Atheistic Lives

[Arialia]

1. If there is no God...

So what? Then, according to you - I'll just go six feet under and that's it. I won't be alive to feel regretful for wasting my life on the Bible. And to be honest, it wouldn't be a regret anyway - because I'm enjoying life more than ever at the minute!

BUT

2. If God does exist...

You'll end up spending an eternity in Hell and all those years that you spent denying God will come back to haunt you. You'll have no chance to escape and you will suffer pain every day and night for an eternity.

...

So you see, that's quite a risk you're taking. You're gambling with the devil. Does that not bother you?

I find it funny you used the word gamble, cause you just totally exemplified the fallacy of Pascal's Gambit (or Pascal's Wager).

macstoogie #4-4 There will be no arguements nor sarcasm on this thread. Humor and respect is allowed

I wasn't being sarcastic, or trying to incite an argument. I was merely pointing out a logical fallacy.

[jossshr]

Now, isn't this the day that I become involved in defending athiests to really do, as athiests why wouldn't they have some of the same values and morals that Christians do. "Why would you even have morals" because they are human beings and were taught values and morals by their parents, grandparents, friends, so on and so forth. The are people, just like you and I are jossshr. Now I will admit I haven't read the first part of this thread because eve, my friend, it's sooooooo long, that I went straight to this response. If I am out of line then I apologize.

Their actions do have consequences. They are accountable to their spouse, partner, friends, family, co-workers, school mates, etc... They also know it's wrong to murder, steal, etc...

You berate her and then thank her for her post that you really enjoyed it. I'm confussled but that's not hard for me.

I just appreciate eve trying to give us a glimpse of her way of life rather than the other athiest post in the outer court that has been posted in to the ground. And it's author, doesn't respond well to questions proposed as he proposed his own questions.

Now I am off my soap box, not taking sides except the Christian side The only side. But I am trying to understand truly.

Well cjrose, I guess I need to clarify what I was saying. Of course their actions have consequences but what you and eve are talking about are human made consequences. Meaning of course you are held accountable by the police if you murder or steal. But that system was set up by humans to keep order. What I am saying is that overall in humans there is a general idea that it is good to do somethings and bad to do other. Now if we are the product of evolution then we should see that same sense of morality in the animal kingdom, but it is not there. So somehow every human being was given a sense of morality. How do you explain that without a divine influence? this thought comes from CS Lewis in mere Christianity and he explains it much better than I. Try reading the first section of that book if my bumbling does not come across right (as it must not have in my first reply)

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

SE,

I have answered this SO many times. And I say the same thing here as I have elsewhere: you act as if Christianity were the only religion. What if Islam or Hinuism is right? You'd have realised there's a god, but picked the wrong faith - so off to hell with you! The same as me. If there is a god, you've got hundreds of religions to pick from. How can you be sure which is the right one? Alternatively, there is a God but humans have never got it right. Or there is no god at all. Either way, if Mormonism was the right answer, or Mayan sun-worship, you're in just as much trouble as me. And given what I know about mythology and human nature - I think the odds are in my favour

The one thing you do not take into account is that most Christians have examined the other Religions in most cases. It is not just a matter of being in a Christian Nation and being raised to be a Christian. Personally I was in a Christian Nation and born and Baptised into a Religion. A Christian Religion. One problem though it was and is just that a "Religion" I was no more a Christian than the man on the Moon.

Upon weighiong the Evidence though I found I Truly did not know who God was nor did I have a Relationship with Him. I had no clue what God desired of me. I did have a clue of what my Religion did though. This left me just as lost as a Hindu or a Muslim.

The fastest growing segment of Christianity is in Africa and China where the Church is under persecution and not the Religious choice of the majority. Or even for that matter allowed to be practiced.

Back to your thought for a minute though. Most Christians become Christians upon weighing the evidence of all the possible Truths out there. They quickly find out that there is only One Truth or else Truth is not Truth. They weigh out the evidence comparing it side by side. Then they come to an unmistakeable conclussion.

Jesus Christ is who He says He is.

How about you secondeve? Have you examined the weight of the evidence? Have you examined the claims of Jesus Christ? Have you examined them against the other Religions claims and hot they claim to obtain Salvation?

