My problem with Evangelical Atheism

[Hyena Dandy]

So you have a feeling this is true. That is a fairly good reason for you to believe, assuming that belief does not impair you from interacting with the world too much, but it is no reason at all for me to believe, and I continue to oppose a culture based on people enshrining their personal feelings into material 'facts'.

We're not telling you that they should be enshrined as facts. Again and again, we have not said that this must be accepted as true. Panacea did not try to give a good reason for YOU to believe. We are giving a reason for US to believe, and saying that us believing is not harming anyone. Including us. You're free to believe or not to believe as you want. If I mandated you believing, or a law mandated you believing, that would be kind of terrible. I would like you to believe, I suppose, but I would much rather that you be compassionate and do good than that you have the same opinion on God that I do.

Argumentum ad popularum. Christianity is now true not because of a new idea, but because it was the most popular of the religions espousing this idea. Everyone became christian, therefore it must be true.

Still not arguing that it's true. Only that it has done good.

His rule was given by the gods, his greatness came from his own actions as champion of the people. Interesting stuff.

Still religious. Not Christian. Still religious.

If a guy says he's allowed to do it because the gods say so, he is still using a religious justification. Thus, religion does good.

[Sleepwalker]

Dandy, read the preamble and afterward before commenting on my commentary. I really was just saying it's a cool thing to read, and not relating it to this particular argument.

As for the rest, I am not going to believe a lie, nor am I going to go along with policies formulated on said lie, simply because positive things may result. As religious people do make choices based on their religious beliefs, and said policies affect me, I am going to continue to oppose religion.

[Rapscallion]

Everyone justifies their shit though

Indeed they do, but if you remove the unthinking reasons for bias, you're left with having to think.

They'll just go to another excuse

We'll have to remove that as well.

The fact of the matter is: We're dickheads. Tribalistic dickheads.

Can't disagree.

But what hasn't been used to justify nasty shit? Some people justify nasty shit because their sports fans for fuck sakes. >.>

With reason, logic, and sufficient policing we've managed to reduce that over here. Horses for courses.

Of course, the rest of Yurp still thinks we're trying to export it.

Religion, from a historical perspective, is really low on the list of shit justification. Religious wars barely even register on the scale of human misery. Politics on the other hand has hurt and killed more people than anything else in the history of humanity.

I'd have to point back up the post and point out that politics isn't against using religion as a tool for its own ends. The crusades have been noted as being claimed for religion, yet the real reason was financial gain for the royalty involved.

You wouldn't remove the friction at all by removing religion. Another excuse would just be found. You need to remove stupidity. But we know how much of an uphill battle that's been. -.-

Your average work shift proves that beyond a shadow of doubt.

As for your other question. Atheism has been used as that excuse before too. An excuse will always be found.

Ah, well - those aren't real atheists, you know? Doesn't count.

If fact it's rather amazing that people can harp on religion when so much shit goes down day to day in the world in conflicts that we in west don't even acknowledge or only occasionally muster ourselves to do a 5 minute blurb on in the news once every 6 months.

Generally speaking, these days I don't harp on about religion. I only got involved in this thread because I could see erroneous claims being made about a position I agree with, along with erroneous claims made for the side claiming them.

Rapscallion

[Rapscallion]

Why do the claims of "atrocities never committed in the name of atheism" keep coming up when it's been shown, with undisputed facts, that thousands of people were murdered in the name of atheism in Russia?

Ah, but they weren't real atheists.

Phew, got away with that one!

Rapscallion

[Rapscallion]

Dear lord I am tired of this arguement.

I'm curious. How often have you heard it other than in this thread?

Ok, First off: There will always be a justification. Some people can twist literally anything to their viewpoints. If they didn't have religion, they'd use nationalism. Or race. Or gender. Or sexual preference. Or political beliefs. Or freaking dietary habits. The problem isnt religion, its ASSHOLES who use it to further their agenda.

Dear lack of lord, I'm tired of hearing this. When they use those, we'll remove those intolerances piece by piece as well. That doesn't justify the unthinking belief in the unproveable as being superior to yourself. It doesn't mean that a theist can say all atheists are poor sports.

In the cause of the lack of their belief? Ok, I'll give you that. I cannot think of anything done in the name of the allmighty Atheism that's more than being a bit of a prick.

Atheism isn't really almighty - as an atheist I prefer not to claim that something that doesn't exist has power.

But, really now. Are we going to bring up that again? "So much evil has been done in the name of religion!"

Addressed earlier, I think.

....most of which can easily be attributed to either politics or cultural issues of the time, or just plain old bigotry, using religion as a convenient excuse.

Ah, the good old 'not real theists' argument.

