Atheists: Why Shouldn't We Follow Jesus?

[nasheayahu]

After all these centuries you Christians worship and you Atheists are still debating on rather this imposter ever existed???? The Christians confine themselves to the compiled Writings of Yashra'al by the their mother Church the Catholics and the Atheists confine the arguments base on just Land mass????

And you still have NO clue who this idoit jesus is????

im·pos·tor
NOUN

1. a person who pretends to be someone else in order to deceive others, especially for fraudulent gain.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Thank you all for your input. There seem to be three main groups of people here whose positions can be summed up with a sentence.

1. "Jesus isn't a good moral example to live by".
2. "There other figures who are just as good, if not better, examples to live by."
3. "I simply don't want to."

If you're in Group 3, then that's obviously your right and fair enough. There isn't anything else to discuss, I guess. Some of those who fall into Group 2 have listed some figures, but at least the majority of these figures seem to have some sort of very major issue with them, such as owning slaves or admiring bloody dictatorships or building weapons of mass destruction. Personally, I haven't seen any example that to me provides a better moral example than Jesus. For those who fall into Group 1, I'm interested in what makes you tick. I've seen some answers already, mainly focused on how if he isn't divine, then he seems bonkers. That's a fair point, though even if he did have some sort of mental disorder that would not take away from the actual moral philosophy itself. "Love thy neighbour" is still a good thing to follow, even if it comes out of the mouth of a schizophrenic.

Another criticism is Jesus teaching that thinking about "sin" is as bad as "sin" itself. The only example I know of where Jesus says this is in the case of adultery, where thinking about a woman lustfully is tantamount to adultery "in your heart". This is expanded on later in more general terms in Matthew 15:19-20: "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone". So if we put this together, Jesus is saying that retaining these defiling thoughts in our hearts without rejecting them will lead us to committing these particular sins. Not that having those thoughts is just as bad as committing the act.

The other criticism is that Jesus teaches that the oppressed merely put up with suffering for the sake of reward in Heaven, but I would like to see some actual basis for this criticism as I cannot think of or find any example where Jesus actually says this.

I happen to be in your category 1, I certainly do not think Jesus is a good moral example to live by. Let me give you several examples, directly from the New Testament:

• If your fig tree doesn't provide fruit for you when it is not fig season, then curse it so that it never gives fruit to anybody else, ever again
• If you are a slave, accept your lot with good grace, because there's nothing really wrong with slavery
• If somebody abuses you, let him abuse you again (a masochist's way of thinking)
• Do not consider tomorrow, don't save for the future, for your children's education
• Don't get married unless you can't control your libido, since you're all going to be dead soon anyway
• Don't work for a living, beg instead
• When people don't like what you're preaching, get really angry at them and curse them and call them names (Socrates was a much better example, much kinder to those who wouldn't listen to him)
• He cured a few sick and blind, and let multitudes of others suffer sickness and blindness -- presumably for his own selfish reasons (to win followers)...if I could cure blindness, I'd do it for everybody
• He elevated poverty and all things base as noble, and denigrated success as being distasteful to God (himself)

I could give you more, but I think that'll do for now.

 

[Underhill]

If I had to choose a fictional character to emulate, I'd probably go with Snake Plisskin.

I would have to go with "The Dude" Lebowski. But to each his own!

 

[viole]

Few would disagree that the life Jesus lived as portrayed in the Bible is a good example to live by. I would go further and argue it is the best example to live by, almost objectively so. To me, the questions often debated on these forums are almost irrelevant. It almost doesn't matter whether or not Jesus existed, or whether or not Jesus was the Son of God and performed miracles. We will likely never be able to know the answers to these questions definitively. If we die and our suspicions are confirmed that there is no God, will we have regretted living a life like Jesus did, leaving the world in a better state than when we entered it? I see no reason why that would be the case.

Too often, when atheists reject the hypocritical religious moral busybodies, the corrupt megachurch pastors fleecing their flocks, the outright crimes committed by some religious people and in the name of their religions, we tend to reject the concept wholesale without retaining what can be good about it. Atheism is just a rejection of belief in a god and therefore does not answer any moral questions; it isn't intended to. That isn't to say that atheists lack morality because that's not true either. But we tend to piece one out based on reason loosely based on the Golden Rule. But is this enough? I don't think so either.

