Exclusive: Prominent Atheist Warns Against Taking Bible as ‘Absolute Moral Truth’ & Answers More of Your Questions
- Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:03am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
This article is part of an ongoing Blaze series called, “Ask an Atheist.” Millionaire secular activist Todd Stiefel answers readers’ most pressing questions about faith and non-belief. Part One of the series can be read here, Part Two is here and Part Three can be found here. The fourth portion, which focuses upon some of the more philosophical issues associated with atheism is below:
Over the past few months, atheist millionaire Todd Stiefel has answered numerous questions from Blaze readers. First, he addressed some curiosities about his personal faith journey and atheism on the whole. Then, he dove into the Ten Commandments and the Bible, highlighting the issues he sees with Christian doctrine. And in the third installment, he spoke about the character of Jesus Christ, among other sentiments.
In this fourth set of questions, the interview series comes full circle, with Stiefel tackling some of the more philosophical questions about atheism and non-belief. The first inquiry in this latest set is, “Who are you and what were you made for?” The general nature of the question is fascinating, as is Stiefel’s short, yet pointed response.
“I am different things to different people,” he says. “I am a husband, father, brother, son, friend and teammate. I was not made for any special purpose (unless my parents wanted a tax deduction).”
Since atheists don’t believe in a higher power, the notion that someone would be created with a “purpose” isn’t something that generally resonates. This is likely why Stiefel added, “I give my life its own purpose,” as non-believers are truly the only beings in charge of their destiny since the Almighty isn’t a factor on their radar.
This, of course, is generally where theists counter that atheists, being in charge of their own actions, lack a moral framework through which to act. The general argument is that, without a God, relativism takes hold (i.e. an “anything goes” mentality).
“In a world with no supreme governing body, is not every moral principle and truth just relative?,” asked another reader. Stiefel responded, in detail:
My opinion is that some moral principles are absolute and some are relative. Committing genocide against random groups of people is always and absolutely wrong. On the other hand, hurting another person is usually wrong, but it depends on the circumstances, such as if it is done in self-defense.
One thing that concerns me is the dangers of taking morality from a supreme governing body. If Jehovah/Yahweh/God is the decider of perfect absolute morality, how can we know what that code is? We do not have his words directly, we only have what imperfect people say his words were. To me, having a religiously-based absolute moral code requires suspending the use of our own minds. It requires making the ethics of others our own morality without question. It makes us the servants of people like televangelists who claim to speak to or for a god.
Taking the Bible or Qur’an as absolute moral truth locks our values in ancient times and prevents us from learning from the mistakes of history. I am much more comfortable with the type of modern Christianity that does not take the Bible literally and attempts to put love first.
And it is this love and compassion that Stiefel claims he embraces in his own life. These qualities, he says, can exist within an individual regardless of one’s belief — or lack thereof — in a higher power. While he rejects holding holy books up for moral truth (considering his views on the Bible, this isn’t surprising), he does believe in a universal goodness, it seems, that can be present in any and all human beings.
One of the other questions he received from a Blaze reader was, “How do you feel that being an atheist affects your ability to have empathy for others?” Stiefel claims that he now has more empathy than he did when he was religious. This is an intriguing revelation — one that he attempts to explain by giving an example about his views on the poor and homeless:
When I was a Christian, I believed the poor, war-torn, sick and starving at least had the hope of heaven. Now, I realize those that suffer will not get a chance for bliss in an afterlife. They get one shot, just like I do. Believing in an afterlife made me feel less upset about their situation, and believing we have one life to live makes me feel more upset about their situation. This in turn makes me feel more compassion for them. I feel a much stronger urge to help them now that I see their situation as more dire than I saw it when I believed in heaven.
This is a fascinating answer and one that evangelicals, in particular, would meet with some criticism. Those who believe in heaven and in Jesus Christ would argue that they are motivated by compassion to act like Christianity’s central figure and to bring salvation to everyone, including those in need. And considering the heavy-duty charity work conducted by churches, there are arguments to make against this sentiment.
But, Stiefel isn’t necessarily making sweeping generalizations here. He’s merely sharing his own experience. He continues, remaining relatively fair-minded regarding overarching themes and generalizations:
Interestingly, a recent study suggested that atheists and agnostics may be more compassionate than religious people. I want to see more independent studies before I will believe that is true. What I would really love to see is data on charitable giving by atheists/agnostics compared to religious people after eliminating donations to groups that mostly provide services to ourselves or to promoting our own viewpoints. For me, that would mean not counting gifts to groups like Secular Coalition for America, American Humanist Association, and my local community, the Triangle Freethought Society. For the religious, donations would not count to their church or any charity that evangelizes. Now, that would be interesting information.
On the topic of charity, Stiefel was asked whether he would consider donating to relief projects that were founded or run by Christian missionaries (Stiefel has given millions to secular groups). He was, once again, pointed and honest in his response:
I would not donate to Christian missionaries, but have donated to relief projects run by Christians. The difference is in the word “missionary.” I have no interest in donating to efforts that result in religious proselytizing. I would rather my donations go through organizations that do not promote supernatural beliefs as part of their charity work. I do donate to Foundation Beyond Belief, and they give grants to many religious organizations, including Christian, that do relief work without evangelism.
Stiefel’s beliefs on the matter are clear. So long as the group isn’t evangelizing, he may considering giving monies.
The Blaze continues to invite you to post questions in the comments section, below. Are there any curiosities you have that weren’t answered in the first four parts of the series? If so, post them and we will include them in the fifth and final interview segment.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 688 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 536 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 458 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 374 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 333 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 302 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 313 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 211 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 301 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 302 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (491)
jordy2010
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:47amProminent atheist = oxymoron……………………but I’ve heard about Pope Benedict the XVI
Report Post »HKS
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:15amgot that, funny huh. like satin’s book be better, a real laugh er.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:19am” like satin’s book be better”
Probably more comfortable, if it’s made of satin.
Report Post »w5dxp
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:44amSince Yahweh, Jehovah, and Allah are all the same God-head, I hope everyone who believes in religious-based law is going to enjoy Sharia-based law – coming soon to a state near you.
The_Jerk
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 12:35pmHumanistic Judaism.
Report Post »http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanistic_Judaism
stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:03pm“When I was a Christian, I believed the poor, war-torn, sick and starving at least had the hope of heaven. Now, I realize those that suffer will not get a chance for bliss in an afterlife.”
Why is that a shock to you? Just because you’re suffering in this life does not somehow exclude you from moral responsibility or reconciliation to God for your sin! ALL HAVE SINNED and fallen short of the glory of God. ALL! That includes those who think they’re “good enough” to get into heaven on a technicality! They’ve sinned too. They are still accountable to God!
This isn’t a game where some are deemed better than others! ALL OF US HAVE SINNED! No one is exempt! And “not believing it” will not change your fate ONE IOTA!
That’s like standing on a train track in the path of an oncoming train and saying, “I don’t believe the train will hit me.” You can repeat that phrase as much as you’d like, but unless you move out of its path your fate is sealed!
The same is true with God. There is only ONE REMEDY for you and that is the shed blood of Jesus Christ!
“Well, I don’t believe that!”
Well, then don’t! But that still won’t change the train coming at you. God is NOT sitting up in heaven ringing his hands at atheists going, “Oh my, what will I do? They don‘t ’believe in Me’!”
He is God and He would be completely justified if He flung all of us off His planet because of our crimes against Him. It’s His love and grace that restrains Him. And thank Go
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:09pmGod has hands?
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:12pm“Taking the Bible or Qur’an as absolute moral truth locks our values in ancient times and prevents us from learning from the mistakes of history. I am much more comfortable with the type of modern Christianity that does not take the Bible literally and attempts to put love first.”
OH NONSENSE!
What? Has morality changed in 2000 years? I mean c’mon! Murder is STILL murder. Rape is STILL rape! Thievery is STILL thievery! What has changed exactly?? Mankind STILL refuses to acknowledge his crimes against God. He still commits atrocities and evil. He has STILL offended God and broken His law. NOTHING HAS CHANGED ONE BIT!
