It’s reasonable to assume, the worst is yet to come.

OR; things are bad but they could be worse.

The above is not the premise of the article. Instead it bases its objection to the outcomes of mans competitive nature on a misconstrued Darwinian “theory” of evolution.

Misconstrued if argued from a Christian belief perspective, since it includes the hand of God in human outcomes.

Best to leave God out of the argument, when exposing the folly of the history of man.

Dan

Yes. Why blame God, in whom a growing number of these "aggressive monsters" don't believe. If the monsters just stuck to the Ten Commandments they wouldn't be monsters

Peter Bowden said "old people suffer from depression"

Answer- The Republic's first chapter is a discussion between two old (and great) men. Read it if you feel down.

In the book of Joshua God orders Joshua to commit genocide on the Canaanites. God slaughters the innocent first born of the Egyptians. In the New Testament God condemns his own son to a most uncomfortable and torturous death. If God is the God in the Bible he is a very nasty individual. Although some humans are nasty I think most of them are kinder and more loving than the God of the Bible.

Yes, wouldn’t it be much better if there is no God.

For a start we could all do whatever we like – or at least whatever we can get away with, with a clear conscience. Any talk of objective right and wrong is meaningless in a godless universe. So even a rapist or a murderer is innocent of wrongdoing!

Yes, if we have just happened to evolve from the primordial slime then it doesn’t matter what we do as there is nothing that we are supposed to do.

Whatever state the world is in is just as “good” or “bad” as any other. For sure people may have preferences about how things should be, but no one has to care about anyone else’s preferences. Just do whatever you like and tell any whingers to shut up!

In a godless universe no one is responsible to anyone else for anything. Talk about being free!

Go for it Peter!!

No, that's incorrect. It's not God that got it wrong but mankind! The unified field theory explains, that everything in the universe is energy. And much of it as transformed energy including us, that is a part of that energy.

As a being, God is unimaginable massively monumental energy. Energy that is able to think, rationalise in pure unemotive logic and love.

And we are a part of that energy as divine sparks that is the life force or divine spark in each and everyone of us!

"In", meaning inside, not an outside lookalike in miniature!

But rather, as if we were but an atom in a water molecule in a vast body of water The body of water, an allegorical representation of the image and the "in', an allegorical representation of the "in" that is mankind!

And not the simplistic explanation of most organised "religions"!
Alan B.

Reading some of the above commentaries, God is blamed for the evil men have done, when given free choice! Or if you will, an ability to choose between good and evil?

Folk with evil in their hearts who succumb to that influence? Will always be able to justify with C.R.A.P., like God demanded it of me?

In today's understanding, we would say such a person hearing voices coming from thin air, was psychotic! And given no evidence to the contrary? How can anyone say otherwise?

Clearly, it's extremely disconcerting to hear voices coming from thin air! But even more so, when you understand what they're saying.
Alan B.

"Yes, wouldn’t it be much better if there is (sic) no God".

Yes, if you wanted to be like all the Third World shitholes that haven't had Christianity as the basis of democracy. All the wrongs done by people are down to people: not a God, nor Christianity.

If you believe in a God, or need a God, you also need to be aware that there's a lot of difference between the Christian one, the Muslim one, and all the idols some people call gods.

As for the people who harp on the Old Testament as sure proof of Christian bastardry, and even the bits of the New Testament they don't like - those people need to know that it was all written by humans, well after the death of Christ. People who hate Christianity are always going to cite the bad - the stuff that any right-minded person objects to - never the good.

Well the author has taken a text completely out of context - the purpose of the Bible is to teach us values, not science or history. In particular, the creation story of Genesis 1 (along the first three verses of Genesis 2) is meant as a hymn for the Sabbath, explaining the value in keeping the 4th commandment, carving regular time off work to rest and contemplate, no matter how successful (or otherwise) we might be at work:

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labour and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God, in it you shall not do any work... For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

It seems that the author finds this particular lesson difficult:

"The particular issue with which this writer has long questioned, however, is sleep. We sleep each night about a third of the day. In a lifetime of 75 or so years, that means we sleep for 25 years, What a waste!"

Resting is not a waste. Keeping a good balance between work and rest is so important for one's well-being. Had people been observing the 4th commandment and curbed their ambitions, perhaps we wouldn't have had that many wars!

Imagine the number of people killed in the name of one religion or the other.
Their beliefs have absolutely no foundation.
All their deaths revolved around who has the best Sky fairy.
There is not on single piece of evidence to support the existence of such a sky fairy, nor the existence of any prophet or saints.
A total waste of human life.

I just wonder why God created stupidity & enough people to adhere to it !

God created stupidity because he created man in his image. It's pretty stupid to destroy almost all life on earth because he didn't like what some humans were doing. It's pretty stupid to tell Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. Since they didn't have the knowledge of good and evil they would have no idea it was wrong to disobey god. The God of the Bible is a most unreasonable fellow. However, he is a creation of human imagination. Those who wrote the Bible could have created a reasonable god, but they chose not to. Reason may take second place to fiction.

Dear Atheist,

«Imagine the number of people killed in the name of one religion or the other.»

You just nailed it: people get killed IN THE NAME of religion, it is not religion which kills them - it is people, foolish people who have no real idea about religion (assuming they even genuinely cared about God in the first place).

«Their beliefs have absolutely no foundation.»

Not if you attempt to treat them as facts, but religious beliefs were not meant to be facts, they were meant as thought-techniques that can help devotees on their path to God. God is beyond any description or intellectual understanding - either you know God or you don't, but these beliefs (when taught correctly) are helpful and operate as a crutch until you do.

«All their deaths revolved around who has the best Sky fairy.»

Just to show that these murderous idiots ridiculously equate God with some sky-fairy.

