Atheist attacking... what 2do?

[Guest]

Among Christians, there's this common misconception that Athiests don't believe in a "higher purpose" (outside of self).

This is really not correct and it would be great if Christians would try to understand this.

Athiests don't believe that there is a God. But, they do believe that there are universal laws that make the world a better place. Laws that are not attributed to God but by human history, biology, philosphy, learning. Laws, that when followed provides a positive experience for all - man and his environment, including future generations. Just because they don't believe in God doesn't mean that they don't CARE.

Take a Jew for example - they don't believe in heaven or hell. So, if you think about it, why do they care if they do anything bad on earth? They care because they WANT to live a good life and provide their progeny with a good future. The laws they follow are attributed to God, but that would be the only difference between Jews and Athiests - the laws are attributed to different sources, and therefore, would be different.

But, if you really think hard about it with an open mind - God's laws are all laws of love. There are a lot of universal laws that coincide with God's laws - because God created nature. Man sees the consequences of not following God's laws - most of which are experienced on earth, and not just in the afterlife. Athiests see these too - for example - if you don't love your wife, then your life would be chaotic - that's a pretty straight-forward immediate consequence thing that man has learned. Whether you believe in God or not, the consequence is felt. Athiests choose their wives wisely as well.

Just my 2 cents, of course.

[slamjet]

Among Christians, there's this common misconception that Athiests don't believe in a "higher purpose" (outside of self).

This is really not correct and it would be great if Christians would try to understand this.

How can a person believe here is a higher purpose of love and uplifting others when the generally accepted universal laws is "the evolutionary law of survival of the fittest?" Maybe someone can explain how is it that a person can live a supposed life of helping others when the very nature of not believing in a universal law of love, faith, hope, charity is dismissed as trite. Maybe I need to put more ginseng into my diet to improve my brain power, but I cannot reconcile this.

[Soulsearcher]

How can a person believe here is a higher purpose of love and uplifting others when the generally accepted universal laws is "the evolutionary law of survival of the fittest?" Maybe someone can explain how is it that a person can live a supposed life of helping others when the very nature of not believing in a universal law of love, faith, hope, charity is dismissed as trite. Maybe I need to put more ginseng into my diet to improve my brain power, but I cannot reconcile this.

I can't speak for everyone, but i can give input to what i see. First off i think the fact you keep thinking survival of the fittest is where most of your problems come from. Just because people believe evolution is how we got here doesn't mean we can't be civilized. People are able to look at the world and see a bigger picture outside themselves even if they don't believe in God. It's really not hard for anyone to see that all humanity is connected. To lift and help others contributes to making the whole a better place. So they can believe in charity, love and hope, they just believe in it because it makes the material world a better place for all vs an eternal reward for doing the same thing. Despite what people think, it's not the faith that brings out the best in us, it's our humanity. Faith does provide a way to curb the less than desirable traits that arise in our humanity, but they aren't the only way.

[Bini]

Here's a few more of my two cents.

This is a deep subject but I have some thoughts on universal law. I think there are degrees within the notion of survival of the fittest. Someone with a bright mind and unwavering self-discipline may be the "fittest" for a particular job description, as opposed to someone less academic and unmotivated. That's one degree of universal law, the natural selection of the best candidate. Another degree would be someone slaying another person in order to achieve that particular job position. But for most people, this degree of survival of the fittest is an unacceptable option in "getting ahead" because regardless of religious belief, it is universally unacceptable to kill another human being without justified cause. You don't have to believe in God to honour morals or do the right thing. This is outside the box but as an example, I'm pretty sure Jedis are Atheist and yet, they live by "the force" that teaches kindness and selflessness.

[Elphaba]

Wow, Harsh.

Yes, it is, isn't it?

I've known, worked with and spoke to many atheists in my time. They all have one thing in common: adjustable responsibility and morality.

There are millions of atheists on the planet and you've only spoken to a relative few of them, certainly not enough to know what "They" all have in common.

They are willing to adjust their role in an act because it's what suits them best at the moment while holding up everyone else to a higher standard when it comes to how it affects them; "big deal, you only live once so get the most out of it that you can regardless of anything else." I knew one lady who defiantly said there is no God. This left her open to run over people, stomp on folks, use folks and just plain lie and cheat so that she could get ahead. And she did. Unfortunately, she's not the only one like that I've run into.

