Is atheism a threat to humanity?

[Nakosis]

Before starting this topic, let me say this: I know that atheists may say the opposite is true. Although this thread is not to discuss its topic in relation to religion, let me only give this example: during the golden age of the Islamic empire, despite what many people may think, the majority of the citizens of that empire were non-Muslims!

The Christians, the Jews, and the Zoroastrians, were all allowed to keep their lands in their hands and keep their places of worship, and were not enforced convert to the new religion. The tax (Jizya) they were paying was marginal compared to the hefty taxes they were used to pay to the Roman and Pertain empires. Indeed that is why many of the citizens of those empires have welcomed and even supported the newcomers. And if it was not for this support, the small number of Muslim Bedouins and other Arabs with their ill equipped forces and poor strategies would not have been able to defeat the two great world powers of that time.

Now, let us return to our main topic, there is a real inherent ethical problem with atheists. They have no red lines coming from an outside source, such as religion. So they follow their own minds, While we all know that the human minds are limited. and humans are weak in nature, and their decisions may influenced by many factors. Even the opinions of the masses may be misguided by some evil powers.

What do you think?!

I don't think it is really any different for religious folks in that they are also only following their own minds. In the case of believers, they only assume their morality comes from an outside source.

You have red lines, we have read line. We just see them as coming from the same source.

 

[blü 2]

there is a real inherent ethical problem with atheists. They have no red lines coming from an outside source, such as religion.

Unbelievers have what religionists have but like to attribute to their gods: an evolved morality appropriate to living as a gregarious primate, and an acquired / cultural morality that fills in the gaps.

Our evolved moral tendencies, found in all cultures, are child nurture and protection, dislike of the one who harms, like of fairness and reciprocity, respect for authority, loyalty to the group, and a sense of self-worth or virtue through self-denial.

So you can see why (for example) the golden rule is articulated very early in human history.

Also in our evolved kit are a conscience ─ the feeling that some of our moral views have universal application, even though the views are personal to the holder ─ and mirror neurons, which allow us to look at the world through our neighbor's eyes (though whether this is due to mirror neurons is sometimes disputed).

We acquire the rest of our morality from our upbringing, culture, education and experience ─ how to wash, dress, eat in company, excrete, relate to others in our society, to strangers, to the opposite sex, customs for wedding, for naming children, for funerals; whether at a wedding a bride-price, a dowry, neither, is required; and so on.

So they follow their own minds,

I love your implication that religionists don't.

While we all know that the human minds are limited. and humans are weak in nature, and their decisions may influenced by many factors. Even the opinions of the masses may be misguided by some evil powers.

One of the functions of religion has been to define to each person his or her identity as a member of a tribe ─ along with having language, stories, heroes, customs, &c in common. Sports fans have similar ways of identifying with their teams and with each other. Evil powers are a matter of where you stand. Religions have always been great promoters of the sin of religious intolerance, and while it's true (as you say) that there was a Golden Age of learning and toleration under the early caliphs, that was after they'd conquered others.

The thing about religion is that either there really are millions of gods, at least one per person, or gods are constructs of human imagination and the evolved human instinct to answer unanswerable questions about nature, luck, death &c. The demonstration is easy: if there were one god, or one single society of gods, then all the world's religions would reflect that. Gods wouldn't be tribal, they'd be the common denominator of all humans, and the disputes would be minor. Nothing in human history, nothing in the world today, shows anything like that.

There's the further problem that gods are indeed imaginary, which is why they neither say nor do, all their messages being told to us by our fellow humans. Have you noticed that there's no definition of a real god, such that if we found a real suspect we could tell whether it were god or not? Words like 'spiritual', 'supernatural' and 'immaterial' are all synonyms for 'imaginary'. If you disagree, please tell me the objective test which will distinguish the supernatural (&c) from the imaginary.

 

[Link]

Before starting this topic, let me say this: I know that atheists may say the opposite is true. Although this thread is not to discuss its topic in relation to religion, let me only give this example: during the golden age of the Islamic empire, despite what many people may think, the majority of the citizens of that empire were non-Muslims!

The Christians, the Jews, and the Zoroastrians, were all allowed to keep their lands in their hands and keep their places of worship, and were not enforced convert to the new religion. The tax (Jizya) they were paying was marginal compared to the hefty taxes they were used to pay to the Roman and Pertain empires. Indeed that is why many of the citizens of those empires have welcomed and even supported the newcomers. And if it was not for this support, the small number of Muslim Bedouins and other Arabs with their ill equipped forces and poor strategies would not have been able to defeat the two great world powers of that time.

Now, let us return to our main topic, there is a real inherent ethical problem with atheists. They have no red lines coming from an outside source, such as religion. So they follow their own minds, While we all know that the human minds are limited. and humans are weak in nature, and their decisions may influenced by many factors. Even the opinions of the masses may be misguided by some evil powers.

