The "controversial opinions" thread!

[timislegend]

Talking of God in literal terms rather than metaphoric and symbolic is fucking stupid.

example - "thank god i was wearing a condom!" = reasonable

vs.

example - "that dude god owes me $13!" = stupid

 

[Limak]

Talking of God in literal terms rather than metaphoric and symbolic is fucking stupid.

Welcome to the 21th century where people still literally fly planes into buildings cause apparently some literal terms god told them to do so(literally).
(Yes, I realise this is not the real Islam and it's just manipulated bullshit created by some madman who really hated west, but the fact that people buy this shit proves how far behind some cultures are just cause of religion being abused, again).

 

[Aaron Smith]

Pascal's wager!

Bro, you're in fear of the afterlife!

I can understand, an eternity of worship/bliss/what have you Vs. Eternal hell. (if that's your stance on the matter, not all Christians agree)

When does the bliss end?

How much of your natural senses would have to be removed from you to not feel empathy for those in hell, possibly a loved one?

I have these questions regarding a theist view of an afterlife.

To me it seems, in some time "Hell" would be a vacation in such a situation.

In my mind, after a life well lived, I would think "God" would give us true peace, nothing.

If by "fear" you're trying to infer that I'm literally scared of the afterlife, that's not true. But if by "fear" you mean to say that I have a sense of humility and reverence towards the idea of the afterlife, then yes, I most definitely do.

All I can really say about your questions on the afterlife, is that you are trying to fathom the concept of eternity while still trying to include the concept of time within in, but the idea of eternity is not that it feels like time has passed in the same way it does each day on earth- eternity is different. Our bodies are temporary, but our souls are eternal.

Why do you assume that the "Atheist" on this board are "intelligent" ?

We don't have the answers you're looking for. It is plain to see, no one does yet.

You have faith, fair enough.



By the way, "no restraints"? really?

By "intelligent" I mean one who has allowed their own intellect to get between them and God, rather than someone who simply just doesn't care enough to even think about God.

By "no restraints" I am not suggesting that all atheists should logically become amoral murderers, but I am inferring that the atheist doesn't have any restraints on their personal thoughts, choices, and actions when no one else will be harmed by it.

 

[TheDriller]

By "no restraints" I am not suggesting that all atheists should logically become amoral murderers, but I am inferring that the atheist doesn't have any restraints on their personal thoughts, choices, and actions when no one else will be harmed by it.

this is by a long shot the dumbest shit i've ever read.
You act like you're the holder of the one true way and the rest of us are just filthy barbarians rolling around in the shit like animals.
The notion that religion is the only valid basis for morality is absurd, considering the depth and breadth of depravity that religions have inflicted on the population of this world.

Come down off the high horse and wise the fuck up eh?

 

[aberration]

I have never understood the whole "Jesus sacrificed his life for our sins" aspect of Christianity. Jesus came to Earth from heaven, knowing not only who he was but where he would ultimately go when all was said and done. Therefore, though he does suffer incredible cruelty and hardship in the story, he knew every step of the way that when he died, he'd go right back to eternal paradise. That just doesn't sound like much of a sacrifice to me. At the most mundane level, we all endure brief periods of hardship (like the workday) because we know what awaits us when it's over (going home to loving family). It just seems to me that if Jesus wanted to make a big showy sacrifice, he would have gone to hell so none of us had to.

 

[Aaron Smith]

this is by a long shot the dumbest shit i've ever read.
You act like you're the holder of the one true way and the rest of us are just filthy barbarians rolling around in the shit like animals.
The notion that religion is the only valid basis for morality is absurd, considering the depth and breadth of depravity that religions have inflicted on the population of this world.

Come down off the high horse and wise the fuck up eh?

You're putting words into my mouth here sir... Where did I say that religion is the only basis for morality? All I'm saying is that there are additional moral changes that occur within the Christian spirit that run counterintuitive to human nature. Christianity doesn't make me a better person than you or anyone else, but it does make me view and interact with the world in a different way.

