In terms of sheer and utter stupidity, which religion (Islam, Christianity, Juda

[OzmO]

My point is that, if God is not that ultimate authority, then it is man.

Such is not the case, but instead a condition you place to make a point.  Nothing says there has to be any ultimate authority.

And, if such is the case, then man is the highest sentient being, whose views and ethics are being revered and “worshipped”.

I wouldn't think atheist see man as the highest sentient being.  I could be wrong, but i don;t think atheism has any roots in the idea that man is the highest being in the universe when 99.999999999999999999999 99999999% is unknown.

That effectively makes man the “deity” of atheism, a natural “deity” vs. a supernatural one.

No i doesn't.  What I've read from the atheist on this board is no where near what you just wrote here.  It's just an conclusion you've made to make sense of them in your belief system.

It isn’t the mere teaching of morality, Ozmo. It’s the SOURCE of such. Whose morals are they teaching? Who do they claim has the ULTIMATE authority of determining right and wrong?

That's the difference between some people.  Some people need a book or set of laws or rules to show them how to be good.  Truly good people don't need laws or rules to follow Biblical or otherwise to be good.

[OzmO]

All of those systems have ONE common doctrine: The belief that there is no supernatural being. In its place, they put a natural being/entity (usually, MAN) as the object of worship and reverence. Or, as the apostle Paul put it, they worship the created, instead of the Creator.

Where does this happen?

Maybe some Pagan off shoot ritual cult does.

[MCWAY]

Such is not the case, but instead a condition you place to make a point.  Nothing says there has to be any ultimate authority.

But, there is an ultimate authority, Ozmo. They are teaching morals and values from some source or standard. If it's not man or God, then who/what is it?

I wouldn't think atheist see man as the highest sentient being.  I could be wrong, but i don;t think atheism has any roots in the idea that man is the highest being in the universe when 99.999999999999999999999 99999999% is unknown.

I missed the part where atheists claimed that there’s a being higher than man. If they "don't know", they assume that there is no such being. And, until they "find" such a being, they place man in that position, by default.

No i doesn't.  What I've read from the atheist on this board is no where near what you just wrote here.  It's just an conclusion you've made to make sense of them in your belief system.

That's the difference between some people.  Some people need a book or set of laws or rules to show them how to be good.  Truly good people don't need laws or rules to follow Biblical or otherwise to be good.

That makes no sense, Ozmo. Again, who/what determines whether or not someone is being good? You can NOT qualify “good” vs. “evil” without some sort of standard. My statements make the point that the atheists have such a standard and a source. But, they spend so much time screaming about what/who that source is NOT, that little attention is placed on who/what that source IS.

Someone taught YOU how to be good and they got their values and morals from a certain source. You didn't learn how to be good on your own (and neither did your parents).

Where does this happen?

Maybe some Pagan off shoot ritual cult does.

Not necessarily! Man is a created being. Therefore, if he is effectively worshipping himself (his own logic, reason, and understanding), the statement from Paul sticks.

[OzmO]

But, there is an ultimate authority, Ozmo. If it's not man or God, then who/what is it?

Why does there have to an ultimate authority?  That's something you assume needs to be.

If they don't know, they assume that there is no such being. And, until they "find" such a being, they place man in that position, by default.

You are the one that seems to be assuming much.  It seems to me that a condition you put on life is the prerequisite of the existence of an ultimate being.  Being that, if you don;t believe there is a God ,then you must replace God with man.

That's not the case at all.  From what i understand Atheists look at themselves as higher animals.

That makes no sense, Ozmo. Again, who/what determines whether or not someone is being good? You can NOT qualify “good” vs. “evil” without some sort of standard. My statements make the point that the atheists have such a standard and a source. But, they spend so much time screaming about what/who that source is NOT, that little attention is placed on who/what that source IS.

Someone taught YOU how to be good and they got their values and morals from a certain source. You didn't learn how to be good on your own (and neither did your parents).

I think I see what you are saying about sources.  God is the source of morality. 

