Atheism vs. Christianity

[Tarsonis Survivors]

You're forgetting the whole crucifixion and who it was done to bit when you extrapolate this nonsense. Especially when you try to (errantly) cite Nietszche.

May I ask how exactly the whole Jesus sacrificial ritual fits into this extrapolation?
My point was that it would be easier for a Christian to use nihilistic reasoning than An atheist.
Atheists usually say you only live once, but Christians say they live forever.
That's all.

(Yeah I dunno where he was going with that one.)
Except that Biblical scripture specifically condemns that type of Nihilist practice. 2 Thessalonians pretty much goes off on people who just sit around waiting for Jesus instead of working.

[Creepoc Infinite]

May I ask how exactly the whole Jesus sacrificial ritual fits into this extrapolation?
My point was that it would be easier for a Christian to use nihilistic reasoning than An atheist.
Atheists usually say you only live once, but Christians say they live forever.
That's all.

(Yeah I dunno where he was going with that one.)
Except that Biblical scripture specifically condemns that type of Nihilist practice. 2 Thessalonians pretty much goes off on people who just sit around waiting for Jesus instead of working.

You see, two different Christians can read the same passage and get two different interpretations of what it means. I know the bible goes off on nihilists, but that doesn't mean a Christian can twist the words, not read the passage, ignore the passage or interpret it differently.
Besides, there are around 40,000 different denominations of Christianity, logically speaking, I'm sure at least one of these denominations has addressed this passage in some way.

I am somewhat aware of what the bible says about nihilism, and it is irrelevant. Most people who claim to be Christian know precisely jack shit about the intricacies of the bibles passages and their nebulous meanings.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

(Yeah I dunno where he was going with that one.)
Except that Biblical scripture specifically condemns that type of Nihilist practice. 2 Thessalonians pretty much goes off on people who just sit around waiting for Jesus instead of working.

You see, two different Christians can read the same passage and get two different interpretations of what it means. I know the bible goes off on nihilists, but that doesn't mean a Christian can twist the words, not read the passage, ignore the passage or interpret it differently.
Besides, there are around 40,000 different denominations of Christianity, logically speaking, I'm sure at least one of these denominations has addressed this passage in some way.

I am somewhat aware of what the bible says about nihilism, and it is irrelevant. Most people who claim to be Christian know precisely jack shit about the intricacies of the bibles passages and their nebulous meanings.

Keep the goal posts firmly where they are.
So now your problem is with people, not the religion itself.

[Creepoc Infinite]

You see, two different Christians can read the same passage and get two different interpretations of what it means. I know the bible goes off on nihilists, but that doesn't mean a Christian can twist the words, not read the passage, ignore the passage or interpret it differently.
Besides, there are around 40,000 different denominations of Christianity, logically speaking, I'm sure at least one of these denominations has addressed this passage in some way.

I am somewhat aware of what the bible says about nihilism, and it is irrelevant. Most people who claim to be Christian know precisely jack shit about the intricacies of the bibles passages and their nebulous meanings.

Keep the goal posts firmly where they are.
So now your problem is with people, not the religion itself.

I guess. But what's dangerous about the bible is that it can be interpreted in a thousand different directions. Or 40,000 according to the number of currently existing denominations.
The problem's always been people.
Think of it this way:
People are the Electric Guitar, religion is a very very loud Amplifier

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Keep the goal posts firmly where they are.
So now your problem is with people, not the religion itself.

I guess. But what's dangerous about the bible is that it can be interpreted in a thousand different directions. Or 40,000 according to the number of currently existing denominations.
The problem's always been people.
Think of it this way:
People are the Electric Guitar, religion is a very very loud Amplifier

More like Religion is the guitar and people can play it anyway they like.

And that's not a problem unique to religion. Any sort of philosophy, be it religion,atheism, nationalism, humanist, political doctrine, etc can be manipulated to fit any person's prerogative.

That's a problem with the human condition not with religion.

[Creepoc Infinite]

I guess. But what's dangerous about the bible is that it can be interpreted in a thousand different directions. Or 40,000 according to the number of currently existing denominations.
The problem's always been people.
Think of it this way:
People are the Electric Guitar, religion is a very very loud Amplifier

More like Religion is the guitar and people can play it anyway they like.

And that's not a problem unique to religion. Any sort of philosophy, be it religion,atheism, nationalism, humanist, political doctrine, etc can be manipulated to fit any person's prerogative.

That's a problem with the human condition not with religion.

My analogy had to do with people are the source of the sound (problem) and the amplifier is what makes it louder and more widespread (the amplifier signifying any ideology or philosophy that can Be used to further an agenda)

But I like your analogy too.
Could you explain it further?
And by the way, I didn't say that religion was the only thing people use in such a way.
Religion is simply one of the oldest and the most popular means of manipulation for how powerful it is.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

More like Religion is the guitar and people can play it anyway they like.

And that's not a problem unique to religion. Any sort of philosophy, be it religion,atheism, nationalism, humanist, political doctrine, etc can be manipulated to fit any person's prerogative.

