Atheist Petra Fans

A place for Petra fans to discuss other topics
Thief
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:08 pm
Pethead since: 1990
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Thief » Tue Feb 24, 2015 6:01 pm

Mountain Man wrote:
Thief wrote:In a nutshell, your argument is that atheists think "There is no God, no after-life, so nothing in this life matters" and I disagree.
No, that's not my argument at all. My argument is that nihilism is the only conclusion logically consistent within an atheistic worldview (and I've explained why in previous posts). That is to say that if all atheists were logically consistent then all atheists would be nihilists; however, I readily concede that many (most?) atheists are not nihilists which says to me that many atheists are not logically consistent.
So, in the end, you're saying you agree with my initial post where I said...
Thief wrote:atheism is not the same as nihilism.
Whether that's logical or consistent, I think it's hard to see it that way from our Christian frame of mind. But that's the only argument I presented in my initial post.
Mountain Man wrote: Let's come at this from a different direction. Answer the following: If atheism is true then what objective basis do atheists have to not be nihilists?
And even though I'm not an atheist, I can venture to guess an answer to your last question, which would be that despite the fact that there is no God or no heaven/hell, life is worth living while we are here, and worth living well. But then again, I'm not an atheist, so perhaps you can ask an atheist that question for a better answer.

Thief
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:08 pm
Pethead since: 1990
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Thief » Tue Feb 24, 2015 6:07 pm

fiendik wrote:
Thief wrote: And finally, all this discussion, albeit interesting, has nothing to do with the fact that nothing good is achieved in this forum and in the grander scheme of Christian thinking by throwing a sharp snap at an atheist person for no reason whatsoever. Quite the opposite, which actually baffles me coming from supposedly Christian people.
I actually had a reason for what I said; I was trying to provoke some thought on what the implications of being an atheist are.

As to the discussion; this Pethead said he had beliefs, so I assume he places some meaningful purpose in life. Now, I'll first point out that the Darwinian view cannot have any life purpose because of the way it works; we are not designed, we do not have souls, and there is no master plan, it's just whatever happens happens. There cannot be good and evil because there is no single person to define these. And that is just the point; if there is no deity, then there can be no plan and no morals; if we evolved, then the only right and wrong can be those "to the improvement of the species" (otherwise "Good for the sake of good"), which we don't have any reason to follow, because there can't be any repercussions if we don't. That is, there is no conceivable reason for life without a soul. Now, one can say that we should not live only for ourselves, but this is only true if there is a deity to live for. Living for a collection of random molecules will never be worth it.
Again, this is a similar argument to the one that Mountain Man presented, and I'm no atheist to try to answer it in the most accurate way. But I disagree with the notion that for atheists, there is no "good and evil", and I already expressed why on an earlier post. I don't think morals or plans, etc. come from a deity, at least not for everyone.
fiendik wrote: So by "atheist" you could mean that you're a Nihilist, a Humanist, or simply a person who accepts some god other than the True One. Darwinians are ultimately Nihilists, and so far all the atheists I have met have embraced this view, at least initially. Sometimes they apply some other morality (conscience) on humans, but really this is inconsistent. To be a true atheist is to believe that there is no god at all; God is the ultimate reason in the universe. Now you can say that you are a god, but that's just silly. Humans make very poor gods. No-one makes an even worse one, so if you are a consistent atheist, then you are in essence saying that you believe that life is random. Randomness cannot have meaning.

So, to perhaps word my original thoughts in a more profitable way, I ask of the atheists a question: Why do you do what you do? What is the reason for your actions? What is your objective?
You are equating the potential randomness of life/universe with whatever meaning someone attributes to his/her life. Again, I've said it countless times, and I don't think that's necessarily the way that all atheists see the world.

Thief
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:08 pm
Pethead since: 1990
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Thief » Tue Feb 24, 2015 6:12 pm

Mountain Man wrote:
fiendik wrote:P.S. Don't take me as unfriendly; I'm bound to sound a bit harsh because I believe that the wrong ideas can get you into hell forever.
I know exactly where you're coming from, and I, too, have been called out at times for my bluntness, but my response is to point to the New Testament where Jesus pulled no punches when confronting worldly philosophy. In fact, he often got downright nasty with the pharisees during public debates, calling them snakes and tombs full of dead men's bones (these would have been very sharp insults back then).
I don't think that is the best example to apply here. I mean, I'm sure you are not equating the Pharisees with these fellow Petheads that have come here willingly to share their experiences with the band we all love. I would rather rejoice in the things that unite us, thus showing them the love of God, than to instantly snap at them to incite a discussion, putting a finger in the things that separate us. I'm all for deep, thought-provoking discussions with people from any religion or beliefs, but that's not the first thing I'm going to spring to someone neither on a website nor on a daily basis.