However, I believe in the atheist's mind, the root of morality, which has manifested itself in many forms and in many cultures through out time stems from the idea of victimization.  If your actions produce a victim then it's wrong.  And morals evolve as cultures evolve.

My parents raised me with a strong set of moral standards based in Christian teachings.  However, those teachings do not keep from doing bad things.  So whether it is God or not, I choose not to do bad things.

I have a friend, who is now a former pastor, who got angry at God becuase of his divorce.  He's womanizing, lying, cheating, drug user now.  He was never a truly good person IMO. The only thing that keep him "in check" was his belief in God.  And that was fine by me becuase i would rather have the way he was.

Not necessarily! Man is a created being. Therefore, if he is effectively worshiping himself (his own logic, reason, and understanding), the statement from Paul sticks.

Not worshiping God doesn't mean you will replace him.  Worshiping is not a core function of man.  In your way of thinking it may be, but not with those who don't believe in God.

[Deicide]

That’s a question you should ask yourself, Deicide.

I do, I have; they are much cooler than your deity!

[Deicide]

There are probably beings much more highly evolved than we are; far greater than homo sapiens.

Hey Ozmo,

I heard on a radio show once how some guy called in and said if he didn't believe in Jebus and the Bible he would murder his neighbors and the host kept asking him, are you serious and he kept saying yes I am serious; for people like that I am glad they have their religion but personally I think they should be hospitalised.

I obviously cannot speak for all atheists but to me morality is simple; cause the least pain and make life as tolerable as possible. This is based on mutual understanding; I don't want others to rob me or stab me so I don't do it myself. I don't need an angry war god shouting out barbarism to me to 'not steal or murder'. People like that should be locked away.

[MCWAY]

Why does there have to an ultimate authority?  That's something you assume needs to be.

Because morals and standards, "good" and "evil", are based on some sort of authority. The question remains, what/who is that authority for atheists, since it is not a supernatural being?

You are the one that seems to be assuming much.  It seems to me that a condition you put on life is the prerequisite of the existence of an ultimate being.  Being that, if you don;t believe there is a God ,then you must replace God with man.

Would you prefer He be replaced with sheep? Again, if it ain't God or man, then who is this ultimate being?

That's not the case at all.  From what i understand Atheists look at themselves as higher animals.

And, unless there's a higher "animal" than man, he is on top of the hiearchy, as is his doctrine, logic, and reason, when it comes to determining "good" and "evil".

I think I see what you are saying about sources.  God is the source of morality. 

EXACTLY!!! But, atheists don't believe in God; therefore someone/something else drives their sense of morality. What is that source?

However, I believe in the atheist's mind, the root of morality, which has manifested itself in many forms and in many cultures through out time stems from the idea of victimization.  If your actions produce a victim then it's wrong.  And morals evolve as cultures evolve.

My parents raised me with a strong set of moral standards based in Christian teachings.  However, those teachings do not keep from doing bad things.  So whether it is God or not, I choose not to do bad things.

I have a friend, who is now a former pastor, who got angry at God becuase of his divorce.  He's womanizing, lying, cheating, drug user now.  He was never a truly good person IMO. The only thing that keep him "in check" was his belief in God.  And that was fine by me becuase i would rather have the way he was.

His anger was misplaced. Just because people do wrong to you doesn't mean you have license to do wrong to others, especially when (most of the time) your victims aren't the ones who did you dirty.

Not worshiping God doesn't mean you will replace him.  Worshiping is not a core function of man.  In your way of thinking it may be, but not with those who don't believe in God.

I beg to differ. Plus, worship does not imply that the fashion in which it's done will be similar or identical. Just as Muslims don't worship Allah in the exact method that Christians worship God, man doesn't worship himself in the same fashion that Christians worship God or Muslims worship Allah.

[MCWAY]

There are probably beings much more highly evolved than we are; far greater than homo sapiens.

Then why aren't you following their standards of right and wrong, instead of your own?

Hey Ozmo,

I heard on a radio show once how some guy called in and said if he didn't believe in Jebus and the Bible he would murder his neighbors and the host kept asking him, are you serious and he kept saying yes I am serious; for people like that I am glad they have their religion but personally I think they should be hospitalised.

