How can religion be evil?

731 posts / 0 new
Last post
AJ777's picture
arakish, how can you call

arakish, how can you call anything good or evil without a moral lawgiver? In order for evil to be a coherent concept God must exist. Otherwise all of your ranting is mere opinion.

Sheldon's picture
AJ777 "arakish, how can you

AJ777 "arakish, how can you call anything good or evil without a moral lawgiver?"

Read one of the many answers you have already been given and simply ignored to go on endlessly and inanely asking the same stupid fucking question.

Troll.

"In order for evil to be a coherent concept God must exist."

Rubbish, evil is a word humans created to describe certain behaviours. Are you really claiming that without a deity you wouldn't know that raping and murdering a child was wrong? Again all I can hope is you never succumb to reason and lose your delusional belief in a deity.

"all of your ranting is mere opinion."

As is yours of course, though paradoxically your histrionics is based on irrational hokum,, rather than any objective evidence, despite your risible hubris.

How can an objective moral standard be obtained through belief in a deity you can demonstrate no objective evidence for?

I challenge you to demonstrate what you consider to be the best piece of objective evidence there is for a deity?

Algebe's picture
AJ777: how can you call

AJ777: how can you call anything good or evil without a moral lawgiver?

The "moral lawgiver" has always been the family and community, which are the products of our evolution as social primates. Ever heard of the "wisdom of the crowd"?

Morality and society evolve in a changing world. Religions try to freeze that evolution by applying a veneer of supernatural transcendence to the values of a particular society at a particular time. Invariably the results are horrific.

The morality of society and family is not perfect, but it's far more humane than religious laws.

arakish's picture
@ AJ777

@ AJ777

: “"how can you call anything good or evil without a moral lawgiver?

I can call anything good or evil because I am mine own moral lawgiver. Morality is entirely subjective. You still have yet to provide any OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that Morality is objective.

: “In order for evil to be a coherent concept God must exist.

First, you must provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that your Sky Faerie even exists. Remember what the true definition of atheism is? Here is an example.

You: "In order for evil to be a coherent concept God must exist."

Me: "I do not believe you. Please provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE else your claim is entirely preposterous and shall be summarily dismissed."

As Sheldon has commented, your grasp of the English language is showing me that English is NOT your primary language. You do not even know what "atheism" or "morality" even means. Even in First Grade I knew what morality meant. Why do fail in knowing what it is at your age?

: “Otherwise all of your ranting is mere opinion.

Ranting? Looks like someone forgot the tale of the pan and the kettle. You asked a question. I answered it. If you want to call my answers ranting, then again you still fail to understand English. What country are you located? Mauritania?

And yes, my take on Morality is entirely subjective to me. Thus, yes, my mere opinion. However, I guarantee that are thousands of people who would agree to my definition of morality for every one person who agree with your definition.

Also that is typical of a Religious Absolutist. They come up against a person whose intelligence far surpasses their own. A person who using pure rationality and logic can completely and utterly destroy your preposterous and fallacious claims. And then they have no recourse but ad hominem fallacies.

Also, here is my Morality:

My Ten Commandments of Humanity

And these ten are more relevant than any ten thousand you could come up with from your Sky Faerie.

  1. Question everything, trust nothing; for it is more important how to think rather than to be told what to think.
  2. You shall mind your own business and responsibilities, and allow others to tend to theirs.
  3. You shall render aid to others when needed, disregarding #2, as you shall want others to do for you. If your aid is refused, then do not force it.
  4. You shall respect the right of ALL persons to believe whatsoever they wish to believe; even if contradictory to your beliefs. You may discuss beliefs; however, forcing your beliefs onto others is condemnable, under penalty of death.
  5. You shall live your own life always seeking to cause no harm.
  6. You shall test everything; but you shall check your own ideas against the facts and evidence, and you shall always be ready to discard even a cherished belief if it does not conform to the facts and evidence.
  7. You shall never overlook evil or shrink from administering justice; but you shall always be ready to forgive minor wrongdoing freely admitted and honestly regretted.
  8. You shall treat ALL living humans with love, honesty, respect, fidelity, and trust.
  9. You shall never indoctrinate anyone, especially children, regardless of their situation; rather, teach them how to think, how to evaluate evidence, and how to disagree with you without disrespect and dishonor.
  10. You shall value the future on a timescale longer than your own life span.

rmfr

AJ777's picture
Sheldon, go read a book if

Sheldon, go read a book if you are truly interested in the evidence for God. I’m curious what would convince you God exists, or what would be the best evidence for you?

