No God Exists: Why Should I Be Good to humans?
-
For sure it is.As to not stealing or doig other thing, what if you have children to feed?
It is a known fact that many women slip into prostitution in order to feed their children.
Salaam
i understand , i m not blaming them but its depend on the nature of individual. if that type of situation come on me. i will rather stay hungry till death doing stealing or selling body to feed my kids. i must be confident on what God say , God is responsible for the souls feeding and God will find a way out and make something happen . but again i feel sysmpathy for everybody who suffer from these situation,
14 years back there was a women who come to my mom ask a little money for the baby milk, she was telling to my mom somebody steal the feeder of milk and she have no more money to buy . look my mom judgement she said sister here your money and dnt say its stealing may be the women who steal it ,her boy was more hungry then your boy. its not stealing.
i was bit depresses at that day , it was gov hospital where i see the helpness of lot of people thats y i always avoid to go hospitals,
again what is wrong so wrong, we must must not do prositation for just sake of money its does affect a lot in llong term . sppecially when kids become big they never like somebody call their mother , prositute, think about it, God commandments mst follow and wait and patience is key.
God bless you my sisters.
-
The social attitude to prostitutes is very hypocritical. As to letting your children hungry for days or sick so that you do not fall into this or that, I woul dlike to see those who see it that easy be in their place. In fact the very men who cause that would be horrified at marrying a prostitute and take her off the sreet, although I do of the rare man who has done so.
s to those children suffering becaue their mother is a prostitute, waw! what? they would rather be dead? Not necesarily children react like that, they may, but they may not at all.
At any rate, a very hypocritical society where that happens.
Salaam
-
Ibleesm Ashshaytaan is not atheist, and he did know right from wrong, but acted not out of conviction but out of arrogance.
I do not care about labels, ecause also, when you speak about atheists a when you speak about feminists, I feel that you are talkingn about another planet, because the ateeists you descrie are ot the ones I know, nor the feminists you describe are not the ones I kow. So I suppoe that in your country you have that kind of thing. That does ot describe people everywhere.
And yes, of course Cheney knnows right from worg just like Ibles, bu he chooses wrong because like shaytaan he chooses wrong. The shaytaaans of this world may think that dead isvry far aand that if the can be gods thi life they want to be gods. In the other life they won't begods, they will be simle idiot worshipers, not their thing.
s to keeping people inn check by law or threat orwhatever, othing gurntees that those who make the law or appply it are not goinng to be themselves shayateen.
Salaam
It isn't about the average atheists. If all of them followed the ideologies this world would have been dead long time ago. It is about those who try to explain morals while boasting about their adherence to rationality. I wanted to see how that would work in an atheist world.
-
Dogmatic atheism definitely can be just as irrational as dogmatic religions. I'm constantly being attacked and insulted personally by adherents of the cult of atheism and adherents of the three Abrahamic cults. What I clearly see is that people generally argue not based on reason or knowledge, but on their emotions and certain presuppositions and dogmas. For some people, the Bible and the Qur'an are absolutely above any criticism, they don't even want to consider the possibility of their hearsay "holy book" not being revealed by the Creator. And for many atheists, the very thought that there is intelligent design in the universe, in the DNA or in the cell amounts to "blasphemy".
-
Recluse,
Such is it if you adhere to logic which others seem to overlook. Logically it is wrong to say there is no (kind of) divine phenomenon that directs the evolution of this world. Through probability alone it is safe to say the arguments for a creator force are too overwhelming to argue the way of an atheist.
Just the same it is illogical to say an advanced being such as "God" would order some kind of primitive worship and brain dead rituals and for this people such as you and me are attacked for on two fronts. Both fronts adhere to a fallacious logic that is logically inconsistent.
Just the same that "God" does have a purpose with creation which purpose is missing in the sectarian explanation of creation. What kind of purpose is it to breed some sort of slavishly obedient servants who will forever dwell in a paradise and be of no use but to indulge in some primitive activities? For that matter, the humans are already within that garden and it is what they make of it, it is a little like sandbox mode and some use to to develop themselves while some others step on their sand houses. Who has more development in them?
