Can atheism coexist with religion?

If you do not believe the human brain is special, among all of the other animals...then not sure you can discern the difference here. ha ha.

And of course I agree that people raised up without religion are moral people too. I only said that religion has been the traditional conduit for morality, and there has been few or none of other organized groups that promoted morality as organized religion has. That concerned themselves with instilling it as an organized group. And unlike a morality that comes from being pragmatic, in order to minimize social conflict within the group, the morality of religion tends not to be as relative in nature and changeable based upon what a human leader might want in regards to morality.

And of course, you have major religions which have not followed their own morals/laws and by their actions been very immoral. Some might say that morality has even survived religion. ha ha

 

What falsehood are you claiming I've made? What religion to you believe I belong to, if any?

 

Max questioning how an atheist can believe evil exist at all.

 

Did you misread my post or are you simply making a false claim like Tecoyah claims others do?

Quote the post where I made that claim. If you can, I will apologize. If you can't, I expect you to apologize for making a false statement against me.

 

religion gives them a road map as well as an excuse for their behavior. Muslims and Christians are equally barbaric. Everyone is an atheist to someone else.

 

Scroll up for proof you are wrong.

 

You mean like government gave Stalin and Mao a roadmap to excuse their behavior? Pol Pot? Do you think eliminating religion of the face of the Earth would eliminate violence? Even by 10% or more? Do you really think what the Spanish did in South and Central America or the British and French in North America would never have happened if Christianity didn't exist?

 

morality being very subjective as well...what is moral to one religion is amoral to another

 

Yes, I'm presuming he's talking about "Intelligent Design". Ask him if the world is closer to 13 billion years in age or closer to 6000 years old....if he answers at all.

 

Except for one thing, the guy our religion is named for wanted us to tell the world about him, you have us confused with someone else.

So we will not be in the closet you made for us.

 

It's real simple. There are angry people on BOTH sides who push their agenda. I say, let me have the belief there is no god and you can have the belief there is. Just don't push your belief on me and I won't push mine on you. To each his/her own I say.

 

Basic morality isn't subjective IMO. For there is a consistency and a commonality in basic moral principles no matter what part of the world you are in, and no matter of culture. You see subjectivity once the moral codes get outside of these commonalities.

The reason for this is because the demands for societal order within groups, even from ancient times, mandated a basic moral code of conduct from us social animals. That moral code was the results of human intelligence noticing what human behaviors created social instability. And these behaviors of bad conduct which necessitated a moral code of behavior, are universal, given we are all human beings with a commonality in human nature. Taking what belongs to another, murder, lying on others in order to get them in trouble, and so on. The basic base side of human nature behavior.

I don't see this as being subjective at all, but came from intelligent observation, objective observation, and then intelligence sought to solve the problem of bad behavior in social groups. Voila, a moral code. Morality. Out of utter necessity. Not some subjective whim. And it is a prime example of early human intelligence. Solving a problem with your thinking brain.

And so I think it is very possible that to add even more weight to the moral code, to make it to be perceived as even more powerful and binding given that self constraint in behavior is not always successful, given the power of emotions, which many times will negate logic and reason, that man came up with the idea to tie the idea of a god, with morality. For if it comes from god, this moral code, it is not just what man made up. But has more authority than mortal man. This principle was used when the founders wrote our founding documents. God given rights. God given moral codes. And so the moral code that is so essential for a society to operate in some kind of order and harmony, was given more authority for it came from god, and if you don't follow it, there is a hell awaiting you once you die. It is about trying to encourage moral behavior, even if a lie like religion had to be used. I think that kinda explains morality, religion's role in it, and the utter necessity for it.

 

I reject the premise of your argument that evil can only be embodied supernaturally.

 

Scroll up to what?

 

Where's your evidence laughing boy. Where's your proof of how life started? Or how the world began? What have you got - nothing. You got nothing. We have eye witness testimony of spirits being seen and heard. I've seen them myself and testimony is considered evidence. An honest scientist will tell you that the laws of physics could only have come from intelligent design.
Just admit you don't know.

 

You clearly misread what Max posted. Max quote: seek to eliminate religion, even with violence
is not the same as " most atheists want to eliminate religion through violence".
Not even close.

 

I'd hazard to say if we removed all religion from the planet, more then 10% of violence would disappear overnight, but that is my biased opinion.

Christianity is a barbaric religion. Christianity evangelizes and demands this evangelism. Would it have happened? Probably, but at least there would not have been a convenient, forgiveable excuse for those butchering bastards, would there.

 

Can atheism coexist with what is likely the biggest scam in human history, eh.

Yeah, atheism will be fine … and probably continue to grow and thrive.

The real question is … can a fantasy like religion continue to coexist with science, facts, logic, and unrelenting human accumulation of knowledge?

Probably, since there will always be masses of uneducated and/or desperate and/or gullible etc. people.

But, thankfully, religion will likely continue to diminish in first-world countries...