That's a problem with the human condition not with religion.

My analogy had to do with people are the source of the sound (problem) and the amplifier is what makes it louder and more widespread (the amplifier signifying any ideology or philosophy that can Be used to further an agenda)

But I like your analogy too.
Could you explain it further?
And by the way, I didn't say that religion was the only thing people use in such a way.
Religion is simply one of the oldest and the most popular means of manipulation for how powerful it is.

My analogy? Religion is like a guitar. It has a prescribed tuning and sound. However anyone can tweak the strings to change the tuning that suits them instead of the traditional tuning. While that is alright for a musician, for something like religion that is inherently problematic.

[Creepoc Infinite]

My analogy had to do with people are the source of the sound (problem) and the amplifier is what makes it louder and more widespread (the amplifier signifying any ideology or philosophy that can Be used to further an agenda)

But I like your analogy too.
Could you explain it further?
And by the way, I didn't say that religion was the only thing people use in such a way.
Religion is simply one of the oldest and the most popular means of manipulation for how powerful it is.

My analogy? Religion is like a guitar. It has a prescribed tuning and sound. However anyone can tweak the strings to change the tuning that suits them instead of the traditional tuning. While that is alright for a musician, for something like religion that is inherently problematic.

I agree.
By the way, my analogy was broader and simpler, but it still works

[Tarsonis Survivors]

My analogy? Religion is like a guitar. It has a prescribed tuning and sound. However anyone can tweak the strings to change the tuning that suits them instead of the traditional tuning. While that is alright for a musician, for something like religion that is inherently problematic.

I agree.
By the way, my analogy was broader and simpler, but it still works

Whatever.

[Creepoc Infinite]

I agree.
By the way, my analogy was broader and simpler, but it still works

Whatever.

I didnt say mine was BETTER

[The Cobalt Sky]

And you know this how exactly? And which 'God' are you talking about, because every religion has their own 'God' or 'Gods' . So make sure your specific.

HE'S LIVING ON THE INSIDE ROARING LIKE A LION.

Stop shouting. Or should I say... Roaring?

[Jah Paradise]

I've never heard of an ontological argument that I found convincing

[Pragia]

I subscribe to Aquinas's proofs of God's existence when needing to respond to the proof argument.

[Vashtanaraada]

Apatheism!

YAY!

WE DON'T CARE!

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

The Christian faith provides, for many people, the eminently useful function of keeping them from falling into nihilism, and, not only that, but as our society, if not a Christian society, is one that is heavily influenced by Christian ideals, having that religion help keep them in line, and make sure that they don't stray too far out from the norm. In addition, it gives them something to do on an idle Sunday, lest they get themselves into some sort of mischief.

Lead them away from nihilism?
I'm inclined to believe that Christianity has greater risk of being nihilistic than atheism.

I get this idea from Nietzche's writings (mostly The Antichrist)
If you want me to simplify it here ya go:

Atheism does not define meaning or give us meaning, but it helps us recognize that we only have one life, so live it to the fullest.

Christianity has eternal afterlife promised to its believers, so they can be inclined to waste their lives not caring about what happens to the planet or themselves because it's not about the party, it's about the after party, so to speak.

Really, what is the core tenants of the Christian faith: love God, love your neighbour (unless he's a heathen bugger), play nice. Those are the prerequisite for entering heaven.

In addition, I did not say anything about Atheism, so the whole comment about how Atheism promote a healthier lifestyle is irrelevent, just as my mentioning that Nietzsche is a nihilist, at the very least, a moral nihilist.

(Not that this is not true with all Christians, because without a doubt, most Christians still instinctively do not live their lives like they are immortal)

Possibly because there is much in the faith the requires not being nihilists, like subscribing to an (erronous) universal set of morals.

But regardless, the dangerous thing about immortality, the curse of immortality, is that it sucks the life out of life.
If you can never die, then you have all the time in the universe to put off anything. An immortal life is a life or misery, boredom, monotony, and meaninglessness.

One can hold that the soul is immortal, but the body isn't, so living you life according to morals which would do the soul good is the usual goal, as I understand it, of most Christians.

Atheists believe in that way less often than Christians do

I can think of an area where Atheists are more likely to be nihilistic than Christian- Atheists are more likely, possibly because they are more able, to be moral anti-realists, but Christians have to accept a form of moral realism (the stupidest kind, DCT) in order to be Christians.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

I subscribe to Aquinas's proofs of God's existence when needing to respond to the proof argument.

I subscribe to reality, which says that almost all of Aqinas' "proof" is fallacious and illogical. That is to say, they are unsound, and possibly invalid.