Case and point.

To live and not care about anyone except for ones self, using the survival of the fittest rule precludes good behavior since there is no one to set the standard except for "nature." And if you look around nature, you will find an example of EVERYTHING. To look up to a higher power or source for guidance on how to live means to give up control of what one thinks is moral. This is what Atheist are running away from.

Others have already explained to you you're stance is not reality, and they've all said it well. You should listen to them.

It is Lazy, short-sighted and narrow-minded.

So, it's harsh when I say it, but not when you do?

I don't doubt that your encounters with atheists have been as negative as you say. Atheists are flawed human beings, and we don't always behave stellarly. On the internet I've met fellow atheists who are aggressive and pushy. Most of them I've met, however, are not.

And as Soulsearcher explained, Christians can be just as aggressive and pushy. The rudest, most aggressive person I ever worked with in the professional world was a devout Mormon whose actions defined the word "unethical." Would you think it valid for me to judge all Mormons by her actions? I wouldn't, and it would never occur to me to do so.

I understand you're saying every single encounter you've had with an atheist was negative. I highly suspect, however, that your antagonism towards atheism, as evidenced by your extreme black and white description of what you perceive atheists to believe, played a factor in at least some of that negativity.

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

How can a person believe here is a higher purpose of love and uplifting others when the generally accepted universal laws is "the evolutionary law of survival of the fittest?" Maybe someone can explain how is it that a person can live a supposed life of helping others when the very nature of not believing in a universal law of love, faith, hope, charity is dismissed as trite. Maybe I need to put more ginseng into my diet to improve my brain power, but I cannot reconcile this.

Love is what you're missing--not a "law" of love where I'm told that I must love or else--but love that exists in my very core.

I love my children just as much as you love yours (if you have them), and would give my life in an instant for either one of them.

That love extends to my family, and forward to the human race as a whole. I sincerely and passionately, want their qualities of life to be equally good, because I know that it benefits everyone, not just me, when it is such. That is extremely important to me.

We may disagree about how to bring that about, but the love is the same, regardless. Discounting that negates reality.

Elphaba

[Jbdf]

And as Soulsearcher explained, Christians can be just as aggressive and pushy. The rudest, most aggressive person I ever worked with in the professional world was a devout Mormon whose actions defined the word "unethical." Would you think it valid for me to judge all Mormons by her actions? I wouldn't, and it would never occur to me to do so.

Elphaba, et al., are right about this. It's impossible to generalize about the behavior of a diverse religious (or irreligious) group. I've met atheists who, at least under most circumstances, are honestly good people by most human standards; they're friendly, cordial, kind, honest folks. I've also met atheists who are aggressive, arrogant, intellectually dishonest jerks whose pride in their own putative omniscience is ludicrous in the highest degree. Sadly, I must grant that the latter are in somewhat of the majority so far. I've met Latter-day Saints who are wonderful, honest, kind-hearted, loving people; I've also met Latter-day Saints who are so distasteful, dishonest, vitriolic, spiteful, and malicious that I can scarcely fathom it. It would be wrong of me to assume that all Latter-day Saints are like the latter, just as I'd be setting myself up for disappointment if I expected them all to be like the former. I've met Evangelicals who are godly, honest people overflowing with love; I've met Evangelicals who are lazy, corrupt, dishonest, judgmental, and all the rest. I think we all need to remember that, whatever negative traits we see in the people we meet from other groups, there are members of those groups who aren't like that and plenty of people from within our own kind who are - which should give us pause when it comes to descriptive ethical generalizations.

Edited December 11, 2010 by Jbdf

[slamjet]

I was getting ready to post a few paragraphs but I decided not to because after re-reading it, I saw how it would offend and anger folks. I will just say that we don't know what each others life experiences were, are and how they shaped our thinking and being. One thing I do know is that tact is not a strong character trait of mine (sometimes, not even a weak one). My Italian side is passionate, My Croatian side is stubborn, My Argentine side is arrogant. So I'm going to cool my jets and get off this wagon before I get banned or worse, tick Pam off.