Topic: Atheism/Agnosticism in the Philippines

[alistair]

I am right in the first place that Atheist is a religion

In your worldview, sir, you are right about everything.

Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no God.

I'm afraid not even the Theists in this thread will take you seriously if you keep saying that.

But this is like saying that "black," (which physicists define as the total absence of color) is not a color.

Gee. The "total absence of color" is a color. What's next, "0" is "1", sir?

If Atheism is a religion, then albino is a suntan.

A United States Federal Court of Appeals has now ruled ruled that Atheism is, indeed, a religion, under U.S. law. See http://www.google.com/search?&q=atheism+religion+court+rule&btnG=Search for details.

Oh, are you saying jurisprudence equates to truth (and morality) sir? Let's go back to the homosexuality thread, and the marijuana thread, then.

[indie boi]

i admit i will be skeptical.  but if someone were to torture them and put them to a slow, painful death and not one of them would recant their statement, then i am more likely to believe.  remember, the Apostles didn't just lived and preached and died peacefully.  they encountered severe harassment and torture from the Romans.  even historians agree that the likelihood of Christianity becoming successful was very, very small, given the steep uphill battle they had againt the resistant Roman empire.  and yet for something beyond logic, Christianity not only survived, it thrived and eventually conquered the Roman empire, and then spread to the world.

you have to look at the circumstances on how Christianity came to be to see how real it is

People died for Heaven's Gate. People died for David Koresh. People died for Jim Jones. Heck, I bet if you tortured Tom Cruise, he'd still declare L. Ron Hubbard God.

I can go on and on. Persecution is not really proof that a religion is "real", what it just shows is faith in that religion. I will not challenge faith because all of us at some point in our lives relied and depended on it. But as I've said before, religion is a construct devised by man in order to try to give a semblance of structure and order about his metaphysical views. That's why, personally, I don't buy that "my religion is better than yours" argument. You guys have consistently explained how omnipotent, all knowing and merciful God is, I find it hard to believe that this same God will just suddenly declare that Christians are the only ones he'll save. Only Man can think that.

[oweidah]

sayang walang hudyo (jew/"chosen people") o muslim (islam) dito sa forum. sa mga kristiyano, may mga katoliko, may kasapi sa ibang denominasyon na ayaw tukuyin kung ano talaga basta "true christian" daw)
kung nagkataon, imumungkahi ko sana ang hiwalay na thread > WHO WILL BE "SAVED", WHO WILL GO TO HEAVEN" para dun sila magdiskusyon, magdebate, magbangayan

atheism/agnosticism in the philippines ang thread topic pero madalas napupunta ang talakayan sa isyu ng "salvation"

[indie boi]

atheism/agnosticism in the philippines ang thread topic pero madalas napupunta ang talakayan sa isyu ng "salvation"

I think that's part and parcel of the whole christian/catholic propaganda -- the constant threat of burning in hell in order to keep you on the straight and narrow.

[oweidah]

I think that's part and parcel of the whole christian/catholic propaganda -- the constant threat of burning in hell in order to keep you on the straight and narrow.

"recruitment"/"conversion" tactic din nila. ang siste- "exclusive" na kami lang ang pupunta sa langit kaya dapat sumapi ka na sa amin. ganun din ang sabi ng ibang relihiyon. kaya walang katapusang bangayan hanggang umabot sa patayan.

there was even a time when its common to hear - "REPENT, THE END IS NEAR" ! palagi sila napaphiya hindi pa rin nagugunaw ang mundo, lampas na ang "end deadline"  

[choy]

I think that's part and parcel of the whole christian/catholic propaganda -- the constant threat of burning in hell in order to keep you on the straight and narrow.

