Atheists & Christians: Argue the OTHER POINT OF VIEW

I haven't read much of the Bible. It probably doesn't matter because very few Christians actually attempt to follow its rules rigorously. But just looking at the Christian community as an outsider, Jesus looks pretty good.

The lovey-dovey one depicted by those who don't know any better has no substance. The one depicted in the bible is wicked. And my problem with people who say he was a great man are that they're promoting this wicked ideology without realizing it. If you'd stop conceding this inaccurate portrait of the Christ, maybe Christianity would start to lose some of its mainstream appeal among the non-religious.

"Turn the other cheek," for example. I have always said that the old playground rant is 100% true: "It all started when he hit me back." If you just laugh it off the other guy will usually stop.

The opposite is true, actually. The torment only stops when you fight back. I was bullied for a short time in 8th grade, until I finally stood my ground and fattened one of their lips. I could walk home in peace after that. Bullies rely on your weakness, on your inability to hurt them back. There is no consequence to their actions, so it becomes a release for their own shortcomings.

Sure that doesn't work among so-called "adults" who fight wars. But the reason we have so many wars is that a lot of bullies are still bullies as adults and they're looking for a fight. If we could cure them in childhood they wouldn't grow up wanting to kill each other. And religion presents bullies as role models. The Old Testament is crammed full of them.

Bullying and war have little in common. Bullies, as I said before, are usually acting out of some frustration. There's never any dispute involved. Wars, on the other hand, usually have something to do with land claims or ideologies. The only commonality between the two phenomenon, actually, is that turning the other cheek is the only sure path to your own destruction.

That's what's so great about Jesus. He tells you that instead of hitting the bully back and having him whomp you with a stick next, you should just leave him standing there looking like the fool he is. There's nothing a bully hates worse than being laughed at.

Except that's not how it really happens. The only way to make the bully look like a fool is to plant him on his ass. You can stop him by appealing to adults, but you can't make him look stupid without beating him at his own game. And just try applying that mentality to any other context. Turning the other cheek during Hitler's reign would have accomplished what, exactly?
 
Scientists are not bound by belief. The scientific method is clearly open to new facts and knowledge. There is no faith involved.

As long as you're happy with it. That's all that matters.

Also, I was referring to Atheists and Christians, but yeah, the same applies to scientists as well, and actually pretty much everyone in this reality. The concept of "fact" in a subjective reality can be considered to be an erroneous term if one chooses. But I guess that would be reserved for those who many would perceive to be suffering from delusions... at least for the present moment anyway.
 
As long as you're happy with it. That's all that matters.

Also, I was referring to Atheists and Christians, but yeah, the same applies to scientists as well, and actually pretty much everyone in this reality. The concept of "fact" in a subjective reality can be considered to be an erroneous term if one chooses. But I guess that would be reserved for those who many would perceive to be suffering from delusions... at least for the present moment anyway.
For atheists, belief is not absolute either. Prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins have repeatedly explained that were sufficient evidence presented for the opposing side, they would have to consider it. Their disbelief in God is also not absolute, since there could be an infinite number of definitions of God, some of which are acceptable. There are very few atheists who would say they are 100% certain there is no god of any kind.
 
For atheists, belief is not absolute either. Prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins have repeatedly explained that were sufficient evidence presented for the opposing side, they would have to consider it. Their disbelief in God is also not absolute, since there could be an infinite number of definitions of God, some of which are acceptable. There are very few atheists who would say they are 100% certain there is no god of any kind.

This is true to an extent, but it appears we are both generalizing. Let me rephrase then.

Maybe not most, but many Atheists and many Christians are incredibly bound by a set of beliefs that can be extremely painful to one's ego if compromised to the point of becoming frustrated or even hostile towards whatever they perceive to be compromising or threatening their deep attachment. But again, this is not just limited to Atheists and Christians. This applies to most everyone on this planet. This entire reality is held together by a set of beliefs.

