The New Atheists

[Moss]

Is god responsible for rape, murder, war, poverty, and disease as well or just the good stuff?

 

Ah hell, why did I have to say anything.

[SarahC]

The short answer is yes and no. God gave us the ability to exercise our own free will, and to stray from him, which is how the horrible acts of sin happen (such as rape, murder, etc).

[Moss]

The short answer is yes and no. God gave us the ability to exercise our own free will, and to stray from him, which is how the horrible acts of sin happen (such as rape, murder, etc).

 

Fair enough, thanks.

[Scalzunfield]

Fair enough, thanks.

 

You're never going to get a legitimate answer to that question anyways from a religious person. In their mind, there's no other explanation for anything than "God did this" or "God gave you that" etc.

 

There's never any physical proof behind it, just the belief that God does everything. You'll never talk a religious person out of that mindset.

 

As a confirmed atheist with a major hatred of organized religion (not the ideas behind it but the way people act upon it when in a group of like-minded followers) I've pretty much given up trying to talk to people who are religious because they will never accept fact, only hearsay, when it comes to religious beliefs.

 

To me, if you translate religious belief into other aspects of the world it would be similar to the doctor at the hospital saying "we've done all these tests and they have revealed your husband has cancer" and the wife turning around and saying "I just think it's a little tummy ache. Let me take him home now."

 

My two cents. Take it or leave it.

[M. (hristine]

(not the ideas behind it but the way people act upon it when in a group of like-minded followers)

I would again point out that group psychology follows certain behaviors, regardless whether the group is gang raping a 15 year old girl or going to church on Sunday. Psych 101.

[Guest Speed Racer]

You're never going to get a legitimate answer to that question anyways from a religious person. In their mind, there's no other explanation for anything than "God did this" or "God gave you that" etc.

 

There's never any physical proof behind it, just the belief that God does everything. You'll never talk a religious person out of that mindset.

 

Wow, that's pretty awesome that you managed to completely ignore Sarah's perfectly reasonable, rather short response that actually attributed nothing to God except that he gave humans free will (free will being, of course, one of the things most people agree that humans have, regardless of how they got it).

 

And you didn't even need a bunch of "like-minded people" to steer you into that misdirection.

 

Ignorant, stubborn atheists who think that the problem in this world are "group-think believers" kinda make me laugh. You can be a Christian and still a reasonable, articulate, wonderful person. The opposite is true, but the same goes for atheists - ignorance and assumptions will get you about as far in this world as walking around with your head up your ass, regardless of what you choose to believe.

[uncool2pillow]

I would again point out that group psychology follows certain behaviors, regardless whether the group is gang raping a 15 year old girl or going to church on Sunday. Psych 101.

While your point on group dynamics may be valid, to equate going to church (or any place of worship) with rape is grossly offensive. I guess atheists are too enlightened to be subject to the rules of group psychology.

[SarahC]

Ignorant, stubborn atheists who think that the problem in this world are "group-think believers" kinda make me laugh. You can be a Christian and still a reasonable, articulate, wonderful person. The opposite is true, but the same goes for atheists - ignorance and assumptions will get you about as far in this world as walking around with your head up your ass, regardless of what you choose to believe.

 

 

that's the exact same thing I was trying to convey in my first post, but you did it better!

 

If anybody ever comes to me and wants to talk about God (or their belief of the lack there of) I will talk for hours, because even a "lack of belief" is believing that it doesn't exist.

 

I don't understand that mind set though, that just because we can't physically see God (the being) means He doesn't exist.

[M. (hristine]

While your point on group dynamics may be valid, to equate going to church (or any place of worship) with rape is grossly offensive. I guess atheists are too enlightened to be subject to the rules of group psychology.

Huh?

[Good Old Neon]

.

[Moss]

I find these types of debates very interesting for both sides of the argument. As an atheist, I just don't know how to debate or ask questions without coming across as a condescending tool. I really have no desire to offend or anger people on here so I tend not to weigh in on these things. Good old Neon does a great job of representing my views for the most part anyways. I guess what I am saying is please accept my questions in the spirit they are intended, honest and open and just wanting to understand. Heck, maybe with a compelling enough case I could be converted! I have all the usual questions that come up when these debates arise so here are a few:

 

1. Are all non Christians (the majority of the earth) doomed to a life in hell for believing in the wrong god?

2. The god portrayed in the old testament seems to be petty, vindictive, jealous..., why is he worthy of worship?

3. Is evolution compatible with religion?

 

I have about 100 other questions but these are the first that come to mind.

[uncool2pillow]

Huh?

Not sure what you're confused about. You equated going to church with rape, I took offense. Your post seemed to imply that church goers are all victims (for lack of a better word) of groupthink. I would contend that all of us are subject to that. By comparing church goers with rapists, I assumed that you were putting atheists on a higher plane of thought.