I obviously cannot speak for all atheists but to me morality is simple; cause the least pain and make life as tolerable as possible. This is based on mutual understanding; I don't want others to rob me or stab me so I don't do it myself. I don't need an angry war god shouting out barbarism to me to 'not steal or murder'. People like that should be locked away.

The apostle Paul had a term for that. It’s called “having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.” There are many people who follow the principles of the Lord, without giving Him honor and glory for such. 

As for your “mutual understanding”, (notwithstanding that such is based on humanistic reasoning) saying that “I don’t want (fill in the blank) done to me; so I won’t do that to other people” ain’t the most sound principle in the world. It's quite easy to justify doing something to someone else that you DON'T want done to you.

You may want to have sex with someone else’s wife/girlfriend; but, it’s highly unlikely that you would want another guy to bone your wife/girlfriend. And, even thieves lament when someone takes their possessions from them. And, virtually no murderer wants to be murdered himself; no rapist wants to be raped.

[Deicide]

Then why aren't you following their standards of right and wrong, instead of your own?

The apostle Paul had a term for that. It’s called “having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.” There are many people who follow the principles of the Lord, without giving Him honor and glory for such. 

As for your “mutual understanding”, (notwithstanding that such is based on humanistic reasoning) saying that “I don’t want (fill in the blank) done to me; so I won’t do that to other people” ain’t the most sound principle in the world. It's quite easy to justify doing something to someone else that you DON'T want done to you.

You may want to have sex with someone else’s wife/girlfriend; but, it’s highly unlikely that you would want another guy to bone your wife/girlfriend. And, even thieves lament when someone takes their possessions from them. And, virtually no murderer wants to be murdered himself; no rapist wants to be raped.

This statement shows clearly that you understood nothing of my statement; Zeus is much cooler than your god is.

[OzmO]

Because morals and standards, "good" and "evil", are based on some sort of authority. The question remains, what/who is that authority for atheists, since it is not a supernatural being?

Who says?

Again that's a condition "you" are establishing and not necessarily the truth.

 

Would you prefer He be replaced with sheep? Again, if it ain't God or man, then who is this ultimate being?

You got to remember i strongly believe in God.  That being said, i would think an Atheist sees life void of an ultimate being until such is proven to exist.

And, unless there's a higher "animal" than man, he is on top of the hiearchy, as is his doctrine, logic, and reason, when it comes to determining "good" and "evil".

I would think  intelligent Atheists don't assume they are the highest in the universe. 

EXACTLY!!! But, atheists don't believe in God; therefore someone/something else drives their sense of morality. What is that source?

I told you in the other part about the pastor.

His anger was misplaced. Just because people do wrong to you doesn't mean you have license to do wrong to others, especially when (most of the time) your victims aren't the ones who did you dirty.

I agree.  but he was this way before he was "saved" and now that his faith is disillusioned he's back to the way he was.  Shows me, he was never what he thought he was at the core. 

I beg to differ. Plus, worship does not imply that the fashion in which it's done will be similar or identical. Just as Muslims don't worship Allah in the exact method that Christians worship God, man doesn't worship himself in the same fashion that Christians worship God or Muslims worship Allah.

Well that brings into question the definition of the word worship:

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
wor·ship    Audio Help   /ˈwɜrʃɪp/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[wur-ship] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -shiped, -ship·ing or (especially British) -shipped, -ship·ping.
–noun
1.   reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
2.   formal or ceremonious rendering of such honor and homage: They attended worship this morning.
3.   adoring reverence or regard: excessive worship of business success.
4.   the object of adoring reverence or regard.
5.   (initial capital letter) British. a title of honor used in addressing or mentioning certain magistrates and others of high rank or station (usually prec. by Your, His, or Her).
–verb (used with object)
6.   to render religious reverence and homage to.
7.   to feel an adoring reverence or regard for (any person or thing).
–verb (used without object)
8.   to render religious reverence and homage, as to a deity.
9.   to attend services of divine worship.
10.   to feel an adoring reverence or regard.


