Can Atheists be Moral?

[ding]

What is it that you think sin is exactly?

Sin is anything which distances us from God. Since no man or woman is all good or all bad, there will be times when they distance themselves from God. It’s unavoidable.

There are three possible states; we can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God or we can be static.

Furthermore, at any point in time we can change states.

So save your bullshit for someone else.

.

What is it that you think sin is exactly?

Sin is anything which distances us from God. Since no man or woman is all good or all bad, there will be times when they distance themselves from God. It’s unavoidable.

christianity is the religion of sinners, (all bad) no matter their persona of repentance they will reap what they sow - the original religion of antiquity is the triumph of good vs evil that is granted judgement and possible admission to the Everlasting.

the Almighty is simply the gatekeeper ... that will keep the unjustified from entering where they do not belong.

There are three possible states; we can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God or we can be static.

bing the dogmatic -

Columbus crossed the void and discovered land on the otherside, that is the mission for a spirit to be freed from the physical constraints through perseverance and knowledge to triumph by their own actions to be admitted to the Everlasting as a reward - it is a sin to remain a sinner, bing. making oneself pure is not - "no man or woman is all good or all bad" - have you fooled yourself or are you just lazy.

You never answered my question. How do you define sin?

.

Sin is anything which distances us from God. Since no man or woman is all good or all bad, there will be times when they distance themselves from God. It’s unavoidable.

You never answered my question. How do you define sin?

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

the above forgery is a sin - the 4th century christian bible is a political document disguised as a religion - is a sin ...


It’s unavoidable.

excuses are sins, not answering what sins someone is unable to stop committing, when defining sin is a sin ... when speaking of a rapprochement with the Almighty while a sinner - is a sin.

the uninterrupted history of persecution and victimization of the innocent by christianity - is a sin.

View attachment 252823


It’s unavoidable -

a history lesson from a christian ...

The reason you can’t or won’t define what sin is is because it would detract from your attack on Christianity.

So let me be very clear here, sin is anything which distances one from God.

.

The reason you can’t or won’t define what sin is is because it would detract from your attack on Christianity.

So let me be very clear here, sin is anything which distances one from God.

who will not answer the question is you, what sins are you unable not to commit. christian.

Excuses are not sins. Excuses are rationalizations for one’s failure to produce the desired result or objective.

that must be one of them.

Excuses prevent one from seeing reality and learning the lesson they were supposed to learn and dooms them to repeating the same mistakes. Excuses transfer ones power and control to external sources. But excuses in and of themselves are not sins.

you have that backwards.

But excuses in and of themselves are not sins.

in regards to the original spoken religion of antiquity they are ... your 10,000 page document is an inexcusable sin. less than attaining the apex of knowledge is not an excuse. by humanity to fail without final judgement - for their existence from the metaphysical they evolved from.

Life did not evolve from the metaphysical. Life evolved from the creation of space and time. The allegorical account of creation in Genesis is factually correct. Spirit created space and time and everything contained within space and time is a product of that creation including you.

So man didn’t evolve from God. Man is a creature created through God’s creation.

 

[basquebromance]

If there is no God, good and evil are subjective

 

[BreezeWood]

.
christianity is the religion of sinners, (all bad) no matter their persona of repentance they will reap what they sow - the original religion of antiquity is the triumph of good vs evil that is granted judgement and possible admission to the Everlasting.

the Almighty is simply the gatekeeper ... that will keep the unjustified from entering where they do not belong.


bing the dogmatic -

Columbus crossed the void and discovered land on the otherside, that is the mission for a spirit to be freed from the physical constraints through perseverance and knowledge to triumph by their own actions to be admitted to the Everlasting as a reward - it is a sin to remain a sinner, bing. making oneself pure is not - "no man or woman is all good or all bad" - have you fooled yourself or are you just lazy.

You never answered my question. How do you define sin?

.

