Purpose For Life

[R. S. Martin]

Oddbird, I'm with you. So far as I can make out, he seems to be saying, "My Christianity is best." That would be just another form of True Christianity™. Of course, he won't see it that way because that's not his style.

 

What I don't get is that he's engaging all these off-topic questions, yet he claims he simply wants to know what purpose we see in life if we are atheists. He has stated his position. If he has no intention to changing his position, and since we have stated ours but he is not willing to accept the answers, why is he still here?

 

He claims he is not trying to convert anyone but if that is the case, what, exactly, is he continuing these arguments for?

 

I struggle with the question: Is all religion wrong?

 

The way he is behaving in this thread is convincing me that it is more wrong than I realized. The self-delusion, the irrationality, the choosing to believe when one is convinced it's untruth--all of this is seriously dangerous to society.

 

In addition, he continues to avoid all posts that refer to a god who purportedly influences humans, but which evidence of said influence fails to register in real life. He claims to be a scientist. A real scientist should not avoid such a scientific challenge set up by his god and his religion...Unless he is the type of person who cannot tolerate evidence that proves his religion wrong.

 

And if he is such a person, he is obviously not a person in search of truth. Yet he told us early on that he is searching truth. Is this another tactic of deception by the Christian?

 

I have been warned not to alienate him. But I am seeing too many inconsistencies. I want to know the truth about this guy. He is well-educated and has a smooth tongue. Beyond that, I am not sure who or what he is.

[oddbird1963]

I have been warned not to alienate him. But I am seeing too many inconsistencies. I want to know the truth about this guy. He is well-educated and has a smooth tongue. Beyond that, I am not sure who or what he is.

Yes. I don't really care about converting the guy, especially if he risks falling into despair if he can't get past the "meaninglessness" misconception.

 

But this individual, as well as other Christians who post here, make me wonder why they have such a hard time engaging in the topic.

 

Supposedly, he wants to know our positions. But, he doesn't want to answer our questions about his. I guess it's a matter of control for the sake of protecting a weak faith - a self-preservation mechanism.

 

Who is warning you not to alienate him? And why are you receiving such warnings? That is a strange thing to do.

 

I guess I don't want to inadvertently make a person of a different position than mine not want to share. But then why should we care if they share if they don't want to answer questions in a manner consistent with the query they were offered? It's puzzling.

[denaje]

Even though danje is obviously a nice guy with a kinder, gentler doctine, isn't what is being offered up here just another version of "True Christianity?" And not a whole lot of people who are Christians follow that doctrine. So who's to say his "Christianity" is really "Christianity?"

No one. In my opinion, I think it's closer to true Christianity. But again, it's just my opinion. I realize that I am in the minority here, but I don't really care about that.

 

And does this god really interact with people in the real world inside of time and history, other than providing perceived relief from perceived meaninglessness within the confines of ones own imagination?

 

Is this universalist christian god's only sphere of influence to just wait, like a hungry outdoor pet, for us to die so he can cart us off to reform school or let us in to the heavenly paradise?

I don't know. I have heard that God interacts with people and does healings and such. But the scientist in me tends to doubt such things. Does this God interact with people? I would like to think so, but I haven't seen much evidence of it beyond the interactions in the Bible. I would like to think that he still does in this day and age, but this is a problem that every Christian has to struggle with.

Oddbird, I'm with you. So far as I can make out, he seems to be saying, "My Christianity is best." That would be just another form of True Christianity™. Of course, he won't see it that way because that's not his style.

Right, that's not my style.

What I don't get is that he's engaging all these off-topic questions, yet he claims he simply wants to know what purpose we see in life if we are atheists. He has stated his position. If he has no intention to changing his position, and since we have stated ours but he is not willing to accept the answers, why is he still here?

 

He claims he is not trying to convert anyone but if that is the case, what, exactly, is he continuing these arguments for?

