ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Religion and Philosophy»
  • Christianity, the Bible & Jesus

'Top Ten Atheist Inconsistencies' Examined

Updated on December 1, 2016

Atheist Issues?

'Top 10 Atheist Inconsistencies' was an article posted on HubPages by fellow 'Hub Pages' member, 'Graynight', to which this item is a response.

That original article is no longer available, but we may still consider the issues.

*

What is the difference between atheists and antitheists?

Are atheists really guilty of at least 'ten inconsistencies'?

Or would that be the antitheists?

Or both, perhaps?

How about agnostics?

~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~

Atheist: Greek "atheoi" αθεοι - "Those without God" [Ephesians]

2nd / 3rd century AD / CE. Out of copyright. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ephesians_2,12_-_Greek_atheos.jpg
2nd / 3rd century AD / CE. Out of copyright. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ephesians_2,12_-_Greek_atheos.jpg | Source

"Atheoi" / Atheists

The Greek term "atheoi" (αθεοι) is found in Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians 2:12. Indeed this is the only place in the New Testament where the word can be found.

"Atheoi" refers to people who are 'without God'.

Above is an image of the word from a late 2nd / early 3rd century papyrus.

More details here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ephesians_2,12_-_Greek_atheos.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ephesians_2,12_-_Greek_atheos.jpg

'Ten Inconsistencies'?


When Graynight, wrote a hub about, what he termed, the 'Top 10 Atheist Inconsistencies', he looked at atheism in ten contexts:

It is worth examining these 'inconsistencies', one by one:


War and Murder

Love

Fidelity and Procreation

Altruism

Abstract Immortality

Literal Immortality

Feelings

Meaning

Mutability

Suffering


From Paul's letter to the Ephesians 2:12

The Bible

Source

Atheist? Antitheist? Agnostic? Some Introductory Thoughts

I consider myself agnostic, rather than atheist,and this may need further explanation. The word 'agnostic' is related to the word 'knowledge'. I do not believe that either I, or anyone else, has enough, suitable, knowledge to know whether or not there is a God.

I am aware of the fact that many people have experienced events, which appear to have been 'supernatural'. I know that there is still much that is unexplained, and might possibly be considered 'paranormal', so I keep an open mind on such matters.

However, while I believe that it is not possible to know either that God exists, or that God does not exist, or what any God might be like, I think it likely that any God would probably either be an immense abstract power, incomprehensible to humans, or, perhaps, the mass 'essences', or souls', of deceased beings.

As far as the existence of 'God', is concerned, I think that sacred scriptures are mankind's attempts at understanding the inexplicable, and are, therefore, human invention; describing human ideas about what might be termed 'God', rather than being based on anything factual.

'The Holy Bible'

King James Bible
King James Bible | Source

'Atheism' often seems to relate to 'God', as originally described in the Old Testament. It also often includes a belief in a divine Jesus. Of course, there are other current belief systems with different views. But few people, nowadays, would call someone who did not believe in Zeus or Odin, an 'Atheist'.

This is something to ponder, because when 'believers' write about the apparent inconsistencies of atheism, they are usually talking about people who do not believe in a specific form of 'God', ie. as 'God' was originally described in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Consequently, criticism of atheists is often applied, almost equally, to agnostics.

Furthermore, agnostics and atheists do share some ideas and opinions.

I do understand why so many atheists feel as they do ~ and I often agree with them.

Thus I feel qualified to respond.

I am simply going to reply to to the assertions made ~ I am not going to refer to a writer or philosopher, whom I know little about, but who Graynight may have cited.

No 'Rules' in Atheism

Graynight claims that atheists 'criticize theists [for their] contradictory beliefs .., but they ignore the contradictions and inconsistencies that are so prevalent within the scope of their own attitudes and ideologies.'

Is that true?

Are atheists inconsistent and contradictory?

Is there an 'atheist attitude' or 'an atheist ideology'?

Before looking at the ten observations of Graynight, it is worth noting that Atheism is not a religious movement, nor anything of that nature, as so many believers seem to think that it is.

Therefore, one atheist does not have to agree with another.

There is no accepted 'dogma'. There are no 'rules' in atheism.

Different philosophers may have different ideas and theories, but other atheists do not have to approve of their conclusions.

The supposed 'contradictions and inconsistencies' are, therefore, completely irrelevant. Atheists simply do not believe that God exists.

'Atheists or Antitheists'?

Graynight begins his hub:

'Atheists - or antitheists, which may be a more fitting term in this context .....'

This comment makes matters more complicated.

Are we looking at the attitudes of ordinary atheists, or at the behaviour of people who don't like theists?

Atheists do not believe in the existence of God

Anti means 'opposed to'.

Theists believe in the existence of a Creator God (or gods).

Thus Atheists are not the same as Anti-theists.

Atheists disagree with theists; anti-theists are opposed to theists.

Some atheists may also be anti-theist ~ but the hub title concerns supposed 'Atheist Inconsistencies' ~ so this confusion between the two terms could lead to some ... confusion.

War and Murder

Graynight: 'One of the biggest lies told by atheists is that the majority of martial conflicts in the world have occurred as a result of people believing in God'.

*

I agree that wars are rarely going to be about one issue, and that power and resources are often key, but ...

But, religion is very, very often also key!
The divide between warring factions is often along religious lines.
Religion is, very often, a very important factor.
And, as Graynight admits, some wars are actually called 'Holy Wars' or 'Wars of Religion'.

Just because other factors may be involved, does not mean that religion is not relevant.

And there are examples in the Bible ~ so any potential Christian 'Crusaders' should know exactly what to do! Consider the death and destruction in the story of the Amalekite bloodbath, where even tiny babies were killed.

Since Graynight indicates that Christianity should not be blamed for the bad behaviour of Christian leaders ~ eg. of the Crusades etc ~ then it is only logical to say that atheism should not be blamed for the bad behaviour of any atheist rulers. Thus Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, etc, should not be held up as examples of atheism.