Having a moral code based on reason is a good thing, but without the impetus to actually put it into practice in all situations, then we end up living our lives in cruise control at the whims of our desires. Most of us aren't terrible people. The harm we inflict on most people tends not to be intentional. Yet, we still harm others out of a sense of opportunity, out of a desire for justice or vengeance, or we still harbour hatred for others. By actively making an effort to live more like Jesus did, we might fall short, but the attempt would most certainly make our lives immeasurably better. So I pose the question again: Why shouldn't we atheists follow Jesus?

If everybody would follow Jesus, except me, I would rule the world. I would have the only problem of keeping pace with all those available cheeks to slap when they do not obey me.

So, go ahead.

Ciao

- viole

 

[David T]

Has anyone actually ever met an atheist wirhout a whole bunch of religious dysfunctionalism on there background? Frank loyd Wright said "I believe in god I just call it nature". I doubt a single atheist actually gets that and certainly most Christian"theological" can't they lack thebmeurology

 

[rusra02]

This implies that the Golden Rule was some new concept. It dates back long before that. The concept is seen in ancient Egyptian writings (The Eloquent Peasant). Confucius said it 500 years before Jesus came on the scene. "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself."

Of course it is not new. It is singularly logical in its simplicity and requires no belief of any kind.

I think it's interesting to note that Confucius' saying was not to do to another what you would not choose for yourself. Jesus, on the other hand, urged positive action, encouraging us to do things for others, not simply refrain from doing harm.

 

[Underhill]

I think it's interesting to note that Confucius' saying was not to do to another what you would not choose for yourself. Jesus, on the other hand, urged positive action, encouraging us to do things for others, not simply refrain from doing harm.

Sure, but the Egyptian version is similar and came roughly 2000 years earlier.

“Do for one who may do for you, That you may cause him thus to do.” – The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant

It could be that the Hebrews actually carried the notion with them from Egypt, or perhaps, as I've noted, it's about simple logic. After all, every religion on the planet offers similar sentiments.

 

[Jiggerj]

If you really think about it, what did Jesus in the bible do that would be a good example to live by? He said, don't worry about food, clothing, or shelter. In my book that would be the all-time worst advice any one could give. Yes, WORRY about those things; worry a lot about them!

Jesus forgave people, no matter the offense. Listen, if we turned the other cheek every day to those that are users (and always will be users) we would be sucked dry emotionally, physically, and financially. It's like saying we have no right to be angry, to hold a grudge against those that would abuse us at every turn, or to seek and work at getting what WE want out of this life.

There are way too many greedy, selfish, and just plain ignorant people in the world today. If we let them they would walk all over us and deny us our right to find our own joy.

 

[sayak83]

I think it's interesting to note that Confucius' saying was not to do to another what you would not choose for yourself. Jesus, on the other hand, urged positive action, encouraging us to do things for others, not simply refrain from doing harm.

The entire Confucius philosophy is about how to do and say things with other people (friends, family, elders, other members of society). You are like someone criticizing a doctor's surgery manual for only saying "whatever you do, don't kill the patient" instead of "go and save the patient" when every other sentence of that 1200 page manual is actually about how to save the patient!

 

[David T]

Atheists aren't already followers of Jesus? That's a novel idea I haven't thought of. Their isn't such a thing as atheism without theism so if atheism only exists as an aspect of theism how are atheists not followers of Jesus? The earliest atheists in Christianity would have been the large minority Arianists at the nicene Council. The modern version of the councils "is divine not divine" debate is just manifested into new linguistic clothing theism vs naturalism is all not much has changed at all except the clothing. I mean I have yet to ever hear a single “atheist“ ever give an Interestingly insightful view to the text (and I would say the same for all theologians) nor have I ever heard a single atheist ever question theists understanding of the word “god“. 0every atheist I have ever heard talk all assumes theists understand the topic!!! There is virtual zero evidence only fractions of proof historically, and mountains of emperically evidence that says that theists do not even understand the topic.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think it's interesting to note that Confucius' saying was not to do to another what you would not choose for yourself. Jesus, on the other hand, urged positive action, encouraging us to do things for others, not simply refrain from doing harm.

