Atheist Bible

[BNguyen]

There is no possible way in science or religion to disprove something with 100% certainty, nobody has that much knowledge nor ever will. Evidence and data as I said before only supports, it does not prove anything.

 

[sokka14]

I always thought I was an atheist but I guess I am not. I think evolution is possible but so is a higher power. What is that called?

It's still called Atheism. Atheists do believe a higher power is POSSIBLE, but in the same respect they believe dragons are possible, as they can't be proved or disproved. Atheists merely choose not to live their lives based on the teaching of dragons.

Calling yourself an agnostic wouldn't be wrong either.

 

[BallPtPenTheif]

Aren't atheist all about NOT believing? If I were an atheist I would just give up and say fuck it! I mean I am not actively religious, and don't really believe in christian beliefs, but to say you are atheist is just crazy. You gotta be something. And if you ARE indeed nothing than you aren't allowed to be organized. Go home!

Everybody is allowed to organize no matter how arbitrary their commonality is. Teachers do it, and so do some grocery baggers. You don't have to be unified by a belief just a course of action.

 

[Deadman Walkin]

It's still called Atheism. Atheists do believe a higher power is POSSIBLE, but in the same respect they believe dragons are possible, as they can't be proved or disproved. Atheists merely choose not to live their lives based on the teaching of dragons.

Calling yourself an agnostic wouldn't be wrong either.

Mkay thanks! I am glad I know what I am, but honestly I am fine with anyone believing what they want to believe. If someone says we are all part of some alien experiment, or something as not probable as Scientology, I am fine with it. I think anyone can believe in whatever they want, so long as they don't try to force it upon others.

 

[EllsinoreOutlaw]

What a shame!!!

 

[Ignignoct]

Atheism is for WEAK minded people!! Its the Fact ppl Get over it!!!

Later brah.

AOL chat's THAT way. --->

 

[EllsinoreOutlaw]

Atheism is for WEAK minded people!! Its the Fact ppl Get over it!!!

Later brah.

AOL chat's THAT way. --->

Ain't your brah. lmao

Just staten the facts bro!

 

[samsprinkle]

Aren't atheist all about NOT believing? If I were an atheist I would just give up and say fuck it! I mean I am not actively religious, and don't really believe in christian beliefs, but to say you are atheist is just crazy. You gotta be something. And if you ARE indeed nothing than you aren't allowed to be organized. Go home!

Everybody is allowed to organize no matter how arbitrary their commonality is. Teachers do it, and so do some grocery baggers. You don't have to be unified by a belief just a course of action.

Does that make it any less stupid?

 

[PiCroft]

Does that make it any less stupid?

Yes, Unions, support groups and societies are all 'stupid'.

 

[traceur_]

You're foisting upon us the typical religious canard that atheists can't be moral. Its bologna. Just because there is no magical man in the sky doesn't mean we don't have certain societal responsibilities and expectations.

Oy vey, I'm jumping in! HIYAH!

In an amoral universe without God, there is no basis for morality. Sure you can be what you may perceive as 'moral', but you have no basis for it, and the ideas of 'right' and 'wrong' are just you trying to force others (Or others trying to force you) to follow your worldview.

Plus, as Cuddly Tomato said:

...morals, ethics, justice, and other such concepts are not scientific, so waving "no proof" in the faces of people for believing in something makes you hypocritical if you still claim to have morals.

Theophobes laugh at me because I believe in some 'invisible man'. Well I laugh at theophobes who, if there really is no God, believe in some invisible moral force that everyone supposedly should adhere to. No such thing as right and wrong in that worldview.

You think we have no morals because we don't believe your morals, morals that were set forth by an omnipotent puppet master. We do not believe in any singular set of morals for we are without a common creed, each of us chooses our own morals. You think you are the only one wise enough to grasp what right and wrong are? "believe in some invisible moral force that everyone supposedly should adhere to. No such thing as right and wrong in that world view" what world view exactly are you referring to? As i have said each of us chooses our own morals so how can you say we don't know what right and wrong are, I don't think that each of us has given you a list of what we think is right and wrong so how can you pass judgment on our morals when you do not know what they are? You truly are a fool if you would pass judgment on me without ever having known me.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

You're foisting upon us the typical religious canard that atheists can't be moral. Its bologna. Just because there is no magical man in the sky doesn't mean we don't have certain societal responsibilities and expectations.

Oy vey, I'm jumping in! HIYAH!

In an amoral universe without God, there is no basis for morality. Sure you can be what you may perceive as 'moral', but you have no basis for it, and the ideas of 'right' and 'wrong' are just you trying to force others (Or others trying to force you) to follow your worldview.

Plus, as Cuddly Tomato said:

...morals, ethics, justice, and other such concepts are not scientific, so waving "no proof" in the faces of people for believing in something makes you hypocritical if you still claim to have morals.

