Are Atheists Potentially Morally Superior to Theists?

[Danmark]

The proposition is that atheists have the potential of being morally superior to theists because to the extent the atheist does good works, he does them because he wants to, because she thinks it right. Whereas the theist acts out of religious necessity or compulsion; the threat of hell or deprivation of heaven.

[Danmark]

First, we do.

Again, is there anything like the atonement in atheism? In individually selected systems of morality?

We are not responsible for the conduct but we clearly do things that atheists cannot do when behavior falters. DO atheists do penances? Do you have a church where you can receive private counseling? Can you be excommunicated for you moral decisions as an atheist?

Are there atheist clergy who will confront you? Whom you turn to for counseling and advice? To issue discipline for faltering moral decisions (even if they are within the law like adultery)?

Indeed, the Westboro Baptist Church is a good example of this trend, wherein many Christians are seeking to get the group branded as a hate group.

The trend, and again this is not universal, in atheism is that anything coming from atheism of late is branded as acceptable. The Santa Monica take over of Christmas displays? Was that necessary or simply kind of jerkish thing to do? So, at what point would atheists look at these kinds of antics and collectively call it too task? Can they? (Asked honestly, not accusingly).

Again that is not to say that atheists are bad people, and there are many who are indeed genuinely motivated to search and seek truth as best they can.

However, its been my experience that almost all journeys are best done with others - collaboration is key. So when a group is working toward a set of accepted goals, pushing each others, admonishing each other, you are going to get greater accountability to those standards in the aggregate.

That process too can be hijacked by the charismatic but unscrupulous as with David Koresh?

So perhaps the proper way forward is a combination of the two? Which would be in line with God telling us to seek wisdom rather than forms. Go figure he was ahead of my analysis yet again ...

I think your trouble may come from those silly websites that want to destroy the English language and infect people with the idea that atheism is a religion. It is not. Atheism as many have explained is simply the lack of belief in a certain type of god.

As an atheist I am also an American citizen, a traveller, a writer, a reader, a husband, a two bit philosopher, a motorcyclist, a sailor, a lawyer, a bum, a chess player, a puzzle enthusiast, a philologist, a husband, a movie watcher, a Seahawks fan, a father and more.

Atheism is of less interest to me, or defines me less than many of these other categories. It is simply an answer I give when someone inquires, or tries to tell me I should believe them because they are a 'Christian.'

Why should atheism have something akin to 'atonement'? It is not a religion. My 'salvation' is not an issue to me. If I have something equivalent to a Christian's 'salvation' in mind, I would simply say that I want to help people and avoid harming them. This does not come from being an atheist. It comes from being a human being and from my own code of conduct.

This entire line of inquiry or debate comparing atheists to Christians is inapposite. One is a belief system based on an erroneous belief in an invisible friend who tells people what to do. The other is a rejection of supernatural belief systems that are promoted by the superstitious or those unable to break the bonds of tradition, or who for reasons unknown to me have decided the need an imaginary ruler/friend/ supreme being to get on with life. Fine. Not my cup of tea.

I participate in a forum like this because I am fascinated by how people in the 21st Century still cling to all these old ideas that are no longer necessary since science has answered the questions the religions were invented to answer.

I also hope that I can help others to free themselves from self induced bondage to these outmoded traditions. If they want to reject that help, fine. I really have no quarrel with it. My conscience is clear. As long as they don't insist on dysfunctional political policy based on false beliefs and irrational thinking, I'm fine with it.

But not believing in god is simply not a religion and should not be expected to have a catechism or a doctrine of atonement or any of the other trappings of a religion.

If I want a good example to follow, I've got Gandhi, Buddha, Jesus, my mother and my father and others.

[stubbornone]

First, we do.

Again, is there anything like the atonement in atheism? In individually selected systems of morality?

We are not responsible for the conduct but we clearly do things that atheists cannot do when behavior falters. DO atheists do penances? Do you have a church where you can receive private counseling? Can you be excommunicated for you moral decisions as an atheist?

Are there atheist clergy who will confront you? Whom you turn to for counseling and advice? To issue discipline for faltering moral decisions (even if they are within the law like adultery)?

