Do atheists have souls?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crazy faux-atheist, you can't force the rest of us to change our definitions of atheism. Words mean what most people take them to mean. That's how language works. Can yourself a cow for all I care but if it mattered to me I would mention to you that you aren't a cow.

I don't notice that crazy faux-atheist is trying to force the rest of us to do anything - just sounding off on his view of things. The word "morals" also means different things to different people - and God knows "god" does.

They are claiming that atheist means no belief in God plus no morals. Then they claimed the rest of the atheists on here aren't real atheists because we believe in morals.

[Anonymous]

Atheists obviously do not believe they have souls unless they are hilariously illogical.

So unless they are wrong about the most important issue that there is... They have no souls.

[Anonymous]

I'm an atheist, and I do believe in souls, as defined as psyche, consciousness, and even spirit. I think humans and possibly some animals have this consciousness. I am open to the idea that souls exist outside of the corporal body. I still consider myself an atheist, because I do not believe in any divinity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the discussion of "morality" has gone way off base. You don't need religion to have moral reason. Why would you?

If a child is running a fever of 102 and vomiting - you know they are sick don't you? You can quickly discern healthy from unhealthy no matter what religion you are?

In the same manner, you can distinguish healthy from unhealthy actions. How would the tribe survive if killing the members indiscriminately was okay? How would the tribe survive if they couldn't trust each other to tell the truth about things like dangerous animals or places? How could the tribe survive if stealing resources from each other was the rule? It wouldn't survive so you wouldn't be here. The successful tribes are the ones that evolved successful moral values among themselves.

If in later times it was helpful to codify those values into some tale about stone tablets, well - fine. History is full of stories told to explain evolutionary events to the uneducated and gullible.

This assumes that "survival of the tribe" is the ultimate Good.
Why would that be? No rational "a priori" basis for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm an atheist, and I do believe in souls, as defined as psyche, consciousness, and even spirit. I think humans and possibly some animals have this consciousness. I am open to the idea that souls exist outside of the corporal body. I still consider myself an atheist, because I do not believe in any divinity.

Thats a funny religion you made up there !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crazy faux-atheist, you can't force the rest of us to change our definitions of atheism. Words mean what most people take them to mean. That's how language works. Can yourself a cow for all I care but if it mattered to me I would mention to you that you aren't a cow.

I don't notice that crazy faux-atheist is trying to force the rest of us to do anything - just sounding off on his view of things. The word "morals" also means different things to different people - and God knows "god" does.

They are claiming that atheist means no belief in God plus no morals. Then they claimed the rest of the atheists on here aren't real atheists because we believe in morals.

I think he made a claim about himself, but not about everyone else. At any rate, don't take it personally, atheists don't have a claim on good sense, with this poster as an example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm an atheist, and I do believe in souls, as defined as psyche, consciousness, and even spirit. I think humans and possibly some animals have this consciousness. I am open to the idea that souls exist outside of the corporal body. I still consider myself an atheist, because I do not believe in any divinity.

what do you think happens to your soul after you die?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an atheist, and I do believe in souls, as defined as psyche, consciousness, and even spirit. I think humans and possibly some animals have this consciousness. I am open to the idea that souls exist outside of the corporal body. I still consider myself an atheist, because I do not believe in any divinity.

what do you think happens to your soul after you die?

The consciousness dies as well.

[Anonymous]

I believe we are all dreaming and don't really exist at all. The whole thing is a mirage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only if they have feet...

What if some are paraplegics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe we are all dreaming and don't really exist at all. The whole thing is a mirage.

Its not even a dream. that is dignifying it too much. It is pointless, nonsensical noise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crazy faux-atheist, you can't force the rest of us to change our definitions of atheism. Words mean what most people take them to mean. That's how language works. Can yourself a cow for all I care but if it mattered to me I would mention to you that you aren't a cow.

I don't notice that crazy faux-atheist is trying to force the rest of us to do anything - just sounding off on his view of things. The word "morals" also means different things to different people - and God knows "god" does.

