Atheism a good thing, Religious perspective

[Marshall McDaniel]

Bob says:

Hi Marshall,

My point about tolerance is this: An atheist will look at an Islamic fundamentalist differently than will a Christian. Where you are looking from always influences what you are looking at. The different religions tend to bicker with one another.

You are probably right, atheists stand on neutral ground to a certain degree. I tend to divide the world into those who have compassion at the core of their Philosophy, and those who do not. The border runs through many Religions and Philosophies and brings us together in a way some people can't even imagine.

I was talking to a man the other day who wouldn't be seen dead in the church in the next village - even though it is the same confession as his own. It became very obvious to me that I wasn't going to understand this mindset, but made me very aware of how much the religious betray their beliefs by such peculiarities.

Shalom
Bob

I am sure that there are some intolerant Atheists. One finds bad apples in every bunch. To my mind Atheists tend to be more tolerant, however. I never really thought of Atheism as neutral ground, but you're right, it is. It is almost as if we are to a certain extent segregated from the warring factions of religion.

Bob says:

Hi epictetus_phrygianslave,

Hey, cut the self-righteous caring-about-others crap! It's not an argument but an emotional appeal!

Christianity which has no compassion but only accuses and threatens is fake! Christians that proclaim such nonsense are really only promoting their elitist racist views on how bad the world is and waiting for redemption - or worst still, they rabble on about an axis of evil and how they represent the "new Israel" that is to fight Armageddon against it's godless enemies.

This is bad stuff and a long way off from a merciful and compassionate and jewish Jesus, who stood up for the oppressed and weak. I'd rather have a peaceloving atheist than a warmongering Christian anyday.

Shalom
Bob

I admire Jesus. He seemed a loving, caring man not afraid to associate with the poor, nor afraid to tangle with the elite, rich priesthood. "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." Where are the Boddhisatvas of today? I suppose i'm a bit of a mystic myself.

Shalom,
Marshall

---

As to why Atheism might be good from a religious perspective...

I am an Atheist. I don't generally advertise the fact and i don't attempt to convert people. Atheism is not a belief, it is the absence of belief in any supernatural deities like Gods , devils, angels, demons, etc. Atheists are neither moral nor immoral by virtue of their Atheism. Some people ask me, "How can you be moral, if you don't believe in God?" and i always have to stifle an inner chuckle at that one. The two are not incompatible. I can not speak for Atheists, because the only thing that Atheists share in common is that absence of belief. But i can tell you what it means to me. I know that if the World is to be a better place, i must make that happen. All of the prayers, sacrifices, and supplication in the World will not put one grain of bread in a starving Ethiopian child's mouth. As an atheist i accept responsibility for my own World. I rely on my reason. I will not cauterize the genitalia of young girls, or commit other acts of cruelty based on longstanding enforced moral codes that have never been questioned. I do not believe in heaven. When one must be rewarded for one's virtue, heaven is already unattainable. I do not wish to live forever. Death gives a sweet poignancy to life, and i give thanks for the grim reaper every day. I love my fellow man, not because someone says i must or because God commands it, but because i can and because i have personally come to the conclusion that it is the right thing to do.

[phrygianslave the wise]

Chanbengchin

You quote Paul to the Ephesians.

Do you actually have any realistic idea of what this “Lord” and “God” is?
It is the ruling reason, the logos, the governing principle, the word. This is what Paul is speaking of. In Jesus this “Lord” and “God” exists in the world. Jesus is the perfect wise man.

When you put on “the full armor of God” all it means is that you adopt the philosophy of right reasoning. The “devil’s schemes” stands for nothing more than all schemes that belong not to the right reason.

Who are these “rulers” and “authorities” and “powers of this dark world” and “spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realm?” Well they are not the “flesh and blood” they are simply the desires and aversions!

The ”day of evil” is nothing more than testing times.

Does this help you at all?

What is faith?

Faith is the virtue in which you follow Truth wheresoe’er it leadeth.

Belief in God

Is belief in that alone which can save, namely, the acropolis of all that is most perfectly balanced and harmonious, the very citadel of the soul, the way, the truth, the light, the seat of the ruling reason, the divine spark, the eternal word, the imperishable prohairesis, the governing faculty, the animating principle, sound judgement…some call it Jesus, or Master, or Lord, it is all the same thing!

It’s just that different people have differing understandings.
It’s also a balancing of the books. A highly educated intellectual atheist who has a high opinion of himself will pay a certain price and obtain a certain understanding.
A Down’s syndrome child will pay a different price and obtain another understanding.
Very often, ironically, the difference in price will appear in the fact that the latter will be a lot happier than the former!
And happiness is what it’s all about in the end!