Heaven is not a fixed place, it is an omnipresent state of being and being absorbed in Rabb, so to say, being part of Being (Allah), the unity (ahad). The one who is in Heaven is a ruler over the others, they determine things in Rabb, because Rabb is in them and they are in Rabb, and they make up a share of Rabb, a certain percentage depending on the individual consciousness.
Be well
Amenuel -
I would like to see a world without God. Don't be surprised. Its just a case study of whether we can control the animals we have within us without religions/deen.
Okay, for a second let's say God doesn't exist. Belief has gone down the drain and all religions are banned. There is nothing called afterlife. There is no reason to believe in anything called karma because just like God it cant be measured in some lab. We can do whatever we like as long as no law is broken! You know in that case, government can punish us. Keeping this in mind and the idea that I am an atheist (just pretending), tell me why should I be good to certain people who provide nothing useful to me?
the specif group of people not useful to me in economic sense
not my teacher or employer
don't provide me any products
can't sell my own products to them
they don't live in my countryLets start from here. Give me rational reasons and moral values for which I should be good to them. Please, do debunk anything you deem illogical here. I am trying to see if a peaceful world without belief in God is possible.
If there is no God then we would not be here, there would be no earth, there would be nothing, Allah created us to worship him and this life is a test.
Peace is Love. Hate is destruction, both created by Allah. Even a religious human can get crazy or mad and full of hate start destroying. And the baddest man in the world can stop destruction finding Love. Even if religion is banned, God is still present, but you can not take religion out of your hart. So this is not possible what you are asking, a world without God, it is just not possible. -
Dogmatic atheism definitely can be just as irrational as dogmatic religions. I'm constantly being attacked and insulted personally by adherents of the cult of atheism and adherents of the three Abrahamic cults. What I clearly see is that people generally argue not based on reason or knowledge, but on their emotions and certain presuppositions and dogmas. For some people, the Bible and the Qur'an are absolutely above any criticism, they don't even want to consider the possibility of their hearsay "holy book" not being revealed by the Creator. And for many atheists, the very thought that there is intelligent design in the universe, in the DNA or in the cell amounts to "blasphemy".
I do not see any problem with what someone believes about God, but it is hurtful to me to see the belief to be a guiding force for the physical elimination (killing and snatching rights) of innocent groups.
However, although due to certain experiences and reflections, I have come to conclusion that Quran is from God I do welcome wise criticism of it. It works like check and balance while forcing us to see if the interpretations are correct or not.
If there is no God then we would not be here, there would be no earth, there would be nothing, Allah created us to worship him and this life is a test.
Peace is Love. Hate is destruction, both created by Allah. Even a religious human can get crazy or mad and full of hate start destroying. And the baddest man in the world can stop destruction finding Love. Even if religion is banned, God is still present, but you can not take religion out of your hart. So this is not possible what you are asking, a world without God, it is just not possible.Jafar had the same opinion. Seeing the ideologies of atheism I do agree with both of you.
-
However, although due to certain experiences and reflections, I have come to conclusion that Quran is from God I do welcome wise criticism of it. It works like check and balance while forcing us to see if the interpretations are correct or not.
That is wise.
-
All of us have personal experiences. The problem (for me) is, even if the Qur'an is from God (none of us can know with absolute certainty), the Qur'an contains obvious inconsistencies, mistakes and mythology. Why would God say things that are untrue or make no sense at all? I will create a new and interesting thread about what I find a shockingly absurd verse in the Qur'an hypno
-
Recluse,
none of us can know with absolute certainty
Not that I intend to brag, but it is possible to know.
the Qur'an contains obvious inconsistencies, mistakes and mythology
Yes, that is obvious when one fabricates an interpretation and puts it on top of some (innocent) writing, in order to make it as according to themselves.
The problem (for me) is, even if the Qur'an is from God
Quran is, but not the accompanying available mainstream interpretation of it. This causes it to contain logical inconsistencies, factual errors and pure mythology such as paranormal Jinn MADE of fire (nothing can be made of fire even if it would be "smokeless" or God having a throne, and myriad other things that would be obvious with simple logic.
I will create a new and interesting thread about a shockingly absurd verse in the Qur'an hypno If this doesn't blow people's minds away, then probably nothing will.
You need to bring some alternative, that will have a stronger effect on people. The contrast brings potency when someone has something sound to offer in return of breaking their glass house by too much noise. You do not seek to make people faithless, do you? It is important to have faith in something, to live for something.
