Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

See more
See less

Atheism and the search for meaning

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Atheism and the search for meaning

    Are we in a world with no home?

    ‐------------

    Is Atheism looking for meaning? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.
    I am reading through a book for a class now called Bulwarks of Unbelief. I am finding it quite good and the main question being asked is “What made atheism a strong enough possibility that many people now embrace it?” Now some might go the route of Richard Dawkins and say it was Darwin who made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. Is that it? Is it really that we found a scientific explanation for something and then God was out of a job?

    That doesn’t really fit since in the medieval period science was being done and none of it was thought to be the end of God. If anything, it was thought to be explaining and upholding God. If anyone was filling in the gaps of our scientific knowledge, it was the Christians. Yet nowhere in this do you see them saying “Does this put God out of a job?”

    The writer of the book, Joseph Minich, brings up Marx and how Marx thought man felt alienated from his labor. Now I oppose Marxism through and through, but while I don’t care for the man, that doesn’t mean he was wrong on everything. Could there be a sense of alienation Marx was right to find, but that he had the wrong solution and explanation for?

    Consider this as an example. Before I came here to the seminary, I worked at a Wal-Mart in Tennessee. Now when the time came that I left to come here, what happened? Did the store shut down because I was gone and obviously, no one could do the work that I did and so that was it?

    Nope. Hire someone else. I was entirely replaceable. This can be in contrast to a time when a son learned his father’s trade and the business was passed on from generation to generation and there was an investment in one’s labor.

    Not only this, but while I was there, did I really care about my job? Nope. I hated it. I liked some of the people that I worked with, but I hated the work that I did. I knew I was expendable and that I was underutilized and that my skills were not being used to the best of their ability.

    So yes, I do think the alienation is real.

    Minich thinks the main culprit here is technology. We have made the world more and more impersonal. As the world becomes more impersonal, we have a harder time seeing a person behind it all. The world seems to function like a machine.

    As a divorced man, I do think there is something to the disconnect from society. I notice when I come home, I go to my apartment building and there are several other apartments. Truth be told, I hardly know anyone in my own building. I have hardly ever had guests over to do anything with me. I also suspect that I am not alone in this. Many of you probably know your Facebook friends better than people you see every day.

    As a gamer, I also miss a certain time in life. That was the time of what is now known as couch gaming. Yes, I can play games online with several people and that’s fine, but really, nothing beats getting together and playing Goldeneye, Street Fighter, Smash Brothers, and other multi-player games together in person. Now I can play a game with people I know nothing about and have no investment in other than a desire to win.

    Now I think technology could be a part of it, but I also think there is something even bigger looming in the background. If there is a sense of alienation from one’s work and then from the society as a whole, what if there is also that sense from the world entire? What if it seems like we have a world that because we have fostered the natural/supernatural divide, seems to work on its own?

    What does this give us but a world without purpose? I find this especially interesting since in my study into game theology, I am noting that purpose is something we all long for. When we think we have a quest, a battle, a goal, we can come alive.

    Now this post is a sort of thinking out loud, but it does explain to me not just atheism in that sense, but a certain kind of atheism. You probably know the type. Let’s be clear this is not all atheists as I suspect some atheist readers of this blog will be able to hear the description and say “Yes. I know someone like that. I agree with their atheism, but I don’t agree with their other beliefs about it.”

    For sake of discussion, let’s refer to these as a sort of evangelistic atheist. These are atheists who think that they have been delivered from the shackles of irrationality and superstition by being embracing atheism. They now think that all theists they meet are ignorant fools who stay cloistered away from anything that goes against them, believe anything without evidence (Constantly thinking faith is belief without evidence), hate science, are sexual prudes entirely, always vote Republican, and that Christianity has done nothing but harm for the world.

    These are the people you find in Facebook groups who seem to do nothing all day long but argue against Christians and other theists. I consider it something akin to many that I see on the left who have what is called Trump-Derangement Syndrome. Whatever you think of him, these are people who seem to have their lives more dominated by Trump than any conservatives that I know. As many of my fellow conservatives say, he lives rent-free in their heads.

    If you are an atheist who says “I don’t think God exists, but I know that there are many Christians who do and many of them are smart people and have good reasons for what they believe”, then you are not one of the people I am speaking of. You can also say “I do agree that Christianity has done a lot of good for the world and many people are better for being Christians.” You will debate with Christians, but it is never about who is smarter than the other based on worldviews alone.

