Atheists: Why Shouldn't We Follow Jesus?

[ArtieE]

I feel like perhaps you missed the point of what I was saying. Everyone has the capacity to ascertain right from wrong, yet we know for a fact that people still do wrong. Atheists are more than capable of reasoning out a moral code that is more or less in line with the example of Jesus, but have little to no impetus to actually follow it in situations where it becomes inconvenient or difficult to do so.

But if you tell people with a survival instinct that the morals come from a god who has the power to grant you eternal happy survival if you follow the codes and will send you to hell if you don't you provide the impetus. Hence the evolution of religion.

 

[Quetzal]

No.

Do you think our current welfare programs are too generous?

 

[Deathbydefault]

Atheists: Why Shouldn't We Follow Jesus?

You can if you want, not like I care.
Just don't knock on my door to tell me how great you think he is and we shouldn't have too many issues.

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you think our current welfare programs are too generous?

Wrong question!
Programs should be changed to encourage self sufficiency.
While the spending level is debatable, that's not what I'd address first when I become dictator.
One problem...:
Programs should stop penalizing those on the dole for working.
Currently, many can lose more in benefits than they'd get in wages if they worked.
This incentivizes being on the dole. (I've known some in this position.)
Another problem....
Subsidized housing requires that landlords surveil tenants for compliance with a myriad of regulations.
There's even special management software for this. This is not just intrusive...it also indicates program
design ripe for abuse.

 

[Quetzal]

Wrong question!

Sigh, of course it is.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Few would disagree that the life Jesus lived as portrayed in the Bible is a good example to live by. I would go further and argue it is the best example to live by, almost objectively so.

There are lots of philosophies available, many more clearly articulated than Christianity.
Why would you choose it over Confucionism, for example? This also has the concept of the Golden Rule.

 

[Altfish]

That's your right. Nobody is putting a gun to your head. It's just a suggestion as something that is good for humanity and has literally no downside to it.

There was a downside if you followed David Koresh

 

[GodlessHeathen]

I am not precisely an atheist , but I would like to know what exactly did Jesus do in his tragically short life? In the 1-3 years he lived, he apparently roamed the countryside performing parochial miracles and exorcisms and preaching the oncoming end of the world (which did not happen) and saying positive sounding but disjointed sayings. Then, believing that the world is about to end, he went into the Temple on a holy day and caused an small uprising which promptly got him executed. The later development of Jesus in God and savior with world-changing significance of his death and resurrection is the brick over which the fascinating structure of Christianity is built. But without that (and atheists would deny that any of that actually happened) what did Jesus do and say and think in his life that makes him comparable to others (I am thinking of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Hillel, Buddha, Confucius, Mencius, Seneca and Marcus Aurelius)? James, Peter and Paul were far greater figures in that respect than Jesus ever was in his life.

Obviously as an atheist, I'm not concerned with claims of performing miracles and preaching of the end times. I reject those claims on the basis of a lack of evidence. I assume you agree with that, so it isn't really even worth discussing. However, I am concerned with his moral philosophy and that doesn't require physical evidence. Because whether or not it's true that he lived that way or even existed has no impact on the actual philosophy itself. I am most concerned with how the character of Jesus as portrayed in the Bible lived.

What makes him particularly admirable is that he associated with criminals, the destitute, and the hated at a time when doing so was enough to get you stoned to death. He preached a message of love and mercy. Many of the other figures you mentioned also had wonderful ideas. Most did not actually live them in practice.

I'd argue that you'd be better served deciding your morality for yourself rather than riding the coattails of a roughly iron-age peasant who still thought the earth was flat(No, not referring to the "people thought the earth was flat until Columbus" bull****, just that the writers of the NT clearly saw the earth as flat, or else the whole bit where you could see "all the kingdoms of the world" from a high mountain wouldn't work).

I think you must be replying to some other thread other than this one because I am clearly talking about moral philosophy, not flat earth theory. What other ideas the figure or Jesus had or might have had has no bearing on his moral philosophy.

