Reasons not to believe in God

[Balerion]

Back to the problem of inherent or innate nature, again.

What is a "good person", what is a "bad person"?
Are some people innately good, so that they can rightfully be called "good people"?
Are some people innately bad, so that they can rightfully be called "bad people"?

The phrases "good person" and "bad person" suggest that there is such a phenomenon as an innately good person, and an innately bad person.
This yet has to be shown, though.

I've already answered this.

Edit: I'll expand, since the first one apparently didn't take: I think the inherent qualities in a good person would be a lack of cynicism, perhaps a good sense of humor and irony, an affection for other people. This goodness can be manifest in their actions, but I think it's displayed more in their motivations. But even the best people are capable of doing bad things, sometimes for good reasons and sometimes for really bad reasons. Just as bad people--those who are humorless, cynical, mean-spirited--can do good things, such as act charitably, display kindness, etc..

No one is wholly one thing or the other. Some people can begin their lives as good people and become very bad people, and vice versa.

 

[lightgigantic]

I've already answered this.

fumble +4
:shrug:

 

[Balerion]

fumble +4
:shrug:

Troll +15,201
:shrug:

 

[wynn]

My interpretation was not flawed. You operated from the assumption that theists are good, otherwise you wouldn't be disappointed to discover that they aren't.

Read my posts again.

I am not operating from the assumption that theists are good, but from the assumption that theists should be good.

There is a difference.

But yes, in both cases, there will be disappointment upon finding that someone who claims to be a theist doesn't seem like a good person.

You're asking why anyone would have that perception, and I answered that it's a common misconception in the west probably based on the squeaky-clean images of certain Christian sects, particularly the Mormons.

Not at all. The assumption is based on the biblical and other doctrinal ideas about how belief in God purifies people, how people who believe in God do not sin and are generally decent people and such.

The expectation that theists should be good people is a doctrinal one, not one based on empirical observation.

Where I live, one can hear sentences like these from non-theists about theists:
"She goes to church every Sunday, and yet she collected funds from the insurance company by fraud!"
"He goes to church, and yet gets drunk every week!"

Bad and criminal acts when done by people who claim to believe in God are considered as worse, than if the same bad or criminal acts were done by non-theists.

 

[wynn]

No one is wholly one thing or the other.

In that case, it is misleading to use the terms "good person" and "bad person" to begin with.

We're not in kindergarden, we should strive for greater precision than kids.

 

[Balerion]

Read my posts again.

I am not operating from the assumption that theists are good, but from the assumption that theists should be good.

There is a difference.

This is what you said: "I think many people expect that those who claim to believe in or know God, would be good people -- "good" by a human standard of goodness."

You're trying to create a false dichotomy. Stop it.

But yes, in both cases, there will be disappointment upon finding that someone who claims to be a theist doesn't seem like a good person.

Right, because the expectation is that they would be good. And as I've said several times now, I don't think this is a very common belief outside of very particular areas in the west.

Not at all. The assumption is based on the biblical and other doctrinal ideas about how belief in God purifies people, how people who believe in God do not sin and are generally decent people and such.

Oh bullshit. You've never even read the bible, so clearly you haven't based it on any such scriptural evidence. Most people who believe aren't well-versed in their holy book anyway, so that's not what it is. It is as I said: a harmless myth based on caricatures of certain religious sects. There is nothing in the bible that would make you believe that a believer in God would be a "good" person. The bible's idea of morality is not at all similar to what you or I would consider moral.

The expectation that theists should be good people is a doctrinal one, not one based on empirical observation.

Again, nonsense. You haven't read the doctrine, so if that were true you wouldn't hold that belief. And yet you do.

Where I live, one can hear sentences like these from non-theists about theists:
"She goes to church every Sunday, and yet she collected funds from the insurance company by fraud!"
"He goes to church, and yet gets drunk every week!"

Okay, so you happen to know a few people living under this misconception. So?

Bad and criminal acts when done by people who claim to believe in God are considered as worse, than if the same bad or criminal acts were done by non-theists.

That's BS. Maybe to other church-goers, but certainly not to the population at large.

 

[Balerion]

In that case, it is misleading to use the terms "good person" and "bad person" to begin with.

Not at all. No one is wholly one thing, but general statements can apply. Do you need to know every detail about every person's life before you make a judgment on them? I seriously doubt you hold yourself to the same criteria when you judge people.

We're not in kindergarden, we should strive for greater precision than kids.

Don't be so pretentious. Terms like "good" and "bad" work just fine.

 

[kx000]

If we could access script to the mind of newborns we could prove natures of good, and evil.

