Existence: What is the point?

I partially agree. And those who blur the lines between 'science!' and 'belief!' commit acts of violence on the scientific method. Their dogmatic opinions are used to justify bullying, but they only illustrate religious bigotry, with the censoring of alternate views or criticisms of their sacred beliefs.

 

Just pointing this out as a second example of you using a line of argument that you admit is invalid. "Show me X or it doesn't exist." Either this line of argument is invalid, and you are wrong to reject the existence of meaning in a godless universe, or it is valid and you must accept anyone claiming it disproves the existence of God. Which is it?

 

We need to develop the ability to hold the realm of religion and the realm of science separate.

The questions are not the same. The root assumptions are not the same. The methods are not the same. What is considered evidence is not the same. What is considered an answer is not the same.

When we have a question, it should be reasonably clear which is the appropriate realm for searching for an answer.

 

..good luck with that!

When has man EVER differentiated between his deeply held beliefs, and empirical fact? For a while, at the birth of the scientific revolution and the age of reason, there was an earnest attempt by phosophers and scientists to distinguish between them. But that was a bygone era, and we're back to Standard Operating Procedure.

..worse, actually, because we should know better. But that is what you get when religio/philosophical ideologies control the knowledge base. They mandate what is 'True!', even when it is a belief.

..and hordes of nodding bobbleheads eat it up.

 

As I wrote before, existence doesn't have a point; it's round.

 

No, its pointed! Right on top of our pointy little heads!

 

You must be thinking about the general population or our political representation.

Scientific method is what our sciences use.

We do have a problem with our general population and of course that couldn't help but extend to our political representation. There, we find an unfortunately large number who can't tell what is science and what is not science.

 

Sticking to the literal creation story in the Bible:

Human existence began in the Garden of Eden, BEFORE original sin.

A Biblical answer to "reason for existence" has to answer for man's existence in the Garden of Eden before sin.

After human sin and expulsion from the Garden of Eden, the primary directives from God have been oriented to earning our way back into God's good graces. None of what has come after the Garden of Eden has anything at all to do with the reason for our existence.

Again:
- the question of reason for existence has to answer for why God wanted two perfect pets populating the Garden of Eden.

- the directives to humans after the expulsion from the Garden is merely one of allowing individuals to attempt to get back into God's good graces.


I would propose that doesn't change much if one decides to accept that God created man by using evolution - a big bang with properties HE knew would lead to mankind. Humans are still given pretty much one reason for existence - to try to get back into God's good graces for being humans.

If God was hoping for something better, we're given scant evidence of what that might have been. Humans were a failed experiment. Now, all we can do is beg forgiveness - as our reason for existence.

 

I do not see anything relating to the OP, just rambling caricatures of your interpretation of the biblical worldview.

How is this an evidenced, or even plausible explanation of the 'point of existence?'

The 'point of existence' is to earn our way back to God? Why? How?

speculating about the motives of a supreme being, from a very mortal one, is pretty silly.

This is your explanation for the Creation? No, just a silly caricature of your hated 'Christians!' You think these caricatures will drive people to embrace atheistic naturalism? Trying to win them over to your cause?

This is not an 'evolution vs creation!' thread. The anti-science bigots hsve driven me from those with incessant heckling and antifa disruption tactics.

But yes, mpost progressive indoctrinees who believe in God, also believe in evolution. Atheistic naturalism has not been completely indoctrinated... yet.

I don't think you believe this, you just present it as a caricature, to demean your religious opponents.

Yes, that caricature is very popular, with progressive indoctrinees. Thinking for themselves is discouraged, but memorized talking points and demeaning caricatures are Standard Fare.

Why don't you present a reasonable, plausible explanation of YOUR BELIEFS, instead of spending your time caricaturing other's?

Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do. ~Benjamin Franklin

 

Existence: What is the point?

Trying not to become extinct.

 

Yes, avoidance of danger is a natural instinct. But i would put a 'point' as something positive.