As an aside, it is often claimed that Hitler was an atheist, but there is also evidence that he was Roman Catholic, so that is a debatable matter. Furthermore, the fact that atheists may have murdered people does not absolve Christians of their own guilt.

Look at the troubles that have occurred in the Balkans, the Middle East, Northern Ireland ~ are they all the result of religious difference? ~ No! Is religion involved? ~ Very much so!

Love

Graynight: 'if you place any kind of ideological value in love and think that there is anything to it other than the synapses in the brain firing in a particular pattern, you are a religious person'.

*

I don't see the logic of this statement. Why does one have to be a religious person to think that love has 'ideological value'? There is more than one ideology.

Whatever the science behind love, people still feel it ~ and it makes people feel great.

It makes people want to help and care for their fellow man.
It has a positive influence on people. It affects people's moral behaviour.

Thus 'love' must be valuable to society.
I have read the scientific books on love and I still believe this.

Religious people do not have a monopoly on love.

Fidelity

Graynight: 'many atheists pride themselves on being able to live according to strict moral codes without needing a deity'

*

The fact is that many atheists can, and do, live according to strict moral codes ~ and they don't believe in a deity.

There is no argument against this, because it is a simple truth. Somehow, most of us have developed a conscience.

OK, believers may say that the conscience is God-given ~ but they cannot prove that. Indeed, evolutionists believe that morality has evolved with society, based upon what is best for that society.

Regardless, Christianity does not have a monopoly on morality.
Why do Christians keep assuming that it does?
It does not!

Procreation

Graynight: 'atheists who think themselves to have such lofty levels of cognition seem to believe that the human genome does not need their superior genes.'

*

One thing that the thinking, caring, educated person notices is that our world is becoming over-populated, polluted and generally damaged by mankind.

Responsible parenthood is a positive thing. In countries where childen often die, and where there is little or no contraception, it is not surprising that many babies are born, but, where contraception, health care and education are available, it makes sense to limit one's family to a reasonable number.

Research has shown, I think, that many atheists tend to be educated people, so it is not surprising, if they have given this matter serious thought and decided to have fewer than the average number of children ~ rather than 'filling the world with [their] seed'. [Graynight quote.]

It is not a good idea, to carry on harming our world, in the hope that 'God will provide'.

Do atheists 'detest' the 'theist masses' and plan their families accordingly!? Or do they simply disagree with them, resent the hostility of some of them, and then get on with their own personal lives?

Altruism

Graynight: 'many atheists still cling to .. concepts of virtue - [like humility, charity, and altruism] .... because they cannot bring themselves to let go of these last vestiges of theist irrationality' ... 'in a universe with no God and no life after death, there is only one thing that matters: me'. ~ 'why do most atheists today still advocate at least some level of altruism?'

*

I am bewildered by this.

In a roundabout way this is suggesting, again, that, without God, there is no morality; no goodness; no charity; no altruism.

Let me repeat: Christianity does not have a monopoly on morality!

Calling a 'virtue', a 'Christian virtue', does not it a 'Christian virtue' make, I'm afraid.
And virtues are not irrational; they are beneficial to society.

Ayn Rand and Friedrich Nietzsche can have any opinions that they wish. Atheists do not have to read them, or agree with all of them.

It is simply not true that, without a belief in God, there can be no virtue, no altruism, no morality, and only selfishness.

A religion is a 'faith' or system of worship, related to a belief in a God ~ a powerful superbeing. It is not really possible to be truly 'religious', if one does not believe in a God or belong to a related faith. Of course, one can treat a sport almost like a religion, but that is not the same thing.

The fact that atheists can be moral people (which Graynight acknowledges) without belonging to a religion, or even believing in God, shows that Graynight is incorrect in saying that moral codes 'are almost completely irreconcilable with a non-religious worldview', since, self-evidently, this cannot be the case.

Abstract Immortality

Graynight: 'noble atheists deal with the problem of death by focusing on the fact that, though they will die, their memories and the effects of their lives will live on.' ... 'Noble atheists must realize that their memories and their legacies are as doomed as they are'.

*

It seems to me that, while someone is remembered, there is, indeed, an aspect of them that lives on.

I study my family history, and ancestors, whom I didn't even know existed, have come alive for me. Without them, I wouldn't even be here. Now I can 'bring them back to life' for the rest of my family to get to know them. That's wonderful.

If their souls live on, in an afterlife, then I hope that this makes them happy. If their souls die at death, then at least they have lived again, for me, and they are not entirely forgotten.

Of course, they will eventually be forgotten, as will I.

Eventually, it seems that this whole world will die and nothing of us, or our history, or achievements ~ or our religious beliefs ~ will be left. I am quite sure that most educated atheists are fully aware of this.

Literal Immortality

Graynight: 'Some atheists .. advocate transhumanist doctrines that prophesy of a near future ... in which ... humans will be able to use science to achieve immortality. ..... But does he believe it's possible that there just might be another being in this vast universe who has achieved all knowledge before he has? No, that is ludicrous.'

*

Science has provided many advances. Could it give us a future, where humans can become immortal? Possibly, I would say. But, then, where would we put all of the people?!

I don't see any problem with accepting this as a hypothesis.

Is it ludicrous to suggest that God has already done this? ~ Well, though I can see the point of this argument, it probably is ludicrous, because even Christians don't portray God as a scientist, experimenting and learning as he goes.

Indeed, God is portrayed, more, as a magician. He can make himself immortal, because he can; because he is God ~ not because he has studied science and discovered ways to outwit death.

Feelings

Graynight: 'Many atheists proudly say that they do not need dogma to tell them what is or is not right..... "just feels right... But when theists say that they believe in God because it "just feels right," that is proof of a lack of intelligence.'

*

Back to morality, again.
Christianity does not have a monopoly on morality.
Christianity does not have a monopoly on morality.
Christianity does not have a monopoly on morality.

Atheists are at least as moral as anyone else. Check court and prison records and I am guessing that you will find this to be correct.

Why don't they go on criminal rampages?
Because they know right from wrong.

Most are intelligent enough to see the damage that crimes do to their societies. They do not need the Bible to tell them that.