They are claiming that atheist means no belief in God plus no morals. Then they claimed the rest of the atheists on here aren't real atheists because we believe in morals.

I'm not claiming that. I'm just claiming that any atheist that does believe in morals is stupid. I personally am not that stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crazy faux-atheist, you can't force the rest of us to change our definitions of atheism. Words mean what most people take them to mean. That's how language works. Can yourself a cow for all I care but if it mattered to me I would mention to you that you aren't a cow.

I don't notice that crazy faux-atheist is trying to force the rest of us to do anything - just sounding off on his view of things. The word "morals" also means different things to different people - and God knows "god" does.

They are claiming that atheist means no belief in God plus no morals. Then they claimed the rest of the atheists on here aren't real atheists because we believe in morals.

I'm not claiming that. I'm just claiming that any atheist that does believe in morals is stupid. I personally am not that stupid.

You might be a sociopath.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's wrong with a logical atheist^^ the posters point is way more scientific and logical . What is a goofier religion than an atheist with some dumb opinion on what he feels is moral or good? Some atheist people have violence and power in the good column and if they can kill you then I guess they are the ones who are right.

Explain the logical connection between the premise "When we die, there is no afterlife and no supreme being," to "There are no morals"?

Morals without a creator or afterlife are individual. If one persons morals include killing people who get in his way then it is equally valid to any other. Anything otherwise is the "feelings"'of a separate essentially worthless being.

You've clearly never taken a college philosophy class. Freshmen can reason better than this.

Go back to church, dear. They'll tell you what to do. It's a good thing that someone will because you're aren't capable of figuring it out for yourself.

hahaha... college philosophy class! that's a funny religion!

Both the fire-and-brimstone-Christian and the faux-atheist could use some classes in ethics and logic and moral reasoning. They teach those in the philosophy class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Christ said " what is good? No one is good except the father ."

Christians do not believe they are good. They believe they are forgiven and saved by grace.

My children are good.

I don't need a god to tell me that I'm wrong in thinking that.

My children are good and kind and loving.

BS. Children are self centered . When is the last time they gave their brand new toys to a poor kid?

What in the hell ever happened to Matthew 19:14?

Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

My daughter gives away her items to her brother, who's younger, and to the thrift shop in our 'hood. My son always writes me cards in school, telling me how much he loves me.

-One of the atheists signing off

But she is not giving her Brand New presents away to other kids so she's self centered , at least according to pp.

FWIW, I do think that God wants us to be kind and good to each other and that includes being charitable to others less fortunate. And charity is not just about money there are lots of other ways to give of yourself. Remember - we are all "less fortunate" in one way or another. It's not just about handing over $$$$ and new toys.

I think what I've highlighted in bold says more about you than about my 10 yo daughter. Just b/c something is new and shiny doesn't mean it has more value. The act of giving is just as important as the item that's being donated.

But you're putting a price on that.

nice job, Christian

Again, if you're so religious and driven by God to do good, you'd know your bible more -

Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

12 years of Catholic school taught me something.

- Atheist signing off again

My post is the one that you bolded, and I think that you either misunderstood or I didn't explain my thoughts well. It was not my intent to put a price on anything actually. Would you want every gift that you receive to be second hand, used. Would you expect your youngest child to never, ever receive anything brand new and just be happy with your oldest child's hand me downs? Of course not.

I have given away used items that had more meaning and more value to a person than any similar new item would. It is quite possible to do that. It is also possible to give away things just to get rid of them. Ex: I recently took a car load of stuff that I no longer wanted to Goodwill. It was better to do that than it would have been to just toss those items into the trash. Someone will hopefully get some use out of them and I have less clutter. Win-win. My family participated in a yard sale recently and one of the things I was selling were children's shoes. I probably had 20 pairs of them set out, many barely worn. It was early in the morning, the sale had just begun and we had already sold a pair for 4 bucks, woohoo! Then a man came up and explained that he was collecting shoes to send to orphans in another country. We gave him the rest of those shoes.

ok
You win.

My daughter's going to hell b/c she donated her used Barbies.

At least I can keep her company.