The bright side of Atheism

[1robin]

I'll live as though there is no possibility of eternal reward or punishment and nobody looking over my shoulder to see which one I deserve. The thing I retain is my autonomy and liberty. A life without those two things is not worth living, Imo. The thing I risk is nothing, since I don't believe in mind-body dualism to begin with.

I was not questioning the willingness to live in rebellion or denial. I was asking for some kind of theoretical justification. I see only a net loss in every category with the exception of having the illusion that a few moral demands do not apply to you (but most would anyway). So your risking everything and anything so you gain what? The liberty of not acknowledging any God beyond your self? How is that worth the potential price. This gets a little complex based on what aspect is under discussion so clarity is necessary.

1. I am not claiming you will ever find God by some kind of default wager arrangement. I am however saying that if you decide (and you do decide) to arbitrarily deny that God exists it can prevent you from finding him.

2. That true faith is subjective proof. I am not living my life in belief in some intellectual proposition. I know at least the essential truth of what I believe.

3. That there is almost no recognizable gain to non-belief nor too much of accost to faith but there is a potential nightmare that can occur for choosing to deny. So given the stakes and using 1. above you should give God the benefit of the doubt in the hopes that one day you might find him because the door was open which will produce number 2. above.

4. Saying denying an actual God makes you your own God is a semantic exercise not an insult.


So including all this, every motivation exists to look for and allow for God's existence (and there is no purely neutral stance available here). I can easily conclude many do not but what I challenge is them having a rational justification for it. I was an atheist for 27 years (actually more of an anti-theist) so know both sides well, and which one is rational IMO.

 

[LuisDantas]

Yes that is the type of faith I refer to.

I hope you did not expect me to have some notion of what you meant here.

 

[idav]

Well until you knew how it turns out eternally you can't possibly know this. That was pretty much the point I was trying to make. Exactly what are you risking your soul for. I was going to use my words but as usual the bible said it best. "What will a man exchange for his soul". In this case it would be the potential for the loss of the soul since we do not share the common ground of certainty.

The premise that a soul exist might make someone think it can be in jeopardy. Atheists dont necessarily assume souls exist so what's to gamble?

 

[Shuttlecraft]

..Atheists dont necessarily assume souls exist so what's to gamble?

Atheists are gambling that their souls don't live on after the body dies..

 

[1robin]

Of course!

Then this is a rare luxury. I am used to the only context not being considered is the one in which my comments came. Bravo!

"Refusing to grant transcendent authority"?

In order to "retain an autonomy that does not exist"?

At the price of "eternal contentment"?

I thought we were talking about atheism. You seem to be talking about... I don't know really. Some sort of Satanism, perhaps?

No, Satanism would be some kind of thwarting of authority. It would be to hate it. Satan challenged God he did not act like God did not exist. Atheism is to neglect it or him. Actually different version of atheism exists but that is classical atheism.

That is nice to know. On that much we can agree.

Yes, Pascal's wager is garbage as written but slightly modified it serves a purpose.

1. You will never meet or find Christ by some default or belief in fire insurance.
2. You can however close the door to him by neglect.
3. So modified a little it has merit. There is no harm in given faith the benefit of the doubt, that will never make you born again but it might make it possible for God to lead you where it can take place.

I got 90% of the way to God by effort and study but the last 10% was an infinite expanse. Pascal works for this 90% but not the last 10%. The last 10%was purely supernatural and an act of God as a response to my faith.

Really? Why did you? It is such an alien experience to me. I never had to deny God even once. I am not even sure what that would be like.

My mother was the only born again Christian in my family of 5. When I was 12 (before I was of an age to really get serious about faith and was not born again) she contracted cancer. It was the worst case I am personally familiar with. It was 5 years of torture and false hope. With every setback I grew madder at any God that would allow this. I was 17 and at the height of the rebellious years when she died. I not only did not believe I did not like the concept it's self or those who did. That explains how I grew to hate a God I did not think existed anyway. The long road to faith is a longer and more involved story I will spare you unless requested.

Good for you, although I can't claim to know what you are talking about.

I claim to know but not to sufficiently explain it. I spent three days in shock. I had never heard the term before but the only way I could describe it to myself was feeling like a new born or born again. I was raised in a very reserved and formal denomination and so had never seen or expected this event. People kept asking if I had gotten a hair cut, or a had met a girl. I had no words to reply and still struggle to explain it.

Maybe I am just not meant to understand what that is.

It is like being in love. You cannot explain it well enough nor understand it until it occurs then all the sappy songs and silly mantras make sense. I am pleased to see you are not close minded to the issues, as I so often find.

 

[1robin]

Atheists are gambling that their souls don't live on after the body dies..