OK, some may just say that it 'feels right', but if it does just 'feel right', then this is because it is something that they have learned from reading, studying, discussing, observing, etc, etc.

The fact that atheists are as moral as Christians is evidence that Christianity does not have a monopoly on morality.

Some feelings are based on actualities; some are just based on ... feelings.

I have to wonder, do atheists actually use the argument that morality simply 'feels right'?

Some probably do, but I haven't heard this 'feels right' argument.

I have heard that morality benefits society and that we have a conscience, etc. but nothing about feelings. This does not negate feelings, of course, but they do need to be backed up ~ if only by saying "I don't understand them, but I live by them".

Meaning

Graynight: "No, I don't believe in God or final judgment, but I have still found meaning in life" ... ask him what great meaning he or she has found, and the response is sure to disappoint you profoundly".

*

Dear, dear, dear!!!
I am tempted to ask how people dare to accuse others of having no meaning in their lives!!!

What if the atheist said: 'I have heard it many times: "Yes, I believe in God and final judgment, and I have found meaning in life." However, when your friend says this, ask him what great meaning he or she has found, and the response is sure to disappoint you profoundly.'

The atheist really could say that.

Since s/he has rejected belief in God, then the meaning that Believers have supposedly found, can't do much for atheists, so they would, indeed, be disappointed.

Atheists can enjoy love and life, children and families, sunsets and rainbows, discovering the past and planning the future. There is so much in this world that we can all enjoy.

Did God make it? Believers think that he did; Atheists think that he didn't. And no-one can prove either of them right or wrong. So the atheist can find as much meaning in his world and his life as can the Believer.

Christianity does not have a monopoly on finding meaning in life, either!

Mutability

Graynight: 'if human life ends with death, and if there is no God, then our existence is nothing more than wind blowing through trees... Mortal humanity as atheists view it cannot be its own end and meaning.'

*

Maybe our lives are 'nothing more than wind blowing through trees'. Maybe our sole 'meaning' is to reproduce and keep our world inhabited ~ just like all of the other animals

Suffering

Graynight: "I suffer. Therefore, there is no God." It's the common mantra of the bitter atheist'. 'The idea that an omnipotent and benevolent God would never let us suffer at all is ludicrous'

*

I have heard it said that the suffering in the world is evidence against the existence of God, and I think that this is reasonable conclusion to draw. Christians say that God is the father and creator, who loves us all ~ even the tiniest sparrow. Well, if that is the case, why, indeed, does he allow us to suffer so much?

I have heard the arguments about parents allowing children to hurt themselves, in order that they might learn about dangers, etc. but I am not talking about anything like this.

Why do innocent children suffer serious diseases? Why do innocent children suffer at the hands of torturing psychopaths?

Why can lions and tigers only live by killing and hurting others of 'God's creatures'?
Why is it 'ludicrous' to ask this?

Furthermore, why does God, as described in the Bible, set such a bad example re causing people to suffer?
The Amalekites were to be annihilated ~ God ordered it. Even the tiny new born babies had to be sliced apart by the edge of a sword!
Job ~ the very good, loyal and devout Job ~ had to lose everything. God sanctioned it ~ in a bet with Satan.

Sam Harris is correct to say that little girls are raped and tortured on a regular basis ~ including the ones, whose parents are praying for them and who believe that God / Jesus is taking care of them ~ in the vain hope that she will be safe. This isn't a childish comment; nor is it a particularly atheistic comment. It's just a fact.

Would suffering end, if atheism ruled the world? ~ I doubt it.
Would suffering end, if Christianity ruled the world? ~ I doubt it.

People are people ~ and some people do some extremely bad things.
If believers are right, and God is there, then why does he not protect the innocent from these very bad people?

To say that mutilated infants and children, who have died after experiencing untold horrors, will be 'healed in Heaven' is simply not good enough. They have suffered unbelievable horrific cruelty ~ and their families continue to suffer.

Mutual Lack of Understanding

It strikes me, sometimes, that some Christians simply cannot understand the minds of those, who don't think and believe as they do.

And perhaps the feeling is mutual.

But I cannot see these 'atheist inconsistencies'!

Original Hub: 'Top 10 Atheist Inconsistencies' - By Grayknight

To read the original article ~ and to check whether I have been fair in my responses, please look at the hub:

'Top 10 Atheist Inconsistencies' ~ By Grayknight

Link below

Another Rebuttal:

Titen-Sxull has also responded to Graynight's hub.

Link below

'Misconceptions About Atheism' - Sam Harris

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Re Hitler Christianity:

      "People often make the claim that Adolph Hitler adhered to Atheism, Humanism or some ancient Nordic pagan mythology. None of these fanciful and wrong ideas hold. Although one of Hitler's henchmen, Alfred Rosenberg, did undertake a campaign of Nordic mythological propaganda, Hitler and most of his henchmen did not believe in it."

      From: 'Hitler's religious beliefs and fanaticism (Selected quotes from Mein Kampf)' compiled by Jim Walker' http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm .

      ***************************************

      "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord." Adolf Hitler

      "My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people." Adolf Hitler, 12 April 1922

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Hi Oztinato. :)

      Sorry, could you please clarify who you mean by 'the intellectual[s who] brush ... truisms aside'?

      Thanks :)

    • Oztinato profile image

      Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

      To any honest observer and studier of such people as hitler it is quite clear Hitler's beleifs were all catering to his insane quest for political power and hence such beliefs were only for expediency. A scientific look at his religious beliefs reveal a clear preference for his own highly idiosyncratic version of ancient pagan Germanic religion. How anyone who claims to be an intellectual can brush such truisms aside has to be taken as proof of "other agendas" such as deliberate highly unscientific misinformation

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Hi Catherine.

      Yes, I think that you are probably correct that most atheists are former believers.

      What Hitler actally believed or didn't believe I cannot be sure, but I have read many times that he was Roman Catholic.

    • CatherineGiordano profile image

      Catherine Giordano 2 years ago from Orlando Florida

      Excellent discussion of theist baseless accusations against people who do not share their beliefs. I had to laugh at some of graynight's statements--they were so off the wall. And don't forget arrogant. and ignorant.