I will let you know this. In every other religion. God asks, seeks, and desires you to make a Sacrifice for your Salvation. Based upon what you have to offer. However in Christianity. God sends His only Son as a Sacrifice for your sins. God obtains Salvation for you. There is nothing more to be offered and there is nothing you can offer God.

Which one sounds more like a Holy, Just, and Righteous God to you?

The Lord bless your seeking today.

Peace,

Dave

[emeraldgirl]

Secondeve,

Hi, how's it going? I used to be an atheist. I hated and despised the Word of God. I went out of my way to debate with Christians and give them a piece of my mind! I thought the idea of God was ridiculous. I believed in evolution - I thought creationists were crackpots! Strange how thing's can change, eh? Especially when God works.

I know your situation - and before I got saved - I would probably have agreed with everything you're saying! However - having been at both extremes (i.e. Hardline atheist who hated Christians - and now a cimmitted Christian with evangelical beliefs) I can telll you which one is best!

No matter how well things are going in your atheist life - there will always be something missing. An empty space which can never be filled. And, no matter how hard you search - you will never find the answers to life.

So, what if you're wrong about God? And what if we're right?

1. If there is no God...

So what? Then, according to you - I'll just go six feet under and that's it. I won't be alive to feel regretful for wasting my life on the Bible. And to be honest, it wouldn't be a regret anyway - because I'm enjoying life more than ever at the minute!

BUT

2. If God does exist...

You'll end up spending an eternity in Hell and all those years that you spent denying God will come back to haunt you. You'll have no chance to escape and you will suffer pain every day and night for an eternity.

Revelation 20:10 - "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

Revelation 20:15 - "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

Just sit back and think about it for a minute. If you're wrong (and there's a good possiblity you could be) then you'll suffer grave consequences.

It's like gambling everything you have on the toss of a coin.

If it lands on heads, you're okay. Nothing gained, nothing lost.

BUT

If you land on tails - not only do you lose everything you have - but you also have to suffer the pain and torment of that decision forever.

------

So you see, that's quite a risk you're taking. You're gambling with the devil. Does that not bother you?

Tribulation, I'm not secondeve, but I wanted to comment on a few things here.

First, I think it is great that you came from Atheism and are happier with your life now as a Christian. But there are others who have gone in the opposite direction. Lots of people leave Christianity. Oh, I know, the Christians will say they weren't "true" believers. They were as certain as you are. So, if they weren't "true" believers, then every Christian here is in trouble, because you might just think your a Christian, but you really aren't a true one.

Second, there are non-Christians who have no "empty space that can never be filled". Conversely, I know Christians who still keep trying to fill an empty space. Becoming a Christian is not an auto-fix for any problem you have.

Third, there are not two possibilities as you outlined above. There are many. You could be wrong, but you don't think you are. I could be wrong. Maybe the Moslem is right. If so, you are the Infidel, and me too.

Fourth, even if there were two choices as in Pascal's Wager, you can't be a Christian on logic alone. If you could, okay, here, I'll wager it's all true and you are right. There. Now my spot in Heaven is secured. You know you can't be a Christian just because it would be "hell to pay" if it turns out to be true. You can't make a choice for faith because of Pascal's Wager, even if it were the only two potential choices. You can only be a Christian in your whole being. So, no non-Christian is likely to go...."Say! You're right! All along I never realized I'm in deep, sorry trouble for ever and ever if I'm wrong about the Christian thing! Better become one, quick!"

[billie]

Are there any nonbelievers out here who believe in what we believe, just say,"No thanks"?

[secondeve]

What I am saying is that overall in humans there is a general idea that it is good to do somethings and bad to do other. Now if we are the product of evolution then we should see that same sense of morality in the animal kingdom, but it is not there. So somehow every human being was given a sense of morality. How do you explain that without a divine influence?

Evolution has produced creatures as diverse as amoebas and whales. Why should giraffes and okapis have long necks, but a chihuahua not? Why should monotremes like the echidna and platypus exist, if birds and lizards lay eggs and mammals have live young? What you are essentially commenting on is the fact that we, as a species, have one innate characteristic which distinguishes us from other animals, and so therefore God must have given it to us. Other animals have social heirachies that are different to ours. Wolves live in packs, but frogs don't. Emperor penguins mate for a season, but fairy penguins and foxes mate for life. Antelopes and springboks pronk, but cows don't. You see what I'm getting at?