 

[aberration]

Aaron, do you believe that a person doing good purely for its own sake is really doing good? This assumes an understood objective "good", of course. I ask because I saw what was supposedly a Bible quote the other day suggesting that a good deed done for any reason other than to glorify God is, in fact, wicked. I admit that I didn't look it up or investigate any further, but sentiments like that do suggest an institutional belief that religion is the only basis for morality. I'm not trolling here, just asking a very reasonable Christian person a question that has been bugging me.

 

[TheDriller]

You're putting words into my mouth here sir... Where did I say that religion is the only basis for morality? All I'm saying is that there are additional moral changes that occur within the Christian spirit that run counterintuitive to human nature. Christianity doesn't make me a better person than you or anyone else, but it does make me view and interact with the world in a different way.

you can claim otherwise but your words and conduct lean heavily on the side of "better" rather than merely "different". Whether it's intentional or not, you're attitude is coming across as arrogant and very literally "holier-than-thou".

I'm sure you're a nice guy and all that but I'm not going to sugar-coat it, you're world-view is warped.

Peace, love and Death Metal.

 

[Morgan C]

By "intelligent" I mean one who has allowed their own intellect to get between them and God, rather than someone who simply just doesn't care enough to even think about God.

I think I used to be an "intelligent" atheist, but now I guess I'm a dumb one. I just don't care to think about whether a being exists or not if he has zero effect on my life. I'm going to assume almost all religions are "dumb atheists" about any other religion. I don't think anyone is in a position to call others "dumb" atheists (even implicity) unless he has studied every single religion possible and arrived at a logical conclusion (ie. they're all full of shit).

I do still enjoy meaningless debates like this, but I don't take them seriously. No side is going to convince the other.

I have never understood the whole "Jesus sacrificed his life for our sins" aspect of Christianity. Jesus came to Earth from heaven, knowing not only who he was but where he would ultimately go when all was said and done. Therefore, though he does suffer incredible cruelty and hardship in the story, he knew every step of the way that when he died, he'd go right back to eternal paradise. That just doesn't sound like much of a sacrifice to me. At the most mundane level, we all endure brief periods of hardship (like the workday) because we know what awaits us when it's over (going home to loving family). It just seems to me that if Jesus wanted to make a big showy sacrifice, he would have gone to hell so none of us had to.

Never thought of it like this, but very good point XD

 

[timislegend]

considering the depth and breadth of depravity that religions have inflicted on the population of this world.

people

just people, not religions.


they are ideas, like science (which is equally sacred). using religion or an idea to make definitive decisions is as maniacal as believing there is nothing bigger than one's self (atheism).

to fathom something incomprehensible, is a shared obsession between the religious and scientific community... general atheism does not share that comparison.

when the world ends we will all witness what was once unfathomable (whatever it is).


another thought:

moral; (from latin morālis) is a message conveyed or a lesson to be learned from a story or event.
-
theism; in the broadest sense, is the belief that at least one deity exists.
-
a-theism, is to be without the belief of any deities.

no one will argue that atheism as become just as relevant as the holy bible but the holy bible is not the only theistic scripture. true or untrue these scriptures are archives of stories and events since the dawn of man.

therefore, to propose the use of any scripture as the origin of moral it is germane (by a technicality) that atheists do not possess the common moral concept as moral functions are a set of functional, culturally influenced and religious aspects of one's lifestyle.

it is possible for an atheist to possess values ...but this is much different.

the other notion is that, there is indeed... no-such-thing as a true atheist.

 

[JeffTD]

using religion or an idea to make definitive decisions is as maniacal as believing there is nothing bigger than one's self (atheism).

...what?

 

[B36arin]

Here's one take on the matter. Christians seem to think that not believing in God is a choice. It's not, I couldn't suddenly start believing in God if I found out that I really wanted to. It doesn't work that way. Could a devote Christian turn of his/her faith because he/she wanted to? The bible claims that God is omnipotent and God created life. That means that God created me the way that I am, and gave me a choice of either being honest to my own personal beliefs or go around lying to people and claiming that I have faith, seeing as I don't believe in God(he created me this way, remember?). So basically God is going to punish me for being honest to myself and the people around me and having an honest outlook on life and make me burn in hell for eternity for it. That would make God a sadistic hypocritical bastard who sends his own children to burn without ever having a chance.