Sin is anything which distances us from God. Since no man or woman is all good or all bad, there will be times when they distance themselves from God. It’s unavoidable.

You never answered my question. How do you define sin?

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

the above forgery is a sin - the 4th century christian bible is a political document disguised as a religion - is a sin ...


It’s unavoidable.

excuses are sins, not answering what sins someone is unable to stop committing, when defining sin is a sin ... when speaking of a rapprochement with the Almighty while a sinner - is a sin.

the uninterrupted history of persecution and victimization of the innocent by christianity - is a sin.

View attachment 252823


It’s unavoidable -

a history lesson from a christian ...

The reason you can’t or won’t define what sin is is because it would detract from your attack on Christianity.

So let me be very clear here, sin is anything which distances one from God.

.

The reason you can’t or won’t define what sin is is because it would detract from your attack on Christianity.

So let me be very clear here, sin is anything which distances one from God.

who will not answer the question is you, what sins are you unable not to commit. christian.

Excuses are not sins. Excuses are rationalizations for one’s failure to produce the desired result or objective.

that must be one of them.

Excuses prevent one from seeing reality and learning the lesson they were supposed to learn and dooms them to repeating the same mistakes. Excuses transfer ones power and control to external sources. But excuses in and of themselves are not sins.

you have that backwards.

But excuses in and of themselves are not sins.

in regards to the original spoken religion of antiquity they are ... your 10,000 page document is an inexcusable sin. less than attaining the apex of knowledge is not an excuse. by humanity to fail without final judgement - for their existence from the metaphysical they evolved from.

What do you believe was the original spoken religion?

.
The Triumph of Good vs Evil - is the original religion of antiquity, reaffirmed by the travails of noah ... why it took them till the 4th century to makeup the forgeries of the christian bible. the fallacies of all three desert religions.

Life did not evolve from the metaphysical.

life is metaphysical without it the physical expression, physiology disappears from existence and is subordinate to the spiritual for its composition. as proof for their shared origin. not of Earth.

 

[ding]

You never answered my question. How do you define sin?

.

Sin is anything which distances us from God. Since no man or woman is all good or all bad, there will be times when they distance themselves from God. It’s unavoidable.

You never answered my question. How do you define sin?

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

the above forgery is a sin - the 4th century christian bible is a political document disguised as a religion - is a sin ...


It’s unavoidable.

excuses are sins, not answering what sins someone is unable to stop committing, when defining sin is a sin ... when speaking of a rapprochement with the Almighty while a sinner - is a sin.

the uninterrupted history of persecution and victimization of the innocent by christianity - is a sin.

View attachment 252823


It’s unavoidable -

a history lesson from a christian ...

The reason you can’t or won’t define what sin is is because it would detract from your attack on Christianity.

So let me be very clear here, sin is anything which distances one from God.

.

The reason you can’t or won’t define what sin is is because it would detract from your attack on Christianity.

So let me be very clear here, sin is anything which distances one from God.

who will not answer the question is you, what sins are you unable not to commit. christian.

Excuses are not sins. Excuses are rationalizations for one’s failure to produce the desired result or objective.

that must be one of them.

Excuses prevent one from seeing reality and learning the lesson they were supposed to learn and dooms them to repeating the same mistakes. Excuses transfer ones power and control to external sources. But excuses in and of themselves are not sins.

you have that backwards.

But excuses in and of themselves are not sins.

in regards to the original spoken religion of antiquity they are ... your 10,000 page document is an inexcusable sin. less than attaining the apex of knowledge is not an excuse. by humanity to fail without final judgement - for their existence from the metaphysical they evolved from.

What do you believe was the original spoken religion?

.
The Triumph of Good vs Evil - is the original religion of antiquity, reaffirmed by the travails of noah ... why it took them till the 4th century to makeup the forgeries of the christian bible. the fallacies of all three desert religions.

Life did not evolve from the metaphysical.

life is metaphysical without it the physical expression, physiology disappears from existence and is subordinate to the spiritual for its composition. as proof for their shared origin. not of Earth.

