18 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayThat's exactly why the universe sprang from a single point, expanded, is balancing out; and then is about to reverse back to that single point. (Which I doubt you can imagine.)
Different weights don't matter when at some point during time all things end up
balancing out and end equally.
Kelly
The start will 'end equally', to quote your good self, during all time.
Weights matter currently, as they can change the length of the eventual outcome.
As you say, weights won't effect the outcome, but currently they DO affect it.
The affect is all the same in the end, and there is little we can do about it!
-m.
18 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by mikelomProb with connection I believe. I was effected bye a cause, not affected by it! 😉
That's exactly why the universe sprang from a single point, expanded, is balancing out; and then is about to reverse back to that single point. (Which I doubt you can imagine.)
The start will 'end equally', to quote your good self, during all time.
Weights matter currently, as they can change the length of the eventual outcome.
As you say, weights w it.
The effect is all the same in the end, and there is little we can do about it!
-m.
18 Jan 11
Originally posted by KellyJay“...Since they all end up the same way no matter what than they were, all choices are
I guess you have not been following the thread, nothing wrong with that, it is
a long one, but the question indeed goes straight to if all things end up in nothing
than no matter what, all choices lead to the same place!
Since they all end up the same way no matter what than they were, all choices are
no different in the end than any other choice made ...[text shortened]... e there are eternal values that do
not have anything to do with how we view them or not.
Kelly
no different IN THE END than any other choice made....” (my emphasis)
why should the sole criteria for deciding what choice we should make is what effect it has in such the very long run that its effect is insignificant?
What is wrong with considering the intrinsic value or benefit of a choice in terms of its effects while we are alive?
“... You living one day longer or one day shorter in the end does not matter!...”
it does matter! I and most normal people rather have a longer life thank you very much.
“... Your values die with you and after you are gone for awhile no one will be around who misses you or really cares that you
were ever here, so who cares if you live one day or a few years longer? ...”
I do; and anyone that really cares for me will do also. It matters to people who care about human life.
18 Jan 11
2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJay“...Value is only worth something while the value lasts, ...”
Value is only worth something while the value lasts, your values if they are all that
matters goes away when you do. You die than what you cared about goes with you
and after awhile sometime down the road we can all die, than nothing anyone ever
did or didn't do mattered. The most vile person life would have the same value as
the most loving, that is al ist that promotes loving care for everyone, they both end up the same
way, in nothing.
Kelly
yes: and that does not diminish its value while it lasts.
“...your values if they are all that
matters goes away when you do. ...”
yes; and that does not change the fact that they are worth something while they last.
“...You die than what you cared about goes with you
and after awhile sometime down the road we can all die, than nothing anyone EVER did or didn't do mattered. ...”(my emphasis)
“ EVER” in this case includes the past tense. How can it have mattered then (before I died) but then, later on (after I died), not mattered then (before I died)? That is the same as saying you can have p and not p at time T in the past when p = ”it mattered” and T = the “then”.
“...The most vile person life would have the same value as
the most loving, that is all Atheism has to offer, ...”
no, a vile person has less value from an atheist/theist point of view because he is vile.
A loving person has more value from an atheist/theist point of view because he is loving.
What supposed to happen in some sort of mystical 'afterlife' doesn't change that one tiny bit and so is irrelevant -a loving person still has more value.
18 Jan 11
Originally posted by KellyJay@Kelly Jay
Value is only worth something while the value lasts, your values if they are all that
matters goes away when you do. You die than what you cared about goes with you
and after awhile sometime down the road we can all die, than nothing anyone ever
did or didn't do mattered. The most vile person life would have the same value as
the most loving, that is al ...[text shortened]... ist that promotes loving care for everyone, they both end up the same
way, in nothing.
Kelly
If I understood you well, you seem to think only theists can live in a meaningful world because the existence of a god is needed to live meaningful. That seems to me a rather dangerous and biased attitude towards your fellow beings who do not believe in an omnipotent being.
I could argue the opposite is at least equally true. Believing in god and an eternal hereafter distracts a person from the most valuable and untouchable spot in the universe: the here-and-now. It must albeit impossible for a theist to live in the eternal chain of here-and-nows when he is all the time occupied and concerned by his hereafter concept and by the demands of an omnipotent being that exists outside himself.
But let us assume for the argument that impermanence and the existence of god are the for one? There are many religions with different gods with different sets of (eternal) values. Do all these belief systems lead to a valuable life as long as their followers believe in the impermanence of their god, whatever that god demands?
18 Jan 11
Originally posted by KellyJaythe fact that if nothing is all that awaits us, it again means the vile and
I believe it does have a great deal to do with the worth and meaning behind our
lives, that is the fact that if nothing is all that awaits us, it again means the vile and
the loving are no different from one another. Another poster said that if they got
no eternal reward what difference does it make, if none is forth coming than the
vile in this life wh ...[text shortened]... All is vanity."
What advantage does man have in all his work Which he does under the sun?
the loving are no different from one another.
No, it does not mean that. I'm afraid that is just some bad logic on your part.
What advantage does man have in all his work Which he does under the sun?
Man can procure for himself many goods under the sun, enough to justify his sweat. He just cannot procure for himself any permanent goods under the sun. Big whoop.
18 Jan 11
Originally posted by KellyJaySilly Billy......I am talking to an atheist who does not accept the eternal nature of the soul which he is.
Illusionary happiness, how would you know what they are feeling is real or not?
Your big on telling everyone their lives are illusions, I disagree, if I had 4 hours to
live I would and could enjoy my friends and family, this life is temporary, but it
is real.
Kelly
You my good sir accept the reality of God.
