The absurdity of atheism

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Atheism is the dogmatic belief that** everything** is ultimately valueless yet that belief presupposes its own value! What is your view?

Atheists don’t believe that good and evil are relevant to Atheist theory. They say there is no necessary good nor is there any evil. It’s all relative to the person’s experience.

However, every atheist code of morality is rooted within religion. Atheists don’t believe in murder but for what they say are other reasons, other than religious moral code. They believe that they can do evil, if they must, without any holy consequence.

They claim to be righteous because they are worldly, however, they fail to reason any greater good; and that that good is necessary.

Their spirits are weak because they only do good for what suits them to do good. I would never trust an atheist with life because their desires can change on a whim; since good and evil are not relative to their “reality”.

I agree with them that an atheist has no soul. For one to have a soul they must believe in eternal life and the Son of God who is Eternal Life. Jesus even says that for one to have eternal life you must believe in Him and He who sent Him.

An atheist soul is a poverty; for they cannot even recognize the beauty of the movement of what Faith is. They tend not to their souls and therefore are dim and fading out of life.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

How can an atheist not be a nihilist?

Depending on which sense of “nihilist” you are invoking here you might find it’s not hard at all.

I know very wonderful atheists whose lives are not nihilistic in their actions nor their lives.

If you’re comfortable with discussing the topic with them I’d encourage asking them why, to the best of their knowledge, that their lives are as they are.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

How do you figure that atheism commits someone to believe that everything is valueless?

Because they cannot hold true to a supreme being who embodies value. They believe in dead matter. But they do not believe in what is living; and that which is living is the source of everything.

Their values are small and they cannot even admit to anything great. What’s the benefit of believing in value when you simultaneously believe that nothing matters. That there is no direction in life. That any value is only valuable to the one who deems its value. That nothing is sacred and therefore, priceless.

 

[Della]

What is the basic premise?

That nothing exists outside the material world. This therefore precludes miracles, and other manifestions of the supernatural, with no exceptions and no need for explanations even if contrary to what one may experience or come to believe.

This being the case, there is no room for personal interpretation, desire, or evidence of any kind that would negate the basic premise.

It means that human existence is random and therefore meaningless no matter what human beings might wish to impose on it in the way of ideas or belief.

Thus existence is meaningless. Any attempt to place meaning on existence is mere delusion brought about by bodily chemicals and the drive to reproduce the species.

As I wrote in my first post, this is too cold, limited, and inhuman for me to accept as a belief system.

 

[clem456]

Ah, but Tony said ultimately valueless. He seems unable to grasp that life for an atheist has value to that individual, but that individual generally considers that they live in an uncaring universe.

In a few generations no-one will remember Tony or myself. Life will drift on as if we never existed. Atheists have no problem with this fact, but it seems to frustrate Christians no end. I was going to say terrify them, but that would only be if they had some doubt in their belief.

So then you believe the self is the center of existence?
If that is the case, what you say makes sense. When you die, you die.
End of story, since the self is the whole.
I personally have absolutely no problem being forgotten by “the world”. And I don’t think most Christians do, or at least that is the aim.
Funny you should broad-brush Christians as being terrified of life’s questions, as if atheists are not.

Kinda funny. Christians will embrace the concept of eternal torment but will recoil in horror at the thought of an uncaring universe.

Let me see if I understand you:
You think “caring” necessarily eliminates suffering?

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Ah, but Tony said ultimately valueless. He seems unable to grasp that life for an atheist has value to that individual, but that individual generally considers that they live in an uncaring universe.

In a few generations no-one will remember Tony or myself. Life will drift on as if we never existed. Atheists have no problem with this fact, but it seems to frustrate Christians no end. I was going to say terrify them, but that would only be if they had some doubt in their belief.

Kinda funny. Christians will embrace the concept of eternal torment but will recoil in horror at the thought of an uncaring universe.

If atheists have no problem with that fact then how come they take care for their lives? If we care for ourselves then that means we want to live. Our lives would have to be endless for us to care so much.

I find that atheist are not philosophically adept. You’re telling me that it does not frighten an atheist if their existence is extinguished? I find that an atheist is an dishonest person when it comes to the question of life. Would you rather live or die?

And let me tell you on your deathbed it will frighten you that you believe in nothing; for blackness darkens your eyes and then there is noth.

And atheists fail to recognize that they exist in this life. They were born into the world empty and they seek to go out of it empty.

Well if I exist in this life then perhaps I exist always–that is illogical to an atheist. An atheist will find that they are in fact dependent upon so much, including their own souls. For what man, any man of sound mine, says I do not want to exist.