I suppose you could apply some of what you saying regarding worship but it's quite a reach to compare it with worshiping God.  In fact, it's not applicable. 

[Deicide]

Because morals and standards, "good" and "evil", are based on some sort of authority. The question remains, what/who is that authority for atheists, since it is not a supernatural being?

Would you prefer He be replaced with sheep? Again, if it ain't God or man, then who is this ultimate being?

And, unless there's a higher "animal" than man, he is on top of the hiearchy, as is his doctrine, logic, and reason, when it comes to determining "good" and "evil".

EXACTLY!!! But, atheists don't believe in God; therefore someone/something else drives their sense of morality. What is that source?

His anger was misplaced. Just because people do wrong to you doesn't mean you have license to do wrong to others, especially when (most of the time) your victims aren't the ones who did you dirty.

I beg to differ. Plus, worship does not imply that the fashion in which it's done will be similar or identical. Just as Muslims don't worship Allah in the exact method that Christians worship God, man doesn't worship himself in the same fashion that Christians worship God or Muslims worship Allah.

So if god decides tommorow that murder and rape are cool (as he had in the past) then it's the moral thing to do? He is the ultimate authority here and remember, before you go on saying he would never do that, A) how can you know the mind of God and B) when you say that you are applying your own standards to him...

[big L dawg]

They are real, except they are not gods.  They are fallen angels who are now in spiritual prisons until judgement day.     

Genesis 6:4
"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."

2 Peter 2:4
"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment"

Jude 1:6
"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day."

have u met them?r they cool cats?how much can they bench?

[Necrosis]

I was talking about science providing "facts", which by definition of science it does not. It provides scientific theories.

a theory is a collection of facts which science or observation has elucidated. Facts exist, wait i know what you will ask, what is existence, what is what?

you seem like you wish to delve deep into these subjects beneth the surface, however some form of philosophical training is required in order to concisely form meaningful objections. I see you failing in your posts to connect any meaning.

[Necrosis]

There are probably beings much more highly evolved than we are; far greater than homo sapiens.

Hey Ozmo,

I heard on a radio show once how some guy called in and said if he didn't believe in Jebus and the Bible he would murder his neighbors and the host kept asking him, are you serious and he kept saying yes I am serious; for people like that I am glad they have their religion but personally I think they should be hospitalised.

I obviously cannot speak for all atheists but to me morality is simple; cause the least pain and make life as tolerable as possible. This is based on mutual understanding; I don't want others to rob me or stab me so I don't do it myself. I don't need an angry war god shouting out barbarism to me to 'not steal or murder'. People like that should be locked away.

exactly, evolutionary psychology has produced many answers as to why morality or altruism exists. It all has to do personal gratification, doing something good produces good feelings, as well as providing service to others who may in fact return the favor if needed. It has been demonstrated in social psychology and morality is extremely beneficial to have as humans prefer order and patterns insted of chaos and disorder. It allows us to increase our fitness and recieve physical/psychologica benefits.

NO GOD NEEDED.

[Nordic Superman]

There are probably beings much more highly evolved than we are; far greater than homo sapiens.

Hey Ozmo,

I heard on a radio show once how some guy called in and said if he didn't believe in Jebus and the Bible he would murder his neighbors and the host kept asking him, are you serious and he kept saying yes I am serious; for people like that I am glad they have their religion but personally I think they should be hospitalised.

I obviously cannot speak for all atheists but to me morality is simple; cause the least pain and make life as tolerable as possible. This is based on mutual understanding; I don't want others to rob me or stab me so I don't do it myself. I don't need an angry war god shouting out barbarism to me to 'not steal or murder'. People like that should be locked away.

Just a clarification, being more "evolved" in regards to natural selection doesn't make sense. Evolution is a mechanism not a measuring stick.

A slug is just as "evolved" as an homo sapien, an homo sapien however is a much more complex organism tho.

[Deicide]

Just a clarification, being more "evolved" in regards to natural selection doesn't make sense. Evolution is a mechanism not a measuring stick.

A slug is just as "evolved" as an homo sapien, an homo sapien however is a much more complex organism tho.