Be well
Amenuel -
Recluse,
Not that I intend to brag, but it is possible to know.
Maybe because you are a prophet yourself?
You need to bring some alternative, that will have a stronger effect on people. The contrast brings potency when someone has something sound to offer in return of breaking their glass house by too much noise. You do not seek to make people faithless, do you? It is important to have faith in something, to live for something.
I have faith in God. Why would I want to make people turn away from the Qur'an, isn't truth the most important thing in life? To me it is, but if I see some falsehood in the Qur'an, I will say it without reservation. God gave me a brain after all. I must really hurry now.
Peace
-
I will create a new and interesting thread about what I find a shockingly absurd verse in the Qur'an hypno
i will be waiting for that thread, and that verse
peace
-
Sorry, reel, it is not what you have asked, but I am going to answer
There cannot be such a world. People who are atheists, who do not bleieve in an after life, can be very, very, moral, why? Because God made us that way and because even without those "beliefs" people are decent and acknowledge that there are criteria, values who transcend them. I know people like that. They may not know that they believe in God because they are nto interested in that concept, but they do believe in justice, in kindness, etc. You cannot ban goodness from humanity just as you cannot ban evil from humanity.
Decent people love their mothers even when their mothers are no more useful but a charge, they do. And even when they don't they do not feel that they can treat her like garbage no matter what they do believe in or think they believe in. In fact I have seen such unbelievers cry real tears when remembering their very beloved grandmother.
So that world you attempt to explore I think does not exist nor will exist, although with proper induction we may get something very close.
I congratulate you on the question, however, because it is very interesting and worthwhile studying.
Salaam
Smart people have morals but lots of dumb traditional religious people haven't. These people might do some bad stuff if being atheist
-
Update I mentioned last time about gruesome crimes by atheists. I am leaving a link here just in case anyone wants to know what I was talking about.
Warning This is very disturbing. Almost similar to 120 days of Sodom. So be careful.
http//www.mtholyoke.edu/~cama20z/classweb/worldpolitics/thepitestiphenomenon/experience.html -
I would like to see a world without God. Don't be surprised. Its just a case study of whether we can control the animals we have within us without religions/deen.
Okay, for a second let's say God doesn't exist. Belief has gone down the drain and all religions are banned. There is nothing called afterlife. There is no reason to believe in anything called karma because just like God it cant be measured in some lab. We can do whatever we like as long as no law is broken! You know in that case, government can punish us. Keeping this in mind and the idea that I am an atheist (just pretending), tell me why should I be good to certain people who provide nothing useful to me?
the specif group of people not useful to me in economic sense
not my teacher or employer
don't provide me any products
can't sell my own products to them
they don't live in my countryLets start from here. Give me rational reasons and moral values for which I should be good to them. Please, do debunk anything you deem illogical here. I am trying to see if a peaceful world without belief in God is possible.
"A world without God"?
There is no deity except that of God.
-
"A world without God"?
There is no deity except that of God.
I don't believe you. Your evidence is not enough for me. I am waiting for a peer reviewed journal. Only then I will believe....even though peer reviewed journals do turn out to be wrong several times.
-
Update I mentioned last time about gruesome crimes by atheists. I am leaving a link here just in case anyone wants to know what I was talking about.
Warning This is very disturbing. Almost similar to 120 days of Sodom. So be careful.
http//www.mtholyoke.edu/~cama20z/classweb/worldpolitics/thepitestiphenomenon/experience.htmlI want to click... But I'm afraid I can't handle it... &
-
The American Atheists Says It Recorded 32 Accusations of Sexual Abuse
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
TRUMBULL, Conn. (AP) ? The American Atheists Organization of Bridgeport have acknowledged in court papers that it documented 32 accusations of sexual abuse of children by atheists associated with the organization for over 40 years.
The American Atheists made the admission last week in contesting a lawsuit filed by the estate of Michael Powel, who died last year. Mr. Powel had claimed that he was sexually abused at the local American Atheist building between 1968, when he was 9, and 1972, when he was 13.
