both partially right and partially wrong) based upon something (what motivates to do good) that at least atheism has nothing to do with - people clearly do good or bad regardless of their belief as evidenced every day in society. Really - your religion is silly(and dangerous), your point is silly and this post is devious. Thank you for allowing us to advertise the truth about your cult and the dangers of cult language (your posts read like a zombie wrote them).
When a religious poster capitalises whole words I know preaching has begun and dialogue has ceased.
When I speak about CAUSE AND CONSEQUENCES as the sole motivating factor, you speak about something else.
Your comments (and also of Cofty) would be perfectly fitting, when someone writes about some cult in this site.
Anyway, I enjoyed your joke!
We need people like you also, in this stressed out world!
This is what Abiather is actually selling...
The Brahma Kumaris leadership has sought to cover up or deny child sex abuses at its headquarters, multiple suicides of followers at centers, financial corruption and abuses, immigration abuses, the persecution of minor or breakaway groups and the breaking up of families...
Abiather your arguments seem to have big philosophical and logical issues that need to be addressed. For instance, most atheists started out as theists and so if the reason for them rejecting a creator was to avoid personal responsibility, then it does not follow that theists also reject personal responsibility in the form of inventing a forgiving God. Atheists should have just stayed where there were as theists, if the goal was personal irresponsibility. The facts are however that atheists are arguably more moral in certain areas than theists are, and I speak as a theist myself. The reason for this is probably due the overabundance of rules and regulations of many a religion, which works against personal responsibility in practice but doesn’t speak to the intent of the practitioner, which is about personal responsibility. Your over simplify to the point of distortion.
aquafrenta - Thank you for posting that video.
Your question is already answered: “My experience is not an exception. It is a sample of history. History testifies to the human rights abuse of both religionists and atheists (eg. Communists Rule in various countries) if they are given political power.”
Any action should serve some purpose—otherwise should not be done. When atheism came to replace theism, what did it have to offer to the humanity? Or what is the message conveyed unuttered or untaught? ‘There is no creator, hence you can do whatever you want’—this is what most people took. Thus it added to the present sorry state of affair.
Take only one example! What is the number of people killed in all wars, terrorists attack, and accidents in a year? Will it come anywhere near to the number of unborn babies killed in the name of abortion every year—more than 50 million?
You said: “The facts are however that atheists are arguably more moral in certain areas than theists are.”
This is like saying: “The pilot who bombed Japan and saw the after-effects of the bombing later turned into an altruistic (He started Cheshire Homes all over the world for the welfare of the crippled and the orphans).”
But this is not the experience of all the pilots who bomb cities—it is just an exception.
Abiather , befoe the god delusion(not a ref'to dawkins)do you believ humans existed?. If so how did non belief in god (you call atheism) replace theism ?
abiather Your metaphor about pilots that bombed Japan is problematic to say the least for it doesn’t address the inconstant logic of your statements. Many who go to war think rightly or wrongly, that right is on their side and put their own lives at risk for people or a cause they believe to be worthy of such personal risk. That in itself could be thought of as the very epitome of altruism.
What people do and why they do it cannot be separated as easily as you imply even though one can be ostensibly good while the other not so much or the other way around. Take abortion for instance, as you mention it! There are reasons why abortion is a good thing; say for a mother who will die if she does not have one for medical reasons. Whether this is a good or bad thing for the embryo and at what stage is up for debate but on balance is will be a good thing for the mother and her existing family.
If you ask atheists why they are atheist, I suspect that none will say that it was because they wanted to escape personal responsibility and therefore changed what they thought to be true, as though choosing one sweet over another in a candy store like the changing wind. As for theists they mostly believe because it is what they were taught to believe by their parents. Again it seems to be not for trying to escape personal reasonability.
You are conflating motive with action and action with consequence and then categorising consequence according to the human concept or right and wrong. This concept does not really exist in nature except in the basic forms of decay and order without moral judgment. In people good motives can give rise to actions and these actions intended to be good can result in bad and vice versa. Actions intended to do good do not always do so because life is more complex that you posit. There is a of course a general correlation between actions intended to do good and good outcomes but over time this effect is always naturalised. Those who feed the poor will eventually die as the poor also will, only to be replaced by new poor and those who wish to help them.
For your position to be having any kind of merit you will have to demonstrate why the effects of entropy and decay will not affect your good works or whatever it is you are trying to preach? You will also have to take into account basic logic and reason, which as yet you dont seem to be doing.
