The difficulty of talking to Atheist

[Loudmouth]

What meanings? You cant prove that meanings exist. What purpose? You cant prove that purpose exist, those are subjective fantasies.

Purpose and meaning are subjective. That is the whole point. They are something we invent . . . kind of like deities.

 

[Colter]

The knowledge that I add to society can live on with humanity in space or on other planets.

You are simply wrong about the idea that an atheist's meaning and purpose die with them. They live in on the people that we love and the societies we are a part of. It is rather disappointing that you feel the need to denigrate atheism in order to feel better about your own faith.



I don't have to admit to any such thing. Atheists choose their own meaning and purpose in life, just as you chose to have christianity as a central part of the meaning in your life.

I'm reflecting back to you the claims of Atheism's doctrines of death. Leaving a shrine to your ego is purposeless for the dead.

 

[Colter]

Purpose and meaning are subjective. That is the whole point. They are something we invent . . . kind of like deities.

You haven't proven that purpose and meaning exist or that they are distinguishable from phantasms or mere internal instinctual responses to external stimuli, inherent electro chemical processes of an evolutionary inheritance. Meanings and purposes aren't real unless you can prove them.

 

[BL2KTN]

Sounds a lot like a God.

And we would appear like gods to the ancient Hebrews. What's your point?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

What meanings? You cant prove that meanings exist. What purpose? You cant prove that purpose exist, those are subjective fantasies.

Now is a good a time as any for what I've come to call the 'even if...' approach.

Even if atheists can't appeal to meaning or purpose in their lives, and even if a god exists, theism remains an epistemological deadzone, with no reliable means whatsoever of gleaning information or distinguishing it from false information. No meaning or purpose can possibly be predicated on it.

So, even granting the best possible circumstances for your litany of naked assertions - which you are absolutely nowhere near actually demonstrating - your position is still vacuous.

 

[True Scotsman]

What meanings? You cant prove that meanings exist. What purpose? You cant prove that purpose exist, those are subjective fantasies.

If the principle of the primacy of existence isn't true as you claim, then there is no such thing as "proof". There is no need to prove anything as existence is subjective. You are stealing concepts again. The concept of "proof" presupposes that there is something to prove (existence, identity), a consciousness which has grasped the concepts of true and false (consciousness) and that facts are what they are independent of anyone's conscious desires (the primacy of existence). The concept of proof rests logically on the very axioms that you reject. You have no right to use the concept of "proof".

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

You haven't proven that purpose and meaning exist or that they are distinguishable from phantasms or mere internal instinctual responses to external stimuli, inherent electro chemical processes of an evolutionary inheritance. Meanings and purposes aren't real unless you can prove them.

Hilarious.

You were being asked these same epistemological questions in regard to your own assertions not two pages ago, and all you did in turn was rephrase your initial assertion. Now here you are, attempting (and failing miserably) to utilize the exact same line of reasoning against someone else. This demonstrates, once again, the seemingly limitless capacity for theistic special pleading.

Absolutely hilarious.

 

[Colter]

Hilarious.

You were being asked these same epistemological questions in regard to your own assertions not two pages ago, and all you did in turn was rephrase your initial assertion. Now here you are, attempting (and failing miserably) to utilize the exact same line of reasoning against someone else. This demonstrates, once again, the seemingly limitless capacity for theistic special pleading.

Absolutely hilarious.

Of course Loudmouth knows meaning, wisdom and has purpose, I don't really require that he prove that he possess those even though they aren't provable in the same way that knowing the presence of the spirit of the heavenly Father is provable. That is my point, Atheist jockey back and forth across the artificial barriers of "proofs" in these discussions. One moment they acknowledge transcendentals and the next moment its all math and we are imagining things.....So, I'm just being playful in asking why meaning isn't also imagination.

 

[Aldebaran]

Of course Loudmouth knows meaning, wisdom and has purpose, I don't really require that he prove that he possess those even though they aren't provable in the same way that knowing the presence of the spirit of the heavenly Father is provable. That is my point, Atheist jockey back and forth across the artificial barriers of "proofs" in these discussions. One moment they acknowledge transcendentals and the next moment its all math and we are imagining things.....So, I'm just being playful in asking why meaning isn't also imagination.

