Smoking Gun, Oh Atheists?

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I didn't say anything about what people call anything. I said that might makes right is all you have left if God does not exist.

Yet I am an atheist, and that is not my value.

There is no moral foundations in atheism, it has no moral doctrines.

Correct. I am an atheist. My moral foundation is elucidated int eh Affirmations of Humanism.

However Christianity does have moral doctrines and foundations, which are all based on God's sovereign and eternal nature.

Belief in a god is not a foundation for anything. It may be your premise for all other beliefs, but it is founded on nothing more than a claim and the will to believe.

Murder will always be wrong because God's nature never changes.

Murder is wrong to secular humanists. No god needed.

And the ethics of Christianity evolve over time.

The ethics of atheism changes relative to whoever is in power at the moment.

There is no ethics of atheism.

If you can't understand what we are and say, you needn't bother lecturing us what we are and must necessarily believe. If you do anyway, you should consider how you are perceived by those who recognize that you don't understand them.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

There are no moral fixed points on atheism.

There are no morals involved in atheism just as there are no morals of theism. Specific types of theism might offer moral values, but the category "theism" does not. It implied nothing but a god belief, and no other belief including moral values.

The atheist's morals come from elsewhere - not atheism per se. I'm a secular humanist, which encompasses a set of moral values that I find consistent with rational ethics and which are consistent with my values.

That's much more than mere atheism..

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I'm not angry, just

a waste of time to engage someone who chooses "his own standards", sorry friend, you reached a wall, me. LOL I am neither beleaguered nor emotional, nor attacking anyone. Are those the best you can do, when you really want to let loose ? No matter, the rule is "don't cast pearls before swine". A person who chooses to judge a comprehensive set of beliefs and principles, based upon cherry picked examples of people WHO SAY, they follow the standard, but obviously do not, makes one, as in the parable, a metaphorical pig. Pigs cannot grasp nor want to grasp, what is patently obvious. They choose their mud to root in, there is nothing for me in conversing with a pig blinded by the mud he chooses, finito.

Bottom line - we were discussing an issue, and one of us refused to go on. Your reasons seem to be that I would not submit to your definition of Christianity, which appears to be your interpretation of scripture and nothing else. Christianity has very little to do with its Bible.

I judge the Christianity I see, not the one you see or want me to see. That frustrated you. You tried valiantly to force me into your construct of Christianity, but I declined, persisted in my own preferred argument, and you broke it off because of that. You refused to countenance the reality of what Christianity creates.

And yes, if your purpose is to convince non-Christians of anything using scripture as evidence of anything more than that somebody had such a thought and that it was recorded, it is as you say a waste of time. If you're going to limit Christianity to your interpretation of scripture, then Christianity barely exists.

 

[shmogie]

Bottom line - we were discussing an issue, and one of us refused to go on. Your reasons seem to be that I would not submit to your definition of Christianity, which appears to be your interpretation of scripture and nothing else. Christianity has very little to do with its Bible.

I judge the Christianity I see, not the one you see or want me to see. That frustrated you. You tried valiantly to force me into your construct of Christianity, but I declined, persisted in my own preferred argument, and you broke it off because of that. You refused to countenance the reality of what Christianity creates.

And yes, if your purpose is to convince non-Christians of anything using scripture as evidence of anything more than that somebody had such a thought and that it was recorded, it is as you say a waste of time. If you're going to limit Christianity to your interpretation of scripture, then Christianity barely exists.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

[ChristineM]

Your reasoning is faulty. I am not trying to "blame" anyone for anything. I am simply stating that atheism was the ideal of the founders of communism for the reasons I have laid out. I have met very moral upstanding atheists, and immoral alleged Christians. To choose to believe in God, or not, is the free right of anyone.

Yet Marx was raised on Jewish and Lutheran principal's. Are you saying a person's upbringing and education do not colour their adulthood?

Slurs, what slurs ? Honeypie, I have seen more of humanity at it's best and it's worst than you ever will. In my almost 70 years I have stood in a Police line to face the very savages I spoke of. I saw unspeakable horrors perpetrated on children, baby's. I have seen people cut into pieces, and tried to deal with a woman gang raped by at least twelve men. I climbed on a roof to save someone from jumping, a month later they shot themselves. You may think civilization is moral, but I spent decades seeing how sick society really is. Your vaunted civilization is just a thin veneer, with the beasts just under it. Don't bother me anymore, you can't understand what is written, and you substitute your own thoughts for what is written. Adieu

Your personal problems are irrelevant, you slur atheism because you are scared of what you don't understand, and are to much of a coward to admit it.

Tell me if you were such a super hero law man, where were you when priests abuse children, when christians shoot up cinemas and schools or blow up city centres on a busy shopping Saturday?

I do not claim civilisation is moral, i do claim that Christianity stole the concept of morality from all humanity and use it to dis the people they stole it from. Which was my counter to your lies and being the coward you are it seems you don't have the nuts at defend your lies.

Thanks for your input.

Bye.

 

[ChristineM]

Bottom line - we were discussing an issue, and one of us refused to go on. Your reasons seem to be that I would not submit to your definition of Christianity, which appears to be your interpretation of scripture and nothing else. Christianity has very little to do with its Bible.

I judge the Christianity I see, not the one you see or want me to see. That frustrated you. You tried valiantly to force me into your construct of Christianity, but I declined, persisted in my own preferred argument, and you broke it off because of that. You refused to countenance the reality of what Christianity creates.