And of COURSE you’re comfortable with the modern church. The modern church is SICK! It does not even remotely REFLECT the early church! It has compromised with the culture which is a SIN! The Bible says: COME OUT FROM AMONG THEM (the world), and be YE SEPARATE! — not EMBRACE the sin of the world!
What you and so many like you are doing is INVENTING a god to suit yourself. You want a god that will affirm you in your sin and use your corruption as a basis for judging righteousness. Rather than attributing God with holy righteousness uncorrupted by sin, you’re wanting to affirm a corrupt culture using corrupt values! How in God’s name does THAT work??
God is HOLY, not you. God is perfect, not you. God is supreme, not you!
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:15pmThe_Doors_Of_Perception — Do you have common sense? If so, when will I know if you’re capable of using it?
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:19pmWhen I stopped believing in fairytales.
Report Post »Hollywood
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:19pm,or ANY other book for that matter.Just the FIRST sentence of the Bible, Genesis Ch 1 states the 5 tenets that account for scientific knowledge. In the Beginning: Time, God-Force, Created-Action, Heavens;Space, and Earth-Matter. Coincidental?? I think not. I pray Todd will have his eyes opened before it is too late.
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:26pm“Interestingly, a recent study suggested that atheists and agnostics may be more compassionate than religious people. I want to see more independent studies before I will believe that is true.”
LOL! Yeah, cuz it’s the ATHEIST who is setting up schools, orphanages, hospitals, homeless kitchens, et al around the world!
Need I remind you that ATHEIST governments are the ones that have been attributed with more murders than any other group!
It has been estimated that in less than the past 100 years, governments under the banner of atheistic communism have caused the death of somewhere between 40,472,000 to 259,432,000 human lives. Dr. R. J. Rummel, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is the scholar who first coined the term democide (death by government). Dr. R. J. Rummel’s mid estimate regarding the loss of life due to communism is that communism caused the death of approximately 110,286,000 people between 1917 and 1987.
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:29pmThe_Doors_Of_Perception — You mean when you stopped believing in reason and adopted the make believe world of science fiction?
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:40pm“I would not donate to Christian missionaries, but have donated to relief projects run by Christians. …I have no interest in donating to efforts that result in religious proselytizing….I do donate to Foundation Beyond Belief, and they give grants to many religious organizations, including Christian, that do relief work without evangelism.”
I’ve heard some really dumb things by atheists…and trust me they’re as unthinking a group of people as they come, but to say I won’t help a charitable group who feeds the orphan and hungry because they tell them that Jesus loves them and will sustain them in their time of need is ridiculously insane.
So, I’ll let people starve simply because they choose to share Christ with the hungry!
And need I point out the utter HYPOCRISY of the atheist worldview in regard to charity? Charity? These are the guys that have tried to convince us through their science fiction stories that we are simply blind pitiless matter — that we are no more valuable than a slug! And THEN they want to turn around and try and convince us that they’ve developed a conscience (something that can’t be explained in a material only universe) and now want to feed their fellow man (or should I say “fellow matter”)?
Yeah, OK! I‘m not suggesting that you can’t be charitable and an atheist; you’re being inconsistently hypocritical! Must be the “new atheists”. Hypocritical and contradictory!
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:53pmSo the real world is the unseen? Angels, demons, gods, devils, talking animals, miracles, witches, unicorns, pegasus, zues? But tangible things like science and recoreded history are fiction? Well at least we know were you stand.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:59pm@Stage9
“I’ve heard some really dumb things by atheists…and trust me they’re as unthinking a group of people as they come, but to say I won’t help a charitable group who feeds the orphan and hungry because they tell them that Jesus loves them and will sustain them in their time of need is ridiculously insane.
So, I’ll let people starve simply because they choose to share Christ with the hungry!”
This seems to be a false premise. If he is still giving to other groups, who do not spend their time and money on religious education and materials, does that not still help these people while being more in line with his own values?
My church has worked with a local university to set up a clinic in Haiti. While we are obviously religious (being a church group), the clinic is not: as per our contract with the university we must be secular. Are you saying that by donating to this clinic, rather than one that both deals in medicine AND proselytizes, that someone would be depriving people of medicine?
As long as he donates to a cause that helps people, I approve of his actions. While I consider Scripture good for the soul like medicine and food are good for the body, as long as people are willing to donate to those in need, I cannot say they are choosing immorally or acting “insane.” Can you?
Report Post »HappyStretchedThin
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 2:38pm@Stage9
Report Post »Stiefel’s not wanting to contribute to proselyting charities is not an example of hypocrisy. You‘re ultimately right that he’s missing a few logical links while pretending to be utterly logical-so in the larger sense, I get what you mean. But I think we owe it to people who don’t agree with us to suspend our judgment first, understand them for what they mean as objectively as we can next, then proceed to blow them out of the water and re-engage our judgment faculties, informed as they are with Christian truth. This is EXACTLY the courtesy Steifel denies Christians.
For example: the idea that believers in an afterlife are more prone to stall their aid is based on a complete misreading of our entire philosophy. He can’t come at us straight. We understand better than anyone that this life is a test, and it’s all we get, so, like him, we are motivated to do good with what little time we have. The difference is, that, in the absence of belief in a God to judge him at the last day, his motivations only aim for the scope of this lifetime. How much greater, then, the Christian who can fear for the eternal well-being of a soul to spend it in the service of his fellow beings? How much greater, then, the Christian who can pass up an earthly treasure for a reward of eternal worth in the service of his fellow beings? Steifel’s urgency is reduced to a much greater tendency for laziness than Christian beliefs, properly read, can produce.
stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 2:43pmThe_Doors_Of_Perception — Oh I’m sorry, that‘s right you’re God….you’ve scoured the entire universe…visited it beyond its breadth and width…and you‘ve concluded that because an angel isn’t standing above you…(beause you are the object of worship in your make beleive universe, and everything is subject to YOUR approval) then by gosh it must not exist.
There’s something you need to come to grips with. You, like the rest of us, are a nothing. You are a speck on a speck in the middle of a vast universe. The universe does not function according to your approval or disapproval. You are no more qualified to deny the supernatural than you are to affirm it.
You claim that there is no God, but in order to EVEN MAKE THAT CLAIM YOU would have to posses the infinite qualities of God. You would have to be all knowing. You would have to know beyond a doubt that nowhere in the universe God exists. You are trying to affirm a negative in the absolute.
In order to say that God does not exist, you would have to have checked under every rock, every canyon, every mountain top, within every molecule and within every nebula. I have reason to believe you’ve done no such thing. Yet, you claim to speak with such authority, leading the naive to believe that you have it all figured out — you speck on a speck in the middle of a vast universe.
But for arguments sake, let’s just give you your little piece of rope with which to hang yourself…
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 2:44pmThe_Doors_Of_Perception —
But for arguments sake, let’s just give you your little piece of rope with which to hang yourself…
So are we to believe that YOU (the speck on a speck…) is in fact God — that you have infinite knowledge in order to say that there is no one that exists with infinite knowledge?
Let’s go a step further, How could you possibly be real because according to you (God) God does not exist. So, GOD, if you do not exist, because you have said so, then you are simply a figment of our imaginations. You are contradiction of reality. You are a myth and therfore have said absolutely nothing. And since you’ve said nothing, we needn’t regard you any longer.
Report Post »Max jones
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 2:50pmActually the individual called allah is apollo. A demon from hell cast onto the earth and under a death sentence for leading a third of the angels into perdition….He is also called lucifer, baal, beelzebub, satan…..and a score of other names. Many people have only this putrid being to look up to, for they have no understanding of the truth, the Key of David and the Advent of Christ.
