• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Are atheists too complacent?

GDon said:
I hear it all the time! :( In a way, it partly validates the sense of Scorpion's OP, since I suspect many atheists become atheists at around the age of 10, with a 10-year-old's definition of omnipotence. And of course, theists are even worse in that regard.
Click to expand...

I didn't become an atheist until I was well into adulthood. For me it was more a matter of impotence. Also the whole "blatantly unreliable narrators" and "apostles murdering sinners" thing.
 
Scorpion said:
Atheists seem to assume that people who believe in God and an afterlife are mentally weak and gullible. Thereby assuming intellectual superiority over them.
But have they considered what it means to really believe you are answerable to a higher power in everything you do?
Is it not easier and more comfortable to believe death brings oblivion, than to believe you are held accountable in an eternal afterlife?
Click to expand...

I haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but your questions are irrelevant.

It does not matter what things mean to you or which is the easiest. It matters what is the truth. Atheists, while not a homogeneous group, are generally not concerned about what is easy, but about what seems to have evidence.

Hans
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
I don't really think that, "I was drunk at the time is ever a good excuse". :boggled:
Click to expand...


You can think whatever you want. The fact is that it's not in the text. Lot's reaction or excuse isn't recorded. Make whatever guesses you want based on whatever moral system you happen to apply. It's completely worthless. There is no mention of Lot's actions or thoughts again in the entire Bible after Genesis 19:35, "And the younger arose, and lay with him; and he knew not when she lay down, nor when she arose."

It's perfectly valid to believe that Lot, overcome with horror, gouged his eyes out and spent the rest of his life wandering around Sumeria. It's valid to believe that he was tried by some court and sentenced to death by stoning. He may never have known. He may have loved the whole scenario.

It's not in the text.It's not implied by the text. It's not even demonstrably true. There is no reason to interpret it one way or the other.
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
I don't really think that, "I was drunk at the time is ever a good excuse". :boggled:
Click to expand...
There is a difference between getting yourself drunk and acting like an ********/idiot, and quite another to be drugged and taken advantage of.
For all intents and purposes this was drugging someone in order to rape them, not a foolish drunken fling.
 
Loss Leader said:
You can think whatever you want. The fact is that it's not in the text. Lot's reaction or excuse isn't recorded. Make whatever guesses you want based on whatever moral system you happen to apply. It's completely worthless. There is no mention of Lot's actions or thoughts again in the entire Bible after Genesis 19:35, "And the younger arose, and lay with him; and he knew not when she lay down, nor when she arose."

It's perfectly valid to believe that Lot, overcome with horror, gouged his eyes out and spent the rest of his life wandering around Sumeria. It's valid to believe that he was tried by some court and sentenced to death by stoning. He may never have known. He may have loved the whole scenario.

It's not in the text.It's not implied by the text. It's not even demonstrably true. There is no reason to interpret it one way or the other.
Click to expand...

Oh come on. I don't have the foggiest idea what poor Lot's reaction to this sordid activity was. It's just story. Whether he existed or not, I would not care. But what about the Believers? Under what circumstance is incest actually OK? Is it permitted when you are drunk? Do not the daughters "deserve" a penalty?
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
Oh come on. I don't have the foggiest idea what poor Lot's reaction to this sordid activity was. It's just story. Whether he existed or not, I would not care. But what about the Believers? Under what circumstance is incest actually OK? Is it permitted when you are drunk? Do not the daughters "deserve" a penalty?
Click to expand...

See also: Where did Cain, Abel(?), and Seth's wives come from?

The story of Lot took place before the Law was given, wherein incest was banned. However, this causes a bit of a conundrum in that there were people considered righteous, even outright priests of God, as side characters before that and the standard for righteousness there is vague at best.

I mean, it'd be silly to think God is a cdesign proponentsists, right?
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
Oh come on. I don't have the foggiest idea what poor Lot's reaction to this sordid activity was. It's just story. Whether he existed or not, I would not care. But what about the Believers? Under what circumstance is incest actually OK? Is it permitted when you are drunk? Do not the daughters "deserve" a penalty?
Click to expand...


I vaguely see where you're headed, but I have to object.

I have no idea what "Believers" think. They're not a monolithic entity. Each person is his or her own personal believer. I can tell you that, when I was a young believer in the Torah, I thought that story was weird. However, I was also taught that very few of the stories in Genesis should be taken as rules about anything. The bible contains 613 commandments and I think there are maybe only half a dozen in Genesis.

While I do know of Jews who believed in the literal truth of the bible, I never belonged to a congregation that did.

I certainly know of no recent case where any individual committed incest or rape because they thought it was justified by these eight sentences. If it were a widespread belief, it should turn up more frequently.

My general feeling is probably the same as yours: People who are inclined to commit incest or rape are going to do it anyway no matter what happened with Lot's daughters.
 
Loss Leader said:
I vaguely see where you're headed, but I have to object.

I have no idea what "Believers" think. They're not a monolithic entity. Each person is his or her own personal believer. I can tell you that, when I was a young believer in the Torah, I thought that story was weird. However, I was also taught that very few of the stories in Genesis should be taken as rules about anything. The bible contains 613 commandments and I think there are maybe only half a dozen in Genesis.

While I do know of Jews who believed in the literal truth of the bible, I never belonged to a congregation that did.

