How can religion be evil?

731 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sapporo's picture
AJ777: So if you can’t change

AJ777: So if you can’t change the nature of a thing, you affirm the absolute truth of the things identity or nature. So it follows truth is objective. Or is that false?

I cannot even be absolutely certain of the existence of a thing, including myself. I didn't say I can't change the nature of a thing, my point was that you cannot change the nature of a thing merely by changing the definition of it.

You may say you have $19 billion dollars in your account, and the bank may tell you there is $19 in your account, but that does not change what is actually in your account.

AJ777:You said “I didn’t say that math is not subjective”. We’re you meaning your opinion math is objective then?

I don't consider abstract things to exist. At best, they are merely constructs that represent things in the real world. But perhaps that is a metaphysical argument rather than something that says anything about the nature of reality.

Sheldon's picture
"Denying that "Objective

"Denying that "Objective truth" exists is distinct from denying that "Objective morality" exists."

AJ777 "How so?"

Objective evidence, we have objective truths that can be objectively evidenced beyond any rational or reasonable doubt, you have been unable to demonstrate any objective evidence for your claim that objective morality exists, what is more you have roundly contradicted your arguments throughout.

Good is perfectly moral, yet you can't say how you know this or offer any evidence or explanation to support the claim. The bible is also filled with claims for acts by that same deity you accept are true, but that you yourself admit are immoral, like torturing babies. Yet you refuse to be questioned on this.

LogicFTW's picture
Only if objective morality

Only if objective morality exists can these claims be taken seriously. Atheists want it both ways, to claim God is evil, but He doesn’t exist and neither does the concept of evil. Are there any honest folks about who can see the forest?

1. I firmly believe god is not real due to a total lack of any real evidence for god. (Any god concept)
2. I do not think god is evil, I believe there is no god, I do think people that cooked up the various god ideas can do use it for all sorts of evil purposes.
3. I totally believe in the concept of evil, but do I think "evil" is objective? Nope just subjective, just in the minds of people and communication evil (and good) does not "exist" in the real world, if every human disappeared today, the concept only thought process of "evil" would be gone, just like the god concepts. Completely... and utterly.. GONE, completely non existent.

 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

▮          I am an atheist that always likes a good debate.          ▮
▮   Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me.    ▮
▮        Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016.      ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

AJ777's picture
LogicFTW, so unlike some

LogicFTW, so unlike some others here you seem to see your atheism as a belief that God does not exist? Unless you possess enough true knowledge about God to know that He doesn’t exist, one cannot know that. And if you did possess true knowledge about God, that would affirm his existence. It seems at best you can only say you don’t know if God exists because our knowledge is limited. One could also use the idea of Gods non-existence for evil purposes, this does not shed any light on His actual existence. In atheism/naturalism there is no meaning or purpose to life. One has to create fictional purpose in order to strive for a subjective goal, which is really meaningless. Why is it that atheists do not actually live as if everything is meaningless? Isn’t this the definition of a delusion?

Sapporo's picture
@AJ777 according to

@AJ777 according to Christianity, life has no purpose: only death has purpose.

Atheism/naturalism says nothing about the meaning or purpose to life.

Giving your life a purpose that is meaningful to you is more meaningful than giving your life no purpose other than to die and then worship some being's ego for eternity or be tortured for eternity.

LogicFTW's picture
@Aj777

@Aj777

I said I believe, what I believe or not requires zero evidence or knowledge. Believing an unevidenced concept does not exist does not require evidence. Just like you do not need evidence that santa claus does not exist, or the tooth fairy etc. I did not say: "god definitely does not exist" that would be a statement, a claim that I would have to back.

It is exactly that, there is no absolute knowledge, I do not know everything and neither do you. You can not prove your god exist, just like I cannot disprove your invisible sky fairy does exist. However, and this is what you keep failing to understand,: believing the absence of an idea that has no evidence for its existence does not require evidence just like an infinite number of ideas of gods or otherwise, they should all be dismissed by default. If you start allowing unevidenced ideas to be real and operate as they are real, you open yourself to all sorts of nasty issues.

You owe me 1 million dollars, prove to me you do not. You can't. But you should not need to, an assertion made with zero evidence can and should be ignored. This applies exactly the same to your god idea.

I do not speak for all atheist, only my self, my purpose to live is my own, I am free to make my own purpose to live. I do not need old people long dead to tell me what my purpose in life is I much rather pick my own purpose to life.