Report Post »To hide his supernatural identity he has worked over time to dilute the truth of human spirituality. Any one who does not accept Jesus as personal saviour is at this monster’s mercy. And a monster is what he truly is.
stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 2:56pmLOCKED — “This seems to be a false premise. If he is still giving to other groups, who do not spend their time and money on religious education and materials, does that not still help these people while being more in line with his own values?”
How in the WORLD is this a false premise??
He is making a judgment to feed one group over another simply because one is being told Jesus loves them. Now PLEASE tell me how THAT is a GOOD moral basis for charity??
My argument isn’t against his giving in general; my argument centers around his PREJUDICES against one starving group simply because they will be told Jesus loves them.
And furthermore, as an atheist he’s a hypocrite of the worst kind, for in one breath he calls us blind pitiless matter, and on the other he feeds those in need. On the one hand the atheist says, that we have no more value than slugs, and then on the other feeds the slugs.
He excoriates Christianity for living according to the precepts of the God which gave us those charitable words: “What you do to one of the least of these you’ve done to me”, but he himself has no moral basis for his own charity. He is borrowing from the Christian worldview in order to demonize it as not worthy as other charities!
Christians give because of love for people and because Christ “first loved us.” Why does the atheist give? To ease a conscience he does not believe exists? So others won’t call him a hypocrite? It certainly isn’t to help slugs!
Report Post »SumoMoses
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 3:04pm@Stage9
“So are we to believe that YOU (the speck on a speck…) is in fact God — that you have infinite knowledge in order to say that there is no one that exists with infinite knowledge?”
Wow! Talk about a straw man!
Here’s a little “Logic 101” refresher for you: It is not possible to prove a negative. That is to say, I can never prove to you that god does not exist, because I will never be able to demonstrate to you that I have “looked everywhere”.
However, before you go celebrating that concession as some sort of victory, please know that your rationale can be used to support any number of preposterous scenarios. Do you believe that Pink Unicorns exist? If not, why not? You can‘t prove to me that they don’t. Have you looked everywhere? In fact, you should probably play it safe and start praying to all of the Pink Unicorns out there, ya know, since you can‘t prove that they don’t exist.
The truth is, no serious atheist will make the claim that “I can prove that god does not exist”, because, again, it is impossible to prove a negative. The only thing atheists claim is that there’s really no compelling evidence to support the existence of a god. There is logically no more reason to believe in god than there is reason to believe in Pink Unicorns; and you don’t REALLY believe in Pink Unicorns, do you?
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 3:09pmHappyStretchedThin — he is not a hypocrite because he does not give to Christian charities, he’s a hypocrite because he gives to CHARITIES AT ALL!
The atheist claims that all life is nothing but blind pitiless matter. The mind is simply a chemical soup of actions and reactions. No one really knows what the letters within the soup will spell out for each of us. Murder might be right in one culture, wrong in another. In the atheist universe there is nothing but pitiless indifference, blind chance. Life in the atheist universe is as meaningless as death. Human beings are no more valuable than slugs they say. There is no rhyme or reason to it, we just are, and we “dance to our DNA”.
And yet here we have an atheist, contradicting all of that. Here we have a “charitable atheist”. At least charitable to those who aren’t dying as Christians.
Now the argument isn’t against his charity; GOOD FOR HIM! The argument lies in how he can defend charity AT ALL within his “blind, meaningless, pitiless, universe”. He steals the philosophical principles of meaning and morality and human value implicit within Christianity and then uses those values to defend his own charity while excoriating ours.
So, yes, I stand by my words; he’s an inconsistent hypocrite!
I suppose Christians aren’t the only ones right?
Report Post »JRook
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 3:49pm“The general argument is that, without a God, relativism takes hold (i.e. an “anything goes” mentality).” Look around and take note and you’ll find that believers are just as good as rationalizing their behavior. As noted in the movie The Big Chill, Where would the world be without rationalization, its more important than sex…… every go a week without rationalizing.” Witness the crap that is represented as reporting and factual commentary by conservative commentators, most who represent that are people of God and Fox News. If in fact the number of evangelicals and their influence is increasing you would expect to see a decrease in lying, tax cheats, stealing (investment bankers), killing (US war machine), etc. Is it anything goes or “We can cover and justify anything by associating it with God and the constitution.” Tough question.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 3:53pm@Stage9
“He is making a judgment to feed one group over another simply because one is being told Jesus loves them. Now PLEASE tell me how THAT is a GOOD moral basis for charity??
My argument isn’t against his giving in general; my argument centers around his PREJUDICES against one starving group simply because they will be told Jesus loves them.”
Again, this seems like a false premise. Do you give to secular groups that need charity? If not, then by your own criteria, you are committing the exact same “wrong” as he is. You would be “prejudiced” in giving to Christian groups as opposed to secular ones. Think of it this way: all other things being equal (the number of people helped, the efficiency of providing services, the group in question)… would you choose a Christian group or a secular group, or both?
As I said, if he chose to not donate at all, then I would agree that this is terrible. Instead he’s giving to a different group, not keeping his money in protest. If he is still giving to a group, and that group aligns with his values but still helps the needy, how is this wrong?
Report Post »Locked
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 4:02pm@Stage9
Reading your comment again, I think the confusion may be in the term “group.” The man in question said instead of donating to missionaries, who would then help a population of people, he would give to non-religious (or at least, non-proselytizing) charities to help a population of people. He is making a decision based on the charity that aligns with his values, not upon the people who will be helped.
At least that‘s how I’m reading it. Not sure if that was your source contention; it sorta seems like a “Well, of course he would?” moment. To give an example: would you donate to Planned Parenthood, knowing they help in breast cancer screenings? Or would you donate to a Christian group that does not provide assistance for abortion? In both cases you’re aiming to help women with breast cancer screenings; you are simply biased toward one group over another.
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 5:38pmLocked: “Again, this seems like a false premise. Do you give to secular groups that need charity?”
I have given to secular causes but those which contradict morality, no I do not. But then Morality is my standard, not prejudice. I would INDEED give to a secular charitable organization that fed the poor — the Red Cross is one! I would not give if they decided to promote something immoral.
But then, my Christian worldview is consistent. I am not to give to something that contradicts God’s Word nor promotes evil. Is Christianity promoting evil? If so, how?
I will say it one more time. It isn’t as much WHO he chooses to give to, I can respect that, it’s his choice, but that HE chooses to give at all is what I question!
The ATHEIST is NOT being consistent with his own worldview when he acts charitably. Again you’ve missed the point. In a world of blind, pitiless indifference, charity is a useless ambition according to atheists. He may give, but he is giving DESPITE his worldview, NOT CONSISTENT with it!
“The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.”
– Richard Dawkins
Why is your atheist buddy giving charitably? Why is he doing “good” to his fellow man? From what part of his worldview does he derive this fantastical pursuit in futility?
I’ll tell you how he does it: HE IS A HYPOCRITE!
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 5:49pmI wrote this in my last post:
“My argument isn’t against his giving in general; my argument centers around his PREJUDICES against one starving group simply because they will be told Jesus loves them.”
What I meant by this is that his giving is a good thing, I have no problem with that generally speaking, but there are inconsistencies within his worldview that contradict the concept of charity. I just wanted to make this clear.
So there are two problems:
1) If two groups are sitting before him, he would only give to the group that didn’t tell them Jesus loved them. Is this a moral qualification? Of course not. It’s simply prejudicial. That’s his only criteria for choosing apparently.*
2) His worldview contradicts charity in the first place! He can’t explain it within the parameters of his own worldview.
*Planned Parenthood may provide some good womens’ health care services, but at the same time they murder babies. Morally speaking, I would not give to them despite the supposed “good services”.
Report Post »Grubmeister
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 5:56pmSTAGE9
Report Post »I’m quite disappointed in your responses to Mr. Steifel. Your attacks make it clear you will never agree with his position. Worse yet, they reveal clearly that you will never understand them either. In trying to nail him as a hypocrite, you’ve shown me one more thing I can respect him for. It seems while you believe he should give to charity because he must, he gives because he chooses to. I think that is the difference between duty and love. Using your intellect as a weapon, you perform admirably as a soldier for your god. Mr Steifel on the other hand, having chosen to love others soldiers on to perform admirably.