Theophobes laugh at me because I believe in some 'invisible man'. Well I laugh at theophobes who, if there really is no God, believe in some invisible moral force that everyone supposedly should adhere to. No such thing as right and wrong in that worldview.

You think we have no morals because we don't believe your morals, morals that were set forth by an omnipotent puppet master. We do not believe in any singular set of morals for we are without a common creed, each of us chooses our own morals. You think you are the only one wise enough to grasp what right and wrong are? "believe in some invisible moral force that everyone supposedly should adhere to. No such thing as right and wrong in that world view" what world view exactly are you referring to? As i have said each of us chooses our own morals so how can you say we don't know what right and wrong are, I don't think that each of us has given you a list of what we think is right and wrong so how can you pass judgment on our morals when you do not know what they are? You truly are a fool if you would pass judgment on me without ever having known me.

No, he doesn't think that at all.

He probably thinks you have difficulty reading posts with an impartial eye though, because you completely missed the point both I and he were making.

It isn't that you don't have morals, in fact his point was that you do have morals, and that those morals are inherently unprovable and scienficially unjustifiable concepts. They are just as much a form of belief as his god is to him. So if you wave the flying spaghetti monster in the faces of people who believe in god or something spiritual, you would be a hypocrite.

 

[Baby Tea]

You think we have no morals because we don't believe your morals, morals that were set forth by an omnipotent puppet master. We do not believe in any singular set of morals for we are without a common creed, each of us chooses our own morals. You think you are the only one wise enough to grasp what right and wrong are? "believe in some invisible moral force that everyone supposedly should adhere to. No such thing as right and wrong in that world view" what world view exactly are you referring to? As i have said each of us chooses our own morals so how can you say we don't know what right and wrong are, I don't think that each of us has given you a list of what we think is right and wrong so how can you pass judgment on our morals when you do not know what they are? You truly are a fool if you would pass judgment on me without ever having known me.

Easy tiger! I never said atheists can't have morality or morals, I'm only saying there is no basis for it. You certainly can judge for yourself what right or wrong is, but to assume that there is a universal moral framework in an amoral universe is silly.

And in a naturalist worldview, where there is no god or anything 'supernatural' (That means spiritualism is out), there is no such thing as right or wrong. It's completely subjective. You could say 'stealing is wrong' and someone else could say 'stealing is ok'. Who is wrong? Who is right? You yourself said that we judge for ourselves what right and wrong is, so what happens when opposing judgments of morality collide?

And, finally, I never passed judgment on you. I never said you, or anyone else, was immoral or evil or anything of the sort. I simply said there is no basis for morality in a naturalist worldview, and no such thing as a universal moral framework in said worldview.

EDIT: Ah, ninja'd by Tomato!

 

[Ignignoct]

No, he doesn't think that at all.

He probably thinks you have difficulty reading posts with an impartial eye though, because you completely missed the point both I and he were making.

It isn't that you don't have morals, in fact his point was THAT YOU DO HAVE MORALS, and that those morals are inherently unprovable and unscienficially justifiable concepts. They are just as much a form of belief as his god is to him. So if you wave the flying spaghetti monster in the faces of people who believe in god or something spiritual, you would be a hypocrite.

So beliefs in supernatural things are inextricably tied to social behavior, and so we're hypocrites if we feel like saying God is a foolish idea, yet we don't murder, steal, rape on principle?

I see the point you're going for, sort of a "HEY! Break it up you two!" cease-fire, but it seems weak and betrays its purpose in that it begs to be argued, to dissolve the already-thin adhesive of your notion.

 

[godevit]

It's kinda silly writing a bible about nothing .....yes I'm an atheist :S

 

[Baby Tea]

So beliefs in supernatural things are inextricably tied to social behavior, and so we're hypocrites if we feel like saying God is a foolish idea, yet we don't murder, steal, rape on principle?

But what do you base that principle on? Where is the basis for it?
If you can steal and get away with it, why wouldn't you?

If naturalism is to be believed then this universe is completely amoral, and any notion of 'good' and 'evil' and 'right' and 'wrong' is not only subjective, but unprovable and unscientific. Therefore, it would be just as much a fantasy as the idea of God.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

Atheism and Christianity don't involve ethics and moral compasses in themselves. Those are tacked on as you get deeper into them.

Atheist = Refusal of all gods
Christianity = There is He, The Lord

Me, I'm as atheistic as can be, with a self-designed religion of ethics and morals.