More importantly, though, you're looking at morality as a thing in itself, rather than an end result. As a result of evolution, our brains grew. This made us intelligent. Because of intelligence, we became imaginative. Imagination and intelligence allowed us empathy. Empathy, imagination and intelligence in the one creature is what gives rise to morality. Intelligence: we can learn from, observe and comprehend both our environment and our place in it. We can assess risks, likelihoods and speculate on the future based on the present. Imagination: bcause we understand the world around us, we can contemplate what it would be like if things were different. We can imagine what it would be like to be that person over there, the same as we can wonder what would happen if we bang two flints together long enough and shower the sparks onto wood. Empathy: we understand that we have feelings, and that so does that person over there. We are already herd animals; we like to live in groups. We are also animalistic, in that we will kill within that group when territory, family or our mates are threatened - but we know what it is like to be the other person. And so laws and morals are born, rudimentary at first, but later more complex, as our minds and the societies which nuture them become more and more complex, too. Over time, laws and morals change and are passed on from parent to child. We learn, from a small age, that it is wrong to tease, or to fight. We still want to, but because it is drummed into us early, by the time we are old, smart and kind enough to see through someone else's eyes, we understand the reason for the lessons.

We can observe, socially, that if a boy grows up with abusive parents who neither love nor discipline him, he will be much more likely to break the laws, both moral and societal. We are all individual people with different personalities from birth, but these are nurtured by circumstance. Some people will, by nature, be kinder than others; some will be more gruff. But understanding the moral law of society is something we learn as children, because our parents learnt it as children - not because God put a little compass inside each person that helps them tell naughty from nice. I've met some Christians who seem to think that people who break their moral law - who are openly gay, for example - are engaging in this behaviour against their own better judgement, against God's internal compass. Well, that isn't true - you've only got to look at the number of Christians who wished, fervently, that they weren't gay, who refrain from having boyfriends or girlfriends, but who nonetheless have the desire. Morality is what we make of it, and what we learn as children - and what we learn as children is taught to us by parents who learned from the larger society, which is the direction morals in an area have taken over hundreds of years. Some are more universal than others, those that relate back to our more animalistic senses: don't take what's mine, or kill what's mine, or hurt my family. Stay off my lands and away from my females. But other laws, which relate more to individual behaviour or to sex - which is a kind of border country in and of itself - are less universal, depending more heavily on the local culture than any innate drive. Nobody wants to be stolen from, but not everyone is gay, and those who aren't are mixed in seeing it as a threat or as natural - just like the juxtapositioning between ancient Greek and Japanese cultures, where homosexuality was acceptable, and Middle Eastern cultures, where you can be killed for it even now.

Does that answer your question?

The one thing you do not take into account is that most Christians have examined the other Religions in most cases.

Dave,

I don't see why popularity is relevant. We are human and imperfect. Christianity is not the biggest religion in the world; Islam is. That doesn't mean Islam is right. You'll find almost nobody now who prays to Set or Isis, but for thousands of years, the Egyptian pantheon was as law. Trends in religion come and go throughout history. Why should the consideration of other faiths of the members of one religion invalidate the fact that they still or did exist?

Edited September 1, 2006 by secondeve

[cjrose]

Well cjrose, I guess I need to clarify what I was saying. Of course their actions have consequences but what you and eve are talking about are human made consequences. Meaning of course you are held accountable by the police if you murder or steal. But that system was set up by humans to keep order. What I am saying is that overall in humans there is a general idea that it is good to do somethings and bad to do other. Now if we are the product of evolution then we should see that same sense of morality in the animal kingdom, but it is not there. So somehow every human being was given a sense of morality. How do you explain that without a divine influence? this thought comes from CS Lewis in mere Christianity and he explains it much better than I. Try reading the first section of that book if my bumbling does not come across right (as it must not have in my first reply)

We have misunderstood each other. I am not defending the fact that she is an athiest but the fact that even non believers have morals and values and know right from wrong. Of course they don't understand the divine intervention that we believers do. We are accountable not only to our friends, family but above all God. You and I believe in the same thing. By the way I love C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity which I read so so long ago, I'll have to go back and read it.