Are you sure that's such a good thing? The masochist would like you to hurt him, so are you suggesting that he should "do unto others as he would have them do unto him?" That is, should he deliberately go out and hurt people because he'd like them to do it to him?

It can never be correct to assume that others want what you want. They very often don't! I have, therefore, always preferred the negative formulation of the Golden Rule. It may leave out one or two good deeds, but it at least tries to ensure that you won't do to anybody what is hateful to yourself.

 

[fantome profane]

FWIW, I generally take "give to Caesar what is Caesar's, give to God what is God" as a coded way of telling a Jewish audience to give nothing to Caesar (since they would have thought that everything belongs to God, leaving nothing for Caesar) in a way that wouldn't have gotten him arrested by any Roman troops or administrators who happened to be listening.

Yes, but I think the second part is more significant. Give to God that which belongs to God. To a first century Jew the thing that belongs to God, the thing that needs to be given back to God was Isreal - "The Kingdom of God". It was a coded way of saying the Roman occupation of Isreal needs to come to an end.

At least that is how I read it.

 

[Milton Platt]

Few would disagree that the life Jesus lived as portrayed in the Bible is a good example to live by. I would go further and argue it is the best example to live by, almost objectively so. To me, the questions often debated on these forums are almost irrelevant. It almost doesn't matter whether or not Jesus existed, or whether or not Jesus was the Son of God and performed miracles. We will likely never be able to know the answers to these questions definitively. If we die and our suspicions are confirmed that there is no God, will we have regretted living a life like Jesus did, leaving the world in a better state than when we entered it? I see no reason why that would be the case.

Too often, when atheists reject the hypocritical religious moral busybodies, the corrupt megachurch pastors fleecing their flocks, the outright crimes committed by some religious people and in the name of their religions, we tend to reject the concept wholesale without retaining what can be good about it. Atheism is just a rejection of belief in a god and therefore does not answer any moral questions; it isn't intended to. That isn't to say that atheists lack morality because that's not true either. But we tend to piece one out based on reason loosely based on the Golden Rule. But is this enough? I don't think so either.

Having a moral code based on reason is a good thing, but without the impetus to actually put it into practice in all situations, then we end up living our lives in cruise control at the whims of our desires. Most of us aren't terrible people. The harm we inflict on most people tends not to be intentional. Yet, we still harm others out of a sense of opportunity, out of a desire for justice or vengeance, or we still harbour hatred for others. By actively making an effort to live more like Jesus did, we might fall short, but the attempt would most certainly make our lives immeasurably better. So I pose the question again: Why shouldn't we atheists follow Jesus?

should you follow a guy that was so annoying he was nailed to a piece of wood?

 

[Revoltingest]

should you follow a guy that was so annoying he was nailed to a piece of wood?

I don't follow him, but I don't find him that annoying either.

 

[corynski]

Few would disagree that the life Jesus lived as portrayed in the Bible is a good example to live by. I would go further and argue it is the best example to live by, almost objectively so. To me, the questions often debated on these forums are almost irrelevant. It almost doesn't matter whether or not Jesus existed, or whether or not Jesus was the Son of God and performed miracles. We will likely never be able to know the answers to these questions definitively. If we die and our suspicions are confirmed that there is no God, will we have regretted living a life like Jesus did, leaving the world in a better state than when we entered it? I see no reason why that would be the case.

Too often, when atheists reject the hypocritical religious moral busybodies, the corrupt megachurch pastors fleecing their flocks, the outright crimes committed by some religious people and in the name of their religions, we tend to reject the concept wholesale without retaining what can be good about it. Atheism is just a rejection of belief in a god and therefore does not answer any moral questions; it isn't intended to. That isn't to say that atheists lack morality because that's not true either. But we tend to piece one out based on reason loosely based on the Golden Rule. But is this enough? I don't think so either.