That is not the part I was questioning. AS far as common g4round goes neither of us can claim to know whether we live after death or the grave is the end. I am saying what gain merits the risk of being wrong. What does an atheist gain that offsets the potential cost? IOW what is it that justifies the wager that was brought up from my original post?

 

[1robin]

The premise that a soul exist might make someone think it can be in jeopardy. Atheists dont necessarily assume souls exist so what's to gamble?

The possibility they are wrong. You do not even have to think Christianity here. More people have believed an afterlife existed than haven't. Some for the best of reasons some for he worst. IOW why not act as if you soul is has the potential of being judged until you knew different. what Gain justifies the potential cost. If I felt a lump in my throat I would probably doubt I had cancer but I would not gain anything by refusing a CAT scan.

 

[idav]

That is not the part I was questioning. AS far as common g4round goes neither of us can claim to know whether we live after death or the grave is the end. I am saying what gain merits the risk of being wrong. What does an atheist gain that offsets the potential cost? IOW what is it that justifies the wager that was brought up from my original post?

A fair god wouldnt go by belief but by intent and worthiness. Believing just cause someone said so isnt much of a test when others try and say the same thing. If we believe all our heart in the wrong truths it isnt from lack of trying to reach god.

 

[Shuttlecraft]

Jesus's deal remains on the table for everybody, he said "If you're my pals we'll spend eternity in Paradise together".
Sounds like a good deal to me, beats me why atheists don't want to be his pal?

 

[idav]

Jesus's deal remains on the table for everybody, he said "If you're my pals we'll spend eternity in Paradise together".
Sounds like a good deal to me, beats me why atheists don't want to be his pal?

Cause it sounds like a trick. If it sounds too good to be true then it probably is. Are you sure Jesus wasnt a cannibal? He said eat me and drink my blood!

 

[England my lionheart]

Jesus's deal remains on the table for everybody, he said "If you're my pals we'll spend eternity in Paradise together".
Sounds like a good deal to me, beats me why atheists don't want to be his pal?

Maybe because to taste this paradise you need to be dead.

 

[LuisDantas]

Jesus's deal remains on the table for everybody, he said "If you're my pals we'll spend eternity in Paradise together".
Sounds like a good deal to me, beats me why atheists don't want to be his pal?

You are not serious, are you?

You can't in good faith be conflating serious religious choice with a self-interested bet in something we do not even believe.

 

[Shuttlecraft]

Originally Posted by Shuttlecraft:
Jesus's deal remains on the table for everybody, he said "If you're my pals we'll spend eternity in Paradise together".
Sounds like a good deal to me, beats me why atheists don't want to be his pal?

You are not serious, are you?
You can't in good faith be conflating serious religious choice with a self-interested bet in something we do not even believe.

Forget the word "believe" mate, all that matters is that we LIKE Jesus..
Then when our bodies die, no way is he going to just forget his pals!
The bottom line is, he was a nice guy, so who wouldn't want to be his pal anyway?
He said to his mates at the last supper- "The next time I drink wine, I'll be drinking it with you in my fathers kingdom"

(That's me out then, I don't drink (sniffle)

 

[Alceste]

I was not questioning the willingness to live in rebellion or denial. I was asking for some kind of theoretical justification. I see only a net loss in every category with the exception of having the illusion that a few moral demands do not apply to you (but most would anyway). So your risking everything and anything so you gain what? The liberty of not acknowledging any God beyond your self? How is that worth the potential price. This gets a little complex based on what aspect is under discussion so clarity is necessary.

1. I am not claiming you will ever find God by some kind of default wager arrangement. I am however saying that if you decide (and you do decide) to arbitrarily deny that God exists it can prevent you from finding him.

2. That true faith is subjective proof. I am not living my life in belief in some intellectual proposition. I know at least the essential truth of what I believe.

3. That there is almost no recognizable gain to non-belief nor too much of accost to faith but there is a potential nightmare that can occur for choosing to deny. So given the stakes and using 1. above you should give God the benefit of the doubt in the hopes that one day you might find him because the door was open which will produce number 2. above.

4. Saying denying an actual God makes you your own God is a semantic exercise not an insult.


So including all this, every motivation exists to look for and allow for God's existence (and there is no purely neutral stance available here). I can easily conclude many do not but what I challenge is them having a rational justification for it. I was an atheist for 27 years (actually more of an anti-theist) so know both sides well, and which one is rational IMO.

I didn't say I was a god, FYI.

Let me put it to you this way. A man comes up to you and says "if you obey me and follow me for your entire life, I'll give you a billion dollars after you're dead." Good deal or crappy deal?

