Ask an atheist!

[Allegory]

I've got a question. How do atheists live their lives knowing that nothing is permanent? Despite what you could accomplish, the loving relationships you could build, none of that can be held unto.

Why should you want to hold onto it forever? I think that people don't really understand the permanency of "eternity". It's pretty easy to say you wish you could live forever...but.... I don't know. When billions of years are insignificant and you are experiencing a second per second it seems like it would be fairly maddening.

You could look at it from the point of view of a collector. The fact that your life and existence are limited adds value. Life isn't a chore to get to the afterlife. Life is all you have. That doesn't mean people have to do spectacular things with their lives, but certainly it should be motivation to. Your accomplishments live on in memories and history.


I don't know, I'm just rambling, but when I think about it...if there's a person who dies "before their time" or whatever and someone were to say "they're in a better place," it really cheapens their life. It's like it doesn't matter if they die or not. I think that a lack of an afterlife makes life itself more precious.

 

[Jedi]

I don't know, I'm just rambling, but when I think about it...if there's a person who dies "before their time" or whatever and someone were to say "they're in a better place," it really cheapens their life. It's like it doesn't matter if they die or not. I think that a lack of an afterlife makes life itself more precious.

I see what you're saying and I quite agree that stripping away the concept of an afterlife does make the life we have now more valuable. After all, if this is all there is, then isn't each moment worth more? Reduce the amount of time we have and each unit of time becomes more precious.

However, to desire this over everlasting life seems, to me, silly. You might as well desire less money over having more, saying to others "See! I have only one dollar, so this dollar is more precious to me than it would be if I had a million!" True as that may be, call me crazy, but I'd still rather have a million dollars. Just the same, I would rather have more time to exist than less. How could I, if I did not exist, profit by not existing? Even if you valued every second of your life more than any person in the world, in the end, it doesn't matter; the man who valued his life and the man who didn't come to the very same end: non-existence.

 

[SnapCount]

Life would be more valuable, sure, but it is still a short amount of time. Life goes by pretty fast. We would just be a wave tossed in the ocean, a vapor in the wind, going from point A to point B before disappearing into the never-ending abyss of non-existence.

When I think of someone I care about, and I mean really care about, just thinking about being forever torn apart from them seems wrong. People wants to be loved, wants to be heard, wants to be important, wants to be depended upon, wants to belong, and wants to have a purpose. I still can't understand why anyone that believes we're just dust particles in a vast universe existing for only a moment with no ultimate meaning and purpose doesn't get depressed.

Eternity is not maddening. It is unlike anything anyone on Earth has and will ever experience. Imagine how much you know about the world today compared to the time when you were 3 or 4. Imagine what an ant knows about astrophysics. Now imagine what we know about the kingdom of an all-powerful, all-knowing and omnipresent God.

Anyway, just the way I see it.

 

[andross77]

Look, you are completely misunderstanding everything.


THERE ARE NO ATHEIST PRINCIPLES. THERE. ARE. NONE. PEOPLE DON'T RULE "IN THE NAME OF ATHEISM". IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

the rest of your posts are moot with your first comment: THERE ARE NO ATHEIST PRINCIPLES. That's EXACTLY why your worldview is DEFICIENT, CHAOTIC and FALSE.

Don't you get it??? That's why Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Mussolini could go on their terror rampages b/c THEY HAD NO PRINCIPLES TO GUIDE THEM! They thought, "this is who i hate" or "this is what i want" and they did whatever it took (which involved killing lots of innocent people).

And as an atheist YOU CANNOT SAY THEY WERE WRONG IN THEIR ACTION. Again, you KNOW it's wrong, but you have NO BASIS to say it's wrong. You will say over and over it's wrong b/c society says it's wrong, but what happens when society gets ruled by a crazy person again? And they say that white people are evil and kill all of them. Then in your society killing white people will be ok and you will have NO REASON TO SAY WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS WRONG B/C AS AN ATHEIST YOU HAVE NO PRINCIPLES!!