 

Your choice, but IMHO the word connotes spirituality just like "sinful" or "wicked". It's a moral judgement. More secular terms, IMO, would be "unlawful" or "bad". While atheists can be moral, it's a relative term. No doubt Uncle Joe and Uncle Mao thought they were moral. In religions, morality is determined by their texts.

I think most of us can agree there is a difference between morality and the law. We don't need religion to define the law. Example: the Hammurabi Code. Although Hammurabi claimed he was given divine authority to rule, it was Hammurabi who enacted the laws. No doubt he built on ancient wisdom and common sense (as most religious laws do), but it's still a secular code/law.

Back to our discussion. If someone violated the Code, I doubt Hammurabi would declare them "evil" or "sinful". IMO, he'd have just determined if the accused broke the Code, then followed the punishment laid out in the Code.

For those interested in the Hammurabi Code circa 1754 BC: https://web.archive.org/web/20070909114038/http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM

 

Interesting perspective. Disagreed the religions are scams, although most certainly some human beings use religion to scam others just like they use politics/"causes" to scam others. Personally, I think Richard Dawkins is 80% scam artist and 20% "believer".

However, I'd like our resident atheists to chime in if they believe religions are scams: @tecoyah and @help3434

 

No doubt you have reasons for your statistic, but I disagree. Bad people do bad things. I think the level of "evil", really just bad actors, in the world will remain the same. If it were possible to eliminate religion (it's not, both Stalin and Mao tried) these bad actors would just find another means to manipulate people for personal gain.

Example: Most people know who Saddam Hussein was. Those who were aware of events at the time know he was a secular dictator, but when he was being attacked and, later, imprisoned, for his crimes he suddenly "got religion" and tried to ignite Jihadist sympathy for his plight. Personally, I strongly doubt he became a true believer. I think he was just trying to save his ass and sought to use religion as a tool to do it.

Back to your point, if religion didn't exist, would Saddam had sought to use some other tool to save his ass? Would he have become less violent?

 

Still waiting for you to prove your false claim.

Do you know the difference between "most atheists" and " most atheists on these forums"? If not, will you wimp out and claim it was a typo? I'm guessing you won't apologize for the error. Feel free to prove me wrong.

Here's my post:

I've seen self-proclaimed "Christians" lie on these forums. Obviously I've seen atheists lie too. Everyone else can judge for themselves.

 

Obviously you either don't know the difference between "most" and "most on these forums" or you're just being dishonest. Which is it?

We've seen the anger several times on this very thread. We've also seen the lies and subterfuge. The question each member must ask is "Who do I trust more?"

 

I think it already has.

Atheism (derived from the Ancient Greekἄθεος atheos meaning "without gods; godless; secular; denying or disdaining the gods, especially officially sanctioned gods"[1]) is the absence or rejection of the belief that deities exist. The English term was used at least as early as the sixteenth century and atheistic ideas and their influence have a longer history. Over the centuries, atheists have supported their lack of belief in gods through a variety of avenues, including scientific, philosophical, and ideological notions.

In the East, a contemplative life not centered on the idea of deities began in the sixth century BCE with the rise of Jainism, Buddhism, and certain sects of Hinduism in India, and of Taoism in China. Within the astika ("orthodox") schools of Hindu philosophy, the Samkhya and the early Mimamsa school did not accept a creator-deity in their respective systems.

Philosophical atheist thought began to appear in Europe and Asia in the sixth or fifth century BCE. Will Durant, in his The Story of Civilization, explained that certain pygmytribes found in Africa were observed to have no identifiable cults or rites. There were no totems, no deities, and no spirits. Their dead were buried without special ceremonies or accompanying items and received no further attention. They even appeared to lack simple superstitions, according to travelers' reports. The Vedas of Ceylon admitted only the possibility that deities might exist but went no further. Neither prayers nor sacrifices were suggested in any way by the tribes

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism

Atheism then was the disbelief of polytheistic 'gods'. This 'deity' for this, that 'deity' for that.

But every monotheistic place did place their hopes and faith in the ONE of GOD.

Theism is broadly defined as the belief in the existence of the Supreme Being or deities.[1][2]In common parlance, or when contrasted with deism, the term often describes the classical conception of God that is found in monotheism (also referred to as classical theism) or gods found in polytheistic religions—a belief in God or in gods without the rejection of revelation as is characteristic of deism. [3][4]

Atheism is commonly understood as rejection of theism in the broadest sense of theism, i.e. the rejection of belief in God or gods.[5] The claim that the existence of any deity is unknown or unknowable is agnosticism.[6][7]


Etymology
The term theism derives from the Greek theosmeaning "god". The term theism was first used by Ralph Cudworth (1617–168.[8] In Cudworth's definition, they are "strictly and properly called Theists, who affirm, that a perfectly conscious understanding being, or mind, existing of itself from eternity, was the cause of all other things".

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theism


What the heck is this???

https://www.google.com/


?????????????