Topic: The problem with atheism. - page 25. (Read 38470 times)

I'm saying that there is no "deeper meaning" after just enjoying life.

You said you believe "life is pointless", then you agree the purpose of life is to live, then you give some hybrid idea that you can find meaning but outside of yourself there is no meaning...

I'm not sure.  I just see contradictions all over the place. 

OK, I agree that the purpose of life is to live... what does that have to do with meaningless system?

The purpose of a purpose is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes a purpose.
The purpose of life is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes life.
The purpose of life is to live.

Not hard.

Edit:  BTW why are you asking me "what is this whole thing about a meaningless system?" when you just said you believe life (i.e. a system) is pointless?

What is this whole thing about a meaningless system? Just because there is no god there is therefore no meaning? No! You can still find meaning in life through your experiences etc. We (at least I) think that life is pointless, as in there is no greater reason or being that put us here. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy life and take meaning from it, though.

FYI, when you're done answering my questions, refute this:

http://ctmu.org/

"Of the three kinds of theory, by far the lion’s share of popular reportage is commanded by theories of science.  Unfortunately, this presents a problem.  For while science owes a huge debt to philosophy and mathematics – it can be characterized as the child of the former and the sibling of the latter - it does not even treat them as its equals.  It treats its parent, philosophy, as unworthy of consideration.  And although it tolerates and uses mathematics at its convenience, relying on mathematical reasoning at almost every turn, it acknowledges the remarkable obedience of objective reality to mathematical principles as little more than a cosmic “lucky break”. "


...


"In fact, if we regard the scientific method as a theory about the nature and acquisition of scientific knowledge (and we can), it is not a theory of knowledge in general.  It is only a theory of things accessible to the senses.  Worse yet, it is a theory only of sensible things that have two further attributes: they are non-universal and can therefore be distinguished from the rest of sensory reality, and they can be seen by multiple observers who are able to “replicate” each other’s observations under like conditions.  Needless to say, there is no reason to assume that these attributes are necessary even in the sensory realm.  The first describes nothing general enough to coincide with reality as a whole – for example, the homogeneous medium of which reality consists, or an abstract mathematical principle that is everywhere true - and the second describes nothing that is either subjective, like human consciousness, or objective but rare and unpredictable…e.g. ghosts, UFOs and yetis, of which jokes are made but which may, given the number of individual witnesses reporting them, correspond to real phenomena.

The fact that the scientific method does not permit the investigation of abstract mathematical principles is especially embarrassing in light of one of its more crucial steps: “invent a theory to fit the observations.”  A theory happens to be a logical and/or mathematical construct whose basic elements of description are mathematical units and relationships.  If the scientific method were interpreted as a blanket description of reality, which is all too often the case, the result would go something like this: “Reality consists of all and only that to which we can apply a protocol which cannot be applied to its own (mathematical) ingredients and is therefore unreal.”  Mandating the use of “unreality” to describe “reality” is rather questionable in anyone’s protocol.  "

Here's a few questions for you to start:

1) How can a meaningless system exist?  And if you can answer that one, then how can meaningful systems arise from a meaningless one?

2) Given the mathematical proof for "the boundary of a boundary = 0" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_(topology)) coupled with the sameness-in-difference principle of logic, how would you explain or model the relationship between you/I and the rest of the Universe?  Then, how would refute the idea that the Universe is as much mental (if not more so) than physical in nature?

3) When you realize that you can't refute the Universe is mental in nature, why is the idea of God ridiculous? Or, at least, why is it more ridiculous than the assertion of God's non-existence?

4) What is your definition of God, and how does it differ (if at all) from "truth" that one might seek, for example, through empirical study and observation?

5) Does your definition of God conflict with others' definitions of God?    Are you arguing against a straw man?  I.e. do you believe that every theist poster in this thread has the same argument?  I've attempted to tackle every "tough question" posited here and I haven't seen much in the way of strong rebuttals, though I do enjoy Rassah's responses.

6) What would you say to someone who tells you that they've directly experienced God, that there is plenty of logical, mathematical, and empirical evidence of God?  Assume this "someone" has no psychiatric history, has multiple collegiate degrees, and strongly grasps the scientific method as well as both inductive and deductive reasoning.

Umm.  OK?  I guess your question about other gods was the tough one you are referring to?  Or I guess it was that I was too proud to believe in other gods?

I thought I dealt with that briefly.  Let's take Hinduism for example- all paths are valid so serve whatever gods you want.  Logic would say it would be the smartest choice to then serve Jesus.  If the Bible says, "There is only one way to the Father and it is through Jesus Christ."  