Do you see how your worldview is very shallow and unsubstantiated? You have nothing to say, you just keep going in circles. But the more you talk, the more people can see that Atheism is false and ignorant, and that's good for the public to see.

 

[andross77]

Why should you want to hold onto it forever? I think that people don't really understand the permanency of "eternity". It's pretty easy to say you wish you could live forever...but.... I don't know. When billions of years are insignificant and you are experiencing a second per second it seems like it would be fairly maddening.

You could look at it from the point of view of a collector. The fact that your life and existence are limited adds value. Life isn't a chore to get to the afterlife. Life is all you have. That doesn't mean people have to do spectacular things with their lives, but certainly it should be motivation to. Your accomplishments live on in memories and history.


I don't know, I'm just rambling, but when I think about it...if there's a person who dies "before their time" or whatever and someone were to say "they're in a better place," it really cheapens their life. It's like it doesn't matter if they die or not. I think that a lack of an afterlife makes life itself more precious.

This is the screwed-up logic of someone who is going from death to death. Life is ONLY precious when it has ultimate consequences that you will reap for all eternity. If you just vaporize and sieze to exist, life has no meaning.

Your view of eternity is so screwed up. It will not be like earth. It will be either all the good things of earth times infinity (heaven) or it will be all the bad things of earth times infinity (hell). Heaven will not be sitting on clouds and strumming your harp. Heaven will be engaging in relationships, discovering new inventions, traveling to new planets, learning a new language, eating great food and waking up the next day knowing you have just as much time to enjoy it as you did yesterday. Also, no possibility of pain, death, evil or sin entering in.

Hell will be the exact opposite. It will be the same drudgery of pain and torture with no communication to anyone, no relief from the agony and no hope for an escape. Your life will hang on by a thread but it will not be remembered by anyone nor have significance to anyone. You will scream and no one will hear you. You will cry and bleed and there will be no one to comfort you.

The screwed-up lie is believing all that doesn't exist. That life on earth is the beginning, middle and end. Life for a Christian is EXTREMELY significant and precious. Much more so than for any atheist, secular humanist or any other worldview/religion. What we do in life will reap eternal rewards that can be used/cherished/developed (or we will lose out on them). Life is EXTREMELY significant for everyone b/c there is no gray area or annhiliation or cease of existence. We were made as immortal souls by God and we will continue to exist FOREVER in one of two surroundings: Love or Evil.

So i take the time to explain this to an atheist b/c i wouldn't wish that latter destination on ANYONE. Not my worst enemies. Not Hitler, not a child rapist, not Osama Bin Laden. But God is the perfect Judge. And He will see who is covered by the Blood of Christ and who isn't and then take care of the rest. I pray the Spirit opens your eyes Allegory b/c that's the only way you will be saved from yourself.

Blessings.

 

[andross77]

wow, i never do the whole "fire and brimstone" or holding up the "you're going to hell sign" so i guess it's just evidence of my frustration with Atheists in general. They are so blind to the Truth and sincerely believe in their heart they are taking the "intellectual highground" when they don't need to "use religion as a crutch to soften the blows of harsh reality".

This could not be farther from the truth and instead of taking the intellectual highground they are actually taking the cowardly backgate out of True Reality which calls into account every careless word and action we do. What we sow we reap, and that for eternity. An atheist doesn't want to accept this responsibility so they cloak their cowardice in lofty philosophies and false-pragmatism. It's sad (truly, i'm not mocking) and so sometimes it's hard to know when to witness to them with the truth of the Gospel and when you are just "throwing your pearls before swine".

Blessings.

