My Visits To Church

by serotonin_wraith 40 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

BurnTheShips

You want me to prove a negative. It can't be done. Russel's teapot, the flying spaghetti monster, things like that cannot be disproven either, but that's no support to believing in them.
I don't believe in Russell's teapot, or FSM, so why do you keep bringing them up? :-)
It isn't my job to pack you up in cotton wool because you're afraid of death. You shouldn't believe things because they make you feel better. If you're poor is it better to fool yourself into thinking you're rich, or to deal with the problem of making ends meet? As comforting as the lie would be, it's not a reasonable position to hold.
You certainly seem to have made something your job, as your militant atheist life demonstrates. Why, you have dropped behind enemy lines at the Baptist church! That's pretty admirable. I am not afraid of death anymore. I look forward to it, I just want to get a few things done in the world first. :-) As I've said, belief in God is reasonable. I will let you read up a bit before we discuss that.
You seem to have a very negative view of this life. Why can't you find joy, peace, fulfillment etc here on planet Earth, instead of waiting for it in some future afterlife there's no reason to believe in?
The Universe is not big enough for me. If it is random and without meaning, then it is nothing more than a prison for my spirit, so it cannot be random and meaningless.
You said before that you wouldn't like it if we were born simply to die. That's a horrible way to look at things. We're born so that we may live. So live.
A Universe without meaning has little value, and life for it's own sake has little value! I LIVE. I am--and I always will be. I am ALIVE. More than you are-because my life will not end, whereas you yourself are nothing more than an ingenious collection of molecules.
You are the one that believes we are born simply to die. How can you believe otherwise in a cold uncaring random and meaningless Universe? To assert a deeper meaning is an act of faith.
You're damn lucky to be here in the first place. It amazes me that there had to be a CONTINUOUS chain of life stretching back over BILLIONS of years on a planet where 99% of all species have gone extinct and countless sperm and eggs don't get to create life so that you could be here now, complaining that if you don't get to live forever, your life is pretty much pointless
I wouldn't call any of that luck....
I am here because I needed to be here.
So, no, there is a point.
Burn
serotonin_wraith

I know you don't believe in the teapot etc. Even though they can't be disproven, you still don't believe in them. You can see that it would be crazy. So why say 'well you can't disprove God!'? It's such a bad argument.
Lol militant. Yeah, words which nobody's forced to look at. Very militant.
You're not afraid of death from planet Earth, but I do think you're afraid of ceasing to exist completely.
You can make your own meaning in life. Spirit - no reason to believe you have one.
A Universe without meaning has little value, and life for it's own sake has little value!

Ungrateful.
I am ALIVE. More than you are-because my life will not end
Arrogant.
You are the one that believes we are born simply to die. How can you believe otherwise in a cold uncaring random and meaningless Universe? To assert a deeper meaning is an act of faith.

My meaning is personal and comes from within myself. It's not faith to think I like eating cheese on toast, so why is it faith to know of other ways I want to enjoy this life?
We do die, but not before living. If I did think death was the only point, I'd hardly be trying to sustain a durable future for our species, would I? It's the journey that matters, not the destination.
I wouldn't call any of that luck....
I am here because I needed to be here.

Visions of grandeur and a bloated self ego.
serotonin_wraith

Thinking about it, you say life just for life's sake has little value, yet you're happy about living forever. Won't that just be an eternity of low value existence?
BurnTheShips

Lol militant. Yeah, words which nobody's forced to look at. Very militant.
You are the one going to churches to expound your philosophy. That is arrogant. That is militant. No that is fanatical. You go in to prey on the sheep. One day you will find a ram there. There are BurnTheShips everywhere. ;-)
Scratch that, one day you will meet the Shephard of the flock.
Ungrateful.
Ungrateful? To who? There is no one out there to be grateful to remember? How can I be grateful to chance and deterministic necessity?
My meaning is personal and comes from within myself. It's not faith to think I like eating cheese on toast, so why is it faith to know of other ways I want to enjoy this life?
My meaning is Personal also, and comes from within a Voice that speaks in me. As for you it is a cold hearless uncaring universe. You are just an accident, remember? You will die, and there will be nothing when the molecules disassociate. Very soon even the memory of you will fade. It will be as if you never existed.
Visions of grandeur and a bloated self ego.
I am. I will be.
What I do in this life will echo in eternity.
That is a LIFE.
Burn
hmike