In my opinion, Jesus is a good role model in some things, but there are whole lot of people who are better role models than him. Ben Franklin, Albert Einstein, or Nelson Mandela, for instance.

Franklin, Einstein, and Mandela are certainly better than most people. However, they weren't without fault themselves. Franklin owned slaves, Einstein built the atomic bomb, and Mandela admired Castro's 'leadership'. These people did some amazing things as well and that obviously cannot be discounted. But I wouldn't exactly base my moral philosophy on those of slave owners.

As far as I understand his life story, if we are to ignore the miracles, he was merely preaching around the land and gathering a group of fellows that believed what he said. I don't really see why his life would be a good example to live by.

If you ignore what he actually said, then sure. I can see how you wouldn't see that. However, I urge you to actually read what he said.

But if you tell people with a survival instinct that the morals come from a god who has the power to grant you eternal happy survival if you follow the codes and will send you to hell if you don't you provide the impetus. Hence the evolution of religion.

There is such a thing as a wrong impetus. Doing good things simply to avoid punishment or to attain some sort of personal reward effectively slaps a selfish motivation on any good deed and calls into question its "goodness". Many would argue that motivations like wanting to become a better, happier person, or improving the world are selfish desires too. However, living a life after Jesus' examples involves doing moral deeds that are seemingly against your interests.

You can if you want, not like I care.
Just don't knock on my door to tell me how great you think he is and we shouldn't have too many issues.

I wish you all the best.

 

[Laika]

Few would disagree that the life Jesus lived as portrayed in the Bible is a good example to live by. I would go further and argue it is the best example to live by, almost objectively so. To me, the questions often debated on these forums are almost irrelevant. It almost doesn't matter whether or not Jesus existed, or whether or not Jesus was the Son of God and performed miracles. We will likely never be able to know the answers to these questions definitively. If we die and our suspicions are confirmed that there is no God, will we have regretted living a life like Jesus did, leaving the world in a better state than when we entered it? I see no reason why that would be the case.

Too often, when atheists reject the hypocritical religious moral busybodies, the corrupt megachurch pastors fleecing their flocks, the outright crimes committed by some religious people and in the name of their religions, we tend to reject the concept wholesale without retaining what can be good about it. Atheism is just a rejection of belief in a god and therefore does not answer any moral questions; it isn't intended to. That isn't to say that atheists lack morality because that's not true either. But we tend to piece one out based on reason loosely based on the Golden Rule. But is this enough? I don't think so either.

Having a moral code based on reason is a good thing, but without the impetus to actually put it into practice in all situations, then we end up living our lives in cruise control at the whims of our desires. Most of us aren't terrible people. The harm we inflict on most people tends not to be intentional. Yet, we still harm others out of a sense of opportunity, out of a desire for justice or vengeance, or we still harbour hatred for others. By actively making an effort to live more like Jesus did, we might fall short, but the attempt would most certainly make our lives immeasurably better. So I pose the question again: Why shouldn't we atheists follow Jesus?

Jesus may well have had a historical existence, but the jesus we know today is of two millennia of whispers, rumours and distortions. He has been reduced in the hands of the church established in his name into a perversion of the human spirit, a hatred of humanity, of life and of pleasure based on a judgement upon mankind as originating in sin and to be redeemed by the authority of the church. He became a form of idolatory, an icon of earthly power and human cruelty as blood was spilt in his name. If there is a false prophet and an anti-christ, it is the jesus that we are taught as the instrument of earthly ambition to reconcile people with their suffering awaiting to be redeemed: To live awaiting redemption after death.

Jesus, assuming he existed, was not remarkable for his divinity, but for his humanity. That spark which made him-along with all the greatest prophets who spoke the truth of the human condition- is alive in us all. We need only listen to it and know ourselves to know him. We created god in our image, so we must learn to make men gods- not merely in power but also in conscience. We must not merely appear to be moral but also to act upon it. Anyone can be christian- the challange to be christ-like.