In the OP, i listed the basic instincts, without the gratuitous nudity..

Maybe that's all there is. Maybe we just live and die, in lives of quiet desperation.

But maybe, there is Something Else. That is what nags us incessantly, and we can't escape it.

 

Don't get so upset. And, try not to misrepresent me by clipping specific bits out of context.

This IS the religion board. So, discussing a religious point of view on a question this central to religion is absolutely REQUIRED.

So once again, I see that the religious issue of why we are here has two parts:
- why did god create us? That has to address the time period BEFORE first sin. The bible says we were not created sinful - we did that ourselves. I do not believe mankind can answer this question, as it requires making monumentally uninformed assumptions about God. One must assume God's creation (Eden with mankind) could have continued. So, this part of the question is why did God create Eden with mankind?

- what NOW is the point of our existence, since original sin. And, THAT has to focus on the directives given to man by God on more than one occasion. Those directives if followed would allow us to be reunited with God as his children in heaven for eternity.


Please note that I stated that evolution is an irrelevancy in this question. It's only a question of how god did it - not why he did it, not the purpose of doing it, not his "point" for doing it. (You really went off on that one!!) Repeatedly on this board you will find me stating that evolution is only a partial answer to the "how" question and does not in ANY WAY address the why questions of the various religions. For the purposes of religious discussion, it's fine with me if we use a literal translation of Genesis - I just don't believe the "how" changes the religious meaning of anything in Christianity.

Please note that I did NOT say why god created man. I explicitly left that undefined, as I don't believe there is ANY possibility of humans coming up with a reason for god to do ANYTHING - let alone create human beings. And, how could we understand an overarching religious "point" of our existence without knowing why we were created?

Please note that after sin (and skipping the OT) it is GOD, through Jesus, who requires us to recognize God's supremacy, his sacrifice of his son and ask forgiveness for our sinful nature. That IS the fundamental requirement of Christianity. How could you POSSIBLY think I stated that as being demeaning?

We can go into that a little farther at some point. I happen to believe that one's entire life is required here - not just coming forward in some protestant denomination. One's every movement, every word is proof or disproof. This becomes the point.

 

Snark noted, but it does not contribute to the topic, or define your beliefs in a meaningful way.

Your religious beliefs are obvious, yet you do not present them to the topic, but prefer to address straw men of other's beliefs.

Why not present your own beliefs, and defend them relating to the topic?

 

1. I'm not now, nor usually ever, 'upset!' over someone's opinions on the internet. False accusation.
2. I did not misrepresent you, but quoted your post and replied to the text. False accusation.
3. It is the 'Religion AND Philosophy' sub forum. Philosophical ponderings are allowed and should not always be interpreted as 'religious proselytizing!'
4. Constructing a straw man of your perceived opponent's points is a fallacy. Let them make their own points, from a theistic or specific POV. What are YOUR beliefs/opinions on this topic?
5. The topic is not the 'Christian!' view of 'why we are here,' but any philosophical view of the reason for existence.. something that has intrigued humanity in every era, culture, and region.
6. Your presentation of The 'Christian!' view, is most likely seen as a straw man.

 

What??? I had zero snark in that.

AND, are you suggesting that since I'm not at present a Christian I can't say anything about Christianity?

Aren't you supposed to be proselytizing as the Bible indicates? Do you think you can do that by telling me to **** when I give totally legitimate comment?

The OP is yours, and I'm sticking to the topic as you presented it. You did not suggest this thread is about comparative religion.

 

..not sure what you are addressing, here.

1. Anyone is free and welcome to submit their opinion, or rebut another's opinion, about the topic. Many have done so, for years, now.
2. Straw man caricatures of another's beliefs, when they have not been presented, is not a rebuttal. It is a fallacy.
3. No, i am not proselytizing. I am pondering existentialist philosophy. I have not quoted verses, or made 'Christian!' arguments, whatever they are..
4. Say what you want, and believe what you want. But your beliefs are not exempt from examination, either.