      Atheists do understand the mind of the theists. They understand because the large majority of atheists were once theists; but after much study and thought they left it behind. The other way around doesn't happen very often.

      Voted up I and U and also funny--because Greynight's comments made me laugh.

      P.S. Hitler was a Catholic. I have never heard of a quote from him saying he was an atheist. l'm sure if it existed, the theists would have plastered it all over the internet.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      No, Joseph, I was on my laptop. I don't know what happened with that post. Weird.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Trish, are you using a slow connection via an Android smart phone? Sometimes that can lead to repeat postings unintentionally.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Green

      Voltaire undoubtedly made the same mistake many make today in confusing Antichristians with Christ's sedulous and peaceful followers.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Voltaire was clearly in a state of great confusion towards the end of his life.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Here's another one that makes Voltaire sound confused.:

      "To believe in God is impossible - to not believe in Him is absurd."

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      More from Voltaire:

      "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."

      "If God has created us in His image, we have more than returned the compliment."

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      Happy Saturday Trish!

      If I may, how does any of this invalidate the truth of his reflection?

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      So, Joseph, why would you repeatedly fall back on the sayings of others, from different times and circumstances, when it is within your own life, your own conscience, that you could well apply your questions and seek answers.

      No one else can do that searching, questioning and answering but YOU, in your own time, with your own energy and honesty.

      Wishing you enlightenment on that journey.

    • Greensleeves Hubs profile image

      Greensleeves Hubs 2 years ago from Essex, UK

      Re-Voltaire; here are a few more wise quotes attributed to him:

      'Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world.'

      'Of all religions the Christian is without doubt the one which should inspire tolerance most, although up to now the Christians have been the most intolerant of all men.'

      'Which is more dangerous: fanaticism or atheism? Fanaticism is certainly a thousand times more deadly; for atheism inspires no bloody passion whereas fanaticism does; atheism is opposed to crime and fanaticism causes crimes to be committed.'

      Voltaire was undoubtedly a truly great thinker. One of the greatest ever. He may have been a believer in God, but that was the times he lived in, and he certainly had scepticisms about the Bible. One can never say how his views would have been had he lived post-Darwin, but I suspect he would have been even more sceptical about religion. Either way, despite the fact that his sayings are often very wise, I do love another of his quotes:

      'A witty saying proves nothing.'

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Voltaire was a great man of his day - but his day was a long time ago and we have learned much since then.

      Born: November 21, 1694, Paris, France

      Died: May 30, 1778, Paris, France

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "Superstition is to religion what astrology is to astronomy: the mad daughter of a wise mother." -Voltaire

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      A combination of wishful thinking and fear, I would say.

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      "Many superstitions have come into existence and then faded away. Faith has not, which suggests it has reality.” - Francis S. Collins - MD, PhD

      Actually what it suggests is that people are prone and are easily susceptible to superstitions. Watch people line up to get their future told and watch how we ignore every error the psychic makes and only remember the correct things. Religion is really nothing more that a collection of superstitions. But science can't tells us why we are here, but neither can religion, it's just wishful thinking.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I am an autodidact, too, and, as I said, I don't know enough about String and M theories to comment.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Sounds more like plucking at strings and clutching at straws to me.

      Joseph, if "they exist outside of our universe," then what does it have to do with us?

      The only way you can communicate with any such other world is by imagination. And that is very suspect.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      Hiya Trish!

      To answer your question, I am an autodidact but you can find good summaries of these theories via Google :)

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I don't know enough about them to comment on String and M theories.Do you? Are you a scientist?

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      All that means is that they exist outside our universe. This is certainly in line with such outlandish conceptualizations as String and M theories.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I am not a scientist but I have heard scientists say things such as that there is no place for God / Heaven to exist within our universe and also that God's miracles would not fit with the laws of physics, etc.

      I appreciate that some scientists are also Believers and, as you suggest, they would 'not expect science to be the means to approaching the supernatural', but I don't see how that can make sense in scientific terms.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "can you explain, scientifically, where he is and how he can affect the universe, unscientifically, as described in the Bible?"

      “I would not expect religion to be the right tool for sequencing the human genome and by the same token would not expect science to be the means to approaching the supernatural. But on the really interesting larger questions, such as ‘Why are we here?’ or ‘Why do human beings long for spirituality?,’ I find science unsatisfactory. Many superstitions have come into existence and then faded away. Faith has not, which suggests it has reality.” - Francis S. Collins - MD, PhD

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      Hiya Trish!

      I must confess, I don't quite understand the relevance of your reply. Can you clarify?

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Joseph: "How do you mean that God's existence 'flies in the face of Physics'?"

      Well, can you explain, scientifically, where he is and how he can affect the universe, unscientifically, as described in the Bible?

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Joseph, the fact that religion causes (way too much) violence is not relevant to whether or not God exists, or whether such a god might be the God of the Bible.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      Do you know of anyone who's been executed for simply owning a copy of a Superman comic?

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      How do you mean that God's existence 'flies in the face of Physics'?

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      ".....us mere humans cannot really grasp what God is all about;...."

      Precisely! And because of this, the concept of "God" has given rise to all manner of metaphor, analogy, artist impressions, poetry, idolatry, etc. All trying to give an idea of what "God" might be like, in terms of what we humans perceive as worth focusing on.

      The trouble comes, I feel, when individuals and even groups cannot see the true nature and function of metaphor. They regard the metaphorical as reality.

      In that bible, metaphor has been so diverse, and the meaning obscure in many cases, that it's brought about argument and derision to the point of bloody warfare, fighting over the "true meaning," when really such "true meaning" is only applicable to the individual reading it.

      With this understanding, Joseph, if you really do "get it," you will see that you really are free to believe and perceive whatever you like, but your own interpretation is not necessarily transferable to the mind or the immediate needs of another person.

      I know that such understanding does not suit the needs of a controlling group of people, called a church or a synagogue or a mosque. Or a faith......