If god or even Christ were a fiction made by human hands, it was also a projection of our own humanity. You do not need Jesus to find what is good, only the courage to know him and all mankind through ourselves. An atheist can love mankind, admire its virtues and forgive its crimes. No-one can save us from ourselves. We just have to come to believe that we are worthy of our own ideals and have the courage and humility to live by them. We may chase the myth of christ as a destination. we need only the to know love and see within each of us that we can all be saints and monsters and everything in between. Whatever we choose, the path we take is irrevocably human.

 

[Nietzsche]

I think you must be replying to some other thread other than this one because I am clearly talking about moral philosophy, not flat earth theory. What other ideas the figure or Jesus had or might have had has no bearing on his moral philosophy.

But it does, or rather, it's a good example of how utterly ridiculous it is to base your moral compass on someone who lived in what amounts to an alien world to modern humans. The world has changed. Culture has progressed.

 

[Koldo]

If you ignore what he actually said, then sure. I can see how you wouldn't see that. However, I urge you to actually read what he said.

I have. Can you elaborate on that ? What do you find so remarkable about his life ?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Few would disagree that the life Jesus lived as portrayed in the Bible is a good example to live by. I would go further and argue it is the best example to live by, almost objectively so. To me, the questions often debated on these forums are almost irrelevant. It almost doesn't matter whether or not Jesus existed, or whether or not Jesus was the Son of God and performed miracles. We will likely never be able to know the answers to these questions definitively. If we die and our suspicions are confirmed that there is no God, will we have regretted living a life like Jesus did, leaving the world in a better state than when we entered it? I see no reason why that would be the case.

Too often, when atheists reject the hypocritical religious moral busybodies, the corrupt megachurch pastors fleecing their flocks, the outright crimes committed by some religious people and in the name of their religions, we tend to reject the concept wholesale without retaining what can be good about it. Atheism is just a rejection of belief in a god and therefore does not answer any moral questions; it isn't intended to. That isn't to say that atheists lack morality because that's not true either. But we tend to piece one out based on reason loosely based on the Golden Rule. But is this enough? I don't think so either.

Having a moral code based on reason is a good thing, but without the impetus to actually put it into practice in all situations, then we end up living our lives in cruise control at the whims of our desires. Most of us aren't terrible people. The harm we inflict on most people tends not to be intentional. Yet, we still harm others out of a sense of opportunity, out of a desire for justice or vengeance, or we still harbour hatred for others. By actively making an effort to live more like Jesus did, we might fall short, but the attempt would most certainly make our lives immeasurably better. So I pose the question again: Why shouldn't we atheists follow Jesus?

His core intentions behind his teaching: sacrifice, love, neighbir before self, etc are traits most religious taught. Id rather follow The Buddha because he didnt use death to achieve these goals. Nor did he advocate obedience but discipleship. His focus was for us to understand not to have someone else to depend on. We like to think that life will begin with no suffering. Thats a human desire. The Buddha taught to understand the nature of suffering. He did die not live forever because he got to that understanding without the need to die to be reborn.

I find thats more beautiful. I would have looked into Hindu given I admire the examples of how to live but I dont see myself being an atheist hindu. That doesnt make sense to me. But then neither does a christian who believes a human is god.

So, it depends on the persons preference. I find everything comes back to me. We can turn away from our beliefs but we cant run from ourselves.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Go on...

Things that come to mind off the top of my head:

- his position that thinking about a "sin" is as bad as committing the act. That's messed up regardless of one's positiom on God.

- he sometimes does things that aren't so much evil per se, but don't really qualify as "good", e.g. cursing the fig tree. That whole episode just comes across as erratic behaviour.

- his suggestion that the oppressed should put up with their oppression in the hope that amends will be made after they're dead. This sort of promise can only be morally good to the extent that it's factually true. Otherwise, it exacerbates suffering... kinda like putting fake fire extinguishers up in a building.

 

[LuisDantas]

Why shouldn't we atheists follow Jesus?

Not a particularly good role model. Nor a very clear one when it comes to his message, which often enough is just odd.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Relevant to this thread, I think: a detailed commentary and criticism of the Sermon on the Mount.