I myself am very much bound by many belief systems due to years of conditioning from a system that dates back for many centuries and even aeons. Letting go and breaking free from these beliefs can take an entire lifetime. It is very much like peeling a very large onion one layer at a time. Not only is this challenging, but it is also quite fun and liberating. :D
 
This is true to an extent, but it appears we are both generalizing. Let me rephrase then.

Maybe not most, but many Atheists and many Christians are incredibly bound by a set of beliefs that can be extremely painful to one's ego if compromised to the point of becoming frustrated or even hostile towards whatever they perceive to be compromising or threatening their deep attachment. But again, this is not just limited to Atheists and Christians. This applies to most everyone on this planet. This entire reality is held together by a set of beliefs.

I myself am very much bound by many belief systems due to years of conditioning from a system that dates back for many centuries and even aeons. Letting go and breaking free from these beliefs can take an entire lifetime. It is very much like peeling a very large onion one layer at a time. Not only is this challenging, but it is also quite fun and liberating. :D
You are generalizing to the point of gross inaccuracy. Atheists generally approve of scientific methods that value doubt and uncertainty. Our beliefs aren't the result of wishful thinking, or resentment, but rather the light of reason. This is in contrast to the religious, who's entire belief system is generally centered around ignoring scientific and historical facts.
 
Scientists are not bound by belief. The scientific method is clearly open to new facts and knowledge. There is no faith involved.


Are you arguing the opposite of what you believe? May the Lord of have mercy on the person who says something that isn't popular in the science community. I will agree with the statement that the science community tends to operate on beliefs, just as much as the religious community. I can not pass up the chance to once again praise the people in this forum for the civility, compared to some other science forums.

Spidergoat, the religious community believes exactly the same thing about themselves.
 
Are you arguing the opposite of what you believe? May the Lord of have mercy on the person who says something that isn't popular in the science community. I will agree with the statement that the science community tends to operate on beliefs, just as much as the religious community. I can not pass up the chance to once again praise the people in this forum for the civility, compared to some other science forums.

Spidergoat, the religious community believes exactly the same thing about themselves.
I'm a theist in this thread, but even theists know that they value faith over facts. There is no atheist belief other than there is probably no god.
 
You are generalizing to the point of gross inaccuracy. Atheists generally approve of scientific methods that value doubt and uncertainty. Our beliefs aren't the result of wishful thinking, or resentment, but rather the light of reason. This is in contrast to the religious, who's entire belief system is generally centered around ignoring scientific and historical facts.

Again, that is a matter of perspective that I truly honor and respect. This is certainly true for you I'm sure. Believe me when I say that I 100% respect any and all in their own unique perceptions. Perspectives and beliefs are what makes this world so fascinating and challenging. However, one's truth does not have to be another's. Again, perceived facts are irrelevant in this reality unless one desires to make them relevant, which many many of us do. Facts or truth is static and singular. Truth is nothing more than pure energy in it's native state. Then there are variations of that truth determined by the individual who wishes to experience that truth in their own way - a fabrication of one's mind. Everything we are experiencing in this reality is a fabrication of our mind.

Just because I am born into a world where eating, drinking, sleeping or even breathing is believed to be required to survive, or a world where there is gravity doesn't mean I have to be attached to that belief. Nor am I required to believe that 1 + 1 is equal to 2 or that there is such thing as this concept called "time", or that the act of moving from point A to point B even exists. The Newtonian laws of physics are completely and totally irrelevant, unless of course one chooses to make them relevant for the purposes of their own experience in this reality.

I certainly understand the point of this thread. We love to debate, especially on subjects that challenge our beliefs. It's purely egoic to be sure that stems from fear.

Again, I see no difference between Atheists, Christians, Scientists, or any other groups of belief systems. I also see nothing right or wrong with any of them. They certainly have their use as all things do.
 
