[–] syntaxaxe 2 points 11 points (+13|-2) ago  (edited ago)

I am not a believer in any gods.

But let me pose a hypothetical scenario.

Let's say that there is an intelligent creator of everything. And, let's say that it created life.

Let's say that an individual human is not really an individual. Let's say that you are a point on a line. This line is life, and it extends over billions of years. Let's say that the "you" that you think of as self, is merely a collection of genetic information, matter, energy, etc. that makes up the physical you. Let's say that this matter, energy, and genetic information is not unique to you. Let's say that it existed before you, will continue and change through you, and continue on after you. Let's say that, at the point where it comes together right now, it manifests itself as a body, a personality, thoughts, instincts, memories, etc. Even from that perspective, you are not really one being in the way that you think of yourself. You exchange these things constantly with the world around you - the matter and energy in you is different than yesterday, and you've exchanged much of it with other life forms and the inanimate world. The network of neurons in you manifests different thoughts and memories and personality traits than you had a year ago, though you think of yourself as functionally the same person. Even genes can mutate or be damaged with time, and your epigenetic traits make you different at a fundamental biological level over the course of a single life. And when you die, all these things continue to exist, but not merged into one being - you pass on your genes to your offspring, your thoughts and actions have a compound effect on the world over time, the matter and energy of your body continues to be passed on to others just as it did in your life, and so on. You are merely a point on a line that extends beyond you, and that point is just the place where all these aspects meet in this exact instant.

In this hypothetical scenario, the creator (let's call it God) didn't give you an individual existence to experience suffering or pleasure. The "life" that this God made was a set of rules by which matter evolves, grows, adapts, innovates new permutations of the elements of reality in a logical manner to become more capable of expressing will on reality. Or, if you like, let's say it is the process by which the creation may further and further decrease entropy in a reality wherein entropy generally increases. Or, if you like, let's say it is the process by which pure energy and potential becomes something of a God itself in some sense, given only space and rules and time.

In such a scenario, clearly the point of any individual life would not be to live in comfort and bliss. It wouldn't even be for any individual life to avoid suffering or death. It would be for all of living Nature to develop in such a way that it might become more than the sum of its constituent elements. Birth, joy, pain, death - all of these things are just perspectives, interpretations of infinitesimally minor facets of a greater whole with a greater goal. And any such interpretation must be incomplete and relative at best - we suffer when our mother dies, but the detritus that decomposes her prospers, and our memories of her death influence the way we raise our children, and if our children are made stronger by the teachings of our experience then they are more likely to succeed and have more influence on the future than that which is weaker, etc etc. And you, your mother, and your children only exist because of situations in the distant past that involved a lot of suffering and death of primitive beings that wouldn't even have the cognitive ability to understand the joy she brought you. And the processes you go through lead to entities a million years in the future that think, create, and experience at such depths that you could not even contemplate. And those primordial beings of the distant past, and those descendants of the distant future - they are part of the same continual flow of life, and they are you and me in a complicated but very real sense (even if we don't share the same neural networks that manifest as the same memories).

In such a very hypothetical situation, would you appreciate this God? Would you feel grateful to it? Would you stand in awe of an intelligence so vast and inconceivably complex that it created a reality that you can't begin to understand yet? Would you want to work to understand the rules set forth for life, and follow them in the manner that most strengthens and benefits you and your family and your community and the future? Do you think you might feel those ways in a million years in the future? Do you think that, somewhere in this process, people might start to conceive of the nature of this reality, and try to find and follow and appreciate this God (let's call that "worship"), despite it being so far beyond their understanding that they necessarily inject a lot of fiction and misunderstanding into their stories of it?

Would the world you want - all peace and comfort and stability - be better and more meaningful than the one in this scenario?

Alright, v/atheism, let the downvoats commence. It was just a little hypothetical rambling of an old man anyway.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 


[–] 13379ck 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Its savage and the black kikery is unreally Jewish.

[–] Artofchoke [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I think it comes to consent and free will, we have neither. And I would never downvoat you for sharing your opinions. We aren't all utter cunts.