Again. An excuse that could have just as easily been replace with a dozen others. with just changing a few freaking key words.

So, not real atheists, we're saying?

Rapscallion

[Panacea]

So you have a feeling this is true. That is a fairly good reason for you to believe, assuming that belief does not impair you from interacting with the world too much, but it is no reason at all for me to believe, and I continue to oppose a culture based on people enshrining their personal feelings into material 'facts'.

Argumentum ad popularum. Christianity is now true not because of a new idea, but because it was the most popular of the religions espousing this idea. Everyone became christian, therefore it must be true.

You should try reading Hammurabi's code sometime, by the way. The preamble and afterward are especially interesting, and cast some light on how religion was invoked back then. He did not invoke the gods to legitimize his actions, he invoked them to legitimize his kingship. His rule was given by the gods, his greatness came from his own actions as champion of the people. Interesting stuff.

Boy, you have a real penchant for quoting out content. I don't "feel" my faith is true, I know it is true based on my own experiences. However, you can't share in my personal experiences, so I don't offer them as a reason why anyone else should believe . . . only why I do.

But you did take the bait, so I am happy to bring up another point.

Atheists, particularly of Dawkins' stripe, like to try and use the scientific method to "prove" that God doesn't exist. You make a vague attempt in that direction when you said, "I continue to oppose a culture based on people enshrining their personal feelings into material 'facts'."

You cannot factually either prove or disprove the existence of a supreme deity. Science cannot answer this question, and does not even try because science does not deal with the supernatural world.

There is a distinct difference between science and faith.

Faith requires the believe to take the risk that he is wrong, that his interpretation of what it means to be a person of faith is wrong, that they interpret their holy scriptures wrong, or misunderstand the will of their deity. Faith requires risk, that's why it is called faith.

To attempt to answer questions of faith with science fails because the attempt tries to remove risk from faith. It cannot be done. This is why creationism and intelligent design (aside from the obvious methodological flaws in scientific method) fails utterly.

It is also why science cannot answer questions about the supernatural world; because you cannot measure the supernatural. It requires the scientist to take a leap of faith (pardon the pun), a risk that the conclusion is wrong because the data is not reproducible regardless of what the scientist is trying to prove. That's why science does not deal with the supernatural.

So you cannot speak of "facts" when you speak of faith. Faith is what it is to the person that holds it. There are consistencies between those who share the same faith, but it is never exactly the same in two people because we all experience it (or fail to do so) differently.

You don't want to accept something that you cannot point to facts, and that's fine. But it is wrong of you to dismiss me for my faith simply because I disagree with your world view, when I'm not even trying to show you how you could find faith of your own (I believe people have to find it on their own).

Many very rational people are and were people of faith. For example, Issac Newton, inventor of calculus and Newtonion physics, was a profoundly religious man. So are many modern scientists, who see no conflict between the two.

Religion started, in part, as a way for people to explain the world around them in a time when science did not exist. It became the basis for philosophical ideas that were the bedrock of many great cultures around the world. It has, unfortunately, been used for harm as well as for good.

So tell me, if you continue to "oppose a culture based on people enshrining their personal feelings into material facts," does this mean you oppose evolution? Charles Darwin was a religious man. Does this mean you oppose literature? Some of the world's greatest literature, such as Milton's "Paradise Lost," were inspired by Christian traditions. Some of the worlds greatest architectural accomplishments, such as the Great Pyramids, the statues of Buddha that the Taliban destroyed, or the step pyramids of the Aztecs, the gothic cathedrals of Europe: all inspired and built around a culture of faith.

If you oppose this, you oppose all of modern civilization. You can't escape the influence of faith or religion.

If a guy says he's allowed to do it because the gods say so, he is still using a religious justification. Thus, religion does good.

Or ill. It does cut both ways.

I love the line from Kull the Conqueror (the movie, haven't read the books) where he smashes the Wall of Law and declares, "By this axe I rule!" Great line, very dramatic.

Of course, ruling the by axe is all well and good as long as Kull remains a fair and just king. If he decides to be arbitrary one day, the poor subject has no recourse.

I think I like our system of laws better

[Rageaholic]

Boy, you have a real penchant for quoting out content. I don't "feel" my faith is true, I know it is true based on my own experiences. However, you can't share in my personal experiences, so I don't offer them as a reason why anyone else should believe . . . only why I do.

This right here is why many people have a hard time believing. It really all comes down to personal experiences that cannot be explained with words. I'm not trying to ridicule anyone as I can't have a problem with those who believe and go on with their daily life. At the same time, it's frusturating to try to understand something that can't be explained, especially when there's a posibility I could be eternally damned if I don't understand it. Thus I find myself in the "I don't know" crowd to save my sanity.

