It is freeing to recognize that I have never sinned and it pissed Christians off when I say this. To clarify, in Christianity sin is not simply "the bad things we do" it is specifically an offense against god. God does not exists so i have never sinned against him.

I've been an atheist for for 16 years but it was only recently that I realized this distinction. It short-circuits the guilt based evangelism. It forces the christian to first demonstrate that god exists before they can convince me I have sinned and need to be saved from that sin. And to say the least, they are ill equipped to demonstrate the existence of god.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 47 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The Bible proves God is real, and God wrote the Bible, which proves he's real because he wrote it.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I know you're illustrating the circular logic at play here. But don't these people ask how the words got onto paper? Like didn't Yahweh need a scribe and a printing press or something? And which version did he write anyway? The ancient Greek one? The King James version from well over a millennium later? The modern one used at their local church?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I had a couple Christian missionaries ring my doorbell last week and I brought some of that up.

    She was reading from the King James New Testament I think... I asked her who controlled the text between the time God wrote it and today. She didn't have an answer and seemed confused as to why I was asking.

    I said that the message of the Bible has been controlled by the Church or the State since its inception, and both of those entities have an acute interest in guiding the will of the people, for good or for ill, depending on when and where. It's how society has always worked.

    I asked if she could see how that message could have been altered over time in the interest of maintaining a complacent (I didn't say it, but also "ignorant") populace. Needless to say, it wasn't very effective.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    What's really fun is that I've talked to Christians who have told me in all seriousness that the King James Bible is the "correct" version and all others, including all those that predate it, are wrong.

    I assume some Christians who speak German say the same thing about whatever German edition they consider to be the "correct" one.

    I don't get it, but that is really what they believe. That it wasn't the true Bible until it was put into English.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    god’s version was like a shitty draft of short stories and some people made a really terrible translation of it and tried to tie it all together in the same universe

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Like how Nintendo tries to say the Zelda series is cohesive, lol

    (Except Zelda is amazing, imo)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Hey, if you take out all of the preachy bullshit, the Bible has a lot of pretty amazing stories too. The entire world drowns except for one family and a boat full of animals. A lady turns into a pillar of salt. A group of people try to build a tower, but can't finish it because suddenly everyone speaks a different language. That's just in the first chapter.

    So maybe we can look at the Bible as someone playing Zelda games, but really badly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    the Bible has a lot of pretty amazing stories too. The entire world drowns except for one family and a boat full of animals

    I don't think you'll ever convince me the Noah's Ark story isn't hot garbage. It's like the shittiest knockoff version of the flood myths from thousands of years prior because someone wanted to shoehorn it into the Bible. Even if we accept it as myth, the water didn't form the earth or give birth to any primordial gods or anything, it was just Yahweh having a childish ecocidal tantrum.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I don't know, I think the childish ecological tantrum part of the story is part of what makes it interesting, divorced from the religious context. Angry gods are more interesting than benevolent ones, at least to me. And sure, it was a derivative story, but so what? So was much of Shakespeare. I would suggest to you that the very fact that it was derivative is evidence that people think it's a good story.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Angry gods are more interesting than benevolent ones, at least to me.

    Sure, but that's also in some of the older, better versions. Noah's flood has the extra tacked on crap about the boat and gathering two of each animal, as if somehow any of that is plausible or sensible. This isn't Shakespeare putting an interesting new spin on the tale of Julius Caesar, IMO it's just sad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago

    It is freeing as an agnostic atheist; I've dropped the idea of sin. An unproven being cannot be 'sinned' against. The bible to begin with was written by man, until God himself visits all of humanity to introduce themselves...The shackles of sin that Christians wear is for them alone. No amount of shame or anger those believers attempt to burden me with will cause me to adopt the concept of sin again! Their creator must prove that it exists, as the burden of proof always lies with the one who presents an idea.

    I simply act with a moral compass that guides me into not doing illegal or shitty things to other human beings. I feel this is enough to live a good life.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    I love to piss them off by telling them the only way for god to objectively exist as an all omnipotent being is for the simulated universe theory to be true.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    One of the fundamentals I've learned in a hobby study of moral philosophy (unaccredited. I just read stuff and watch videos.) is the English language is not great for talking about wrongdoing.

    We have the words sin and crime

    Sin is a wrongdoing against God or against the divine, as asserted by organized religious ministries, who often do not agree. (Here in the States, some churches assert that gay sexual behavior is a sin, whereas others assert that judging others for being gay is a sin.) None of this is true. As Pope Frances observed, Only God knows the mind or intent of God, and Protestant faiths operate by the doctrines Sola Fide (By faith alone) and Sola Scriptura (By scripture alone) does one find salvation. Your favorite minister can only advise with opinions, and often they do to serve their own agenda. You and you alone get to decide what parts of the bible are valid in your life in the 2020s, and which parts are allegory, which parts are out of date (e.g. slavery, genocide, human sacrifice) and whether God will understand you're doing your best in the circumstances He threw at you.

    Crime is an offense against the state, which is, in turn, the organization that defines and enforces state law and is supposed to provide governance, often typically serving only the plutocrats and oligarchs that define what kinds of policy will be enacted. The state is not the community or the land, hence we see routine pushes to roll back environmental protections so that the community has clean air and drinking water, instead allowing industry to dump its soot and pig farmers to let their poop lagoons leak and poison the water table.

    As a younger adult, seeing the CIA extrajudicial detention and enhanced interrogation program kidnap people and torture them, including innocent Americans, without judicial review or due process was one of my first steps into realizing the illegitimacy of the United States. None of that served the people of the US (we have much more effective non-pain-driven ways to interrogate POWs. Torture only happened because rich people wanted brown people to suffer). Since then we've seen our own rights stripped away peacemeal, and noticed a disparity in how the rule of law applies to those with wealth, and those without. So the state is very much an entity other than the public or our society.

    Neither sin nor crime reflect wrongdoing against the self, the community, the society or the commonwealth, and English doesn't have names for such wrongdoing. We have to modify sin and crime such as crime against humanity or sin against nature

    And this, then leads to what we imagine sin and crime to be, mostly wonton (unlicensed) sex, bank robbery and serial killing. Our songs of sin and remorse talk about killing neighbors or fucking neighbors. They don't talk about war profiteering, or pushing addictive pharmaceuticals, or capturing the government of the people, or actively obfuscating the effects of mass fossil-fuel use on the ecology, collapsing the ecology, extinguishing biodiversity and possibly the human species. Elite deviance (e.g. white collar crime) causes more death, more destruction and more cost than all the petty sins and crimes _by multiple orders of magnitude) and yet God (God's alleged voice) has nothing to say about them, and the state says very little, while it's instead looking to abolish drag queens reading to children at the library.

    So not only is there no sin, but sin and crime are irrelevant, except for those things that are enforced by law enforcement institutions that mostly want to rob citizens and / or shoot them. But this is to say you will be hunted for self publishing your music or whistleblowing a company for balking safety regulations as you will robbing a bank.

    So not only are we truly free from moral obligations, but we might actually be ethically bound to consider for ourselves what we opine is right and wrong. When religious ministries are asserting violence against gays, Palestinians and immigrants is right and proper, obedience to divine command theory is no longer safe or right.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Since I became an atheist, I have been really trying to sanitize my speech away from the religious speak because its not a matter of simply choosing different synonmyns because words like immoral and sin are words with completely different meanings.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›