Does atheism scare you?

[ratiocinator]

And they would be wrong, of course...

Why "of course"? How is that any more than your opinion (based on your opinion about the bible)? I also note that you completely ignored my description of what an actual objective moral standard would involve (the first half of my post).

Although we know there are many twisted thinkers out there, could it be we are mis-communicating "defend" and its application?

I hate divorce but I can defend a reason for a certain divorce. God's standard is being lovingly faithful to your spouse and adultery while married is grounds for divorce even if you hate divorce.

Sounds good to me, anyway, and holds to the "love" principle.

And what do you imagine the equivalent justifications might be for slavery and genocide?

 

[Spirit of Light]

I have seen a lot of debate between atheism and religion, whether that is about the truth of it, morally and so forth.

However have noticed that in some of them, especially when it comes to the question of morality, that its not uncommon that an argument like "Without God there is no moral justification" or "without God nothing would prevent people from just doing whatever they want", just to clarify, I don't believe those people using these types of arguments (at least not the majority of them) make the claim that atheists can't be moral. But rather that this is an argument for the likelihood of God. Meant in such way, that atheists might claim that they don't believe in a God, but without one, there is no explanation or reason for objective morality, therefore God offers the best explanation, atheists just won't or are to ignorant to see the evidence. This post is not meant to be about morality, but rather how people view atheism.

So to those of you which are religious and believe in objective morality, would you be afraid of becoming an atheist, meaning that you fear you might lose some moral "control", or what to say?

If you for whatever reason, do not believe in objective morality as a religious person, I would also be very interested to hear, why that is the case?

(If you want a quick introduction to what Im talking about, this is a debate between William Lane Craig and Shelly Kagan, where William present the argument. Hopefully it should start the correct place at 22.45 and end roughly around 26.30 depending on how much you care to watch.)

Atheism in it self does not scare me A few atheists may have scared me in the past
Objective morality? I believe morality do have a highest set of Right and Wrongs. But that does not mean human beings will understand those sets of morality exactly the same. we are individual people with our own understanding also within religious practices. But then again its a huge part of the population who are not believers, and honestly some of those have often better morality then those socalled believers.
And some belivers have a very high moral code they follow in a righerous way.

So the answer to your questions is not black and white. it all comes down to whom you ask

 

[night912]

Murder = God command not to do it, God condemns

Slavery = God commands how to do it, God condones

What's the difference between the two?

I explained that twice before... have no desire to do it again.

But, one thing that is obvious... in one you are dead and in the other your are alive?

Since you don't have the desire to, so I guess it's up to me to explain it.

Condone definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary
Condone
- to forgive, pardon, or overlook (an offense)

Usage of the word, "condone" in a sentence: If someone condones behavior that is morally wrong, they accept it and allow it to happen.


So that means that God doesn't accept murder because he sees it as being wrong(except for when God does not), but God accepts slavery because he does not see it as being wrong. God commands that humans should not murder(except for when he does), whereas God commands that humans should enslave other humans and how to do it.

So we go to the law of firsts, or precedent, where God's commandments trumps any later commandments, exactly like what you've been arguing for. And yes, that most definitely includes Jesus, obviously the father came before the son, and the "New" testament, because the "Old" testament preceded the "New" testament, hence holds authority over it.

God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

But, one thing that is obvious... in one you are dead and in the other your are alive?

But just remember, that's just ONE of the things that's obvious. As for the other obvious thing, obviously it's been presented above. Which you have obviously ignored.