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Joseph, let's say that God exists. I don't know whether this is possible or not. I know that it seems to fly in the face of Physics, but I am agnostic, so I don't know.

      Now, let's say that us mere humans cannot really grasp what God is all about; that it is too huge a concept for our minds, but we try. And throughout time we have tried. And this has resulted is all sorts of beliefs; all sorts of gods.

      Why should the Bible stories be any closer to the 'real God' than the stories from any other ancient culture?

      The fact that lots of Bibles are sold is irrelevant. Lots + lots of Superman comic books, videos, etc, etc, are sold. Does that mean that Superman is real and is God?

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Rad

      “The vulgar modern argument used against religion, and lately against common decency, would be absolutely fatal to any idea of liberty. It is perpetually said that because there are a hundred religions claiming to be true, it is therefore impossible that one of them should really be true.

      The argument would appear on the face of it to be illogical, if anyone nowadays troubled about logic. It would be as reasonable to say that because some people thought the earth was flat, and others (rather less incorrectly) imagined it was round, and because anybody is free to say that it is triangular or hexagonal, or a rhomboid, therefore it has no shape at all; or its shape can never be discovered; and, anyhow, modern science must be wrong in saying it is an oblate spheroid. The world must be some shape, and it must be that shape and no other; and it is not self-evident that nobody can possibly hit on the right one.

      What so obviously applies to the material shape of the world equally applies to the moral shape of the universe. The man who describes it may not be right, but it is no argument against his rightness that a number of other people must be wrong.”

      ― G.K. Chesterton

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      The fact that the Bible is the single most published book in all of human history. Billions of copies have been printed, it's available the world over in hundreds of languages and each one announces that Jehovah is the one and only true God.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      The answer to that is simple, Trish.... it's all head stuff....lol

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Joseph, what makes you say that 'the God of the Bible, stands head and shoulders above all other gods'?

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      @Joseph, I'm sure the Greeks thought Zeus stood head and shoulders above all others. It's kind of funny because the Mormons are sure that the book of mormon is as divine as the NT. If they can be sure and wrong of that than you can can be sure and wrong.

    • Oztinato profile image

      Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

      Joey

      please stop embarrassing yourself. Its hard enough to combat atheist religious intolerance. Listening to an allegedly religious person defend religious intolerance is abysmal.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      It's also very interesting how, if you "read between the lines" of many stories found there, they reflect human nature, human leanings, human desires, successes, failures, emotions, social traits, etc...... all of which can be seen in our modern day. We humans have not changed in our basic, animal, instinctive characteristics.

      I am so glad that Charles Darwin had the courage to step outside of conventional thinking, and by doing so opened up the human mind to other ways of exploration.

      We have all, religious and non-religious alike, benefited from his work.

      Not to say anything is ever "cut and dried," of course. There is always room for more observation, more learning.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      But do you understand why Jehovah God, the God of the Bible, stands head and shoulders above all other gods?

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      But do you understand why Jehovah God, the God of the Bible, stands head and shoulders above all other gods?

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      Hey Joseph, I'm not sure how you think those to quotes make any case at all. I did like the guy who said letting go of his belief in evolution was difficult for him. What next, is he going to let go in his belief in electricity?

      I have to say I'm a little embarrassed for these two. You may want to have a critical look at all the prophesies. Like fortune telling they may sometime hit a not and that's all one remembers, they don't remember the thousand misses. Further, we don't know what the writer of the NT had access to because they very well may have wrote what the prophesies said. Notice the first gospel has no mention of the birth of Jesus or the resurrection, but the ones that came after did?

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I'm afraid that I haven't found anything other than very interesting historical documents in the Bible.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "My work as a biochemist involved studying the design of certain molecules found in ocean-dwelling cyanobacteria, which are microorganisms that don’t depend on other living things for food. Some researchers think that these organisms were the first living things on our planet. Using energy from sunlight, the microbes use an extremely complex chemical process, which is still not fully understood, to convert water and carbon dioxide into food. I was also amazed at how cyanobacteria can harvest light with incredible efficiency.

      I thought about engineers trying to imitate the marvelous mechanisms found in living things, and I came to the conclusion that life must have been designed by God. But my faith was not based solely on what I studied in science. It was also based on a careful study of the Bible.

      One of the many things that convinced me was the detailed fulfillment of Bible prophecies. For example, centuries in advance Isaiah described in abundant detail the death and burial of Jesus. We know this prophecy was written before Jesus’ death because the Isaiah Scroll, found at Qumran, was copied about a hundred years before Jesus was born.

      That prophecy says: “He will make his burial place even with the wicked ones, and with the rich class in his death.” (Isaiah 53:9, 12) Remarkably, Jesus was executed with criminals but was buried in the tomb of a wealthy family. This is just one example of the many fulfilled prophecies that convinced me that the Bible is inspired of God. (2 Timothy 3:16) In time, I became one of Jehovah’s Witnesses." -Dr. Davey Loos, former atheist (http://bit.ly/16DSMSi)

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "To my surprise, I found substantial knowledge and deep insight in the pages of the Bible. I was fascinated with researching the scientific accuracy of the Bible and the fulfillment of hundreds of detailed prophecies applying to events occurring over thousands of years of human history. I was especially impressed by how the integration of multiple Bible prophecies—in the books of Daniel and Revelation—provides a solid basis for determining that we live in “the last days.”—2 Timothy 3:1.

      In studying the Bible, I was unknowingly in excellent company. I later learned that Sir Isaac Newton, regarded as one of the greatest scientific geniuses of all time, admired and intensely researched the Bible. Like Newton, I focused on prophecies in Daniel and Revelation that foretold major historical events and developments that have actually occurred. However, I had the distinct advantage of living during and after the realization of the many prophecies that have been fulfilled since Newton’s day. I discovered that these prophecies are amazingly diverse and extensive as well as unerring and undeniable. It was an eye-opener to realize that the entire Bible, penned by more than 40 men over a period of 1,600 years, contains an internally consistent, coherent, and compelling message concerning the major issues facing humankind and its future.