Indeed, the Westboro Baptist Church is a good example of this trend, wherein many Christians are seeking to get the group branded as a hate group.

The trend, and again this is not universal, in atheism is that anything coming from atheism of late is branded as acceptable. The Santa Monica take over of Christmas displays? Was that necessary or simply kind of jerkish thing to do? So, at what point would atheists look at these kinds of antics and collectively call it too task? Can they? (Asked honestly, not accusingly).

Again that is not to say that atheists are bad people, and there are many who are indeed genuinely motivated to search and seek truth as best they can.

However, its been my experience that almost all journeys are best done with others - collaboration is key. So when a group is working toward a set of accepted goals, pushing each others, admonishing each other, you are going to get greater accountability to those standards in the aggregate.

That process too can be hijacked by the charismatic but unscrupulous as with David Koresh?

So perhaps the proper way forward is a combination of the two? Which would be in line with God telling us to seek wisdom rather than forms. Go figure he was ahead of my analysis yet again ...

I think your trouble may come from those silly websites that want to destroy the English language and infect people with the idea that atheism is a religion. It is not. Atheism as many have explained is simply the lack of belief in a certain type of god.

As an atheist I am also an American citizen, a traveller, a writer, a reader, a husband, a two bit philosopher, a motorcyclist, a sailor, a lawyer, a bum, a chess player, a puzzle enthusiast, a philologist, a husband, a movie watcher, a Seahawks fan, a father and more.

Atheism is of less interest to me, or defines me less than many of these other categories. It is simply an answer I give when someone inquires, or tries to tell me I should believe them because they are a 'Christian.'

Why should atheism have something akin to 'atonement'? It is not a religion. My 'salvation' is not an issue to me. If I have something equivalent to a Christian's 'salvation' in mind, I would simply say that I want to help people and avoid harming them. This does not come from being an atheist. It comes from being a human being and from my own code of conduct.

This entire line of inquiry or debate comparing atheists to Christians is inapposite. One is a belief system based on an erroneous belief in an invisible friend who tells people what to do. The other is a rejection of supernatural belief systems that are promoted by the superstitious or those unable to break the bonds of tradition, or who for reasons unknown to me have decided the need an imaginary ruler/friend/ supreme being to get on with life. Fine. Not my cup of tea.

I participate in a forum like this because I am fascinated by how people in the 21st Century still cling to all these old ideas that are no longer necessary since science has answered the questions the religions were invented to answer.

I also hope that I can help others to free themselves from self induced bondage to these outmoded traditions. If they want to reject that help, fine. I really have no quarrel with it. My conscience is clear. As long as they don't insist on dysfunctional political policy based on false beliefs and irrational thinking, I'm fine with it.

But not believing in god is simply not a religion and should not be expected to have a catechism or a doctrine of atonement or any of the other trappings of a religion.

If I want a good example to follow, I've got Gandhi, Buddha, Jesus, my mother and my father and others.

Why should atheism have something like the atonement? Because it is a hugely useful tool in discerning personal failings and taking actions to correct them.

You will forgive me Danmark, but most atheists (and indeed Christians) have not been blessed with your insight and intellect. Most people, bereft of those gifts (no doubt possessing others) still have the desire to be both moral and, at least I hope, a desire to refine and improve themselves in their moral standing ... whatever that may be.

So, does being a husband give us something like the atonement (trust me, the atonement is not like a nagging wife ... )

Does being Sailor give you tools that refine your morality? Or tools that make you a better Sailor?

Again, intelligent and insightful people will often find reasons to improve themselves, but intelligent people also have the propensity to rationalize ... not that my comparatively small brain would ever do that

So the challenge before you would be to systemitize the tools you used to arrive at a position of respect and general morality. How did you keep yourself straight when so many others falter?

That is what the atonement does for us. Its not just about forgiveness, more that forgiveness is needed to refine us.

Again, as an Army Ranger, I am sure that acknowledging struggles with pride and overt independence would come as a great shock?

Seriously, are you shocked?

Again, even before I left atheism, I was hardly a bad person, but the first time I sat down and gave an accounting of myself before God ... lets just say it was a deeply humbling experience.

the atonement, if we value morality, is one of the best tools or systems I have ever encountered.

