Debunking those atheists, the smart way!

[Eruca]

I mean when people say that morals have nothing to do with religion, they're making a technical error, because the way we use the word in everyday conversation would suggest they're right, but when you research the word you'll find that morals by definition come from God and are taught through the church.

It's just being picky though because when using the everyday definition of it I'd agree with Night.

Ok. So how does the way we use the word today differ from what you believe to be the definition that God gave it? What is the definition as you understand it?

Well as a Christian I believe we're all created in the image of God, so I believe everyone, when being "moral" is doing it because they understand intuitively the "good/right" thing. (Lewis notes that when people get ticked when they are cut in line or whatever happened, they don't argue that they broke the rules, they argue that the other person wronged them, i.e. we all have the moral compass inside of us.)

Basically the internal moral compass, IMO, is from God anyway, but in others' opinion, is biological (which I agree with too)/from their own self/whatever. What's the difference, really?

When asked to support your claim that morals are, by definition, from god you simply restate your beliefs with the evidence that this is the Christian view. If I am an atheist I do not believe in god, therefore I do not believe he created morals, therefore it is silly to use this as an argument against an atheist as right off the bat he doesnt agree with the initial premise.

Lets try again. ;D

"Research the word [and] you'll find that morals by definition come from God and are taught through the church"

What research should I be doing? I really do want to know, as many Christians seem to agree with this "atheists arent moral" thing.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

The arguments of the OP seem very straight-forward and simple.

Final conclusion: A person who eats babies was initially well aware that eating babies is wrong, but as a result of a great, internal moral struggle, he changed his mind. A person who once believed in God also knew that atheism was wrong, but also as a resutl of a great, internal moral struggle, he changed his mind.

Hence, the atheist is just like a baby-eater. He stops believing in what is true and begins believing into what is false because of his internal moral struggles.

This is an inadequate

Many people who are atheists now did not become atheists because they underwent a great internal moral struggle. Some were never believers in the first place and many of those who were believers to begin with lost their faith for a different reason.

 

[Totenkindly]

The arguments of the OP seem very straight-forward and simple.

Final conclusion: A person who eats babies was initially well aware that eating babies is wrong, but as a result of a great, internal moral struggle, he changed his mind. A person who once believed in God also knew that atheism was wrong, but also as a resutl of a great, internal moral struggle, he changed his mind.

Hence, the atheist is just like a baby-eater. He stops believing in what is true and begins believing into what is false because of his internal moral struggles.

This is an inadequate

Many people who are atheists now did not become atheists because they underwent a great internal moral struggle. Some were never believers in the first place and many of those who were believers to begin with lost their faith for a different reason.

2. As much as most believers would want to deny this, they are much less confident in their belief that God exists tha

Uh oh. SolitaryWalker just blue-screened again.
*thump thump*
Can someone report this bug to Microsoft?

 

[Son of the Damned]

How can you debunk something that doesn't assert anything?

 

[Eruca]

How can you debunk something that doesn't assert anything?

Atheists assert that god doesnt exist?

 

[Charmed Justice]

Well as a Christian I believe we're all created in the image of God, so I believe everyone, when being "moral" is doing it because they understand intuitively the "good/right" thing. (Lewis notes that when people get ticked when they are cut in line or whatever happened, they don't argue that they broke the rules, they argue that the other person wronged them, i.e. we all have the moral compass inside of us.)

When asked to support your claim that morals are, by definition, from god you simply restate your beliefs with the evidence that this is the Christian view. If I am an atheist I do not believe in god, therefore I do not believe he created morals, therefore it is silly to use this as an argument against an atheist as right off the bat he doesnt agree with the initial premise.

Lets try again. ;D

"Research the word [and] you'll find that morals by definition come from God and are taught through the church"

What research should I be doing?

I would like to know as well. Was Cicero a Christian?

I guess my confusion is in that Usehername originally suggested that the Christian definition of morals was the true definition, but that the secular version was on par with ethics, the two apparently being very different. I'm still not sure what saying the difference is, although I think it was later suggested that there wasn't really any difference.

Basically the internal moral compass, IMO, is from God anyway, but in others' opinion, is biological (which I agree with too)/from their own self/whatever. What's the difference, really?