    When I have seen these evangelistic atheists in the past, I have been confused by it. If you really thought this was the way the world was, why are you wasting your time here? Go on vacation regularly and hit the beach. if you think there is ultimate wrong and right, why not just go out every night sleeping around?

    If I am correct, the answer now is obvious. These people are still wanting to find some sort of reading, something that they can do in the world, and they have decided they will be evangelists for atheism to set people free from the shackles of theism into the glorious light of science and reason. Dare I say it, this could be considered a cultic form of atheism.

    When I have met atheists like this, they are amazingly like the idea of Christians that they always go against. They refuse to read anything that disagrees with them. They have the entire side painted in an us vs. them battle and the other side is just ignorant of the real truth out there. They alone are the sole bearers of freedom and they must deliver the good news. They will often go about their personal experiences of how they were once Christians. They will not investigate any other ideas contrary to what they believe. They also love the fellowship of other like-minded atheists and seem to have a mutual admiration society going on.

    When it comes to the Bible, it must always be interpreted literalistically. They will believe anything whatsoever provided it agrees with them without researching it. If anything could make the other side look bad, it is automatically true. If anything makes it look good or at least is neutral to it, it is automatically false.

    I suppose I could go on if need be, but I suspect you get the idea. So, why they do it then is they do it to at least give themselves some sense of purpose. They can think that they are accomplishing something. If work doesn’t give fulfillment and pleasure doesn’t, you have to go somewhere else to get ultimate fulfillment.

    Part of my study into gaming theology has been that we have a need for quests in order to find fulfillment. We want to be part of a grand story. If my theory is true, why should that be just the case for Christians? It will be just as true for atheists or any other position. Evangelistic atheists get some fulfillment then out of what they do in spreading their gospel of atheism.

    This is a theory that for me is just in its opening stages. This post is a sort of thinking out loud. i do invite your opinions on the matter and especially if you are an atheist that would be not an evangelistic atheist and can say “I know some of the atheists you talk about and yes, this does seem to describe them.”

    I look forward to hearing from you.

    In Christ,
    Nick Peters
    (And I affirm the virgin birth)
    Is Atheism looking for meaning? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out. I am reading through a book for a class now called Bulwarks of Unbelief. I am finding it quite good and the main question being asked is “What made atheism a strong enough possibility that many people now embrace it?” Now some … Continue reading Atheism And The Search For Purpose

  • #2
    What kind of God doesn't deal with evil immediately?

    ---------------------

    What kind of God should deal with evil? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

    In yesterday’s post, I wrote about a certain idea of God that many evangelistic atheists have. We could describe this as a functional god. This god is meant to explain the universe. This god is meant to be a presence to me in suffering.

    When it looks like the universe works scientifically on its own and that there is no emotional presence, then atheism seems rational to these people. Let’s consider another aspect of this. What about evil?

    Too often, we theists have been on the defensive end in this area. It is up to us to explain why a good God allows evil. What never seems to go answered is “Why should God be obligated to deal with evil at all, let alone in XYZ manner?” To say that God has to deal with evil is to assume that God has an obligation to us.

    Note I am not saying that God will not deal with evil. I am questioning the why He will and the how and when of His doing so. If an atheist says that God needs to deal with evil, they have in mind a certain theology of the God that they think should defeat it, but what is this God like? We need to know.

    For instance, why should God have to deal with what we deem to be a problem on our terms? Why should He have to deal with it as a being with unlimited resources in a way that we think is amenable to our limited resources? You need more of an answer than “I want Him to” or “If He really loved us, He would do it this way.” Why?

    Could it be that evil really became a problem when we thought the universe was meant to be a place that was just to make us happy and that it was all about us? I get that people have talked about suffering and wondered about it for awhile, but at the same time, they didn’t jump to atheism. Job and his friends never doubted the reality of the deity, but just debated what He was like.

    The problem of evil is in many ways asking a question about justice. Will there be any justice in the universe? We often have the saying of justice delayed is not justice denied, and it is true. Just because justice isn’t happening immediately doesn’t mean it’s not happening at all.

    A Christian specifically views this world as intentional and while this world is not all about our happiness, it is meant for us to live in. We were made for this place. In a sense, this is our home. Someone else like Richard Dawkins will instead look at the world and say in River Out of Eden.
    “In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”

    Yet if this is the way the universe is, then why do we have this longing for justice? Why do we cling to ideas of good and evil? Does Dawkins? Not at all. Look at any moral crusade Dawkins goes on, whether he’s right or wrong in it, he certainly thinks he’s going out for something good. He certainly thinks science is a good worth pursuing. He certainly thinks Christianity is damaging to young people.