[Duelist925]

I'm curious. How often have you heard it other than in this thread?

Surprisingly often. True, I do here it most on this board, but I've seen it in a number of other areas, both rl and online.

Dear lack of lord, I'm tired of hearing this. When they use those, we'll remove those intolerances piece by piece as well. That doesn't justify the unthinking belief in the unproveable as being superior to yourself. It doesn't mean that a theist can say all atheists are poor sports.

Dude, if you or anyone, atheist, theist, or worshipper of the freaking sun, can remove tribal dickery and general prickishness from human nature, then we may have the first on record miracle of modern times. I've had deaththreats back when I worked as tech support over who won or lost a football match--I aint holding my breath.

And I'm not saying atheists are poor sports--Im saying that arguement is flawed.

Atheism isn't really almighty - as an atheist I prefer not to claim that something that doesn't exist has power.

I admit, I was using it in the same vein some people use "angry sky pixie". I really shouldnt. I apologize.

Ah, the good old 'not real theists' argument.



So, not real atheists, we're saying?

Rapscallion

Dude, you missed the point of my arguement entirely. Wether they were theists or not doesnt matter, except it gave them a convenient excuse to give the masses. "We're going here to kill all the brown people and take their shit because they call their god some foreign gabble rather than the right proper thing".

They could have easily said, "Hey were going here to kill the brown people because their king insulted our kings mother, and then went oh snap. And we hate those jokes" and it still would have worked.

Wether or not they were "real theists" is a moot point. They were motivated by politics of hte time/greed, take your pick, and used religious reasons to placate the masses.

[Gravekeeper]

Indeed they do, but if you remove the unthinking reasons for bias, you're left with having to think.

People justify shit with an excuse like race, nationality, religion, sports team, etc because they don't think to begin with. Not because their excuse doesn't make them think. Again, the excuse doesn't matter, its that idiots exist to begin with. Theist or atheist doesn't matter, stupid shit has been done, is being done and will be done in the name of both. Along with in the name of politics, race, creed, sports team, favourite TV show, Justin Bieber, etc. Stupid horrible shit has even been done in the name of science.

The entire argument present in this thread is putting the cart before the horse. People do not do horrible things because of theism/atheism, they do horrible things because they are stupid, horrible people to begin with. Laying the fault of their stupidity at the excuse they use for it is missing the problem entirely.

Saying someone did stupid shit because they think God wants them too is just as silly as saying it's their God's fault that they did stupid shit. It's not.

It's their own fucking fault. Case closed. -.-

I'd have to point back up the post and point out that politics isn't against using religion as a tool for its own ends.

No, its not. But again, "Holy" wars are blips on the historical radar. The Crusades only racked up a kill count of 1-3 million. WW2 racked up 40-72 million. The An Lushan rebellion racked up 33-36 million. The Mongols scored a good 30-60 million and that was because fuck it, we're Mongols. The war between the Qing and Ming dynasties in China: 25 million dead. Taiping Rebellion, anywhere from 20 to 100 fucking million.

Religious wars are a little more than hiccups in the annals of history and they utterly pale in comparison casualty wise to, well, absolutely every other reason we've ever killed each other. Which is why this entire argument is so bloody stupid. Why are we blaming everything on one of the least popular reasons on the list? Why does killing people because you think a supernatural being wants you too somehow more stupid than killing people because they're brown, or they speak a different language or because a mortal leader told you too?

This entire debate, which occurs every damn time someone mentions the J word as if that's the battlecry of atheism for some reason, is frustrating and idiotic. All around. You cannot blame all of the ills resulting from a fraction of group on the entire group ( Especially if that group compromises the majority of the fucking population of the planet ) whilst simultaneously claiming that any ills pointed out by your opponent don't count because you're on the "right side" of the debate or that those incidents aren't real theist/atheists or whatever the fuck else.

Stupid fucking people wear many strips because they're fucking stupid and won't think for themselves regardless. Piss on them if you want, but don't wave your dick around and hit everyone else wearing the same colour shirt too. Some of us just happen to like that colour.

[Rapscallion]

Dude, if you or anyone, atheist, theist, or worshipper of the freaking sun, can remove tribal dickery and general prickishness from human nature, then we may have the first on record miracle of modern times.

I doubt anyone could succeed, but I think it's worth making the effort. Good to start with an easy one.

I admit, I was using it in the same vein some people use "angry sky pixie". I really shouldnt. I apologize.

I wouldn't worry about it. I'm the one who brought the phrase 'vengeful sky pixie' to this board from a colleague of mine's colourful vocabulary. Besides, the concept of a belief in nothing being all powerful simply amused me.