So in your dying hours you may find peace.
Although finding peace does not mean you shall return back to Godhead.
To return back to Godhead one must be pure and not live by error.
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by vishvahetuAre you saying all atheists don't accept that they have a soul, and that that can't be eternal?
Silly Billy......I am talking to an atheist who does not accept the eternal nature of the soul which he is.
You my good sir accept the reality of God.
So in your dying hours you may find peace.
Although finding peace does not mean you shall return back to Godhead.
To return back to Godhead one must be pure and not live by error.
Are you saying we all need a God to have a soul?
I have stated that all will go back to that point of singularity. I didn't concede that we weren't here before that point, neither in soul nor being. 😉
The energy we have as beings comes from somewhere. The energy we ourselves have now to live, came from our mother. But eons ago, with first life, there had to be energy input that formed life. That energy was from the mix and chain reaction of the simple elements that bound to form life. Their energy came from the big bang. The energy that caused the big bang came from somewhere. As yet, that is all still an unknown but isn't, in anyway, a given that it came from a God.
-m.
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by mikelomCorrect the expanding from a single point leaves to many questions for my liking,
That's exactly why the universe sprang from a single point, expanded, is balancing out; and then is about to reverse back to that single point. (Which I doubt you can imagine.)
The start will 'end equally', to quote your good self, during all time.
Weights matter currently, as they can change the length of the eventual outcome.
As you say, weights w ...[text shortened]... it.
The affect is all the same in the end, and there is little we can do about it!
-m.
it is a belief no doubt about it, but that is for another thread not this one.
Kelly
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by souverein"If I understood you well, you seem to think only theists can live in a meaningful world because the existence of a god is needed to live meaningful."
@Kelly Jay
If I understood you well, you seem to think only theists can live in a meaningful world because the existence of a god is needed to live meaningful. That seems to me a rather dangerous and biased attitude towards your fellow beings who do not believe in an omnipotent being.
I could argue the opposite is at least equally true. Believing in ...[text shortened]... as long as their followers believe in the impermanence of their god, whatever that god demands?
No, I've acknowledged all of our meaning is real, but it only lasts as long as it
lasts, and we all know we are going to die, and everyone we know is going to die,
and at some point most of us believe we as a race will die off and the universe will
come to an end. That says to me that all your meaning is only real as long as you
are it isn't the lasting type.
When you compare that to a believer whose meaning isn't just built upon their
lives, but instead an Eternal Good God, than the meaning and justice of 'good' and
'evil' is a different standard than that of an Atheist who also acknowledges that
their 'meaning' is only a temporary one, so when comparing the morals between
the two groups they are not the same their foundations are completely different.
Kelly
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by souverein"I could argue the opposite is at least equally true. Believing in god and an eternal hereafter distracts a person from the most valuable and untouchable spot in the universe: the here-and-now. "
@Kelly Jay
If I understood you well, you seem to think only theists can live in a meaningful world because the existence of a god is needed to live meaningful. That seems to me a rather dangerous and biased attitude towards your fellow beings who do not believe in an omnipotent being.
I could argue the opposite is at least equally true. Believing in ...[text shortened]... as long as their followers believe in the impermanence of their god, whatever that god demands?
I'd disagree, as I see it good and evil are real, they are not man made tokens we
use to paint those things we like and dislike. From a Godly prespective His would
be the true plumb line for reality where our desires could not hide truth due to
our selfishness.
Kelly
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by souvereinNo time, but will get to your other point later.
@Kelly Jay
If I understood you well, you seem to think only theists can live in a meaningful world because the existence of a god is needed to live meaningful. That seems to me a rather dangerous and biased attitude towards your fellow beings who do not believe in an omnipotent being.
I could argue the opposite is at least equally true. Believing in ...[text shortened]... as long as their followers believe in the impermanence of their god, whatever that god demands?
Kelly
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by souverein"There are many religions with different gods with different sets of (eternal) values."
@Kelly Jay
If I understood you well, you seem to think only theists can live in a meaningful world because the existence of a god is needed to live meaningful. That seems to me a rather dangerous and biased attitude towards your fellow beings who do not believe in an omnipotent being.
I could argue the opposite is at least equally true. Believing in ...[text shortened]... as long as their followers believe in the impermanence of their god, whatever that god demands?
If you wish to start a thread on other religions and their eternal values and
meanings you can, this thread basically is dealing with Atheism. I'm just staying
on topic.
Kelly
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by vishvahetuYou are still doing it, I know I believe in God, that does not void an Atheist's views
Silly Billy......I am talking to an atheist who does not accept the eternal nature of the soul which he is.
You my good sir accept the reality of God.
So in your dying hours you may find peace.
Although finding peace does not mean you shall return back to Godhead.
To return back to Godhead one must be pure and not live by error.
on what is meaningful or not to him or her, it only voids anything as far as they
are concern after they die. You are attempting to tell another person their views
that they have, their feelings that they have are not real. Who are you to tell
another human being such a thing? We all share the same reality, our views about
the universe we live in only colors how we view it, it does nothing to change
reality, only the way we view it. So our feelings, our meaning is real for ourselves
and you deny that by suggesting only those with a belief in God has real views
or meaning.
Kelly
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonYour posts require more than a few minutes to respond to Andrew, I'll attempt to
“...Since they all end up the same way no matter what than they were, all choices are
no different IN THE END than any other choice made....” (my emphasis)
why should the sole criteria for deciding what choice we should make is what effect it has in such the very long run that its effect is insignificant?
What is wrong with considering the intr ...[text shortened]... nd anyone that really cares for me will do also. It matters to people who care about human life.
cover your posts soon.
Kelly