It just happened that we decided, rather secondeve did and I agreed that our topic belonged in a different thread. This thread is not meant for me as a means to agree to athiesm when I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ with all that I am, but to allow others to see her point of view. She's really very intelligent and respectful and even debating with her is enjoyable.

If I offended you, I do apologize and I get what you are saying. Do you get what I'm saying? Shhhhh don't tell her but I think she's fruitfull soil she just won't agree and doesn't realize it yet. But I say, which gives me comfort in knowing is, that every knee will bow, even non believers will meet our Lord. It will just be too late and for that I grieve.

[secondeve]

Shhhhh don't tell her but I think she's fruitfull soil

Ooh ooh! Can I be apricots? Or strawb'ries!

[Guest Thomas I Believe]

What I am saying is that overall in humans there is a general idea that it is good to do somethings and bad to do other. Now if we are the product of evolution then we should see that same sense of morality in the animal kingdom, but it is not there. So somehow every human being was given a sense of morality. How do you explain that without a divine influence?

Evolution has produced creatures as diverse as amoebas and whales. Why should giraffes and okapis have long necks, but a chihuahua not? Why should monotremes like the echidna and platypus exist, if birds and lizards lay eggs and mammals have live young? What you are essentially commenting on is the fact that we, as a species, have one innate characteristic which distinguishes us from other animals, and so therefore God must have given it to us. Other animals have social heirachies that are different to ours. Wolves live in packs, but frogs don't. Emperor penguins mate for a season, but fairy penguins and foxes mate for life. Antelopes and springboks pronk, but cows don't. You see what I'm getting at?

More importantly, though, you're looking at morality as a thing in itself, rather than an end result. As a result of evolution, our brains grew. This made us intelligent. Because of intelligence, we became imaginative. Imagination and intelligence allowed us empathy. Empathy, imagination and intelligence in the one creature is what gives rise to morality. Intelligence: we can learn from, observe and comprehend both our environment and our place in it. We can assess risks, likelihoods and speculate on the future based on the present. Imagination: bcause we understand the world around us, we can contemplate what it would be like if things were different. We can imagine what it would be like to be that person over there, the same as we can wonder what would happen if we bang two flints together long enough and shower the sparks onto wood. Empathy: we understand that we have feelings, and that so does that person over there. We are already herd animals; we like to live in groups. We are also animalistic, in that we will kill within that group when territory, family or our mates are threatened - but we know what it is like to be the other person. And so laws and morals are born, rudimentary at first, but later more complex, as our minds and the societies which nuture them become more and more complex, too. Over time, laws and morals change and are passed on from parent to child. We learn, from a small age, that it is wrong to tease, or to fight. We still want to, but because it is drummed into us early, by the time we are old, smart and kind enough to see through someone else's eyes, we understand the reason for the lessons.

We can observe, socially, that if a boy grows up with abusive parents who neither love nor discipline him, he will be much more likely to break the laws, both moral and societal. We are all individual people with different personalities from birth, but these are nurtured by circumstance. Some people will, by nature, be kinder than others; some will be more gruff. But understanding the moral law of society is something we learn as children, because our parents learnt it as children - not because God put a little compass inside each person that helps them tell naughty from nice. I've met some Christians who seem to think that people who break their moral law - who are openly gay, for example - are engaging in this behaviour against their own better judgement, against God's internal compass. Well, that isn't true - you've only got to look at the number of Christians who wished, fervently, that they weren't gay, who refrain from having boyfriends or girlfriends, but who nonetheless have the desire. Morality is what we make of it, and what we learn as children - and what we learn as children is taught to us by parents who learned from the larger society, which is the direction morals in an area have taken over hundreds of years. Some are more universal than others, those that relate back to our more animalistic senses: don't take what's mine, or kill what's mine, or hurt my family. Stay off my lands and away from my females. But other laws, which relate more to individual behaviour or to sex - which is a kind of border country in and of itself - are less universal, depending more heavily on the local culture than any innate drive. Nobody wants to be stolen from, but not everyone is gay, and those who aren't are mixed in seeing it as a threat or as natural - just like the juxtapositioning between ancient Greek and Japanese cultures, where homosexuality was acceptable, and Middle Eastern cultures, where you can be killed for it even now.

Does that answer your question?

The one thing you do not take into account is that most Christians have examined the other Religions in most cases.

