Posted on 05/27/2007 9:43:00 AM PDT by wagglebee
I received a lot emails from snippy atheists after my column, “Atheists had Better Pray to God They’re Right” ran the week of May 13, 2007. I had many God-deniers tell me, quite self-righteously I might add, that they lived by a high moral code without the aid of any “opiate” or “crutch” like Jesus or Moses, and they didn’t need some archaic holy book giving them the skinny on how they should live.
Hey, arrogant atheists, here’s an aside before I take you to task any further: that self-righteous, “I’m good enough without God” attitude is the very sin that Christ condemned the most. But I wouldn’t worry about that, since Jesus probably never existed anyway. And if He did, He wasn’t “the One” He thought He was and said He was and thus, all He said was a load of hooey. That is, according to your wizards.
Anyway, back to my point. Did I make a point yet? Please forgive me. My coffee is wearing off. Okay, now I’m tracking. . . .
In the volley of hate email hailed down upon me, one particular anti-God guy stated that he lived better than most Christians. He further patted himself on the back by saying that his Christian buddies even gave him big props for his squeaky-cleanness. Well, let me join in your hombres’ praise by saying a big “Good for you, dude. Here’s a brownie button.” I’ll be the first to admit that I’ll take a civil atheist over an irrational and violent al Qaeda op any old day.
The problem I have, however, with the atheists and their goodness and their morality claims is that all your ethical codes of conduct sound strangely similar to the principles inherent to the Judeo-Christian traditions. As a matter of fact, it seems as if you have bellied up to the Bible and are treating it like a buffet . . . passing up on the worship of the person and work of God, while taking second helpings of His moral principles, you duplicitous, little, evolved monkey, you.
One of my old seminary profs used to say that although such muddled atheists would never verbally affirm the existence of God, they would live according to some ethical standard, some moral capital they have milked from us theists.
If I were an atheist and I believed that God didn’t exist, that the Bible was a bunch of weird bunk written by religiously deluded men several thousand years ago, that Jesus was an apocalyptic, sandal-wearing, hippie forerunner of David Koresh who went around spitting out cheeky clichés who needed not to be heeded, but straight-jacketed or at least ignored—I sure as heck wouldn’t be borrowing any tidbits of His wisdom to navigate my life’s glide path.
If Moses, Elijah, Abraham, David, Jeremiah, Paul and Peter were not who they claimed to be and spoke not for Whom they claimed to speak, then these dudes were certifiably psycho and you wouldn’t find me (if I were an atheist) taking any of their moral maxims and making them into inspirational refrigerator magnets.
That’s what I appreciate about the atheist and philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). Freddy is one of the few atheists who told his fellow atheistic buddies that they couldn’t have their cake and eat it, too. Nietzsche understood that we can either have God and meaningful morality, or we can have no God and thus, all life is meaningless and without any trace of hope . . . it officially sucks.
Nietzsche came to the conclusion that if there is no God—or God is dead, as he put it—then he’s not going to live “as if” God is alive and His moral principles mattered. Yes, brass-balled Friedrich said that the opposite of how the Bible says to live is the way we should live.
Nietzsche, unlike you postmodern Nancy atheists, was welded to his belief that God was dead and Christian morality was gonzo. He was not a half-hearted atheist parading around like most atheists do today, claiming the title while schlepping to Judeo-Christian principles.
Once again, if I did not believe in God and I believed that the 10 commandments were BS and that faith, hope and love is for “the herd”, and that I came from nothing and I’m going to nothing and there is no ultimate eternal accountability for my actions—then I am sure not going to live like I did. Why do you do so, Mr. & Mrs. Atheist?
So what’s it going to be, my obstreperous amigos? Are you going to continue to blather on about there being no God and then live like there is one and that His word and will matters? Get consistent, why don’t ‘cha? Don’t live by the Ten Commandments. Don’t live by the Golden Rule. Don’t do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That’s our stuff. That’s the Judeo-Christian way. Get your own commandments that are logically deduced from the “no God” hypothesis, write your own unholy book and form your own civilization. Then let’s see how appealing it is, how it betters the planet and how far you’ll get.
Perfect!
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
When they are on the edge of death, let us hear the cries... “I’m good enough without God”.