For the record I'm not against Christianity or Christians, I have many very close friends and relatives who interpret Christianity in a way which doesn't give them a need to get on a moral high horse and look down on non-believers. But as soon as people start condemning me because of their twisted interpretations of their religion they lose my respect. Religion is a strictly personal matter, I don't need anyone to tell me what to believe.

 

[timislegend]

...what?

making decisions purely based on something that may have worked in the past is a mistake. the world changes around you (as well as people) and it is necessary for ideas to evolve. science and religion evolve slowly because of the overwhelming hubris amongst the separate communities and if it ever does evolve or make progress it is because one community attempts to prove the other wrong (not in all cases). this is all as equally maniacal as considering or deducing there is nothing bigger than you, when the fact (in and of itself) has yet to be proven... in literal terms, self-evidence. which is actually similar to faith.

 

[Aaron Smith]

Aaron, do you believe that a person doing good purely for its own sake is really doing good? This assumes an understood objective "good", of course. I ask because I saw what was supposedly a Bible quote the other day suggesting that a good deed done for any reason other than to glorify God is, in fact, wicked. I admit that I didn't look it up or investigate any further, but sentiments like that do suggest an institutional belief that religion is the only basis for morality. I'm not trolling here, just asking a very reasonable Christian person a question that has been bugging me.

Unfortunately I can't say that I know which Bible passage you're talking about, although if it is a Bible passage, it would be interesting to read it and try to unpack the meaning behind it.

Ultimately, one's actions (good or bad) have no bearing on whether or not they are considered righteous by God, as the Bible teaches that no one is righteous, and that all are in need of a savior. So, the act of helping the poor is in itself not wicked, but if the act of doing so causes one to believe that they are therefore more deserving of God's goodness or are a more righteous person, then that subsequent or motivating thought is definitely wicked. Hopefully that's a helpful response...

My pastor actually wrote a good, Biblically consistent column for the Washington Post some time ago about this whole "origin of morality" topic, so check it out if you're interested:

Why bad people do good things

 

[Aaron Smith]

you can claim otherwise but your words and conduct lean heavily on the side of "better" rather than merely "different". Whether it's intentional or not, you're attitude is coming across as arrogant and very literally "holier-than-thou".

I'm sure you're a nice guy and all that but I'm not going to sugar-coat it, you're world-view is warped.

Peace, love and Death Metal.

I definitely don't mean to come across as being "holier-than-thou"- perhaps I just haven't been choosing my words carefully enough, or maybe it's just that it's difficult to concisely communicate this topic on an internet message board. Ironically, one of the core tenets of Christian faith is to accept that you are depraved and sinful in God's eyes, which is precisely the opposite of looking upon others and feeling some sense of superiority or righteousness. God sees me the same way he sees Osama bin Laden, so I have no reason to boast whatsoever.

 

[JeffTD]

making decisions purely based on something that may have worked in the past is a mistake. the world changes around you (as well as people) and it is necessary for ideas to evolve. science and religion evolve slowly because of the overwhelming hubris amongst the separate communities and if it ever does evolve or make progress it is because one community attempts to prove the other wrong (not in all cases). this is all as equally maniacal as considering or deducing there is nothing bigger than you, when the fact (in and of itself) has yet to be proven... in literal terms, self-evidence. which is actually similar to faith.

You're speaking in circles at this point.

You're saying it's a mistake to base future decisions of past results?

My problem with this is that there being "nothing bigger than you" seems to be a base state, and any claims other than that would require proof.

Self-evidence requires no proof, it's not faith - by definition it's something that's obvious. As in "it's self-evident that Hitler is dead."

 

[Cyanide_Anima]

I think it's bullshit that theists automatically assume they are right and that is the default position to believe in a god/afterlife. It's not, it's only asserted as so. They don't even have to back any of it up with physical proof, only slick rhetorical devices parroted as told by their pastors or mined from their favorite Big Book of Multiple Choice (Dillahunty, lol). That's it. All us Atheists are saying is that we don't believe any of your supernatural/superstitious claims of grandiosity. It is not up to us to prove you wrong, but yours to prove it is right, correct, and true. But... You have no actual proof. If you omit your Bible and various ancient writings from which it was derived you have nothing, and the bible itself is proven unreliable time and time again. But that goes ignored. Grrr. All you can do is point at the bible or come up with completely contrived non sequiturs, arguments from ignorance, and cases of special pleading like:

"But the evidence is all around us"
"We have 2 eyes, 2 ears, 2 lips, 2 of this, 2 of that, 2 tits...."
"Anything which begins to exist must have a creator (except the creator, d'oh...)"
"But the (loose, cryptic, and unspecific) prophecies foretold (which can be interpreted a thousand ways and are) came true!"
"Jesus is coming!"