 

I find these types of debates very interesting for both sides of the argument. As an atheist, I just don't know how to debate or ask questions without coming across as a condescending tool. I really have no desire to offend or anger people on here so I tend not to weigh in on these things. Good old Neon does a great job of representing my views for the most part anyways. I guess what I am saying is please accept my questions in the spirit they are intended, honest and open and just wanting to understand. Heck, maybe with a compelling enough case I could be converted! I have all the usual questions that come up when these debates arise so here are a few:

 

1. Are all non Christians (the majority of the earth) doomed to a life in hell for believing in the wrong god?

2. The god portrayed in the old testament seems to be petty, vindictive, jealous..., why is he worthy of worship?

3. Is evolution compatible with religion?

 

I have about 100 other questions but these are the first that come to mind.

 

1. Are all non Christians (the majority of the earth) doomed to a life in hell for believing in the wrong god?

 

While many people of faith believe this about their religion, I certainly do not. I'm not even sure what heaven is and I don't believe hell is anything more than total absence from God. To that point, I believe that there are many atheists who are doing God's work more than many so-called Christians. They might have a pleasant surprise upon their passing. We are all human beings and we are all blinded by our cultural leanings. God's message gets distorted through our culture and our meager ability to understand it. Christians have no more monopoly on the true message of God than anyone else.

 

2. The god portrayed in the old testament seems to be petty, vindictive, jealous..., why is he worthy of worship?

 

This is probably because of the culture of the early Hebrews. They were the first Monotheists and were subject to all sorts of scorn. The God they worshiped reflected their culture. To some, this is an argument that they "created" the God they worship. To me, it's another example of our understanding of God being distorted by our culture.

 

3. Is evolution compatible with religion?

 

Sure, why not? There are fundamentalists who accept the story of Genesis, but I think there are millions of enlightened Jews, Christians, and Muslims who accept Genesis as a myth filled with allegory and moral lessons. Religion is about a heckuva lot more than a story about how we got here. Scientists now answer the "hows" of nature than theologians. Religious people would do well to realize this and focus on the "whys".

 

I appreciate most of what people write in these threads. It's hard for atheists to not sound condescending and for believers to not sound high-minded, but it's a conversation that's mostly fun, enlightening, and challenging.

[Calexico]

Why do atheists always get pitted against Christians?

 

Seeding system, like Wimbledon.

[M. (hristine]

 

 

As a confirmed atheist with a major hatred of organized religion (not the ideas behind it but the way people act upon it when in a group of like-minded followers) I've pretty much given up trying to talk to people who are religious because they will never accept fact, only hearsay, when it comes to religious beliefs.

 

 

I would again point out that group psychology follows certain behaviors, regardless whether the group is gang raping a 15 year old girl or going to church on Sunday. Psych 101.

Not sure what you're confused about. You equated going to church with rape, I took offense. Your post seemed to imply that church goers are all victims (for lack of a better word) of groupthink. I would contend that all of us are subject to that. By comparing church goers with rapists, I assumed that you were putting atheists on a higher plane of thought.

 

 

Uh no. I did not equate going to church with rape. My point was that behavior of a group is bound by certain laws. That as a member of ANY identified group, one is prone to conform with the norms of that group, regardless how an outside observer might judge such behavior. Working to objectively investigate and dismantle certain GROUPS might be a good thing.

 

My problem with people saying they have 'hatred' of organized religion is that RELIGION is not the problem. To hate with a broad stroke is prejudicial ignorance. It is from that very mind set which so much human strife arises. I think I have pretty clear about that throughout this debate. Had you read any of my other posts, or even thought about the post you took offense at, you might have understood that.

[Calexico]

You guys should hear the church hierarchy try to defend the indefensible here this week. Two reports on systemic abuse of children by priests in Ireland ,over the last 20 or so years, were published this week. Everyone is scrambling to pass the buck onto someone else and spin the topic to suit themselves. Church, cops, schools, all manner of institutions. Fucking shameful.

 

 

Makes me glad I gave up on religion and the church as a kid. Never trust an organisation where men volunteer for chastity. No fucking way.

 

A priest came to our door a while back looking for donations or whatever it is they seek and I gave him such a litany of things wrong with this country and his church that he just blushed and stumbled out the door. Fucking brass neck of him to look for money when the country is on it's knees and he works for the richest organisation in the world.

 

I really shouldn't have stepped into this thread because I knew it would make my blood boil. Apologies.

[M. (hristine]

[Calexico]

 

Are you saying I should have posted that instead of my ill thought out, bile inflected post?

 

Smart aleck....

[M. (hristine]

 

I listened to that story this week. Sinead was brave, so many years ago.

[uncool2pillow]

Uh no. I did not equate going to church with rape. My point was that behavior of a group is bound by certain laws. That as a member of ANY identified group, one is prone to conform with the norms of that group, regardless how an outside observer might judge such behavior. Working to objectively investigate and dismantle certain GROUPS might be a good thing.