You are incapable of giving a straight answer, aren’t you?

Which religion was that again? The triumph of good versus evil? Never heard of it. Are you talking about Judaism?

 

[ding]

If there is no God, good and evil are subjective

Right. And outcomes show they aren’t.

 

[RWS]

We've been talking for a while breezewood, and you have always had my side.

Now one of these freaks have changed you?

Really?

.
Ive noticed it is you who has changed -

I remain steadfast, 4th century christianity, the desert religions are forgeries using the events of the 1st century (christianity) to disguise their political documents as religions as history bears witness.


changed by not reading posts for content -

will the physiology you / science create have a spiritual content - will it need nourishment to survive a means to reproduce, sensations etc. ... all questions answered by the metaphysical forces that did create the physiology that does exist in the universe.

View attachment 251943

the transformation from one physiological state to another is accomplished by the cicadas spiritual content - through metaphysical means derived not by an individual but from the forces that created it - from the Everlasting. the Almighty will not allow sinners (desert religions) to interfere, they are doomed.

Bullshit.

.

Bullshit.

Can Atheists be Moral?


I have yet to receive a response from you or any christian, what sins they are unable to stop committing - and that the 1st century was an affirmation of the original religion of antiquity to triumph over evil for there even to be a judgement.

4th century christianity and the other two desert religions have abandoned the original religion to substitute their own that are political documents disguised as religions to suit their own self interest that falls far short of the path leading to admission to the Everlasting.

if there are sins christians are unable to not commit they can not be moral - for those that triumph over evil they can not be 4th century christians.

morality is a goal acquired through triumph - the apex of knowledge, purity of a freed spirit being a sabbath is the path to the Everlasting.

Wow... we need to have a group hug and a discussion...

Not really. It’s all good as everything works towards good. Sometimes it’s just a longer journey is all.

Are you excusing the evils that your religions did? That shit don't work... jus sayin....

 

[RWS]

Pray to your god that you are forgiven for what your ancestors did.

And learn the new reality.,,,

 

[ding]

.
Ive noticed it is you who has changed -

I remain steadfast, 4th century christianity, the desert religions are forgeries using the events of the 1st century (christianity) to disguise their political documents as religions as history bears witness.


changed by not reading posts for content -

will the physiology you / science create have a spiritual content - will it need nourishment to survive a means to reproduce, sensations etc. ... all questions answered by the metaphysical forces that did create the physiology that does exist in the universe.

View attachment 251943

the transformation from one physiological state to another is accomplished by the cicadas spiritual content - through metaphysical means derived not by an individual but from the forces that created it - from the Everlasting. the Almighty will not allow sinners (desert religions) to interfere, they are doomed.

Bullshit.

.

Bullshit.

Can Atheists be Moral?


I have yet to receive a response from you or any christian, what sins they are unable to stop committing - and that the 1st century was an affirmation of the original religion of antiquity to triumph over evil for there even to be a judgement.

4th century christianity and the other two desert religions have abandoned the original religion to substitute their own that are political documents disguised as religions to suit their own self interest that falls far short of the path leading to admission to the Everlasting.

if there are sins christians are unable to not commit they can not be moral - for those that triumph over evil they can not be 4th century christians.

morality is a goal acquired through triumph - the apex of knowledge, purity of a freed spirit being a sabbath is the path to the Everlasting.

Wow... we need to have a group hug and a discussion...

Not really. It’s all good as everything works towards good. Sometimes it’s just a longer journey is all.

Are you excusing the evils that your religions did? That shit don't work... jus sayin....

Ummm... you mean people. Religion is like any other tool, dipshit.

To answer your question... no. I’m not.

 

[hobelim]

You say its all magical bullshit.

And you claim your particular, preferred pile of magical bullshit is the only magical bullshit that is not bullshit.

So, a rational person like me is left with two choices"

1) Shaman Hobelim holds the only, absolute divine truth, and everyone else is full of shit.