I think there's a big one. Where is the moral compass of a sociopath? How does religion account for the fact that certain relationships and life experiences literally help to form certain areas in our brains that prompt us to be more, or less, pro-social("moral" or "ethical")?

If religion asserts that all people are evil anyway, what use is there in attempting to understand why people do the things that they do? A good example is the preacher in the video explaining evil by using the young baby reaching out for his watch. Clearly, that man had no understanding of children or how children learn(or how they survive). Further, he likely didn't care to know either, as he had already made his mind up in identifying the child's actions as evil(per his biblical understanding). His "proof" being that a young baby persisted in attempting to look at his shiny watch, even after he grabbed the child's hand and redirected him/her. Further, it didn't even occur to this man that perhaps the real evil was in his persistently, and very much knowingly, tempting a young curious infant with a shiny watch in the first place.

 

[Risen]

^ I know you know that I'm steering away from the original argument. I just want to get to the roots of where personal ethos come from. Surely it wouldn't pop up in your mind from out of nowhere.

It comes from the social environment and one's appraisal/judgements and reactions to it.

And for the record, L was INTP .

 

[Usehername]

When asked to support your claim that morals are, by definition, from god you simply restate your beliefs with the evidence that this is the Christian view. If I am an atheist I do not believe in god, therefore I do not believe he created morals, therefore it is silly to use this as an argument against an atheist as right off the bat he doesnt agree with the initial premise.

Lets try again. ;D

"Research the word [and] you'll find that morals by definition come from God and are taught through the church"

What research should I be doing? I really do want to know, as many Christians seem to agree with this "atheists arent moral" thing.

Your last line doesn't even make sense.

I never said atheists aren't moral. In fact, I stated the exact opposite. I believe atheists are more often than not moral individuals (when using the colloquial definition of today's age).

I asserted that the linguistic definition originated from the church to refer to something purely theological. Read closer.

 

[Usehername]

I would like to know as well. Was Cicero a Christian?

I guess my confusion is in that you originally suggested that the Christian definition of morals was the true definition, but that the secular version was on par with ethics, the two apparently being very different. I'm still not sure what you're saying the difference is, although I think you later suggested that there wasn't really any difference.


I think there's a big one. Where is the moral compass of a sociopath? How does religion account for the fact that certain relationships and life experiences literally help to form certain areas in our brains that prompt us to be more, or less, pro-social("moral" or "ethical")?

If religion asserts that all people are evil anyway, what use is there in attempting to understand why people do the things that they do? A good example is the preacher in the video explaining evil by using the young baby reaching out for his watch. Clearly, that man had no understanding of children or how children learn(or how they survive). Further, he likely didn't care to know either, as he had already made his mind up in identifying the child's actions as evil(per his biblical understanding). His "proof" being that a young baby persisted in attempting to look at his shiny watch, even after he grabbed the child's hand and redirected him/her. Further, it didn't even occur to this man that perhaps the real evil was in his persistently, and very much knowingly, tempting a young curious infant with a shiny watch in the first place.

You're arguing against a very specific kind of religion, creating a strawman to represent religious people period. I don't believe in most of the stuff that you've asserted here, and I consider myself quite religious.

 

[Charmed Justice]

You're arguing against a very specific kind of religion, creating a strawman to represent religious people period. I don't believe in most of the stuff that you've asserted here, and I consider myself quite religious.

You said that the internal moral compass comes from God, but I'm still not clear on what your understanding of morals actually is. Or, how it differs from a secular understanding. In briefly researching the word "morals", it appears to have come from Cicero. Where can I find more information?

In any case, if god gives morals to all people where is the moral compass of a sociopath? Does he give the same amount of morals to everyone? And if he's giving morals to people, why is it the fault of anyone if they happen to get shorted? And how again, would you explain the fact that life experiences literally act in a way on the brain to translate into behaviors that are more, or less, pro-social(or moral, in the secular sense)?

 

[Oaky]

And for the record, L was INTP .

I'm fully aware of it.

 

[Risen]

When it comes to morality, we argue over the effects of our actions and whether or not we want what those actions bring. That is all it has ever been, at its core. From that basic principle stems every system of behavior/restriction, religious beliefs on morality, society wide concepts of morality, etc. Pick and choose what kind of world you want to live in, consider what actions will lead you there, and you will give birth to morality.