[chanbengchin]

Do you actually have any realistic idea of what this “Lord” and “God” is?

Do you?

[phrygianslave the wise]

As to why Atheism might be good from a religious perspective...

I am an Atheist. I don't generally advertise the fact and i don't attempt to convert people. Atheism is not a belief, it is the absence of belief in any supernatural deities like Gods , devils, angels, demons, etc. Atheists are neither moral nor immoral by virtue of their Atheism. Some people ask me, "How can you be moral, if you don't believe in God?" and i always have to stifle an inner chuckle at that one. The two are not incompatible. I can not speak for Atheists, because the only thing that Atheists share in common is that absence of belief. But i can tell you what it means to me. I know that if the World is to be a better place, i must make that happen. All of the prayers, sacrifices, and supplication in the World will not put one grain of bread in a starving Ethiopian child's mouth. As an atheist i accept responsibility for my own World. I rely on my reason. I will not cauterize the genitalia of young girls, or commit other acts of cruelty based on longstanding enforced moral codes that have never been questioned. I do not believe in heaven. When one must be rewarded for one's virtue, heaven is already unattainable. I do not wish to live forever. Death gives a sweet poignancy to life, and i give thanks for the grim reaper every day. I love my fellow man, not because someone says i must or because God commands it, but because i can and because i have personally come to the conclusion that it is the right thing to do.

What a noble speech honourable Marshall!

You cannot “make” the world “a better place.” That is so arrogant! Only a god can do such a thing. Or are you telling me that you are a god and possess the power to change the world?
You’re unable even to change your own mind let alone the world! And yet your mind is the only possession you have that can be truly said to belong to you and that you have some power over!

And what do you mean, “a better place?” What’s wrong with it now? So you can do a better job than the creator of existence? You’re still believing in this creed of external good and evil. On the one hand you don’t believe in god, on the other you do believe there’s good and bad in the world! That is some inconsistency!

You speak of “acts of cruelty.” And in so speaking you reinforce the illusory evil you seek to destroy! That is why all men who believe in external good and evil are then required to daily run the gauntlet of that very good and evil they tell us exists. Can you not see that you are responsible for creating a world in which good and evil exist? No one else, you and you alone! That’s the price one has to pay for clinging on to delusions!

Having read many of your contributions, you come across as a very nice person indeed, Marshall. So the last thing I want is to be rude to you in any way. But I have to tell it how it is, you’d have little respect for me if I was a brown-nose, and I’d have even less respect for myself. So, this is all professional, don’t take anything I say personally.

[chanbengchin]

Practically there is no difference whether you sin because you are a sinner or you are sinner and therefore you sin. For if you have committed, by commission of omission of action, but one sin, you are a sinner, and thereafter it is moot. And who can say he is without sin?

So all are sinners, irrespective whether there is original sin or not.

However philosophically there is a very important distinction. It is like saying parallel lines dont meet or parallel lines meet. You then either get Euclidean or non Euclidean geometry.

And none of you have really addressed the issue WHY are there babies dying, naturally, even before birth.

And why has the notion of the original sin done harm? Is it not good to know the truth? For has it been proven/argued reasonably that there is NO original sin. That it is not pleasing to the ear or painful to our fragile egos is no substitute for an argument, nor does it falsify the offensive idea.

Now arent you all philosophers who idealised the self-actualised state of man, one who is detached from himself, able to reflect critically and reflexively, assured and confident of what and who he is, no matter what he sees, for his goal is not his ego, but to seek the beauty of truth, for which all else pales in comparision?

So why then do you react so emotionally and personally to the idea that all men are evil, that you find it repulsive, abhorent and offensive? Are you not afraid of missing the truth? and reducing all your efforts to futility?

[chanbengchin]

I would call any truth, that posited itself as the only truth, no truth at all.

Unless you are positing such a truth yourself, you must accept it is possible "the only truth" is true.

[phrygianslave the wise]

Chanbengchin

Didn't I just explain things to you a couple of posts back?

Are you awake or what?

Do you read the responses to your own posts at all?

I suggest you go to a bookstore and buy yourself some good old-fashioned books on Biblical exegesis.

[chanbengchin]

Didn't I just explain things to you ...

I was not asking questions. I was merely rethorical.

[phrygianslave the wise]

Marshall, you asked,

I am tentatively prepared to agree with you. What precisely do you mean by external?

