Ask an atheist (the second coming)

He's not a saint yet. He's just been beatified (sp)?
 
Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia regarding the history of atheism, which I found to be very interesting:

"Will Durant explains that certain Pygmy tribes found in Africa were observed to have no identifiable cults or rites. There were no totems, no gods, no spirits. Their dead were buried without special ceremonies or accompanying items and received no further attention. They even appeared to lack simple superstitions, according to travelers' reports. The Vedahs of Ceylon, only admitted the possibility that gods might exist, but went no further. Neither prayers nor sacrifices were suggested in any way."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism
 
OldSChooler88 said:
1. Who is your favorite Atheist? Mine is Douglas Adams.

2. Were you always an Atheist or did you start to become one at some point? If the latter, details would be cool.

3. Does being an Atheist make you sad that you will cease to exist after you die, or happy because you can do things strict religious people couldn't do, and not have to worry about punishment after you die?

1. Favorite?.. I don't really have one. There are several people who I really enjoy reading / listening to:
Bill Maher,
Pat Condell,
Tim Minchin,
PZ Myers,
Richard Dawkins,
Greta Christina,
Chistopher Hitchens (I love to hate to love him!)
Mano Singham
Sam Harris

All of these people are nothing more than well-known and well-publicized atheists. There is nothing inherently 'better' about these people than others, it's likely simply a result of them having either widespread media exposure or interesting blogs.

2. I was not always an atheist. I was raised in a good old-fashioned white church New England Protestant household. Church every Sunday, confirmation at age 14. But by the time I was supposedly 'confirming' the pact that my parents made on my behalf at my baptism I was already a disbeliever. I can't say there was a morning when I woke up and said 'Nope, Not Real'. It was more a slow realization. If someone, somewhere, really did turn water into wine, or 10 fish into 1000 fish, or whatever, then you'd expect this to be remarked upon all over the empire. Even if 'the man' tried to crush the story, it would have certainly lived on in folklore. But instead we only have some scraps from one tiny little tribelet. Doesn't pass the sniff test. Of course there was more to it than just one or two stories not being independently corroborated. But it was things like this that made me start to question the historical accuracy of the central text. Once you allow that some of it isn't true, then you MUST question the entire text. At that point, it's a simple matter of relating what the text claims with what we all see around us: No Evidence Of Gods.

3. I'm not at all sad that I will cease to exist when I die. I'm not sure I understand why anyone would feel otherwise - there has not been a single documented case of someone returning from the grave, so why on earth would you assume it's possible? I think it's much healthier to assume you're not going to live forever, and make the best of this one little life that you have; rather than pine and fret over something you have to reason to believe in. That's just lunacy in my book.

As for doing things that religious people can't do?.. Well, I sincerely doubt there's much that I do that religious people don't. The thing about religious people is that, aside from their irrational belief in make-believe gods, there's very little difference between them and atheists. They lie, they cheat, they murder, they adulter, they donate to charity, they lay down their life for a stranger in the street, they don't put poison in Halloween candy, they love their children, they hate their bosses - they are just like everyone else.

The reason I don't cheat on my wife isn't because a shepherd's deity proscribed it. It's because only a d!ck would do that. The reason I don't drink to excess isn't because I might slander your prophet's god. It's because it's not healthy for my body or my relationship to my family. The reason I don't eat beef isn't because your gods' cows are holy. It's because I get a stomach ache after eating a steak. But I'll eat fishes and pigs and lambs and goats and ducks and pheasants and chickens as long as I know where they come from. Not for kosher reasons, but for economic and food policy reasons.
 
Yeah, but if he exists, he won't look like that, he'll look like the guy Yoshua (or whatever his name was) who actually existed and was inspiration for the Jesus legend.

The blue eyes, blonde hair, was a later addition, I believe. Jesus did not actually look like that (if he existed, etc.)

I've never seen Jesus being depicted as blonde. Anyway, I am simply explaining what's my mind's picture of Jesus, based on the stereotypes I grew up with (not that I ever believed Jesus was god or something, but I've been in church enough to get this picture burned into my brain).

And this is why civilization(or maybe civ fanatics) is so awesome.

Why? I live in a society that's essentially atheistic. ~95% of my friends are atheists. If anything, CFC is far more religious than anything else I am in daily contact with.
 
Why? I live in a society that's essentially atheistic. ~95% of my friends are atheists. If anything, CFC is far more religious than anything else I am in daily contact with.
And what society, might I ask, is this?
 
What do you believe the intentions were of the writers of the Gospels (I'll go with those specifically) in writing those accounts of Jesus's life?

I'll repeat..question is to anyone.
 
Czech society. Or more precisely, that of below-30 urban middle class college educated Czechs.

In Sweden we're a large majority(despite, ironically, having no separation of church and state), one of the reasons I moved here.
 
In Sweden we're a large majority(despite, ironically, having no separation of church and state), one of the reasons I moved here.

Yes, from what I heard Sweden is pretty godless too. Where are you from, originally? (And I believe that the lack of a proper separation of state and religion actually contributes to the decline of religion, so maybe it's not such a bad thing after all...)
 
Yes, from what I heard Sweden is pretty godless too. Where are you from, originally? (And I believe that the lack of a proper separation of state and religion actually contributes to the decline of religion, so maybe it's not such a bad thing after all...)

I was born in the University of Virginia, however I grew up in Louisville. While I quite like both of those cities, certain aspects of America angered me.

Another reason for my Swedish immigration was my fascination with the native walrus and beluga populations.
 
I'll repeat..question is to anyone.

I think it was a serious attempt to record why their faith was the way it was. Each author had bias, obviously, but I think they had a true faith in what had happened and were trying to pass it on.
 
What were the intentions of the writers of Beowulf? It is a moot question.

Not really a good comparison there (although, I would argue that knowing the intentions of the author of Beowulf would be meaningful - sadly, we don't know who that was). The Gospels are considered, at the very least, an attempt to provide a picture of Jesus's life and ministry. Whether you think it is embellished or not, I think the question of why the writers wrote what they did is a fair one.
 
Not really a good comparison there (although, I would argue that knowing the intentions of the author of Beowulf would be meaningful - sadly, we don't know who that was). The Gospels are considered, at the very least, an attempt to provide a picture of Jesus's life and ministry. Whether you think it is embellished or not, I think the question of why the writers wrote what they did is a fair one.

I don't see why it is not an apt comparison. The chronicles of Beowulf could likewise be considered an attempt to provide a picture of Beowulf's life and experiences.

I don't know what could be the reasoning behind ancient writers. Perhaps they thought Beowulf/Jesus was divine. Perhaps they just wanted to share a story. Both tales were passed down many generations before being put into writing.
 
I don't see why it is not an apt comparison. The chronicles of Beowulf could likewise be considered an attempt to provide a picture of Beowulf's life and experiences.

I don't know what could be the reasoning behind ancient writers. Perhaps they thought Beowulf/Jesus was divine. Perhaps they just wanted to share a story. Both tales were passed down many generations before being put into writing.

What do you mean by many generations? Mark was written around 70AD and the other Gospels not long after (of course, the age is approximate).
 
What do you mean by many generations? Mark was written around 70AD and the other Gospels not long after (of course, the age is approximate).

My understanding was that most of the gospels of Jesus's life were written hundreds of years afterwards.
 
Top Bottom