One could possibly come to believe that whomever created it was divinely inspired or something?

[Danmark]

Why should atheism have something like the atonement? Because it is a hugely useful tool in discerning personal failings and taking actions to correct them.

You will forgive me Danmark, but most atheists (and indeed Christians) have not been blessed with your insight and intellect. Most people, bereft of those gifts (no doubt possessing others) still have the desire to be both moral and, at least I hope, a desire to refine and improve themselves in their moral standing ... whatever that may be.

So, does being a husband give us something like the atonement (trust me, the atonement is not like a nagging wife ... )

Does being Sailor give you tools that refine your morality? Or tools that make you a better Sailor?

Again, intelligent and insightful people will often find reasons to improve themselves, but intelligent people also have the propensity to rationalize ... not that my comparatively small brain would ever do that

So the challenge before you would be to systemitize the tools you used to arrive at a position of respect and general morality. How did you keep yourself straight when so many others falter?

That is what the atonement does for us. Its not just about forgiveness, more that forgiveness is needed to refine us.

Again, as an Army Ranger, I am sure that acknowledging struggles with pride and overt independence would come as a great shock?

Seriously, are you shocked?

Again, even before I left atheism, I was hardly a bad person, but the first time I sat down and gave an accounting of myself before God ... lets just say it was a deeply humbling experience.

the atonement, if we value morality, is one of the best tools or systems I have ever encountered.

One could possibly come to believe that whomever created it was divinely inspired or something?

You bring up good points, but I have to say they are, as I have alluded, beside the point of atheism. Atonement, or as Joseph Campbell refers to it: at one ment is not something I reject. It is an unsubstantiated god that I reject. I believe that god is our unconscious mind. As such I should [again this has nothing to do with atheism necessarily] aspire to be at one with my higher self, my unconscious mind.

I really do believe that the unconscious mind is so amazing, profound, brilliant and unfathomable that it is called 'god.' Certainly we should try to be at one with it. I think Jesus did this, as did Gandhi, Buddha and one of my daughters.

One can be a member of Alcoholics Anonymous and be an atheist. One's 'higher power' can be one's unconscious.

I am sorry to admit that there are many who I may not consider my equal in terms of 'insight' or 'intellect' who are vastly my superior in self actualization, or at one ment with their higher power, their unconscious mind. There are many very sweet people out there, many of them Christians, many of other faiths or non theists, who I would not want to compare myself to.

I'm like many struggling people, a mix of confidence and self doubt, arrogance and humility, brilliance and stupidity, creative yet dull, interesting and boring.

I am lazy and undisciplined, yet manage to pull thru when the chips are down, perhaps only at my best when I absolutely have to be (unless it involves hitting a game winning free throw, in which case I should not even be on the floor).

In short, I'm like most of us. I'm just trying to get by somehow. Once in a while I'm privileged to help someone who is a better man than me simply because of the time, place and circumstance. Every one is better than every one else at something. Everyone can help someone, and receive help. We help each other. I don't see the need for an overarching religion or 3rd party's philosophy to point the way. We just have to be kind, and sensitive; patient and ready to help.

It takes no great intellect to do that.

You mention your military experience. You know what and who an E9 is.
I was once in a position to help a Command Sargent Major in the Rangers.
As you can imagine he was a rather intimidating person, with more discipline than I ever hope to have. Heck, more discipline than I want to have.

I am proud to have been in that position and to have passed the test somehow.
As an aside, one day I asked him about the jargon they had for other ranks. An E8 was a 'Green Weenie.' I confessed that if I had served, it would probably have been as a 2d Lt. since I would likely have entered the Army after college.

My friend refused to tell me the appellation that would apply... until I insisted.
As you prob'ly know I would have been a mere _ _ _ _ head. =o) The point is that even a S. H. can be of assistance to a Command Sergent Major.

I just don't see religion entering into the equation.

[TheTruth101]

First, we do.

Again, is there anything like the atonement in atheism? In individually selected systems of morality?

We are not responsible for the conduct but we clearly do things that atheists cannot do when behavior falters. DO atheists do penances? Do you have a church where you can receive private counseling? Can you be excommunicated for you moral decisions as an atheist?