Our existence is the spirit of life that persists.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

That nothing exists outside the material world. This therefore precludes miracles, and other manifestions of the supernatural, with no exceptions and no need for explanations even if contrary to what one may experience or come to believe

Got it, so you see atheism as synonymous with “philosophical materialism.”

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

I think it was a catholic monk 1500 years ago who said two weeks after death nobody will remember them. They used to spend part of their days digging their own graves, partly to remind them of their own mortality and partly to save the others the trouble.
I think catholics don’t fear death or worry at all about life or about death. Death is fine, its the beginning of Life. so I don’t understand what you mean, it has no resonance in catholicism.

You fear not your suffering. I think you are a dishonest person.

Are you one to hold your hand to the fire without recoiling.

Don’t say death doesn’t affect you because everyone is afraid of the sting of death.

You’re telling me that you rejoice in the fire?

I don’t believe in your bravery…or any bravery.

It is not for man to be brave. It is for God to sustain his faith even in man’s doubts.

I find that my fellow Catholics put on a good show, however, I find them lacking in honesty. You’re telling me doubt does not pervade your mind along with faith.

Even Jesus says if one should not doubt then they will say to the mountain move and it will move.

I have yet to see a mountain move. Speaks so much to doubt.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Got it, so you see atheism as synonymous with “philosophical materialism.”

minus the philosophical part. It is my experience that atheists don’t read up on philosophy. If they did they would believe in truth. But rather they say that truth is subjective.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

If atheists have no problem with that fact then how come they take care for their lives? If we care for ourselves then that means we want to live. Our lives would have to be endless for us to care so much.

I find that atheist are not philosophically adept. You’re telling me that it does not frighten an atheist if their existence is extinguished?

I think there are a lot more people fearful of the process of dying or leaving matters unfinished than being dead. That we temporarily walk on this earth is something that many find out at a young age. That we in all likelihood will be dead within 120 years of our births or less is something that I think people are okay with. If someone finds out that she has “the big C” and will be experiencing a lot more pain and discomfort over the next several months to several years then you might see a reaction of the anticipation of the long discomfort. The pain can be scary. Some people would rather self-terminate than experience the pain and be a prisoner in their own body.

People have had what they thing to be a close encounter with death. Sometimes their concerns don’t turn to what will happen to the self, but to the loved ones that are left behind. “How will my death impact the children that depend on me?” (@Bradski - didn’t you have an experience like this?).

Not that any of this is specific to a person that is religious or a person that is non-religious.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

I think there are a lot more people fearful of the process of dying or leaving matters unfinished than being dead. That we temporarily walk on this earth is something that many find out at a young age. That we in all likelihood will be dead within 120 years of our births or less is something that I think people are okay with. If someone finds out that she has “the big C” and will be experiencing a lot more pain and discomfort over the next several months to several years then you might see a reaction of the anticipation of the long discomfort. The pain can be scary. Some people would rather self-terminate than experience the pain and be a prisoner in their own body.

People have had what they thing to be a close encounter with death. Sometimes their concerns don’t turn to what will happen to the self, but to the loved ones that are left behind. “How will my death impact the children that depend on me?” (@Bradski - didn’t you have an experience like this?).

Not that any of this is specific to a person that is religious or a person that is non-religious.

I agree with what you have to say. However, I know for a fact that you would rather exist than not exist.

Even with suicidal people, they believe life will turn for the better if they could just end their suffering for today.

It’s not that suicidal people don’t want to exist. They just want to exist in better circumstance.

To be or not to be?–which do you prefer. I would have to say that you are dishonest if you suggest that you would rather not be.

There is psychology to ‘not being’ but it is compartmentalized in the person’s mind. One minute the person says they do not want to exist and then the next minute they say I like ice cream.

It is through the spirit of man that we become dependent upon so many things, even to that which an atheist refuses to call–a soul. Even an atheist is dependent upon his own life.

 

[Della]

Got it, so you see atheism as synonymous with “philosophical materialism.”

Yes. Essentially, that’s what it is.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Atheism could be “refuted” in a heartbeat, if only God would manifest himself. And when one asks, why God does not do that, the apologists will attempt to explain AWAY the lack of such manifestation. Usually some ridiculous assertion that having positive knowledge of God’s existence would “rob us” of the virtue of (blind) “faith” and would drag the “mystery” down into sordid empiricism.

Nothing ridiculous about it.

What’s ridiculous is that every time an atheist comes along God should have to appear in a physical manifestation of himself to refute atheism “in a heartbeat.”

God did that once before, and for many of those to whom he revealed himself there was a thankless “No thanks!” and a bloody crucifixion to follow. So the refutation requires not only evidence, but also faith. God has already evidenced himself in the person of Jesus Christ. The faith that should follow is on you, not on him.

