• Our popular and beloved forums are finally back, after being down since April 2018 due to hosting and server issues. We have now switched to a better platform, while maintenaing all data as it was before (contents and user names) . Thank you for your patience and loyalty. If you have any questions, need to report an error, or are having trouble logging in, please email us at: assyrianvoice@rogers.com

What is everyones opinion on Assyrians trying to revive Ashurism?

mrzurnaci

New member
Well firstly, Yahweh isn't a false name, Yahweh was one of many gods in Canaan.
Yahweh was also differentiated from El.

Judaism didn't become monotheistic fully until the exiles came back from Babylon and adopted the idea of monotheism from Zoroastrianism.

I think this is a perfect opportunity to create a new religion that can patch some faults in Christianity.
 

Cascade

New member
SonOfAssyria said:
Again, as an Agnostic, what do you base what is good and bad on? Please answer this question.
You don't need religion to be moral though. As an agnostic atheist myself I find it insulting when people ask this. Anyone can live ethically and morally without religion because every person on the planet knows right from wrong without needing a religion to tell them. It's a natural instinct of all animals and probably the only remaining animal instinct in humans that is beneficial. In many cases religion only alters and blurs what is right and wrong. Killing is wrong, but killing in the name of god seems to be okay. History and present day prove that to be true. Many religions enforce these altered ideas of right and wrong with blind faith and self-righteous attitudes, which in turn, create more problems pertaining to ethics and morals.

Thousands of people everyday live morally and ethically in the world and are not practicing or a part of any religion. Take a poll of criminals in prison and you'll find that most of them believe in God. Belief in God or belonging to an organized religion is not necessary for knowing right from wrong, or for being a good person. Normal people have a conscience, whether they are religious or not. If religion was the basis of morals, then atheists would be criminals, which isn't true.

If you didn't adhere to any religion, does this mean you would go out and kill anyone you dislike? This makes you intrinsically bad, no? Think about it.
 

mrzurnaci

New member
Cascade said:
You don't need religion to be moral though. As an agnostic atheist myself I find it insulting when people ask this. Anyone can live ethically and morally without religion because every person on the planet knows right from wrong without needing a religion to tell them. It's a natural instinct of all animals and probably the only remaining animal instinct in humans that is beneficial. In many cases religion only alters and blurs what is right and wrong. Killing is wrong, but killing in the name of god seems to be okay. History and present day prove that to be true. Many religions enforce these altered ideas of right and wrong with blind faith and self-righteous attitudes, which in turn, create more problems pertaining to ethics and morals.

Thousands of people everyday live morally and ethically in the world and are not practicing or a part of any religion. Take a poll of criminals in prison and you'll find that most of them believe in God. Belief in God or belonging to an organized religion is not necessary for knowing right from wrong, or for being a good person. Normal people have a conscience, whether they are religious or not. If religion was the basis of morals, then atheists would be criminals, which isn't true.

If you didn't adhere to any religion, does this mean you would go out and kill anyone you dislike? This makes you intrinsically bad, no? Think about it.
The point of religion isn't to be moral, the point of religion is to bond everybody in a society through a common ideology... Why else do Jews and Muslims see each their own fellow believers as brothers and sisters despite not having any blood or cultural relation what so ever?
 
Cascade said:
You don't need religion to be moral though. As an agnostic atheist myself I find it insulting when people ask this. Anyone can live ethically and morally without religion because every person on the planet knows right from wrong without needing a religion to tell them. It's a natural instinct of all animals and probably the only remaining animal instinct in humans that is beneficial. In many cases religion only alters and blurs what is right and wrong. Killing is wrong, but killing in the name of god seems to be okay. History and present day prove that to be true. Many religions enforce these altered ideas of right and wrong with blind faith and self-righteous attitudes, which in turn, create more problems pertaining to ethics and morals.

Thousands of people everyday live morally and ethically in the world and are not practicing or a part of any religion. Take a poll of criminals in prison and you'll find that most of them believe in God. Belief in God or belonging to an organized religion is not necessary for knowing right from wrong, or for being a good person. Normal people have a conscience, whether they are religious or not. If religion was the basis of morals, then atheists would be criminals, which isn't true.

If you didn't adhere to any religion, does this mean you would go out and kill anyone you dislike? This makes you intrinsically bad, no? Think about it.
I think you misunderstood my point. I never said that someone with a secular worldview cannot be moral, on the contrary. The Bible even says that the law is written on the hearts of men, a person does not need to be religious to be a good person.

The point I'm trying to make is if you are not religious, then what do you base your moral compass on? The question is how do you know what is good and what is evil? You say that it is a natural instinct of all humans to know what is right and wrong. You may have the natural instinct to believe it is wrong to murder someone by hitting them over the head with an axe, just so they can steal the money in their wallet. Someone else may have a natural instinct to believe it is morally justified for them to hit someone over the head with an axe and murder them, because they feel they deserve the money that the person has in their wallet and believe that the person is an obstacle that they must overcome so they can take the money that they deserve.

Now, why is your subjective opinion on what is morally correct more valid than the person who believes it is right for them to murder someone and steal their belongings?