I trust and respect who he had chosen to become more than who you have chosen to follow.
Drives Like Jehu
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 6:01pmWell, whatever else Todd Stiefel is, he definitely is a certified liar. He used the phrase “When I was a Christian…”; WRONG – one does not enter and exit being a Christian like a revolving door. IF one is elected by God the Father, redeemed by God the Son and drawn by God the Spirit, it is permanent. Those who reject Christianity were never Christians to begin with and therefore are not qualified to speak for it.
Report Post »stage9
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 6:12pmGrubmeister,
Really? So what you’re saying is that you respect that he is prejudiced? Many Christians give out of love and that turns you away?
Let me explian it another way….
If there was a natural disaster and I was able to give to only one family –a fellow Christian family or their atheist neighbor, do you really want to know how it would go down? If the fellow Christian was a true Christian, he would most assuredly tell me to give to his neighbor rather than himself.
Why?
Because he is being consistent with his worldview which says: “love your neighbor as yourself.”
What Mr Stiefel is implying above, that if faced with a similar situation he would give to his fellow atheist over the other family for one simple reason, they are Christians. He is not making a moral judgment, he is making a prejudicial judgment. And THAT is my point.
Report Post »db321
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 7:07pmThis Story brought to your by the Blaze’s own Billy Holliday. Get use to it Blaze Readers, this Holliday fruit cake has been posting Fake Articles with Fake Surveys on the Blaze for a few weeks now – unless you believe that 85% of Americans will vote for an Atheist or Muslim. Click Billy Hollidays name and look at the Garbage this guy is putting up, and it is happening right under Glenn’s and your eyes. I will fight Glenn to the the end on this one. I love Glenn to death, but Billy Holliday needs to go back the Satan’s Times and stop putting the phony demonic articles up on the Blaze.
Report Post »HappyStretchedThin
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 7:25pm@Stage9
Report Post »You‘re not really helping your argument when you don’t adequately show that you’ve understood the other side before blowing it to smithereens.
I recognize that you’re making steps when you cite Dawkins, and insist that Stiefel believes in a cold pitiless universe before showing that such a worldview leads inevitably to lack of compassion. You‘re right about that philosophy’s end result in Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. And you’re right to oppose it.
But it would be more convincing if you could recognize that Stiefel and many other atheists think through their own beliefs differently than those ruthless dictators. You could make room for what’s good in their philosophy (giving charity) and take their honestly held beliefs (that knowing there’s only one shot at life makes them prone to want to improve it for themselves and others) at face value before adding more truth and light (that ultimately being good is not enough, that if there’s a God of justice, we’ll all eventually fall short without the intercession of a Redeemer who they must accept to be saved, because anything less leads to trust in oneself and one’s material, and fails to move beyond the mechanics of science into the realm of explanatory power for material’s purpose that only religion can provide).
Just trying to help, and honestly get frustrated when people misrepresent someone’s beliefs (my own, and Steifel’s alike).
SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:13pmThe conundrum for atheist in regard to morality is this: where does their sense of justice and injustice come from, good and evil? If they claim that The bible should be disregarded because it was wriitten by men and not God then what is their morality based on if not man’s knowledge and judgments? Therefore moral relativism cannot be escaped and therefore no universal morality exists as is trying to be argued in this article and by some posters on this thread. Why would they engage in charity when they believe in evolution as the machine responsible for the advancement of humanity? Death domination and competition are the currency in the economy of evolution. Yet they engage in charity and other philanthropic activities, why? What even makes that good or desirable as an atheist? Because you believe it is? So what many have already trashed a book written by “men” and their assertion of morality as being invalid and dismissible. Yet base their belief system on the knowledge of man. Where does that idea of social justice and injustice come from? The issue is quite a problem of consistency within the belief system of atheists. I would certainly invite an atheist to debate this issue because it is quite an interesting problem in logic as I have read much on both sides of the issue and as of yet have not come across a satisfying explanation yet. In consistency an atheist should probably live for self not others. To do so actually points to a moral law giver.
Report Post »Quietinside
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:15pmWhat a fun game. Create beings with an innate tendency towards sin which they didn’t ask for, then tell them that “the wages of sin is death.” And then tell them you love them beyond what they can imagine…. Unless of course they don’t do what you want, in which case you’ll make sure they burn in an eternal hell fire. Truly an amazing love. Would any of you place that ultimatum on your own child? Can you fathom feeling the love you have for them in your heart and telling them about that love….and then saying “but if you don’t do as I say… I will send you somewhere to burn forever?”
Report Post »Where’s the logic there? I know, I know…. Don’t question it, that would be blasphemous. To question the writing of MEN… Flawed human men who said “Hey, listen up. God spoke to me and told me to tell you this,” and then made it clear in those writings that you should never question, just believe (hmmmmm).. Would be blasphemous. God can only be loving and compassionate beyond what we are capable (see earlier reference to your own children) or a manipulative, game playing, insecure and unstable dictator whose love is frightengly conditional. I choose love. I know in my heart that God is love. I didn’t need some dude to write that down for me and tell me God said it.
SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:03pm@ quiet inside…. I want to say as nicely and humbly as possible that your comment had two huge logical flaws. First is that you did not fairly or accurately portray the gospel or teaching of sin, salvation, or judgment as taught by the bible. Secondly, you condemn “flawed” human men as being terribly misguided in favor of your own insights and wisdom? You of course do realize you are a flawed human being as well right? As you stated, where is the logic in that? If you really believe in God as traditionally defined then you are choosing your ability to understand the infinite (you yourself being finite) over how God has chosen to reveal himself through the person of Jesus Christ as the bible records. The other challenge I have for you if sincere is how you arrived at the conclusion that the bible was written by men without the inspiration of God? What evidence have you collected and studied? Namely the bibliographical, external, and internal evidence? Thanks ahead of time.
Report Post »Quietinside
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:15pm@SLEAZYHIPPOS ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Report Post »Please tell me where I got the teaching of sin wrong. I sat in church and had it spoon fed to me for 20 years but maybe I wasn’t listening well enough. With regards to your comment about flawed men, you are precisely correct. I too am a flawed man, which is why it would be insane for anyone to take my words as those of God. That’s my point, friend.
Lastly, are you really asking me for evidence that those words written by men weren’t given to them by God? I don’t blame you for going there because….. Where else could you go? Let me ask you a question: Where’s your proof that Muhammad was not a true prophet? Or Ron L Hubbard? Where‘s your proof that David Koresh wasn’t delivering God’s message? Is the burden of proof on me for that too, or is it okay to step back, look at it, and conclude that it simply does not make sense?
SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 9:44am@ QUIETINSIDE….First of all thank you for your response. If I may I would like to address the second part of your comment first. There seems to be an inconsistency either in your statement or your beliefs. You stated in your first post that flawed men’s writtings about spiritual realities including the nature of God was not valid, but then went on to say how you (a flawed man just like those who’s knowledge you rejected) knew in your heart the reality of those spiritual realities. This makes no logical sense at all if I may say so. While it is true that all men have been, are, and will be flawed, if you believe in God then you must believe He is not. If He is not flawed then He must be capable of using flawed men to communicate accurately the reality of spiritual truths and His own character. We by the very nature being flawed and only having partial knowledge cannot, by logic if nothing else, know and understand the infinite and the unseen. This seems to be somethng you glossed over in your response by saying that was your point, but I am not sure you understand its profound implications. You are trusting in yourself to “figure” these things out based on your perspective alone which is very dangerous in this life, let alone about things we really cannot know. However, you seem convinced of your position. I would point to your inquisitions about the questions you asked me about other religous figures. You simply cannot know what you say you do. CONT…
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 9:52am@ QUIETINSIDE…. In fact, the bible and Jesus himself equates our knowledge of spiritual things to physical blindness because we do not know, apart from God’s revelation to us, about the reality of spiritual things. As far as the questions you asked me about other religous figures and my proof that they were not right that is actually pretty easy. None of them performed miracles verified by many many eyewitnesses nor did any of them raise from the dead also verified through many many eyewitness accounts. Now if you want to go through that evidence with me I will be happy to do so in as much as this format allows. Finally you did portray the doctrines of sin, slavation, love and judgment accuratly for some of the following reasons: First, God did not create beings with a tendency toward sin. He created them holy and sinless. The choice to sin was by man‘s own doing not God’s. Next, you say they didn’t ask for it. I would say they most certainly did ask for it and every person since the first continue to “ask for it” every time we choose our way over God’s. Put another way we want to be the god of our own lives not Him. He does love them beyond what we can imagine and the wages for sin is death, but because God loved us through the person of Jesus, who gave up heaven, became a man, became our sin, hung on a cross, went to hell for me by being seperated from the Father (the only time the Godhead was divided in all eternity), and made eternal life possible for
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 10:01am@ QUIETINSIDE….Even though I was his enemy and wanted nothing to do with Him, He so desperately wanted me to be with Him that He did these things and suffered on my behalf immensely. Even though I follow His ways now I still sin and He has said it is all covered, forgiven, not counted against me. Yet despite His great attempts at loving His creation many still refuse His love and the sacrifice of His own son. Not compelling anyone to do what they are unwilling to do, God simply gives people in the next life what they stated very very plainly in this life they want. An existence apart from Him. Since hell is defined in its most raw form as a complete and utter seperation from God and His presence in any way (much like physical death seperates from the living). Jesus went on to illustrate the agony of those who refused the grace of God because they will never exist in a redeemed state, no love, no mercy (that currently experience while alive), no rest, no peace…Your rendition if I may wanted to implicate God and the men he chose to reveal these truths through, not sinful man where the blame belongs. If you believe in God then you should probably let Him reveal who He is to you and not create a God in your image. Sorry for the length of these responses but your questions, I felt, made it a necessity…..Thanks again.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 10:29am@ QUIETINSIDE…..and yes I am really asking you to lay out the case with objective evidence why the bible was not written by men who were inspired by God himself? The three broad catagories to evaluate any work of antiquity is bibliographical, external and internal evidence. I hope we can dispatch with the bibliographical since most do not attempt to oppose the bible on this evidence since it is so overwhelming. We have more than 24,000 complete and partial manuscripts that leave all but about 43 lines of the bible in doubt as to it being what was originally written those 43 lines involve the story of the woman caught in adultery and the end of Mark both of which should be marked in your bible unless it is an older version. If you object to the the bible not being what was originally written then you would have to reject all other works of antiquity (Galic wars, Homer, etc.). Hopefully, you will not want to argue this area so I will assume we will concentrate on the other two areas mostly….Thanks.
Report Post »BO_Bill
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:45amThe ethnic Jewish community has a greater fear of two white guys in a bass boat than they do of the crypts or bloods. It makes no sense but it is our reality, and it is shaping our society.
Dig into each instance and you will find that this is, and has been, the root of most attacks against the Christian church in America for the past one hundred years. Theirs has been a highly successful effort.
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 12:57pmYou will also find them in large numbers in every divisive cultural issue, be it gender, Straight/Gay, Black/White, Hispanic/White, Rich/Poor, Christian/non-Christian. Theirs is always the antagonist view.
Minorities require division in the culture, divide and conquer is the short version. As a people living in another’s land, historically, they’ve become very adept at this strategy. This is why they have historically become the victim. Talmudic law is separate but equal, but that can not work when living among other cultures.
Report Post »Hanner
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 12:59pmThe atheist battle cry–”Your God is a genocidal murderer!” What did those heathen people do to deserve such judgement? I’m glad you asked. Leviticus 18-(abominations of these heathen) idol worship, murder, violence, incest and rape, bestiality, witchcraft, child sacrifice(hello abortion), unrestrained sexual perversion, homosexuality…..and many more. To top it off…Joshua 5:1–the amorite and canaanite kings heard about the Lord parting the Jordan for the Israelites and their hearts melted in them….So, these heathen kings knew God and were afraid of him but still rejected him. Sounds like a pack of atheists to me. The women and children of these heathen were just as dangerous as the men. Don‘t question my God’s motives for destroying these people for their horrific lifestyle and rejection of him. This christian nation protects you. Go live in Iran and see how long you will keep your head on your shoulders for being apostate.
The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:11pmSo Hanner…geonocide is not wrong?
Report Post »WTF_People
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:15pmA little correction for you Hanner… The heathen kings were most certainly not atheists. Atheists know that there is no god and therefore do not fear a god. We do fear religious fundamentalists and the atrocities they commit in the name of their god.
Report Post »Hanner
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 2:42pmYou guys are too much.
Report Post »Doors– I don‘t question God’s reasons for wiping out whole nations and people. He has the right to do whatever he sees fit to do.What makes you think that God ever quit killing people in these large numbers? Millions are still being wiped out today through war, and disease….oh, by the way, God said these things would come on the disobedient back in the OT. Seems like the bible is still playing out word for word even today. Will you deny the things that are in your face? Turn on the news.
People– correction — a lot of atheists have been submerged in religion at some point in their life and for whatever reason have walked away from it. So my statement about the heathen kings still stands.
blamb61
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:45amSince atheists don’t believe in a higher power, the notion that someone would be created with a “purpose” isn’t something that generally resonates. This is likely why Stiefel added, “I give my life its own purpose,” as non-believers are truly the only beings in charge of their destiny since the Almighty isn’t a factor on their radar.
———————————————————————————————————————————————–
We are free to choose our purpose and to pursue our destiny. God may have a plan for us but if are not faithful it will not come about (Sampson of the Old Testament is an example of someone who didn’t measure up to what he could have done).
Since we are free to decide our purpose in life, how does having mentors (God and others) rob us of deciding our purpose? He pre-supposes that we are pre-destined which we are not. This one statement of his (that non-believers are the only ones in charge of their destiny ) is very weak!
I choose to follow God because I know he will lead me to be the best I can be. I’ve learned that through experience. It is my choise and that is what I choose.
Report Post »memyselfandi
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 12:53pmAtheism denies the element of faith and rejects the possibility that supernatural events ever occur. My problem with this is…they have happened to me and because there is no “rational, reasonable” explanation of what happened to me, the atheist calls me delusional or even accuses me of lying.
Here’s the deal, when I was 13 I was running and I fell on a jagged piece of metal that cut my side open 1’’ wide from my hip to my arm pit nearly ripping my clothes completely off of me. My friends who were there carried me home and my mother…a Bible believing Christian and a person of childlike faith put me on the couch and laid a towel over the bloody wound. She kneeled down on the floor next to me, prayed a short little prayer and took the towel off and with a shocked look on her face…eyes popping wide open…with gasping breath…she said “oh my God”!!! I looked down and the wound had closed up!!! I’m 49 years old and I still have a huge scar on my side to remind me that it really happened. Why me…I don’t have a clue…but because of what happened that day I have no choice but to believe in God and I am a man of faith but my faith is in no way “blind”.
Atheists can explain away God as superstition all they want, but I can’t…I am living proof that there is something out there that operates beyond the confines of physical science.
The Bible makes many claims of supernatural activity…atheists and non-believers simply choose not to believe i
Report Post »memyselfandi
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:32pmMy question to Mr. Stiefel is this…
Do you understand the theme of the Bible (and there is one) from Genesis through Revelation…from the beginning to the end?
If you don’t…are you not merely rejecting something you really don’t fully understand?
Is that not akin to dropping out of school before you have completed you education and then criticizing the entire system?
If you do understand the theme of Bible and are in fact able to explain it in detail to anyone who should ask you what it is (it takes me 4 to 5 hours to do it) and yet you choose to reject it…so be it.