I get it, religion is a very good well refined con, that you and likely mostly everyone you know has fell victim to, all their lives, but breaking free is as easy as just demanding real evidence you can actually test and do for yourself.
 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

▮          I am an atheist that always likes a good debate.          ▮
▮   Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me.    ▮
▮        Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016.      ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Sheldon's picture
"LogicFTW, so unlike some

"LogicFTW, so unlike some others here you seem to see your atheism as a belief that God does not exist?"

Atheism
noun
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

By definition it's not a belief. An atheist may hold this belief of course, but that doesn't change how atheism is defined.

"Unless you possess enough true knowledge about God to know"

You possess no objective knowledge of any deity, else you could demonstrate it, and you cannot.

"It seems at best you can only say you don’t know if God exists because our knowledge is limited."

Like invisible invisible unicorns you mean? I don't know about you, but I don't generally believe claims because they're unfalsifiable. Otherwise you could believe literally anything defined in such a way it was unfalsifiable.

"In atheism there is no meaning or purpose to life. "

That's like saying not collecting stamps doesn't give your life meaning. Whilst it is true it is pretty dumb. Also atheism is no barrier to anyone's life having meaning, and your delusion life has some ultimate overarching purpose, is something you still have yet to demonstrate any objective evidence for.

"One has to create fictional purpose in order to strive for a subjective goal, which is really meaningless."

Well if it works for you, but I prefer to deal with objective facts and reality.

" Why is it that atheists do not actually live as if everything is meaningless?"

I can't speak for others but my life isnlt meaningless to me. This is a lie a fiction you have created to denigrate atheists because your bronze age superstitious fantasy is being met with cold hard reason.

"Isn’t this the definition of a delusion?"

No, you need to look up delusion, and then look up meaning, but I and the people I care about, and my empathy for others is what gives my life meaning, this might be subjective of course, but it is not a delusion. Not in the sense that believing a magic sky fairy from a bronze age superstition created everything using magic with humans in mind - that no one can demonstrate any objective evidence for is by definition a delusion.

xenoview's picture
@aj777

@aj777
Would you kill your child if god told you to? In most Western countries, they would put you in jail.

If your father came to you and told you that he was going to kill you because god told him to, would you let him do it?

Algebe's picture
@Xenoview: If your father

@Xenoview: If your father came to you and told you that he was going to kill you because god told him to

Isaac thought they were going to sacrifice a lamb. The god of absolute morality and his faithful servant Abraham apparently saw nothing morally wrong with deceiving a child.

Diotrephes's picture
Algebe,

Algebe,

"The god of absolute morality and his faithful servant Abraham apparently saw nothing morally wrong with deceiving a child."

Abraham was a disgusting person. Being a liar was was the least of his faults.

Algebe's picture
@Diotrephes: Abraham was a

@Diotrephes: Abraham was a disgusting person. Being a liar was was the least of his faults.

Yep. He screwed his wife's slave and made her pregnant. When his wife gave birth, he kicked out the slave and her son, Ishmael. Then he tried to stab and burn his other son.

But god approved of all this because Abraham was objectively moral, right?

AJ777's picture
Algebe, there is a difference

Algebe, there is a difference between descriptive and prescriptive literature on the Bible. If morality is subjective anyway there’s nothing objectively wrong with anything any character in the Bible has done.

Sapporo's picture
AJ777: If morality is

AJ777: If morality is subjective anyway there’s nothing objectively wrong with anything any character in the Bible has done.

This is true, although via metrics such as peacefulness as defined by numbers of deaths due to war and homicide, and level of torture, secular societies are far more peaceful than Christian ones, and our time is far more peaceful than the time in which the bible was written.

AJ777's picture
Atheistic societies have

Atheistic societies have murdered far more than religious in the 20th century alone over 100 million.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/givi...

Mao, not to mention Stalin, and Hitler who was not a Christian.

Sapporo's picture
AJ777: not to mention Stalin,

AJ777: not to mention Stalin, and Hitler who was not a Christian.

Atheism says nothing about murdering people. At its most basic, it is simply a lack of belief in the existence of gods.

The 20th century was the most peaceful century in history in terms of the per capita number of deaths from war and homicide. It was also the most secular century in history.

"Besides that, I believe one thing: there is a Lord God! And this Lord God creates the peoples." - Adolf Hitler

"We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations; we have stamped it out." - Adolf Hitler

Stalin was not an atheist either:
http://freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Was_Stalin_an_atheist%3F

AJ777's picture
At the least Hitler and

At the least Hitler and Stalin were not practicing their religions unless you think Jesus commanded to kill the Jews wherever you may find them(Islam). The 20th century had the most deaths. A lack of belief in something says nothing. My pet rock has a lack of belief in God.