SecularSonOfABiscuitEater's picture
You are the believer. The

You are the believer. The burden of proof is on you.

Sheldon's picture
So you can't offer a single

So you can't offer a single piece of evidence for your beliefs and assertion at all? Quelle surprise...

"Full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing" might have been written with your verbiage in mind.

"go read a book if you are truly interested in the evidence for God"

Why don't you, you're the one who claims a deity exists, but then when asked for your best piece of objective evidence can't produce a single word, priceless.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ AJ777

@ AJ777

go read a book if you are truly interested in the evidence for God

I just read a book...by David Weber, it had absolutely no evidence for a god or gods in it...rattling good yarn though.

arakish's picture
AJ777: "Sheldon, go read a

AJ777: "Sheldon, go read a book if you are truly interested in the evidence for God. I’m curious what would convince you God exists, or what would be the best evidence for you?"

Although directed at Sheldon, I am also going to answer this and do so before anybody else's replies.

Why don't you go and read a book?

Scientists/Atheists read many books and still feel they have a lot to learn.
Religious Absolutists barely read one book and feel they know everything.

As Cognostic once said, “Someone once asked me if I read the bible, I said sure. Then I asked, “Have you read anything else?”

And I guarantee Sheldon is very much like me. But for me, the only evidence I would consider is OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that I can then take into several labs and give it 1001 tests to prove its veracity. Otherwise, anything you could supply as evidence is likely to be preposterous and fallacious without any tests. That is want Religious Absolutists are taught.

The confirmation bias of where you simply repudiate anything that stands against your beliefs, even if it irrefutably counters those beliefs. You only affirm those things that you think you can rationalize from your indoctrination process to make sense for your position. Religious Absolutists are trained to react to ideas, and to reject them no matter what they are told, presented, and/or taught. They are taught to never question their beliefs. Militantly trained to maintain and preserve the faith. And, due to this designed abusive training and indoctrination process, they shall do so with apologetics, beguiling dialectical semantics, distorted and perverted data, emotional whiny-ass pleas, and sometimes divinely-inspired violence. Worst of all, their conditioning is so ingrained that most never question why they need to defend their belief at all. Using rationality and logic, this means it is nothing more than playing “make-believe,” and it is not even a sincere belief most of the time. It is a delusion called, “Let’s play pretend.”

What you need to do is to remove those god glasses, unplug, and look at reality.

rmfr

PS — Now to read what others replied.

xenoview's picture
@aj777

@aj777
What objective evidence do you have a god exist? Not subjective evidence from your mind.

I apply xenoview's razor to your claims that a god exist.

Xenoview's razor
Objective claims requires objective evidence

AJ777's picture
Or what kind of evidence?

Or what kind of evidence?

arakish's picture
How many times must this be

How many times must this be repeated?

ONLY OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.

See? Your grasp on English is non-existent.

rmfr

AJ777's picture
So, you’re only willing to

So, you’re only willing to accept evidence that can be observed inside the universe or natural world to discover if something exists outside the universe or supernatural world. That is a category error.

David Killens's picture
@AJ777

@AJ777

"So, you’re only willing to accept evidence that can be observed inside the universe or natural world to discover if something exists outside the universe or supernatural world. That is a category error."

Actually, postulating something supernatural or outside the universe is a fail in itself. It is by definition untestable.

arakish's picture
Please provide OBJECTIVE HARD

Please provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that anything can exist outside of the real universe. Just by making that statement is a logical fallacy. You really need to do more reading than that one obsolete, irrelevant, barbaric, savage, offensive, and unsubstantiated, immoral Bronze and Iron Age religious text. The Bible is irrelevant in today's society. Your version of "morality" is irrelevant in toady's society. All religion is irrelevant.

As science progresses, religion will forever continue sinking into darker and smaller pockets until it is nothing more than a pest like a cockroach.

rmfr

LogicFTW's picture
@AJ777

@AJ777

So, you’re only willing to accept evidence that can be observed inside the universe or natural world to discover if something exists outside the universe or supernatural world. That is a category error.

