Things which could exist in a world without atheism

Theoretically, I think in a world without atheism, the following things could cease to exist:

*Rape, murder, child molestation, terrorism, violence (all of which are simply the practice of atheism and the exertion of the animalistic drives within mankind's subconscious - which atheism revels in).

*"Religious" atrocities done in the name of crass materialism, such as money and power (meaning the motive behind many so-called "religious" atrocities were in fact atheistic and materialistic).

If there was a way to forcibly remove any inclination toward atheism from mankind's psyche or DNA, it's possible that world peace could be achieved, and that the atheistic inclinations which lead to senseless violence, sexual deviancy, nihilism, and crass materialism and greed which is responsible for all war, atrocity, and suffering in the human condition could be eliminated forever.

Sadly this probably isn't possible except in speculation - maybe eventually sciences could isolate the genetic cause of atheism and have it removed from the human population altogether via genetic engineering, but unless that happens we won't be able to deal with these evils so easily.

 

If you lost your belief in God, would you be raping, murdering, etc? Is God belief the only thing holding you back? If so, please stay over there in that side of the border. Thank you kindly.

 

The basis for all Judeo-Christian religions is to inspire mankind to rise above it's inherent weaknesses.

I believe that every person on Earth, regardless of their Religious belief, or not, absolutely knows right from wrong, and far too many people consciously choose to do wrong, using any excuse they dream up.

 

Atheists have no moral code, the natural sciences have no applicable 'value system' therefore provides no pathway for moral codes, Stalin, Mao and other atheists in power proved atheist morals to the world.

 

Stalin was!___and he was the leader of a country, Help us understand what basis you are calling the OP a troll? Stalin slaughtered millions in his deity based religious purges, anyone that did not conform to his marxist atheism had a tasty lead lunch.Very unhealthy diet, none survived.

 

I just finished reading, Stalin, New Biography of a Dictator by Oleg V. Khlevniuk about a month ago. You are correct, Stalin was a died-in-the-wool Marxist, who was taught to be ruthless by Vladimir Lenin, and their goal was to USE socialism to force communism on everyone, because their ultimate plan was to cause revolts and take-overs across the world - by any means necessary. Near the end of his life, Lenin hated Stalin, but Stalin was much much smarter, and after Lenin kicked the bucket, Stalin made himself Dictator, and became a psychopathic mass murdering lunatic.

Those Marxists you mentioned in another thread, that flood threads with 50 posts of ignorant and/or vile nonsense, should read a book once in a while, to learn about exactly what they are supporting - not that I expect the education would change their minds - probably make them even more nutty...

 

Atheism and wickedness are two different things. Anyone can be wicked. And Atheists in general possess essentially the same higher attributes as theists. Attributes like a conscience, love, mercy, kindness and so on. Talking about God and quoting scripture doesn't make one a better human. Jim Jones, Jimmy Swaggert, James and Tammy Baker, and David Koresh come to mind. Not to mention religious radicals. I'll take an Atheist any day over these types.

 

You think well.

 

I do believe that you are correct....
and I also believe that amazing progress is going to be made over the next one hundred and sixty years according to what was shown to former Atheist and near death experiencer Howard Storm.



https://near-death.com/howard-storm-nde/

......

 

The most enthusiastic supporters of Operation Moses and Operation Solomon were Israeli Skeptics, Agnostics and Atheists..... many of the most religious Israelis did NOT want to rescue the Falasha Jews of Ethiopia and take them to Israel and give them citizenship and all the benefits of Israeli citizenship. Our being religious will not necessarily lead us to a high level of understanding of the Golden Rule.

Back in 1988 I was deeply religious....
but messed up in many ways and I am so glad that near death experience accounts assisted me to understand about straining out gnats... at the same time that we swallow camels?! I am guilt of being way off theologically..... but it was a learning experience.


https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/AboutIsrael/People/Pages/Operation-Moses-Israel’s-Ethiopian-community.aspx

 

Human rights has been conceived in the context of atheism/deism (a position that doesn't really exist anymore as it was). Human rights is the basis for most considerations of morality, we could pretend then that atheism triumphed from a moralistic point of view.
Would I really make this point. Not it's a simply rhetorical way of presenting things.

Judging atheism morality by the height of Stalin or Mao is as valid as judging religion as a whole by what ISIS did (or many more other religious slaughters (Albigensian crusade, acts of Conquistador) and so on.

 

Id have to ask what you think the defiition of "religion" is if that is what you claimed, since that post really does not make sense without a followup explanation.

 

I would be pretentious of me to pretend to define what a "religion" is, because as far as I know, it's a matter of debate for a long time.
Let's take an external source then :

 

which is why its necessary for you to define which version you are using to make sense out of your post.

Can we justify clone wars as religious in the sense you are using?

We could also talk about a more modern and recent clone war, when the zionist jews attacked germany. Im not sure ISIS is real.

 

In a world without atheism, people would invent a god who commands them to do such crimes.

Every God is a manifestation of human wishes and desires.
Man made God, not the other way around.

 

unfortunately no one can know your claim is true until its proven

 

The "Man-made-God"* theory is most plausible before other theories of God's existence. According to Occam's Razor, this theory is valid until there is a simpler one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

*) It's the most simple theory because it doesn't have to be proven that people have enough imagination to create a God.

 

The razor is only tool that can be applied in 'some' cases not when you attempt to use it as an excuse to bypass proving up your claim, neither is it a remotely accurate measuring stick of the correctness of evaluation since 'simple' is not a requirement of proof. Simplicity does not prove up a claim. Nice try though.

 

Insert Bertrand Russell here.

 

useless nonsense post noted

 

Yepp, it doesn't, but it shows us which one of the multiple claims is most probably true.

BTW, is there really a problem with a God out of human imagination? Is he less powerful than a God who is independent of us? I don't think so. As long as many people believe in Him, He couldn't die and His power is unbroken.

 

The cool thing about God is that the definition can be changed at will.

 

it "shows" no such thing, like I said it has limited application.
I dont care one way or another which side proves their case, I am agnostic because neither side can prove their case, and like most people not willing to change my position until one side or the toher can 'prove' their case. Good luck with your 'lets accept simple minded as fact' for the mere sake of being simple minded.

 

You don't understand. Truth needs a hysteresis and that's what Occam's Razor provides. Occam's Razor helps us evaluate various theories. You don't have to like it. But I take it for valid.

 

You said it, bro. God is just an idea if we break this down to its own muthafu**ing level. God makes believers happy but is irrelevant to all infidels. Simple, isn't it?