I engage all these off-topic questions because they were brought up, and I perceived misconceptions about my position that I wanted to clear up. I want to be understood just like (I assume) you want to be understood. And please realize that thinking takes time. I'm still pondering what was said early on in the discussion. I'm not unwilling to accept your answers. I'm just not willing to accept them right now. I still like my version of Christianity, but you have brought up a lot of good questions that I don't have good answers to. Whatever religion (or non-religion) I eventually decide to accept is a very big decision, and it's not something I can choose to change in just a few days.

The way he is behaving in this thread is convincing me that it is more wrong than I realized. The self-delusion, the irrationality, the choosing to believe when one is convinced it's untruth--all of this is seriously dangerous to society.

 

In addition, he continues to avoid all posts that refer to a god who purportedly influences humans, but which evidence of said influence fails to register in real life. He claims to be a scientist. A real scientist should not avoid such a scientific challenge set up by his god and his religion...Unless he is the type of person who cannot tolerate evidence that proves his religion wrong.

 

And if he is such a person, he is obviously not a person in search of truth. Yet he told us early on that he is searching truth. Is this another tactic of deception by the Christian?

Dangerous to society? I'm not sure I can speak to that. IMHO, it is more of an inner struggle than an outward danger. Just because I'm wrestling with my religious convictions doesn't mean I'm more of a danger to society. Unless I misunderstand what you mean by that...

And I'm sorry that I avoided posts that deal with the problem of God's involvement in real life. Probably the reason is because I don't have a good answer to it. Like I said, I haven't personally witnessed anything that I could call a "miracle" or anything that is obviously supernatural. It is a huge problem that my brain can't decipher. On the one hand, I want to believe in God for lots of reasons, but on the other hand, I don't see physical evidence of it. And on the third hand (?), I'm told by other Christians that you don't need to witness God's work physically in order to believe in him. It does make sense that you needn't apply only scientific processes to an understanding of the supernatural, by the very definition of "supernatural". But my brain is wired to doubt and question and test things...so it is a paradox.

Yet, there are other people I know who do claim that miracles and stuff happen. I've heard second-hand accounts of supernatural healings and the like. So is it all made up, or is there some truth to it? I don't know. It deserves more research. You also need to understand that I have been immersed in Christianity for my entire life. Change isn't going to happen overnight. And when change occurs, I couldn't tell you at this time in what direction that change will take place.

At risk of sounding like a broken record, I will reiterate that all I wanted from this post was to get a more complete grasp of your reasons for rejecting Christianity and how you deal with a specific problem that I saw with the rejection. And it makes sense. It really does. I'm not prepared to make that same leap quite yet, though, because there are still other things that I need to get a hold of. I appreciate your honesty and your insight, but you should know that I am right in the middle of a drawn-out thought process. My mind is not made up by any means.

[oddbird1963]

And does this god really interact with people in the real world inside of time and history, other than providing perceived relief from perceived meaninglessness within the confines of ones own imagination?

 

Is this universalist christian god's only sphere of influence to just wait, like a hungry outdoor pet, for us to die so he can cart us off to reform school or let us in to the heavenly paradise?

I don't know. I have heard that God interacts with people and does healings and such. But the scientist in me tends to doubt such things. Does this God interact with people? I would like to think so, but I haven't seen much evidence of it beyond the interactions in the Bible. I would like to think that he still does in this day and age, but this is a problem that every Christian has to struggle with.

 

Thank you, Denaje for you refreshingly honest and from the heart answers. I don't think I've encountered too many Christians on this site who seem as forthcoming in writing from the heart as you. It really is refreshing. Thank you for dealing with my questions.

 

I wonder how you ascribe any kind of authority to Christians who speak about god and miracles and how god is supposed to interact in the world? It sounds like your wanting these things to be true have made you convey upon these people more authority than they deserve.

 

I remember asking myself on a number of occasions, even before I left Christianity, "How does this person know anything about what God will do?" People tend to go on about what what they wish would be true and , because they are in a position of authority, others believe them.