    And this is what we really need to be asking atheists. What is this idea of good that you hold to? What is this idea of evil? We use these terms and speak about them as if we all know what they mean when they really don’t. I, as a classical theist, ask atheists to tell me what they mean by good. If good boils down to what you want and evil to what you don’t want, then you are saying that the universe should bow to your desires and that if God were real, He would do the same. Not much of a god then.

    Then, we need to go beyond that and ask what their idea of God is like. Yes. Atheists have an idea of what God would be like if He existed. One such seems to be He would deal with evil in such and such a way in such and such a time. They also think that this is an obligation on His part.

    There is another point I would like to make on this and this is in the question of suffering, but that is for another day.

    In Christ,
    Nick Peters
    (And I affirm the virgin birth)
    What kind of God should deal with evil? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out. In yesterday’s post, I wrote about a certain idea of God that many evangelistic atheists have. We could describe this as a functional god. This god is meant to explain the universe. This god is meant to be … Continue reading Atheology and the Problem of Evil

    Comment


    • #3
      Do you belong?

      ---------------

      Where do we live? Let's plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

      I have said a lot this week about atheology and the idea that we have God in a specific niche for how He is supposed to work in the world. Atheists think that God is not filling this niche and then abandon theism. We need to realize that we can be just as prone to that kind of thinking where we see God on a functional basis. God is not the ground of being, but rather a being who fills in the gaps for us and is supposed to comfort us. This has been known as moral therapeutic deism.

      Final Fantasy IX has as its intro a song called "A Place To Call Home." That's really what we are to think as theists. This world is supposed to be our home. Yes. I am going to dispute the song that says "This world is not my home. I'm just passing through." This world was created for God to dwell with man forever in, and if we read the end of Revelation, He has not abandoned that plan.

      When we have suffering in our lives, we can dwell on it and get stuck in and let it consume us. Note I am not saying to never be depressed. When something tragic happens, by all means mourn. I am not telling you to be a stoic and to suppress all emotion and never feel sad.

      That being said, there comes a time when you have to move on with your life. My divorce hurt immensely when it happened, but I couldn't stay there. Did I have to spend some time mourning? Yes. Some times will take longer than others and to some extent I still mourn everyday, but when it comes to fighting evil in my own life, I couldn't stay there.

      If we focus on ourselves in the evil, we will likely have an entitlement mindset and think that we are even owed by God the solution that we want to our problem. It's easy to go from "God didn't do what He was supposed to" to "God doesn't care about me" to "God doesn't exist."

      However, we can also go another route and say that we are aware of the evil and we are going to do something to fight against the evil. I make it a point to try to help men who are going through divorce now whenever I can. I have been pleased to hear that my forthrightness has been a blessing to some men. I don't want any man to walk this road alone.

      That sense of injustice that we can have can drive us to do something about evil. If you think sex trafficking is an evil, you're more prone to do something about it. The same with abortion or cults or anything else out there. Rather than give up on what you see as a problem, you go out there and do your part to help deal with the problem.

      Yet I need to say one more thing about suffering. Some people can get so caught up in themselves and their suffering that they can think that they don't belong at all in the world. We can claim the internet has led us to have global connections, but we have also missed local connections. How well do you know your next-door neighbors? Do you even know them at all? I notice living in an apartment complex on a seminary that most of us when we go home at the end of the day, we stay there.

      It's easy to feel alone in the world and feeling alone can easily lead to an idea that you don't belong, especially when suffering hits. This can then lead to suicide. In order to think that is the best response, in some level, you must have built in an idea of God that He is supposed to do XYZ or else He doesn't love you.

      To a degree, it makes sense to us, but it is also very much focused on ourselves. One of the greatest helps we could have to dealing with suffering is to have good doctrine about God and our relationship to Him. That has made a tremendous difference in the suffering that I have experienced. If you are thinking this way, please go somewhere like here. Reach out to someone. You are not an accident and you do belong here.

      Please.

      Possibly tomorrow we will return to reviewing the atheist book I have been reviewing.

