7 Points of a Godless Life

[Esquilax]

As usual, Esquilax, you offer up dishonest and diversionary debate points. Apparently doing so satisfies some need you have for self-righteous anger and belief in your own moral superiority.

And as usual, you completely misunderstand the basic concepts I was talking about, making your haughty, condescending ad hominems rather funny. Because see, you go on to say:

The Christian position is not, as you say, that people require the threat of after-death retribution to behave morally; but rather, that God gives the justice that is conspicuously absent during our mortal term. Christians are called to manifest in their words and deeds love of the Lord and to others as themselves. Love, not fear, is the basis of Christian morality.

I never said that. What I said- in fairly unambiguous terms, I thought- was that I find it interesting that the christians willing to say that atheists live a life free of accountability seem to believe that they require retributive justice after death, something that I as an atheist don't actually think I need. The implication is that christians like you commit acts that demand punishment, whereas atheists do not. When I die, it won't be with the sense that I'm getting away with some wrong committed in life, because I'll have done my best to commit no wrongs, and to make up for those I do in the here and now. I'm kinda blown away with the hidden premises of what you said, which is that you yourself have committed wrong acts with no intention of making up for them before you die, to the point that you can't imagine anyone else being otherwise.

I can't even understand how you managed to take an "evidently, atheists are more moral than christians," statement and turn it into a "so you think we can't be moral?!" statement.

You claim not to need a divine threat as an incentive to behave morally.

No, my claim is that, divine threat or not, I have nothing to fear because I've done nothing deserving punishment. See, that's the thing: you're either going to have a reasonable god who will assess my actions on their own terms, in which case I'm fine, or you're going to have a christian god who's just going to Hell me up for not believing, in which case it doesn't matter what I do, since I can't force myself to believe something irrational, nor can I trick that god through presenting a belief I don't hold.

If you have a god whose judgment would actually reflect a moral dimension, then I would come out good. If you have a god whose divine threat I would actually fall afoul of, then his judgment would not reflect a moral dimension at all, it would just be retribution for not kowtowing to arbitrary rules.

A good god would not send me to hell. A god that would send me to hell would not be doing so because I wasn't good.

That may be. But that was not my point which was this; just as believers can take comfort in God’s justice and mercy, atheists can take comfort in the idea that they are not bound by any divine or natural law. This gives them license to conform morality to their personal opinions and proclivities, which is what you, Esquilax and others, do.

I don't, though? My personal opinions are irrelevant to morality. Reality is what informs morality, not what I want. The harm or benefit actions cause are objective, not subjective.

With respect to your mean-spirited accusation that Christians avoid responsibility, it is true that some Christians mistakenly believe that they can sin and not be held accountable if they ask for forgiveness. That is not sound doctrine (Scriptural references provided upon request). Christ’s forgiveness is not a “Get-Out-of-Hell-Free” card. First there must be true repentance before God extends Mercy. Even our earthly justice system recognizes that the severity of the sentence is tempered by the convict’s contrition. Once forgiveness has been granted the believer must persist in their regeneration. It is Christ’s victory that allows us to overcome, something not available to unbelievers who rely on their own strength and willpower. And it is He who provides the full restitution that no mortal, on his own, has power to give.

Still the same thing. Whether you're actively out to skip out on justice or not, the fact is that, if you believe you deserve some form of justice in the afterlife but are taking a course of action that would prevent that justice from being borne out and placing that responsibility on another, you are taking a loophole. To use your convict example, yes, the law recognizes contrition, but it doesn't just say "okay you're sorry, you're acquitted," either. Nor would the judge accept "I'm sorry, and also Jake over there has already served my sentence, so..." as reason to acquit either. There's still some expectation of punishment, even if that punishment is lessened due to remorse. The Jesus option is still a loophole, and so a christian has no place at all to be talking about accountability, since they've already arranged matters such that they face none. The intent behind that is meaningless, the deal still prevents them from being accountable for their own actions.