I have had debates about this on other posts.  I personally do feel that there will be people that with sincere hearts serve "God", "Allah" or whatever other name they call "HIM" that will find themselves in Sheol and will understand at that point all things and have a chance to accept or reject Jesus there.  It is not that I believe all paths are valid.  Jesus paid the price for our sins so He is the only way we have a chance to have eternal life.  (I don't expect you to get this BTW but you asked for my world view and I am giving it to you here.)  This is not the common Christian belief BTW.  Most Christians are very adamant that if you don't accept Jesus here on earth you go to Hell.  It is pretty black and white for them but I believe it leads to some problems.  The major one being a sense of God being "unfair."  But because I believe God gives us our conscious and our sense of fairness to begin with how could we call Him unfair?  I had trouble with this and found that it was really a problem with the English Translation of the Bible that basically takes "Sheol" and turns it into "Hell."  Sheol is a waiting place for the dead.  I believe that during the three days before Jesus rose again he took the "keys" (as scripture points out) and goes there to preach to the souls.  I believe it will be a place outside of time and everyone will get the chance to accept or reject Him.  So for all of the other paths, gods etc. that people are serving they will have a chance with eyes wide open to accept the truth or reject it.  

As for being too "proud" to serve other gods.  I fear the true God too much to even dare do that.  Call it pride if you want.  I believe the Bible to be true to the core of my being.  So much so that if you held a gun to my head and made me deny my faith, I hope by the Grace of God I would not deny Him.  Call me a fanatic if you want.  Call it a cult.  But that is how strongly I feel about my faith.  I have had people tell me it was the same as the fanatic Muslims.  I am not the one going out there with a gun to kill other people though so I don't get that connection.  I guess the willingness to die?  It is not that I want to.  That would be crazy, but if someone was forcing me to should I just give in?  And yes, horrible things have been done in the name of religions.  I get it.  But many people, even today, face death just for their faith in Jesus and just for doing good things for others.

Did this answer any questions?  Do you have any more?  If I did not answer the question you had let me know.  I really am not trying to skirt the issues here and love to discuss these things!  Iron sharpens iron so they say.

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.   

Why do you assume we or our planet is insignificant?  If the definable Universe includes us and the planet, then we aren't insignificant to the Universe, but rather we are integral to its definition.

First of all, I'm talking about language as an algebraic construct (i.e. syntax + content + grammar = language).  By definition, any identifiable thing or concept or system is a language.  While we may have created languages (e.g. Morse code), it is also correct to say that language allows for us to exist in the first place.  Language is mathematically holosymmetric in nature, and that's why we can create new languages at all.

Second, you automatically contradict yourself.  Saying the universe is "pointless" is ascribing a defined set of meaningful parameters to the Universe itself (i.e. you are implying that you know what it means to be 'pointless' and so you posit pointlessneses in opposition of meaning), and saying that "random chance" is responsible for our existence is ascribing a causal mechanism for our existence.  Chance is a word that way too many people misunderstand.  There is no such thing as raw chance - chance is unexplained causality.

Third, you're thinking about 'meaning' on a very superficial level ("Oh, that means so much to me!"), and you're ignoring that it's meaningful to be able to even perceive objects, measure sizes and distances, etc. at all.  All humans share at least one common language, namely the language of perception.  The fact that we all perceive the same Universe in congruence with each other indicates that there is something, some meaningful syntax, that binds us together.

Fourth, hearing a foreign language you don't understand is not the same as meaninglessness.  The fact that you recognize it as a language at all indicates that it conveys its meaning to you as linguistic, and it did that successfully.  Meaninglessness implies that you can't even know if there is any information whatsoever that could ever be deciphered or interpreted.  If I showed you writings from an unknown ancient civilization, you would instantly recognize the writings as a language even if you didn't know what was being said.  But, knowing that it is an unknown language, perhaps you'd be compelled to try to learn more about it...

Not meaningless, insignifiicant. In the same way that guessing a private key to a Bitcoin address has a chance that is so insignificant that it's almost meaningless. It has a chance, just like our communication has meaning, but it exists in such a vaste space of probabilities that it might as well be meaningless.

At least you are humble enough to see that in reality we are "nothing."    That is better than some.

I guess where I argue (even if you think it is pointless) is that God does care about us.  So much more than we even know or realize. 

From our previous discussions on other boards I know where you are coming from though Rassah. I will give you credit that you have good reasons to doubt having seen first hand tremendous suffering of people around you without feeling like God did anything about it.  I get that and I don't understand everything either and I agree that it is easy to feel like God just lets us be His pawns in this game of life as He sits back and just observes.  But having seen Him intervene and felt His comfort in difficult times in my life I have come to realize that even when it does not feel like God is there and when it feels like He doesn't care, He does care so much more than I know or even can understand.  Since God is no respecter of persons, His love for you or anyone else is no different than me.  I am not "special."  Perhaps I just have a softer heart or a willing heart to come to Him for help.  That is the only difference.  But I will say that God's plans or the things He allows me to go through are not always pleasant for sure.  It is really easy to doubt.  But I have learned through the years that He works all things out for the good of those that are called according to His purpose and I have learned to just wait and see what "good" can come from all the crap I have gone through.