2) Shaman Hobelim is just as full of shit as eveyone else.

Its not a tough call.

lol,,, there you go again too..

I tell you there is hidden teaching in scripture just like any fairy tale and you say there is no hidden teaching. I mention a talking serpent and you said the authors 'absolutely' believed that snakes can talk. I tell you that a talking serpent is an archetype for a specific type of person described in great detail, which is true about any talking animal in a fairy tale, and you call you that magical bullshit.

Now thats quite the steaming pile of hypocritical bullshit right there dripping off your lips.



You two are just as dumb and deliberately blind as any deceptive religious fundamentalist nut job out there...

 

[ding]

You say its all magical bullshit.

And you claim your particular, preferred pile of magical bullshit is the only magical bullshit that is not bullshit.

So, a rational person like me is left with two choices"

1) Shaman Hobelim holds the only, absolute divine truth, and everyone else is full of shit.

2) Shaman Hobelim is just as full of shit as eveyone else.

Its not a tough call.

lol,,, there you go again too..

I tell you there is hidden teaching in scripture just like any fairy tale and you say there is no hidden teaching. I mention a talking serpent and you said the authors 'absolutely' believed that snakes can talk. I tell you that a talking serpent is an archetype for a specific type of person described in great detail, which is true about any talking animal in a fairy tale, and you call you that magical bullshit.

Now thats quite the steaming pile of hypocritical bullshit right there dripping off your lips.



You two are just as dumb and deliberately blind as any deceptive religious fundamentalist nut job out there...

You are a religious fundamentalist.

 

[hobelim]

You say its all magical bullshit.

And you claim your particular, preferred pile of magical bullshit is the only magical bullshit that is not bullshit.

So, a rational person like me is left with two choices"

1) Shaman Hobelim holds the only, absolute divine truth, and everyone else is full of shit.

2) Shaman Hobelim is just as full of shit as eveyone else.

Its not a tough call.

lol,,, there you go again too..

I tell you there is hidden teaching in scripture just like any fairy tale and you say there is no hidden teaching. I mention a talking serpent and you said the authors 'absolutely' believed that snakes can talk. I tell you that a talking serpent is an archetype for a specific type of person described in great detail, which is true about any talking animal in a fairy tale, and you call you that magical bullshit.

Now thats quite the steaming pile of hypocritical bullshit right there dripping off your lips.



You two are just as dumb and deliberately blind as any deceptive religious fundamentalist nut job out there...

You are a religious fundamentalist.

No. I am an ordinary unbeliever who just happened to learn how to recognize a fairy tale and search for the moral teaching of the story before I went to kindergarten.

By the second grade and I first heard about the story of Adam and Eve I had already known how to do that for years.

So when I first heard a religious instructor say "we believe that this bread made by human hands will become for us the body of christ", after I had memorized the ten commandments and learned about the death, hell, and eternal damnation consequent to disobedience I said to myself, "there goes a talking serpent, **** this religion."

Nothing magical, mystical, mysterious, supernatural, complicated, religious, or special about it.

I was just paying attention.

 

[BreezeWood]

.



the above forgery is a sin - the 4th century christian bible is a political document disguised as a religion - is a sin ...


It’s unavoidable.

excuses are sins, not answering what sins someone is unable to stop committing, when defining sin is a sin ... when speaking of a rapprochement with the Almighty while a sinner - is a sin.

the uninterrupted history of persecution and victimization of the innocent by christianity - is a sin.

View attachment 252823


It’s unavoidable -

a history lesson from a christian ...

The reason you can’t or won’t define what sin is is because it would detract from your attack on Christianity.

So let me be very clear here, sin is anything which distances one from God.

.

The reason you can’t or won’t define what sin is is because it would detract from your attack on Christianity.

So let me be very clear here, sin is anything which distances one from God.

who will not answer the question is you, what sins are you unable not to commit. christian.

Excuses are not sins. Excuses are rationalizations for one’s failure to produce the desired result or objective.

that must be one of them.

Excuses prevent one from seeing reality and learning the lesson they were supposed to learn and dooms them to repeating the same mistakes. Excuses transfer ones power and control to external sources. But excuses in and of themselves are not sins.

you have that backwards.

But excuses in and of themselves are not sins.

in regards to the original spoken religion of antiquity they are ... your 10,000 page document is an inexcusable sin. less than attaining the apex of knowledge is not an excuse. by humanity to fail without final judgement - for their existence from the metaphysical they evolved from.

What do you believe was the original spoken religion?

.
The Triumph of Good vs Evil - is the original religion of antiquity, reaffirmed by the travails of noah ... why it took them till the 4th century to makeup the forgeries of the christian bible. the fallacies of all three desert religions.

Life did not evolve from the metaphysical.

life is metaphysical without it the physical expression, physiology disappears from existence and is subordinate to the spiritual for its composition. as proof for their shared origin. not of Earth.

You are incapable of giving a straight answer, aren’t you?

Which religion was that again? The triumph of good versus evil? Never heard of it. Are you talking about Judaism?

.

Never heard of it.

the spoken religion of Antiquity, The Triumph of Good vs Evil - that's all there is christian ... and what is your religion of sinners called, that includes a messiah that is to save you from your uncontrollable sinning by granting you admission to the Everlasting than too who Triumph's over evil.

the religion of Antiquity is the spoken religion as prescribed by the Almighty, the travails of noah - yours is madeup in the 4th century by the crucifiers that misconstrued the events of the 1st century as has been perpetrated since the 4th century to this day. their 10,000 page political document disguised as a religion.

 

[MedfordMan]

Bullshit.

.

Bullshit.

Can Atheists be Moral?


I have yet to receive a response from you or any christian, what sins they are unable to stop committing - and that the 1st century was an affirmation of the original religion of antiquity to triumph over evil for there even to be a judgement.

4th century christianity and the other two desert religions have abandoned the original religion to substitute their own that are political documents disguised as religions to suit their own self interest that falls far short of the path leading to admission to the Everlasting.

if there are sins christians are unable to not commit they can not be moral - for those that triumph over evil they can not be 4th century christians.

morality is a goal acquired through triumph - the apex of knowledge, purity of a freed spirit being a sabbath is the path to the Everlasting.

What is it that you think sin is exactly?

Sin is anything which distances us from God. Since no man or woman is all good or all bad, there will be times when they distance themselves from God. It’s unavoidable.

There are three possible states; we can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God or we can be static.

Furthermore, at any point in time we can change states.

So save your bullshit for someone else.

.

What is it that you think sin is exactly?

Sin is anything which distances us from God. Since no man or woman is all good or all bad, there will be times when they distance themselves from God. It’s unavoidable.

christianity is the religion of sinners, (all bad) no matter their persona of repentance they will reap what they sow - the original religion of antiquity is the triumph of good vs evil that is granted judgement and possible admission to the Everlasting.

the Almighty is simply the gatekeeper ... that will keep the unjustified from entering where they do not belong.

There are three possible states; we can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God or we can be static.

bing the dogmatic -

Columbus crossed the void and discovered land on the otherside, that is the mission for a spirit to be freed from the physical constraints through perseverance and knowledge to triumph by their own actions to be admitted to the Everlasting as a reward - it is a sin to remain a sinner, bing. making oneself pure is not - "no man or woman is all good or all bad" - have you fooled yourself or are you just lazy.

You never answered my question. How do you define sin?

Sin is disobedience to the law of God. But since the words of the law are figurative and the subjects are hidden, as Jesus revealed, many people are walking around feeling guilty for doing what is not sin and defiantly sinning without any awareness of their guilt.

Some people lie in the name of God as if its a religious duty and defy his commands as if death is the way to life.