Are there atheist clergy who will confront you? Whom you turn to for counseling and advice? To issue discipline for faltering moral decisions (even if they are within the law like adultery)?

Indeed, the Westboro Baptist Church is a good example of this trend, wherein many Christians are seeking to get the group branded as a hate group.

The trend, and again this is not universal, in atheism is that anything coming from atheism of late is branded as acceptable. The Santa Monica take over of Christmas displays? Was that necessary or simply kind of jerkish thing to do? So, at what point would atheists look at these kinds of antics and collectively call it too task? Can they? (Asked honestly, not accusingly).

Again that is not to say that atheists are bad people, and there are many who are indeed genuinely motivated to search and seek truth as best they can.

However, its been my experience that almost all journeys are best done with others - collaboration is key. So when a group is working toward a set of accepted goals, pushing each others, admonishing each other, you are going to get greater accountability to those standards in the aggregate.

That process too can be hijacked by the charismatic but unscrupulous as with David Koresh?

So perhaps the proper way forward is a combination of the two? Which would be in line with God telling us to seek wisdom rather than forms. Go figure he was ahead of my analysis yet again ...

I think your trouble may come from those silly websites that want to destroy the English language and infect people with the idea that atheism is a religion. It is not. Atheism as many have explained is simply the lack of belief in a certain type of god.

As an atheist I am also an American citizen, a traveller, a writer, a reader, a husband, a two bit philosopher, a motorcyclist, a sailor, a lawyer, a bum, a chess player, a puzzle enthusiast, a philologist, a husband, a movie watcher, a Seahawks fan, a father and more.

Atheism is of less interest to me, or defines me less than many of these other categories. It is simply an answer I give when someone inquires, or tries to tell me I should believe them because they are a 'Christian.'

Why should atheism have something akin to 'atonement'? It is not a religion. My 'salvation' is not an issue to me. If I have something equivalent to a Christian's 'salvation' in mind, I would simply say that I want to help people and avoid harming them. This does not come from being an atheist. It comes from being a human being and from my own code of conduct.

This entire line of inquiry or debate comparing atheists to Christians is inapposite. One is a belief system based on an erroneous belief in an invisible friend who tells people what to do. The other is a rejection of supernatural belief systems that are promoted by the superstitious or those unable to break the bonds of tradition, or who for reasons unknown to me have decided the need an imaginary ruler/friend/ supreme being to get on with life. Fine. Not my cup of tea.

I participate in a forum like this because I am fascinated by how people in the 21st Century still cling to all these old ideas that are no longer necessary since science has answered the questions the religions were invented to answer.

I also hope that I can help others to free themselves from self induced bondage to these outmoded traditions. If they want to reject that help, fine. I really have no quarrel with it. My conscience is clear. As long as they don't insist on dysfunctional political policy based on false beliefs and irrational thinking, I'm fine with it.

But not believing in god is simply not a religion and should not be expected to have a catechism or a doctrine of atonement or any of the other trappings of a religion.

If I want a good example to follow, I've got Gandhi, Buddha, Jesus, my mother and my father and others.

Danmark, I consider you the Good Samaritan from my post exchanges with you. Prabably the only Atheist I consider on this forum to be one.


Watch this youtube with SOUND.




Dosent this scare you? Can you honestly say after watching this God does not exist?

Whats said on your post notes the people of faith cannot continue on, so in turn, finds God to take the hardships of life.

As evident by our nation commiting to God in the national anthem, are you serious with your claims? Even the highest court takes oath under God, and you are a lawyer correct?

C'mon realize God exists..

[Danmark]

Danmark, I consider you the Good Samaritan from my post exchanges with you. Prabably the only Atheist I consider on this forum to be one.


Watch this youtube with SOUND.




Dosent this scare you? Can you honestly say after watching this God does not exist?

Whats said on your post notes the people of faith cannot continue on, so in turn, finds God to take the hardships of life.

As evident by our nation commiting to God in the national anthem, are you serious with your claims? Even the highest court takes oath under God, and you are a lawyer correct?
Thank you for your kind regards, but no I do not believe. As a lawyer the only oath I have t
C'mon realize God exists..

