Dealing with existential nihilism

[Mister Agenda]

They laughed at the Wright brothers! Yeah, well, they also laughed at Bozo the clown. Until I establish that I'm not in the latter category, I shouldn't preen too much about the good company I'm in when it comes to being laughed at.

Except I understand very well where the mockery is coming from.

I very much doubt that.

---

So the solution to the problem of religions among each other is for God to not provide a true one? Is this what you are saying?

Not only is that not what's being said, it's ridiculous that anyone could think that's what is being said.

[Amarok]

Messengers were all mocked, I am in good company

Yup they also mocked Bozo the clown and for much the same reason . But by all means stick with your deluded martyrdom complex  

Except I understand very well where the mockery is coming from.

You mean people who clearly see through your bullshit attempts to sound all wise and epic

---

To exclude God out of how you define yourself is nothing but  hate of God and hate of the closest being to us.  We are his creation, servants, and his perception defines us and his grace preserves us.

Nope to define myself and not give two shits how a magic pixie feels about or suggests is not hate of god sorry . Nor do I care weather it made me or not that makes no difference what so ever . And no i'm no ones servant . His perception defines nothing and I don't need his or anyone else's "grace" nor do I need to be preserved .

[Brian37]

Messengers were all mocked, I am in good company

Yup they also mocked Bozo the clown and for much the same reason . But by all means stick with your deluded martyrdom complex  

Except I understand very well where the mockery is coming from.

You mean people who clearly see through your bullshit attempts to sound all wise and epic

---

To exclude God out of how you define yourself is nothing but  hate of God and hate of the closest being to us.  We are his creation, servants, and his perception defines us and his grace preserves us.

Nope to define myself and not give two shits how a magic pixie feels about or suggests is not hate of god sorry . Nor do I care weather it made me or not that makes no difference what so ever . And no i'm no ones servant . His perception defines nothing and I don't need his or anyone else's "grace" nor do I need to  be preserved .

Theists, not just Muslims, love accusing atheists of hating fictional characters. It is like accusing us of hating Spiderman or Thor or Yoda. They can't seem to grasp it is the logic we reject, not a real god. We can't hurt Yoda's feelings because Yoda isn't real. But I can hurt a Star Wars fan's feelings if I said the movies sucked. I am sure I would get accused of mocking Yoda too.

[henryp]

Do you remember all the cookies you've eaten in your life?  If you were handed a cookie, would you have a hard time logically explaining why you want to eat it?  It tastes good.  Cookies are amazing.  There doesn't need to be more to enjoy the cookie.  

It's only seems complicated, because we're socially, and maybe genetically, pushed towards the idea of an imaginary big picture  Good, bad, right, wrong, meaningful, wasted, etc...  But it's hogwash.  It's a cookie.  You eat it because it's delicious.  It's a nice way to live if you have a cushy 1st world existence, and can come to terms with temporary existence.

[bennyboy]

So the solution to the problem of religions among each other is for God to not provide a true one? Is this what you are saying?

Try logic.  Squint real hard, stand on your head, slap your palm against your noggin a few times. . . really try hard to get it.

If there are thousands of different gods that people strongly believe in, then what's the most likely position?

1)  All those other idiots are mislead, and they don't know the One True God™.   Luckily, I was born in the right time and place to have heard about the actual God Who Exists and Isn't Made Up™. 
2)   Wait. . . all those billions of others think each other's God is made up.  I think theirs is made up.  They think mine is made up.  So clearly one's cultural beliefs, one's religious experiences or feelings, and one's logical attempts to justify them cannot establish the truth of a religion.  I will need actual evidence beyond wishy-thinking to prove my points.

[Neo-Scholastic]

If there are thousands of different gods that people strongly believe in, then what's the most likely position?...billions of others think each other's God is made up.  I think theirs is made up.  They think mine is made up.  So clearly one's cultural beliefs, one's religious experiences or feelings, and one's logical attempts to justify them cannot establish the truth of a religion.