Natures of faith, and know. Given a natural faith we have proven an afterlife.

 

[Jeeves]

The only thing you can count on gods for is to let you down.
Much like people.

 

[kx000]

The only thing you can count on gods for is to let you down.
Much like people.

Why do you say?

 

[Nom-De-Plume]

For me, personally:

• Lack of evidence,
  
• No real need for belief in a God,
  
• History of negative effects,
  
• Personal negative experience, and
  
• Fallacious nature of most religions and concepts of God(s)

"I don't believe in leprechauns, pixies, werewolves, jujus, Thor, Poseidon, Yahweh, Allah or the Trinity. For the same reason in every case: there is not the tiniest shred of evidence for any of them, and the burden of proof rests with those who wish to believe". -- Richard Dawkins, Evolutionary Biologist

 

[wynn]

For me, personally:

• Lack of evidence,
  
• No real need for belief in a God,
  
• History of negative effects,
  
• Personal negative experience, and
  
• Fallacious nature of most religions and concepts of God(s)

"I don't believe in leprechauns, pixies, werewolves, jujus, Thor, Poseidon, Yahweh, Allah or the Trinity. For the same reason in every case: there is not the tiniest shred of evidence for any of them, and the burden of proof rests with those who wish to believe". -- Richard Dawkins, Evolutionary Biologist

If there weren't so many things which you believe,
but for which you have no evidence, no real need to believe in them, a history of negative effects, personal negative experience and believe the nature of those concepts is fallacious,
you'd have a point.

 

[Nom-De-Plume]

If there weren't so many things which you believe,
but for which you have no evidence, no real need to believe in them, a history of negative effects, personal negative experience and believe the nature of those concepts is fallacious,
you'd have a point.

e.g.?

 

[Photizo]

Some people can begin their lives as good people and become very bad people, and vice versa.

All people begin their lives separated from God and as such, they are incapable of ultimate/ideal 'good'. With respect to God, this is the only acceptable good (that which is in accordance with His standard). Barring a reconnection (which is strictly his prerogative) to Him, one remains (1) unable to achieve anything remotely resembling 'good' to Him and (2) in that state separation which will continue on into eternity. One might consider these things a reason not to believe in God, but, that is not your prerogative, as He commands all people everywhere to repent and believe.

 

[kx000]

Nom-De-Plume

You would believe if you were destined to be dirt? I would not.

 

[Nom-De-Plume]

Nom-De-Plume

You would believe if you were destined to be dirt? I would not.

I have no idea what that means, or what half of your posts do, for that matter.

 

[kx000]

Faith? The presence of belief! I believe to be, I wish to be! Love?

 

[wynn]

e.g.?

Anything from the ABC and names of days in the week to believing that smoking causes cancer or that NASA went to the Moon.

It's nothing special, it's a given that we believe all kinds of things for which we have no evidence, or no need etc. It simply comes with being human, living among humans. See John Hardwig's Epistemic dependence.

It's just that when it comes to God and "spiritual matters" that some people forget how much we actually take on faith or believe for no apparent reason, and instead these people propose that taking things on faith or believing for no apparent reason is something exclusively typical for religion/spirituality, but not for other areas of life and knowledge.

 

[wynn]

mod queue

e.g.?

Anything from the ABC and names of days in the week, to believing that smoking causes cancer or that NASA went to the Moon, to believing that all people are essentially equal or that we all deserve to be happy.

It's nothing special, it's a given that we believe all kinds of things for which we have no evidence, or no need etc. It simply comes with being human, living among humans. See John Hardwig's Epistemic dependence.

It's just that when it comes to God and "spiritual matters" that some people forget how much we actually take on faith or believe for no apparent reason, and instead these people propose that taking things on faith or believing for no apparent reason is something exclusively typical for religion/spirituality, but not for other areas of life and knowledge.

 

[Balerion]

All people begin their lives separated from God and as such, they are incapable of ultimate/ideal 'good'. With respect to God, this is the only acceptable good (that which is in accordance with His standard). Barring a reconnection (which is strictly his prerogative) to Him, one remains (1) unable to achieve anything remotely resembling 'good' to Him and (2) in that state separation which will continue on into eternity. One might consider these things a reason not to believe in God, but, that is not your prerogative, as He commands all people everywhere to repent and believe.

I'm not particularly concerned with what a bunch of illiterate desert-dwellers in ancient Mesopotamia might think of my conduct, you might be surprised to know. My morals are shaped by the world I live in, and thus are the only ones relevant to the world I live in.

I won't begrudge you your self-flagellation, but know that no one in their right mind would be a part of it.