Again, I'm baffled that most people don't agree with me. I'm not talking about avoiding arguments or sugarcoating stuff, but there is a time for everything "a time to plant, a time to uproot".

User avatar
Mountain Man
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 925
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 9:11 pm
#1 Album: Wake Up Call
Pethead since: 1983

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Mountain Man » Wed Feb 25, 2015 7:23 am

Thief wrote:
Mountain Man wrote:
Thief wrote:In a nutshell, your argument is that atheists think "There is no God, no after-life, so nothing in this life matters" and I disagree.
No, that's not my argument at all. My argument is that nihilism is the only conclusion logically consistent within an atheistic worldview (and I've explained why in previous posts). That is to say that if all atheists were logically consistent then all atheists would be nihilists; however, I readily concede that many (most?) atheists are not nihilists which says to me that many atheists are not logically consistent.
So, in the end, you're saying you agree with my initial post where I said...
Thief wrote:atheism is not the same as nihilism.
Whether that's logical or consistent, I think it's hard to see it that way from our Christian frame of mind. But that's the only argument I presented in my initial post.
Mountain Man wrote: Let's come at this from a different direction. Answer the following: If atheism is true then what objective basis do atheists have to not be nihilists?
And even though I'm not an atheist, I can venture to guess an answer to your last question, which would be that despite the fact that there is no God or no heaven/hell, life is worth living while we are here, and worth living well. But then again, I'm not an atheist, so perhaps you can ask an atheist that question for a better answer.
"So, in the end, you're saying you agree with my initial post..."

If you think that then you can't possibly have understood a single thing I've said.

"I can venture to guess an answer to your last question, which would be that despite the fact that there is no God or no heaven/hell, life is worth living while we are here, and worth living well."

That doesn't even come close to answering my question. :roll:

If atheism is true then what objective reason is there to think that "life is worth living while we are here, and worth living well"? Why shouldn't an atheist live by the philosphy of "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die"?

gman
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1059
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:03 am
Location: Used to be Grand Rapids, MI after leaving the beautiful beaches of NJ. Now it's PA.
Contact:

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by gman » Wed Feb 25, 2015 2:10 pm

Who defines living life well? Maybe some think that eat, drink, and be merry is living life to the fullest.

User avatar
fiendik
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 130
Joined: Sat May 10, 2014 11:48 am
#1 Album: Beat The System
Pethead since: 2010

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by fiendik » Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:22 pm

But then of course you wouldn't be offended by someone else's beliefs, because you wouldn't care. As long as it didn't get in the way of eating, drinking, and being merry, than you're fine with it. I guess maybe they were just saying that they were consistent in their not caring. At least they're not trying to fight someone they claim doesn't exist... that never made sense. Most famous atheists do that, you know.
"Fiends are a gift from above, fiends are devoted and true..."

User avatar
Mountain Man
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 925
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 9:11 pm
#1 Album: Wake Up Call
Pethead since: 1983

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Mountain Man » Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:51 pm

gman wrote:Who defines living life well? Maybe some think that eat, drink, and be merry is living life to the fullest.
Exactly. If atheism is true then it's all subjective and there's no objective reason to live one way versus another which is why nihilism is the only conclusion logically consistent with atheism.

Thief
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:08 pm
Pethead since: 1990
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Thief » Fri Feb 27, 2015 7:55 pm

Ok, this conversation has branched out in several directions, none of which was my primary concern when the argument started, unfortunately. So, in the effort of bringing the topic back to my initial concern, I will address that first, and then I will go back and try to reply to the last few posts as time allows me.

First, we have this...
fiendik wrote:
merlin wrote:Well I'm also an Atheist Petra fan - so I guess there's at least 2 ;p

Hartman has penned some of the best riffs I've ever heard. Honestly if I only listened to stuff I agreed with I wouldn't listen to much (or learn much either) - and I respect the bands honesty and sticking to their guns in-spite of having fundamentally different beliefs to my own.
But you're an atheist, so you essentially believe nothing...
First of all, I commend merlin for bringing up his reasons for being a Petra fan in a respectful and educated manner, despite what are without a doubt "fundamentally different beliefs".