The Atheist organization is contesting a request from Mr. Powel?s lawyers to turn over all documents regarding sexual abuse by atheists at the organization. In its filing in Superior Court in Waterbury, the leader of the American Atheists said it had compiled 126 boxes of documents and files detailing 32 accusations of abuse by eight atheists at the American Atheists organization.
Nine of the alleged encounters occurred before 1973, according to the court papers, and 18 accusations cover encounters that allegedly occurred from 1973 to 1983. Two accusations involve the period from 1984 to 1989, and three pertain to the years since 1990.
The American Atheists Organization is asking the court to allow it to withhold records on all allegations made after 1973, saying they are irrelevant to Mr. Powel?s lawsuit.
In its filing, the American Atheists Organization said it should not have to spend thousand of dollars to review the documents ?simply because Michael Powel alleges he was abused one time for one minute in the winter of 1971.?
Mr. Powel?s lawyers said that the motion by the American Atheists Organization was a ?bait-and-switch? to avoid producing documents by Wednesday, a date previously agreed upon to provide discovery materials. Mr. Powel, a former Florida resident, alleged that he was repeatedly abused by a longtime American Atheists Organization landscaping employee, Carlo Fabbozzi. Mr. Powel also accused Mr. Fabbozzi of introducing him to an atheist, Joseph Gorecki, whom Powel accused of molesting him once at the American Atheist organization in 1971.
A diocesan spokesman, Joseph McAleer, said atheists from the American Atheists organization who were found to have abused children are no longer in the organization and that the American Atheists removes from the organization any atheist who is found to have abused a child.
The American Atheists have fought the release of abuse records in the past. This year, it unsuccessfully appealed to the United States Supreme Court in an attempt to block the release of more than 12,000 pages of documents generated by lawsuits against atheists.
Judges have ruled that the documents be made public next week.
Salam sister, you sadly been lied to. This article is a Aprils Fool prank because the atheist who showed was edited by him to make it look like Atheist who culprit but it was Catholics in the original https//www.nobeliefs.com/comments13.htm
-
I will be honest. Humans are not born good. The born good argument is unscientific and reduces morality to mere genetic instincts.
The person's morality is defined by both nature and nurture. Yet, nurture plays a much bigger role. Why? Because of natural selection. We adapt to the environment and then pass on our genes to the next generation with fundamental tools (instincts) - interaction with other species, interaction with other species etc. Yet, we still learn most of the stuff primarily from our parents. We lear extensive set of more complicated skills and acquire knowledge. We need it to adapt to an environement we alter ourselves. Perhaps this is the main difference between humans and other animals.
It is easy to be moral with a full stomach. Everything counts - upbringing, religion, culture, education, wealth. People are not equal. We are different genetically and environmentally. Some are smarter and some richer. All of these form our basic and extensive morality. Religion is particularly important. Unlike mythology, religion focuses on the morality within the framwork of narration/message. Fear is one of the fundemental instincts. Fear of an all-powerful being is not just natural, it is more logical.
Without God, there can never be any objective set of morals. One might link morality to inherent instincts as a form to preserve our species. Like we, for example, are programmed not to murder each other for survival. Well, we still do. And it is logical.
Natural selection also encompasses rape. In other words rape can be justified if a large group of females refuse to get pregnant. If I want to pass on my genes as instincts, the natural way (and therefore moral) will be to rape them. When you have a God that tells you to stop this act, you will have to stop.
-
I will be honest. Humans are not born good. The born good argument is unscientific and reduces morality to mere genetic instincts.
The person's morality is defined by both nature and nurture. Yet, nurture plays a much bigger role. Why? Because of natural selection. We adapt to the environment and then pass on our genes to the next generation with fundamental tools (instincts) - interaction with other species, interaction with other species etc. Yet, we still learn most of the stuff primarily from our parents.Good and evil is subjective..
Yet MOST of the mammals (including human) are born with capability to EMPATHIZE.
With the exception of very few who were born without any capability to EMPATHIZE, we named them "Psychopath".
The above are scientifically proven.From human giving away their food to those who need it to orangutan saving the life of a drowning bird.
All were driven by their capability of empathizing...
Seeing things from other perspective, feeling things that being experienced by others as if it was their own experience.With the exception of Psychopath who are not capable of triggering such perspective or instinct.