Thank you for your kind regards, but no I do not believe. As a lawyer the only oath I have taken was to support the Constitution of the United States of America.

Here's the Lawyer's Oath in the State of Washington. Seems different than the one I took. I would have sworn there was a line that said something about not refusing a man's case because of 'lucre.' I think it has been revised. Too many attorneys could not pronounce 'lucre.'


1. I am fully subject to the laws of the State of Washington and the laws
of the United States and will abide by the same.

2. I will support the Constitution of the State of Washington and the
Constitution of the United States.

3. I will abide by the Rules of Professional Conduct approved by the
Supreme Court of the State of Washington.

4. I will maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers.

5. I will not counsel or maintain any suit or proceeding which shall appear
to me to be unjust, or any defense except as I believe to be honestly
debatable under the law, unless it is in defense of a person charged with a
public offense. I will employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes
confided to me, only those means consistent with truth and honor. I will
never seek to mislead the judge or jury by any artifice or false statement.

6. I will maintain the confidence and preserve inviolate the secrets of my
client and will accept no compensation in connection with the business of
my client, unless this compensation is from or with the knowledge and
approval of the client or with the approval of the court.

7. I will abstain from all offensive personalities and advance no fact
prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party or witness unless
required by the justice of the cause with which I am charged.

8. I will never reject, from any consideration personal to myself,
the cause of the defenseless or oppressed, or delay unjustly the cause of any person.

http://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/?f ... id=gaapr05

[stubbornone]

Why should atheism have something like the atonement? Because it is a hugely useful tool in discerning personal failings and taking actions to correct them.

You will forgive me Danmark, but most atheists (and indeed Christians) have not been blessed with your insight and intellect. Most people, bereft of those gifts (no doubt possessing others) still have the desire to be both moral and, at least I hope, a desire to refine and improve themselves in their moral standing ... whatever that may be.

So, does being a husband give us something like the atonement (trust me, the atonement is not like a nagging wife ... )

Does being Sailor give you tools that refine your morality? Or tools that make you a better Sailor?

Again, intelligent and insightful people will often find reasons to improve themselves, but intelligent people also have the propensity to rationalize ... not that my comparatively small brain would ever do that

So the challenge before you would be to systemitize the tools you used to arrive at a position of respect and general morality. How did you keep yourself straight when so many others falter?

That is what the atonement does for us. Its not just about forgiveness, more that forgiveness is needed to refine us.

Again, as an Army Ranger, I am sure that acknowledging struggles with pride and overt independence would come as a great shock?

Seriously, are you shocked?

Again, even before I left atheism, I was hardly a bad person, but the first time I sat down and gave an accounting of myself before God ... lets just say it was a deeply humbling experience.

the atonement, if we value morality, is one of the best tools or systems I have ever encountered.

One could possibly come to believe that whomever created it was divinely inspired or something?

You bring up good points, but I have to say they are, as I have alluded, beside the point of atheism. Atonement, or as Joseph Campbell refers to it: at one ment is not something I reject. It is an unsubstantiated god that I reject. I believe that god is our unconscious mind. As such I should [again this has nothing to do with atheism necessarily] aspire to be at one with my higher self, my unconscious mind.

I really do believe that the unconscious mind is so amazing, profound, brilliant and unfathomable that it is called 'god.' Certainly we should try to be at one with it. I think Jesus did this, as did Gandhi, Buddha and one of my daughters.

One can be a member of Alcoholics Anonymous and be an atheist. One's 'higher power' can be one's unconscious.

I am sorry to admit that there are many who I may not consider my equal in terms of 'insight' or 'intellect' who are vastly my superior in self actualization, or at one ment with their higher power, their unconscious mind. There are many very sweet people out there, many of them Christians, many of other faiths or non theists, who I would not want to compare myself to.

I'm like many struggling people, a mix of confidence and self doubt, arrogance and humility, brilliance and stupidity, creative yet dull, interesting and boring.

I am lazy and undisciplined, yet manage to pull thru when the chips are down, perhaps only at my best when I absolutely have to be (unless it involves hitting a game winning free throw, in which case I should not even be on the floor).