 

[Ignignoct]

You think we have no morals because we don't believe your morals, morals that were set forth by an omnipotent puppet master. We do not believe in any singular set of morals for we are without a common creed, each of us chooses our own morals. You think you are the only one wise enough to grasp what right and wrong are? "believe in some invisible moral force that everyone supposedly should adhere to. No such thing as right and wrong in that world view" what world view exactly are you referring to? As i have said each of us chooses our own morals so how can you say we don't know what right and wrong are, I don't think that each of us has given you a list of what we think is right and wrong so how can you pass judgment on our morals when you do not know what they are? You truly are a fool if you would pass judgment on me without ever having known me.

Easy tiger! I never said atheists can't have morality or morals, I'm only saying there is no basis for it. You certainly can judge for yourself what right or wrong is, but to assume that there is a universal moral framework in an amoral universe is silly.

And in a naturalist worldview, where there is no god or anything 'supernatural' (That means spiritualism is out), there is no such thing as right or wrong. It's completely subjective. You could say 'stealing is wrong' and someone else could say 'stealing is ok'. Who is wrong? Who is right? You yourself said that we judge for ourselves what right and wrong is, so what happens when opposing judgments of morality collide?

And, finally, I never passed judgment on you. I never said you, or anyone else, was immoral or evil or anything of the sort. I simply said there is no basis for morality in a naturalist worldview, and no such thing as a universal moral framework in said worldview.

EDIT: Ah, ninja'd by Tomato!

There is no rational, nutritional basis for italian sausage and chicken pizza, but there it is, delicious, fatty, and begging for me to partake of it.

To be more concise: The basis is no longer relevant when the secular naturalists are by-and-large already onboard for a lawful, crime-disdaining society.

I'd try to bore you with how secular cultures themselves have rules, laws, etc, based on that humans are social animals that need to cooperate on some level to flourish, but I had pizza on the brain, and that idea seemed boring.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

No, he doesn't think that at all.

He probably thinks you have difficulty reading posts with an impartial eye though, because you completely missed the point both I and he were making.

It isn't that you don't have morals, in fact his point was THAT YOU DO HAVE MORALS, and that those morals are inherently unprovable and unscienficially justifiable concepts. They are just as much a form of belief as his god is to him. So if you wave the flying spaghetti monster in the faces of people who believe in god or something spiritual, you would be a hypocrite.

So beliefs in supernatural things are inextricably tied to social behavior, and so we're hypocrites if we feel like saying God is a foolish idea, yet we don't murder, steal, rape on principle?

I see the point you're going for, sort of a "HEY! Break it up you two!" cease-fire, but it seems weak and betrays its purpose in that it begs to be argued, to dissolve the already-thin adhesive of your notion.

Naah. Not quite so weak...

You said murder, steal, rape... prove they are wrong. No, I do not require proof. I don't need someone to tell me. I don't myself think they are right.

I am just asking, where is the proof?

Those things are wrong not just because we get taught it, but because we feel it. Guilt, conscience, other such things. But you see, to many religious people god is the same. Belief isn't the same as just thinking that there is some man in the sky, it is a feeling of something else.

Belief in a moral, belief in a supernatural entity, belief in nothing at all... it is all the same.

 

[Legion]

So beliefs in supernatural things are inextricably tied to social behavior, and so we're hypocrites if we feel like saying God is a foolish idea, yet we don't murder, steal, rape on principle?

But what do you base that principle on? Where is the basis for it?
If you can steal and get away with it, why wouldn't you?

If naturalism is to be believed then this universe is completely amoral, and any notion of 'good' and 'evil' and 'right' and 'wrong' is not only subjective, but unprovable and unscientific. Therefore, it would be just as much a fantasy as the idea of God.

Agreed.

Although there is *some* basis for "morals" from an atheists perspective.

A man who rapes/murders/steals is unattractive to women because they do not have any respect for them. Therefore they make a poor mate. (he might rape them, get caught stealing/murdering and get punished so not there to support them).

The reason they are punishable is because they detract from society as opposed to morality.

 

[Ignignoct]

So beliefs in supernatural things are inextricably tied to social behavior, and so we're hypocrites if we feel like saying God is a foolish idea, yet we don't murder, steal, rape on principle?

But what do you base that principle on? Where is the basis for it?
If you can steal and get away with it, why wouldn't you?

If naturalism is to be believed then this universe is completely amoral, and any notion of 'good' and 'evil' and 'right' and 'wrong' is not only subjective, but unprovable and unscientific. Therefore, it would be just as much a fantasy as the idea of God.

Because I conduct my behavior based on how I would want others to treat me as a human, even while acknowledging that such will not always be returned in kind.

I do good, as the reciprocation of kindness back from others is reward enough. Makes me feel good.

Kinda like that corny saying, "I just want to love and be loved."

You're stuck on a primitive, black-and-white, Lord of the Flies philosophy that is the polar opposite to fundamentalist Christianity, both of which we can all agree to be ill-suited to modern society.