No God Exists: Why Should I Be Good to humans?
-
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
-
Things are taken care of the system in place automatically, you will reap what you sow, sometimes the reaction is more swift than we imagine and we will be powerless to react or sense. Can we get everything as we wish? as we get something we will find something we lost in the process. Common Goodness exists, yes God the common goodness provider exists.
-
Why should I not be good to humans?
The very question is prejudiced. It seems to take for granted that the "normal" behaviour should be not to be good to humans.
We are huamans, we do not live in a void we need other humans to exist, so if we do something against other humans the end point is we would be doing something against ourselves, since our very life depends on othr humans.
Of course, in particular that may be an average but the individual relationships can be very varied with other of our species and with the rest of the creatures and elements. And that is where morals come in. AS A GUIDANCE. We exist and we do not know where our run starts or ends or turns into something else. So WE GET GUIDANCE if we care to take it. If not the loss is ours.
Salaam
-
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
Thanks bro for the clarification. I suppose I mixed it up with elite atheists opinion that pedophilia isn't so wrong after all.
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.
Empathy exist in all mammals, with exception of Psychopath..
The problem isn't empathy, but how someone realizes where, when and how to use it. Sometimes it is just too late. Examples from Trump's supporters
Replying to @MrsPeel67 @realDonaldTrump
If trashing me for being honest brings you comfort please do so. I voted for this steaming pile of garbage, I regret it, and I am sorry for it. Trump has hurt a lot of people and anyone who helped him win deserves the abuse.Vick
@1LostBird
Apr 16
More
Replying to @realDonaldTrump
Wake up Trump voters, we've been duped. The recent attack in Syria was all for isreal and a completely staged false flag. I regret ever voting for this snake, who promised the exact opposite!Exceptional Detective
@TheExceptionalD
Apr 13
More Exceptional Detective Retweeted Partisangirl
Im glad youre okay. I contacted my friends via fb in Damascus and they were safe as well. This is so shameful to me. I regret voting for Trump. I will support Syria and Russia before I support bombing of civilians over neo-cons claiming "MUH WMDS" ever. Im sorry this happened@Rob_balboa
Mar 31
More
Replying to @realDonaldTrump
Shut up dunce. Your real goal is so apparent. your trying to get them to charge everyone sales taxes. your always out to hurt the people over your 10 year old rants. I regret voting for you since @seanspicer was told 2 lie about crowd size. New Republican President incoming 20/20https//twitter.com/trump_regrets
-
The problem isn't empathy, but how someone realizes where, when and how to use it. Sometimes it is just too late.
The point were
-
All mammals, including human, with exception of few psychopaths have an inbuilt capability of empathy which shall drive them to be compassionate, loving, caring. No religion is needed.
-
The psychopathic leader occasionally sprung up times to times to spread hatred towards other living being. They devise a religion to suppress the in-built capability of empathy within human. Thus enabling the psychopath to use the help of other human to do harm, torture, killing and destruction towards another human which has been labeled as "enemy".
-
-
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.
Why not just use pure reason? You don't need a peer reviewed journal to verify what is a matter of pure reason. Rationally speaking, you can't deny the the existence of an Almighty God. Consider the following topic
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9610345.0