      Letting go of my belief in evolution did not come without resistance, however. I respected the substantial weight of scientific authority backing up this theory. Nevertheless, I discovered that all Bible statements about the physical world are entirely consistent with known facts and cannot be disproved. I came to appreciate that in order to achieve a complete, cohesive understanding of the Bible’s extensive, interrelated contents, one cannot discount a single teaching, including the creation account in Genesis. I therefore discerned that acceptance of the entire Bible as truth was the only reasonable conclusion." -Dr. Kenneth Tanaka - Former Atheist (http://bitly.com/1ebIe05)

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Yes, it is certainly possible that the ancient priests and chiefs 'used' the idea of God as a means of control.

      It is also likely that anything unknown or misunderstood could have been taken as 'God'.

      I can understand a belief in the supernatural, but I don't see why modern man, even if he believes in a superior deity, should believe in God as described in the Bible - as opposed to gods found within any other ancient writings.

      Why that version? Why not Zeus or Odin or Ra? I suggest that it's just chance - that the version which eventually reached us was the one which arrived in the hands of people who could spread the idea further. (The Roman Catholic Church, perhaps???)

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      I suggest the "God of the Bible" was designed by Man. Designed by Church- and State-orientated people to use as a Weapon of Mass Control.

      Create a sense of guilt in your population for a start. Then build fear of retribution. Then paint scenarios of punishment and destruction. Threaten "Hell, Fire and Brimstone," as a consequence of not bowing to Order.

      Now paint another picture, one of Avoidance. Avoiding the consequences of disobedience, by "believing in" one who seemed to have Harry Potter-like, magical abilities and who continues to look down upon each and everyone of us in judgement. One who reports back to his "heavenly" Father who will then decide which 144,000 from the flock of billions will be allowed into that Pie-in-the-Sky, "Heaven."

      You know that "God of the Bible" is in reality a bunch of self-serving people that call themselves christian.

      Join with Joseph. Join the Club.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      Happy Thursday Trish! :)

      You say, "I do not believe that the God of the Bible is real." Why is that, if you don't mind my asking?

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I have to say that I find it, at the very least, disconcerting and confusing, as to why decent moral people, who would normally condemn genocide, rape, murder, torture, child abuse, etc, are willing to find excuses for such behaviour, and even praise, worship and adore the perpetrator and / or his followers, just because this is the Bible

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I love listening to Dawkins. I keep searching for his debates on YouTube. I used to love listening to Christopher Hitchens, too.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I found this Richard Dawkins quote. (It may, eventually, appear more than once because it keeps disappearing.)

      "... in the case of religion, I think there was something built into the human brain by natural selection which was once useful and which now manifests itself under civilised conditions as religion, but which used not to be religion when it first arose, and when it was useful."

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/pe...

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Now there's a courageous man!

      So was the Late Rev. Lord Donald Soper, who would debate with anyone at

      Speakers' Corner in Hyde Park. He was a Christian minister, renowned for his great and noble work with the poor, in the docklands of East London.

      He remained a Pacifist throughout World War II, despite being castigated as a traitor for not fighting in the war.

      Courage to stand up for what he believed.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      PS. Richard Dawkins discusses / explains belief as a genetic trait in some of his books.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      @Joseph, are you suggesting that you KNOW that animals (other than human animals) are irrational? Or is this just one more of your beliefs?

      How can we KNOW the nature of how other animals "think?" You and I, and most other people, can communicate with each other, using language, art, etc., to describe the way we are thinking. We can compare notes, come to some kind of conclusion that what we are thinking is at least similar.

      Scientists can do experiments to reach various conclusions about what and how other animals think and react to situations. We cannot know what they are "thinking" about when they just sit/lie there, ruminating on their cud, or just.... staring into space, as we perceive.

      Ultimately, what does it matter what they think, or whether they "think" at all?

      If they think even half as much as we do, they will have a pretty poor opinion of mankind; that species which plays havoc with and often destroys their habitat.....all because we presume we are that much more important and closer to our "creator" than they are.

      Maybe this is a bit too rational for you, eh?

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Hi again jonnycomelately :)

      Why do modern people - even educated ones - believe that ancient texts reveal a true creator God, who still watches over us, requiring our devotion?

      Why do believers want non-believers to convert to their religion?

      Interesting questions. I have thought about them a lot - and asked people about them.

      I personally know some very intelligent and highly educated people who are devout believers - and I have read about others. Why don't they doubt?

      I ask one friend, who answered that we all believe in something. This happened to be his thing.

      Only yesterday a friend told me that it was what she had been brought up with; it suited her and her family, felt right, so why abandon it?

      Others tell me that they have experienced something that sounds almost magical - God talking to them or working in their lives.

      And then there is 'the human difference'. Yes, of course we are animals but, even noting all the similarities, we are still very different even from our closest relatives likes bonobos. Why?

      Also, many people do have what appear to be supernatural or spiritual experiences. I have had them, myself, and know lots of others who have, too.

      No doubt this has happened throughout time and, when coupled with such mysteries of nature as thunder and lightning, for example, must have seemed like evidence for God and for other heavenly, or hellish, realms.

      To this day, not all apparently paranormal activity has been explained.

      I think that all of this helps to explain a continued belief in the existence of a magical deity. And I also think that, with no clear explanations for some of these mysteries, this is understandable.

      It's not that I am a complete atheist; I consider myself agnostic. As my friend the believer said - we all believe in something and you (ie. 'me') believe in all sorts of weird and wonderful things.

      I would say that I believe in possibilities, but I do not believe that the God of the Bible is real, except as a reflection of what the ancients believed, and I very much doubt that Jesus was an incarnation of this rather violent and fickle Bronze Age super being.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I think, Joseph, that you know all about the science of evolution so your question is clearly meant to be tongue-in-cheek :)

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Trish, Greensleeves, I see so much effort on the part of theists to convert me to their way of thinking, their beliefs, that it amazes me they even bother.

      Is their "faith" not strong enough to stand without my help or agreement? Does their "god" have so little actuality that "He" must always have his flock repeatedly reaffirming his existence?