By external I mean the objective world beyond that, at it were, me-centred intelligence thing. Like, when I get drunk, (which I don’t anymore,) it is the internal me-thing that gets affected. The external world, however, is completely indifferent to my drunkenness.

I have some control over parts of the internal and little or no control over the external world.

Where does this external world begin and end? I used to think the border between the two was my the fence around my property, then my body and its space, then my skin, and so on, until I finally realised that the only thing belonging to me was my power to form correct judgements - call it moral purpose.

Nothing else whatsoever belongs to me, for everything outside the domain of the moral choice can be hindered or thwarted. But in the realm of the moral purpose I suddenly become invincible, and no power on earth or in heaven can defeat me unless I choose to allow it to.

It is but a short step from this realisation to complete enlightenment.

As for good and evil: there is no external good or evil. All externality is a kind of illusion, a trick, a sleight of hand. This does not mean that you can go around killing people and with impunity because it’s only an illusion and they’re not really dead. Far from it! The people who do that sort of thing are the same as the ones who believe in the illusion. Both are blinded, one by sorrow, the other by hatred. No, this sort of illusion I am speaking of is the one where I witness events and then make rash judgements about the guilt, the right and wrong, the good and evil, the merits and demerits, and so on of the matter, and of a matter that is really none of my own business. After all. isn’t my own evil enough for me? Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof! Thus, know thyself!

Suffice to say that if you find you are disturbed by some external thing it is not the thing itself that disturbs you but it is your opinion of the thing. What are you going to do, weep and rail, and curse god and the whole human race because you lost your loved ones in a suicide bombing attack? But what on earth made you ever believe that your loved ones were something that actually belonged to you and would live forever or die the way you decided?

Now, as I said, I do have control over my opinions, but little or no control over externals. So, if I’m really bothered about something, I’ll act to change it, if I think it’ll make a definite improvement to the lot of humankind. But I wont just complain about it or exchange theories or argue for the sake of argument. No, I’ll get off my ass and do something. And as I do I’ll remind myself that I may not succeed in my aim, things may not go according to plan, they may fall apart disastrously, and the suchlike. So, whatever happens I wont despair and curse and raise my fists to heaven. For that would not be philosophical. And, when the suicide bomber pulls the pin and I see the explosion just a micro-second before I am blasted into oblivion I will praise god and tell him all is well for wherever I am it will be well with me.

And finally, I love everyone, Geo. W. Bush as much as Saddam Hussein, the Israelies as much as the Palestinians, etc., you are all my brothers and sisters, we're all in this together, so let's carnival!

[Marshall McDaniel]

epictetus_phrygianslave stated:

As to why Atheism might be good from a religious perspective...

I am an Atheist. I don't generally advertise the fact and i don't attempt to convert people. Atheism is not a belief, it is the absence of belief in any supernatural deities like Gods , devils, angels, demons, etc. Atheists are neither moral nor immoral by virtue of their Atheism. Some people ask me, "How can you be moral, if you don't believe in God?" and i always have to stifle an inner chuckle at that one. The two are not incompatible. I can not speak for Atheists, because the only thing that Atheists share in common is that absence of belief. But i can tell you what it means to me. I know that if the World is to be a better place, i must make that happen. All of the prayers, sacrifices, and supplication in the World will not put one grain of bread in a starving Ethiopian child's mouth. As an atheist i accept responsibility for my own World. I rely on my reason. I will not cauterize the genitalia of young girls, or commit other acts of cruelty based on longstanding enforced moral codes that have never been questioned. I do not believe in heaven. When one must be rewarded for one's virtue, heaven is already unattainable. I do not wish to live forever. Death gives a sweet poignancy to life, and i give thanks for the grim reaper every day. I love my fellow man, not because someone says i must or because God commands it, but because i can and because i have personally come to the conclusion that it is the right thing to do.

What a noble speech honourable Marshall!

You cannot “make” the world “a better place.” That is so arrogant! Only a god can do such a thing. Or are you telling me that you are a god and possess the power to change the world?
You’re unable even to change your own mind let alone the world! And yet your mind is the only possession you have that can be truly said to belong to you and that you have some power over!

I am part of the World. I can at least make that a 'better place'. For thousands of years, man has accepted the lowly place relegated to him by religion. At one time priests were more powerful than Kings. There are those who are glad to see all of the little pious religious people give up their rightful place in life. Many have seen this. Marx remarked that religion is the opiate of the masses. Many have done just as their wise venerable elders, somehow (we ask not how) in touch with the creator, ruler, and future judge of the World have told them. They have Taken time away from their life's work, kneeled and prayed to the 'master of the universe'. And in some cases have done little else. "Put the shoulder to the cart thyself, sluggard..." As aesop would have Zeus say in one of his fables. I submit, noble Phrygian slave, that these are the people left powerless to change the World.

epictetus_phrygianslave continues:

And what do you mean, “a better place?” What’s wrong with it now? So you can do a better job than the creator of existence? You’re still believing in this creed of external good and evil. On the one hand you don’t believe in god, on the other you do believe there’s good and bad in the world! That is some inconsistency!