In short, I'm like most of us. I'm just trying to get by somehow. Once in a while I'm privileged to help someone who is a better man than me simply because of the time, place and circumstance. Every one is better than every one else at something. Everyone can help someone, and receive help. We help each other. I don't see the need for an overarching religion or 3rd party's philosophy to point the way. We just have to be kind, and sensitive; patient and ready to help.

It takes no great intellect to do that.

You mention your military experience. You know what and who an E9 is.
I was once in a position to help a Command Sargent Major in the Rangers.
As you can imagine he was a rather intimidating person, with more discipline than I ever hope to have. Heck, more discipline than I want to have.

I am proud to have been in that position and to have passed the test somehow.
As an aside, one day I asked him about the jargon they had for other ranks. An E8 was a 'Green Weenie.' I confessed that if I had served, it would probably have been as a 2d Lt. since I would likely have entered the Army after college.

My friend refused to tell me the appellation that would apply... until I insisted.
As you prob'ly know I would have been a mere _ _ _ _ head. =o) The point is that even a S. H. can be of assistance to a Command Sergent Major.

I just don't see religion entering into the equation.

Well, you have hot a couple of different things.

#1 - You are correct, you cannot substantiate a God. I have seen very strong what I term preponderance of the evidence cases in both directions. Hashing over that portion of the often debated question seems fruitless.

I will say, even as I acknowledge that I cannot prove it, that I know God is real. Indeed, I am in a church that is absolutely perfect me, and I am there directly as a result of asking God, essentially, "Please, show me the right way." Within an hour of praying, missionaries were at my door ... and that first Sunday in the church, the had a guest pastor ... I still have no idea who he was and no one can seem to recollect him ... but I swear he delivered a sermon specifically for me and what I was going through at the time. I left in tears.

And trust me, Rangers don't cry ... so hopefully that conveys a sense of how profoundly a perfect stranger hit my circumstances on the head having never met or spoken to me.

But I also came to acknowledge that love is not just those who agree with us, but those who tell us what we need to hear - especially when we need to hear it but do not want to.

I will also say that, as a former atheist, when I began to consider faith as an alternative I struggled with that intellectual vaccum of uncertainty. But, just as the good book promises, when I took a leap of faith, when I truly believed ... I got the evidence I craved. It's not something I can share on a public forum, but all I can say is that it instantly erased any doubt in mind that God is real - or that he is uncaring in the slightest.

My story is far from alone, and at some point - intellectually, its tough to simply excuse these stores as mere happenstance.

I realize this sounds ... stubborn? Irrational? But I know there is a God, and at least in my limited way I know how much he cares for us humans, warts and all, and I am left utterly dumbstruck by how much he cares ... even more so when I realize that all my intellectual and emotional capacity doesn't really fully understand just how vast and deep that love is.

It may not be something I can prove, but it isn't something I could ever walk away from either.

#2 - The God of the subconscious, although interesting, is also a conclusion that ultimately rests upon faith. I obviously disagree, but - that has never prevented me from exploring other religions or spiritual/moral ideas. There is great merit in exploring the untapped potential of the subconscious, and indeed meditative and other techniques are widely used both in and outside religion very much in result of what you say.

The only point that I would highlight is that the subconscious 'God' you claim is as intellectually certain as the God I claim.

Not to fret, I could make the same comment about Hinduism or Paganism as well ...

But in terms of intellectual certainly, I simply do not think we can find it? At some point our conclusions must rest on a body of faith - in whatever that may be.

#3 - I have been a student of religion even longer than I have been religious. There is tremendous overlap in most faiths ...

For example, suffering is a major tenet of Buddhism, the we should embrace rather than shun it, for it refines us and makes us stronger. Although I disagree that we should embrace suffering to the point that we would undertake a 100 mile journey of single step gesticulation, that doe snot prevent me from acknowledging the discipline and faith required to do so.

It is also in seeing these things that I have come to see the reality of many of 'my own' faiths teaching such has howto handle adversity and 'trails' as we call them (not what you call trials). Indeed, we reached the same conclusion, that much of the suffering placed before us was meant to refine us and reveal weaknesses so we could be stronger, wiser, and indeed refined (albiet without the 100 mile journey of single step gesticulation).