The universe is pointless. There's no reason for our existence here other than some chemical reactions and random chance that our planet is the exact distance from the right size star, and it's the correct size, etc. There's meaning that we put into it. We are intelligent enough to provide meaning to things. We can try to convince ourselves that there's a reason for our existence, or the universe's existence for that matter, but it doesn't mean that it has to be true. We CREATED language. We PUT meaning into it. Just like if someone says something to you in another language that you don't understand, that has no meaning to you besides the tone of voice and body language of that person. We learn to put meaning to things that already exist or things that we create.

Meaning is embedded into the structural syntax of the universe, and necessarily so.  Information catalyzes meaning.  Without meaning, information is useless, chaotic, and impossible to decipher or communicate. 
Without meaning, you wouldn't be able to empirically study anything.

To say the Universe is meaningless is akin to saying that language is meaningless (reality is, by definition, a language).  But, that would be ridiculous because language predicates meaning.

Basically, if you think the Universe is meaningless, then please explain how information is conveyable.

funny we're arguing about this crap, while living on a tiny spec of dust in an enormous universe that doesn't know or care about anything we do.

God states in the Bible, "I am who am."  That does not imply that he is a being, but rather that he is being, period.

And, an omnipotent god would, logically, be able to place his own constraints upon himself, e.g. manifesting as a human.

One god, one universe, infinite points of god, infinite children of god.

One can believe in a couple hundred gods, but that doesn't make those gods THE god.  Do you see what I'm saying?  God is everything, as are we.

THE god (all consciousness) exists beyond physical manifestation and is a singular point of the purest form of energy, love.

So when will you let go of your pride and accept the other couple hundred gods into your life?

Or is everyone else wrong?

Thanks.  To be hateful would go entirely against what I should be as a Christian so I take that as a compliment.

It gets complicated to be a Christian sometimes.  Because I believe so strongly that the Bible is true I am seen as totally narrow minded by many people.  But because I believe the Bible to be true to my core I cannot rewrite the Bible and make it say whatever I want it too.  Then I would not be a true Christian.  In fact, I see many people that claim to be that pick and choose what they want to believe out of the Bible.  In a way they are just creating their own "god".  

As for providing evidence.  I could go a few different directions with that.  There is a book called "The Case For Christ" by Lee Strobel http://www.amazon.com/The-Case-Christ-Journalists-Investigation/dp/0310209307 where a well known reporter approached searching for evidence for proof that Jesus was really who he said he was.  He did not believe it and wanted to prove once and for all that Jesus was just a big scam but came to realize that there was evidence out there that was undeniable.  That said, even with "evidence" it takes someone with a willingness to accept that evidence as truth or as some call it "faith."

Also, one thing that resonates with me for the evidence of God is the complexity of the human body.  Even the complexity of a single cell in our bodies should make us wonder at how would that ever just happen by chance.  As intelligent as humans are we cannot even understand everything about how our bodies work.  Isn't that enough to make us think that there is something greater out there?  I would think that it would cause someone to at least believe in Intelligent Design.  If we were walking along the beach and saw a glass bottle with the coke logo on it would we think "Wow, what a strange sand formation?"  Of course not.  It obviously was created by someone.  How much more complex are humans?  We were obviously intricately designed.

As for all of the different paths or "gods" the Bible is pretty narrow in that it says, "There is one way to the Father, through Jesus Christ."  This is not popular for sure.  I think the thing that is eye opening for me is that all of the other religions require people to do works to earn their way to a "higher place" "nirvana" or the afterlife they believe in.  Christianity is the only religion where one realizes that there is nothing that we can do in ourselves.  It is not about "earning" or being "good."  It is about understanding we will never be good enough and we need a savior and our salvation is a free gift.  So Christianity is different then all religions in that.

I had a long conversation with a Hindu I met at the beach once.  He argued with me that all paths were valid.  I said that if all paths were valid and Christianity said that there was only one way to the Father and it was through accepting Jesus, then the most logical choice would be to become a Christian so that your salvation would be guaranteed.  He smiled and said, "You are beginning to persuade me."  I am not sure what he did decide to do because I have not seen him since.  

But all of this is just words on a page.  True faith is about letting go of our pride and actually praying to God and asking Him for help.  Simple yet profound and it seems so few want to do that.  The sad thing is even I, as a Christian, find myself struggling to "let go and let God" have His way at times too.  It is a journey for sure.