Why Atheism?

[naomi24]

“Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.” Isaac Asimov

[nailit]

Havnt read all the posts (yet) but I fail to see how debunking the bible...which needs to be debunked...is a force for atheism?
Anymore than debunking the Koran or the Vedas.
Or on a similar vein, debunking Piltdown man is a potent force for the existance of God.

[naomi24]

nailit, it isn't about debunking the bible. The point Isaac Asimov was making is that, properly read, the bible debunks the Abrahamic religions.

[nailit]

Naomi, Ive read http://www.amazon.co.uk/Asimovs-Guide-Bible-Isaac-Asimov/dp/051734582X
And I agree, Abramic faiths need calling into question, That doesnt translate into atheism though which is the title of your original post.

[naomi24]

nailit, I’m not sure what you mean. I took the title of the op from Asimov’s quote.

[mibn2cweus]

Khandro
“When I do good, I feel good..." So it's all about you is it? How certain are you that when you feel you are doing "good", you actually are?
Would you not agree that most of the word's despots believed they were doing good?
22:55 Mon 03rd Nov 2014

All very good questions, Kandro. But I do respect others (no less then myself), until they prove undeserving and so do not wish to hijack the intention of Naomi's thread any more than I have already.

[grasscarp]

However, the question is what constitutes ‘properly read’ and why ought we to think that Asimov’s reading of the Bible was an example of a proper reading of it? What if his reading wasn’t proper and a proper reading was the opposite of his conclusion. That would then make it the case that, ‘Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for theism ever conceived’? Perhaps Asimov provided in more detail what this proper reading consisted of but if so, the atheists who cite it have never provided that context for examination. As it stands as a quote it is a demonstration of shallow thinking from Asimov and those who repeat his folly.

[Hypognosis]

///beso
goodlife //Even among the most “primitive,” that is to say, undeveloped, civilizations, there is found evidence of worship of some form. //

So religion is a stone age mentality then. Is continuing with irrational stone age practices something to be proud of?
23:00 Wed 29th Oct 2014
///

Superb!

Next time we're asked "Why atheism", by Goodlife, we can point him/her back to your post.

It's primitive and it is for the fearful. Also, I find being good, in hope of eternal reward, almost sounds like a variation on greed. We are all naughty children and, just like any other parent, who has to buy our good behaviour with promises of confectionery, God has to buy it with promises of perpetual paradise. Or… erm, threats of eternal punishment.

[naomi24]

Grasscarp, please demonstrate why “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for theism ever conceived”.

[naomi24]

Mibs, thank you. It's an interesting topic and worthy of discussion.

[Khandro]

Hypo;//We are all naughty children and, just like any other parent, who has to buy our good behaviour with promises of confectionery, God has to buy it with promises of perpetual paradise. Or… erm, threats of eternal punishment.//
Wise up! and please spare us the the juvenile cr*p, we are in the second millennium. Religion and biblical interpretation, apart from a that of a few of the seriously weird, just like the law, aspects of science and all other forms of human affairs, has moved on.

[naomi24]

^That warrants some serious explanation.

[Hypognosis]

@Khandro

//Wise up! and please spare us the the juvenile cr*p//

All that hellfire and damnation stuff was just a 17th century fad then?


Incidentally, I was trying to get across that the whole reward/punishment setup is juvenile. Childish, even. "We should be as little children" etc.

Are you conceding that it is so or can I take it that you mean my lampooning of it is juvenile?

[Khandro]

^ ever ready to oblige. When did you last go to a religious gathering? and if your memory goes back that far, did you hear any sermons on "eternal punishment"?

[naomi24]

Been to a Baptism lately, Khandro? The Devil plays a big part - and we all know where he leads us.

[Hypognosis]

@Khandro

//When did you last go to a religious gathering?//

School assembly would be the closest approximation to such a thing. I vaguely recall that A-level students weren't compelled to attend. So age 16,
then.

// and if your memory goes back that far, did you hear any sermons on "eternal punishment"?//

No. Like I said, that went out of fashion in the dim and distant past. Besides, it was "broad church" - neither CofE nor Catholic.

So, I'm left wondering where I got such ideas from. Dramatic portrayals of fervent priests in films and TV dramas, perhaps? Louis Theroux interviewing US Christian fundamentalists? The religious spokespersons in TV debates on Sunday mornings?

[Khandro]

Re, 23:21 ^ I seem to have overlooked a millennium! I meant 'third'. :0)

[Hypognosis]

//Been to a Baptism lately, Khandro?//

I've not been to a baptism at all. Not even my own. If I believe a certain movie, this is a baaaad thing and I'll be cut off from my closest family members if there's an afterlife.

There's 'encouraging' for you!

[vetuste_ennemi]

"I beg to differ, religion is connecting to a greater spiritual community and a shared sacredness, a basic human need which today's evangelical atheists are blind to. Humanity without a sense of the sacred would have died out long ago."
I may be missing something; can you explain more fully what you mean by "spiritual community" and "shared sacredness", please, Khandro? These terms, if I were to accept your definition of religion, would lead me to believe that religion should bring people together, not promote divisions among them. You do see how your statement might lead me to that conclusion, don't you? Yet this is not what I see to be the case. What's wrong here: my perceptions or your proposition?

[vetuste_ennemi]

Apologies, Naomi, for going totally off-piste with this post. Although you may find the Youtube interview interesting in its own right.
Khandro, I too am fond of Scruton, and, religion apart, share much of his conservatism. In this first of three he compares the different attitudes of the Christian and Islamic traditions to secular authority.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi-8hzhutXY

[Khandro]

v_e; //I may be missing something; can you explain more fully what you mean by "spiritual community" and "shared sacredness", please, Khandro?//

As that most brilliant of human beings Trevor Legget once pointed out to us at the Buddhist Society, London, If you search for the root of the word 'religion' you find that the 'lig' part is synonymous with the 'lig' component found in such words as ligature and ligament i.e. to tie, to connect to, or bind together.
All religions contain THREE fundamental elements; 'The teacher(s)' Buddha, Christ, Lao-tzu etc.) 'The Teaching' (The dharma, the scriptures etc.) and the 'Spiritual Community' - The sangha, monastic brotherhood, the congregation, and any form of shared experience of the sacred, and what Scruton refers to in my above quote.
All three It seems to me the atheist, being without any religion, is denied.