Personally, I'm not seeing the problem here. MK and I do significantly differ with respect to the special revelations we accept. And yet when I read the arguments and observations he brings to the table, these are nearly always based on general revelations of the divine with which I agree. I see nothing wrong with the idea that God meets us where we are (in this fallen creation) and would expect Him to take into account the culture and temperaments of those He is trying to reach. Ultimately, religion is about loving God with all our being and loving others as we would love ourselves.

This particular objection, that religions have various doctrines, is the flip side of TrueBelievers where uncertainty and indeterminacy cannot be tolerated. For example within Christianity, some doctrines, such as the Resurrection, are nearly universal. Meanwhile, other doctrines, such as eternal conscious torment versus annihilationism, are indeterminate. I have heard good arguments on both sides. It makes for interesting inter-Christian debate but is not a great source of division. Similarly, MK and I have different views on the authority of the Koran versus the NT Synoptic Gospels, Pauline letters, etc. I have heard arguments on both sides and have come down on the side of the NT. That in no way lessens my respect for MK or gives me cause to doubt his sincerity, just as I do not doubt your sincerity.

[Brian37]

If there are thousands of different gods that people strongly believe in, then what's the most likely position?...billions of others think each other's God is made up.  I think theirs is made up.  They think mine is made up.  So clearly one's cultural beliefs, one's religious experiences or feelings, and one's logical attempts to justify them cannot establish the truth of a religion.

Personally, I'm not seeing the problem here. MK and I do significantly differ with respect to the special revelations we accept. And yet when I read the arguments and observations he brings to the table, these are nearly always based on general revelations of the divine with which I agree. I see nothing wrong with the idea that God meets us where we are (in this fallen creation) and would expect Him to take into account the culture and temperaments of those He is trying to reach. Ultimately, religion is about loving God with all our being and loving others as we would love ourselves.

This particular objection, that religions have various doctrines, is the flip side of TrueBelievers where uncertainty and indeterminacy cannot be tolerated. For example within Christianity, some doctrines, such as the Resurrection, are nearly universal. Meanwhile, other doctrines, such as eternal conscious torment versus annihilationism, are indeterminate. I have heard good arguments on both sides. It makes for interesting inter-Christian debate but is not a great source of division. Similarly, MK and I have different views on the authority of the Koran versus the NT Synoptic Gospels, Pauline letters, etc. I have heard arguments on both sides and have come down on the side of the NT. That in no way lessens my respect for MK or gives me cause to doubt his sincerity, just as I do not doubt your sincerity.

There is no such thing as "divine revelation" not for Christians, not for Muslims, not for Jews, not even for Hindus. I don't think even most Buddhist understand the superstitious mythical roots of what was back then, in reality, merely a man, or group, whom managed to create Buddhism as a spin off of Hinduism. 

In all of antiquity, even far older than modern monotheism, even in prior polytheism humans falsely thought their fortunes were handed down to them from above. 

Even the ancient Egyptians and Greeks and Roman polytheism was based on gods who intervened in their lives. But just as a cleric and Rabbi or priest or minister, nobody talks to invisible beings. Sure they may think they do, but so did the Oracles of polytheism. 

Maybe you and MK need to BOTH consider you got it wrong and there is nobody above helping anyone.

[Neo-Scholastic]

There is no such thing as "divine revelation" not for Christians, not for Muslims, not for Jews, not even for Hindus.

Unsupported assertion, personal opinion pretending to be knowledge, blah, blah, blah... poser.

[bennyboy]

If there are thousands of different gods that people strongly believe in, then what's the most likely position?...billions of others think each other's God is made up.  I think theirs is made up.  They think mine is made up.  So clearly one's cultural beliefs, one's religious experiences or feelings, and one's logical attempts to justify them cannot establish the truth of a religion.

