Most vile concept/aspect of atheism.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The atheistic worldview (there is no God) cannot defend moral absolutes and thus its moral system is inconsistent and self-contradictory. The Christian theist worldview can defend moral absolutes and thus it's moral system is consistent and non-self-contradictory.

Starrman is right, moral systems do not require moral absolutes.

Originally posted by whodey
We all live for various things that seem to give our life meaning. In the end, however, all is vanity because we are mortal. Have you ever read the book of Ecclesiastes? It was written by Solomon who was reported to be the wisest man who ever lived. He had all the money in the world, all the women in the world (which included about 800 concubines), and wa ...[text shortened]... t the chance. It gives you a little different perspective on life and makes you think a little.

You are assuming that atheists believe women, land and power are the important things in life. They don't. Some people need deities and threatened punishments to lead a fruitful and positive life. I for once, don't . I don't deny the existance of a higher power (I'm not an atheist) but I don't think we should spend too much time worshipping it, if it exists. I help my fellow man at every turn because I believe immortality comes from within, from making a positive impact on the world before you move on to decompose and fuel other life.

Originally posted by whodey
We all live for various things that seem to give our life meaning. In the end, however, all is vanity because we are mortal. Have you ever read the book of Ecclesiastes? It was written by Solomon who was reported to be the wisest man who ever lived. He had all the money in the world, all the women in the world (which included about 800 concubines), and wa ...[text shortened]... t the chance. It gives you a little different perspective on life and makes you think a little.

Would it have been more meaningful if he had lived forever, and had had all the money and women in the world forever?

Originally posted by Nordlys
Would it have been more meaningful if he had lived forever, and had had all the money and women in the world forever?

The key question is what are you investing in for the future? It is just like wordly wealth. What kind of investments are you going to throw your money into? Are you going to go with an investment that may do well shorterm but one that you know will go bankrupt at some undetermined point? Or are you going with an investment that may seem like it is not doing well at first. In fact, it may seem like you are losing money. However, this investment will always be there and eventually pay off big in the end? From the christian perspective this is how we look at things. There are two ways of living. You either live carnally or be spiritually minded. If you live spritually minded you focus on the important things that last and therefore are worth investing in. Your body is carnal and is only interested in things like a full belly and a good lay. You may concentrate all your efforts into pleasing your body but in the end it is fruitless because your body is dying. It's kinda like living your life for a dead relative. Sure, you may get satisfaction from doing so, but it is pointless and vain. Your spirit-man is the only eternal aspect to your existence. Therefore, it is only sensible to invest the majority of your energy attending to it. This is what I was attempting to convey. A meaningful existence has nothing to do with material wealth and such.

Originally posted by Starrman
This is an bandied assumption made by your particular brand of theist, but which fails to cut the mustard in any way. To make a claim like this you must demonstrate that:

A) Why moral absolutes should be held as opposed to an evolving set of morals which reflect the changing world views.
B) Why it is self-contradictory in nature should it be n ...[text shortened]... is not sufficient to dscribe my worldview or how I treat my fellow humans, theist or otherwise.

The problem with morality from the atheistic viewpoint is that it is purely self righteous. Who is to say that treating your fellow human being with compasion and respect is always "good" or necessary? From the atheistic point of view things that we consider good, such as love are merely mutated chemical reactions that have evolved in the pursuit of self interest and preservation. There is no such thing as love in and of itself. Perhaps this in and of itself is the most vile aspect to the atheistic point of view that I have unearthed as of yet.

Originally posted by whodey
I thought it only fair to ask in light of only christianity and Islam being picked upon. Well, what of it? I think the most vile aspects of atheism is the fact that there is no purpose to life. What is worse, in fact, is that we will die and never again exist. Not only do we serve no purpose and are on the verge of nonexistence, but we are merely animals ...[text shortened]... defend our postitions about something that we know without a shadow of a doubt is 100% nonsense.

Interestiong interpretation that leads me to think u are venting your fustration on the nihilistic aspect of an ontological existenance....