[Sociobiology]

I subscribe to Aquinas's proofs of God's existence when needing to respond to the proof argument.

the first two are exactly the same and absolutely illogical, if everything needs a cause then so does the (unmoved mover), if the unmoved mover can exist than everything does not need a cause, its very existence disproves the condition is is called for to solve.

the contingency argument disproves itself because nothingness would be the most unstable state that could possibly exist and thus could only lead to something. it also falls apart due to stability, a candle's light continues to exist regardless of what happens to the candle, that is part of the nature of particles.

the degree argument is full of holes the existence of something in no way requires a maximum degree to actually exist.( by that logic the universe can't exist because if black holes exist than somewhere a black hole as big as the entire universe must exist therefore the universe cannot exist.) it proposes a principle we have no reason to believe exists. see also the argument from worst smell.

and the design argument has been proven blatantly false by physics and biology. patterns of optimization do not require conscious design but are a function of basic mindless laws interacting.

organisms possess heritable traits, these traits vary thus traits that tend to increase the chances of the organism reproducing will tend to increase in the population. its as simple as that.

[Warpspace]

Yo, just to drop in here again as the friendly neighborhood Nihilist, but Nihilism does not mean a bunch of emo kids sitting around bitching about how everything they do isn't going to matter and in the end everything is but dust- but rather is just the acceptance that everything is pointless. Nietzsche's entire point is that if everything is pointless and everything is going to be forgotten and destroyed, you might as well enjoy life and live it to the fullest.

See the quote in my sig.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

I subscribe to Aquinas's proofs of God's existence when needing to respond to the proof argument.

the first two are exactly the same and absolutely illogical, if everything needs a cause then so does the (unmoved mover), if the unmoved mover can exist than everything does not need a cause, its very existence disproves the condition is is called for to solve.

Except that ignores a very important property of God, that he is wholly unlike anything in the universe because he isn't in the universe, he exist beyond it, time, material, and all, and created it. A more metaphysically expensive proposition, to be sure, but one that demonstrates that this objection fails.

the contingency argument disproves itself because nothingness would be the most unstable state that could possibly exist and thus could only lead to something. it also falls apart due to stability, a candle's light continues to exist regardless of what happens to the candle, that is part of the nature of particles.

First, I am not sure what is being argued here, that nothing leads to creation of things ex nihilo, at which point, I would love to hear how, or what the analogy of the candle's light is supposed to show (the light is the result of the flame, which would not exist unless there was the candle or a portion of the candle, the obliteration of the candle altogether would mean the cessation of the light).

the degree argument is full of holes the existence of something in no way requires a maximum degree to actually exist.( by that logic the universe can't exist because if black holes exist than somewhere a black hole as big as the entire universe must exist therefore the universe cannot exist.) it proposes a principle we have no reason to believe exists. see also the argument from worst smell.

Black Holes (a physical description) is of a different nature than "Perfection" (a value).

There is not only a presumption of naturalism, but also an assumption that everything is like natural properties.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

Yo, just to drop in here again as the friendly neighborhood Nihilist, but Nihilism does not mean a bunch of emo kids sitting around bitching about how everything they do isn't going to matter and in the end everything is but dust- but rather is just the acceptance that everything is pointless. Nietzsche's entire point is that if everything is pointless and everything is going to be forgotten and destroyed, you might as well enjoy life and live it to the fullest.

See the quote in my sig.

What is the point of pleasure or pain, if they do not have any objective value, nor should any reasonable person think that they do?

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Yo, just to drop in here again as the friendly neighborhood Nihilist, but Nihilism does not mean a bunch of emo kids sitting around bitching about how everything they do isn't going to matter and in the end everything is but dust- but rather is just the acceptance that everything is pointless. Nietzsche's entire point is that if everything is pointless and everything is going to be forgotten and destroyed, you might as well enjoy life and live it to the fullest.

See the quote in my sig.

What is the point of pleasure or pain, if they do not have any objective value, nor should any reasonable person think that they do?

there is no point. that's the point.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

What is the point of pleasure or pain, if they do not have any objective value, nor should any reasonable person think that they do?

there is no point. that's the point.

If there is no point, then there is no reason why any rational being would affirm life, pleasure, happiness, etc.

[Immoren]

Yo, just to drop in here again as the friendly neighborhood Nihilist, but Nihilism does not mean a bunch of emo kids sitting around bitching about how everything they do isn't going to matter and in the end everything is but dust- but rather is just the acceptance that everything is pointless. Nietzsche's entire point is that if everything is pointless and everything is going to be forgotten and destroyed, you might as well enjoy life and live it to the fullest.

See the quote in my sig.

What is the point of pleasure or pain, if they do not have any objective value, nor should any reasonable person think that they do?

Pointy point of pointless pointine´ss.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

there is no point. that's the point.

If there is no point, then there is no reason why any rational being would affirm life, pleasure, happiness, etc.

Except for as Descartes said "I think there for I am" there may be no point to existence as Nihilism would suggest, but regardless you're here. So you might as well live as to what makes your existence better, instead of worse.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

If there is no point, then there is no reason why any rational being would affirm life, pleasure, happiness, etc.

Except for as Descartes said "I think there for I am" there may be no point to existence as Nihilism would suggest, but regardless you're here. So you might as well live as to what makes your existence better, instead of worse.

If there is no value in pleasure or pain, there is no reason to prefer one to the other, and, thus, no reason to live well.