But if not…with all due respect sir…you don’t even know what you are talking about and we should not be paying attention to a single word you say.
Report Post »sawbuck
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:44am“In charge of their own destiny.”…[SAD]
I believe those are the words, that are written above the gates of hell.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:53amwhich language are those words written in? english? do only english speaking people go to hell?
Report Post »CptStubbing
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:03amThe answer to your first question is: Atlantean
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:08amoh, thanks. anyway, how could you read in hell – won’t your eyes be burned from their sockets? i’d really like to know since, you know, i’ll be going there some day.
Report Post »SREGN
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:14amGod opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.
Report Post »sawbuck
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:24amPhilly
I’m going to have to go with “sign” language…
In the fact that when ALL of you that DIE as an Atheist
and find out that there is a God ..
and by choosing poorly.. The Atheist who is NOW A believer …
Is kneeling at the gates of hell …screaming for forgiveness….
But its to late…. The NEW believers fate is sealed….
THERE’S YOUR “SIGN”..!
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:34amSAWBUCK – but i don’t know sign language. most people don’t. how am i going to know where i’m at? maybe it’s just a nice big bonfire where we all sit around, drinking beer, and laughing at the annoying harp music being played in heaven.
Report Post »sawbuck
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:48amPhilly
Report Post »Well Your still living ..So there’s still hope for you yet.
That you will never have to find out the answers to these questions…
The hard way.
puravida56
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:06amI’d rather laugh with the sinners than die with the saints- because sinners are much more fun. – Billy joel
:)
Seriously though- where is hell? Where is heaven? Its clear that ancients thought hell was below the earth and heaven was in the sky. When all of the people joined together to create a tower tall enough to reach heaven, God became angry and spread the people all over the globe and gave them different languages so they could never try to reach heaven again……however when we created space traveling vehicles, god was ok with that. See I think he had time to move heaven from the sky to just outside saturn’s rings,
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:29amYou are scary…
Report Post »TheArbiter
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:52amsawbuck relishes the idea of others burning in hell; that’s why he talks about it all the time. anyone notice how little hell is actually mentioned in the bible? in fact, it is of so little importance that god didn’t even bother mentioning it in the old testament!
Report Post »sawbuck
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 12:41pmTheArbiter
How many warning do you need…?
How many times did your dad have to tell you..
Not to play in the street..?
Do you have a ADD problem ..?
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:24pmHell is not so much a physical place as it is more a state of being…..completely cut off from the presence of God in every meaningful way. Much like physical death separates from the living. Yet there will be a conscious eternal understanding of that unchanginf state and the consequences of a life lived opposed to the love of God in the person of Jesus Christ. Also, the concept of hell is present throughout the entire bible. Jesus expanded on the OT tradition by citing the example of Gehenna, the city trash heap where the fires burned night and day. Is this metaphor or literal? That is another discussion.
Report Post »puravida56
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 9:50am@sleazy hippo- you are just making that up. It is what you have to do to justify your belief. The bible does not say that hell is a state of being.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 3:40pm@ PURAVIDA…. Dems your long on assumptions and accusations and pretty short on actual objective information. But as a pose recently commented, I suppose it is what you have to do to justify what you believe. I challenge you to debate what the bible teaches about hell. If you want you can start and I will respond to any area or question you pose regarding this topic. First of all, however, we must agree that in investigating these things we must apply the same objective literary critiques to the bible that we would any other literary work. Tha means that context means everything and the entire counsel of the bible must be considered to understand areas of metaphor, simile, and literal or historical language….agreed? The bible should have boric fervent standards in objectively examining what is contained within it…I hope you understand the importance of applying consistent and objective standards to all things? After all it is the basis of which science is built, which is whati believe you place your trust in? Thanks ahead of time.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 3:56pm@ PURVIDA.. BTW you apparently didn‘t understand my previous comment because I was emphasizing that he’ll should thought of more in terms of a state of being rather than location, but this does not mean that it cannot have a location. Your simplistic rebuttal demonstrates a rudimentary understanding of the doctrine of hell and what the whole counsel of the bible teaches on this subject. The first step in gaining understanding is to be sincere about what we don’t know or fully understand. My desire is not to mock you but to provide accurate objective information. Not conjecture and opinion steeped in supposed knowledge that really is ignorance.
Report Post »BlackCrow
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:44amIt‘s not the morality that’s off base, it’s the science that reflects a second century understanding of physics, geology and biology that gives me heartburn along with people who think that science is infallible. Remember what the church did to Galileo when he insisted the sun was at the center of the solar system. Funny the bible hasn’t changed but everyone accepts a heliocentric solar system so how come Christians still think the universe is 6000 years old?
Report Post »SREGN
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:27amScience is a false god. It takes more faith to believe the bilge scientists are selling then it does to believe the Bible. Funny how a couple of centuries ago the “consensus of scientists” believed the Earth was flat despite the Bible referring to it as a sphere. Now with seven of the nine planets experiencing warming they’re trying to say we puny earthlings are the cause. Everytime I turn on a lightbulb I’m causing warming on Jupiter. Go ahead, pray to your false god, Stephen Hawking, I’ll keep the real one.
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:32amScience is not a false god because it is not a god at all. You just don’t understand science but thats ok because many do. People in the bible didn’t understand a lot of things that we do now…its just sad you are still stuck in the 1st centruy with them.
Report Post »Git-R-Done
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 12:42pmThe_doors – While you’re still stuck with the old Soviet Union version of morality. Not to mention that your side tries to push global warming as real and that we’re causing it.
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 12:50pmIs the soviet union all you people have for real? I have heard that like 5 times today. Um, I don’t like communism as a viable political system. Hopefully, that will do and I won’t have to hear about it anymore.
As far as global warming…am I on the right thread still?
You do a lot of assuming.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:43pmWhere does the bible make the scientific claim the the Earth is the center of the solar system? It does not. In fact the heavenly bodies were meant to reflect spiritual realities. The moon has no light of its own but reflects the suns light. In the same way Christians have no righteousness of their own but should dimly reflect that of Christ. The sun cannot be looked uponwiththe naked eye without looking away. I the same way sinful man cannot look upon the full glory of God. The illuminates our physical world so that we may see. In the same way the son illuminates the spiritual so we may see. It makes sense to me that the bible would have always supported the sun (son) being the center.
Report Post »puravida56
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:44amThis installment wasnt as compelling as the others, but he still defends his lack of faith well. Some of what he said has resonated with me. I give as much to charity now as an agnostic as I did as a born again, but I give to different groups. My donations were all to mission type groups before, and now I give directly to individuals I find that are suffering.
I am not shocked that Beck lets an atheist talk. It riles up all of the believers and always gets the most comments. (The same theory is put into play on pro wrestling when they have the bad guy that gets boos……….the fan stays engaged). However I am shocked that he puts one on that eloquently states his position and backs it up with sound rational. This guy is planting seeds of logic in the back of more than one believer’s brain. Perhaps those seeds will grow until one day that person stops believing books written by primitive men.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:52amlove the comparison to the wrestling heels. well said.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:51pmLogic? Eloquently stated? He is quite flawed and easily shown as illogical and inconsistent in many things he has stated.
Report Post »NJBarFly
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:26pmSLEAZYHIPPOs – Instead of saying he’s illogical and flawed, how about giving a few examples and backing up your statement. It seems in these comments that there’s very little actual criticism of any of his points and lots of name calling.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 9:17amI have commented all over this thread my friend and over several topics if you sincerely want to know then go through the different pages and read for yourself.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 10:16amJust one quick one for you NJBARFLY….He stated in early stories that he only believes in what he can prove (this is a summation but it conveys accurately the point he was making). But in this article he believes in some nebulus universal goodness but only to a point???? That is a comment steeped in a blind faith. No proof of those things at all, just the way he feels about it. Which ones are universal? Who decides what qualifies as universal? What if someone else disagrees with what is considered universal, for them it ceases to be universal…When it comes down to it, morality is a huge problem without a moral law giver outside of humanity because everything becomes relative. Why do you think he feels the need to define some universal morality in the first place? He feels the need because most all of humanity has an innate knowledge of what makes something good or evil. But these lines are blurred when men start to create their own morality because our own desires/self interests corrupt morality. And please don’t give some of the superficial arguments about morality, most have no clue of the depth of the problem or the profoundness of the arguments and gloss over with their perceived “insight” all the while they expose that they really don’t even understand the issue they are talking about. I don’t mean to sound inpatient but I guess I get frustrated with people that think they know more than they really do about this topic. This is just one quick example.