They also talk a lot about "luck". I guess they have faith in that.

 

[Loudmouth]

You haven't proven that purpose and meaning exist or that they are distinguishable from phantasms or mere internal instinctual responses to external stimuli, inherent electro chemical processes of an evolutionary inheritance. Meanings and purposes aren't real unless you can prove them.

I never claimed that they do exist, other than fulfilling an emotional need.

 

[Loudmouth]

Of course Loudmouth knows meaning, wisdom and has purpose, I don't really require that he prove that he possess those even though they aren't provable in the same way that knowing the presence of the spirit of the heavenly Father is provable. That is my point, Atheist jockey back and forth across the artificial barriers of "proofs" in these discussions. One moment they acknowledge transcendentals and the next moment its all math and we are imagining things.....So, I'm just being playful in asking why meaning isn't also imagination.

You claim that God is a real being. That requires real proof.

We are claiming that the meaning and purpose in our lives are not real things, but emotional needs that we fulfill.

There's a big difference.

 

[Loudmouth]

They also talk a lot about "luck". I guess they have faith in that.

What?

 

[Colter]

If the principle of the primacy of existence isn't true as you claim, then there is no such thing as "proof". There is no need to prove anything as existence is subjective. You are stealing concepts again. The concept of "proof" presupposes that there is something to prove (existence, identity), a consciousness which has grasped the concepts of true and false (consciousness) and that facts are what they are independent of anyone's conscious desires (the primacy of existence). The concept of proof rests logically on the very axioms that you reject. You have no right to use the concept of "proof".

6. The Father’s Primacy
​

(52.4) 3:6.1 With divine selflessness, consummate generosity, the Universal Father relinquishes authority and delegates power, but he is still primal; his hand is on the mighty lever of the circumstances of the universal realms; he has reserved all final decisions and unerringly wields the all-powerful veto scepter of his eternal purpose with unchallengeable authority over the welfare and destiny of the outstretched, whirling, and ever-circling creation.

(52.5) 3:6.2 The sovereignty of God is unlimited; it is the fundamental fact of all creation. The universe was not inevitable. The universe is not an accident, neither is it self-existent. The universe is a work of creation and is therefore wholly subject to the will of the Creator. The will of God is divine truth, living love; therefore are the perfecting creations of the evolutionary universes characterized by goodness — nearness to divinity; by potential evil — remoteness from divinity.

(53.1) 3:6.3 All religious philosophy, sooner or later, arrives at the concept of unified universe rule, of one God. Universe causes cannot be lower than universe effects. The source of the streams of universe life and of the cosmic mind must be above the levels of their manifestation. The human mind cannot be consistently explained in terms of the lower orders of existence. Man’s mind can be truly comprehended only by recognizing the reality of higher orders of thought and purposive will. Man as a moral being is inexplicable unless the reality of the Universal Father is acknowledged.

(53.2) 3:6.4 The mechanistic philosopher professes to reject the idea of a universal and sovereign will, the very sovereign will whose activity in the elaboration of universe laws he so deeply reverences. What unintended homage the mechanist pays the law-Creator when he conceives such laws to be self-acting and self-explanatory!

(53.3) 3:6.5 It is a great blunder to humanize God, except in the concept of the indwelling Thought Adjuster, but even that is not so stupid as completely to mechanize the idea of the First Great Source and Center.

(53.4) 3:6.6 Does the Paradise Father suffer? I do not know. The Creator Sons most certainly can and sometimes do, even as do mortals. The Eternal Son and the Infinite Spirit suffer in a modified sense. I think the Universal Father does, but I cannot understand how; perhaps through the personality circuit or through the individuality of the Thought Adjusters and other bestowals of his eternal nature. He has said of the mortal races, “In all your afflictions I am afflicted.” He unquestionably experiences a fatherly and sympathetic understanding; he may truly suffer, but I do not comprehend the nature thereof.

(53.5) 3:6.7 The infinite and eternal Ruler of the universe of universes is power, form, energy, process, pattern, principle, presence, and idealized reality. But he is more; he is personal; he exercises a sovereign will, experiences self-consciousness of divinity, executes the mandates of a creative mind, pursues the satisfaction of the realization of an eternal purpose, and manifests a Father’s love and affection for his universe children. And all these more personal traits of the Father can be better understood by observing them as they were revealed in the bestowal life of Michael, your Creator Son, while he was incarnated on Urantia.

(53.6) 3:6.8 God the Father loves men; God the Son serves men; God the Spirit inspires the children of the universe to the ever-ascending adventure of finding God the Father by the ways ordained by God the Sons through the ministry of the grace of God the Spirit. Urantia Book 1955

 

[JGG]

* And you won't believe me unless and until you experience it yourself.

Right. Just as you will not believe in the supernatural beliefs of others until you experience. The idea that reality is a reflection of what you believe is fairly arrogant. Why are you better than me? Why are you special?

* I'm making the assertion that I am having a faith experience with a spiritual reality, we symbolize that with the term "God". My perceptions of the spirit are similar to others who are having the same, this isn't to be confused with the dogma of religious institutions who unfortunately try to standardize the experience, it's interpretations as well perpetuating other unfortunate byproducts of ecclesiasticism.

You're making the assertion that your beliefs are true to the exclusion of the cobtradictory beliefs of others. You are claiming that your experience pertains to me though I cannot experience it.

* I don't claim that life is meaningless, I observe that the philosophy of the Atheist is ultimately meaningless in that it terminates in eternal death from which there is no recollection, consciousness, future, present or past. Ultimately life meant nothing after the fact. However, some Atheist do claim that they leave behind meaningful doctrines of doubt in posterity for the good purpose of dissuading future generations of would be religionist....all for the betterment of the world which will one day be gobbled up by the sun. Such is life in the mind of the materialist.

Again, that's a pretty arrogant and self-centered view. My life has no meaning because it ends. How sad.

* If religion is the opiate of the masses, its not the religion of Jesus of Nazareth. My faith is not merely a part of my life, an escape from life, a ritual or a tradition, my faith encompasses the totality of life, of all reality.

Really? Why are your beliefs so special?

"But do not make the mistake of trying to prove to other men that you have found God; you cannot consciously produce such valid proof, albeit there are two positive and powerful demonstrations of the fact that you are God-knowing, and they are:


1) The fruits of the spirit of God showing forth in your daily routine life.

2) The fact that your entire life plan furnishes positive proof that you have unreservedly risked everything you are and have on the adventure of survival after death in the pursuit of the hope of finding the God of eternity, whose presence you have foretasted in time.​

Nice. But it holds no meaning for me.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

After the earth is eaten by the Sun your friends, family and society won't exist. This doesn't prove God or that meanings can grow into eternal realities, but an intellectually honest Atheist would have to concede an ultimate meaninglessness at some point in the future to anything in the earths history that was lofty, noble and good.

No, why would an atheist have to concede "ultimate meaninglessness"? That makes no sense to me at all. Would my life be "ultimately meaningful" if someone erected a statue of me that was somehow able to survive the eventual destruction of the Earth and solar system? Would my life be "ultimately meaningful" if that statue somehow continued to exist for billions of years, floating in the cosmic dark, up until the end of the universe itself? Would my immoratilisation in this statue make life any more meaningful for me?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Of course Loudmouth knows meaning, wisdom and has purpose, I don't really require that he prove that he possess those even though they aren't provable in the same way that knowing the presence of the spirit of the heavenly Father is provable. That is my point, Atheist jockey back and forth across the artificial barriers of "proofs" in these discussions. One moment they acknowledge transcendentals and the next moment its all math and we are imagining things.....So, I'm just being playful in asking why meaning isn't also imagination.

What you're trying, and failing, to do is make an internal critique. You don't actually know anything at all about atheism or materialism - which, by the way, are not synonyms - or materialist accounts for emergent properties ('transcendentals', as you call them), so your attempts here come across as so much inept rambling.

You really should just do everyone a favor, including yourself, by taking time off to learn some rudimentary reasoning skills. Take a few hours and read a basic logic textbook. I recommend Copi and Cohen.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

6. The Father’s Primacy
​

(52.4) 3:6.1 With divine selflessness, consummate generosity, the Universal Father relinquishes authority and delegates power, but he is still primal; his hand is on the mighty lever of the circumstances of the universal realms; he has reserved all final decisions and unerringly wields the all-powerful veto scepter of his eternal purpose with unchallengeable authority over the welfare and destiny of the outstretched, whirling, and ever-circling creation.