So if religion gives u more meaning to your life then utilise it as a social tool as others utilise morality, laws and regulations but dont define it as a definite and infinite truth......

there is no real or unreal, no right or wrong, there are many layers to perspectivism and "There are no facts just interpretations" (Nietzsche)

Originally posted by whodey
[b]I thought it only fair to ask in light of only christianity and Islam being picked upon. Well, what of it? I think the most vile aspects of atheism is the fact that there is no purpose to life. What is worse, in fact, is that we will die and never again exist. Not only do we serve no purpose and are on the verge of nonexistence, but we are merely animals ...[text shortened]... defend our postitions about something that we know without a shadow of a doubt is 100% nonsense.[/b

I think you have every right to question atheism or agnosticism just as I am 'picking on' christianity and islam.
That said, however, my main arguments against those religions are based on the idea the bad things I see in those religions not coming from any god but simply the result of thousands of years of power seeking people, mostly, almost entirely, men, seeking power over everyone they can, including women, and building a power base that greatly enhances the power, riches, and prestige of the leaders.
So all that leading in the case of those two religions, of deaths by the millions, privation, slavery, subjugation of women.
Nowhere in your protestations of atheism is there any such charge.
So you basically are arguing about intangibles that may effect some people's state of mind or happiness quotient or some other measure of their life but I see no charge against atheism that they systematically enslave people forcefully against their will making them become christian as in times past or forcing islam on bahai's as happens now and killing them if they recant. I see no such charges from you against atheism so to me the points you bring up are too
moot to effect anyone except those who critizise their misconceptions of a way of life that is just as fulfilling as any religious one. This is coming from one who is not atheistic, close maybe but I can't deny the possiblility of deities, if they are there, they or it is being very very quiet and only speaking to a select few whom we, the presumed peons of the world, don't get this privilaged information and therefore have to rely on what we consider the truthfullness index of the speaker for the god. There is a large order of magnitude differance between the effects on people's lives between what you object to and what I object to. You don't seem to see any problem with one religion enslaving whole populations or you say, well, they are not the TRUE religion therefore only OUR religion is correct and follow us and we will make you a place in heaven. Doesn't cut the mustard with me.

Originally posted by whodey
From the atheistic point of view things that we consider good, such as love are merely mutated chemical reactions that have evolved in the pursuit of self interest and preservation. There is no such thing as love in and of itself. Perhaps this in and of itself is the most vile aspect to the atheistic point of view that I have unearthed as of yet.

That's like saying a computer program has no value because it is nothing more than a collection of 1's and 0's. Damn! I wanted RHP to have value in and of itself.

Originally posted by sonhouse
I think you have every right to question atheism or agnosticism just as I am 'picking on' christianity and islam.
That said, however, my main arguments against those religions are based on the idea the bad things I see in those religions not coming from any god but simply the result of thousands of years of power seeking people, mostly, almost entirely, m and follow us and we will make you a place in heaven. Doesn't cut the mustard with me.

I would agree that the key problem of the world are power seeking people and religion is a tool "only" and not the provocation. I am amazed that you say that atheist do not enslave or persecute as well. If I remember my history correctly I seem to recall a little thing called the iron curtain. Christians and other religious folk were routinely rounded up, persecuted, torchered and killed for their beleifs. Stalin was the picture perfect atheist. In fact, he killed more people than Hitler. He was not villified as much as Hitler for two reasons. First he was an ally of the victorious powers and because he did not kill as a result of racial bias. It is estimated that Stalin had around 10 to 20 times more people killed than did Hitler. One of my fovorite stories was regarding a chrurch in Germany that the Russians destroyed after the war. They took away any resemblence of what had been there and constructed a secular tower with mirrors. When it was completed, the reflection of the sun on the mirrors formed a picture perfect cross. This was much to the dismay of the artchitect who probably wound up in Siberia somewhere afterwards.

Originally posted by whodey
We all live for various things that seem to give our life meaning. In the end, however, all is vanity because we are mortal. Have you ever read the book of Ecclesiastes? It was written by Solomon who was reported to be the wisest man who ever lived. He had all the money in the world, all the women in the world (which included about 800 concubines), and wa ...[text shortened]... t the chance. It gives you a little different perspective on life and makes you think a little.

Now you're just begging the question. Why should we believe that our mortality has anything at all to do with the what is valuable or meaningful? If God exists, I love my wife and try to be a good husband. If God doesn't exists, I love my wife and try to be a good husband. The fact that God doesn't, in fact, exist, shows nothing about the extent to which my love for my wife is vanity, or about the value of this relationship. or about the extent to which this relationship contributes to making my life meaningul.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The atheistic worldview (there is no God) cannot defend moral absolutes and thus its moral system is inconsistent and self-contradictory. The Christian theist worldview can defend moral absolutes and thus it's moral system is consistent and non-self-contradictory.

You don't know the first thing about secular ethical theories, as your posts on this topic indicate. Utilitarianism (in both act and rule versions) defends moral absolutes, as does Kantian deontology, virtue theory, contractualism, contractarianism, intuitionism, etc.

Originally posted by whodey
I would agree that the key problem of the world are power seeking people and religion is a tool "only" and not the provocation. I am amazed that you say that atheist do not enslave or persecute as well. If I remember my history correctly I seem to recall a little thing called the iron curtain. Christians and other religious folk were routinely rounded up, ...[text shortened]... as much to the dismay of the artchitect who probably wound up in Siberia somewhere afterwards.

There is a big differance between the actions of an insane despot and the philosophy behind atheism. There are no books of atheistic dogma demanding the deaths of non-atheists. Those despots you mentioned are the same as the religious bigots, using some concept to justify their killings. This has nothing to do with atheism per se.
The killings of christianity and islam and to a small extent, scientology, is from the dogma of the leaders, as a built in feature of each of those insanities.

Originally posted by bbarr
Now you're just begging the question. Why should we believe that our mortality has anything at all to do with the what is valuable or meaningful? If God exists, I love my wife and try to be a good husband. If God doesn't exists, I love my wife and try to be a good husband. The fact that God doesn't, in fact, exist, shows nothing about the extent to which m ...[text shortened]... ship. or about the extent to which this relationship contributes to making my life meaningul.

So either way you love your wife and try to be a good husband? Good for you. So now we are down to seeking eternal life and be a good husband and loving your wife, or allowing yourself and your wife both to perish while being a good husband and loving your wife. If you are an atheist, one thing is certain. That certainty is that you will perish. This is both from the Christian and atheistic perspective.

I would also like to point out that my faith is not just for the after life. My faith has straightened me out on many different levels. It has redirected my paths from many destructive avenues. My faith has also strengthened the relationships that I have and I have noticed my love for others is not as narcissistic in nature as it used to be before my conversion. My faith has also given me an inner peace that I never had before and I am a happier person for it. I am not trying to shove my beleifs down any ones throat. It is only that I feel compelled to share with others what has worked for me. Would you not do the same?

Originally posted by bbarr
How does any of this follow from atheism? I'm an atheist, and I think that the purpose of life is to live well. Of course I think that we are animals, but we are also very special animals. We are conscious, reflective animals that can love and think and create; we are animals that can imbue our lives with meaning by virtue of what we value and how we live. ...[text shortened]... take seriously your claims about the possibility or justification of secular ethical theories.

I'm always amazed at how easily Atheists use words like 'love' and 'special' and 'meaning' without realising the philosophical implications of this. If 'love' is just an illusionary (evolutionary) fantasy then how can it really mean anything in real terms to anybody? Theists are always being asked to come face to face with the difficult implications of what they believe (ie questions of suffering etc) but Atheists seems to often let themselves off the hook when facing the ultimate implications of their beliefs and still use woolly concepts like 'love'. For me , the logical living out of Atheism is nihilistic despair , unless of course you can find an intellectual loophole that lets you get away with a watered down version of Atheism where you can maintain an 'illusion' of meaning. But who can really live and be true to Atheism (a world without any real meaning)? Once you have faced the 'void' you might be well on the way to giving Theism a try but until then is it just have your cake and eat it ?

Originally posted by whodey
Your spirit-man is the only eternal aspect to your existence. Therefore, it is only sensible to invest the majority of your energy attending to it. This is what I was attempting to convey. A meaningful existence has nothing to do with material wealth and such.

I agree with your last sentence, but I don't have to believe in eternal life to agree with it. The things I regard as meaningful are meaningful in itself. I don't see how eternal life would make them more (or less) meaningful. If you believe that you will be rewarded for good deeds, for example, it may make it more attractive to do them, but it doesn't make it more meaningful. If a good deed will be remembered forever, it may give you a good feeling for a longer time, but it doesn't make it more meaningful. How does time add meaning to something?