 

I stand corrected.. i DID quote a bible passage, some time back. But it was not a 'proselytizing!' post, but a 'seeking knowledge & understanding!' point. The bold below is the principle, or belief, from me, regarding the quest for Truth. I am not insisting that anyone accept my opinion, but to search for themselves.

I still find this simple phrase, from thousands of years ago, to be profoundly insightful.

Jesus echoed this concept, when He said, 'Seek and you will find..'

I believe it is a universal Truth, in the human experience.

True words are not pleasing. Pleasing words are not true. ~Tao Te Ching

 

I hope you don't mean that one can't even LOOK without first believing in God!

I do like the "Seek and ye shall find" part - important and universally applicable.

Those who find/achieve/etc. do so because they put in the effort - the seeking.

 

Did the Big Bang create itself? If so, from what?

 

There are a number of significant theories on what was/is around the big bang. It could be that the big bang was a local event in an infinite universe of universes - think of bubbles or of squeezing off a portion of a balloon to make a balloon animal. It could be that for some reason nobody has identified, there was/is a god that decided to make a universe.

It's pretty hard to gather evidence concerning what was before or around or in other parts of our universe. In fact, the vast majority of just THIS universe can not be seen by us. We can see the cosmic microwave background radiation from the big bang and can explore back to a very short time after the big bang.

So, one can consider one or both of:
- an infinite god that made a universe.
- an infinite universe.

I don't see the one with god as being somehow more logical or more supported by what we can observe.

 

Good, interesting post, and one that accurately describes my own "world view" for several decades. But I've researched the evidence & now feel very differently. It was a long process, and one I can't simplify to the length of a forum post. But briefly, and totally inadequately, I'll say this. I was very scientifically oriented, & had been convinced God was unnecessary & non-existent. A parent's death somehow triggered the question whether evidence of an afterlife existed. I resolved to research it--but with an open mind--following the evidence, if it existed, to wherever it took me--and accepting that evidence as truth if it made sense. The research started with learning about Near Death Experiences, and interviewing several individuals who'd experienced them. I found them to be absolutely truthful & convincing, and my world view began changing. Further queries into past life research & reincarnation--equally convincing--expanded my world view even more. Eventually, God worked its way back into that changing world view, but in a vastly different form from what traditional religion teaches. My research made me become gradually aware of different levels of consciousness, which turns out to be a significant aspect of all our realities, and a divider of realities from each other. The three dimensions of our "normal" world, expanded to four (time), and then to 11, then to a possible infinite number of dimensions of reality--all distinct, all different in some ways, and many inter-related, and even co-dependent on one another for their very existence. Forces totally unknown & unrecognized in parallel realities, became recognized as having major impacts on life here, even though the vast majority of humans on Earth were entirely oblivious to their existence. God became the one, overall totality of consciousness of all these parallel realities combined, inherent in everything that exists, and non-judgmental--quite unlike the traditional God of our most prominent religions. Human life itself took on a new meaning & importance, while simultaneously becoming a temporary experience for a very real, spiritual (soul) form of energy consciousness that is the real life form for each & every one of us. There is a constant & consistent interdependent working relationship between our physical world & the immediate spiritual one we all originate from & return to upon the death of our physical body. It's complex & complicated, and there's much to learn about it for future researchers. But we don't exist without it.

 

I'm fine with that. I'm not here to try to cause people to disbelieve their own religion - a silly objective if there ever was one.

I believe those who have near death experiences are telling the whole truth as they know it.

The human brain is astounding. Humans have incredibly creative dreams, dreams that end up pointing to stuff the individual needed to think about, presenting new ideas, locating missing parts of ideas as well as physical objects, etc. My daughter had a dream that included her becoming 2 dimensional, like a window pane and traveling around through the air visiting various important places and ideas, gathering knowledge, ending with a swooping trip into my father's open body (who had just died) with the intent to fix him. I can't remember what came before or after. There was a lot to her dream before that and some came after.