I certainly know of no recent case where any individual committed incest or rape because they thought it was justified by these eight sentences. If it were a widespread belief, it should turn up more frequently.

My general feeling is probably the same as yours: People who are inclined to commit incest or rape are going to do it anyway no matter what happened with Lot's daughters.
Click to expand...

Any idea why Old Testament theists, Jewish and otherwise, don't speak up and proclaim there is a lot of bad information in there?

Is it because, if they do, the whole foundation of their belief system is for naught?
 
Skeptical Greg said:
Any idea why Old Testament theists, Jewish and otherwise, don't speak up and proclaim there is a lot of bad information in there?
Click to expand...
Actually, all ancient traditions have their "revised" versions, which updates older sacred texts. So the bad information wasn't in fact "bad", just misunderstood! For the Jewish tradition, there is the Talmud:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

The entire Talmud consists of 63 tractates, and in the standard print, called the Vilna Shas, it is 2,711 double-sided folios.[6] It is written in Mishnaic Hebrew and Jewish Babylonian Aramaic and contains the teachings and opinions of thousands of rabbis (dating from before the Common Era through to the fifth century) on a variety of subjects, including halakha, Jewish ethics, philosophy, customs, history, and folklore, and many other topics. The Talmud is the basis for all codes of Jewish law, and is widely quoted in rabbinic literature.​

There are also Jewish philosophers like Philo of Alexandria (First Century CE) who re-interpreted Old Testament passages from a Platonic allegorical perspective: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo

Philo used philosophical allegory to harmonize Jewish scripture, mainly the Torah, with Greek philosophy. His method followed the practices of both Jewish exegesis and Stoic philosophy. His allegorical exegesis was important for some Christian Church Fathers, but he had very little reception history within the Rabbinic Judaism.[1] He adopted allegorical instead of literal interpretations of the Hebrew Bible.​

On the Christian side, there is Origen and other Church Fathers. All fascinating stuff!

And of course, in more modern times, we learn through sincere analysis that the Bible is consistent with science (if only we look at it the right way), and was so all along! Amazing! :)
 
Last edited:
Loss Leader said:
I vaguely see where you're headed, but I have to object.

I have no idea what "Believers" think. They're not a monolithic entity. Each person is his or her own personal believer. I can tell you that, when I was a young believer in the Torah, I thought that story was weird. However, I was also taught that very few of the stories in Genesis should be taken as rules about anything. The bible contains 613 commandments and I think there are maybe only half a dozen in Genesis.

While I do know of Jews who believed in the literal truth of the bible, I never belonged to a congregation that did.

I certainly know of no recent case where any individual committed incest or rape because they thought it was justified by these eight sentences. If it were a widespread belief, it should turn up more frequently.

My general feeling is probably the same as yours: People who are inclined to commit incest or rape are going to do it anyway no matter what happened with Lot's daughters.
Click to expand...

It's so nice you might see where I'm headed but I wish you would tell me because I don't have a clue. It's not that I think anyone would use Lot's example as justification to commit sinful acts but how they justify the actions of Lot's daughters.
 
Skeptical Greg said:
Any idea why Old Testament theists, Jewish and otherwise, don't speak up and proclaim there is a lot of bad information in there?

Is it because, if they do, the whole foundation of their belief system is for naught?
Click to expand...


I doubt that's the reason. People with faith rarely believe that they're just pretending to have faith.

In any case, here's what the Talmud says about the correct or incorrect behavior of Lot's daughters. Some think Lot was justly punished. Some point out that the punishment for the daughters should have been death (but that God, knowing their pure intentions, spared them). That's when I stopped reading.
 
On a generic level, Atheists just like the Religious should be free to believe what they want, but don't need to get all up in other's faces about it.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Most are, even when the religious get in their faces anyway. Are atheists too complaisant?

Dave
Click to expand...

Not the point when I see anyone shoving their belief/nonbelief in my face as something invading my personal space. Neither side of the coin should do it.
 
rockysmith76 said:
Not the point when I see anyone shoving their belief/nonbelief in my face as something invading my personal space.
Click to expand...

And have you any experience of atheists doing that? By which I mean, seeking you out and trying to push their beliefs on you, as opposed to simply trying to prevent the religious imposing beliefs on them?

Dave
 
rockysmith76 said:
On a generic level, Atheists just like the Religious should be free to believe what they want, but don't need to get all up in other's faces about it.
Click to expand...

Look Ma, that guy is doing the stale routine of "An atheist is just another believer".
 
RedStapler said:
Look Ma, that guy is doing the stale routine of "An atheist is just another believer".
Click to expand...

You know exactly what I meant: It could be an Atheist, a Bible Thumper, A Trumpkin or SJW type, if they're in your face with their own particular vitriol, it's an invasion of personal space.

I'm not getting sucked into some pointless belief/nonbelief nitpicking
 
rockysmith76 said:
You know exactly what I meant: It could be an Atheist, a Bible Thumper, A Trumpkin or SJW type, if they're in your face with their own particular vitriol, it's an invasion of personal space.
Click to expand...

Yes, but if some of them are prone to push their beliefs on others and some aren't, then you're doing the latter an injustice by lumping them in with the former. So, once again, do you have any personal experience of atheists seeking you out and trying to force their beliefs or lack of beliefs on you, in the way that many religions specifically mandate their followers to do?

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom