1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Judeo/Christian/Atheism.

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by John D. Brey, Aug 8, 2020.

  1. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    I think it was Heidegger (perhaps in Being and Time) who suggested that the fact that anything does exist, rather than not, is the miraculous thing. Add to that the fact that sentient creatures can acknowledge, and speak of existence, and voila, in my opinion we have something parallel in significance and self-evidency as the existence of something we could easily label "God."

    Defining that "God" is problematic since in some sense even knowledgeable theists concede that God is atheistic. The atheist's rejection of a God that "exists" (so to say) is part and parcel of a true understanding of God. Which is to say that a fuller understanding of the true theology of God must incorporate atheism as one of the legitimate branches of theology: Judeo/Christian/Atheism.



    John
     
    #1 John D. Brey, Aug 8, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2020
  2. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,176
    Ratings:
    +511
    Religion:
    None
    That sentence does not make any sense to me. It appears that you just said "that even knowledgeable theists concede that God is [not convinced that he exists.]"


    If there are no gods, including God, then there is nothing respecting gods there to understand, true or not.

    Since theology is not the study of God, but merely what other people have thought about God, theology might as well encompass Judaism/Christianity/Islam/[people who are not convinced by theists claims].

    But this does nothing to demonstrate the claim that any god exists.
     
  3. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    1,996
    Ratings:
    +886
    Religion:
    none
    Heideggers concept of Dasein is very different from how we would commonly use the term "existence". It is an, I would argue, fundamentally human state of affairs, a constant motion away from being born into the world towards the ever present spectre of Nonexistence. In this sense, I would argue that Heidegger's God could not be in such a state of Dasein, and therefore does not "exist" in the Heideggerian (or existentialist, if you will) sense; the concept is a fundamentally humanocentric one, I would say.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    What'd Bill Clinton say about the meaning of "is"? This is like that. God doesn't "exist" therein justifying the atheist belief about him not existing. I.e., there's no essence, or essential existing thing, that has any god-ness in it.

    And yet God "is" . . . seguing back to Clinton's deference to the meaning of "is."


    John
     
  5. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    As many modern philosophers have noted, and I quote Jean-Luc Nancy, "Nothingness is not nothing . . .."

    Say you got to the end of the universe, the very end of the universe (or the end of absolute reality), what would be beyond that? Say you got to absolutely the smallest building block of material reality: what would happen if you broke it open? What would be inside it?

    Being, existing, has no being, if there's no such "thing" (so to say) as the non-existent. In other words, if non-existing is just nothing, then existing is everything, and thus nothing, since there has to be a distinction between everything and not everything.

    That's where God comes into the discussion: as the non-existent "other" that allows existence to exist in opposition to God's non-existence. God doesn't exist, his essence is nothing-ness; but it's not nothing at all, just nothing we would recognize as something.



    John
     
  6. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,176
    Ratings:
    +511
    Religion:
    None
    I don't see that. Existence simply is. And non-existence cannot be. So to say that existence is nothing is a logical contradiction and so necessarily rejected.

    The claim the opposition is necessary entails a logical contradiction (see above), and therefore cannot be true. As such, God is not necessary and does not become a consideration.
     
  7. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    . . . For animals, mammals, God's non-existence is neither here nor there. But for man, the divine animal, God's non-existence is the very "spirit" that allows the human mammal to send machines to Mars to explore.

    There are a number of smart, famous, atheists, who are now conceding that man's mind is doing things these days that refute the logic of evolution and natural selection. It's as though some non-material alien has been guiding evolution to the development of the human brain, where, just a few thousand years ago, it finally landed and established a beach-head (so to say).

    That's what the Bible is all about. That's what Abraham, Moses, David, Isaiah, Jesus, Saul of Tarsus, are all about. The Bible predicted precisely where we are today thousands of years ago and it did it because the non-material alien guided the writers of the Bible to say where man was heading, so that having said it, it would become a self-fulfilling prophesy, as it has.



    John
     
  8. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    . . . Right. <s>



    John
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,176
    Ratings:
    +511
    Religion:
    None
    No. You are wrong.
     
  10. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    Every single "thing" we know we come to know based on the interplay between opposites. We can see only because there is light and dark creating "difference" that (the difference) can be gauged precisely because they are different. We have male and female, light and dark, good and bad, right and wrong, material and immaterial, living and inert, etc. etc..

    Existing and non-existing have to provide a similar, even fundamental, duality.

    But if, as you say, existence simply is, then it would be something that doesn't require the very duality that every other thing requires. Which is to say that nothing has to be something even if it's nothing.

    Which is where theology comes in since life and death present the same sort of conundrum: I can't be alive if I can't be dead, since otherwise being alive and being dead would be the same thing.

    When someone says existing, and being alive, simply are, they are (the person saying that), unbeknownst to themselves, reverting to the status of the animals for whom the human distinctions between alive and dead, existing and not existing, are not genuine issues. They're not issue for animals or insects, so far as we know.

    Theology is about the fact that mankind possesses a spirit that allows him to realize, if he uses the spirit as it should be used, that the world is theological more, and before, it's logical.



    John
     
    #10 John D. Brey, Aug 8, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2020
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    . . . See, you do believe in God. He's you. You just made a dogmatic pronouncement which apparently creates its own authenticity by the power of a quasi-divine dogmatism.

    To say something is wrong dogmatically, rather than showing that something is wrong logically, or reasonably, betrays that we come from animals. But we only revert to our past, and our base self, when we feel threatened with a responsibility we never possessed while we were animals.

    Animals won't answer to God. We . . . well, yes, there is a drawback to being a landing spot for divine spirit. We're all responsible to it now whether we wanted it or not. . . You can run along now. I won't leash you. You can go play with the other bipeds if that's your preference. . . Forget you ever met me. Pretend nothing I've said makes any sense to you and all will be right as rain.



    John
     
    #11 John D. Brey, Aug 8, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2020
  12. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,176
    Ratings:
    +511
    Religion:
    None
    Nah. Opposites are a concept that we made up to express relationships in a way that we found satisfying. Just because you have two things do not mean that they are in opposition. Neither male and female, nor light and dark are in opposition. Living and inert certainly aren't

    And just because you have one thing does not mean that it has an opposite. The existence of a duck does not mean there is an anti-duck. The existence of something does not require a something else. Just because one can conceive of an anti-thing, does not mean that one's brain has conceived of anything that has any connection to reality.

    Duality is an assertion without a rational foundation.
     
  13. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,176
    Ratings:
    +511
    Religion:
    None
    No. You're wrong.
     
  14. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    . . . That's too easy to say without a shared criteria for whether it's correct or not. But if it makes you feel better to make your personal opinion the criteria for all authenticity knock yourself out bro.



    John
     
  15. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    . . . As is the assertion that duality is an assertion without a rational foundation. . . And round and round we go. Whoopee . . . look at me. No hands!



    John
     
  16. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,176
    Ratings:
    +511
    Religion:
    None

    I don't see why I need to provide evidence for a post that you provided no evidence for. Your post was just a list of bald assertions, John. You made your opinion known and provided no substance or demonstration that what you said should even be considered to be true.
     
  17. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,646
    Ratings:
    +116
    Religion:
    Christian
    . . . Some of what I said should be self-evident. For instance, do you think animals worship God? And here's a "famous" atheist on the demise of natural selection:

    Today, the 4-billion-year-old regime of natural selection is facing a completely different challenge. In laboratories throughout the world, scientists are engineering living beings. They break the laws of natural selection with impunity, unbridled even by an organism's original characteristics. Eduardo Kac, a Brazilian bio-artist, decided in 2000 to create a new work of art: a florescent green rabbit [he named Alba]. . . Alba stands at the dawn of a new cosmic era, in which life will be ruled by intelligent design [rather than natural selection].

    Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens, p. 198-199.​

    Do you really suppose intelligent design is an emergent phenomenon emerging out of mindless natural selection? Do your really believe mindless chance can design mindful intelligent design by accident and then hand the keys to the kingdom over to accidental mindfulness?



    John
     
    #17 John D. Brey, Aug 8, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2020
  18. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,176
    Ratings:
    +511
    Religion:
    None
    Most of it is not true. Some is even false.


    Maybe. Assumes facts not in evidence.


    No justification for that claim. Rejected.


    Non-existence is not anything. Your claim is rejected.


    What allows us to explore - be it basements, mazes or mars - is our curiosity, fear, greed, ingenuity, mobility, and tool use.


    This is so offensive. When talking to a black man do you try to make your point by starting “there are a number of smart, famous black people…”? Ick.


    This is puerile. I’m sorry to be so blunt, but it just is. If you want to cite someone on the topic of evolution then you should cite a biologist. Or more accurately you should cite biologists who represent the consensus view of those whose field is specifically human evolution. For all I know you are citing smart, famous, atheists who plumbers or historians or cosmologists - which would be freaking useless.


    Your bald assertion is rejected.
     
  19. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,176
    Ratings:
    +511
    Religion:
    None
    It doesn't matter. Even if you were to successfully refute a thousand positions that were in competition with your own, that would do nothing to demonstrate that you are rationally justified in holding your own.
     
  20. night912

    night912 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages:
    980
    Ratings:
    +360
    Religion:
    Not religious
    What's the context of that quote?



    You're wrong about "existing." If "non-existing" is "nothing", then "existing" is "(a)thing" in other words, something because "athing" is not a recognized English word. The opposite of "everything" is not "nothing." It's "not everything." Everything cannot consist of nothing, it's a contradiction. If "nothing" was part of "everything" then it wouldn't be everything.

    That's because "nothingness" is not "nothing." They are two different and separate concepts, having different meanings.
     
Loading...