My own view is that as a human brain dies and as it receives the deprecated input of dying or dead sensory organs, it's not really shocking that one's own view of the afterlife is featured.

Don't let that change your mind, obviously.

I'm not opposed to theism - I grew up in a strongly conservative mainstream Christian denomination with church events multiple times per week, so I know Christianity reasonably well. I do defend atheism against the charges of being "deranged" or other nonsense. I do see our government as distinctly separate from religion. I see it as important to include science in informing our decisions. I object to suggestions that our educational institutions are hotbeds of evil - we as a nation need to be far more supportive of education including both vocational and academic. After all, the most important natural resource in our new economy is brains - and America has only has 5%.

 

Really enjoyed your post. Thank you for sharing. I agree with your policy of not trying to change other's religious beliefs or affiliations. What I write here, especially in the Religion & Philosophy section, is simply a statement on my personal experience, which I know matches no one else's. I am grateful for the learning curve I experienced myself though, for I am convinced I understand far more of the actual reality of our lives here than I ever did in my youth under the influence of traditional Christianity.

Interestingly, it was my daughter who started my own conversion to believing in reincarnation. Under hypnosis, she remembered being a Native American female, being awakened by a loud commotion outside her tepee early in the morning. She arose & exited the tepee to see her people yelling & screaming & running in every direction. As she exited the tepee, she began walking toward her left & saw a column of mounted soldiers riding fast toward her & her village, yelling & shooting as they came. She remembered thinking to herself, "Why can't they leave us alone?" She also described feeling an intense hatred for the white man. She continued walking and said she saw an American flag flying on a tall post inside her village encampment. There was a tepee between her & the flag, so she couldn't see the entire flagpole, or even the lower corner of the flag itself. Then she said she found herself floating in the air above her body, and continued watching the conflict from a place even with the tops of the tepees. She watched as a soldier came rushing in to intercept a young teenage native boy, strike the youth with his rifle, then swiftly dismount, rush to the boy's side & kill him with another swift strike with the rifle butt, then scalp him with a knife. My daughter described the weather as cloudy, cold, & feeling like threatening snow. It was just after dawn, and she was adamant about the flag flying inside the Indian camp. She described the place where the mounted soldiers came from was a low, flat ridge with a shallow valley beyond. She drew me a picture of the landscape & the path of the soldiers from the ridge & the location of her tepee & the flag for reference.

My daughter & I decided to attempt research to identify the time & place of the massacre. We read books on the topic, magazine articles, research papers, etc.--everything we could find. (This was during the early stages of the Internet). We worked on the project for nine months, narrowing it down to two similar massacres, one in CO & one in NM. Overall, I favored the one in CO, for a variety of reasons, but the issue of the flag flying in the Indian camp made me uneasy. I couldn't imagine any reason a Native American tribe would fly the symbol of their sworn enemy in their own village. Nothing we found in our research mentioned a flag. But in that ninth month, I suddenly did find a reference mentioning a massacre where the victims had flown a flag. It was the CO site. It's called the Sand Creek Massacre of 1864. It was carried out by the Colorado State Militia, and it was like something from the annals of Genghis Khan. It was a slaughter--unprovoked, bloody and a dark chapter in the history of Colorado & the nation. Between 150 & 200 natives were slaughtered, mostly women & children. Most were scalped, and the genitals of the women were taken back to Denver & displayed on the tops of spears during a celebratory parade. The convincing evidence for me was finding that the Native Chief, Black Kettle, had met with the territorial governor one week before, & had been told he could avoid conflict with whites if he flew an American flag inside his village. I discovered this fact nine months after my daughter's past life regression. Neither she nor me had any previous knowledge of, or familiarity with, Native American massacres. We had no way of knowing about that flag.

I've had other, even more convincing experiences with past life regression research since then, to the point of being personally convinced that it matters not whether we believe in reincarnation. We are all participants.

 

It didn't. It is a cycle of expansion and contraction going on for eternity.

 

Interesting theory.