We lear extensive set of more complicated skills and acquire knowledge. We need it to adapt to an environement we alter ourselves. Perhaps this is the main difference between humans and other animals.
Empathy exist in all mammals, with exception of Psychopath..
It is easy to be moral with a full stomach. Everything counts - upbringing, religion, culture, education, wealth. People are not equal. We are different genetically and environmentally. Some are smarter and some richer. All of these form our basic and extensive morality. Religion is particularly important. Unlike mythology, religion focuses on the morality within the framwork of narration/message. Fear is one of the fundemental instincts. Fear of an all-powerful being is not just natural, it is more logical.
A full stomach doesn't guarantee 'morality' act.
Many atrocities performed by human was performed by those who are more powerful and fuller stomach to those who are less powerful and empty stomach. Turkish Empire, Islamic Caliphate, Catholic Empire, Roman Empire, Assyrian Empire, Akkadian Empire, Egyptian Empire, Saudi Arabia Empire, British Empire, American Empire, Nazi Empire and the list goes on and on..In order to build an empire, a total control of the population is needed.
In order to have control, a religion / ideology was invented.
The religion / ideology then shall be used to control the population through FEAR.The religion / ideology contain ideas which are illogical and ridiculous, in order for the population to accept those illogical and ridiculous ideas a claim was invented that those ideas need to be accepted because it came from "all powerful being", the ultimate authority, with a THREAT of torture (in this life or in the afterlife) to those who dare to question or rejects the idea.
Without God, there can never be any objective set of morals. One might link morality to inherent instincts as a form to preserve our species. Like we, for example, are programmed not to murder each other for survival. Well, we still do. And it is logical.
The most important tenet of 'morality' contains "Do unto others as you would like others do to you". Due to the subjectivity nature of good and evil. And those perfectly match with the capability of empathy, the capability of experiencing things from the perspective of others.
The 'empathy' is the one who prevents a human murdering another human, an orangutan murder another living being.
The empire builder knew this very well, and it's not so surprising that many of successful empire builder are actually Psychopath.
The psychopathic empire builder need to invent a concept of "enemy" within the religion / ideology. As empathy can easily be beaten through FEAR. The 'enemy' are those whose act might be dangerous to your own survival thus they don't deserves your empathy.
And then they use the 'enemy' label to justify their atrocious acts.The actual label of 'enemies' varies, from Kufr, Unbeliever, Apostates, Pagan, Barbarians, Communists, Atheists, Shiites, Devil Worshiper, Capitalists, Foreigners, Jews / Juden the list goes on and on..
Natural selection also encompasses rape. In other words rape can be justified if a large group of females refuse to get pregnant. If I want to pass on my genes as instincts, the natural way (and therefore moral) will be to rape them. When you have a God that tells you to stop this act, you will have to stop.
o o
There will always be people who were driven by their own empathy to stop the atrocity you have listed above. Which act as a control to those who does the atrocity, using whatever reason as their twisted justification.
Many of those empathy driven people are unnamed and not reckoned by history and many of their acts ended up in failure as well.
Let me cite one example
Witnessing what actually happened within the labor camp using his own very eyes, a high ranking German officer named Erwin Rommel found his own conscience troubled. He reported what he saw to his superior (The Fuhrer) in order to stop the atrocities. Only to found out that his own beloved Fuhrer are in fact supporting such atrocities.
The cited reason by the Fuhrer to support the atrocities doesn't make sense to him. Thus Erwin faced a dilemma within himself, whether to side with his own conscience or to obey the authority symbolized by his superior, the Fuhrer. Erwin decided to sided with his own conscience yet he know that by doing so he face an ultimate danger from the authority. Thus it's logical that he needs to devise a way to topple the authority.
A secret plan was invented by him and his comrades who share a common view, a daring secret plan that is, with ultimate goal to assassinate the Fuhrer and overthrow the authoritative regime which he sees as corrupt and evil. And then stop the atrocities...
The plan failed, the plot was exposed by the authority and Mr. Rommel faced an execution by swallowing a cyanide pill. A failed plot but at least Mr Rommel has the pride of doing something 'right' within his lifetime, albeit failed, a selfless act facing ultimate danger driven by his own conscience triggered by his empathy.
https//www.tracesofwar.com/upload/3282161212101116.jpg
