There is no justice if atheism is true

[muhammad_isa]

Paul would preach to the gentiles that salvation is by faith, not by the law.

I think that that should be understood in context.
Many Jews rejected Jesus' authority, and emphasised "the law".
Could there be salvation without belief in Jesus' authority? No.

Luther even added a word to a passage in the Pauline writings to read 'only' by faith.

..not good..

..you should not be telling Christians what to believe IMO

People will believe what they want to believe. They can decide for themselves.

 

[RJM]

I think that that should be understood in context.

In the context of the Quran, 600 years later, you mean?

 

[muhammad_isa]

..that doesn't cancel Christ's teaching, in the sermon on the mount, for instance.

Exactly.
Jesus taught his followers that those who live good lives and follow his teachings will be rewarded with eternal life in God's kingdom. Jesus also taught that those who commit sins and turn their back on God will receive eternal punishment in Hell.

It is not just about what Paul taught.

 

[RJM]

Many Jews rejected Jesus' authority, and emphasised "the law".

Other Jews, like Christ's closest disciples Peter, James and John took the other view -- as espoused by Paul in the earliest Christian writings, before even the gospels

is not just about what Paul taught.

Never said it was

 

[muhammad_isa]

In the context of the Quran, 600 years later, you mean?

The context I refer to is in rejecting Jesus' authority, as Paul did previously.

 

[RJM]

The context I refer to is in rejecting Jesus' authority, as Paul did previously.

If you say Paul rejected Jesus's authority, then you have to include Christ's closest followers: Peter, James and John. Did Peter and Jesus's brother James reject Jesus's authority?

 

[RJM]

@muhammad_isa

Please ignore my post above. I misunderstood you. Sorry

 

[muhammad_isa]

If you say Paul rejected Jesus's authority, then you have to include Christ's closest followers: Peter, James and John. Did Peter and Jesus's brother James reject Jesus's authority?

Huh?
Paul [aka Saul of Tarsus], persecuted followers of Jesus prior to his conversion on the road to Damascus.
After that, he obviously did accept Jesus' authority. He became a zealot.

edit: ah, you misunderstood OK

 

[RJM]

Huh?
Paul [aka Saul of Tarsus], persecuted followers of Jesus prior to his conversion on the road to Damascus.
After that, he obviously did accept Jesus' authority. He became a zealot.

Yes. Sorry. I misunderstood you. Sorry again

 

[badger]

You miss the whole point of Christ's teaching. Believe what you want, but you should not be telling Christians what to believe IMO

I've never mentioned Christ once.
And I've never told anybody what to believe.

 

[badger]

@badger
Of course there is justice in Christianity.

Salvation is by faith, not by the law, you mentioned.

Of course there is justice amongst non theists.

 

[wil]

Meh, I think it is just the opposing thumbs dexterity, and big frontal lobe.

I think we will constantly be amazed of the language used (communication) and consciousness by animals and plants

 

[wil]

I still find the title of this thread hillarious, disengenuous and sad

 

[Cino]

I still find the title of this thread hillarious, disengenuous and sad

To be fair, it was not started by the person whose words are quoted in the title.

One thing we have only touched on is the question of what this means.

"There is no justice if there is no god, no afterlife, and evildoers can get away with it at the end of their lives, they don't have to fear consequences beyond their lifespan"?

or

"Atheists are a danger to justice due to their unbelief, they undermine the ethical foundations of society"?

Two very different readings of the thread title.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

To be fair, it was not started by the person whose words are quoted in the title.

One thing we have only touched on is the question of what this means.

"There is no justice if there is no god, no afterlife, and evildoers can get away with it at the end of their lives, they don't have to fear consequences beyond their lifespan"?

or

"Atheists are a danger to justice due to their unbelief, they undermine the ethical foundations of society"?

Two very different readings of the thread title.

Reply removed at user's own request

 

[Ahanu]

"There is no justice if there is no god, no afterlife, and evildoers can get away with it at the end of their lives, they don't have to fear consequences beyond their lifespan"?

That's right. Let's hear why @wil thinks that is sad.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Atheists simply don't care if another doesn't 'get it' they are not about to plunder another culture and force them into accepting atheist thinking.

I don't think you can generalise like that.
There are many "isms" that are aggressive in nature. Not only religious belief.

Mankind are often violent. We often oppress one another.
It's not hard to fool ourselves into thinking we are the righteous ones,
whether it be capitalist, communist or otherwise.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

I don't think you can generalise like that.
There are many "isms" that are aggressive in nature. Not only religious belief.

Mankind are often violent. We often oppress one another.
It's not hard to fool ourselves into thinking we are the righteous ones,
whether it be capitalist, communist or otherwise.

Reply removed at user's own request

 

[Ahanu]

Money is an immaterial reality. I don't mean coins or bank notes or credit cards or account statements - these are icons, representations, but they are not "money".

Stories are immaterial. Ideas. Mathematics. Justice.

They are not immaterial under atheism.

Only the natural world we perceive exists under atheism.

Beliefs have material existence. Money is a belief system. Once neural structures in a creature reach a certain level of complexity, belief content appears in the mind. Our beliefs - including money and justice - reside there. It makes no sense to say an atheist can accept immaterial realities.

 

[Ahanu]

I accept immaterial realities, as do other atheists. I just don't have a god, on any plane, material or immaterial.

What other atheists accept immaterial realities?

Why classify a belief as immaterial under atheism?

It is true that I am a materialist, in a basic sense, in that I am convinced that life, consciousness, immaterial realities etc. require and arise out of matter and energy, not the other way around.

After beliefs arise out of matter, they become immaterial and, once matter is dispersed, they return to a material reality or disappear? I don't get it. Better to just label a belief as possessing material reality.

Panpsychism is a rather "idealist" (as opposed to "materialist") idea.

So it wouldn't make sense for an atheist to adopt this belief.

The question whether there are atheists who are not materialists is interesting. I have not met any so far.

Probably because there aren't any?