There are even buildings all around the world where believers openly practice idolatry every Sunday thinking that by conforming to that vile and degrading practice they are saved.


Imagine that!

H,

i disagree.

Sin is not just disobedience to the law of God it is disobedience to the perfect will of God whether that is expressly outlined in a "law" or not.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

perfect will of God

Of course, the only one correct and perfect interpretation of which is in your possession. Don't leave out the best part!

 

[MedfordMan]

Can persons who resort to fallacy instead of sublime Truth (value) discoverable through argumentation, be moral?

DP,

the problem with "truth" is the limited nature of what man can know (Plato's cave allegory)

As Descartes opinined, "I think therefore I am".

Other than than mankind hasn't been able to agree on what is Truth.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Other than than mankind hasn't been able to agree on what is Truth.

Right, in cases where there is no way to test the truth of a proposal. On the other hand, mankind has come to agree the earth is a spheroid. And those who claim otherwise are wrong. Note that our only "truths" come from empirical examination.

While, on the other hand, magical, "divine" truths are untestable and, therefore, nonsense.

 

[MedfordMan]

perfect will of God

Of course, the only one correct and perfect interpretation of which is in your possession. Don't leave out the best part!

Actually, no I don't have truth of or understanding of God's perfect will.

God has the truth which he communicates to me constantly through the Holy Spirit.

my choice to act according to his direction or to act according to my own direction.

If I act on my understanding of the truth, my understanding is limited and my actions are often erroneous.

Unlike the Gnostics we don't study the Bible and worship God to learn the truth for ourselves, we do so to remind ourselves of who we are, who HE is and to stay in communion with HIM.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

God has the truth which he communicates to me constantly through the Holy Spirit.

Then you do claim to have it. Get your story straight.

And you also claim everyone who doesnt believe as you do is wrong. Further evidence that, despite any of your contrived, flowery talking points to the contrary, you claim to be in possession of the one truth.

And this contradiction in your treatise from the start is evidence that you are selling a bill of goods.

 

[toobfreak]

Many theists believe it is clear-cut. Humans can only have opinions about morality, and no one’s opinion is any more valid than anyone else’s. This leads them to the conclusion that an objective source of morality must stand apart from, and above, humans. That source, they say, is God. Since atheists, reject God, atheists can have no basis for morality.

This is really two separate arguments: (1) that God is the source of objective morality and humans can learn morality from God and (2) that humans on their own have no way to know what is moral and what is not.

Can atheists be moral? - Atheist Alliance International

Well, you kind of got that right. In an absolute sense, morality, the ability to tell right from wrong must be independent from mankind otherwise any tyrant could say killing millions of his enemy is "Right" and it would be so. In absolute terms, also, how is an atheist to judge or determine right or wrong in the context of spiritual beliefs or acts? They can't, therefore, again, in that context, the highest absolute morality above all men must come from a source presumed above and separate from mankind, which we call "God."

Then it is up to you to argue the case for or against believing in a God in the first place, whether you are theist or not. If one accepts the source as divine then, OK. Thus, man shall not kill, steal, and so forth.

But some people are atheist, so they will not accept a so-called divine source of morality above man, nor can they rightly determine the correct morality in spiritual matters since they don't even recognize them! But in ALL OTHER INSTANCES of right and wrong, there is no reason to think or claim an atheist isn't capable of leading a "moral" life. Their morality will simply be based on some standard other than God, the innate inner compass of "common sense" that abides in all normal, healthy, reasonable, intelligent people we call our "conscience."

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

the ability to tell right from wrong must be independent from mankind otherwise any tyrant could say killing millions of his enemy is "Right" and it would be so.

And it IS so, if enough peole agree, for all practolical purposes.. Just as we all agreed at the time that firebombing german civilians was "right".

No, morality and ethics are not independent of the human mind. In fact, they are an invention of the human mind, and that is the only place they exist. Thus, a social contract and legal system designed to enforce the consensus from outside the human mind.