The most profound personal example of forgiveness I ever experienced did not come from a Christian, but a Muslim. The importance of forgiveness is as prominent in Islam as it is in Christianity, and only a fool would not be touched by the power of a man who lost dozens of family members to our violence, who set aside the hurt, the anger, the desire for revenge and subverted it all into the service of others. I am still left in awe of his example, one that is little known outside of only precious few ... and even that provides a lesson in humbleness that an often overly proud Ranger holds in deep reverence.

The list can go on ...

The main point being that should we value morality, religion is actually a very good place to start. Even if you disagree with the specific theological claims (and I have yet to meet a church - or mosque temple whatever - where there was complete and unflinching support for every doctrinal point), the lessons that are delivered and indeed the parables that highlight the importance of those vales are a great places to start.

Indeed, it would be a poor man indeed who rejected the Buddha's admonition toward resiliency in the face of adversary because of unverifiable claims of reincarnation.

I will say this, in closing with the beginning, that all that study of religions left me with a sincere appreciation for the effects of honest faith in any human being. Many are, as you say, almost unbearably good people that make us feel tiny even at our best. Yet, its off when we discover that these stalwarts of humanity also have their own struggles and often admire the way we handle problems that they struggle with ... a deeply surprising reminder that we are all here taking a journey on earth of one sort or another.

But, in closing with the beginning, all that study and appreciation of religion, that unverifiable evidence in God, lead me to where I am today. I cannot say that my faith is the 'right' faith for anyone but me (nor would I), but I was amazed as the clarity of the doctrinal positions, and more than once had moments of discovery that were nothing less than, "Oh My God ... THAT is correct!"

Though I may struggle with the fragility of my own humanity and very human passions, I am deeply grateful that I was given a small glimpse of the love that God has for us ... for that little bit of insight allows me to step back and contemplate the reality that we are all his children and to see us all as he does ... and then try to capture some small bit of that love to share as he does.

It terms of morality, I don't think in my studies and ponderings I have been given as profound a gift into morality as that brief bit of understanding in God's love. Whether you think he's real or not, as a moral position, Love of and service to our fellow human beings is not a bad place to start.

[Artie]

That is interesting because I have debated many atheists on many forums, and time and time again that all atheism is the belief that there is no God and nothing else. Ergo, how can 'nothing else' equate to a fundamentally sound moral code?

A fundamentally sound moral code is derived from logic, reason and common sense, altruism, empathy, compassion, love, respect, conscience, ethics, the Golden Rule etc etc. If you don't have these qualities you must listen to a moral (religious) teacher or (religious) book and just obey what he says which is why religion evolved.

Indeed, that is exactly what the ten commandments do for the faithful every Sunday when they walk in and take communion and receive the atonement of Jesus Christ - it is an examination of our actions against those standards and an honest assessment of how we are doing against them. Over time, goal setting, initiative, effort, etc. can result in real change for people against those standards.

True. It is vitally important for moral people and human society as a whole that some people who might not have logic, reason and common sense, altruism, empathy, compassion, love, respect, conscience, ethics, the Golden Rule etc etc. at least follow what their moral religious teachers tell them is moral. Because if they had these qualities in the first place, why would they need somebody to teach them morals?

[stubbornone]

That is interesting because I have debated many atheists on many forums, and time and time again that all atheism is the belief that there is no God and nothing else. Ergo, how can 'nothing else' equate to a fundamentally sound moral code?

A fundamentally sound moral code is derived from logic, reason and common sense, altruism, empathy, compassion, love, respect, conscience, ethics, the Golden Rule etc etc. If you don't have these qualities you must listen to a moral (religious) teacher or (religious) book and just obey what he says which is why religion evolved.

Indeed, that is exactly what the ten commandments do for the faithful every Sunday when they walk in and take communion and receive the atonement of Jesus Christ - it is an examination of our actions against those standards and an honest assessment of how we are doing against them. Over time, goal setting, initiative, effort, etc. can result in real change for people against those standards.