      In Christ,
      Nick Peters
      (And I affirm the virgin birth.)
      Where do we live? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out. I have said a lot this week about atheology and the idea that we have God in a specific niche for how He is supposed to work in the world. Atheists think that God is not filling this niche and then abandon … Continue reading Theology And Suffering

      Comment


      • #4
        Is God asking too much?

        ----------------

        Will you give me everything you have? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

        Remember the greatest commandment? Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength? Well, David Madison doesn’t like that commandment.
        If you’re a follower of Jesus, ponder the implications of this text for your own life. Is it even possible to give God all? And why does the powerful God who is described as self-sufficient require this level of commitment—a level that few, if any, believers even strive for, let alone attain.

        Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 31). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

        So in Christian thinking, God is the greatest good of all, the one who gives every good gift, redeems eventually from every suffering, forgives all your sin, loves you beyond measure, and everything else. Please, make sure you don’t overdo it in loving Him back.

        God calls for the best and He deserves the best. What would it say if Jesus had said, “Oh, and make sure you give a little bit of honor to this God dude. Alright?”

        He also talks about Ananias and Sapphira as an example and says most Christians either ignore it or explain it away.

        I guess explain it away means “Give an explanation for it.”

        Quite simple. They were never required to give everything. Peter says so in the text. They could have kept back some of it for themselves had they wanted. The problem was dishonesty and lying. They wanted to get all the glory for giving it all. For the fledgling church, it was needed to show that God is still serious about sin.
        Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on. (Mark 12:43-44, NRSV) This script fits Mark’s theme about extreme commitment earlier in the same chapter, and religious bureaucrats have commonly championed “giving until it hurts.” Yes, it’s a legitimate point that the rich don’t deserve high praise for giving away what they won’t miss, but commending the poor widow for her deed? That’s another matter. Under any normal, rational idea of what makes sense, it was not smart that the widow “put in all she had to live on.” It’s more logical to wonder why Jesus didn’t help her get the money back. Why would Jesus commend a mindset that prompts a widow to give away—to a mammoth religious bureaucracy—all the money she has to live on?

        Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 33). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

        Something to note here is all Jesus says is she gave more than the others did since she gave all she had to live on. He never directly praises her. Could He have been doing that in showing her faithfulness? Yes. Could it be though that the temple was charging higher taxes and she had to give in all that she had? Also, yes. Did Jesus do anything to help this widow out after? The text doesn’t say.

        So what about this one?
        So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions. (Luke 14:33 NRSV) Certainly this teaching has not stood the test of time. Even the most faithful believers pay little or no attention to it—sure evidence that Christians wish Jesus hadn’t said it.

        Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (pp. 34-35). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

        Actually, the original text doesn’t say possessions. It says all that he has. Looking at the text, what Jesus is talking about is total devotion. Don’t start building a tower unless you are ready to give it your all to finish it. Don’t go to war unless your all is sufficient to handle it. In the same way, if you want to be a disciple, make sure you’re all in.

        Which would be standard for a disciple if he wanted to be devoted to a master’s teaching.

        So once again, Madison gets basic things wrong that simple research could have answered.

        We’ll continue next time.

        In Christ,
        Nick Peters
        (And I affirm the virgin birth)
        Will you give me everything you have? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out. Remember the greatest commandment? Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength? Well, David Madison doesn’t like that commandment. If you’re a follower of Jesus, ponder the implications of this text for your own … Continue reading Book Plunge: Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught Chapter 4

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
          Are we in a world with no home?

          ‐------------

          Is Atheism looking for meaning? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.
          I am reading through a book for a class now called Bulwarks of Unbelief. I am finding it quite good and the main question being asked is “What made atheism a strong enough possibility that many people now embrace it?” Now some might go the route of Richard Dawkins and say it was Darwin who made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. Is that it? Is it really that we found a scientific explanation for something and then God was out of a job?

          That doesn’t really fit since in the medieval period science was being done and none of it was thought to be the end of God. If anything, it was thought to be explaining and upholding God. If anyone was filling in the gaps of our scientific knowledge, it was the Christians. Yet nowhere in this do you see them saying “Does this put God out of a job?”

          The writer of the book, Joseph Minich, brings up Marx and how Marx thought man felt alienated from his labor. Now I oppose Marxism through and through, but while I don’t care for the man, that doesn’t mean he was wrong on everything. Could there be a sense of alienation Marx was right to find, but that he had the wrong solution and explanation for?

          Consider this as an example. Before I came here to the seminary, I worked at a Wal-Mart in Tennessee. Now when the time came that I left to come here, what happened? Did the store shut down because I was gone and obviously, no one could do the work that I did and so that was it?