I'm going to use the same argument I used earlier; you may think that it was wrong for Hitler to murder 6 million Jews, but Hitler and his followers thought it was morally justified to do so. Again, why is your opinion on what is morally correct much more valid than Hitlers?

I hope you start seeing the dangers that comes with Atheism.
Nihilism. If there is no God or afterlife, then what truly matters? Nothing. In Nihilism, there is no inherit morality. Moral values are accepted depending on one's subjective opinion. It is very easy for an Atheist to fall under Nihilism, and that is where the danger comes from, when people believe that nothing matters they do whatever they feel like doing, or what they instinctively feel like doing. If one instinctively feels that they should murder another person for no reason at all, then how, as an Atheist, can you justify that they are wrong in thinking that? They are acting out on their instinctive moral guidelines, just as you believe all humans do. But why is one particular persons instinctive moral guideline invalid? How do you know that they are not a more evolved human being who sees the truth in reality and understands that nothing matters, why are they wrong and why are you correct? When you get an entire society under an ideology like this, this is when mass destruction and chaos occurs, and there are many examples of this happening throughout history.
 

Nemrud

New member
SonOfAssyria said:
I think you misunderstood my point. I never said that someone with a secular worldview cannot be moral, on the contrary. The Bible even says that the law is written on the hearts of men, a person does not need to be religious to be a good person.

The point I'm trying to make is if you are not religious, then what do you base your moral compass on? The question is how do you know what is good and what is evil? You say that it is a natural instinct of all humans to know what is right and wrong. You may have the natural instinct to believe it is wrong to murder someone by hitting them over the head with an axe, just so they can steal the money in their wallet. Someone else may have a natural instinct to believe it is morally justified for them to hit someone over the head with an axe and murder them, because they feel they deserve the money that the person has in their wallet and believe that the person is an obstacle that they must overcome so they can take the money that they deserve.

Now, why is your subjective opinion on what is morally correct more valid than the person who believes it is right for them to murder someone and steal their belongings?

I'm going to use the same argument I used earlier; you may think that it was wrong for Hitler to murder 6 million Jews, but Hitler and his followers thought it was morally justified to do so. Again, why is your opinion on what is morally correct much more valid than Hitlers?

I hope you start seeing the dangers that comes with Atheism.
Nihilism. If there is no God or afterlife, then what truly matters? Nothing. In Nihilism, there is no inherit morality. Moral values are accepted depending on one's subjective opinion. It is very easy for an Atheist to fall under Nihilism, and that is where the danger comes from, when people believe that nothing matters they do whatever they feel like doing, or what they instinctively feel like doing. If one instinctively feels that they should murder another person for no reason at all, then how, as an Atheist, can you justify that they are wrong in thinking that? They are acting out on their instinctive moral guidelines, just as you believe all humans do. But why is one particular persons instinctive moral guideline invalid? How do you know that they are not a more evolved human being who sees the truth in reality and understands that nothing matters, why are they wrong and why are you correct? When you get an entire society under an ideology like this, this is when mass destruction and chaos occurs, and there are many examples of this happening throughout history.
But again, whats the point of believing in the bible if it isnt true? The people who wrote the gospels luke etc were anonymous, noone know who they were, and they wrote it 40-70 years after jesus death, do you serious belive in that? then do that, l dont care, noone care, but stop claiming that its good to belive in a fake religion when all religions are fake, we should all be non religious and beileving in the right one, science. Science is the right belief.
 
Nemrud said:
But again, whats the point of believing in the bible if it isnt true? The people who wrote the gospels luke etc were anonymous, noone know who they were, and they wrote it 40-70 years after jesus death, do you serious belive in that? then do that, l dont care, noone care, but stop claiming that its good to belive in a fake religion when all religions are fake, we should all be non religious and beileving in the right one, science. Science is the right belief.
First of all, Science isn't a belief, it's more accurate to call it a study or a discipline.

Secondly, Christianity is not a fake religion. Whats the point of being an Atheist if Atheism is the most unquestionably stupid worldview?
The Gospels are very accurate. Evidence even affirms this.
 

Nemrud

New member
SonOfAssyria said:
First of all, Science isn't a belief, it's more accurate to call it a study or a discipline.

Secondly, Christianity is not a fake religion. Whats the point of being an Atheist if Atheism is the most unquestionably stupid worldview?
The Gospels are very accurate. Evidence even affirms this.
Some of it is real, not all, do you seriously believe that a homo sapiens could have powers? So you are saying all religions are fake except christianity?
 
Nemrud said:
Some of it is real, not all, do you seriously believe that a homo sapiens could have powers? So you are saying all religions are fake except christianity?
Yes, that's exactly what I am saying. If I didn't say that than I wouldn't be Christian.
 

mrzurnaci

New member
well according to our history, we worshiped Ashur as a lone god but we didn't deny the existence of the other gods like Isshar or Neshrukh.

I think the idea of Ashur was spread from the fact that our name "Assyrian" came from the city of Ashur so the god Ashur represented the city as our father.
 

