The book of Wisdom, written a few hundred years BC refers to atheists and nature worshipers (Chapter 13:1-9).
I agree with the general issue here I would ask you to realize theist and atheist simply are not separate groups! I have always contended atheist would (and do) but forth a theist face to the public, and vis versa. All people have doubts both ways.
And thus one of the big problems how can an atheist argue his morals/ethics are anything other than his personal boundaries regardless of what he chooses to include or exclude in those persoanl boundries.
on this we disagree
But does the author of the book mean atheists as in the type we know today or atheists, as in folks who don’t worship the author’s God (but may worship some other god)? Some theists argue their religion is the only true faith and worshippers of other gods don’t actually worship god at all but demons or trees, etc. Not worshipping a particular god is not the definition of an atheist.
I can tell my folks to get lost and do my thing without having any doubts about their love for me. Lucifer has seen God, so it can’t be said he has no faith in God. It’s more like he didn’t fancy being told what to do by God. Adam was offered eternal salvation but the serpent offered what seemed like a good prospect and Adam was tempted. It’s like a person going on a diet to lose a few pounds to improve their health. They get tempted by junk food, but this does not mean they stop believing in the importance of a diet and healthy eating. Often the person will say to himself ’ I know this is bad for me, but…’
I understand what you’re saying about people who don’t worship the author’s God.
1. No one in their right mind would spend millions of dollars trying to convince others that a fictional character is not real - not if they really believed he was fictional or mythical?
a. Have you ever heard of anyone suing in court to prevent public school teachers mentioning the Big Red Dog? Tooth Fairy? Sand Man? Rumpelstilskin?
b. Have you ever met any adult (of average or above intelligence) willing to spend more than two seconds trying to convince you that a fictional character was fictional? Try it sometime. They will just roll their eyes and walk away....or maybe ask what the joke is. But they are not going to waste time arguing with you.
c. Do you know any adult who will become angy with you just because you say you believe in a fictional character?I think u are generalising a bit. Some people might pretend because they feel uncomfortable to reveal doubts in front of other people, but not everyone. I don’t live in a country where I have to pretend to be an atheist, while secretly doubting it all. I don’t doubt atheism - it fits me like a glove, and I am comfortable with it. I don’t think to myself ’ maybe God exists…’ because as far as I know, there’s no evidence for God.
And how can any theist argue that his choice of religion is anything but his personal boundaries, regardless of whether he is a sede vacantist, TLM, Novo Ordos, liberal or cafeteria catholic? If u have feminist/liberal tendencies in your views, u are not very likely to go for LTM catholicm are u?
All laws are man made - especially religion based law which comes off books written by men long dead.This means your natural moral law is also man-made, like it or not.
Equally, no one would spend millions of dollars telling the rest of us that Christianity is the true faith, as the truth doesn’t need an expensive advertising campaign fronted by churches all over the world and priests excommunicating anyone who disagree.
Quite a few US citizens believe they have been kidnapped and impregnated by UFO. Still many others believe Jedi is an actual religion. These guys would sue u if u dared tell them they are talking rubbish. There’s a lot of strange people out there.
They would - if they felt u were taking the view of u being Darth Vader just a tad too seriously.
Yes - I once believed in the tooth fairy and had an invisible friend. My dad worried and suggested therapy, my cousin laughed and suggested a chainsaw.
God doesn’t exist. No one would spend millions of dollars telling the rest of us that God exists, as the truth doesn’t need an expensive advertising campaign fronted by churches all over the world and priests telling us immoral atheists we’ll burn in hell for not believing in God.
p1: Atheists are God (see Mannyfit75 above)
You really think I what I wrote is literal? You ought to know what I wrote is figurative speech. When I said that atheist had made themselves God, or should I say gods because they admit to themselves they do not believe God. They prefer that the destiny of man is up to mankind.p1: Atheists are God (see Mannyfit75 above)
p2: Atheists don’t exist (see Ginger2 above)
Conclusion: God does not exist.
Wow! Looks like my work here is done…
ROMALMHO!!!p1: Atheists are God (see Mannyfit75 above)
p2: Atheists don’t exist (see Ginger2 above)
Conclusion: God does not exist.