This is juxtaposed to fiendik's retort, which is the complete opposite, patronizing and confrontational, IMO. Now, he admits that he did so to "provoke some thought on what the implications of being an atheist are", but I seriously doubt that method of approaching people with different beliefs is successful at all. I'd rather approach them with the same respect I want them to approach me.

Now, Mountain Man later compared fiendik's "harshness" to the way Jesus treated the Pharisees, calling them "snakes and tombs full of dead men's bones". But like I said before...
Thief wrote: I don't think that is the best example to apply here. I mean, I'm sure you are not equating the Pharisees with these fellow Petheads that have come here willingly to share their experiences with the band we all love. I would rather rejoice in the things that unite us, thus showing them the love of God, than to instantly snap at them to incite a discussion, putting a finger in the things that separate us. I'm all for deep, thought-provoking discussions with people from any religion or beliefs, but that's not the first thing I'm going to spring to someone neither on a website nor on a daily basis.

Again, I'm baffled that most people don't agree with me. I'm not talking about avoiding arguments or sugarcoating stuff, but there is a time for everything "a time to plant, a time to uproot".
But ironically, none of you addressed this post in your subsequent replies, which to me, is the crux of my concerns. So, in an effort to channel the discussion back to this point... do you think that a confrontational tone (or "harsh", as fiendik put it) is successful from a Christian point of view, when approaching an atheist (or anyone with different beliefs) that isn't being confrontational in the first place? Do you think that will make him say "You know, I think I will listen to this guy"?

Thief
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:08 pm
Pethead since: 1990
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Thief » Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:22 pm

After that, the conversation has branched out into a contrast of atheism vs. nihilism, down to the last few replies. Now, although I'd rather not take the focus of the last post, which like I said, is my main concern and issue, in respect of the discussion already started, I will try to address these last posts.

Here's one of my first posts...
Thief wrote:atheism is not the same as nihilism.
Mountain Man, on the other hand, says that...
Mountain Man wrote:nihilism is the only conclusion logically consistent within an atheistic worldview (and I've explained why in previous posts). That is to say that if all atheists were logically consistent then all atheists would be nihilists;
However, in the same post, you say...
Mountain Man wrote:I readily concede that many (most?) atheists are not nihilists which says to me that many atheists are not logically consistent.
And that is why I said that, in a way, you are agreeing with my initial point. You are actually conceding that many atheists are not nihilists, which is my belief as well. They are two different doctrines, or whatever you want to call them, hence why we both agree that both groups don't overlap completely. Now, you see it as logically inconsistent, but I disagree. Let's establish that...

atheism = a disbelief in the existence of deity.

nihilism = the belief that traditional morals, ideas, beliefs, etc., have no worth or value.

That's from Merriam-Webster, but I doubt you'll find very different meanings anywhere else. And if you don't see the difference in those two ways of thinking, well, then I don't know what to say. Sure, many atheists are also nihilists because their disbelief in a deity also leads them to think that life, then, has no meaning, worth, or value. But that is not the case with all atheists. Atheists can adhere to many moralistic/ethical doctrines and ways of thinking, as long as it doesn't involve the belief in a deity. They can go from moral universalism, to Platonism, to humanism, and whatnot. The bottom line is that there is no inconsistency whatsoever in being an atheist, but not a nihilist.

User avatar
Mountain Man
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 925
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 9:11 pm
#1 Album: Wake Up Call
Pethead since: 1983

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Mountain Man » Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:58 am

Thief wrote:The bottom line is that there is no inconsistency whatsoever in being an atheist, but not a nihilist.
So you keep saying, but you have not offered a single, substantive argument to support this assertion. Even worse, you gleefully retort, "You are actually conceding that many atheists are not nihilists, which is my belief as well.," apparently without comprehending that this does nothing to undermine my position.

