God and Contradiction

[The Pixie]

He idea is that, since everything is entirely contingent and there is no reason laws of nature cannot change, atheists cede the hope of resurrection of the dead to religion unnecesarily.

Christianity - if true - offers a very high probabilty of resurrection after life for certain people, including the individual Christian. This guys seems to be clinging to the hope of being resurrected on the very faint chance that the laws of nature will change (something that has not happened in the last 4 billion years), and will change in such a way that everyone is resurrected. Intuitively, the chances of that happen are vanishingly small.

It is religion-envy - he wants the hope of resurrection, despite not believing in God.

Reposted from above....

. But in this way the atheist remains blind to the fact that the very borders of his own territory are religious. For the atheist claims that all that exists is the world inherited from the priest: a finite and limited world, submitted to fixed laws, appalling once left to its own devices. The philosopher speaks of God because he refuses these borders, because he does not confirm the partition between immanence and transcendence to which the atheist fully and truly submits.

He sees not getting resurrected as appalling, and so has built this elaborate argument based on wishful thinking. Or so it seems to me.

Most atheists accept that when they die they die. It is sad, but that is the way it is, and it does not and should not mean one should waste our lives being miserable about it.

[Jim B.]

He idea is that, since everything is entirely contingent and there is no reason laws of nature cannot change, atheists cede the hope of resurrection of the dead to religion unnecesarily.

Christianity - if true - offers a very high probabilty of resurrection after life for certain people, including the individual Christian. This guys seems to be clinging to the hope of being resurrected on the very faint chance that the laws of nature will change (something that has not happened in the last 4 billion years), and will change in such a way that everyone is resurrected. Intuitively, the chances of that happen are vanishingly small.

It is religion-envy - he wants the hope of resurrection, despite not believing in God.

Reposted from above....

. But in this way the atheist remains blind to the fact that the very borders of his own territory are religious. For the atheist claims that all that exists is the world inherited from the priest: a finite and limited world, submitted to fixed laws, appalling once left to its own devices. The philosopher speaks of God because he refuses these borders, because he does not confirm the partition between immanence and transcendence to which the atheist fully and truly submits.

He sees not getting resurrected as appalling, and so has built this elaborate argument based on wishful thinking. Or so it seems to me.

Most atheists accept that when they die they die. It is sad, but that is the way it is, and it does not and should not mean one should waste our lives being miserable about it.

There are some atheists who believe it's possible to survive after death and some theists who think that when you're dead, you're dead. And many atheists who hope for a techno-resurrection, ala transhumanism.

[met]

... And there are religions (with millions of adherents) dedicated to the idea that the goal is to be NOT resurrected!

[Jim B.]

... And there are religions (with millions of adherents) dedicated to the idea that the goal is to be NOT resurrected!

"Dew drop slips back into the shining sea." or something like that...

[Metacrock]

He idea is that, since everything is entirely contingent and there is no reason laws of nature cannot change, atheists cede the hope of resurrection of the dead to religion unnecesarily.

Christianity - if true - offers a very high probabilty of resurrection after life for certain people, including the individual Christian. This guys seems to be clinging to the hope of being resurrected on the very faint chance that the laws of nature will change (something that has not happened in the last 4 billion years), and will change in such a way that everyone is resurrected. Intuitively, the chances of that happen are vanishingly small.

It is religion-envy - he wants the hope of resurrection, despite not believing in God.

Reposted from above....

. But in this way the atheist remains blind to the fact that the very borders of his own territory are religious. For the atheist claims that all that exists is the world inherited from the priest: a finite and limited world, submitted to fixed laws, appalling once left to its own devices. The philosopher speaks of God because he refuses these borders, because he does not confirm the partition between immanence and transcendence to which the atheist fully and truly submits.

He sees not getting resurrected as appalling, and so has built this elaborate argument based on wishful thinking. Or so it seems to me.

Most atheists accept that when they die they die. It is sad, but that is the way it is, and it does not and should not mean one should waste our lives being miserable about it.

the assertions you make are wrong I can't know why others believe jn God I don't believe out of a desire to live forever. I don't want to die.But desire to live forever has nothing to do with it

there are studies sho9wing ahteism is reallly about low self esteem

[The Pixie]

...
there are studies sho9wing ahteism is reallly about low self esteem

That is odd, when it is Christianity that is so insistent that we are all miserable sinners.

[Metacrock]

...
there are studies sho9wing ahteism is reallly about low self esteem

That is odd, when it is Christianity that is so insistent that we are all miserable sinners.

those are two different things. Living forever and being freed from sin are not necessarily the same thing

[The Pixie]

Metacrock: there are studies sho9wing ahteism is reallly about low self esteem

Pix: That is odd, when it is Christianity that is so insistent that we are all miserable sinners.

Metacrock: those are two different things. Living forever and being freed from sin are not necessarily the same thing

I was talking about a third thing - your dubious and entirely unsupported claim that atheists have low self-esteem.

[met]

... And there are religions (with millions of adherents) dedicated to the idea that the goal is to be NOT resurrected!

"Dew drop slips back into the shining sea." or something like that...

Geez! Now I have a urge to write rhymed poetry in iambic tetrameter....

[met]

Metacrock: there are studies sho9wing ahteism is reallly about low self esteem

Pix: That is odd, when it is Christianity that is so insistent that we are all miserable sinners.

Metacrock: those are two different things. Living forever and being freed from sin are not necessarily the same thing

I was talking about a third thing - your dubious and entirely unsupported claim that atheists have low self-esteem.

Oh, the irony! The thing is, high self-esteem is the exactly the kind of thing atheists (rather than theists) value.

OTOH, X-ians aren't (Biblically) supposed to have "high self-esteem" at all, but probably do....