I'm An Atheist Who Follows the Golden Rule

[McBell]

I believe what is ironic is that a sinner believes in keeping the golden rule without the aid of God to counteract that sinfulness. I believe the only way for that to happen is for it to have been learned somewhere along the line without remembrance or knowledge that God had something to do with it.

Made by a person who claims god had anything to do with it in the first place.
Perhaps if you were to loook at it from the perspective that there is no god...
Meaning that NOTHING came from god.
Meaning that everything came from something else.
Including the Golden Rule.

I am not making any claim that it is correct, merely pointing out that mindlessly tossing your god into everything only works with the choir.

 

[Frank Merton]

That the Golden Rule and things like that came from men is okay with me. It is less than perfect, but good enough for a guide 99 percent of the time. It also has a practicality to it, in that doing good things for people tends to lead to their doing good things for us.

I don't think for a moment these things come from God, as if they did we would have to follow them much more closely than anyone does in reality. Think about it -- if we must do to others what we would like them to do to us, we would give away or merchandise if we were a merchant, lend to anyone without interest if we were a bank, never send anyone to prison or even arrest them if we were a policeman, and even give our services freely if we were a prostitute.

God's laws (which for this reason don't exist) require strict adherence. We can bend man's laws to fit with reality.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I believe what is ironic is that a sinner believes in keeping the golden rule without the aid of God to counteract that sinfulness. I believe the only way for that to happen is for it to have been learned somewhere along the line without remembrance or knowledge that God had something to do with it.

Perhaps he reads ancient Chinese philosophy?

 

[Muffled]

Made by a person who claims god had anything to do with it in the first place.
Perhaps if you were to loook at it from the perspective that there is no god...
Meaning that NOTHING came from god.
Meaning that everything came from something else.
Including the Golden Rule.

I am not making any claim that it is correct, merely pointing out that mindlessly tossing your god into everything only works with the choir.

I believe for me that would be like trying to deny there is a sun in the sky.

I believe that really boils down to a pig in a poke sort of like believing in the bogeyman.

I believe everything I say is with the mind of God so you are right in that respect.

 

[Muffled]

That the Golden Rule and things like that came from men is okay with me. It is less than perfect, but good enough for a guide 99 percent of the time. It also has a practicality to it, in that doing good things for people tends to lead to their doing good things for us.

I don't think for a moment these things come from God, as if they did we would have to follow them much more closely than anyone does in reality. Think about it -- if we must do to others what we would like them to do to us, we would give away or merchandise if we were a merchant, lend to anyone without interest if we were a bank, never send anyone to prison or even arrest them if we were a policeman, and even give our services freely if we were a prostitute.

God's laws (which for this reason don't exist) require strict adherence. We can bend man's laws to fit with reality.

I believe your thinking is contrary to the evidence.

I believe I don't know what planet you are from but I don't see any of those scenarios as having any validity. For instance I would not want a merchant to give away his wares because I would not want to have to do that if I were a merchant.

 

[Muffled]

Perhaps he reads ancient Chinese philosophy?

Can anyone verify the source of ancient Chinese philosophy?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Can anyone verify the source of ancient Chinese philosophy?

Only to a limited degree. Let's assume, for a second then, that K'ung Ch'iu didn't write the exact words I mentioned, since that is obviously more likely than not. Someone wrote them. As opposed to Middle Eastern society at the same time, there was both literacy (in the ruling classes) and books.
So I'm a little unsure what point you are driving at, honestly?

 

[Frank Merton]

Only to a limited degree. Let's assume, for a second then, that K'ung Ch'iu didn't write the exact words I mentioned, since that is obviously more likely than not. Someone wrote them. As opposed to Middle Eastern society at the same time, there was both literacy (in the ruling classes) and books.
So I'm a little unsure what point you are driving at, honestly?

What you say applies to all ancient philosophies and religions. We have myths as to where they came from but they are only myths -- interesting stories with maybe a kernel of history here and there but mostly invented over time.

I think about the Buddha, who lived about 500 BCE, and has elaborate wondrous stories told about him of miracles and portents and a perfect life. This is obviously nonsense, but that does not mean a great teacher of his sort did not live at that time. The stories are natural enough but must be discounted.