          Nope. Hire someone else. I was entirely replaceable. This can be in contrast to a time when a son learned his father’s trade and the business was passed on from generation to generation and there was an investment in one’s labor.

          Not only this, but while I was there, did I really care about my job? Nope. I hated it. I liked some of the people that I worked with, but I hated the work that I did. I knew I was expendable and that I was underutilized and that my skills were not being used to the best of their ability.

          So yes, I do think the alienation is real.

          Minich thinks the main culprit here is technology. We have made the world more and more impersonal. As the world becomes more impersonal, we have a harder time seeing a person behind it all. The world seems to function like a machine.

          As a divorced man, I do think there is something to the disconnect from society. I notice when I come home, I go to my apartment building and there are several other apartments. Truth be told, I hardly know anyone in my own building. I have hardly ever had guests over to do anything with me. I also suspect that I am not alone in this. Many of you probably know your Facebook friends better than people you see every day.

          As a gamer, I also miss a certain time in life. That was the time of what is now known as couch gaming. Yes, I can play games online with several people and that’s fine, but really, nothing beats getting together and playing Goldeneye, Street Fighter, Smash Brothers, and other multi-player games together in person. Now I can play a game with people I know nothing about and have no investment in other than a desire to win.

          Now I think technology could be a part of it, but I also think there is something even bigger looming in the background. If there is a sense of alienation from one’s work and then from the society as a whole, what if there is also that sense from the world entire? What if it seems like we have a world that because we have fostered the natural/supernatural divide, seems to work on its own?

          What does this give us but a world without purpose? I find this especially interesting since in my study into game theology, I am noting that purpose is something we all long for. When we think we have a quest, a battle, a goal, we can come alive.

          Now this post is a sort of thinking out loud, but it does explain to me not just atheism in that sense, but a certain kind of atheism. You probably know the type. Let’s be clear this is not all atheists as I suspect some atheist readers of this blog will be able to hear the description and say “Yes. I know someone like that. I agree with their atheism, but I don’t agree with their other beliefs about it.”

          For sake of discussion, let’s refer to these as a sort of evangelistic atheist. These are atheists who think that they have been delivered from the shackles of irrationality and superstition by being embracing atheism. They now think that all theists they meet are ignorant fools who stay cloistered away from anything that goes against them, believe anything without evidence (Constantly thinking faith is belief without evidence), hate science, are sexual prudes entirely, always vote Republican, and that Christianity has done nothing but harm for the world.

          These are the people you find in Facebook groups who seem to do nothing all day long but argue against Christians and other theists. I consider it something akin to many that I see on the left who have what is called Trump-Derangement Syndrome. Whatever you think of him, these are people who seem to have their lives more dominated by Trump than any conservatives that I know. As many of my fellow conservatives say, he lives rent-free in their heads.

          If you are an atheist who says “I don’t think God exists, but I know that there are many Christians who do and many of them are smart people and have good reasons for what they believe”, then you are not one of the people I am speaking of. You can also say “I do agree that Christianity has done a lot of good for the world and many people are better for being Christians.” You will debate with Christians, but it is never about who is smarter than the other based on worldviews alone.

          When I have seen these evangelistic atheists in the past, I have been confused by it. If you really thought this was the way the world was, why are you wasting your time here? Go on vacation regularly and hit the beach. if you think there is ultimate wrong and right, why not just go out every night sleeping around?

          If I am correct, the answer now is obvious. These people are still wanting to find some sort of reading, something that they can do in the world, and they have decided they will be evangelists for atheism to set people free from the shackles of theism into the glorious light of science and reason. Dare I say it, this could be considered a cultic form of atheism.

          When I have met atheists like this, they are amazingly like the idea of Christians that they always go against. They refuse to read anything that disagrees with them. They have the entire side painted in an us vs. them battle and the other side is just ignorant of the real truth out there. They alone are the sole bearers of freedom and they must deliver the good news. They will often go about their personal experiences of how they were once Christians. They will not investigate any other ideas contrary to what they believe. They also love the fellowship of other like-minded atheists and seem to have a mutual admiration society going on.

          When it comes to the Bible, it must always be interpreted literalistically. They will believe anything whatsoever provided it agrees with them without researching it. If anything could make the other side look bad, it is automatically true. If anything makes it look good or at least is neutral to it, it is automatically false.