 

[tonyrey]

The question is whether all

You are restricting yourself to subjective values, Brad, but how about the right to life? Can we afford to disagree on that (remembering it wouldn’t make sense if life is valueless ?

 

[tonyrey]

I would really like to see how can one speak of “intrinsic value”, which stands alone, without someone who makes the “value-judgment”. The proper question is “object X is valuable to WHOM?”. The “truncated” question: “is object X valuable?” is unanswerable.

Primitive man didn’t recognise the value of life. Does that mean it didn’t exist?

 

[tonyrey]

Got it, so you see atheism as synonymous with “philosophical materialism.”

It is possible to believe minds exist independently of bodies but it is rare because it bypasses the question of how they originated and also violates the principle of economy - that there is one Supreme Mind.

 

[Della]

It is possible to believe minds exist independently of bodies but it is rare because it bypasses the question of how they originated and also violates the principle of economy - that there is one Supreme Mind.

You lost me. What does that have to do with philosophical materialism, which is its basic premise?

And what proof do you have that primitive man new nothing about values? I’m afraid that’s not something anyone can prove or disprove. Adam and Eve certainly understood values or are you talking about “proto-humans,” which are supposed to be our ancestors, but for which there is no solid evidence, merely speculation based on finding bone fragments, which can be interpreted any number of ways.

The existence of God is the only rational answer to man’s value–that we were created by him, out of his love, and to be in communion with him in love. Otherwise all we have is a collection of random atoms believing they have value merely because they feel something. Not very convincing or reliable.

 

[tonyrey]

I was surprised and pleased to see there have been 56 replies and 700 views in two days. I hesitated before posting it because the subject has often been discussed on this forum but it’s obviously as topical as ever.

 

[tonyrey]

It is possible to believe minds exist independently of bodies but it is rare because it bypasses the question of how they originated and also violates the principle of economy - that there is one Supreme Mind.

 

[Bradski]

One thing I enjoy about posting on a forum like this is that you find out a little about yourself. And so far, just in this short thread I have discovered a few things:

I believe that nothing has value
I’ve been tricked.,
I think that life is Random.
I ignore evidence.
The only bonds I have with others are due to my selfish reasons.
My conscience has been socially engineered.
My values are fantasies.
I don’t consider evidence.
My beliefs are circular.
I am immune to reason.
I embrace hopelessness.
I am a nihilist.
I think that life is empty of reason.
I consider good and evil are not really relevant.
I claim to be righteous.
My spirit is weak.
I can’t be trusted with life.
I have no soul.
I’m dim and fading out of life (?).
I believe in dead matter.
My values are small.
I believe that nothing matters.
I have no direction.
Existence for me is meaningless.
My beliefs are inhuman and limited.
I am not philosophically adept.
I’m dishonest in some things.
I don’t accept that I exist.
I don’t read philosophy.

Wow. And I thought everything was going so well. In fact, I was going to make a list of everything that is going right for me at this time. Mostly to do with family but including friends and some general feely-goody stuff. But I don’t want to be thought of as giving the finger to anyone who may be going through a rough time at the moment. We all have them and my sympathies if you are experiencing one.

But…if there is a fixed amount of love and happiness in the world, then colour me guilty because somehow I have ended up with more than my fair share. For someone to say something along the lines of my having no value in life just makes me laugh. Literally. Out loud. I was giggling to myself on the train this morning whilst I was making that list from the few posts so far.

I have this mental picture of me and my family sitting on the deck having a drink and the new neighbour starts shouting out across the fence: ‘You have no values! You have no direction! You think that life is empty of reason!’. Then she goes back in and someone says – what the hell was that? And I say not to worry, she’s a Christian. And there’s a long pause, we all pull pretend glum faces and dissolve in laughter.

What I mean is that no evidence that is not in line with atheism will convince because it cannot be allowed within the premise. For example, “miracles do not exist therefore they cannot exist” is one argument I’ve read by an atheist even though the evidence for a miracle would be convincing to anyone who does not need to deny that miracles can exist.

Della, tell that atheist she is an idiot. Or maybe she’s not an idiot but basic logic is beyond her.

Look, I don’t think miracles occur either. If you asked me if I thought they did then the short answer would be ‘No’. However, the longer answer, which is a tad more specific and which I don’t write every time I’m asked because a simple ‘No’ is much quicker is this:

‘I haven’t seen any evidence of the supernatural that would convince me that it exists. I have been presented with many examples and none of them are remotely believable. I am quite prepared, up to a point, to listen to anyone who thinks that they have credible evidence. I say ‘up to a point’ because I am generally a busy man with work and family matters to deal with. But I am prepared to be convinced. Until such time that credible evidence is produced, I will assume that it doesn’t and make my way through life on that basis.’

That sound reasonable?