Sermon on the Mount - Iron Chariots Wiki

 

[Koldo]

Things that come to mind off the top of my head:

- his position that thinking about a "sin" is as bad as committing the act. That's messed up regardless of one's positiom on God.

- he sometimes does things that aren't so much evil per se, but don't really qualify as "good", e.g. cursing the fig tree. That whole episode just comes across as erratic behaviour.

- his suggestion that the oppressed should put up with their oppression in the hope that amends will be made after they're dead. This sort of promise can only be morally good to the extent that it's factually true. Otherwise, it exacerbates suffering... kinda like putting fake fire extinguishers up in a building.

May I add the delusion of grandeur which is a seed for the 'holier than thou' attitude ?
Like John 14:6 (NIV) -
"Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7If you really know me, you will knowb my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”"

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

C.S. Lewis gave his "liar, lunatic, or Lord" trilemma to respond to people who claimed that Jesus was a great moral teacher but not divine:

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse.

Lewis's trilemma - Wikipedia

Lewis is right (in this case, anyhow): to the extent that Jesus is good, his goodness is bound up with his divinity. Someone saying the things that are attributed to Jesus who wasn't the son of God wouldn't be a person to follow.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Jesus according to the gospel had the philosophy of a typical quasi-peaceful (I say quasi because his teaching was authoritarian, absolutionist and exclusivist) religious teacher. With the notable exception of teaching hell doctrine (according to my interpretation) which I believe is fundamentally unjust. I don't think his philosophy in its entirety is fit for me to follow, and what little pieces I agree with I see written better in other teachings.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Few would disagree that the life Jesus lived as portrayed in the Bible is a good example to live by. I would go further and argue it is the best example to live by, almost objectively so. To me, the questions often debated on these forums are almost irrelevant. It almost doesn't matter whether or not Jesus existed, or whether or not Jesus was the Son of God and performed miracles. We will likely never be able to know the answers to these questions definitively. If we die and our suspicions are confirmed that there is no God, will we have regretted living a life like Jesus did, leaving the world in a better state than when we entered it? I see no reason why that would be the case.

Too often, when atheists reject the hypocritical religious moral busybodies, the corrupt megachurch pastors fleecing their flocks, the outright crimes committed by some religious people and in the name of their religions, we tend to reject the concept wholesale without retaining what can be good about it. Atheism is just a rejection of belief in a god and therefore does not answer any moral questions; it isn't intended to. That isn't to say that atheists lack morality because that's not true either. But we tend to piece one out based on reason loosely based on the Golden Rule. But is this enough? I don't think so either.

Having a moral code based on reason is a good thing, but without the impetus to actually put it into practice in all situations, then we end up living our lives in cruise control at the whims of our desires. Most of us aren't terrible people. The harm we inflict on most people tends not to be intentional. Yet, we still harm others out of a sense of opportunity, out of a desire for justice or vengeance, or we still harbour hatred for others. By actively making an effort to live more like Jesus did, we might fall short, but the attempt would most certainly make our lives immeasurably better. So I pose the question again: Why shouldn't we atheists follow Jesus?

What's so great about how Bible Jesus behaved? Seems like kind of a whiny preachy busybody with some serious megalomania to me. Emulate that if you like, but I sure wouldn't hang out with you.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I have no quarrel with someone who wishes to live by some of the basic rules Jesus taught. I mean the real meaty bits of his message is that you must submit to god and to worship god. Those are not moral or helpful things but if you can take his "lessons" for morality and separate them from the religious parts then I can understand to a degree why one might want to follow his example. Its better than Muhammad at least.

However the problem with simply "believing" in Jesus is the concept of belief without evidence. This opens up the floodgates for people to put beliefs above facts even if they don't have evidence. That is dangerous. Best example I can think of right now is the anti-science movement headed by fundamentalist Christians. Because of their beliefs and belief systems they are harming themselves and others with science rejection.

Unquestioned dogmatic belief is the biggest enemy.