Again, that is a matter of perspective that I truly honor and respect. This is certainly true for you I'm sure. Believe me when I say that I 100% respect any and all in their own unique perceptions. Perspectives and beliefs are what makes this world so fascinating and challenging. However, one's truth does not have to be another's. Again, perceived facts are irrelevant in this reality unless one desires to make them relevant, which many many of us do. Facts or truth is static and singular. Truth is nothing more than pure energy in it's native state. Then there are variations of that truth determined by the individual who wishes to experience that truth in their own way - a fabrication of one's mind. Everything we are experiencing in this reality is a fabrication of our mind.
Trust me, you are not a fabrication of my mind. :bugeye:

Just because I am born into a world where eating, drinking, sleeping or even breathing is believed to be required to survive, or a world where there is gravity doesn't mean I have to be attached to that belief.
Riiiight... :rolleyes:
 
But at what cost?

No it's not. Homo sapiens is a pack-social species like all the other apes except orangutans. We have an instinct to care for and depend on the other members of our pack, and to hate and distrust outsiders, because they're competitors for scarce food and other resources. Nationalism is merely an expansion of that instinct to include ever-larger groups. The technology of agriculture both permitted and required our ancestors to live in permanent villages, and once they did that they discovered the benefits of division of labor and economy of scale in increasing their prosperity. This led them to invite other tribes to come live with them, so they'd all be more prosperous. Pack-->tribe-->city-->state-->nation--> and now the transnational hegemonies like the EU.

Do you have some evidence to cite for that assertion? I'm wracking my brain and every time since the Stone Age when two or more groups of people united to form a larger "nation," it was rarely about a common religion. In fact it was more often a stronger one assimilating a weaker one and forcing their own religion on them. In the days of polytheism, people rather easily figured out that they had the same gods, just with different names. Jung teaches us that the gods of the ancients were archetypes, hard-wired into our synapses by DNA. We each have a Warrior, a Healer, a King, a Hunter, etc., inside us.

I also don't understand your phrase, "the uniting force of religion." For centuries, at least ever since the counterintuitive horror of monotheism began metastasizing across the globe, religion has been a dividing force. Most of the wars of the modern era have been fought over religious differences, going all the way back to the Reformation, which was a euphemism for a century of non-stop warfare between different cults of Christianity.

I don't find your premise the least bit credible, so your conclusion is irrelevant.

Yet more often than not it is, precisely, religion. You're sitting here in 2013 staring at a brewing three-way Nuclear Holy War between Muslims, Christians and Jews. How can you say my anger at religion is misplaced? Those various flavors of Abrahamists all want to kill ME because I'm not aligned with any of them!

The Bible has a lot of lovely prose, but people have a knack for misinterpreting it to support their own goals. As for preventing conflicts and uniting people, as I showed above in a brief synopsis of history, you're simply dead wrong. Religion has killed more people than any other cause in the last 2,000 years. Just start with the Holocaust and work backward. And don't throw communism at me: it's an offshoot of Christianity. "To each according to his needs, from each according to his ability," is an elaboration of a line from the Book of Acts.

Yes, I understand that delusions and misinformation can be comforting.

Very funny. No one understands the cesspool of religion better than those of us who have had to carefully avoid being brought down by the people who dwell in it.

Yes we have other flaws but religion is arguably the worst of the lot. Christian armies destroyed two entire civilizations, the Aztec and Inca, for being "heathens." They even burned the Aztec libraries and melted down the Inca art. How much worse than that can an institution be??? That's the kind of evil you only expect to find in a videogame.

What's wrong with anger being a primary emotion? These people murdered a bunch of my relatives in Europe for being of Jewish descent without even practicing the religion. As I already noted, they destroyed two civilizations and even tried their best to obliterate evidence of their culture; as a scholar I find that to be the worst crime that can be committed. The Taliban prohibit music and treat musicians as criminals; as a musician I hardly have to explain my feelings about that. They also separate themselves from the rest of civilization by declaring dogs "unclean," while in fact children who grow up with dogs have much healthier immune systems and don't grow up loaded down with allergies and other autoimmune diseases--not to mention the mental-health benefits of having one family member whose love is unconditional. The Orthodox Jews in Israel throw rocks at EMTs who dare to drive their ambulances on the Sabbath. How about the Westboro Baptist Church and their screed against gays, actually picketing military funerals since "God hates the USA because we tolerate homosexuality."