LOL
thats the lie that anti-Christians like you propagate

hell is not something to scare you into doing good.  its the fact that happens when you choose to leave the relationship you have with God.  its like saying, if you play with fire, you will get burned.  is that a threat?  is that a punishment?  or just a fact that playing aroudn with fire can get you burned

[dpogs]

sayang walang hudyo (jew/"chosen people") o muslim (islam) dito sa forum. sa mga kristiyano, may mga katoliko, may kasapi sa ibang denominasyon na ayaw tukuyin kung ano talaga basta "true christian" daw)
kung nagkataon, imumungkahi ko sana ang hiwalay na thread > WHO WILL BE "SAVED", WHO WILL GO TO HEAVEN" para dun sila magdiskusyon, magdebate, magbangayan

atheism/agnosticism in the philippines ang thread topic pero madalas napupunta ang talakayan sa isyu ng "salvation"

that is my point when i PM you... ayaw ko lang magsimula ng bagong thread regarding that issue.

this thread is between atheist and theist...

medyo na figure out ko lang later na... 

[dpogs]

I think that's part and parcel of the whole christian/catholic propaganda -- the constant threat of burning in hell in order to keep you on the straight and narrow.

the worst part


"outside of churce there is no salvation".


anyway back to the topic between atheist and theist...


How do atheist view morality?

Did atheist follow right and wrong?

I googled and it always lead mo to conclude that atheist when feel it is the right thing to do they just do it.

[alistair]

atheist when feel it is the right thing to do they just do it.

Sir, I think you are confusing the idea of someone who's atheist and someone who's amoral.

[dorian_gray]

Sir, I think you are confusing the idea of someone who's atheist and someone who's amoral.

Naku para sa ibang tao, pareho-pareho lang iyan--amoral, atheist, agnostic, bakla, tomboy, Muslim, halaman, kulangot, virus.

Lahat sila mapupunta sa impiyerno.

[indie boi]

How do atheist view morality?

Did atheist follow right and wrong?

I googled and it always lead mo to conclude that atheist when feel it is the right thing to do they just do it.

Again you have mixed up morality with ethics.

[bumblebee]

dpogs,

Honestly, I feel for you. It's really difficult to understand how atheists view things because you're not one of them. And vice versa. But let us not generalize to suit our thinking.

Atheists can be "moral". Ang daming Kristiano na immoral.

And Christians can be free-thinkers as well.

[bass_nut]

<snp>
and God wants a relationship with man, a loving relationship.  not just believe He is there or that He exists.  by showing up, sure, it may convince a few more people, but where's the love?  thats why Jesus shunned a lot of people who came to him for miracles.  because He knew they were there not to become close to God, but just to use His power for their own benefit.

its like if you win the lottery, suddenly relatives you never knew you have show up and suddenly you were oh so close.  is that the relationship you want with them?  same with God.  He wants a real, loving relationship.  giving the proofs you ask for only gives you what you need in your mind to believe, but not what your heart needs to love.

i agree 102%... contractual faith is not true faith

[dpogs]

i am just want a clear answer

how atheist draw a line between moral and imoral?

paano nila masasabi na ang ganitong gawain ay imoral o hindi?

do they have some set of standards? or kung ano lang din ang sinasabi ng gobyerno susundin lang nila.

[bumblebee]

choy,

Firstly, I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, His only son our Lord.

Secondly, all you said are nice and I fully agree.

But proof, there is none.

[bumblebee]

i am just want a clear answer

how atheist draw a line between moral and imoral?

paano nila masasabi na ang ganitong gawain ay imoral o hindi?

do they have some set of standards? or kung ano lang din ang sinasabi ng gobyerno susundin lang nila.

They follow what the society they are in dictates.

[sardaukar]

no, it is not ingrained in all aspects of science

do you even know how do they come up with the age?

Not ingrained in the sciences? Geology--plate tectonics, carbon dating, geologic record; cosmology--speed of light and distance to stars and galaxies, and how old they are; paleontology--fossil record, like how fossilized sea creatures are found at the tops of mountains; physics--doppler effect, stars and galaxies are all moving away from us.

I'm sure there are many many more examples but I'm just a casual reader/watcher of scientific programs. And practically all the programs I watch on these subjects will inevitably give the age of the earth or the universe as billions of years. No ifs, no buts, not even an explanation, really. It has become a given. There's really no getting away from it when the topic is continental drift or dinosaurs or space or extinction or meteors. And I'm not even mentioning programs on evolution.