 

[Jedi]

Eh, careful about the tone in your posts there. It seems rather insincere to say "blessings" after shouting at someone in telling them they're "screwed up," "false," and "blind." Personal ad hominemns typically don't go over too well. It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

 

[andross77]

Eh, careful about the tone in your posts there. It seems rather insincere to say "blessings" after shouting at someone in telling them they're "screwed up," "false," and "blind." Personal ad hominemns typically don't go over too well. It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

thanks for your concern but careful about putting words in my mouth as that is slander and as bad if not worse than using ad hominem arguments.

i clearly state that the "logic" and "lies" are screwed up and it's unfortunate that atheists believe them. I also call atheism a false worldview. Never do i call Allegory "screwed-up".

And didn't Jesus call false teachers "blind guides" in Matthew 15:14? I am not using ad hominem b/c i am not trying to personally attack anyone here, including Allegory. I'm just stating my opinion that (that i think is backed up my logic, reason and experience, not just faith) atheism is a false worldview that doesn't hold up when put to the test.

If you take offense when someone calls someone "wrong" then i feel sorry for you and would advise you not to read any of my posts b/c they might be a little more than "bland" and have a little "force" behind them.

Blessings. (and i mean it )

 

[andross77]

Eh, careful about the tone in your posts there. It seems rather insincere to say "blessings" after shouting at someone in telling them they're "screwed up," "false," and "blind." Personal ad hominemns typically don't go over too well. It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

if you can show me where i use ad hominems i'll retract my posts and apologize. but don't say they are implied b/c that would be you reading into my posts something that isn't there. If you can't show where i have ad hominems, then please apologize.

Blessings.

 

[Jedi]

thanks for your concern but careful about putting words in my mouth as that is slander and as bad if not worse than using ad hominem arguments.

Haha, you are a spitfire, aren’t you? Very well then, let’s play your game.

i clearly state that the "logic" and "lies" are screwed up and it's unfortunate that atheists believe them. I also call atheism a false worldview. Never do i call Allegory "screwed-up".

I’m sorry, but this is such a cop-out. It’s like saying to a woman, “I didn’t say you were a witch, I just said you’re acting like one.” The force of the attack is still clearly present, and you outright attacked all atheists as cowards in post 206, suggested they are swine, place atheists next to Hitler, child rapists, and Osama Bin Laden in post 205, that atheists are “ignorant” in post 204 (you say “atheism,” but surely a person who appeals to an “ignorant” belief system falls under the same adjective as that belief system?), and that atheists have nothing to say (by this, we can only presume you mean “nothing intelligent or constructive") in post 204. I’m sorry, but you have repeatedly targeted the atheists themselves as people with inflammatory comments and the fact that you’re trying to wiggle out of this thing you are blatantly guilty of suggests a lack of character or a bigoted blindness on your part. I’m no atheist, rest assured, but if I were one, I would label you as just another religious fanatic bent on condemning others instead of listening to what they have to say, supposing that because others don’t agree with your overall conclusion, they must not have any good points at all (i.e. they have "nothing to say" in your words). Bad form, pal. Bad form.

Do I need to actually tell you that you catch more bees with honey than vinegar? When you’re pointing the finger at someone, telling them their logic and worldview are “screwed up” and other inflammatory accusations such as shallowness and cowardice, you put them on the defensive and anything you have to say just won’t make it through. This is true of essentially anyone – including Christians such as you. It’s clear you don’t want open dialogue here – you merely want to slam atheists and their “screwed up” and “blind” ways through inflammatory comments. Again, disagree without being disagreeable.

And didn't Jesus call false teachers "blind guides" in Matthew 15:14?

Please, tell me you’re not putting yourself in the position of Christ. Show me where Christ rebuked anyone who taught and made honest mistakes. Go ahead. You see, Jesus rebuked those who knew better and still taught and led wrongfully; it was the condition of their hearts He rebuked, not the fact that in all sincerity, people were mistaken on a number of facts. There’s no sense in condemning someone morally for doing all they can do to lead and teach, even if they make mistakes along the way or mistakenly teach a false idea they believed to be true. Such people need gentle correction, not rebuke and finger pointing such as you’ve given. Your impression of atheists screams “newbie,” suggesting you know very little, if any atheists, judging by your naive accusations against them.