Dude, you missed the point of my arguement entirely. Wether they were theists or not doesnt matter, except it gave them a convenient excuse to give the masses. "We're going here to kill all the brown people and take their shit because they call their god some foreign gabble rather than the right proper thing".

It's not just a convenient excuse for themselves, though, is it? It's an exhortation from a divine source the masses are told to worship and obey to be a bigot or whatever.

Rapscallion

[Rapscallion]

Why does killing people because you think a supernatural being wants you too somehow more stupid than killing people because they're brown, or they speak a different language or because a mortal leader told you too?

Interesting point. I think for me it's because while I can feel the tribalistic impulses trying to drag me one way or another when jingoistic stuff is broadcast, I can recognise it for what it is and can understand it. For example, a neighbour keeps throwing his cat's shit into my yard, but at least he's not of another colour of skin and in a funny foreign land where they do all sorts of odd things - felt it, fought against it, suppressed it. I can understand it.

Religion? Something that makes unproveable claims, or contradicts itself, or ties its tongue in words to prove something that's convenient for the time? I cannot understand someone following that.

Rapscallion

[Gravekeeper]

Religion? Something that makes unproveable claims, or contradicts itself, or ties its tongue in words to prove something that's convenient for the time?

Exactly like politics in other words? >.>

I cannot understand someone following that.

And that's perfectly fine. That's not really the problem. The problem is blaming the entire group for the actions of a few morons, who would be morons regardless. Especially when we're talking about a group that comprises the majority of the world's population. Religion is no better or worse than any other excuse said morons use.

I don't agree with the Christian view of the cosmos either. But I understand why one would voluntarily follow it. Because it offers them something that enriches their lives. Whether it turns out to be true or not is, in my view at least, actually a secondary concern. If its done them good in their lives and they've done good by it, I don't care if they worship Raldoor, Herald of the Eternal Turnip.

[Duelist925]

I doubt anyone could succeed, but I think it's worth making the effort. Good to start with an easy one.

Easy? My friend, if it were easy this thread wouldn't exist.

Belief, wether for or against a god, is deeply held by people, and to be frank...most people really suck at convincing one another. As can be seen many times on this forum alone, it far too often degenerates into sniping at one anothers side, in an attempt to rile up flame war, or just wars of logical fallacies against one another.

*snip*

It's not just a convenient excuse for themselves, though, is it? It's an exhortation from a divine source the masses are told to worship and obey to be a bigot or whatever.

Rapscallion

Perhaps. I can't speak for another individuals mind--I can't read'em. I do also know there are some damn good ideas within that divine source as well. I also point towards Gravekeepers response to that, since he makes a much better point than I could.

Incidentally, I am making a Paladin of Raldoor, Herald of the Eternal Turnip at some point. Thank you gravekeeper.

[Panacea]

This right here is why many people have a hard time believing. It really all comes down to personal experiences that cannot be explained with words. I'm not trying to ridicule anyone as I can't have a problem with those who believe and go on with their daily life. At the same time, it's frusturating to try to understand something that can't be explained, especially when there's a posibility I could be eternally damned if I don't understand it. Thus I find myself in the "I don't know" crowd to save my sanity.

The eternal damnation part is another issue where what the Bible says has been twisted around to mean what people want it to mean. You have to remember, the Bible has undergone considerable editing over the years; some intention, some errors of translation.

Example; one of the early editions of the King James version had a type, "Thou Shalt Commit Adultery." Needless to say, King James was not pleased.

But all the mistakes, errors, or attempts to rewrite the Bible for political purposes, added to the fact we don't have access to a first edition Gospel, mean that we have to be very careful in taking its words on a literal basis.

But as I said, faith requires risk. That's what makes it faith. It's not for everyone, even some "very religious people" who would rather let an error filled book do their thinking for them and condemn others than do their own thinking while building their personal relationship with God.

I recommend you read Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus: The Story behind Who changed the Bible and Why."

People justify shit with an excuse like race, nationality, religion, sports team, etc because they don't think to begin with. Not because their excuse doesn't make them think.

The entire argument present in this thread is putting the cart before the horse. People do not do horrible things because of theism/atheism, they do horrible things because they are stupid, horrible people to begin with. Laying the fault of their stupidity at the excuse they use for it is missing the problem entirely.

Saying someone did stupid shit because they think God wants them too is just as silly as saying it's their God's fault that they did stupid shit. It's not.

It's their own fucking fault. Case closed. -.-

Eloquently put.

[AdminAssistant]

Example; one of the early editions of the King James version had a type, "Thou Shalt Commit Adultery." Needless to say, King James was not pleased.

He should have been, considering the fact that he was bedding every maid and manservant he could get his hands on.