True. It is vitally important for moral people and human society as a whole that some people who might not have logic, reason and common sense, altruism, empathy, compassion, love, respect, conscience, ethics, the Golden Rule etc etc. at least follow what their moral religious teachers tell them is moral. Because if they had these qualities in the first place, why would they need somebody to teach them morals?

Oh, so fundamentally sound moral codes are the result of logic ... which atheists claim ... but results in zero applicable published standards or doctrines?

You then turn around and claim that one that WAS created, and widely revered by many very intelligent people, is worthless ... because of its very act of creation?

Well, then, as you have declared it both easy to do and so poorly done in every other moral code in the world, I believe you have just set a rather high bar for yourself.

Good luck in creating the perfect moral code, one that will doubt be glorified as the THE SOLUTION to mankinds torment, and ... well, no doubt every knee will bow before the standards you are about to quite breathlessly and with apparent ease lay before us?

By all means, I await the enrapturing display of your logic that exceeds that all other attempts.

Fire away cowboy.

[TheTruth101]

Danmark, I consider you the Good Samaritan from my post exchanges with you. Prabably the only Atheist I consider on this forum to be one.


Watch this youtube with SOUND.




Dosent this scare you? Can you honestly say after watching this God does not exist?

Whats said on your post notes the people of faith cannot continue on, so in turn, finds God to take the hardships of life.

As evident by our nation commiting to God in the national anthem, are you serious with your claims? Even the highest court takes oath under God, and you are a lawyer correct?
Thank you for your kind regards, but no I do not believe. As a lawyer the only oath I have t
C'mon realize God exists..

Thank you for your kind regards, but no I do not believe. As a lawyer the only oath I have taken was to support the Constitution of the United States of America.

Here's the Lawyer's Oath in the State of Washington. Seems different than the one I took. I would have sworn there was a line that said something about not refusing a man's case because of 'lucre.' I think it has been revised. Too many attorneys could not pronounce 'lucre.'


1. I am fully subject to the laws of the State of Washington and the laws
of the United States and will abide by the same.

2. I will support the Constitution of the State of Washington and the
Constitution of the United States.

3. I will abide by the Rules of Professional Conduct approved by the
Supreme Court of the State of Washington.

4. I will maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers.

5. I will not counsel or maintain any suit or proceeding which shall appear
to me to be unjust, or any defense except as I believe to be honestly
debatable under the law, unless it is in defense of a person charged with a
public offense. I will employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes
confided to me, only those means consistent with truth and honor. I will
never seek to mislead the judge or jury by any artifice or false statement.

6. I will maintain the confidence and preserve inviolate the secrets of my
client and will accept no compensation in connection with the business of
my client, unless this compensation is from or with the knowledge and
approval of the client or with the approval of the court.

7. I will abstain from all offensive personalities and advance no fact
prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party or witness unless
required by the justice of the cause with which I am charged.

8. I will never reject, from any consideration personal to myself,
the cause of the defenseless or oppressed, or delay unjustly the cause of any person.

http://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/?f ... id=gaapr05

If you still don't believe Gods existence after watching that video, it can rather be looked upon as denial instead.

Hope you realize there is much more to life than this. Eternity begins the day you kneel and pray.
As repetence only brings good to you through it all. Because you will see your mistakes and reflect, and reflection itself is a form self discipline as well as an acknowledgement to yourself that you care of morals through actions, not mere words or instaneous thoughts.

Remember your freedom is only given through flesh. Once the flesh perish, then your soul that gets eternity is under total and complete submission and orders from God.

This is the Word that have been set on rocks from God. The free will of the flesh.

Be wise and think of eternity, it is evident all around us through 21 grams, and of Emily rose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_MacDougall_(doctor)

[Artie]

If such were the case, than selflessness would be common in the animal kingdom .. it isn't.

Of course it isn't. It has evolved in structured societies where several individuals live together and depend on each other. What would a solitary predator need selflessness for?

And who has the best chance of reproducing? The selfless guy? No, the strongest guys - who beat down the weaker guys and control the females ... behavior that is QUITE common in even in our nearest ancestors.

Sometimes I think you are mocking Christians and pretending you are one to put them in a bad light. Do you live in a community or a city? Then go find some weak guys and take their females. Then see if the consequences are to your advantage.