DRFseven

Odemus, we all do the same thing; we try to explain "all this" according to the evolutionary nature of our brains. Lacking the inclination to figure things out, we wouldn't have gotten very far as humans, would we? Of necessity, in order to explain "our view", we must debunk the predominating view. Yours is the majority opinion; there is no need for you to preface your statements regarding "all this" with something like, "You know there really is a Creator...", because almost everybody already thinks so, anyway.

Odemus

'Ooooooohhh no here we go again.Why is it we are always forced to invent fresh exciting approaches to the same old arguments?'

Which brings me back to my original question.What's the point?

That is because it isn't hard wired into your genetic coding.Is your genetic coding better or worse than mine?Is it better or worse than a fascist dictator?Who's genetic coding should be given preference and why?


Did I ask that?What could I have meant?

Could the same not be said about every other living organism?

That is at least consistent thinking.


Glorifying God is the chief end in and of itself.There is no reason for doing it other than we are forced to whether we choose to do so or not.

Assuming for the sake of your argument that God exists, perhaps the same reason that you enjoy the unique human experience of loving your children.

Can you please substantiate this claim with empirical evidence?What if I told you that my faith grants me a fulfilling appreciation of my mortal life, of worth, of beauty.Who are you to tell me it can't?


If there is no God what is the point of regarding Shakespeare better than Bazooka bubble gum wrappers?To a child the wrapper is certainly better.To you perhaps not.In any case what is the universal standard for making distinctions which are purely subjective?(for the record I prefer Shakespeare)


How can your conclusion be any different by believing there is no God?
By comparison yes, by quantitative assesment not at all.I enjoy life.

even if you 'contribute' something that leaves a recognizable mark on society, what does it matter?

Are you unable to acknowledge the same thing about the life I live?

How do I make you miserable?What about your life is impacted by the way I live mine?

What if I told you that something other than myself convinced me?Can you empirically prove otherwise?

What if I just genuinely love the being in question?Can you prove otherwise?

Badgering is an odd word choice for something you willfully subject yourself to.Regardless it's all about love.Love is a good thing isn't it?

[ July 12, 2002: Message edited by: Odemus ]</p>

Odemus

Are you saying that this is the way you desire things to be over any other alternative?

In the final analysis both people are dead so I would say that both of their opinions are of equal importance.

To the contrary, my belief in God grants me a fuller appreciateion of all these things.

So in theory would you say that their lives are essentially no different than yours?

That is at least consistent thinking.

Datheron

Odemus,

No - every system of belief is based on axioms, presumptions. Presuppositionism, on the other hand, refers to the particular brand of thinking whereby the theist, using his arbitrary God as authority, denies any arbitrary atheist basis.

It means that meaning only comes from what we make of it, no more. And yes, if seals derive meaning from eating fish, then they find meaning in it, whereas we would not. The inverse works as well - seals find no meaning in drinking, for example. Is that too difficult to understand?

I won't, or I can't?

It is a weak argument because an explanation is given (and subsequently ignored) and because everyday example shows otherwise. It would be like me asserting "Every theist, in his heart, knows there is no God, but is too afraid to admit that" over and over without actually acknowledging the fanaticism which religion is based on.

To who, and what?

I think the problem is that we have two different definitions of meaning. You wish "meaning" to mean glory to God, where I wish "meaning" to be anything self-derived. Hence, you ask these confusing questions and claim that we have no meaning while operating under your belief that anything Godless is without meaning. It is a circular argument.

Because he is taking the meaning and happiness of life away from others.

Once again, the self-referential argument that only meaning can come from God.

You're simply not listening to what what humans truly find meaningful. Why is it that we find a lover's letter meaningful, whereas the next person would not hold any attachment to it? Does that have anything to do with God? Or perhaps a beautiful sunset? Does that hold no meaning because it does not glorify God? According to you, it does, but people often show otherwise.

Odemus

What I am saying is that in the world view of the disbelief in God your life doesn't hold any more meaning than the cause and effect relationship of the inanimate.

Granting for the sake of argument that there is no God, I fully concur.No more, no less.