I haven't run out of examples but I have run out of energy. If you can't see the unforgivable (and in many cases irreparable) harm that has been done to civilization by religion--especially the execrable monotheistic Abrahamic varieties that now dominate the globe--you're beyond hope.

Hmm. Well I didn't intend to the first time, and looking back over my post I still don't quite see it. But I apologize because it wasn't meant for you. However, this time you have pushed my buttons by defending religion, at a time when it's clear to anyone with two eyes and a brain that it may well destroy us all. Christians, Muslims and Jews all have nuclear weapons. They're no longer just termites; they're termites with chainsaws!

I haven't read much of the Bible. It probably doesn't matter because very few Christians actually attempt to follow its rules rigorously. But just looking at the Christian community as an outsider, Jesus looks pretty good.

"Turn the other cheek," for example. I have always said that the old playground rant is 100% true: "It all started when he hit me back." If you just laugh it off the other guy will usually stop.

Sure that doesn't work among so-called "adults" who fight wars. But the reason we have so many wars is that a lot of bullies are still bullies as adults and they're looking for a fight. If we could cure them in childhood they wouldn't grow up wanting to kill each other. And religion presents bullies as role models. The Old Testament is crammed full of them.

That's what's so great about Jesus. He tells you that instead of hitting the bully back and having him whomp you with a stick next, you should just leave him standing there looking like the fool he is. There's nothing a bully hates worse than being laughed at.

We are in totally agreement about human nature, but disagree about the importance of religion.
"And forcing their own religion on them". Why do you think they did that?

A nice thing about belief systems with many gods is they have no reason to knock someone else's ideas about gods. Rome was very tolerant of other beliefs, they just asked that the gods of Rome be respected as well, because the gods gave them a belief system that united Rome and gave the very diverse civilization order.

India is also very tolerant of other beliefs, and tends to consume all religions into Hinduism.

Actually at the beginning of Christianity it also assimilated other belief systems, by Christianizing pagan celebrations and pagan notions. Like one morning pagans woke up to a Christian world, without any intention of giving up old beliefs for Christian ones. But suddenly the Easter Bunny and Easter Egg representing new life in Spring, and the resurrection of life in Spring, represented Jesus and his resurrection. The mother goddess and child, becomes Mary and her son Jesus. Frigg another nature goddess figure, common to cultures with female goddess that make things grow, because our Friday. Around the world cultures accepted Christianity because the belief was not so different from their own, and this discovery that others held the same beliefs gave credibility to Christianity being God's truth.

The US education system was first modeled after Athens education for well rounded individual growth. In this secular education, the word God was found in many text books, along with value statements such as the notion we have a duty to God, family and country. However, acknowledging God does not equal religion. God does not become religion until we attempt to define God, and that is where people get into trouble.


Turning the other cheek works best if one is large and full of self confidence. It does not work so well for vulnerable people.
 
I don't know what side of the argument I should take, considering I am spiritual and not religious.

Being "spiritual" isn't going to alter your eternal destination. I mean pagans can be some of the most "spiritual" people around, and I dare say that the vast majority of them will not find themselves rewarded for their heretical practices with a room in God's house. Quite the opposite, in fact.

What is of primary importance is what you are spiritual about, and it needs to be Jesus. You should be crying out, in spirit, that He is Lord. His sacrifice should be at the core of your very soul. This is the only spirituality that is of any final, positive consequence.
 