Hey Serotonin and Burn,
I'm getting way off the original topic here, but you both have been discussing perspectives on life and death, and since you are both "here" and represent different perspectives, this might be a good time to ask about something I've wondered...
In the New Testament, and especially the books of Luke and Matthew, we see the future Kingdom of God as the equalizer for this life.
• Jesus says to his disciples, "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God" (Luke 6:20), and also, "But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort" (6:24).
• Jesus tells the story of the rich man, who lived in luxury, and went to torment when he died, and Lazarus, who lived in utter poverty, but went to Paradise when he died. Abraham says to the rich man, "Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony." (Luke 16:19-31)
There are many other statements, all saying to the Israelites something like, "For those who are poor, disadvantaged, miserable, enslaved, and abused in this life, great things await in the coming Kingdom. But if you're insulated from misery, well-fed and living in luxury and comfort in this life, that's your only good time because in the future, you'll be left out of the Kingdom in misery and torment." So to those who are wealthy, Jesus advises them to voluntarily adopt the perspective of the poor, or maybe even literally become poor if that's what it takes. The idea is that this life is relatively short and conditions are temporary—the everlasting future is more important—better to have it rough now and wonderful later than the other way around.
In the society of this time, the message that there was a new world coming was "good news" to the poor and outcast. Good times were ahead. This was something to look forward to—something that made the misery and trouble of this life tolerable, and even something to embrace. That was the appeal of the gospel of the Kingdom, and it was welcomed by people in this kind of life situation. On the other hand, in Luke's book, Jesus says it is hard for the rich to enter the kingdom of God (18:24). The indication seems to be that the appeal of wealth and comfort is a hindrance, even a barrier, to entering the Kingdom.
Now look at the life most of us in the industrialized countries have. We have food, housing, entertainment, heating and air conditioning, running water, sanitation, 40-hour work weeks, medicines and health care, government aid, etc. Even on the lower end of the economic scale, we live better, longer, and more comfortably than the best did back then. We are far more than wealthy by standards of that time.
This leads to my questions regarding perspectives on life and death:
Does living in these privileged conditions dull the appeal of the gospel for a better future?
Are we like the wealthy of the time of Jesus, enjoying a heaven on earth?
Are those with a good, satisfying life now simply not interested in a good future life?
Is the prospect of creating a world without hunger, homelessness, crime, and a world with love, peace, and unconditional acceptance, and high quality of life for long lifespans replacing the gospel of the Kingdom? (In other words, does this gospel simply represent a need or dream which can be realized by people without God?)
It seems to me that in our relatively affluent society, churches are placing more emphasis on what faith can do now, in this life, than what it can bring in the future.
Anyone who wants can answer this.
Serotonin, I hope you don't mind. We'll eventually get your thread back on track.
serotonin_wraith

You are the one going to churches to expound your philosophy. That is arrogant. That is militant. No that is fanatical. You go in to prey on the sheep. One day you will find a ram there. There are BurnTheShips everywhere. ;-)
Again, atheism is not a philosophy.
Can I ask what's wrong with talking about religion with people who want to talk about it? It's no different to going to a religious forum, explaining my position and chatting with people about it. I take it you don't have a problem when people try to spread the message of Jesus? I don't either by the way, because I can either say 'no thanks' or I can talk about it with them. It's my choice. Why the double standard?
Is it also fanatical to talk with people about who the next president should be, or the best way to eat healthily? Hardly. Religion is just another topic where opinion is different. If people's faith is strong, why be afraid to hear my side? They could show me I'm wrong by giving me their good reasons. Perhaps I'll be converted.
Why does your god need defending from me? Why do you want to shut off the communication between believer and non believer? What are you afraid of? Much of this betrays what I feel is insecurity on your part, although I know in advance you will probably deny this. Someone in a strong position shouldn't be afraid of hearing an opposing view. I'm not.
Yes, ungrateful. Not satisfied. Not with a person, but with the situation.
As for you it is a cold hearless uncaring universe. You are just an accident, remember? You will die, and there will be nothing when the molecules disassociate. Very soon even the memory of you will fade. It will be as if you never existed.
Let's say this is the case. Is it wrong because it doesn't sound very nice? No.
The point is that even in a 'cold heartless universe', here I am with the chance to experience something which may not even exist elsewhere in the universe- life. With all the millions of planets which support no life, this only helps show that I should be grateful (to the situation) to be here at all. My life isn't cold and hard. That's the important thing, not the lifeless universe above our atmosphere.
Perhaps nobody will remember me when I die. Is it wrong because it doesn't sound very nice? No. Much of what you say talks about this. 'Your position must be wrong because it doesn't appeal to me.' Not a good argument. This is about what's real, not about what people want to be real. The slice of life you're living now is what matters, not what some future life will think of you. I hope they'll be off enjoying their life instead of wasting it looking you or me up.
I am. I will be.
What I do in this life will echo in eternity.
That is a LIFE.
Burn
Close. Remove the capital F.
How will the universe get by without knowledge of your existence in the future? I really feel for them. Keep posting, write books, make music. Their lives won't be complete unless they know Burn existed at some point in their past!
serotonin_wraith