Only in the context of cause and effect.In other words the sudden implosion of the earth wouldn't cause this debate to have any more or less meaning.

Mageth

(Yawn)

We seem to get variations of this same tired argument about meaninglessness and "why bother debating with theists?" every week or two.

Odemus, when asked to define "meaning," you posted a dictionary definition (actually four different connotations). Instead, in your own words, please define what "meaning" means to you.

And it might be useful if you capitalized it - "Meaning" - to distinguish this grand concept of yours from meaning, which is what each of us strives to find in our own lives.

Assuming your atheism is a more correct approach to life, how does it hold more value or meaning than mine?

I personally don't look to my atheism for Meaning(with a capital M). Atheism doesn't claim to hold Meaning. Actually, I don't look for Meaning at all.

I find meaning and value in the "little" things of life - my family, my work, my interests and hobbies, art, nature, music, poetry, etc.

If I'm satisfied, healthy and happy, and my friends and family are as well, what more can I ask of life?

Koyaanisqatsi

Here's an even simpler way of putting it, Odemus.

A christian scientist will let their child die of infection, because their beliefs (their uncertain certainties, if you like) compell them to allow their own child to die rather than seek the help of their fellow men and women.

Such a belief is not just unworthy of respect it is demonstrably detrimental to other human beings and therefore society should intervene and say, in effect, you are simply not allowed to act in this manner based upon your belief.

You can believe anything you want, but you cannot act upon that belief in this manner.

Just as we as a society declare that the Al Queda cannot act upon their beliefs in the manner they have chosen.

Belief is perfectly fine when it is kept as a personal, inactive and non-influential "lucky charm" if you like, but when one's beliefs affect others in a harmful or detrimental manner, then just as you have the right to hold that belief, society has the right to prevent you from acting upon that belief.

The same is true of all aspects of our society. You can certainly want to murder somebody all you like, but if you act upon that desire, society says, "No. You can't do that."

If the majority of christians actually followed one of Jesus' declarations (to not do as the hypocrites do and pray in secret) and that were the only declaration followed then we wouldn't be "passionate" at all.

Well, I should of course qualify that; I wouldn't be passionate about it all.

But the majority of christians follow everything but that one edict; they proselytize and "witness" and inculcate their children ("suffer the children unto me") and spread their slave mentality doctrines like a virus from the local all the way up to our f*cking President, who, as a direct result of his own inculcation calls entire nations of people "evildoers" under an "axis of evil."

This is not just a profound and unconsionable lie, it is and has proved to be extremely detrimental to humans all over the world, both here and abroad.

Division, hatred, prejudice, victimization, torture, executions, wars; all of which have been as a direct result of the words and teachings of just the New Testament, not to mention the Old.

For centuries!

The christian cult, specifically, was so powerful and so detrimental that our entire country was founded upon the principle of separation of Church and State (and we still haven't gotten there, as witnessed by the recent fact that Congress stood on the steps stating "under God" while they pledged allegiance to the flag).

"In God we trust" is on our money and in our courtrooms and christian prayers are spoken in our schools. The Ten Commandments can be found in just about any Government office throughout the Bible belt.

Hell, we even have a whole section of our country that is still largely referred to as the Bible belt.

You may see nothing wrong with that, because, I contend, you have been conditioned to see nothing wrong with that.

You have been told, I would venture, that when Jesus said, "I come not to bring peace, but a sword," that this actually meant that he came to bring peace and not a sword, yes?

Or that when Jesus said you have to hate your mother and your father and your brothers and your sisters and your own life also in order to be his disciple he actually meant that you have to love your mother and your father and your brothers and your sisters...etc., etc., etc., yes?

And that when you must turn the other cheek and render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and obey authority because they are God's servants that you do just that without questioning. Why? Because all of those things are "of this world" and therefore don't apply to you, even though it means that you are being conditioned to be a sheep that says nothing and does nothing when authority comes to take away your rights or your property or you, for that matter.

It's all in "god's" hands, right?

Which means that your beliefs are training you to be a slave to the ruling elite, plain and simple, while at the same time confusing in your mind what "love" and "hate" are so that, as long as you believe that you are acting "in Jesus' name" (as every single one of our christian soldiers believe; just ask any one of them) you aren't culpable for your actions.