By 'evolved' I meant this more in an abstract sense, not the technical sense of the word...

[Nordic Superman]

By 'evolved' I meant this more in an abstract sense, not the technical sense of the word...

Abstract?

Next you'll be posting ambiguous philosophical responses like wavelength!

[MCWAY]

exactly, evolutionary psychology has produced many answers as to why morality or altruism exists. It all has to do personal gratification, doing something good produces good feelings, as well as providing service to others who may in fact return the favor if needed. It has been demonstrated in social psychology and morality is extremely beneficial to have as humans prefer order and patterns insted of chaos and disorder. It allows us to increase our fitness and recieve physical/psychologica benefits.

NO GOD NEEDED.

There's at least one major problem with this statement of yours: Doing something good DOES NOT always produce good feelings nor provide personal gratification.

What about reporting a wrongdoing, when the perpetrator is a close friend or relative? Does it produce good feelings, when that buddy of yours now hates your guts, because he's in trouble?

Then, there are people that give and help out a friend financially, even though they are barely making it themselves. How gratifying is it, when such sacrifice goes without gratitude or even returned with scorn?

If everybody did good, simply because it produce good feelings or it was gratifying, this planet would be in even WORSE moral shape that it currently is now.

[Decker]

exactly, evolutionary psychology has produced many answers as to why morality or altruism exists. It all has to do personal gratification, doing something good produces good feelings, as well as providing service to others who may in fact return the favor if needed. It has been demonstrated in social psychology and morality is extremely beneficial to have as humans prefer order and patterns insted of chaos and disorder. It allows us to increase our fitness and recieve physical/psychologica benefits.

NO GOD NEEDED.

That's a great point. 

How do we know that God is the source of morality?  B/c some guys told us God told/inspired them of good/evil.  That looks like nothing more than some biblical guys giving us their own opinion on how they derived their own views of right and wrong.  Divine Inspiration is a human-centered conclusion.  I think it speaks more to the psychology of the person asserting the claim of divine knowledge than it does to the value of the claim.

It is the human mind that makes sense of and establishes order on reality.

[Decker]

There's at least one major problem with this statement of yours: Doing something good DOES NOT always produce good feelings nor provide personal gratification.

What about reporting a wrongdoing, when the perpetrator is a close friend or relative? Does it produce good feelings, when that buddy of yours now hates your guts, because he's in trouble?

Then, there are people that give and help out a friend financially, even though they are barely making it themselves. How gratifying is it, when such sacrifice goes without gratitude or even returned with scorn?

If everybody did good, simply because it produce good feelings or it was gratifying, this planet would be in even WORSE moral shape that it currently is now.

Why does a martyr do what he does?  "Good feelings", to me, indicate some sort of psychological satisfaction in doing something.  That would include dying for a cause--running into a burning building to save a child, throwing oneself on a grenade, or just plain sacrifice for a cause bigger than one's self.

[MCWAY]

Who says?

Again that's a condition "you" are establishing and not necessarily the truth.

YOU say!!! Your statement was "that God is the source of morality". My question was that, since atheists don't believe in God, what is their source or standard of morality? Who/what is the measuring stick for right and wrong?

You got to remember i strongly believe in God.  That being said, i would think an Atheist sees life void of an ultimate being until such is proven to exist.

I beg to differ. Until an atheist feels that the existence of an ultimate being has been proven, he will insert himself (man) as that being.

I would think  intelligent Atheists don't assume they are the highest in the universe. 

I told you in the other part about the pastor.

I agree.  but he was this way before he was "saved" and now that his faith is disillusioned he's back to the way he was.  Shows me, he was never what he thought he was at the core. 

Well that brings into question the definition of the word worship:

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
wor·ship    Audio Help   /ˈwɜrʃɪp/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[wur-ship] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -shiped, -ship·ing or (especially British) -shipped, -ship·ping.
–noun
1.   reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
2.   formal or ceremonious rendering of such honor and homage: They attended worship this morning.
3.   adoring reverence or regard: excessive worship of business success.
4.   the object of adoring reverence or regard.
5.   (initial capital letter) British. a title of honor used in addressing or mentioning certain magistrates and others of high rank or station (usually prec. by Your, His, or Her).
–verb (used with object)
6.   to render religious reverence and homage to.
7.   to feel an adoring reverence or regard for (any person or thing).
–verb (used without object)
8.   to render religious reverence and homage, as to a deity.
9.   to attend services of divine worship.
10.   to feel an adoring reverence or regard.