There is no inconsistency. unveil your argument.

and,

You speak of “acts of cruelty.” And in so speaking you reinforce the illusory evil you seek to destroy! That is why all men who believe in external good and evil are then required to daily run the gauntlet of that very good and evil they tell us exists. Can you not see that you are responsible for creating a world in which good and evil exist? No one else, you and you alone! That’s the price one has to pay for clinging on to delusions!

Having read many of your contributions, you come across as a very nice person indeed, Marshall. So the last thing I want is to be rude to you in any way. But I have to tell it how it is, you’d have little respect for me if I was a brown-nose, and I’d have even less respect for myself. So, this is all professional, don’t take anything I say personally.

You have always treated me amiably. I still have not seen your argument for the lack of good and evil in the World. I would find that interesting.

epictetus_phrygianslave concludes with:

Marshall, you asked,

I am tentatively prepared to agree with you. What precisely do you mean by external?

By external I mean the objective world beyond that, at it were, me-centred intelligence thing. Like, when I get drunk, (which I don’t anymore,) it is the internal me-thing that gets affected. The external world, however, is completely indifferent to my drunkenness.

I have some control over parts of the internal and little or no control over the external world.

Where does this external world begin and end? I used to think the border between the two was my the fence around my property, then my body and its space, then my skin, and so on, until I finally realised that the only thing belonging to me was my power to form correct judgements - call it moral purpose.

Nothing else whatsoever belongs to me, for everything outside the domain of the moral choice can be hindered or thwarted. But in the realm of the moral purpose I suddenly become invincible, and no power on earth or in heaven can defeat me unless I choose to allow it to.

It is but a short step from this realisation to complete enlightenment.

As for good and evil: there is no external good or evil. All externality is a kind of illusion, a trick, a sleight of hand. This does not mean that you can go around killing people and with impunity because it’s only an illusion and they’re not really dead. Far from it! The people who do that sort of thing are the same as the ones who believe in the illusion. Both are blinded, one by sorrow, the other by hatred. No, this sort of illusion I am speaking of is the one where I witness events and then make rash judgements about the guilt, the right and wrong, the good and evil, the merits and demerits, and so on of the matter, and of a matter that is really none of my own business. After all. isn’t my own evil enough for me? Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof! Thus, know thyself!

Suffice to say that if you find you are disturbed by some external thing it is not the thing itself that disturbs you but it is your opinion of the thing. What are you going to do, weep and rail, and curse god and the whole human race because you lost your loved ones in a suicide bombing attack? But what on earth made you ever believe that your loved ones were something that actually belonged to you and would live forever or die the way you decided?

Now, as I said, I do have control over my opinions, but little or no control over externals. So, if I’m really bothered about something, I’ll act to change it, if I think it’ll make a definite improvement to the lot of humankind. But I wont just complain about it or exchange theories or argue for the sake of argument. No, I’ll get off my ass and do something. And as I do I’ll remind myself that I may not succeed in my aim, things may not go according to plan, they may fall apart disastrously, and the suchlike. So, whatever happens I wont despair and curse and raise my fists to heaven. For that would not be philosophical. And, when the suicide bomber pulls the pin and I see the explosion just a micro-second before I am blasted into oblivion I will praise god and tell him all is well for wherever I am it will be well with me.

And finally, I love everyone, Geo. W. Bush as much as Saddam Hussein, the Israelies as much as the Palestinians, etc., you are all my brothers and sisters, we're all in this together, so let's carnival!

How does this view differ from those of solipsism and idealism? I mean i agree with your statement, "Suffice to say that if you find you are disturbed by some external thing it is not the thing itself that disturbs you but it is your opinion of the thing." I believe this to be one of the great lessons bestowed by the stoics, (Seneca being a favorite of mine). But you also say,

"So, if I’m really bothered about something, I’ll act to change it, if I think it’ll make a definite improvement to the lot of humankind."

and this to my mind seems to contradict your earlier admonition to me in which you say,

"You cannot 'make' the world 'a better place.' That is so arrogant! Only a god can do such a thing. Or are you telling me that you are a god and possess the power to change the world?"