Biblical Support of Atheism

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." - Isaac Asimov

Daily Atheist Quote - View All Quotes

Baptist Pastor Says Beat the Gay Away

NOTE: I'm posting this NOT as an endorsement. I think this is one of the most offensive things I've ever seen from the pulpit. I'm just sayin....

Pastor Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church in Fayetteville, NC tells congregants to break the limp wrists of effeminate boys and essentially "beat the gay away" from their kids. He has offered a lame apology (see justification) on his blog at http://pastorseansblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/important-clarification-to-sunday.... I hate to tell him, but his "clarification" just reinforces the thrust of his violent message.

A good Christian pastor tells parents to beat the gay away? Hardly a religion of peace...

Pastor Sean Harris Tells Congregation to Punch Their Gay Sons - YouTube

Re: It's not true that India did not have 'a Socrates'

Ancient India was very much similar to Ancient Greece.  There was a focus on mathematics, self-knowledge, and skepticism.  Some say this knowledge reached Pythagoras.  Much of the Arabs' knowledge of these things came from India. Including the numbers we use today.  There were large universities and libraries in India before they were burnt to the ground by Muslim fanatics during the Mughal Empire.

"know thyself" (gnōthi seauton) is the same as the sanskrit "Atmanam viddhi" which had been used in India since very early, and of course continued on in their more philosophical and metaphysical stage.  Such as the Upanishads.  This text is a reflection on knowledge, which is at least as advanced as Immanuel Kant. Constantly, the refrain within this is knowledge of the true self and being active in the knowledge of how one's mind works.  This either means that the Greeks somehow were conscious of these ideas, or they developed separately.  But it is incorrect that India did not have a type of Socrates, or no philosophy.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  In fact, they wrestled with many problems we face today like disagreements about dualism and materialism.  Some schools considering themselves dualistic, while others non-dualistic.  There is even the conversational style of Plato in the Indian works.  Also, I would read what some Western philosophers such as Voltaire, Schopenhauer, Thoreau, and others have said about the heritage of India.

Also, unlke Judeo-Christianity, atheism was and is accepted within Indian tradition and culture (and even within Hinduism).  Same is true for Jains and Buddhists.  There is even the sankrit word "nir-īśvara-vāda" which means 'statement of no god' or atheism.  There are four schools of philosophy of atheism in Indian history: Mimansa, Samkhya, Carvaka, and Ajivika.  These are similar to the various schools in Hellenistic Greece. However, this is in fact more advanced than the greeks since they were not able to derive atheism yet, to say nothing of the average person who was far inferior in his thinking to the philosophers.  But India had declared it proudly at the very same time in history. 

It is also false that this is fortune cookie philosophy.  For one, this would be like saying that Heraclitus is a fortune cookie because of the fragmentary remains of his work.  But most of what exists in Indian philosophy are fully formed metaphysics, and not random statements.  It could be said that reading older texts is useless because of modern texts which are apparently more intelligent, but that would also mean that nothing in European history is worth anything.  And does not negate the fact that India had philosophy.  In fact, I would claim that India was far more advanced intellectually at one time than either the Muslims or British who invaded them.

In terms of modern thinkers, I think that Jiddu Krishnamurti is a very straight forward version of Indian philosophy.  I think he is probably the most serious person that has existed to talk about self-knowledge since Socrates.  And probably goes much further.  But of course his ideas are a condensed version of Indian ideas.

It's not true that India did not have 'a Socrates'