I am not using ad hominem b/c i am not trying to personally attack anyone here, including Allegory.

Your tone suggests otherwise, as does your accusations against those who appeal to atheism. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that simply because you didn’t attack someone directly, you could not have possibly attacked them at all.

If you take offense when someone calls someone "wrong" then i feel sorry for you and would advise you not to read any of my posts b/c they might be a little more than "bland" and have a little "force" behind them.

Hardly, I’ve debated over these matters for at least the past 10 years. I don’t have a problem with disagreeing with people; I have a problem with how you’re doing it. Again, disagree without being disagreeable by use of inflammatory language.

 

[andross77]

Haha, you are a spitfire, aren’t you? Very well then, let’s play your game.



I’m sorry, but this is such a cop-out. It’s like saying to a woman, “I didn’t say you were a witch, I just said you’re acting like one.” The force of the attack is still clearly present, and you outright attacked all atheists as cowards in post 206, suggested they are swine, place atheists next to Hitler, child rapists, and Osama Bin Laden in post 205, that atheists are “ignorant” in post 204 (you say “atheism,” but surely a person who appeals to an “ignorant” belief system falls under the same adjective as that belief system?), and that atheists have nothing to say (by this, we can only presume you mean “nothing intelligent or constructive") in post 204. I’m sorry, but you have repeatedly targeted the atheists themselves as people with inflammatory comments and the fact that you’re trying to wiggle out of this thing you are blatantly guilty of suggests a lack of character or a bigoted blindness on your part. I’m no atheist, rest assured, but if I were one, I would label you as just another religious fanatic bent on condemning others instead of listening to what they have to say, supposing that because others don’t agree with your overall conclusion, they must not have any good points at all (i.e. they have "nothing to say" in your words). Bad form, pal. Bad form.

Do I need to actually tell you that you catch more bees with honey than vinegar? When you’re pointing the finger at someone, telling them their logic and worldview are “screwed up” and other inflammatory accusations such as shallowness and cowardice, you put them on the defensive and anything you have to say just won’t make it through. This is true of essentially anyone – including Christians such as you. It’s clear you don’t want open dialogue here – you merely want to slam atheists and their “screwed up” and “blind” ways through inflammatory comments. Again, disagree without being disagreeable.



Please, tell me you’re not putting yourself in the position of Christ. Show me where Christ rebuked anyone who taught and made honest mistakes. Go ahead. You see, Jesus rebuked those who knew better and still taught and led wrongfully; it was the condition of their hearts He rebuked, not the fact that in all sincerity, people were mistaken on a number of facts. There’s no sense in condemning someone morally for doing all they can do to lead and teach, even if they make mistakes along the way or mistakenly teach a false idea they believed to be true. Such people need gentle correction, not rebuke and finger pointing such as you’ve given. Your impression of atheists screams “newbie,” suggesting you know very little, if any atheists, judging by your naive accusations against them.



Your tone suggests otherwise, as does your accusations against those who appeal to atheism. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that simply because you didn’t attack someone directly, you could not have possibly attacked them at all.



Hardly, I’ve debated over these matters for at least the past 10 years. I don’t have a problem with disagreeing with people; I have a problem with how you’re doing it. Again, disagree without being disagreeable by use of inflammatory language.

Thanks for your response. I disagree with you completely. I am a sensitive person but you are 10X so. In real life i would steer clear of you since you don't seem to understand arguments.

I was not calling atheists Osama or swine. You don't understand the rules of argumentation i guess. An atheist, or anyone, can become swine in the proper context if they are not rationally and openly listening to points being made on the opposite side.