 

By what criteria do you ascribe authority to people who say "God will do this?" Or why do you give any credence to people who say, "You don't have to see god do anything physically in this world?"

 

There is one other question I wonder if you have dealt with. Why do you ascribe any historical validity to the Bible as a written account of what god did? You said you would like to believe god "still does [do miracles and healing] in this day and age." Why do you believe he ever did then?

 

I'm sure you realize there have been countless billions of people throughout time who wanted to believe that some god or another was active in their lives. And because they wanted this to be true so badly, they "saw," "heard," and passed on claims about their god that were fabricated (perhaps innocently and inadvertently) out of their need for there to be a supernatural reality in charge of things.

 

Why, of all the traditions, scriptures, rituals and authorities out there is the Bible to be believed to be a faithful historical recording of miraculous deeds done and conversational encounters with the Divine?

[denaje]

And does this god really interact with people in the real world inside of time and history, other than providing perceived relief from perceived meaninglessness within the confines of ones own imagination?

 

Is this universalist christian god's only sphere of influence to just wait, like a hungry outdoor pet, for us to die so he can cart us off to reform school or let us in to the heavenly paradise?

I don't know. I have heard that God interacts with people and does healings and such. But the scientist in me tends to doubt such things. Does this God interact with people? I would like to think so, but I haven't seen much evidence of it beyond the interactions in the Bible. I would like to think that he still does in this day and age, but this is a problem that every Christian has to struggle with.

 

Thank you, Denaje for you refreshingly honest and from the heart answers. I don't think I've encountered too many Christians on this site who seem as forthcoming in writing from the heart as you. It really is refreshing. Thank you for dealing with my questions.

 

I wonder how you ascribe any kind of authority to Christians who speak about god and miracles and how god is supposed to interact in the world? It sounds like your wanting these things to be true have made you convey upon these people more authority than they deserve.

 

I remember asking myself on a number of occasions, even before I left Christianity, "How does this person know anything about what God will do?" People tend to go on about what what they wish would be true and , because they are in a position of authority, others believe them.

 

By what criteria do you ascribe authority to people who say "God will do this?" Or why do you give any credence to people who say, "You don't have to see god do anything physically in this world?"

 

There is one other question I wonder if you have dealt with. Why do you ascribe any historical validity to the Bible as a written account of what god did? You said you would like to believe god "still does [do miracles and healing] in this day and age." Why do you believe he ever did then?

 

I'm sure you realize there have been countless billions of people throughout time who wanted to believe that some god or another was active in their lives. And because they wanted this to be true so badly, they "saw," "heard," and passed on claims about their god that were fabricated (perhaps innocently and inadvertently) out of their need for there to be a supernatural reality in charge of things.

 

Why, of all the traditions, scriptures, rituals and authorities out there is the Bible to be believed to be a faithful historical recording of miraculous deeds done and conversational encounters with the Divine?

 

Sorry, it's been a while, and I remember that your post deserves an answer. In regards to ascribing authority to others, my answer has changed significantly over the years. I used to be small and naive, and I would do or believe anything anyone told me. It wasn't until high school that I learned that I actually had knowledge and could think for myself! Since then, I've been questioning many things, including the authority of others (although, not to their faces ). I don't necessarily believe anything a teacher or pastor says at face value anymore, unless it's proven that they really know what they're talking about (say, my computer architecture professor). But when it comes to religion, I no longer accept anything at face value. I do listen and try to make sense of it, but sometimes it doesn't make sense. Since religion is not a science at all, I have to have reasons for my faith instead of just believing something because someone told me to.

 

As for ascribing authority to the Biblical record, there's no good answer. I've since come to believe that our modern English versions are flawed, as they don't always represent the true intention of the original writers. But who's to say that they were honest in the first place? I don't know...it's just a matter of faith I suppose. If I choose to believe in Christianity, then I must have faith that its primary text is valid, or else I've got nothing to stand on. For me, belief in the Bible's veracity is derived from belief in Christianity, not the other way around.

