Life has Meaning, Therefore God Exists

[Counterpoint]

You, Jean Paul Sartre, and Albert Camus, maybe. Not me!

Well, may be you’re one of those simpletons Jesus referred to…a child with a innocent view of the world where everything is just hunky-dory. But for most us, the words of the OT preacher ring true…

“Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.” - Ecclesiastes 1:2

 

[Peter_Plato]

Well, may be you’re one of those simpletons Jesus referred to…a child with a innocent view of the world where everything is just hunky-dory. But for most us, the words of the OT preacher ring true…

“Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.” - Ecclesiastes 1:2

Do you mean those “simpletons” that Jesus claimed understood the secrets of the Kingdom better than the wise and intelligent?

At that time Jesus said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and have revealed them to infants; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. (Matt 11:25)

Or the childlike condition that Jesus clearly said was necessary for entry into the Kingdom?

Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me.
(Matt 18: 3-5)

 

[Counterpoint]

This isn’t, in any sense, “evidence” that the world is meaningless. At most it shows that “most people” suffer from existential angst because their sense of meaning does not correspond with the meaning inherent in “the world.”

You’re missing the point. The author of the OP asserted that “the universe has meaning” as if this was some kind of objective fact. It’s not an objective fact, it’s a subjective interpretation of the ‘evidence’ - an interpretation which many believe that the evidence (the way things appear to be) suggests otherwise…that there is no ultimate purpose…that there is no ultimate meaning…that there is no God.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The author of the OP asserted that “the universe has meaning” as if this was some kind of objective fact. It’s not an objective fact, it’s a subjective interpretation of the ‘evidence’ - an interpretation which many believe that the evidence (the way things appear to be) suggests otherwise…that there is no ultimate purpose…that there is no ultimate meaning…that there is no God.

Is it an objective fact that the universe has no meaning? If you think so, that appears to be an unwarranted assumption on your part, not a fact.

Do you know that subjective interpretation can work both ways, to affirm or to deny?

If you don’t feel there is a God, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a God, and you certainly can’t produce evidence that there isn’t a God.

What is there about the universe that makes it appear to you “that there is no ultimate meaning”?

 

[Counterpoint]

Do you mean those “simpletons” that Jesus claimed understood the secrets of the Kingdom better than the wise and intelligent?

Yes. I said “child.” Did I not? I don’t believe I was coy about this…maybe a little sarcastic…but definitely not coy.

“But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.” Luke 18:15-17

 

[Counterpoint]

Do you know that subjective interpretation can work both ways, to affirm or to deny?

Yes, I know. You’re making my point. Thank you very much.

If you don’t feel there is a God, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a God, and you certainly can’t produce evidence that there isn’t a God.

What is there about the universe that makes it appear to you “that there is no ultimate meaning”?

Actually, I believe in the existence of God. But I do not believe the argument presented in the OP of this thread was a very compelling one. And I was simply expressing my opinion in that regard. Evidently, it struck some kind of nerve.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Actually, I believe in the existence of God. But I do not believe the argument presented in the OP of this thread was a very compelling one. And I was simply expressing my opinion in that regard. Evidently, it struck some kind of nerve.

Are you a deist, pantheist, what?

 

[Counterpoint]

Are you a deist, pantheist, what?

I consider myself a “theist.”

 

[Peter_Plato]

You’re missing the point. The author of the OP asserted that “the universe has meaning” as if this was some kind of objective fact. It’s not an objective fact, it’s a subjective interpretation of the ‘evidence’ - an interpretation which many believe that the evidence (the way things appear to be) suggests otherwise…that there is no ultimate purpose…that there is no ultimate meaning…that there is no God.

Well, no. A subjective interpretation of the evidence, if objectively correct, is, ipso facto, objectively consistent with verifiable facts. It might even be argued that, at some level, subjective interpretations have objective existence, in and of themselves. The interpretations may more or less accurately depict physical reality, but that does not preclude that subjective interpretations do not exist as objectively real entities, at some level.

 

[oldcelt]

Always look on the bright side of life, or something like that.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

I consider myself a “theist.”

Ah, now it’s all so clear!

 

[Counterpoint]

Ah, now it’s all so clear!

“We must love those whose opinions we share and those whose opinions we reject. Both have labored in the search for truth and both have helped us in the finding of it.” - St. Thomas Aquinas

 

[Charlemagne_III]

“We must love those whose opinions we share and those whose opinions we reject. Both have labored in the search for truth and both have helped us in the finding of it.” - St. Thomas Aquinas

Consider yourself loved!

 

[oldcelt]

Ah, now it’s all so clear!

Me great at filawsofie.