I do see your point about "honey instead of vinegar" and grouping people together. And no i was never placing myself in the spot of Christ. Again, you putting words in my mouth. I'm using Christ's example to say that it is appropriate to call people out sometimes.

You are using a false argument by saying the people Jesus called out were 100% rational and cognizant of what they were doing and the person (allegory) or group (atheists) i'm speaking against are all naive, innocent, and unable to make rational and well thought out decisions.

Sorry i just don't agree with you at all. If this was real life, i probably would just refrain from talking to you again b/c i see our personalities are too opposite. But since this is the internet i'm sure we'll keep going back and forth. Keep calling out my method if you want and just ignore the evil worldview that atheists try and spread. I on the other hand will try and make better use of my time.

Blessings.

 

[Jedi]

Thanks for your response. I disagree with you completely. I am a sensitive person but you are 10X so. In real life i would steer clear of you since you don't seem to understand arguments.

And so you continue your personal jabs. Need I say more? On the contrary, friend, I have a B.A. in Theology with Philosophy being one of my minors. I tell you where you’re getting inflammatory here needlessly and what do you do? You shrug it off by labeling the person who pointed it out as being overly sensitive. Surprise, surprise.

I was not calling atheists Osama or swine. You don't understand the rules of argumentation i guess. An atheist, or anyone, can become swine in the proper context if they are not rationally and openly listening to points being made on the opposite side.

Another needless, personal jab. Can you restrain yourself at all? The fact is you clearly accused atheists of being swine; saying others could also fall into that category is irrelevant. Your guilt remains. The "rules of argumentation" exclude accusations you've made here, such as "You're blind, you're swine, you're a coward," etc. They do nothing but hinder the dialogue. Perhaps you'd like to take a class or two in philosophy or debate before you try preaching to others?

And no i was never placing myself in the spot of Christ. Again, you putting words in my mouth.

Again, you’ve got to be kidding me. The entire point of you referring to what Christ did was to justify your own actions, suggesting “Hey, I’m just doing what Jesus did.” Not quite.

You are using a false argument by saying the people Jesus called out were 100% rational and cognizant of what they were doing and the person (allegory) or group (atheists) i'm speaking against are all naive, innocent, and unable to make rational and well thought out decisions.

Where did I ever say all atheists were “naïve, innocent, and unable to make rational and well thought out decisions?” For someone who so avidly screams I’m putting words into your mouth, you have a funny way of staying clear of it yourself. I asked you to show me where Jesus rebuked someone for an honest misunderstanding. You failed to provide. That’s all. I also noted that the way you talk about atheists as a whole suggests you have very little, if any, experience with atheists. By and large, they are not out to get you, knowingly deceiving people with malicious intent. Surely you don’t assume this to be true of anyone who disagrees with you on something?

Keep calling out my method if you want and just ignore the evil worldview that atheists try and spread.

More childish antics. I’m not impressed. If you knew anything about how I’ve spent my time in debate, you would certainly know I don’t ignore Atheism and its contrast to Christianity. Here you make the mistake of supposing that because I called you out on your inflammatory, counter-productive methods in interacting with someone who disagrees with you, I must also magically ignore the problems with Atheism, even though I posted earlier in this thread directly responding to something that was suggested by an Atheist. Go figure.

 

[andross77]

And so you continue your personal jabs. Need I say more? On the contrary, friend, I have a B.A. in Theology with Philosophy being one of my minors. I tell you where you’re getting inflammatory here needlessly and what do you do? You shrug it off by labeling the person who pointed it out as being overly sensitive. Surprise, surprise.



Another needless, personal jab. Can you restrain yourself at all? The fact is you clearly accused atheists of being swine; saying others could also fall into that category is irrelevant. Your guilt remains. The "rules of argumentation" exclude accusations you've made here, such as "You're blind, you're swine, you're a coward," etc. They do nothing but hinder the dialogue. Perhaps you'd like to take a class or two in philosophy or debate before you try preaching to others?