Dave,

I don't see why popularity is relevant. We are human and imperfect. Christianity is not the biggest religion in the world; Islam is. That doesn't mean Islam is right. You'll find almost nobody now who prays to Set or Isis, but for thousands of years, the Egyptian pantheon was as law. Trends in religion come and go throughout history. Why should the consideration of other faiths of the members of one religion invalidate the fact that they still or did exist?

Eve, Is Christianity a religion in your view ? Just curious...

Eve, Is Christianity a religion in your view ? Just curious...

[nebula]

In nature, animals kill to eat, to keep from being eaten, in terratorial fights or over mates. That's just what people do - with one exception. We also kill for pleasure. Animals, when not killing for food, fight and sometimes kill because it demonstrates power. It makes the other animals aware that they are a force to be reckoned with. This is what I think happens with people. We commit horrible crimes because we want to show how powerful we are, or to feel in control. There are crimes like rape, because we see something that we want and endeavour to take it. We kill out of fear or in self-defence, protecting our territory or our herd. We kill to show who is the strongest alpha, or squabble to decide who gets first pick at the best food. The difference between humans and other animals is that we're smarter. We can think through, plan ahead. We recognise why certain acts make us feel strong, and we recognise the power of fear and awe and aggression. But we have dexterous hands, tricky minds and better tools. And those things in combination can make us brutal. They are also the same things which can make us brilliant, and caring, and clever. But we still evolved from animals, and when circumstances or anger force us down to the bones of our selves, where survival of us and ours is all that matters, we become either scavengers, prey, or predators. They're simple terms, and ugly ones - we can still think and be human, but we know that, when all other choices or normality have been stripped from us, those are the options left. Indifference is just as dangerous - and it comes from a herd mentality. Before all others, I protect my tribe, my pack, my people. Why should I send my money to help those who are starving in Africa? They aren't my pack. But when we are at our best, and we use empathy, we recognise that yes, they are like us.

How many times have you driven by a car-crash and seen people gawking? Morbid curiosity. We're glad we're not the ones in the car, but we want to look. We're curious creatures. And gossipy. The reason we like a bit of tragedy or drama in our stories is because they'd be bland without them. Nobody wants to read about Sally-who-has-a-perfect-life, because Sally-who-has-a-perfect-life doesn't exist. We live with our little struggles everyday, and we like to see other people going through the same thing. It isn't that we want bad things to happen to other people - we just know that, sooner or later, they will, because that's how it is with everyone on the planet. We want to hear about things that are real, or which, in the right light, look real. I loathe reality TV, because they invariably dredge up uninteresting, dramatic, showy people who wouldn't know a good conversation if it was brought to them asleep on a chair. But people watch for three reasons. We know that bad things happen, and so we are curious when circumstances allow us to view them objectively, at a distance - i.e., when they are happening to someone else, so that maybe we can understand them better when it's our turn. We like suspense and drama because they thrill us - will they defuse the bomb in time? Will he get the girl? Will she be ok? - because they make us feel as if we were living that experience, too, and it gives us the rush of chemicals we might get if it did happen to us, but without the personal anxiety. And, finally, we recognise when stories are false. Even mythology is without perfection. The gods always start out with good intentions, but some little trickster or enemy ruins it. Lots of times, we start out immortal. But someone makes a mistake, and death comes to man. We start out friends with the animals, but again, it doesn't last. I think, in a way, we understand that we can only appreciate the good times when we understand that they don't last - because then we know how special they are.

Does that answer your question?

Yes and no.

I know I asked for your opinion, but what you expressed doesn't touch where exactly I'm coming from.

Let me try this way.

Have you seen the movie Contact? The whole time Ellie, the scientist, puts forward her scientific mind and sells herself on her science, all the while relating the world and the universe to science and "the language of science."

Yet when she traveled through the universe, she was so awestruck and mesmorized she exclaimed, "They shouldn't have sent a scientist, they should have sent a poet!"

That's what I'm looking for it this answer.

Through the eyes of a poet, not a scientist (not saying you have to write a poem, but in terms of finding answers and expressing meanings the way a poet would) -

Why are people so drawn to evil?

(For example, Why do we prefer heros with "dark" edges rather than 'Mr. Goody-two-shoes"? )

I want you to speak to my heart, not my mind - why are we so appealed to peoples' bad sides?