hmike,
I can see how it could be appealing to look forward to a better afterlife if the current life isn't of a high standard. Even if I were starving in Africa, riddled with disease, most of my family had died and things were unbearable, I may think 'well, this is a bit shit' but I STILL couldn't make myself believe in something, just because it gave me comfort. To me, it's just wishful thinking.
I get the sense that many people 'find God' when they're going through a rough patch. They lose their legs in an accident, their child dies, etc. 'Look at all this suffering' people say, 'I'm looking forward to a time when Jesus steps in and helps us.' I agree when you say better lives on Earth are replacing the need for god belief. That doesn't apply to me, although I cannot be sure of my thoughts if I'd been born in a poorer country.
Apart from America, I think it's right to conclude that the poorer countries have the most believers ( I include other religions here) and the countries better off are more likely to have a more secular outlook.
I do hope this 'new world' created by humans replaces the desire to have a god do it. Religious people can do much good, yet religion isn't needed. We don't need to read 'Love thy neighbour and God will be pleased' in order to go and help Africans build wells. We can do it for the sake of helping our fellow humans. Some religions can even prevent this. The JWs only look after their own because they don't think it is within man's power to solve the world's problems. They believe this so much, they don't even want to try.
hmike

We don't need to read 'Love thy neighbour and God will be pleased' in order to go and help Africans build wells. We can do it for the sake of helping our fellow humans.
I wonder, "Would we?"
It would be interesting to see what would have happened in history, and what the world would be like if Christianity were totally absent. We'd lose the bad, but we'd also lose the good. What if the positive influences of Christianity were removed from the non-Christian world? Even if beneficial things aren't the direct result of Christianity, it still has influenced the consciousness of Western society.
Many of us know where we'd be without faith, and we wouldn't be helping our fellow humans.

BurnTheShips

I wonder, "Would we?"
It would be interesting to see what would have happened in history, and what the world would be like if Christianity were totally absent. We'd lose the bad, but we'd also lose the good. What if the positive influences of Christianity were removed from the non-Christian world? Even if beneficial things aren't the direct result of Christianity, it still has influenced the consciousness of Western society.
Many of us know where we'd be without faith, and we wouldn't be helping our fellow humans.

We have remarked before that the parasites which live in the intestines of higher animals, feeding upon the nutritive juices which these animals supply, do not need either to see or hear, and therefore for them the visible and audible world does not exist. And if they possessed a certain degree of consciousness and took account of the fact that the animal at whose expense they live believed in a world of sight and hearing, they would perhaps deem such belief to be due merely to the extravagance of its imagination. And similarly there are social parasites, as Mr. A.J. Balfour admirably observes,[10] who, receiving from the society in which they live the motives of their moral conduct, deny that belief in God and the other life is a necessary foundation for good conduct and for a tolerable life, society having prepared for them the spiritual nutriment by which they live. An isolated individual can endure life and live it well and even heroically without in any sort believing either in the immortality of the soul or in God, but he lives the life of a spiritual parasite.

serotonin_wraith

hmike,
I was thinking about going into more detail about this, but there's really no need. It can all be summed up in one word. Japan.
I can elaborate if you like, but I don't think there's any need.
If someone won't help other humans without their faith, that's one thing. Their choice. If they try to cause suffering or let suffering happen without intervening, then they are not truly moral to begin with. If the only reason someone wouldn't hurt others was because he or she thought that would please their god, then they are extremely dangerous people.
BTS,
I only have one question. A yes or no answer is all that is needed.
If you did not believe in a god, would you hurt others?

My Visits To Church

Share this