Again, you’ve got to be kidding me. The entire point of you referring to what Christ did was to justify your own actions, suggesting “Hey, I’m just doing what Jesus did.” Not quite.



Where did I ever say all atheists were “naïve, innocent, and unable to make rational and well thought out decisions?” For someone who so avidly screams I’m putting words into your mouth, you have a funny way of staying clear of it yourself. I asked you to show me where Jesus rebuked someone for an honest misunderstanding. You failed to provide. That’s all. I also noted that the way you talk about atheists as a whole suggests you have very little, if any, experience with atheists. By and large, they are not out to get you, knowingly deceiving people with malicious intent. Surely you don’t assume this to be true of anyone who disagrees with you on something?



More childish antics. I’m not impressed. If you knew anything about how I’ve spent my time in debate, you would certainly know I don’t ignore Atheism and its contrast to Christianity. Here you make the mistake of supposing that because I called you out on your inflammatory, counter-productive methods in interacting with someone who disagrees with you, I must also magically ignore the problems with Atheism, even though I posted earlier in this thread directly responding to something that was suggested by an Atheist. Go figure.

Wow, i'm sorry your mind can't grasp what i'm trying to say. I still disagree with you and you are putting words in my mouth i never said. You are reading into my comments and making them something they weren't intended to be.

thanks for your input. bye.

 

[Jedi]

Wow, i'm sorry your mind can't grasp what i'm trying to say.

And he continues with the personal jabs... anyone else not surprised?

I still disagree with you and you are putting words in my mouth i never said. You are reading into my comments and making them something they weren't intended to be.

That's great. I explain things; you just beg the question. Well done. And you're wanting to debate an Atheist?

 

[andross77]

And he continues with the personal jabs... anyone else not surprised?



That's great. I explain things; you just beg the question. Well done. And you're wanting to debate an Atheist?

Wow, you just dont get it. I did no personal jabs until that last post and that's b/c you keep putting words in my mouth and acting like a know it all (in other people's minds no less).

You don't get what i was saying. You don't understand the point i was trying to get across. You don't understand the logical and rational outworkings of an atheistic worldview.

You've added nothing to this thread except your snobbery. Hope you are gone from here for good.

 

[Jedi]

You don't get what i was saying. You don't understand the point i was trying to get across.

I'm sorry - I must have missed it among your inflammatory comments. Perhaps if you cleaned it up a bit, your point would be easier to find.

You don't understand the logical and rational outworkings of an atheistic worldview.

Haha, you have no idea who you're talking to, bub. You lack the basis for such a bold statement. I've studied these issues of theism, atheism, agnosticism, etc. for years at the University level. Have you? How many years have you been talking with atheists and agnostics? How many times a day do you talk with them on average? I'm very curious, since apparently, you think you have grasped Atheism while I have missed it entirely. And you have the audacity to suggest snobbery on my part? Haha, if nothing else, you're quite funny.

Hope you are gone from here for good.

More of your true colors coming out, it seems. Keep it up with the personal attacks and hostile remarks. It makes Jesus smile, I'm sure.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Both of you are sounding ridiculous.

 

[Jedi]

Haha, perhaps so. I've stooped to his level of meaningless argumentation and hostilities. My bad. I'll utilize my ignore list here.

My atheist friends, don't mind him too much. He seems to still be in that "holy crusade, attack the heathen" phase.

 

[andross77]

Haha, perhaps so. I've stooped to his level of meaningless argumentation and hostilities. My bad. I'll utilize my ignore list here.

My atheist friends, don't mind him too much. He seems to still be in that "holy crusade, attack the heathen" phase.

Wow, you continue to be wrong and stick your foot in your mouth. You haven't understood me from the beginning and you don't understand me now.

Glad others can see you look ridiculous even if you can't.

 

[Bl00dBought]

It makes Jesus smile, I'm sure.

Man, don't say stuff like that it's degrading and wrong.