(52.5) 3:6.2 The sovereignty of God is unlimited; it is the fundamental fact of all creation. The universe was not inevitable. The universe is not an accident, neither is it self-existent. The universe is a work of creation and is therefore wholly subject to the will of the Creator. The will of God is divine truth, living love; therefore are the perfecting creations of the evolutionary universes characterized by goodness — nearness to divinity; by potential evil — remoteness from divinity.

(53.1) 3:6.3 All religious philosophy, sooner or later, arrives at the concept of unified universe rule, of one God. Universe causes cannot be lower than universe effects. The source of the streams of universe life and of the cosmic mind must be above the levels of their manifestation. The human mind cannot be consistently explained in terms of the lower orders of existence. Man’s mind can be truly comprehended only by recognizing the reality of higher orders of thought and purposive will. Man as a moral being is inexplicable unless the reality of the Universal Father is acknowledged.

(53.2) 3:6.4 The mechanistic philosopher professes to reject the idea of a universal and sovereign will, the very sovereign will whose activity in the elaboration of universe laws he so deeply reverences. What unintended homage the mechanist pays the law-Creator when he conceives such laws to be self-acting and self-explanatory!

(53.3) 3:6.5 It is a great blunder to humanize God, except in the concept of the indwelling Thought Adjuster, but even that is not so stupid as completely to mechanize the idea of the First Great Source and Center.

(53.4) 3:6.6 Does the Paradise Father suffer? I do not know. The Creator Sons most certainly can and sometimes do, even as do mortals. The Eternal Son and the Infinite Spirit suffer in a modified sense. I think the Universal Father does, but I cannot understand how; perhaps through the personality circuit or through the individuality of the Thought Adjusters and other bestowals of his eternal nature. He has said of the mortal races, “In all your afflictions I am afflicted.” He unquestionably experiences a fatherly and sympathetic understanding; he may truly suffer, but I do not comprehend the nature thereof.

(53.5) 3:6.7 The infinite and eternal Ruler of the universe of universes is power, form, energy, process, pattern, principle, presence, and idealized reality. But he is more; he is personal; he exercises a sovereign will, experiences self-consciousness of divinity, executes the mandates of a creative mind, pursues the satisfaction of the realization of an eternal purpose, and manifests a Father’s love and affection for his universe children. And all these more personal traits of the Father can be better understood by observing them as they were revealed in the bestowal life of Michael, your Creator Son, while he was incarnated on Urantia.

(53.6) 3:6.8 God the Father loves men; God the Son serves men; God the Spirit inspires the children of the universe to the ever-ascending adventure of finding God the Father by the ways ordained by God the Sons through the ministry of the grace of God the Spirit. Urantia Book 1955

Which of these pseudo-philosophical, vacuous non-arguments do you care to defend with your own words?

 

[Colter]

Right. Just as you will not believe in the supernatural beliefs of others until you experience. The idea that reality is a reflection of what you believe is fairly arrogant. Why are you better than me? Why are you special?



You're making the assertion that your beliefs are true to the exclusion of the cobtradictory beliefs of others. You are claiming that your experience pertains to me though I cannot experience it.



Again, that's a pretty arrogant and self-centered view. My life has no meaning because it ends. How sad.



Really? Why are your beliefs so special?



Nice. But it holds no meaning for me.

You come to this discussion with preconceived resentment towards religious people leading you to project attitudes or views onto me that I don't hold.

It's the philosophy of Lucifers Atheistic religion or "meme" that ultimately has no meaning because it ends in death. You on the other hand are precious in the heart of God.

In answer to your more relevant question, it's not "my" religion, it's the religion of Jesus. It's "special" because it will save your life.

 

[Eudaimonist]

It's the philosophy of Lucifers Atheistic religion or "meme" that ultimately has no meaning because it ends in death.

Why would any religion, meme, or anything else have no meaning because it ends in death? That doesn't follow.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Colter]

Why would any religion, meme, or anything else have no meaning because it ends in death? That doesn't follow.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Because you won't exist anymore. Is that really that difficult to follow?