And yes, if your purpose is to convince non-Christians of anything using scripture as evidence of anything more than that somebody had such a thought and that it was recorded, it is as you say a waste of time. If you're going to limit Christianity to your interpretation of scripture, then Christianity barely exists.

Yes i have just met the same cowardly sloping shoulders from him. I challenged his claim of atheists not having morality and he goes into self aggrandisement stomp and bottles out.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Yes i have just met the same cowardly sloping shoulders from him. I challenged his claim of atheists not having morality and he goes into self aggrandisement stomp and bottles out.

I understand people like Shmogie. He's in an impossible situation. He's trying to defend his faith based beliefs from the incursion of conflicting evidence and argument. He chose to do so here by attempting to limit the discussion to his vision of Christianity and disqualify other opinions. He's not interested in looking at the world and seeing what the church is doing. He wants to confine the discussion of what Christianity is to his favorite scriptures and his idea of a true Christian, neither of which mean much to unbelievers or have manifest much in the world.

And most of them eventually hit a wall of frustration as he did, and become angry.

 

[ChristineM]

I understand people like Shmogie. He's in an impossible situation. He's trying to defend his faith based beliefs from the incursion of conflicting evidence and argument. He chose to do so here by attempting to limit the discussion to his vision of Christianity and disqualify other opinions. He's not interested in looking at the world and seeing what the church is doing. He wants to confine the discussion of what Christianity is to his favorite scriptures and his idea of a true Christian, neither of which mean much to unbelievers or have manifest much in the world.

And most of them eventually hit a wall of frustration as he did, and become angry.

Yes, there are a lot of them about.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I find this an interesting question. I am not a Christian, yet a Christian is asking where in their own book these atrocities are contained. Sadly, especially in regards to sex slavery, it is found throughout the OT where women are labeled as property, considered part of the spoils of war, and in Exodus if she is a virgin she can't even refuse to be wed to her rapist.

If it's found throughout, then it shouldn't be too hard to find where in the Scriptures God's people committed irrational, heartless and misogynistic actions such as you portray.

How were slaves treated, in Israelite society?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If it's found throughout, then it shouldn't be too hard to find where in the Scriptures God's people committed irrational, heartless and misogynistic actions such as you portray.

That's what is making this amusing to me. I know the books and chapters, but you, the Christian, apparently do not.

How were slaves treated, in Israelite society?

As pieces of property who could be beaten because they were property; men where released after a time, women were not.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That's what is making this amusing to me. I know the books and chapters, but you, the Christian, apparently do not.

As pieces of property who could be beaten because they were property; men where released after a time, women were not.

Oh, I know them, but I find that many, even professed Christians, simply repeat what they've been told. And, if they have read it, they pick and choose verses.

But really, as is the case with every Bible-related question, the issue of slavery must be considered in context. A careful examination of the Scriptures reveals that God deplores the mistreatment of humans.

Such an examination also reveals that the kind of slavery practiced by God’s people in the Bible is not the cruel and abusive slavery that is envisioned by most people today. (And the Bible shows that God will deliver us from all forms of slavery in due time. Then, all mankind will enjoy true freedom.—Isaiah 65:21, 22.):

Does the Bible Condone Slavery? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

My next post will deal specifically with the treatment of women in ancient Israel.

Take care.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Hey, @Shadow Wolf , hope you are doing well.

Here is an article that I hope you'll find interesting.... I hope you're open to reading it.

If you have questions, please feel free to ask!

Does God Really Care About Women? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

As for foreign women -- i.e., not Israelite -- two examples the Bible provides us are Naomi, who married Boaz, and Rahab from Jericho, who although she had been a harlot, and everyone knew it, she married high up in Israelite society: the son of the leader of the tribe of Judah.

What we can learn from this is that, if we turn to Jehovah, it doesn't matter to Him how we lived our lives prior. He is willing to overlook and forgive past errors. -- Acts of the Apostles 10:34-35

So should we then.

Take care, my cousin.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Does God Really Care About Women? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

None of that mentions a woman being unclean while she's on her period, female slaves do not go free, she is to ask no questions or even speak in church, nor does it mention that a woman who doesn't bleed on her wedding night is to be put to death. And there is also the issue of buying and paying for a woman for marriage.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

slavery practiced by God’s people in the Bible is not the cruel and abusive slavery

The Bible itself is clear that because a slave is your property, you can beat them as severely as you want provided you don't kill them and they recover after a few days.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Why the little Z's?

 

[shmogie]

Why the little Z's?

Sleep apnea

 

[shunyadragon]

We outsiders judge Christianity by its actions, not scripture.

The problems lie in scripture, and the unfortunate result in the history of the world.

Check out the Book of Revelation some time. It is indeed an advocate of the war against Evil in a righteous crusade. There is no middle ground.

 

[shmogie]

The problems lie in scripture, and the unfortunate result in the history of the world.

Check out the Book of Revelation some time. It is indeed an advocate of the war against Evil in a righteous crusade. There is no middle ground.

You know, or should know, that Revelation is a symbolic prophecy, but yes, the war against evil is a righteous crusade,

 

[shunyadragon]

You know, or should know, that Revelation is a symbolic prophecy, but yes, the war against evil is a righteous crusade,

It is ironic you consider it symbolic, but fully justify the real world 'symbolic' meaning of the Book of Revelation to many Christians in history.

 

[Willamena]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

A fine debate technique...