What do you think?!

Religions follow things blindly so they end up through that method believing some worse morals than Atheists would ever come up with. Atheists on the other hand lack a lot of insights from religions. I think Atheists are right with a lot of things. I also see a lot of truth in religions.

I think us picking and choosing like cafeteria from religions and guidance is also of no good.

So what is the way to truth and what is the guidance? I believe it's not that way or that way, but calmly submit to the tree of light from God.

The problem today, is no one is upon the middle way, where we don't rely on the Prophets and Messengers blindly but seek insights from them and seek to verify all we attribute to them. No sect or religion or group of people right now only attributes God 100% what they know.

Quran and Ahlulbayt in theory would guide us to the right path, but we follow scholars and their methods like ilmel rijaal and their way of understanding religion, which has left us attributing God some great evils.

Atheists are smarter then Deists in many respects, they know if God exists, he would guide humans, and so don't see the guidance anywhere, and have given up on God as a result. Deism that believes a God that is silent and just watches, which I followed for 5 years, is just as evil as Atheism, which is just as evil as all religions including the one I subscribe to at the moment.

I'm actually thinking I'm better off not saying I'm either Muslim or Shiite because all the none-sense attribute by Muslim and Shiites to God is then thought with me.

 

[We Never Know]

Before starting this topic, let me say this: I know that atheists may say the opposite is true. Although this thread is not to discuss its topic in relation to religion, let me only give this example: during the golden age of the Islamic empire, despite what many people may think, the majority of the citizens of that empire were non-Muslims!

The Christians, the Jews, and the Zoroastrians, were all allowed to keep their lands in their hands and keep their places of worship, and were not enforced convert to the new religion. The tax (Jizya) they were paying was marginal compared to the hefty taxes they were used to pay to the Roman and Pertain empires. Indeed that is why many of the citizens of those empires have welcomed and even supported the newcomers. And if it was not for this support, the small number of Muslim Bedouins and other Arabs with their ill equipped forces and poor strategies would not have been able to defeat the two great world powers of that time.

Now, let us return to our main topic, there is a real inherent ethical problem with atheists. They have no red lines coming from an outside source, such as religion. So they follow their own minds, While we all know that the human minds are limited. and humans are weak in nature, and their decisions may influenced by many factors. Even the opinions of the masses may be misguided by some evil powers.

What do you think?!

Humanity is a threat to humanity.

 

[SalixIncendium]

What do you think?!

I'm wondering if anyone else finds irony in the OP.

If I'm going to vote for what 'ism' is a threat to humanity, I'll cast my vote for egoism.

Judgment of others is a product of the ego. I think if anything is a threat to humanity, it's the validation of actions based on self-interest.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Before starting this topic, let me say this: I know that atheists may say the opposite is true. Although this thread is not to discuss its topic in relation to religion, let me only give this example: during the golden age of the Islamic empire, despite what many people may think, the majority of the citizens of that empire were non-Muslims!

The Christians, the Jews, and the Zoroastrians, were all allowed to keep their lands in their hands and keep their places of worship, and were not enforced convert to the new religion. The tax (Jizya) they were paying was marginal compared to the hefty taxes they were used to pay to the Roman and Pertain empires. Indeed that is why many of the citizens of those empires have welcomed and even supported the newcomers. And if it was not for this support, the small number of Muslim Bedouins and other Arabs with their ill equipped forces and poor strategies would not have been able to defeat the two great world powers of that time.

Now, let us return to our main topic, there is a real inherent ethical problem with atheists. They have no red lines coming from an outside source, such as religion. So they follow their own minds, While we all know that the human minds are limited. and humans are weak in nature, and their decisions may influenced by many factors. Even the opinions of the masses may be misguided by some evil powers.

What do you think?!

Your last sentence answered your question. The masses ( which would be fair to say MOST of humanity ), are influenced by the minute
to do most of the horrible atrocities of inhumanity. They are influenced by what people call "evil forces". But the masses don't understand
that these "forces" even exist in most cases.

The masses are not in control of their own minds
There is a war going on for the mind of man,
the battleground is the mind, the war is spiritual,
an the "enemy" is US ….ourselves.

Because we don't KNOW ourselves,
THIS is what "gnosis" (Gnosticism) is about

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Your last sentence answered your question. The masses ( which would be fair to say MOST of humanity ), are influenced by the minute
to do most of the horrible atrocities of inhumanity. They are influenced by what people call "evil forces". But the masses don't understand
that these "forces" even exist in most cases.

The masses are not in control of their own minds
There is a war going on for the mind of man,
the battleground is the mind, the war is spiritual,
an the "enemy" is US ….ourselves.