Report Post »CptStubbing
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:42amWho is this guy to say genocide is wrong? Next he’s going to say slavery is absolutely wrong. After that he’s going to say abortion is absolutely wrong. Oh wait never mind, killing over 100,000 human beings every day is fine, because we wouldn’t want to inconvenience a person with being responsible for their actions and choices.
It’s his opinion there are absolute truths and relative ones. If a truth is absolute who decides it is absolute? Why does this guy get to be the authority on what is an absolute truth and what isn’t?
“One thing that concerns me is the dangers of taking morality from a supreme governing body.” Yeah, it would suck to have to actually be held accountable for your actions.
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:49amHow do you know genocide is wrong? God ordered many genocide missions.
Report Post »mindsend
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 3:12pmMorality is pretty simple. What’s wrong between two people is generally wrong for society as a whole. There are always going to be exceptions to every wrong and right you can think of, and the further out you get from the basic principles (lying, cheating, stealing, killing etc) the more complex it becomes. But we as thinking beings can certainly decide for ourselves what should and shouldn’t be done. And once we accept these things as universal to every human being (we’re well on our way) we can collectively enforce them as a society; from preventing genocide right down to telling little Tommy why it wasn’t OK to push little Susie and take her lollipop. Religion is unnecessary for humanity except for the weak individuals who need to be coddled by something more. You’re more than capable of living without it… but that would be too haaaaaaard waaaaaaaah where do I find the aaaanswers what do I dooooooo. Buck up. Life is not that difficult and it’s very, very short.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:02pm@ mind send….you have no clue what you are talking about. The content of your comment demonstrates you don’t have full understanding of the issue at all. Your false assumptions and proud statements about morality exposé an ignorance of the issue before you and the problems it poses for the atheist. Universal morality is a huge problem without a transcendent law giver. You are not even aware in what capacity that it is based on your argument. Read my previous post for some clues as to the inconsistency of what you have stated.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:41amPsalms 1:1-6 (all you need to know about athiests)
1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2 But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4 The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5 Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
6 For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
Report Post »swsb6x
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:45amHere’s something that “atheists” already know : Romans 1:21-22 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools,
Report Post »puravida56
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:18amIf a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT
The word of the omniscient lord……….rapists must marry their victims
Matthew 5:18
18 Truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
so jesus agrees that we should make rapists marry their victims.
Report Post »Styx
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:12pm@Puravida56 – Husbands are also expected to love their wives as Christ loves the Church (not the building or the institution, but the people who follow Him). Christ died for the Church. A rapist is not exempt from this rule; he must literally be willing to give his life for her and live his life accordingly. The Bible condemns all forms of sexual impurity, including rape. However, if a man rapes a woman, it is justice that he should spend the rest of his life making up for it. There is no other form of punishment or payment which can make it right for the woman. Killing the man does not change what he has done. Money is pointless, though the man is ordered to pay in addition to marriage. Imprisoning the man does nothing concrete, and still ignores the needs of the woman.
Lastly, the rapist will answer once more for his crime when he meets God – regardless of whether he abides by the law or not.
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:14pmOften what seems cruel to us I this time and culture was actually an act of mercy. Of course due to presentism we don‘t see it and sit in judgment upon God’s word when we don’t understand the full picture. In the case of the scripture listed in order to disrespect God the actual context is missing. In those daysif women were raped they were often shamed and never a candidate for marriage. This made them condemned to a life of poverty and sever struggle. By having the man marry her it was a way for her to be provided for in an instance that she would otherwise be destitute and alone. Of course, society was different then compared to now as we can see from the story of Lot and the fact that wives often gave their maidservants to the husbands to bear more children. Taking things out of their literary and social/cultural context does nothing but demonstrate either ignorance or a disingenuousness.
Report Post »DimmuBorgir
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:40amI’m confused by these “Atheist Answers” segments. Is the Blaze promoting atheism or something?? Giving one of them a chance to try to convince an audience of believers. I just think it’s really weird
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:50ami think it’s both really good and important. just by reading the comments on this series and Atheist stories at the Blaze in general, there are so many misconceptions about what Atheists are and what we believe in. this series will not eliminate many prejudices, but it may effect some people’s view of the non believers.
Report Post »DimmuBorgir
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 2:01pmBut why do I care about someone’s views who think my views are ridiculous.
They don’t respect us either. How big of an insult is their spaghetti monster god? And I’m supposed to warm up to them and listen to their lies?
Report Post »SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:18pmBecause we care about their souls?
Report Post »Hanner
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:40amRomans 1:28–They did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a reprobate mind…they are filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, GREED, and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice. They are gossips, SLANDERERS, GOD-HATERS, insolent, arrogant, boastful….they have no understanding. If my bible doesn’t speak the ABSOLUTE truth about these people then what does. This guy slanders something he don’t even believe in. My bible proves itself more true every day.
Report Post »THERepublic
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:39amHis morality is relative. He highest power he lives by is himself which means all decisions, good or evil, can be rationalized and accepted as justice and absolute. Its the advantage of being your own god but unfortunate for everyone else around him and his soul.
Report Post »ChristmanWalking
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:38amI have a question? When are you going to live what you believe and leave me alone. I have now need to hear anything from you. Thanks but even if I’m wrong I can promise you my life will be more full and happier than yours. God Love Ya!
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:59amOnly a beliver could say something like that without feeling completely infantile. So meek…so humble
Report Post »MichiganPatriot
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:38amIf we do not have a guide to tell us what is right and what is wrong who is too say that it is immoral to kill, steal, lie, deceive or oppress? These people have all the answers except one. Who gave us our morality or our rules to begin with? One mans morality may be different from another. One may see killing as just and OK, where another thinks it is very bad and should not be allowed. We have to have a stable base or we can all just make up our own rules and live how we want.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:55amif you really believe that then you must be very simple minded. if not for fear of eternal punishment, would you go on a killing spree? i doubt you, or just about anyone else would. think a little deeper before posting such nonsensical thoughts.
Report Post »RLTW
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:43amThis guy appears to be religiously devoted to his atheist beliefs.
Report Post »scotte5620
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:56amPhillyatheist: Let us remind you of 1) Fort Hood, 2) 9/11, 3) The drug cartel beheadings in Mexico, 4) Rawanda, 5) Uganda, etc. And remember Pol Pot’s Khmer rouge (1.5 Million deaths)? Joseph Stalins Great Purges (2-3 million deaths) or the most famous Adolf Hitler (11 million deaths in concentration camps)??? All of these people justified their acts using their own morality. According to you these things were not “Killing sprees” or Mass Murder??
Report Post »Rather than saying MichiganPatriot is simple minded because he has a superior knowledge, I would suggest Phillyatheist get checked for “Attention Deficit Disorder” if you cannot recall the simplist of Historical facts.
phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:04pmSCOTT – Uganda and Rowanda are OVERWHELMINGLY Christian nations. the rest of your claims have been beaten to death, so i won’t even bother with them. you seem to revel in misinformation so i won’t ruin your day.
Report Post »WTF_People
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:49pmIf you believe the only thing holding humanity back from murder, theft, rape, and the like is a work of literary fiction…that scares me.
Report Post »MichiganPatriot
Posted on July 5, 2012 at 12:50pm@Philly Athiest I love how athiest and overly educated get off on belitting people. I asked a simple question which you have no answer for so you rattle off a comment that is supposed to make look stupid or “Simple Minded” so that you will not have to answer, that is text book Athiest and liberal cop out’s. And quite entertaining…you guys are so easy to bait.