Having a moral code based on reason is a good thing, but without the impetus to actually put it into practice in all situations, then we end up living our lives in cruise control at the whims of our desires. Most of us aren't terrible people. The harm we inflict on most people tends not to be intentional. Yet, we still harm others out of a sense of opportunity, out of a desire for justice or vengeance, or we still harbour hatred for others. By actively making an effort to live more like Jesus did, we might fall short, but the attempt would most certainly make our lives immeasurably better. So I pose the question again: Why shouldn't we atheists follow Jesus?

Jesus wasn't a truth seeker to my mind, as I don't recall him questioning the existence of any god or goddess. And I never read where Jesus questioned where a 'god' could have come from, or why a god would create anything so stupid as this world, where every creature must eat another living creature to survive. And I don't remember where Jesus objected to killing witches, or wild teenagers, as 'God' demanded. There must be better role models than Jesus.......

 

[corynski]

Has anyone actually ever met an atheist wirhout a whole bunch of religious dysfunctionalism on there background? Frank loyd Wright said "I believe in god I just call it nature". I doubt a single atheist actually gets that and certainly most Christian"theological" can't they lack thebmeurology

David T...... And how would you know? How many atheists have you met? Excuse me but your statements are meaningless, and lack validity. Of course atheists understand what Wright meant, as our worldviews are likelier healthier and more accurate than religious believers whose minds are clouded with fiction, and can barely perceive reality. The fact that religious believers must never question the reality of their deity, or the historicity of their myths and 'holy' book tells us immediately that religious believers have only a distorted idea of reality.

 

[rusra02]

Are you sure that's such a good thing? The masochist would like you to hurt him, so are you suggesting that he should "do unto others as he would have them do unto him?" That is, should he deliberately go out and hurt people because he'd like them to do it to him?

It can never be correct to assume that others want what you want. They very often don't! I have, therefore, always preferred the negative formulation of the Golden Rule. It may leave out one or two good deeds, but it at least tries to ensure that you won't do to anybody what is hateful to yourself.

I think it is obvious Jesus was not talking about mental illness nor sexual perversions when he encouraged us to treat others as we would like to be treated. Rather, he was giving practical application to the second greatest commandment in the Law: "You must love your neighbor as yourself." (Matthew 22:39)

 

[Tumah]

After all these centuries you Christians worship and you Atheists are still debating on rather this imposter ever existed???? The Christians confine themselves to the compiled Writings of Yashra'al by the their mother Church the Catholics and the Atheists confine the arguments base on just Land mass????

And you still have NO clue who this idoit jesus is????

im·pos·tor
NOUN

1. a person who pretends to be someone else in order to deceive others, especially for fraudulent gain.

Eng·lish
ˈiNG(ɡ)liSH/
noun

1. 1.
   the West Germanic language of England, now widely used in many varieties throughout the world.

 

[skl]

Why follow anyone or anything real or not for any reason? Make your own way in the world. You do not have to pander to a man-made god, a Pope in a ridiculous dress or an idiot who gets nailed to a cross and the ancient book of children’s stories that are borrowed from older religions. Of course, if life is a bit tough for you and you cannot control yourself from committing crimes and immoral acts then it is ok to follow your god because it may save the rest of our society from you. One thing though, do not splatter your diatribe over the rest of us normal people like you crazy religious people always want to do.

 

[Paradox22]

Why follow anyone or anything real or not for any reason? Make your own way in the world. You do not have to pander to a man-made god, a Pope in a ridiculous dress or an idiot who gets nailed to a cross...

You are missing the point. Obviously he is not recommending that atheists follow Jesus, even though they remain atheists. That wouldn't make any sense. He is suggesting things would be better if people acted in accordance to the actions or teachings attributed to Jesus. We don't have to believe in Jesus to act in ways that are consistent with what the stories say about him. That's not to say I agree. I think there are better examples, but if the people who are most immoral would instead act in ways that are consistent with what is said about Jesus, then certainly things would be better for a lot of people. For example, I think the world would be a better place if members of ISIS started acting in accordance to principals that are attributed to Jesus. Whether or not he existed.