Cascade

New member
The point I'm trying to make is if you are not religious, then what do you base your moral compass on? The question is how do you know what is good and what is evil?
You say that it is a natural instinct of all humans to know what is right and wrong. You may have the natural instinct to believe it is wrong to murder someone by hitting them over the head with an axe, just so they can steal the money in their wallet. Someone else may have a natural instinct to believe it is morally justified for them to hit someone over the head with an axe and murder them, because they feel they deserve the money that the person has in their wallet and believe that the person is an obstacle that they must overcome so they can take the money that they deserve.
That person may have a natural instinct, but he has no moral or conscience. You're speaking of a specifically deranged individual. Let's face it - Some humans are good and some are not. This will always be a fact of life. But in most case, for so many people, it is a natural instinct not to kill and to have self-control.

Now, why is your subjective opinion on what is morally correct more valid than the person who believes it is right for them to murder someone and steal their belongings?
Why? Maybe because murdering someone and stealing their belongings would create more harm than good. It can also backfire and eventually put me and my life in jeopardy (either be put in jail or have someone kill me to avenge their loved one's death). This is common sense. Humans don't always want trouble.

I'm going to use the same argument I used earlier; you may think that it was wrong for Hitler to murder 6 million Jews, but Hitler and his followers thought it was morally justified to do so. Again, why is your opinion on what is morally correct much more valid than Hitlers?
And pedophilic serial killers enjoy raping little girls before butchering them. It's sick and horrible. Like I said, evil people will always exist in this world. Doesn't mean they are right or have morals. What's your point? And what does this have to do with atheism? It's ironic that you bring up Hitler, considering his deep-rooted Catholicism and the New Testament was a basal inspiration for his Jewish hatred. 

I hope you start seeing the dangers that comes with Atheism.
Nihilism. If there is no God or afterlife, then what truly matters? Nothing. In Nihilism, there is no inherit morality. Moral values are accepted depending on one's subjective opinion. It is very easy for an Atheist to fall under Nihilism, and that is where the danger comes from, when people believe that nothing matters they do whatever they feel like doing, or what they instinctively feel like doing. If one instinctively feels that they should murder another person for no reason at all, then how, as an Atheist, can you justify that they are wrong in thinking that? They are acting out on their instinctive moral guidelines, just as you believe all humans do. But why is one particular persons instinctive moral guideline invalid? How do you know that they are not a more evolved human being who sees the truth in reality and understands that nothing matters, why are they wrong and why are you correct? When you get an entire society under an ideology like this, this is when mass destruction and chaos occurs, and there are many examples of this happening throughout history.
No, I frankly do not see any dangers and I'm barely convinced. Yes, there are some evil strains within atheism (state atheism and communism), but there is also such in religion if you check out your history as well. Please take out the log in your eye first before picking on mine, as the saying goes. :)

Not all atheists should belong to such parties, ideas and such. I'm not a nihilist and I'll be confident enough to tell you that most atheists are not. Look at atheist/agnostic scientists, disease researchers, technological fielders, general innovators, etc. They still provide more good to the world than bad.

P.S. Most atheists know that killing someone is wrong. I'm not sure why you're going on with this. Scratch that. Nearly every human of every religious and cultural background (unless if they're radicals) know that murder is immoral.
 

Cascade

New member
SonOfAssyria said:
First of all, Science isn't a belief, it's more accurate to call it a study or a discipline.

Secondly, Christianity is not a fake religion. Whats the point of being an Atheist if Atheism is the most unquestionably stupid worldview?
The Gospels are very accurate. Evidence even affirms this.
There is no evidence for many events in the gospels. And calling something you don't agree with "stupid" won't make you win the argument or the debate. Insults will not get you anywhere. Because I can also go on and declare the bible's absurdities, atrocities and zany contradictions. But I digress.

Oh, speaking of that, I've already made a thread on the bible more than a year ago. Check it out and reply to my post. ;)

http://www.assyrianvoice.net/forum/index.php?topic=47320.0
 
Cascade said:
There is no evidence for many events in the gospels. And calling something you don't agree with "stupid" won't make you win the argument or the debate. Insults will not get you anywhere. Because I can also go on and declare the bible's absurdities, atrocities and zany contradictions. But I digress.

Oh, speaking of that, I've already made a thread on the bible more than a year ago. Check it out and reply to my post. ;)

http://www.assyrianvoice.net/forum/index.php?topic=47320.0
Don't worry, I can't spend too much time here but I will reply to this post and the post you linked sometime next weekend, as my exams will finally be over :p

And on the contrary, I am not trying to "win" any argument or debate at all, nor am I insulting anyone. Calling something stupid does not mean I am insulting somebody lmao.
 

Cascade

New member
SonOfAssyria said:
Don't worry, I can't spend too much time here but I will reply to this post and the post you linked sometime next weekend, as my exams will finally be over :p

And on the contrary, I am not trying to "win" any argument or debate at all, nor am I insulting anyone. Calling something stupid does not mean I am insulting somebody lmao.
Well, last time I checked "stupid" isn't a really nice thing either. Lol.

Yeah, you need to be on that thread. Just let you more about 'our' side of things. ;)
 
Top