Report Post »Fonz777
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:35amgood for a laugh
Report Post »randy
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:33amPlease GLENN!
Report Post »Just stop with the “Ask an Atheist.” series……
searching for the Truth
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:49amYes ! Please , pretty please, please with sugar on top ! These guy‘s can get one’s children killed ! Have you really ever worked around a real atheist !
Report Post »NJBarFly
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:03amEvery time there’s an ask an atheist story, all the Christians get riled up and complain. Yet they keep coming back and giving the page more views, increasing ad revenue. It‘s all money in Glenn’s pocket.
Report Post »The_Doors_Of_Perception
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 11:01amTotaltarians. No other points of view but your own. Sick
Report Post »ScienceIsNotEvil
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 2:49pmsearching for the Truth,
S.E. Cupp whom Beck pays to work for him is an atheist.
Report Post »stone2016
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:32am“Committing genocide against random groups of people is always and absolutely wrong.”
The one question I’ve never had a “reasonable” answer to is why? Why is it wrong to “kill” a mass of tissue and electrical impulses?
Also, love the “after eliminating donations to groups that mostly provide services to ourselves or to promoting our own viewpoints.” If someone believes that they are helping others by promoting their belief, who is he to say that doesn’t count as charity?
I find it interesting that an athiest can set the “higher moral ground” while claiming that my moral ground “requires making the ethics of others our own morality without question.” No. It doesn’t. I choose to believe in God. I choose to believe in the Bible. My religion is my decision. My ethics may be professed by others, but it is always my choice to believe or not to believe. There is no force. There is no “servants of people like televangelists who claim to speak to or for a god.”
As much as Athiests like to bash on Christians for our “hypocricy”, it doesn’t take long to realize those in glass houses…you know.
Also, stop trying to explain my beliefs. You don’t believe them, so you can’t understand them. Stick to your beliefs and stop making the crux of your belief based on how ignorant Christians are.
And your’s is a belief system and equating it to “peace is a form of war” doesn’t change that. You believe there is no God. No proof, just faith.
Report Post »VoteBushIn12
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:45amIt’s very difficult to “prove” something does NOT exist.
What is not difficult to say is that there is no proof of existence. There is much we don’t understand and you can feel free to attribute that to God. But I just want to say two things regarding that perspective
1) In the past we attributed much to God and have since learned the scientific truth behind them so, historically speaking, we will one day also learn the science behind those things we currently attribute to God.
2) It should not inhibit you from finding the truth. And, when it is found, should not be cloud your judgment and prevent you from accepting it.
So you may think that God started the Big Bang, or that he resides in the centers of Black Holes, or he vibrates the strings in String Theory, but just realize we once thought he controlled the tides, made the sun revolve around the earth, and created a flat earth on which we could live. When we discover the true origin to these modern questions I expect you to accept the answer wholeheartedly.
If you do not, then I will consider you an idiot. Until such time you are free to believe whatever you want.
Report Post »jesustheway
Posted on July 4, 2012 at 9:52pmJust because our perception at one time told us the sun revolved around the earth and now we understand otherwise does not diminish God’s role in the creation of those things. He is the source of that creation which we use science to describe.
Report Post »kbstreet1
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:32am“America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these areas, America will collapse from within” Joseph Stalin
Report Post »NJBarFly
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:00amHe never said that.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/undermine.asp
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:02amNJBARFLY – i’ll beat the conservatives here to the punch – snopes is owned by George Soros and cannot be trusted as a source! lol.
Report Post »labec
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:29amAh, yes. I should listen to an atheist who has no moral authority other than SELF and SELF ONLY.
Report Post »NJBarFly
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:51amAh, yes. I should listen to a Christian who gets their morals from a 2000 year old book, supposedly inspired by an imaginary man in the sky, but in reality, written by men.
Report Post »StopAttackingBirthersGlen
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:28amthis guy is an asshat, I could care less what he has to say
Report Post »Locked
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:08am@Stopattackingbirthersglen
“this guy is an asshat, I could care less what he has to say”
Two thoughts on this:
1. What did he say that caused you to label him as “asshat”? All his discourse seemed polite, and unlike yours, there was no infantile insults. I might not agree with his views, but nothing he said made me think he was rude.
2. If you “could care less,” that means you actually do care (as you imply that there is a lesser degree to which you could care). Now, if you “couldn’t care less,” that might make your point a bit better.
Go with Christ, friend :-)
Report Post »mwhaley
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:25amI guess this guy has everything all figured out. At least when he actually meets GOD he cannot use the I did not know excuse.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:41amYa know, the way I see it is if God would condemn a foolish person (and we ALL are) to eternal damnation for not accepting words written by other men, translated by other men, and published by other men as the absolute truth, then I say piss on him. That God sounds like a uncompassionate pr1ck. I have a feeling when/if I find God, he’d be a little more understanding based on our limited capabilities, as human beings, to be fooled. I’m not knocking anyone who is a believer, but that’s just how I see it.
Report Post »CptStubbing
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:00amNow, I don’t believe people are condemned to hell, they just don’t continue living after the resurrection. But to say piss on God, because you don’t think he should expect perfection is a bit naïve. If God wants everyone to go to heaven, that’s his choice. If God wants everyone to just go into oblivion after they die, again his choice. And if God thinks everyone should be condemned to hell for eternity, again his choice.
What exactly should God be understanding of? He’s God, in no way, shape, or form does he have to answer to us for anything. I am a Christian and if I meet God someday, and he says “Sorry, Falun Gong was the right answer.” Should I be upset? And Why?
Report Post »justangry
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:58pmIf God wanted something from me, he’d speak to me directly like he did doubting Thomas. It‘s not God that I don’t trust, it’s the men between him and I.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:25amSounds like a decent fella to me, but then again most people despite their religious beliefs are despite the media trying to portray everything as evil to keep us scared, in our houses, and not talking to one another.
Report Post »not2cool2believe
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:25amIt must be such a relief to not have to worry about ever getting to heaven. The daily struggle of following a set of basic rules that were given to us to make everyone and everywhere better is just too much to handle.
Report Post »acovenantinblood
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:25amI can tell you what happens if we don’t use the Bible as a moral absolute:
Report Post »Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. Romans 1:25-32
I can tell you what happens when we do again:
If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land
searching for the Truth
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:44amYes, that about covers it ! Not all , but pretty close ! It’s really sad . People have gone to the worship of the ” creature ,” to such an extreme , that some even worry about killing vermin and insect pests’ .
Report Post »Hammerdown
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:15amWhy should I care what this guy thinks or says. He doesn’t know or understand Faith. And why does the Blaze think this is so important? Makes me question what is behind it all, what does Glenn think about it?
Report Post »NJBarFly
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:38amYou clearly disagree with everything he stands for. Most people here on the Blaze show open hatred for atheists and talk with glee about how they will be tortured in a lake of fire. Don’t you want to be educated about their beliefs? How can you hate or be against someone when you don’t understand them?
Report Post »RRFlyer
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:43amI agree. Why would you want to ask an atheist anything about his belief? His answers would be based on lies anyway from the father of all lies.
Would he, or any atheist take the time to ask me and try to understand why I believe what I do?
As to why blaze is publishing these articles. they are like any other media outlet and thrive on controversy, the truth doesn’t matter.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 10:10amRRFLYER – “Would he, or any atheist take the time to ask me and try to understand why I believe what I do?”
most of us grew up in religion, so we know what you believe. we used to believe it too. some of us decided it’s all bunk and have moved on.
Report Post »freedomisasfreedomdoes
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:09amHe never truly answered some questions.
Report Post »NJBarFly
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 9:33amWhich ones didn’t he answer?
Report Post »freedomisasfreedomdoes
Posted on July 3, 2012 at 1:45pmthe tax one… look it NJBarfly
Report Post »