Trust me, you are not a fabrication of my mind. :bugeye:


Riiiight... :rolleyes:


I was reading about this non reality just today. I believe it was Greeks discussing geometry who said. something to effect that that which is born is not real, because it is always in the process of becoming. For something to be real, like say a triangle, it must be what it is eternally.
 
Again, I see no difference between Atheists, Christians, Scientists, or any other groups of belief systems. I also see nothing right or wrong with any of them. They certainly have their use as all things do.
I'm sure they have a use, but science is demonstrably true because it works. Computers compute, rockets fly to Mars and beyond, diseases are cured. Just because we perceive things with a subjective perspective, the mind, doesn't mean we cannot discover things that are objectively true.
 
Being "spiritual" isn't going to alter your eternal destination. I mean pagans can be some of the most "spiritual" people around, and I dare say that the vast majority of them will not find themselves rewarded for their heretical practices with a room in God's house. Quite the opposite, in fact.

What is of primary importance is what you are spiritual about, and it needs to be Jesus. You should be crying out, in spirit, that He is Lord. His sacrifice should be at the core of your very soul. This is the only spirituality that is of any final, positive consequence.


I suppose since we are suppose to be arguing the opposite of what we believe, I should be making the argument you made.

:D: On leaving a church, I once complimented to the preacher on how nice his pagan service was, and he didn't look too pleased. It delights me that you speak of paganism and spirituality. Sorry I am not doing a good job of arguing against what we I believe. My heart just isn't into it. :thankyou:
 
Just because I am born into a world where eating, drinking, sleeping or even breathing is believed to be required to survive, or a world where there is gravity doesn't mean I have to be attached to that belief. Nor am I required to believe that 1 + 1 is equal to 2 or that there is such thing as this concept called "time", or that the act of moving from point A to point B even exists. The Newtonian laws of physics are completely and totally irrelevant, unless of course one chooses to make them relevant for the purposes of their own experience in this reality.

I certainly understand the point of this thread. We love to debate, especially on subjects that challenge our beliefs. It's purely egoic to be sure that stems from fear.

Again, I see no difference between Atheists, Christians, Scientists, or any other groups of belief systems. I also see nothing right or wrong with any of them. They certainly have their use as all things do.

This sort of theological/metaphysical relativism, or pluralism, or whatever, is total nonsense. You're effectively saying that it doesn't matter whether one recognizes the significance of the sacrifice that God made when He became a man and suffered for our sins in the most horrific manner imaginable. This could not be further from the truth.

"But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep."

"Bold and willful, they do not tremble as they blaspheme the glorious ones, whereas angels, though greater in might and power, do not pronounce a blasphemous judgment against them before the Lord. But these, like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed, blaspheming about matters of which they are ignorant, will also be destroyed in their destruction, suffering wrong as the wage for their wrongdoing."

Irrational animals, blaspheming about matters of which they are ignorant! For the love of God, you people must repent. I beg you!
 
Scientists are not bound by belief. The scientific method is clearly open to new facts and knowledge. There is no faith involved.

Watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqESR7E4b_8

No-one can possibly walk away from that and still be an atheist. It would be absurd. If you can, or if you have, then you're in denial, and denial, funnily enough, is sort of like faith. See, scientists will say, about examples like this, that there is only the appearance of design. In other words, they'll admit that the universe looks like it was created. But if this is true, if the universe looks like something made by God, why reject the possibility? Why flatly deny it? Faith, of course. Faith that the science will, one day, finally be able to explain it away.

A personal God, who possesses the full scope of human emotion (love, anger, jealously, forgiveness, spite etc) is the much simpler explanation.
 
Last edited:
Are you arguing the opposite of what you believe? May the Lord of have mercy on the person who says something that isn't popular in the science community. I will agree with the statement that the science community tends to operate on beliefs, just as much as the religious community.

Do me a favor: Back that statement up with an example of the scientific community operating on belief rather than legitimate science.

Spidergoat, the religious community believes exactly the same thing about themselves.

No they don't. Faith is a central aspect of religious belief.
 
Back
Top