If you were not a Christian, what would you be?

[FireDragon76]

A lot of people, myself included, can't really see themselves as anything but Christian.

Is the inability to think abstractly a Christian virtue?

Just delve into the writings of C.S. Lewis for a counterpoint to that perspective. He was able to appreciate what was true in other faiths and cultures, without feeling like he was betraying his own loyalties.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Now why, do you think, all the Atheists suppose we're dying to know which Asian cult or obscure philosophy they'd choose?

I don't. It just beats running naked through the thread.

Or maybe not.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[FireDragon76]

The main reason I'm not a Stoic, aside from believing the Gospel is true, is because stoicism presents such a bleak picture of life. It's about managing life, not embracing it. Without the hope of the inbreaking of the Kingdom of God and the World to Come, and left with a basic atheism, that's sort of what we are left with- management of life. Suppression of the emotions. Not really abundant life, where we can embrace the depths of despair and the highest ecstasy as both hallowed.

And actually, if I accepted some basic kind of monotheism- I might also choose Judaism.

But other people are entitled to their perspective.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The main reason I'm not a Stoic, aside from believing the Gospel is true, is because stoicism presents such a bleak picture of life. It's about managing life, not embracing it. Without the hope of the inbreaking of the Kingdom of God and the World to Come, and left with a basic atheism, that's sort of what we are left with- management of life. Suppression of the emotions. Not really abundant life, where we can embrace the depths of despair and the highest ecstasy as both hallowed.

You need to get into some Nietzsche.

 

[Eudaimonist]

The main reason I'm not a Stoic, aside from believing the Gospel is true, is because stoicism presents such a bleak picture of life. It's about managing life, not embracing it.

While "bleak" isn't the word that I would use, that's pretty much my reason for not being a Stoic as well.

Without the hope of the inbreaking of the Kingdom of God and the World to Come, and left with a basic atheism, that's sort of what we are left with- management of life. Suppression of the emotions. Not really abundant life, where we can embrace the depths of despair and the highest ecstasy as both hallowed.

What? I'm not familiar with this "basic atheism".

I can't speak for all atheists, of course, and perhaps my atheism is not "basic" (whatever that means), but I definitely view life as something to be lived abundantly, and not merely managed, and I'm very much opposed to a Vulcan-like suppression of the emotions. I can't imagine what you are talking about.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[FireDragon76]

I've read some Nietzsche, particularly Zarathustra. He embraces a godless irrationalism, which in my mind is a ridiculous invitation to insanity, as was born out in his life. If I were to be godless, stoicism would be how I would do it.

 

[FireDragon76]

If God doesn't exist, life is indeed rather bleak. We are born, we live, we die. Most of us living in material privation, for no particular reason. I consider that pretty bleak. The stoics have it right... you just have to shut all those feelings out and do your duty and accept it.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I've read some Nietzsche, particularly Zarathustra. He embraces a godless irrationalism, which in my mind is a ridiculous invitation to insanity, as was born out in his life.

He didn't go insane because of his ideas. His fate was one shared by many Christians of his day.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I've read some Nietzsche, particularly Zarathustra. He embraces a godless irrationalism, which in my mind is a ridiculous invitation to insanity, as was born out in his life. If I were to be godless, stoicism would be how I would do it.

Twilight and Human, All Too Human are musts.

 

[Eudaimonist]

If God doesn't exist, life is indeed rather bleak.

Actually, it isn't, as I have discovered.

We are born, we live, we die.

Note the word in bold. It contains far more than just four letters.

Most of us living in material privation, for no particular reason. I consider that pretty bleak.

So wealth is the measure of a life? I don't hold that view.

The stoics have it right... you just have to shut all those feelings out and do your duty and accept it.

The Stoics weren't quite saying that. Yes, they thought that one should accept reality, but they stressed that external values weren't nearly as important as internal values (such as the virtues). External values may be nice to have, but one doesn't actually require them in order to have a complete life. IOWs, not having them doesn't mean that one's life is a failure.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If God doesn't exist, life is indeed rather bleak.

Why? How could this be bleak?

 

[JGG]

What? I'm not familiar with this "basic atheism".

I can't speak for all atheists, of course, and perhaps my atheism is not "basic" (whatever that means), but I definitely view life as something to be lived abundantly, and not merely managed, and I'm very much opposed to a Vulcan-like suppression of the emotions. I can't imagine what you are talking about.

It's a glimpse of the stereotype believers pass around about atheists. We are hopeless, dismal, depressed (and yet emotionless), pitiful creatures. I'm pretty sure "basic atheism" refers to a type of person rather than a basic set of beliefs, ideas, or other such qualification. Our lives need to be bleak, or depressed so theirs can be fulfilling.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It's a glimpse of the stereotype believers pass around about atheists. We are hopeless, dismal, depressed (and yet emotionless), pitiful creatures. I'm pretty sure "basic atheism" refers to a type of person rather than a basic set of beliefs, ideas, or other such qualification.

It's a remarkably persistent stereotype. It largely stems from the nihilistic notion that, unless something is infused with theological significance, it has no significance at all.

 

[Albion]

Why? How could this be bleak?

It might be pretty, but it could still be considered meaningless. I'm not sure about that. The life of a single firefly could be considered to be of titanic importance by some people, but I'm just not convinced.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It might be pretty, but it could still be considered meaningless.

Yes, to a nihilist.

 

[Albion]

Yes, to a nihilist.

Everything's pointless --and worse--to a nihilist, so that doesn't shed any light on the matter.

 

[JGG]

It might be pretty, but it could still be considered meaningless. I'm not sure about that. The life of a single firefly could be considered to be of titanic importance by some people, but I'm just not convinced.

It's not simply pretty. That is an infinite expanse of things we do not yet know. It allows for wonder, exploration, questioning, learning, studying, philosophizing, etc... I'd say it has meaning.

 

[Albion]

It's not simply pretty. That is an infinite expanse of things we do not yet know.

I guess I'm not finding that to be as meaningful as you do. We could call it by other positive adjectives, but does it make life have a purpose? Welllllll.....[/QUOTE]

 

[muichimotsu]

If I wasn't an atheist I would probably be a theist.

I think the OP wanted to be a bit more specific, like a monotheist or a polytheist. We don't even have to get into specific faith tradition.

 

[muichimotsu]

I would be/am simply a disciple of Jesus of Nazareth, of his original, pre-cross gospel of The Kingdom of Heaven.

I believe Jesus is "Christ", that is how I am Christ-ian, but Peter and Paul's new gospel about Jesus evolved away from the religion of Jesus.

You're not contributing to the discussion besides affirming your present position. At most, all you can say is that you wouldn't be a Christian, you'd just revere Jesus, which is like saying I wouldn't be a Buddhist, but I could respect and admire Siddhartha Gautama. We're talking about an alternative position, not a revamp of what you already believe.