Me, I say crappy deal. First, I only know for a fact that I will live one life - this one. Whether I get a bunch more, as the Buddhists and Hindus believe, or this one goes on after I'm dead as the Abrahamics believe, or whether I just go back to the cozy non-existence I enjoyed for about 4 billion years before being born is never going to be more than just a guess. So I would be giving up a CERTAIN reward - an autonomous, self-reliant, liberated life - for a POSSIBLE reward. And one that doesn't even appeal to me, to be totally honest. Also, the person demanding my obedience may be a liar or a lunatic, and have no intention of rewarding my obedience.

I expect that for believers any joy at contemplating heaven is cancelled out by fear at contemplating hell. For me, death isn't so scary I feel a need to deny it, so neither prospect moves me.

 

[1robin]

Maybe because to taste this paradise you need to be dead.

Death is certain in either case. Might as well get the perks. One of my favorite quotes was in the Kingdom of Heaven. The Barron told the crusader he was marching to certain death. The crusader replied all death is certain.

 

[idav]

I didn't say I was a god, FYI.

Let me put it to you this way. A man comes up to you and says "if you obey me and follow me for your entire life, I'll give you a billion dollars after you're dead." Good deal or crappy deal?

Me, I say crappy deal. First, I only know for a fact that I will live one life - this one. Whether I get a bunch more, as the Buddhists and Hindus believe, or this one goes on after I'm dead as the Abrahamics believe, or whether I just go back to the cozy non-existence I enjoyed for about 4 billion years before being born is never going to be more than just a guess. So I would be giving up a CERTAIN reward - an autonomous, self-reliant, liberated life - for a POSSIBLE reward. And one that doesn't even appeal to me, to be totally honest.

I expect that for believers any joy at contemplating heaven is cancelled out by fear at contemplating hell. For me, death isn't so scary I feel a need to deny it, so neither prospect moves me.

Thats actually not a bad plan. Tell everyone to do a bunch of stuff for us and to look forward to the most awesome rewards once we all die. Forget working for physical food, work for spiritual food thats where its really at.

 

[Alceste]

That is not the part I was questioning. AS far as common g4round goes neither of us can claim to know whether we live after death or the grave is the end. I am saying what gain merits the risk of being wrong. What does an atheist gain that offsets the potential cost? IOW what is it that justifies the wager that was brought up from my original post?

We don't believe in heaven or hell, so it isn't a serious risk.

 

[Alceste]

Cause it sounds like a trick. If it sounds too good to be true then it probably is. Are you sure Jesus wasnt a cannibal? He said eat me and drink my blood!

Exactly. There's a good reason whores ask for their payment in advance. I like to think I'm at least as clever as your average whore.

 

[1robin]

I didn't say I was a god, FYI.

I did not say you did. I even went so far as to modulate any mistaken insult that might have been taken. It is a default position that seems to be inevitable in a sense.

Let me put it to you this way. A man comes up to you and says "if you obey me and follow me for your entire life, I'll give you a billion dollars after you're dead." Good deal or crappy deal?

That is one problematic analogy. What rules? Can I use money after death? What evidence backs up the mans claims to being true either temporally or eternally. Your going to have to be much more relevant here. Analogies are hard to use with God.

Me, I say crappy deal. First, I only know for a fact that I will live one life - this one. Whether I get a bunch more, as the Buddhists and Hindus believe, or this one goes on after I'm dead as the Abrahamics believe, or whether I just go back to the cozy non-existence I enjoyed for about 4 billion years before being born is never going to be more than just a guess. So I would be giving up a CERTAIN reward - an autonomous, self-reliant, liberated life - for a POSSIBLE reward. And one that doesn't even appeal to me, to be totally honest.

Well moral laws are certainly good but that is not how anyone will ever get to heaven. I get to heaven by faith in Christ's merits not mine. So while I fail to obey I get the good stuff any way because no one could have merited perfection to begin with.

My point is that in almost every way to attempt to obey God is temporally beneficial. Countless lives have been wrecked and lost by doing the opposite. There is no loss in making an effort and potentially infinite gain. It would be different if I was asked to have cancer to get to heaven or fly a plane into a building to get to paradise. I am not. I am asked to do what is best for a man to do anyway.

I expect that for believers any joy at contemplating heaven is cancelled out by fear at contemplating hell. For me, death isn't so scary I feel a need to deny it, so neither prospect moves me.

I did not find Christ by looking for fire insurance. I found him by looking at evidence and past 27 years of bias. Anyway I don't want to press you any harder on this so I will leave it here. Have a good one.

 

[1robin]

Exactly. There's a good reason whores ask for their payment in advance. I like to think I'm at least as clever as your average whore.

I imagine they do so because they are dealing with a very dishonest clientele (that looks misspelled). Christians have the exact opposite. Your analogies may be humorous but they are not very analogous.