The entity that creates this, that constructs a foundation of blood and death - fuck that thing. It's crazy or evil or sleeping or not there. If we're lucky, its not there.

[–] 12547567 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

That was rather beautiful. Multiple perspectives is always a gift worth having. Thank you and well said @syntaxaxe

[–] Chimaira92 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

In both cases, neither are worthy of worship.

[–] BoraxTheFungarian 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Even though suffering and sacrifice is a condition of free will, you're still going to cry about its existence and call it a burden. Got it.

[–] Artofchoke [S] 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

There is no free will, certainly not in the biblical sense. Every action is informed by our genetics.

[–] 12544143 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

Why does any parent allow his children to play outside and risk being hurt or even killed? Do you want your children to learn about responsibility and mature into adults? Even with your best guidance as a parent how responsible are you for your offspring if they choose to go off and rebel against you?

At the end of the day do you still love your children even if they grow up to disappoint you at times? Were your child to return home after a long time away from you would your instinct still be to open your arms and hug them with all your love?

[–] Wahaha 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Replace children with ant colony. Would you still care? Or are you trying to say god is human, too?

[–] 12547453 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Two points:

  • If you respect all forms of life, you do care and wish to see them survive, to live, and to fight against eternal entropy.
  • The easy answer is we are created in God's image. Free will and the gift of sentience, the ability to judge good from bad, the gift of looking up to the stars with such a fierce fascination and curiosity of everything. Is it no wonder the majority of all humans throughout history consider it all divinely inspired?

[–] Artofchoke [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Creating life is immoral, I'm spayed. Having said that, I love everything wth the same intensity, whether or not it is 'mine'. I see us all as hostages on this rock, propelled into whatever fate we've been destined to since before we were born.

[–] 12548371 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I disagree with your assertion creating life is immoral. It's one of if not the most beautiful thing in this existence. Even if one takes the most pragmatic view of morality, survival is morality. That which furthers the existence of your own genetics and promotes a prosperous species is moral. However I'm sure you have your reasons for your personal choices though and I admire your commitment to loving the world.

However blaming all negative things on the world or God is not a healthy path to go down. Things just are. We need to take responsibility for ourselves, hold others accountable for the same with compassion in our hearts. See the beauty around you; in nature, in the world, in your family and friends, and most importantly within yourself. People rejecting themselves is the greatest epidemic we face today.

[–] Things_Stuff 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Very nice.

[–] unclejimbo 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I find Atheists tend to spend more time thinking about God then I do.

[–] syntaxaxe 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I think it makes sense. If I was hungry, and didn't think there was any food in my fridge, I'd probably think about food a lot.

People are hungry for meaning. Some people satisfy that hunger with their ideas of God, some people do it other ways. But those who aren't satisfied are probably going to think about it a lot.

[–] Doglegwarrior 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Yep this! Dawkins said something about a fly that has larva that come out of kids eyes and blind them, he doesnt think that's what a God would create.

[–] kalgon 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Maybe that kid with larva coming out of his eyes was an absolute asshole who poked people's eyes just for the sake of it in his previous life

[–] syntaxaxe 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Maybe God created this world for the sake of that species of fly. Maybe God is a fly god, and we're just the favorite food of his chosen people, so of course the world we'd want created would be different.

[–] [deleted] 4 points 3 points (+7|-4) ago 


[–] SlideRule 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

You have no humility

[–] syntaxaxe 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

It always seems to me like people misuse the word "whom" when they are trying to seem smart, since it is usually followed by calling people retarded or stupid. It's pretty petty of me to point out, but I also think it's pretty funny.

[–] 13379ck 3 points -3 points (+0|-3) ago 

Gofuck yourself. I will molest your cousins face with my uncircumsvized mitz(penis (__))=========%£]~~~

[–] adolfshrektler 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

religion is a kike invention to keep the goyim in check, why do you think so many of (((them))) are atheist as well?

[–] jesus_is_lord 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

Joh 6:64  But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. 

Joh 6:65  And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

load more comments ▼ (15 remaining)