      Is there so much ambiguity to be seen within that holy book, so vague behind and in amongst the ancient texts, that it takes a multitude of interpreters to bring even a slight semblance of "truth" to my ears?

      Does it stand up to good logic that people take ancient texts, about ancient peoples and cultures, in a distant desert land, and try to pretend that their "god" spoke to those people in strange, magical ways which can be taken at face value in the 21st century after their (questionably fictitious) founder left this physical world?

      Such feats of logic are even prevalent amongst well educated and intelligent individuals.

      Must be a genetic trait.... can't think of any other explanation. Can you?

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Green

      Evolutionary origins? Are you suggesting we share some ancient ancestry with irrational animals?

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Yes, Greensleeves Hubs, I agree that, while we humans are, indeed, animals, there is something rather different about us - and I acknowledge that it is a mystery :)

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Yes, it's interesting, 'jonnycomelately' , that many Christians seem to think that they have some kind of monopoly on morality.

    • Greensleeves Hubs profile image

      Greensleeves Hubs 2 years ago from Essex, UK

      Joseph, I take it you refute the science of biology? Yes, I can agree 'animal' does have a somewhat different meaning in popular English usage which likes to distinguish between other species and human beings on the basis of our enhanced cognitive abilities and emotional complexity, but biologically speaking in terms of anatomy, physiology and - yes, our evolutionary origins - we are all animals. That is a fact. It is not in dispute among biologists.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Joseph, 'rational, thinking, feeling human being's are animals, too.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Yes Rad Man, you and I seem happy to consider ourselves animals :)

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      Nope. I'm not an animal. I'm a rational, thinking, feeling human being :)

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      BTW Joseph, Spiritual experiences have been given to people by simply utilizing magnetics to the right hemisphere in 90% of people. I don't pretend to have a creator besides my parent, but I can say that if simple magnets produce what you would can the presence of God then that feeling is a product of your mind.

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      @ Trish, and they call Atheists arrogant? It's they who think they are the apple of God's eye, the centre of the universe and the reason for the universe and somehow not animals.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Joseph, your arguments do not improve.

      Religious belief does not equate to being "moral."

      However, it can equate to feeling superior.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I am an animal, Joseph.

      Of course I am.

      And so are you.

      So are we all.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Rad

      "Argumentum assertio?"

      Yes, argumentum assertio. “That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.” Prove your claim. Prove that your Creator is just a figment of imagination.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "I'm an animal"

      Speak for yourself :)

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Jonny

      "My abhorrence towards gang-rape has nothing to do with my atheistic view point."

      Because Atheism is amoral.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I've commented on the suffering animals hub.

      As I said, I'm an animal and I am capable of suffering.

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      Oztinato,

      I thought I'd add some Godel quotes if you don't mind.

      "Religions are, for the most part, bad—but religion is not"

      "I like Islam, it is a consistent [or consequential] idea of religion and open-minded."

      I've yet to see the math or logic yet. Not that this matter but he was good friend with Einstein and Einstein disagreed.

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      Argumentum assertio? I don't believe you understand that fallacy. You see it is you who is telling us that X is true and if we don't believe it we have a closed mind. It's also known as Rhetoric because an assertion itself (God) isn't really proof of anything.

      I don't believe I'll be reading your hub that states that animals don't suffer, you see I have another animal in the house and I know they suffer. I didn't read nor will I read anything after that nonsense.

    • Oztinato profile image

      Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

      Rad

      Kurt Godel. Remember? Proving God by pure logic and maths.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      @Joseph

      "Some action, say, gang rape, may not be biologically or socially advantageous and so in the course of human evolution has become taboo; but there is on the atheistic view nothing really wrong about committing gang rape."

      My abhorrence towards gang-rape has nothing to do with my atheistic view point. PLEASE, Joseph, if as you say in your Profile you are a "foe of lies," then do not try to twist logic into something that you know is not true.

      You are trying to present yourself as someone scholarly and able to present a reasonable argument. Yet, in suggesting that a belief in a god is a walk towards morality, you show simply a deep bias that is unable to consider wider possibilities... In my humble opinion.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "God allows innocent animals - human and non-human - to experience utter terror, torture, pain, humiliation, death, disease, etc. He is all-powerful, so, yes, if he is there, then he is allowing it."

      You'll be glad to know that animals don't actually suffer. I just finished publishing a hub on this very subject: Can Animals Actually Suffer? http://bit.ly/1v5ripl

      As far as human suffering is concerned you need to consider if our Creator could have a very legitimate reason for temporarily permitting human suffering: http://bit.ly/11EyvgO

      "Not only that, but he has created the system and the individuals which result in this suffering."

      Not in the slightest. Our current state of affairs was architected by Satan, Adam and Eve. Our loving Creator had nothing to do with it: http://bit.ly/11EyvgO

      "So please tell me how I am supposed to assume that morality comes from God?"

      Remember what Bahnsen said? Without absolute moral values and duties you can't judge anyone's actions as moral or immoral. You'd merely be expressing your own opinions, nothing more.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Rad

      Argumentum assertio. “That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.” Prove your claim. Prove that your Creator is just a figment of imagination.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Joseph, I have written a few hubs that relate to God and morality. They will explain my stance on the subject:

      https://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/Frank-Tur...

      https://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/Genghis-C...

      https://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/The-Destr...

      https://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/If-Jesus-...

      Suffice to say that child murder, gang rape and other revolting behaviour has evolved as human society has evolved. It helps us to live happier more successful lives if we co-operate better. Is it also because we are born with some kind of innate sense of morality? I don't know.

      Some people say that we do have an innate sense of morality and that God put it there. However, this cannot be so - and, here, I look at the God of the Bible and at God as (apparently) experienced by earthlings.

      The Bible has God encouraging, condoning and even ordering baby murder and gang rape, so it certainly cannot be this version of God who has made mankind consider them evil and immoral

      And from our our experiences we see that God allows innocent animals - human and non-human - to experience utter terror, torture, pain, humiliation, death, disease, etc. He is all-powerful, so, yes, if he is there, then he is allowing it. Not only that, but he has created the system and the individuals which result in this suffering.