I suppose you could apply some of what you saying regarding worship but it's quite a reach to compare it with worshiping God.  In fact, it's not applicable. 

Definitions 1, 7, and 10 seem to fit the bill, as to the type of "worship", that atheists do. In particular, I point out definition 1:

1.   reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.

Key words: "Or a sacred personage". With atheism, the "or" option is taken and the "sacred personage" is man himself. "an's thoughts, man's logic, and man's reason have become revered.

[MCWAY]

Why does a martyr do what he does?  "Good feelings", to me, indicate some sort of psychological satisfaction in doing something.  That would include dying for a cause--running into a burning building to save a child, throwing oneself on a grenade, or just plain sacrifice for a cause bigger than one's self.

There's a reason it's called "sacrifice", Decker. It's because it DOES NOT feel good. It hurts: physically, emotionally, mentally, psychologically, financially, or any combination thereof.

Anyone can do something good, when it feels good. How many can do something good, when it hurts? Can you love someone who doesn't love you back?

Can you help someone, knowing they don't or won't appreciate it? Can you give, knowing that it's going to put you in financial strain?

[Decker]

There's a reason it's called "sacrifice", Decker. It's because it DOES NOT feel good. It hurts: physically, emotionally, mentally, psychologically, financially, or any combination thereof.

Anyone can do something good, when it feels good. How many can do something good, when it hurts? Can you love someone who doesn't love you back?

Can you help someone, knowing they don't or won't appreciate it? Can you give, knowing that it's going to put you in financial strain?

That's why I termed the phenomenon 'satisfaction' and not 'good feelings'.  Why do people visit graves of loved ones?  There's no one there to speak with.  It's an emotional event...usually negative in some aspect b/c the subject is dead.  Yet the living visit the dead all the time.

Why do people sacrifice their lives for strangers?  Why does the martyr exist?

I agree with you.  It is most definitely not 'good feelings'.  There is something more profound at play here. 

[OzmO]

I beg to differ. Until an atheist feels that the existence of an ultimate being has been proven, he will insert himself (man) as that being.

That's an assumption you are making FOR atheists.  Show me where atheists say that.  We are back to you putting a false condition on something to make your point make sense.

YOU say!!! Your statement was "that God is the source of morality". My question was that, since atheists don't believe in God, what is their source or standard of morality? Who/what is the measuring stick for right and wrong?

I don't believe the God that's identified in the bible is the source of morality.  But that's another discussion, a horse well beaten to death by us.

Victimization is a great measuring stick.

Definitions 1, 7, and 10 seem to fit the bill, as to the type of "worship", that atheists do. In particular, I point out definition 1:

1.   reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.

Key words: "Or a sacred personage". With atheism, the "or" option is taken and the "sacred personage" is man himself. "an's thoughts, man's logic, and man's reason have become revered.

"a" (a sacred personage) denotes singularity.  It does not denote an entire species.

in definition 7 it's the same.

In definition 10, it's a general statement.  I view my children and parents with "reverence or regard"   Does that mean worship them instead of God?

[Deedee]

Talk about illustrating my point.  Where exactly did I state this?   

Here.  Am I not reading English 

It's ridiculous to say that atheists who have all of the earmarks of a religion are not, in essence, a religion.  Don't just point to one item.  Look at everything I mentioned.

They have a fundamental belief (there is no God).
They meet on a regular basis, sometimes every week, at "humanist centers."
They have national and probably local organizations.
They have annual conventions.
They have a cable TV show.
They probably have radio shows.
They publish magazines and likely newsletters.
Based on their website, it looks like they lobby. 
The website also looks like they have support groups.   

If you view these factors together, it absolutely qualifies as a religion in my book.