          I suppose I could go on if need be, but I suspect you get the idea. So, why they do it then is they do it to at least give themselves some sense of purpose. They can think that they are accomplishing something. If work doesn’t give fulfillment and pleasure doesn’t, you have to go somewhere else to get ultimate fulfillment.

          Part of my study into gaming theology has been that we have a need for quests in order to find fulfillment. We want to be part of a grand story. If my theory is true, why should that be just the case for Christians? It will be just as true for atheists or any other position. Evangelistic atheists get some fulfillment then out of what they do in spreading their gospel of atheism.

          This is a theory that for me is just in its opening stages. This post is a sort of thinking out loud. i do invite your opinions on the matter and especially if you are an atheist that would be not an evangelistic atheist and can say “I know some of the atheists you talk about and yes, this does seem to describe them.”

          I look forward to hearing from you.

          In Christ,
          Nick Peters
          (And I affirm the virgin birth)
          Atheism isn't looking for a meaning, it's a recognition that there is no ultimate meaning. The universe exists, we humans like everything else in it are a part of this universe. All of this we know. What we don't know is anything else other than that. "Why is there something rather than nothing?" "Well, why was there a god rather than nothing?" Brute fact I guess, eh? We humans are creative in our own right and we create our own meaning, and the way some of us do that is to create a strange and weird fantasy being, that no one can know or see or hear, a fantasy being that created the world from out of nothing, and created life out of the world, that spoke all there is into existence from out of nothing. Why? So that he could save us from himself. All we know, all we have evidence for is the material world we live in and are part of, are born of and will die in. Whatever meaning there is, is whatever has meaning to you in your life. That's it! As far as we know!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JimL View Post

            Atheism isn't looking for a meaning, it's a recognition that there is no ultimate meaning.
            Atheism itself has nothing to do with meaning per se, including that it's not a "recognition that there is no ultimate meaning".

            The universe exists, we humans like everything else in it are a part of this universe. All of this we know. What we don't know is anything else other than that.
            That's more materialism and agnosticism than atheism.

            We humans are creative in our own right and we create our own meaning,
            More like the illusion of meaning than actual meaning.

            and the way some of us do that is to create a strange and weird fantasy being,
            Making a knowledge claim when you have already made a claim to the limits of knowledge is quite strange.

            that no one can know or see or hear, a fantasy being that created the world from out of nothing, and created life out of the world, that spoke all there is into existence from out of nothing. Why? So that he could save us from himself.
            More like saving us from ourselves.


            All we know, all we have evidence for is the material world we live in and are part of, are born of and will die in. Whatever meaning there is, is whatever has meaning to you in your life. That's it! As far as we know!
            Depends on how what is considered "evidence".
            P1) If , then I win.

            P2)

            C) I win.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

              Atheism itself has nothing to do with meaning per se, including that it's not a "recognition that there is no ultimate meaning".
              Sure it does per se. Unless you're speaking of human reason, then you'd be correct. But Atheism infers that it is what it is, no creation, no god, no ultimate "created" meaning or purpose.


              That's more materialism and agnosticism than atheism.
              Well I think you will find that atheists are materialists. Again, atheism infers materialism just as it infers "no ultimate meaning"

              More like the illusion of meaning than actual meaning.
              Depends on how you're defining "meaning"?

              Making a knowledge claim when you have already made a claim to the limits of knowledge is quite strange.
              That's my very strong opinion based on very good evidence, that being that there is no evidence of a god or of a paradise. So, let's just say that, there is no empirical evidence for the existence of anything other than the world we live in and are part of.

              More like saving us from ourselves.
              So god created us in order to save us from ourselves? That doesn't make sense Diogenes.


              Depends on how what is considered "evidence".
              Well sure it does. But there is no kind of evidence of any god. There may be things we don't understand, and that may cause some to invoke a god of some sort, but those things are not evidence of God.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                Sure it does per se. Unless you're speaking of human reason, then you'd be correct. But Atheism infers that it is what it is, no creation, no god, no ultimate "created" meaning or purpose.
                The word you're looking for is "implies". "Atheism" covers a large gambit.

                Well I think you will find that atheists are materialists. Again, atheism infers materialism just as it infers "no ultimate meaning"
                Most are materialists, yes. Atheism doesn't necessitate materialism.

                Depends on how you're defining "meaning"?
                Lots of things depend on other things.