      So please tell me how I am supposed to assume that morality comes from God?

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      Joseph, air is something measurable and testable, God is something imagined. If you are at all honest you would see the difference.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "it is not necessary for God to exist in order for morality to exist."

      Let me emphasize again, the question is not: “Must we believe in God in order to live moral lives?” There is no reason to think that atheists and theists alike may not live what we normally characterize as good and decent lives. Similarly, the question is not: “Can we formulate a system of ethics without reference to God?” If the non-theist grants that human beings do have objective value, then there is no reason to think that he cannot work out a system of ethics with which the theist would also largely agree. Or again, the question is not: “Can we recognize the existence of objective moral values without reference to God?” The theist will typically maintain that a person need not believe in God in order to recognize, say, that we should love our children. Rather, “the central question about moral and ethical principles concerns this ontological foundation. If they are neither derived from God nor anchored in some transcendent ground, are they purely ephemeral?” (Paul Kurtz)

      If there is no God, every basis for the herd morality evolved by mankind as objectively true is quite frankly arbitrary. In the end, just what is so exceptional about humanity in general? On Atheism, we are simply concomitant nimieties of nature having advanced comparatively recently on an infinitesimal speck left high and dry somewhere in a dreary and purposeless universe condemned to oblivion individually and jointly in a relatively not to distant future.

      Some action, say, gang rape, may not be biologically or socially advantageous and so in the course of human evolution has become taboo; but there is on the atheistic view nothing really wrong about committing gang rape. If “The moral principles that govern our behavior are rooted in habit and custom, feeling and fashion,” (Paul Kurtz) then the non-conformist who chooses to brush-off the herd morality is doing nothing more serious than acting passé.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Joseph, I don't wish, hope or intend to convert you. I simply disagree with you. :)

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      And I'm glad you did!

      Like Christ before me, I too "do not speak of my own originality, but the Father who remains in union with me is doing his works." - John 14:10

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      'How so? Surely not because you simply say so, is it?'

      I could ask the same of you, Joseph :)

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      I'll elaborate a bit.

      Only believers believe this and believing something does not necessarily make it so.

      It is not necessary for God to exist in order for air to exist.

      Similarly, it is not necessary for God to exist in order for morality to exist.

      Believers can say that these things are true and then base all sorts of conclusions on the premise. This does not mean that they are correct.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "that simply isn't true."

      How so? Surely not because you simply say so, is it?

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "God, [] creates murderers and perverts and allows them to torture the innocent,"

      God doesn't create murderers or rapists anymore than you can give birth to murderers or rapists. Individuals CHOOSE to become murderers or rapists.

      "allows them to torture the innocent, is not a loving or 'sublimely perfect' father-figure. He is either cruel and / or uncaring, or he lacks the power to help us."

      Why would he help you? Why would he care for any of you? All you do is proclaim to the world how much you despise him:

      "At that time they will call to Jehovah for help,

      But he will not answer them.

      He will hide his face from them at that time,

      Because of their wicked deeds." -Micah 3:4

      "If anyone turns a deaf ear to [Jehovah's] instruction, even their prayers are detestable." -Proverbs 28:9 (Bracket mine.)

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Sorry Joseph, that simply isn't true.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Rad

      "Gods words [] are unethical and immoral."

      @Trish

      "the Bible tells of several atrocities attributed to God."

      "Imagine a person who comes in here tonight and argues 'no air exists' but continues to breathe air while he argues. Now intellectually, atheists continue to breathe - they continue to use reason and draw scientific conclusions [which assumes an orderly universe], to make moral judgments [which assumes absolute values] - but the atheistic view of things would in theory make such 'breathing' impossible. They are breathing God's air all the time they are arguing against him."

      - Greg Bahnsen

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Rad

      "no straw man was used"

      Then show me where I specifically state "It's just to starve and molest children."

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      As for 'Proverbs 19:3' etc, I do not need the Bible to tell me that if God exists then he has to be supreme - and a supreme, all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful God, who creates murderers and perverts and allows them to torture the innocent, is not a loving or 'sublimely perfect' father-figure. He is either cruel and / or uncaring, or he lacks the power to help us.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Joseph, I'm afraid that creating predatory animals to rip baby lambs, etc, apart and creating murderers and perverts to wreck or end children's lives is not the work of a 'sublimely perfect' super-being.

      Furthermore, the Bible tells of several atrocities attributed to God.

      Either way, this is not good and would not be tolerated in humans.

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      @Joseph, no straw man was used. I'm looking straight at the words that you say are Gods words and showing you they are unethical and immoral.

      And NO. I need not delude myself with a soother into pretending I'm immortal.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      Except that God is perfect and everything he does is sublimely perfect. Man's failings are his own by his own choices. See Proverbs 19:3.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      "Man made trains and boats and planes but God made Man and God gave Man his brains."

      I can't remember who said that but we used to repeat it our school assemblies on occasion.

      The thing is, it works both ways. If man's achievements are really God's, then man's failings are really God's too.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Rad

      "It's such a shame to see someone allowing religion to blame the helpless victims."

      "People ruin their lives by their own foolishness and then are angry at the LORD." -Proverbs 19:3

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Rad

      "If a God exist, we know nothing about him"

      Would you like to know about him?

      "It's just to starve and molest children?"

      Strawman. Sorry, try again.

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      One would think that the unethical and immoral behaviour seen in the bible would be a clue that said God doesn't exist, but it appears the need to hold onto the concept of immortality is greater than the need see reality as it is. Sad, really.

    • Trish_M profile image
      Author

      Tricia Mason 2 years ago from The English Midlands

      Yes, Rad Man, I too find it surprising that so many people are willing to accept behaviour from a 'loving deity' that they would heartily condemn in any human.

    • profile image

      Rad Man 2 years ago

      Joseph, it's not a rebellion against God, it's a rebellion against the concept of a God. If a God exist, we know nothing about him other than he put us here on a planet orbiting a second or third generation sun which is one of billions in our galaxy which is one of billions of galaxies.