 

My problem with people saying they have 'hatred' of organized religion is that RELIGION is not the problem. To hate with a broad stroke is prejudicial ignorance. It is from that very mind set which so much human strife arises. I think I have pretty clear about that throughout this debate. Had you read any of my other posts, or even thought about the post you took offense at, you might have understood that.

While I am sure I have read all of your posts, I don't always keep track of who says what. If you point wasn't to equate church goers with rapists, why not use some other example? The group dynamics of, say, a rowdy football or soccer crowd? Or a political rally? Choosing rape seemed to me to be a rather deliberate choice with an evil connotation. If I was wrong in reading implications that were not there, I apologize.

[M. (hristine]

I used gang rape because of this story which was reported on NPR a couple weeks ago.

The specific choice of group behavior had no connotation other than it's been on my mind since the story aired. To put it in the context of my (consistent) argument; In gang rape, SEX is not the problem.

[uncool2pillow]

I used gang rape because of this story which was reported on NPR a couple weeks ago.

The choice of group behavior had no connotation other than it's been on my mind since the story aired. To put it in the context of my (consistent) argument; In gang rape. SEX is not the problem.

Your context does help clarify matters. Thank you.

[Moss]

 

She sure caught a ration of crap for that one didn't she? I remember Lou Reed saying something about how ridiculous it was that Madonna criticized her for this.

 

And thanks for the thoughtful responses Uncool. I have found that most Christians I come into contact are willing to discuss these things rationally and I find it an interesting debate. Like you said; fun, enlightening and challenging!

[Good Old Neon]

I used gang rape because of this story which was reported on NPR a couple weeks ago.

The specific choice of group behavior had no connotation other than it's been on my mind since the story aired. To put it in the context of my (consistent) argument; In gang rape, SEX is not the problem.

 

The problem isn’t so much the followers, it’s the ideology. The bible - among other tracts - is desperately outdated, and followers who take their cues from these texts are basically subscribing to a 2000 + year old book (or books) that maybe doesn’t work so well in dealing with contemporary issues like same sex marriage, abortion, stem cell research, etc. If one is to take the teachings of the bible literally, as was the case throughout most of our history, (and still is in some parts) who can be blamed for taking a dim view of same sex marriage, abortion, stem cell research, other, “false” religions, etc - especially when the reward for independent thought and action is an eternity in hell? Stories such as the ark and Adam and Eve were taken literally up until it became apparent, through the use of science, that these stories are just that, stories. Then, and only then did they take the form of metaphors – which is where religion finds itself now, spouting a limp, watered down sort of humanism.

 

I’m not suggesting we do away with religion, but many people are held prisoner by its more dogmatic points of view. In much of Europe, where there is a larger secular population, a higher percentage of that population is ok with stem cell research, same sex marriage, reproductive rights, etc – and where it’s not, what do you think is largely responsible for that attitude? If groupthink is the problem, then the ideology upon which the groupthink is founded is a large part of the problem.

 

Last year, the Vatican’s official astronomer decreed that it is ok to believe that life exists on other planets, and if it were found, it would not contradict the catholic faith – which, until last year, it pretty much would. Why, I wonder, probably as a result of finding water on Mars, which increases the likelihood of finding evidence of life, current or much more likely, fossilized. Groupthink is not responsible for the Catholic Church’s prior belief, and by extension, many of its followers, but the text upon which it rests is.

[Good Old Neon]

The short answer is yes and no. God gave us the ability to exercise our own free will, and to stray from him, which is how the horrible acts of sin happen (such as rape, murder, etc).

 

If God is not responsible for man’s acts against man, and it’s all freewill, why does he intercede on some occasions, usually in rather mundane affairs, but not others, say, in Serbia, where infants were tossed in the air to be caught upon bayonets?

 

And what of natural disasters that regularly wipe out scores and scores of individuals – if he is responsible for the earth and all its beauty, is he also responsible for its unstable plates, weather, etc?

 

Do you believe God has a plan for us – and if so, is that not a form of determinism, and if everything is predetermined, where does that leave freewill? If God’s plan is for me to die at the hands of a co-worker, in a hail of bullets, did the shooter act freely, or was he simply playing a role in God’s plan?

 

As for why I’m an atheist, probably for all the same reasons you are with regards to the hundreds and hundreds of now extinct religions – as Dawkins is fond of saying, I just took it one god further.

[Guest Speed Racer]

If God is not responsible for man’s acts against man, and it’s all freewill, why does he intercede on some occasions, usually in rather mundane affairs, but not others...

 

In the point of being fair, I don't believe Sarah ever said god *did* interfere with anything.

 

Her question, of course, but it's a point of annoyance for me in this thread that people seem to think ALL atheists think the same things and ALL Christians think the same things, and that who says what isn't all that important (when it's probably extra-important in this thread).