Or, at the very least, not culpable enough for your actions, because, after all, you're forever "caught" between a battle of "good" and "evil," that will all be sorted out for you once you're dead.

Not here, mind you. Once you're dead and it no longer matters; once you're actions in this life have been done on Earth as it is in Heaven and let God sort it out.

In short, it means that you can be manipulated rather easily to vote a particular way or fight a particular enemy or not object strong enough to a particular law.

It means you're a sheep and can be shepherded.

As I've said many times before, if Jesus had used pigs and compared himself to a pigfarmer, do you think there would have been a cult of any kind beyond that?

No. Why not? Because that particular imagery is offensive, no matter how identical it is to being comparaed to a sheep and that's the whole point.

It is the imagery used and the manner in which the inculcation is performed--usually from birth to grave--that causes the cognitive dissonance and scrambles the brain so that you are actually posting here and asking us why we are so passionate about "disbelief!"

You cannot see the detriments of christianity because you have been conditioned to believe there are none, which simply is not true.

There are, in fact, so many, that the list is quite literally mind boggling, but, as with the nature of your cult conditioning, those who cannot see it are screwed.

Hate the sin, not the sinner, ring any bells? Well, in our (my, I should say) case, the "sin" is cult dogma and the sinner is the poor, innocent person who, unfortunately, got programmed by that cult dogma.

Is that any clearer, without my "tone?"

(edited for formatting - Koy)

[ July 12, 2002: Message edited by: Koyaanisqatsi ]</p>

Odemus

Sure why not?It makes me happy.
Haven't you gathered as much?

Koyaanisqatsi

See above.

Perchance

Got it in one .

Yes, it's the way I want to live my life, and at the moment it doesn't look as though there are many obstacles to me living my life that way. The only possible exception I can think of at the moment is meddlesome relatives who might want me to live when I have determined that I want to die, such as if I develop Alzheimer's. I have decided that this would represent such a deterioration of my quality of life, because memory is so important to me, that I would commit suicide. The same thing would happen if I lost my eyesight, and possibly my hearing. However, other people I've talked to don't like the idea of my committing suicide, so that might be a problem, when and if it ever comes up.

I might still be open to the possibility of theistic argument convincing me, if I ever heard a good one and I was convinced that it would lead me to a more logical and joy-filled life (which is why I would call myself an agnostic, or atheist agnostic, rather than an atheist). But I haven't heard one yet. And just as I can't know when I'm going to die, I can't know when I might suddenly change my mind as to God's probable existence, or find evidence that actually convinces me. So I don't worry about it that much.


You do have a bit of a hang-up with death, don't you?

Never mind, I'll answer the question .

Yes- in the end. But I'm not at the end right now. I'm living right now. Someone can tell me this, or tell me that from where he stands, my life looks worthless.

"Right," I will say, "and from where I stand, my life is full of minor annoyances and sharp joy. The joy tends to outweigh the annoyances, and I create things that I think are beautiful, poetry and fiction, so it matters to me."

I've read some nihilistic things and spoken to people who held those views. They seem to be almost as much bored as they are gloomy.

Good! Then you are living your life the way you want to, and the only way I would have an objection is if you insisted on trying to force others to live the same way (because, sooner or later, those others might include me).

I am sincerely happy for you if your faith in God grants you a fuller appreciation of life. My non-belief leads me to a fuller way of life. Do you object to this?

Again, got it in one .

I think faith in God matters a lot less to many people than most think- unless someone is perceived as directly threatening it, the way that I would be unhappy if the government decided that no one could read fantasy novels anymore, since I like to read them. Theists who go around saying that God is the most important thing in their lives are the exception here. These people say one thing and act another way. (I once asked a Mormon friend who liked to talk about her God, in a burst of curiosity, if her children mattered more to her than God or not. She stammered a lot, and couldn't answer).

I think that a lot of people really do prize their human lives and the world around them even more highly than their religious faith, but they've been taught that it's unacceptable to say so.

Hey, thanks.

Waiting to see if she earns the "consistent thinking" award for this post,
Perchance .