«There is not on single piece of evidence to support the existence of such a sky fairy»

Anything which exists is limited, including sky-fairies, if they did.
A limited being, powerful as it might be, is not worthy of worship or seeking, certainly unworthy of being called "God".

Clearly God does not exist, for otherwise He/She/It would be limited, if by nothing else than at least by existence, presumably their own creation.

«nor the existence of any prophet or saints.»

Perhaps not a material evidence, but when you see someone behaving completely selflessly, sacrificing everything they have, including their life if necessary, for the well-being of others, that is an indication of their sainthood. I had the fortune to meet someone like that.

«A total waste of human life.»

We are here to learn. No life is completely wasted if we learn our lessons, including the unpleasant and fatal ones.

The big bang theory is just not credible! But supported by folk who want to believe there's no God nor intelligent design!

Gravity measurements tell us that the most abundant matter in the universe is dark matter. And the known universe could be a tiny projection of dark matter transformed into what we know as the immeasurable known universe? [Given from nothing you get nothing!]

Other than that, we know that the visible universe and everything in it, including you and I, is part of a unified field and as such, just transformed energy vibrating a tad below the speed of light.

Can the universe think or love? Well, you and I can and we are an integral part of it. When you or I think a thought, there is a measurable transfer of electrical energy between one brain synapse and another. And all matter is also transformed energy! Think about that!
Alan B.

Dear Yuyutsu,

One cannot learn a fatal lesson. Somebody else may learn a lesson from the fact of our demise. I don't think we are here to learn or for any other particular purpose. We learn to do things that will help us survive. Sometime we learn things that will make us less likely to survive. In the end none of us survive. However, learning can give us pleasure.

You must have joy from meeting the saintly person you mentioned. I have joy from remembering my grandmother who combined love, kindness and skepticism better than anyone else I have ever met.

It's incredible that the very people who don't believe in God, blame this non-existent God for the bad behaviour of humans like themselves.

Dear David,

«One cannot learn a fatal lesson. Somebody else may learn a lesson from the fact of our demise.»

Yes, others too may be able to learn, but I should have made myself clearer: logically, one indeed cannot learn a lesson after their demise, but this inevitable demise which I referred to by loosely using the word "fatal", only describes the demise of our body, thus we can hopefully still learn to not repeat our mistakes the next time around.

«I don't think we are here to learn or for any other particular purpose. We learn to do things that will help us survive.»

This sounds depressing: why would one care to learn such things that could help their bodies to survive a while longer if they already know that this fix can only be temporary, while also thinking that there is no other purpose for us to be here? Yes, they may obtain some temporary pleasure from the act of learning, but this pleasure too would neither last nor is believed by them to constitute a purpose.

Dear Yuyutsu,

I get pleasure from learning. I know the pleasure is only temporary, and the gray cells that contain that learning will decay with my death. Why do you think there will be a next time around? Some of the atoms that make up my body will be part of another living body in the future. Most won't. My consciousness will disappear with my death. All pleasure as all pain is evanescent. Our pleasure like our suffering is temporary. That's life. That's death.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/246/246-h/246-h.htm

I sometimes think that never blows so red
The Rose as where some buried Caesar bled;
That every Hyacinth the Garden wears
Dropt in its Lap from some once lovely Head.

Enjoy it.

Dear David,

«Why do you think there will be a next time around?»

This is the most likely possibility, so it would be irrational to assume otherwise.

As a rule, most things we do once, we will be doing again, perhaps not exactly to the last minute detail, but still. If we eat, the probability is that this will not be our last meal: we might not eat again the exact same food with the same spoon, but most likely we will eat again, and not just once. If we tie our shoelaces, the probability is that we will tie them again. Perhaps the edge will be a few millimeters shorter or longer, perhaps it would not even be the same laces on the same shoe, but most likely we will tie shoelaces again, and not just once.

So having once associated our consciousness with some physical body, in most likelihood we shall do this again.

Dear Yuyutsu,

You think the next time around is a likely possibility, but that is your belief. You have provided no evidence for your belief so there is no reason for me to accept that is a likely possibility. I think it is more reasonable that there is no next time around. I think that the simpler assumption is the more likely.

Dear David,

Well of course, nobody could ever provide a physical evidence for that which is non-physical, else that too would have been physical!

You are, I hope, aware that you are conscious, it would on the one hand be laughable if someone insisted that you are not, but on the other hand you will never be able to provide evidence for that subjective experience which for you is undeniable.

«I think that the simpler assumption is the more likely.»

Upon seeing a flower, assuming that it is the one and only, is not a simpler assumption.

I would normally have passed by without commenting, I'm less evangelical than I used to be.

@ttbn called atheists "monsters." This kind of dehumanising characterisation is not very Christian.

The 10 Commandments might be a good source for virtue signalling, but you clearly didn't read them very well.

Thanks for your papers, Peter.

For a few years, I have been pushing the idea that Over Cheaters, Bully Narcissists at different times in society's take over much of the administration of government, businesses, banking etc. The result of this is war.

The point is mankind has really reached the end of its ability to host large scale wars on this planet so how are we going to find our own way to subdue this personality type?

Usually, it's we go to war & that kind of resets things until the next conflagration.

There is some evidence for the criminal behavior of various groups in our prson population.

https://brucegerencser.net/2021/07/does-atheism-lead-to-criminal-behavior/

The author of the website referred to above is a former prison chaplain who is now an atheist. It includes statistics of the religion of prisoners and of chaplains. There is no evidence that atheists are monsters.

I am an atheist and don't feel like a monster. I love my wife and children. I wish humans would be nicer to each other. The atheists I know behave differently from each other. They seem to have a range of behavior and ethics similar to those with beliefs in a deity or deities.