Personally, I'm not seeing the problem here. MK and I do significantly differ with respect to the special revelations we accept. And yet when I read the arguments and observations he brings to the table, these are nearly always based on general revelations of the divine with which I agree. I see nothing wrong with the idea that God meets us where we are (in this fallen creation) and would expect Him to take into account the culture and temperaments of those He is trying to reach. Ultimately, religion is about loving God with all our being and loving others as we would love ourselves.

That's certainly the essence of the Christian position, and I've met many muslims who seem to project this principle as well.

But I don't think it's true that religion is ultimately about anything. Religion is the linguistic expression of the human capacity for awe, a lack of knowledge about the nature of reality, and a sense of mystery. It depends on the feelings we as a species get when we engage in ritualized behaviors, the breaking-down of everyday mundanity.

The problem with MK's sermons is that he's projecting a gnostic position into an area in which he can't possibly be gnostic. In other words, he's bullshitting.

This particular objection, that religions have various doctrines, is the flip side of TrueBelievers where uncertainty and indeterminacy cannot be tolerated. For example within Christianity, some doctrines, such as the Resurrection, are nearly universal. Meanwhile, other doctrines, such as eternal conscious torment versus annihilationism, are indeterminate. I have heard good arguments on both sides. It makes for interesting inter-Christian debate but is not a great source of division. Similarly, MK and I have different views on the authority of the Koran versus the NT Synoptic Gospels, Pauline letters, etc. I have heard arguments on both sides and have come down on the side of the NT. That in no way lessens my respect for MK or gives me cause to doubt his sincerity, just as I do not doubt your sincerity.

MK doubts the honesty of everyone who he think fails to get his message. He cannot accept that people see his view as a cultural artifact-- he thinks we are deliberately ignoring the truth. The truth is that there are clearly great mysteries at work-- but the mysteries of creation, of consciousness, and so on, do not require a personal God idea. They require diligent real investigation much more than the suspension of disbelief. To be frank, your religion hasn't really progressed much in the past 2000 years-- right or wrong, it is not growing in interesting ways, and not adding new contributions to our society.


My position is this: a real believer in God must look to facts as the expression of God's truths. That means dropping mythology and investigating actual truths through observation and experimentation. In other words, if you aren't primarily interested in Scientific inquiry as the best tool for learning the truth, you are shouting about God while covering your eyes and ears to avoid being exposed to the truth. The deliberate suspension of disbelief, then, isn't service to God-- it's evidence of a lack of faith that wherever in the Universe you look, you will necessarily find God written in everything from QM particles out to the farthest reaches of the Universe.

Real faith isn't to be found in the 3000 (or in MK's case 1500) year-old texts of desert dwellers. If God is alive, then find a way in which he matters to anyone who isn't looking for fairy-tale sunglasses that give the world a nicer aspect.

[Brian37]

There is no such thing as "divine revelation" not for Christians, not for Muslims, not for Jews, not even for Hindus.

Unsupported assertion, personal opinion pretending to be knowledge, blah, blah, blah... poser.

No, that is what you are doing. I am not the one who claims an invisible super hero picks certain people to communicate with. Divine revelation is not unique to Christianity regardless, the concept has existed since the earliest written religions. 

Humans in all of antiquity mistook their fortunes as being handed from above. Now go outside at  and see if a holy book or holy writing of any religion suddenly falls out of the sky. See if when you walk out you hear the voices of Apollo talking to you. Maybe if you simply concentrate Buddha will magically communicate with you and guide you. 

Oh and if you stupidly think Buddhism isn't rooted in mythology and superstition then you don't know who Queen Maya is nor do you know how the first Buddha was depicted to be born. I'll give you a hint, the divine world spoke to Queen Maya and said she would give birth to a boy who would bring wisdom to the world. 

Humans be they holy people or not, have throughout our species history have always claimed to communicate to the super natural world. Doesn't sound to me like this allegedly "divine world" everyone speaks of, has it's shit together. Sounds more to me like humans merely projecting their own qualities on to fictional non human things because humanizing the world around you creates a placebo effect. 

If you really want to believe in a divine world, you sure will. Just like if a kid really wants to believe Santa is real, they will, even though he is not.