Perhaps these hypocritical atheists follow the “moral code” because to do otherwise would land them in jail, or dead. In other words, for pragmatic reasons.
I for one am grateful they are so hypocritical!
Atlas Shrugged, for example. Ayn Rand was one of those who tried to get the last 6 Commandments without the first four. Not coincidentally, there were neither children nor humor among the heroes of her civilization. In fact, the only children in that whole wretched tale -- met only in passing -- were nothing more than little grown-ups.
The precise problem with an atheistic approach to objective morality is that it must rely on something other than God. Ayn Rand never satisfactorily answered the question of why people shouldn't behave like the rest of nature -- she simply assumed that they mustn't do so. It was her secret nod to the necessity for God, but she'd never have admitted it.
Atlas Shrugged, for example. Ayn Rand was one of those who tried to get the last 6 Commandments without the first four. Not coincidentally, there were neither children nor humor among the heroes of her civilization. In fact, the only children in that whole wretched tale -- met only in passing -- were nothing more than little grown-ups.
The precise problem with an atheistic approach to objective morality is that it must rely on something other than God. Ayn Rand never satisfactorily answered the question of why people shouldn't behave like the rest of nature -- she simply assumed that they mustn't do so. It was her secret nod to the necessity for God, but she'd never have admitted it.
bttt
So I guess at the end of the day it might make a difference if you live in Mister Rogers' Neighborhood with him in charge, or if you live in Mister Adolph Hitlers' Neighborhood with Hitlers' moral code in place.
...hmmm, sounds like it's time to post my "Darwin meets Jesus in our public schools...and the American Atheists love it that way" because survival of the fittest and natural selection doesn't work real well for the weak or the outnumbered....
Why doesn’t he just say “Atheists, get out of the country?”
Nietzsche is dead. - God
G.K. Chesterton, a devout Catholic, once wrote a poem he called “The Song of the Strange Ascetic”. All stanzas except the last began, “If I had been a heathen...”
According to the poem, he would have -
“praised the purple vine/My slaves should dig the vineyard/And I would drink the wine”
“I’d have crowned Neaera’s curls/And filled my life with love affairs,/My house with dancing girls”
“I’d have sent my armies forth,/And dragged behind my chariots/The Chieftains of the North”
“I’d have piled my pyre on high,/And in a great red whirlwind/Gone roaring to the sky”
At the end, Chesterton laments the strange ascetic, the “poor old sinner” who “sins without delight”, who does “not have the faith, and will not have the fun”.
They already did. It was called the Soviet Union. Oh, and let us not forget North Korea.
If I were to use any god as a source for my beliefs, I would defiantly not use the Christian god, or at least take the Xtian god in a literal sense.
Here’s why.
Biblegod has slaughtered the firstborn children of the Egyptian nation.
Joshua 7:15
He kills all the living beings on earth except for a few.
Genesis 6:7, 17
He sends 2 virgins to get raped by a mob.
19:7-8
And many more brutal things done by this Biblegod can be read in Genesis. I would say more, but I have to go buy some groceries in a few minutes.
One does not need to be Jewish or Christian or a member of any other religion to follow the Golden Rule.
Here is something to think about from the Wikipedia article on the Ethic of Reciprocity (Golden Rule):
"Ethics of reciprocity is fundamental to Buddhism. This is partly due to the fact that Buddhism, unlike theistic religions, does not rely on divine revelation. Therefore, in Buddhism, all aspects of teaching are regarded as wisdom rather than supernaturally derived and are to be undertaken voluntarily rather than as "commandments."
Before you blame God, you might want to actually read some of the verses you quote. There is no indication that God condoned Lot’s action in trying to send his daughters out to appease the mob. That was entirely Lot’s idea and if you read more about Lot you will find that he often made bad choices which had some terrible consequences. Further, God’s angels acted supernaturally to blind the mob and prevent anyone from being injured. So, your last point is completely bogus.
Nietsche (1888): God is dead!
God (1900): Neitsche is dead.
Here is a link to the entire text. It is odd that people who have declared themselves free of G-d spend most of their time and energy railing against Him. http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~mward/gkc/books/ascetic.html
I have no argument with your argument, but do correct misspelled word in your tagline.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.