Sapporo's picture
AJ777: At the least Hitler

AJ777: At the least Hitler and Stalin were not practicing their religions unless you think Jesus commanded to kill the Jews wherever you may find them(Islam). The 20th century had the most deaths. A lack of belief in something says nothing. My pet rock has a lack of belief in God.

If you are going to be an apologist for God, why did you attack atheism for a property that does not define it?

Atheism at its most basic is simply a lack of belief in the existence of gods. the basic definition of an atheist is someone who lacks a belief in the existence of gods. If you define your pet rock as a someone, be my guest: it is obvious you have no problem defining an inanimate thing as your pet.

The 20th century also had the biggest population. Per capita, it was the most peaceful century in history. This century so far has being even more peaceful, being especially peaceful in secular Western Europe.

arakish's picture
AJ777: "Atheistic societies

AJ777: "Atheistic societies have murdered far more than religious in the 20th century alone over 100 million."

Actually you are wrong. More people have been killed because of religious beliefs.

rmfr

Diotrephes's picture
AJ777,

AJ777,

Are you the old JohnBrezzy?

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Dio

@ Dio

We have had our differences, but reading these posts from AJ777...I think if not the same person they are classmates.

Algebe's picture
@AJ777: there is a difference

@AJ777: there is a difference between descriptive and prescriptive literature on the Bible.

And how does one tell the difference? Is it objectively obvious, or is some kind of subjective interpretation involved? Who has the authority to decide which passages are descriptive or prescriptive?

For example, is the story of Lot's wife being turned into salt supposed to be descriptive or prescriptive? If it's prescriptive, what rules are we supposed to learn? Death through mineralization seems like a rather harsh sentence for instinctively turning around in response to a bright light and loud noise.

Sheldon's picture
"Algebe, there is a

"Algebe, there is a difference between descriptive and prescriptive literature on the Bible. If morality is subjective anyway there’s nothing objectively wrong with anything any character in the Bible has done."

Another cowardly dodge. You believe it is true, and that it represents objective morality. So you think rapine, slavery, genocide, torturing children and on and on and on are perfectly ok. Atheists think it is barbaric, the fact it isn't true doesn't stop it being immoral, anymore than the murders in the godfather films are ok because they are fictional.

Do you really not understand what amoral principle is? If a fictional film depicts child molestation, is it a moral concept to you because it isn't real? And lets not forget, you believe that shit in the bible is real, and still claim it is moral.

Sheldon's picture
" If morality is subjective

" If morality is subjective anyway there’s nothing objectively wrong with anything any character in the Bible has done."

Do you believe that it's true? Do you believe it is a moral guide? Do you believe the deity in it is real and perfectly moral?

If so then why do you keep repeating this straw man argument that atheists don't believe it, it's just your way of dishonestly avoiding addressing your hypocrisy here.

AJ777's picture
Isaac was in his 30’s.

Isaac was in his 30’s.

arakish's picture
AJ777: "Isaac was in his 30’s

AJ777: "Isaac was in his 30’s."

So? So was I.

rmfr

Algebe's picture
@AJ777: Isaac was in his 30’s

@AJ777: Isaac was in his 30’s.

How do you know? The KJV translates the word as "lad", while other versions use "boy", which I believe was translated from the Hebrew word na'ar. I don't think that would be applied to a grown man in his 30s.

Sheldon's picture
"Isaac was in his 30’s."

"Isaac was in his 30’s."

So you think murdering your son is perfectly moral if he's in his 30's? This is a rare glimpse of theistic objective "morality".

Sheldon's picture
Are you claiming it is

Are you claiming it is morally acceptable to murder someone in their 30's if god tells you to?

Sheldon's picture
Are you saying murder is

Are you saying murder is immoral? So your saying your deity is immoral then, or the bible is nonsense? No more pretending you don't believe it is true to dodge these questions.

Which is it?

" Why would it be wrong if he was though?"

I already told you why, not my fault you ignored my answer. Now are you going to show some integrity and tell us why you think it would be wrong? Your deity was fine with it according to the bible, and the story is supposed to present faithful believer, someone who is prepared to murder his own infant son because the voices in his head told him to, nice.

Now one more time as you're ignoring it, since you claimed *in your opinion* that torturing children is wrong, tell us why you think it wrong? Or are you just an automaton incapable of moral reasoning?

Sapporo's picture
It is possible that @AJ777

It is possible that @AJ777 finds statements such as "I believe that something is subjectively wrong" to be absurd because he believes himself to be infallible.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.