                That's my very strong opinion based on very good evidence, that being that there is no evidence of a god or of a paradise. So, let's just say that, there is no empirical evidence for the existence of anything other than the world we live in and are part of.
                Plating games with words is par for the course.

                So god created us in order to save us from ourselves? That doesn't make sense Diogenes.
                What you said didn't make sense. I responded to the trope I assume you were implying and that made the most sense as to your intent.

                Well sure it does. But there is no kind of evidence of any god. There may be things we don't understand, and that may cause some to invoke a god of some sort, but those things are not evidence of God.

                ​​​​​​​Again, word play.
                P1) If , then I win.

                P2)

                C) I win.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                  The word you're looking for is "implies"
                  Ya know, I was going to use "implies" too but went with infers instead. I always get those two mixed up. But I knew if you didn't pick up on it the head grammar Nazi would be right along to correct it. He should be here shortly. 🤣

                  Atheism" covers a large gambit
                  I wouldn't know about that, to me it simply means no god, no creation, that the universe is it.

                  Most are materialists, yes. Atheism doesn't necessitate materialism.
                  Possibly, though personally I've never known an atheist that wasn't also a materialists. But who knows?


                  Lots of things depend on other things.
                  Sure, I guess. But not exactly the point.🤪 ☺️

                  Plating games with words is par for the course.
                  No word games here, just telling it like I see it, like, "as far as anyone knows" it is. No invisible being looking in on us from the outside, there is just the universe which contains all there is.


                  What you said didn't make sense. I responded to the trope I assume you were implying and that made the most sense as to your intent.
                  Yes I did. I made sense. Your reply to me is what didn't make sense. You "implied" or how about you "suggested", that god created us in order to save us from ourselves. Not sensible!
                  Actually that whole mess isn't worth getting into, the whole thing is rather silly if one actually gave a bit of honest thought to it. But honest thought is not something that is conducive to one maintaining their beliefs, so they don't really do that too much.

                  Again, word play.
                  ​​​​​​What are you talking about, word play? Looks to me as though you just can't refute the assertion. That's understandable.
                  Last edited by JimL; 05-11-2024, 12:24 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JimL View Post

                    Ya know, I was going to use "implies" too but went with infers instead. I always get those two mixed up. But I knew if you didn't pick up on it the head grammar Nazi would be right along to correct it. He should be here shortly. 🤣
                    A simple correction doesn't make me a grammar Nazi and I'm not the "head grammar Nazi" on Tweb.



                    Yes I did. I made sense. Your reply to me is what didn't make sense. You "implied" or how about you "suggested", that god created us in order to save us from ourselves. Not sensible!
                    I'll admit I assumed a corrected statement and responded to that. I'll admit it's a habit to attempt to make an inference of what's said and then respond likewise, but that's more a result of being in the discussion space. Perhaps I gave you too much credit. There was a typical counterpoint that could have been interpreted in what you said and I responded to that instead of what you actually said, mea culpa.


                    Actually that whole mess isn't worth getting into, the whole thing is rather silly if one actually gave a bit of honest thought to it. But honest thought is not something that is conducive to one maintaining their beliefs, so they don't really do that too much.
                    Agreed, which is why I haven't been strenuous in my relies.

                    ​​​​​​

                    P1) If , then I win.

                    P2)

                    C) I win.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                      A simple correction doesn't make me a grammar Nazi and I'm not the "head grammar Nazi" on Tweb.





                      I'll admit I assumed a corrected statement and responded to that. I'll admit it's a habit to attempt to make an inference of what's said and then respond likewise, but that's more a result of being in the discussion space. Perhaps I gave you too much credit. There was a typical counterpoint that could have been interpreted in what you said and I responded to that instead of what you actually said, mea culpa.




                      Agreed, which is why I haven't been strenuous in my relies.

                      ​​​​​​
                      Well nothing much to respond to here other than I wasn't referring to you as being the head grammar Nazi. That would be the arrogant one aka CP.

                      Comment

                      Related Threads

                      Collapse

                      Topics Statistics Last Post
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-16-2024, 06:19 PM
                      0 responses
                      17 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-06-2024, 04:30 PM
                      10 responses
                      64 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post JimL
                      by JimL
                       
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-01-2024, 09:43 PM
                      6 responses
                      76 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 04-25-2024, 09:42 AM
                      0 responses
                      11 views
                      1 like
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 04-09-2024, 09:39 AM
                      28 responses
                      210 views
                      1 like
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Working...
                      X