Replying to Avatar The Beave

Yup. But, your position isn't logical, IMO.

If you believe in an afterlife, then, that presupposes a belief that some part of us humans is not physical and may, in fact, be eternal. If humans are possibly eternal (at least in part), then why is it impossible to believe that there might just be a God (or God's) who is also eternal?

I find it much more logically consistent to believe that the simplistic complexity (yes, I'm juxtaposing those two things intentionally) of everything we can observe was created by something. That something, if it was indeed the creator of everything, would necessarily be many orders of magnitude greater in intellect and wisdom than anything than we are capable of thinking and observing. Then, if that's also the case, why would it not be fitting to call that thing God? (I'm basically borrowing "The Watchmaker Argument" from the school of Intelligent Design.)

I find the universe much more easily comprehensible from the perspective that it is a dynamic system designed and set in motion by an omnipotent, omniscient creator, since, it really does appear that there are real laws that govern all of physicality. I assist reject the argument of most materialists that we humans are just simply mechanistic extensions of the only physical universe. So, I also posit that we have a soul and that our soul lives on after our physical demise. Most systems of thought don't treat this very well, but, given that there are so many of them, I do think that one of them should be closest to the truth.

To summarize:

If humans have a soul, God very likely exists.

Adenda: atheists are idiots. (Not sorry. 😎)

Lol. No worries, mate. Ya ain't gonna convince me otherwise. Believe me, you're far from the first to try. We'll have to agree to disagree on this matter.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

That's cool.

And for what it's worth, I would never say that atheists are idiots, they just have a very different perspective on life and the concept of a soul. One of the common criticisms towards atheism is that an atheist individual has a complete lack of any moral or ethical convictions. This isn't true, at all. And so far I have never once heard anyone make a justifiable argument against such a belief. It can actually be somewhat disheartening to hear sometimes. 🤷‍♂️

Against atheism?

Self-selecting a morality usually just leads back to mostly the same ethics unless one adopts nihilism.

All (generally accepted as) "positive" ethical frameworks derive from a necessity of a higher being/power. Humans (IMO) are not capable of complete self-sovereignty.

Besides, atheism has led to most of the worst of humanity in the last ~century. That's a signal that it isn't the way.

"Besides, atheism has led to most of the worst of humanity in the last ~century. That's a signal that it isn't the way."

It sure has. But, they chose such a path. There are plenty who commit to the opposite. Christianity has also been behind some of the worst atrocities humanity has ever committed. Although, that is obviously not the case for all who follow these beliefs. All religions possess some very dark historical segments. 🤷‍♂️

Yup. But... That's not what Christians are supposed to do.

Athiests don't have any "supposed to do" built in. Big, big, difference.

I'm well aware they're not supposed to. Neither are atheists.

Just like how there is no integral attribute about atheism to suggest that atheists have no morals or ethics.

There are bad Christians and there are bad atheists, as well. It's a human fault, not a fault with personal beliefs.

I wouldn't separate those two so easily.

Accepting that there is an objective standard is very, very fundamental to morality, and, you don't get that with any serious flavor of atheism.

I'm not so sure about that one, mate. I don't necessarily see morality from that particular angle. I see morality as more of a component of the individual. And it being their duty to discover and develop their moral and ethical convictions. I've never felt the need to hold belief in a core set of principles to achieve this.

Except that where does that duty come from? You can't just speak it into existence without it being based on something. That kind of subjectivity leads to post-modernism and all the gross stuff that entails.

I vehemently disagree! I, most definitely, can speak that into existence. And i have done so. That duty I feel to protect my family comes from the belief that I'm the only bloke capable and willing to do so. I don't need some false deity to tell me to do that.

To play devil's advocate...

Why do you feel that is your duty to protect your family?

Why do you think? Or do you really want me to say why?

I'm curious as to your reasoning.

How is that not the duty of a father? How isn't it the same of someone's son?

How am I playing devils advocate?

Look at how many sires of children don't raise them. If there are no objective standards based on absolute truth, then why are you bothering to do that when so many others don't?

I don't care about them. That's their issue. Certainly not mine. There are absolutely no objective standards when it comes to my moral and ethical standards and I believe that makes them of much higher standard than any BS religious ones. I don't bloody well care if others don't do it. 🤣🤣🤣 I do it! Its ensured the safety of my family and that's all! Done! Goodnight! 🌚👍

Goodnight.

Even if you're logic is flawed, I'm glad you're doing the right thing. 😎