[oddbird1963]

For me, belief in the Bible's veracity is derived from belief in Christianity, not the other way around.

 

So, denaje, is it accurate to say you have belief in Christianity because the narrative of Christianity just sounds more appealing to you than other narratives of say Islam, Hinduism, Ba'Nai or other faiths?

 

Is it the bare aesthetic and emotional appeal of the words used in Christianity that make you hope it's the truth?

[Astreja]

Eternal life offers absolutely no advantage over finite life when it comes to meaning and purpose.

 

In the first case, there is always one more moment to come; therefore one never does get to "the point of it all."

 

In the second case there's actually an end point, but after our deaths we become insentient and there is no way for us to reflect on what came before.

 

I assert that one must find meaning in the doing and in the living. I see purpose as immediate experience, not as some hypothetical reason for that experience.

[paradoxical]

Having been banned for life at CARM which is filled with Evangelicals, it's nice for a change of pace to see the reasoned posts in here. I have to tell you that Denjae is mild compared to what goes on at CARM. there are some very warped and demented people there.

 

Whwn I see people mention God and Christianity in the same sentence, my hair on the back of my neck raises up. Christianity is a fabricated religion, born at a time when humans were superstitious and had no means to explain things, so they inserted miracles and magic and "God" into events. Those with an agenda to create a relgion did exactly that, and needy, gullible humans went along for the ride.

 

In some respects, Christianity fills a human's psychological needs, particularly the desire to escape death, along with there being a reward for good deeds, and a punishment for evil that isn't dealt with here on earth. Dennis Prager, the religious commentator blowhard suggests the bible is true because it imparts morals. He forgets that evolution demands certain morals for the survival of the species.

 

Being a deist, I THINK we live forever, but one cannot be sure. I think this way because the universe is filled with intelligence and matter and energy convert, with nothing being wasted. We could be "Gods" experiencing every imaginable experience for an eternity. As for Christianity, I think it's a very poorly constructed religion. No God would want, need, or require worship. No God would sacrifice a son to prove a point. I could go on, but is it necessary?

Eternal life offers absolutely no advantage over finite life when it comes to meaning and purpose.

 

In the first case, there is always one more moment to come; therefore one never does get to "the point of it all."

 

In the second case there's actually an end point, but after our deaths we become insentient and there is no way for us to reflect on what came before.

 

I assert that one must find meaning in the doing and in the living. I see purpose as immediate experience, not as some hypothetical reason for that experience.

[Deva]

Having been banned for life at CARM which is filled with Evangelicals, it's nice for a change of pace to see the reasoned posts in here. I have to tell you that Denjae is mild compared to what goes on at CARM. there are some very warped and demented people there.

 

I am sure that's true paradoxical, but i have been here long enough to see some REALLY demented Christians post here too. Yes, Denjae is mild. You haven't seen nothing yet...

[Deva]

As for ascribing authority to the Biblical record, there's no good answer. I've since come to believe that our modern English versions are flawed, as they don't always represent the true intention of the original writers. But who's to say that they were honest in the first place? I don't know...it's just a matter of faith I suppose. If I choose to believe in Christianity, then I must have faith that its primary text is valid, or else I've got nothing to stand on. For me, belief in the Bible's veracity is derived from belief in Christianity, not the other way around.

 

Denaje, have you ever heard heard the term "sola scriptura" - that was at the root of the whole reformation in the 16th century. I may have missed it, but do you have a Catholic background? I mean, if you are a Protestant or from any sort of protestant form of Christianity, what you are saying in your last sentence makes absolutely no sense. The Bible IS the authoritative source - that is ALL you have. Catholic - well that is different. Then your belief would be based on the authority of the Church.

 

I determined that both are equally spurious and mistaken - that is why I had to leave.