Theists will attempt to argue using science if they believe (usually falsely...well, almost always. haha) it supports their position but will completely reject scientific findings when it clashes with their predefined and presupposed ideas. "Hooray!" for confirmation bias and compartmentalization! And sorry, the scientific process is NOT bias at all. It's entire purpose is to eliminate (as much as possible) our biases, faults, ideals, and to test, test, test and to be able to replicate the results. That last step is key. No supernatural claims of the bible (or anywhere for that matter) can or in principle, be replicated or reproduced. Religious leaders love this fact as it always keeps the claims out of the realm of testability and falsification. We have no reason, at all, to believe that anything exists outside of this physical universe. At least, until we do have good reason. Such as a physics, medical, or energy claim outside of what we understand is required. Which is never the case. Throughout the entire history of man we have replaced superstitious beliefs with ones rooted in the natural world. It has so far never worked opposite to this.

Hmm, we atheists must believe in some other god or rhetorical "god" if we don't accept the protestant christian version of god? Ridiculous. Do I call you an Arastafarian or an Azoroastrian? Where do you get this information from? I almost guarantee it wasn't from an atheist who knows his theology. It wasn't from some apologist's website, or from your pastor, now, would it? Pastors and preachers warn believers about people like us and for good reason. We know what we are talking about, so we are demonized and belittled and told not to be trusted, that we don't even know what our beliefs or lack thereof are. Preachers and proselytizers say that one little book contains all the answers in it's ridiculous, asinine, often cryptic, pseudo-philosophical parables. Yet we are the ones often called arrogant? The nerve!

If ya'll read your own shit properly (IE. not through systematic interpretation, read it how it is...) before you were exposed to all the claimed benefits, social pressures, and group-think you likely wouldn't believe any of it. I wish I had learned it on my own instead of the light, cryptic, sometimes "revelations-esque" things my father would say sometimes. and from TV, school, friends, etc. All you really hear when you are a kid is "Jesus loves you!" and that we are are all saved "sinners" awaiting the return of our savior to take us to paradise. My parents did not shove religion down my throat at all, but they were elated when I became a "serious" born-again crosstitute when I was 10 or 11. You never hear all the fucked up terrible shit that's in that book, it's rarely preached. Or if it is it is slowly crept in, and if it is it has some irrational backwards positive spin on it. I'd love to hear a sermon on Hosea Chapter 1. That would make my day. Won't ever happen, though

I also never get a strait answer from believers on the question of the source of god's claimed "all good" morality. Does he get his ideals from himself, as in he created them himself, or are they intrinsic properties of (a) god? IE. They come from an outside source, not from god himself. That question kind of pisses me off too. haha. They always try to get around it through stupid rhetorical non-answers that they themselves obviously do not understand. Or they answer, panic at my response, and then try to change their answer or get around it with semantics. So far I had one guy tell me one of the most shocking things I've ever heard come from a believers fingertips. haha. Obviously, when faced with a question never before thought of, or the answer has not yet been given to them, they do not know how to respond. I'm not trying to stir up shit or put anyone down, but this is a legitimate observation I've made, as have many, many others like me. =P

 

[midget donkeys]

"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told." (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. "Why have you let all the women live?" he demanded. "These are the very ones who followed Balaam's advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves. (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)


Sounds like the kind of god I want to worship. A god that orders murders of women and children, allows slavery and the rape of young girls.

 

[GarethSE]

The unity of things also reconciles all paths, journeys and life choices. If all things are one then they are all equal and all valid. Non-dogmatic spirituality rules.

 

[GarethSE]

I can't wait until science realizes that everything is everything, that infinity is infinite and that is simply is, which it will.