Uh no. That is basic common sense everyone should have and it is rather scary you do not have it, and seemingly steadfastly refuse to think that it is even a problem. Stuff that exist outside the universe or only in the supernatural should be of zero concern to you.

As soon as you start accepting things without real world evidence you open yourself to a whole host of problems, like falling for the con that is religion. Cool thing is, you can beat this con real easy, just start demanding real world evidence, like you do for (hopefully) just about everything else in life.

 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

▮          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
"only willing to accept

"only willing to accept evidence that can be observed inside the universe or natural world "

Hilarious, can you demonstrate objective evidence there is anything else?

What evidence would you accept that invisible unicorns exist that are undetectable in any objective way?

Do you people even read the stuff you right?

xenoview's picture
@aj777

@aj777
Objective evidence that exist outside the mind.

AJ777's picture
Sheldon I don’t think you’re

Sheldon I don’t think you’re interested in evidence based on past conversations.

Cognostic's picture
AJ77: All you have done is

AJ77: All you have done is waggle your fingers over the keyboard in complete nonsense. You have provided NOTHING AT ALL supporting ANYTHING AT ALL you have inanely asserted with NO EVIDENCE AT ALL.

EVIDENCE: 1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

You have been called on your bullshit assertions numerous times and instead of supporting your "OPINION" you ignore posts and try to intellectualize your opinions without regard for EVIDENCE. You would not know something evidence related if it jumped up and bit off your nose.

Sheldon's picture
"Sheldon I don’t think you’re

"Sheldon I don’t think you’re interested in evidence based on past conversations."

I don't think you are able to think, based on your posts.

You run away every time your asked for evidence, so do please do stop pretending as we're too familiar with theistic hubris evaporating into evasive obfuscation like you have just done when they are called on to demonstrate this evidence they keep claiming exists.

I challenge you again to demonstrate what you consider to be the best piece of objective evidence you think exists for your deity.

"He stood rooted to the spot, and speechless, and moved mindlessly from one foot to another, as if he had a hundred each of those appendages, and was determined to try each one in turn"

I'm not holding my breath.

AJ777's picture
Cognistic, what kind of

Cognistic, what kind of evidence would you accept?

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ AJ777

@ AJ777

what kind of evidence would you accept?

Why don't you just give us what you got?
Your verbose meandering around something that should be simple, if not blindingly obvious is causing the suspicion that you have nothing at all....

Sapporo's picture
AJ777:

AJ777:
Cognistic, what kind of evidence would you accept?

First, you need to define what you are trying to prove.

Cognostic's picture
EVIDENCE: Use the damn

EVIDENCE: Use the damn dictionary. I realize you have never attempted to present an argument from a position of factual evidence before. It's not your fault your educations is lacking. This happens a lot to people involved in religions. There is only "evidence." The "evidence" is true and it supports the claim you are making or the "evidence" is poor and does not support the claim you are making. So far, you are doing a dismal job of supporting anything. Perhaps if we go back to square one and use our dictionaries.

EVIDENCE: 1.
The available body of FACTS or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

FACT: 1. thing that is known or proved to be true.
2. The truth about events as opposed to interpretation. (Objective, valid, verifiable, repeatable, facts.)

Sheldon's picture
So he's offered fuck all

So he's offered fuck all after all that posturing, is anyone remotely surprised? Every time you ask a theist to demonstrate some evidence the silence is deafening.

Cognostic's picture
First time he has addressed

First time he has addressed me Sheldon. Perhaps he thinks he will have better luck with his nonsense on this court. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!!

AJ777's picture
The cosmological argument is

The cosmological argument is an example of evidence for a creator I’m sure you are familiar with.

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its beginning.

2. The universe began to exist.

3. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-natu...

CyberLN's picture
That argument holds only if

That argument holds only if one accepts the first premise. I, for one, do not. I reject it as evidence since it cannot be demonstrated to be true.

Sapporo's picture
AJ777:

AJ777:
The cosmological argument is

The cosmological argument is an example of evidence for a creator I’m sure you are familiar with.

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its beginning.

2. The universe began to exist.

3. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-natu...

1. That is not falsifiable. It is true in an isolated system that effects have causes, but that tells you nothing about the origin of the system.
2. You cannot prove that the universe began to exist: you can only refer to an earliest known event.
3. That is not falsifiable.

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.