Because we don't KNOW ourselves,
THIS is what "gnosis" (Gnosticism) is about

AND, also why most people hate my guts, lol
when you tell people you know them better than they know themselves, directly or indirectly, it strikes a nerve.
and I understand that nobody likes a "know-it-all"....

wait a minute, isn't God a "know-it-all" ?...hummm

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Before starting this topic, let me say this: I know that atheists may say the opposite is true. Although this thread is not to discuss its topic in relation to religion, let me only give this example: during the golden age of the Islamic empire, despite what many people may think, the majority of the citizens of that empire were non-Muslims!

The Christians, the Jews, and the Zoroastrians, were all allowed to keep their lands in their hands and keep their places of worship, and were not enforced convert to the new religion. The tax (Jizya) they were paying was marginal compared to the hefty taxes they were used to pay to the Roman and Pertain empires. Indeed that is why many of the citizens of those empires have welcomed and even supported the newcomers. And if it was not for this support, the small number of Muslim Bedouins and other Arabs with their ill equipped forces and poor strategies would not have been able to defeat the two great world powers of that time.

Now, let us return to our main topic, there is a real inherent ethical problem with atheists. They have no red lines coming from an outside source, such as religion. So they follow their own minds, While we all know that the human minds are limited. and humans are weak in nature, and their decisions may influenced by many factors. Even the opinions of the masses may be misguided by some evil powers.

What do you think?!

No - I do not believe that atheism is a threat to humanity.

I do - however- believe that Islam is.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

I'm wondering if anyone else finds irony in the OP.

If I'm going to vote for what 'ism' is a threat to humanity, I'll cast my vote for egoism.

Judgment of others is a product of the ego. I think if anything is a threat to humanity, it's the validation of actions based on self-interest.

well said..

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Humanity is a threat to humanity.

Only until we learn how that is true...

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Only until we learn how that is true...

I'm trying...

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I'm trying...

Then philosophy will help you a lot more than religion. Try Jacob Needleman, or A.C. Grayling.

 

[McBell]

So far it appears that the only thing atheism is a threat to is theists of weak faith.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Then philosophy will help you a lot more than religion. Try Jacob Needleman, or A.C. Grayling.

Can you tell me what "wisdom" is ?...and I'm just asking your understanding.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Can you tell me what "wisdom" is ?...and I'm just asking your understanding.

And Christian Gnostics have no "religion", no creeds, no dogma, no priest, no BS......it's a "personal" thing.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Can you tell me what "wisdom" is ?...and I'm just asking your understanding.

In my own view, wisdom is what enable you to think and act using what you really know, what you've experienced, your own understanding and common sense. It's what allows you to use unbiased (that is, without using what you've been told but can't justify) judgment, your own compassion and your own experiential self-knowledge, and to do that in an ethical and benevolent way.

Wisdom, in my own view, is never, and cannot ever be, dogmatic -- based on "received insight." Wisdom can never cause unnecessary harm.

 

[Audie]

Can you tell me what "wisdom" is ?...and I'm just asking your understanding.

It starts with avoiding religionism

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

It stsrts with avoiding religionism

"Philosophy"...means "the love of wisdom", "philo"(love), and "Sophia" (wisdom)...
like "Philadelphia" (city of brotherly love)

"Wisdom" is Female, and the hypostasis of a real Being....the Sacred Feminine..
and the proper use of "Knowledge".
There is no knowledge without wisdom......she is the "mother" and in fact and in truth
as the Female aspect of the Living God, she is the one who is really "in charge".

"As above, so below "

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

And why gnostics treasure the "feminine" and see her as literally the half of the whole, and not to be exploited or abused
like in "patriarchal religions". Jesus and Mary Magdalen were a lot "closer" than religious scholars and historians can imagine.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Before starting this topic, let me say this: I know that atheists may say the opposite is true. Although this thread is not to discuss its topic in relation to religion, let me only give this example: during the golden age of the Islamic empire, despite what many people may think, the majority of the citizens of that empire were non-Muslims!

The Christians, the Jews, and the Zoroastrians, were all allowed to keep their lands in their hands and keep their places of worship, and were not enforced convert to the new religion. The tax (Jizya) they were paying was marginal compared to the hefty taxes they were used to pay to the Roman and Pertain empires. Indeed that is why many of the citizens of those empires have welcomed and even supported the newcomers. And if it was not for this support, the small number of Muslim Bedouins and other Arabs with their ill equipped forces and poor strategies would not have been able to defeat the two great world powers of that time.

Now, let us return to our main topic, there is a real inherent ethical problem with atheists. They have no red lines coming from an outside source, such as religion. So they follow their own minds, While we all know that the human minds are limited. and humans are weak in nature, and their decisions may influenced by many factors. Even the opinions of the masses may be misguided by some evil powers.

What do you think?!

It is fanaticism and disunity which is the real threat to humanity.