Are these programs watchable to you? Or do you just roll your eyes and change the channel?

[alistair]

They follow what the society they are in dictates.

Not necessarily, sir. In ethics, particularly normative ethics, there are several ways one can answer, "How ought one act, morally speaking?" such as consequentialism (which includes utilitarianism, welfarism) or deontology (best exemplified by Kant's Categorical Imperative).

[sardaukar]

i am just want a clear answer

how atheist draw a line between moral and imoral?

paano nila masasabi na ang ganitong gawain ay imoral o hindi?

do they have some set of standards? or kung ano lang din ang sinasabi ng gobyerno susundin lang nila.

Ano bang source ng morality mo? The Church? The Bible? Both?

[indie boi]

Not necessarily, sir. In ethics, particularly normative ethics, there are several ways one can answer, "How ought one act, morally speaking?" such as consequentialism (which includes utilitarianism, welfarism) or deontology (best exemplified by Kant's Categorical Imperative).

Unfortunately, having mentioned what ethics entails, I bet the next reply would still confuse what ETHICS and MORALITY means. And frankly, any kind of discourse won't progress if we can't even agree on a common frame of reference or definition.

[bumblebee]

alistair,

I'm a software developer, I don't have any idea on all those things you said I'm speaking in general.

[alistair]

@bumblebee To expound, sir, utilitarianism seeks to maximize 'good' among all sentient beings. An act is moral if it provides the greatest utility for all. I think welfarism is closely related, but tends toward economic welfare instead of a more general 'good' or utility.

On the other hand, there's Egoism, seeks to maximize utility for the self. I suspect that dpogs thinks all atheists subscribe to egoism and act mainly out of self-interest.

Kant's Categorical Imperative roots morality in humanity's rational capacity and asserts certain inviolable moral laws, such as the first imperative: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."

[dpogs]

Ano bang source ng morality mo? The Church? The Bible? Both?

Bible. never change through time.


i dont based my morality on what the church says. its always the bible. every church leader has their own conviction which may be differnt from others... but the Bible standard never change through time.



how about atheist... i assume some of them may be still confuse where to base their morality.

[sardaukar]

So you're perfectly fine with this passage?

Deuteronomy 13:7-11
'If your brother, the son of your father or of your mother, or your son or daughter, or the spouse whom you embrace, or your most intimate friend, tries to secretly seduce you, saying 'Let us go and serve other gods' unknown to you or your ancestors before you, gods of the peoples surrounding you, whether near you or far away, anywhere throughout the world, you must not consent, you must not listen to him; you must show him no pity, you must not spare him or conceal his guilt. No, you must kill him, your hand must strike the first blow in putting him to death and the hands of all the rest of the people following. You must stone him to death, since he has tried to divert you from Yahweh your God.'

Find it moral?

[indie boi]

So you're perfectly fine with this passage?

Deuteronomy 13:7-11
'If your brother, the son of your father or of your mother, or your son or daughter, or the spouse whom you embrace, or your most intimate friend, tries to secretly seduce you, saying 'Let us go and serve other gods' unknown to you or your ancestors before you, gods of the peoples surrounding you, whether near you or far away, anywhere throughout the world, you must not consent, you must not listen to him; you must show him no pity, you must not spare him or conceal his guilt. No, you must kill him, your hand must strike the first blow in putting him to death and the hands of all the rest of the people following. You must stone him to death, since he has tried to divert you from Yahweh your God.'

Find it moral?

Oh, snap!

[dpogs]

Before I answer that...


Where do atheist based their morality?

[bumblebee]

Been answered a lot of times already. alistair even expounded on it.

[alistair]

Bible. never change through time.

Really? Or only since synods of the 4th century?

how about atheist... i assume some of them may be still confuse where to base their morality.

How about reasoning? Doesn't require faith, revelation, or superstition.

[indie boi]

Before I answer that...


Where do atheist based their morality?

They answered already and those are valid bases for morality. Your turn to answer Sardaukar's question.

[dpogs]

nope... still... not clear answer...

there still a disagreement between atheist...