 

[Usehername]

You said that the internal moral compass comes from God, but I'm still not clear on what your understanding of morals actually is. Or, how it differs from a secular understanding. In briefly researching the word "morals", it appears to have come from Cicero. Where can I find more information?

In any case, if god gives morals to all people where is the moral compass of a sociopath? Does he give the same amount of morals to everyone? And if he's giving morals to people, why is it the fault of anyone if they happen to get shorted? And how again, would you explain the fact that life experiences literally act in a way on the brain to translate into behaviors that are more, or less, pro-social(or moral, in the secular sense)?

In addition to the body's experiences chemically flooding the brain to adapt based off of life experience, you can also assert that temporal lobe epileptics, when they seize, experience "profound religious experiences" which explicates exactly how individuals have the religious experiences that they claim to have. You can reduce everything to biology.

These questions you have are actually the "does a god exist" debate. No one can prove their beliefs about their answers (atheists or theists).

Your question about sociopaths is the same question as when people ask, "what about people who don't grow up in places where they could have a chance to hear the gospel? Can they go to heaven?". All of these are Big Questions that have theories but no real answers--just like the field of philosophy has Big Questions with no real answers (if there were real answers, there wouldn't be competing POVs).

The answer to your questions is basically "there is no guaranteed correct answer" just like atheists who believe morals are purely evolutionary adaptive cannot guarantee that there is no metaphysical explanation.

There's legitimate scholarship to back up both sets of beliefs; some people choose to crawl into the meaning-making box of religion, some people choose to crawl into the meaning-making box of xyz, everyone's unable to prove their POVs to these Big Questions.

(I'm not intentionally ducking the question here, but to answer your questions with genuine honesty, it would require explicating my religious foundations upon which these "answers" rest, and honestly I didn't mean to get into the debate here because I simply don't have time, all I meant to say was "linguistically, morals were defined by the church in theological terms" because I thought that I'd be able to make that linguistic reference without getting into any Big Questions.)

 

[LEGERdeMAIN]

Unfortunately for the believers, there are no real answers to their metaphysical questions. Chances are, we're just another breast-fed species on an organic spaceship floating through space following Ra eternally. If you do have the "answer" let me know.

Until then, the best you can do is: figure out what works for you, try not to preach to people who don't want to hear it, not kill other people because they believe something different, start your own religion.

I have no answers....and I can prove it. Why don't I get a religion?

 

[The Third Rider]

So according to that article if we get enough peer pressure on atheists they will then try to believe in God? Brilliant!

 

[LEGERdeMAIN]

I'm half-way believing already

 

[01011010]

Unfortunately for the believers, there are no real answers to their metaphysical questions. Chances are, we're just another breast-fed species on an organic spaceship floating through space following Ra eternally. If you do have the "answer" let me know.

Until then, the best you can do is: figure out what works for you, try not to preach to people who don't want to hear it, not kill other people because they believe something different, start your own religion.

I have no answers....and I can prove it. Why don't I get a religion?

To know with absolute certainty on either side of this argument, doesn't make very much sense to me.

Your first statement reminded me of a quote.

“We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special.” - Stephen Hawking

 

[LEGERdeMAIN]

To know with absolute certainty on either side of this argument, doesn't make very much sense to me.

Your first statement reminded me of a quote.

“We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special.” - Stephen Hawking

Yeah, without absolute certainty, I can't vote for either side. I mean, if it were a vote, which it isn't.

yeah, nice quote. I used to listen to stephen hawking's lectures on youtube when I was a kid.

 

[Forgetful Functor]

To know with absolute certainty on either side of this argument, doesn't make very much sense to me.

Your first statement reminded me of a quote.

“We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special.” - Stephen Hawking

I don't know with absolute certainty that Santa Claus isn't real, but I have no problem living my life as if he doesn't exist.

 

[01011010]

I don't know with absolute certainty that Santa Claus isn't real, but I have no problem living my life as if he doesn't exist.

Sure. Like people that do believe in fictional god(s), and live their lives accordingly. How one lives isn't the point.