Wow! Looks like my work here is done…
[SIGN][/SIGN]Then where are the scads of news articles about the roving atheist street gangs who rob banks, shoot up in day cares, have sex hanging from church steeples, et cetera et cetera?
Totalitarian regimes do not kill people because they’re religious; they kill them if that religion is something they cannot control, and anything they cannot control is a danger to their existence. Notice how China has a state-controlled Church, even though it professes to be atheist. Nobody is killed for belonging to the Chinese Catholic Church; instead, people are hunted out for belonging to the Roman Catholic Church, because Beijing does not have the Vatican under its thumb. And there have been plenty of religious totalitarian governments: Francisco Franco enforced Catholicism, Elizabeth I forcibly converted her subjects to Protestantism to try to break the Pope’s control (and Mary made them all become Catholic again), and so on and so forth. Totalitarian governments killing people over matters of belief is not nearly as one-sided as you seem to imagine.
To be fair though, some atheists do proclaim to know what happens after we die. Nothing. There is no brain activity and our body decomposes. Oblivion. If you’ve heard some other belief, I’d be interested in knowing more about it.
Well, that is one of the points I’m making. Fear of eternal punishment, which is a function of death, doesn’t enter the equation for atheists. So fear of death, if any, must be based upon something else. Maybe you are saying that since we can’t observe from the perspective of the person that died what happens after death, we can’t really know. Frankly, I think that’s a good insight, and one that is consistent with atheism.
If I’m understanding you correctly then I believe you can assert this and still be consistent. I’m not sure all atheists can though. The materialistic mindset leads to the conclusion that once the brain waves stop for a certain period of time, there is no more consciousness or awareness ever again. That is proof enough for some.
It’s hard to say how many I personally know. I have many friends and acquaintances who give no express indication nor profess to believe in God. I have a few who claim that God is a myth. I don’t find the latter group to outwardly commit more immoral acts than I would - say - some who proclaim to believe that God exists. The reasons they’ve given for not believing in God are weak in my opinion. But if I thought otherwise I wouldn’t be a Catholic.
I disagree. The world view of most atheists I’ve debated do not support the ability to make judgments about what constitutes good character from a bad character. The best I’ve heard is a John Stuart Mill type utilitarianism, and even that ends either in arbitrariness or internal contradiction. You may have a different method of justifying such character judgments. I’m interested in knowing.
The Chinese state run Catholic just ordained a bishop that had Pope’s blessings.
catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=25468
Those were done by Secular governments. Though, I never would endorse their actions when the rights of individuals are threatened. The Church then doesn’t condemned forced conversions.
Read your Kant!
Utilitarianism is fine on the chalkboard but useless in general practice. ‘Natural law’ is a nice way of saying ‘because God said so’, or, for the nonbeliever, ‘because I said so’ – no depth, no meaning, just fiat, divine command and the epicycles looped around it by humans. With the Categorical Imperative, though, we start to get somewhere.
And that’s great – but the operative word there is just.
So Franco, Elizabeth, and Mary (and Cromwell, and others) were totally secular rulers who believed in a separation of Church and State? Are governments only religious if it’s convenient for you?
Read your Kant!
And that’s great – but the operative word there is just.
It was actually done on 21 SEPT 07.
*Pope Benedict XVI approved the ordination of the new archbishop of Beijing, Joseph Li Shan, the Vatican stated on Sept. 21, hours after the ceremony took place at Immaculate Conception Cathedral (South Church) in the Chinese capital.
Also that day, Archbishop Fernando Filoni, the third-highest Vatican official as substitute (sostituto) to the secretariat of state and a long-time expert on China-Holy See relations, spoke with journalists in Rome. He said the installation of the new bishop, recognized both by the Vatican and the Chinese government, “is undoubtedly a positive sign.”
The Vatican considers Beijing an archdiocese, while the government-approved church authorities in China, who conducted the ordination, recognize only dioceses.*
The nomination of bishops is a still a vexed question between the two sides, Archbishop Filoni acknowledged, but he said the ordination of Bishop Li “is a positive fact, a first page, we hope it is the (first) page of a long story, a long chapter, of a new reality.”
No. You’re confusing Divine Law and Human Law with Natural Law. “God says so”, like in the 10 commandments, is Divine Law.