User avatar
fiendik
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 130
Joined: Sat May 10, 2014 11:48 am
#1 Album: Beat The System
Pethead since: 2010

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by fiendik » Thu Mar 05, 2015 12:24 am

Law requires a basis; a "rule", by which meaning is "measured". In order for this rule to have any authority, it must be the author, or maker. Our creator is the same as our master. If the space aliens made us, then we should respect them. If nothing made us, then we should respect nothing; no rule is binding because we do not have any logic in our existence. Your standard atheist accepts evolution, which denies logic in creation, but then come back with some belief that logic created itself, and that good exists. How does good exist? When random things happen, only random outcomes are produced, and if there can be any atheist morals, then they must be random morals, with no reason behind them. There is no cause, there is no objective. Darwin laid down the original plans for a belief in nothing... nihil. All atheists accepted this. It just seems obvious to me that someone with this worldview would tolerate anything. Strangely this is not the case with most. They know there is a God, which is why they are often quite bitter toward the person they claim they do not believe even exists.

Things are changing now; evolutionism is bearing its rotten fruit in a generation of careless pleasure-seekers, who cut themselves off from reality, because they no longer acknowledge reality. But I am getting a bit off topic here.

I have now laid down the logical basis for the atheism=nihilism argument. If there is logic behind the opposing position on this point, I'd like to hear it.

As to approach; My attempt in my original post was to point out the hopelessness of an atheistic perspective, using a logical argument, put in as few words as possible. I now know that being brief is not usually being clear, and not to be preferred; however, I see a major problem with atheism, and my apparently very controversial 9-word post covered that problem. Atheists claim to be logical, yet they claim that you can be "good for the sake of good", while denying the possibility of any source of good. Serious problem, serious answer.

Of course, I realize that nothing I say here will probably have any positive impact on anyone involved, but it doesn't seem harmful, either. Only God can change a life, and these are dark times, full of doubt and denial. Atheists (or anyone) do not usually admit they were wrong, and I don't expect this to happen here. Logical conversation should not have any problems; discussion is always good except when those involved do not show any logic, or interest in logic. My first statement was intended to be a statement of fact, and it was. No bitterness involved, and I hope none gets involved.
"Fiends are a gift from above, fiends are devoted and true..."

Thief
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:08 pm
Pethead since: 1990
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Thief » Sun Mar 08, 2015 7:39 pm

Mountain Man wrote:
Thief wrote:The bottom line is that there is no inconsistency whatsoever in being an atheist, but not a nihilist.
So you keep saying, but you have not offered a single, substantive argument to support this assertion. Even worse, you gleefully retort, "You are actually conceding that many atheists are not nihilists, which is my belief as well.," apparently without comprehending that this does nothing to undermine my position.
First of all, I'm not "gleefully retorting" or trying to "undermine" your position. As a matter of fact, that quote you mention was pretty much a direct quote from one of your posts, and I was actually looking for a common ground among our arguments in saying that not all atheists are nihilists.

As for supporting my argument, I think I have offered enough already. By definition, we are talking about two different terms, that again, by definition, refer to two different groups of people. The fact that some of you choose to lump them together is irrelevant.

You asked...
Mountain Man wrote: If atheism is true then what objective basis do atheists have to not be nihilists?
...I can only say that I know many atheists, and nearly all of them reject the notion that atheism equates to nihilism. Most of them believe that "morality" and "life's worth" isn't tied to any specific deity, but rather that it's inherent in our own nature. Whether that's objective enough for you, or just the "crazy opinion" of my acquaintances, that's what I use to base my argument on.

User avatar
Mountain Man
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 925
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 9:11 pm
#1 Album: Wake Up Call
Pethead since: 1983

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by Mountain Man » Sun Mar 08, 2015 9:33 pm

Thief wrote:As for supporting my argument, I think I have offered enough already.
No, you really haven't. Your argument is basically this: "Nihilism can not be the logical conclusion of atheism because some atheists are not nihilists." This makes as much sense as saying, "2+2 can not equal 4 because some people believe it equals 5."

User avatar
rexreed
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 926
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:21 pm
#1 Album: Beyond Belief
Pethead since: 1991
Location: Houston

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by rexreed » Mon Mar 09, 2015 8:42 am

All the athiests I know are moral people. I recommend you go to an atheist group or website if you really want to know what they believe, instead of trying to determine their beliefs from your recliner. It would cut through the endless metaphors and comparisons and you might learn a thing or two about yourself.
Image

User avatar
pmal
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:44 am
#1 Album: All of Them
Pethead since: 1985
Location: South Carolina
Contact:

Re: Atheist Petra Fans

Post by pmal » Mon Mar 09, 2015 9:59 am

What is "moral" to an atheist?
May the downforce be with you!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests