GOD IS DEAD

The purpose is assigned to you by your owner/desiger. It (the owner/designer) considered the purpose relevant and designed the tool for his purpose. If someone else steals this hammer and decides they want to use it to break windows, then that new purpose becomes relevant (to this new owner). It doesn't mean the hammer is best suited to the second task but it can be re-designated in terms of purpose.You're owned by God and he designed you for a purpose. That purpose is what you are best crafted for - not the purpose that your current owner has in mind for you. Sure, you can be used to smash windows in - you're a versatile tool in someones hands. But that doesn't alter the purpose that your actual owner has in mind for you. This is all hammer-in-toolbox deciding on it's own purpose. But you don't get to decide it. Your owner does. Or the person who has misappropriated you temporarily does. The question is misframed as you might now appreciate. You don't get to decide what your own purpose is. You get to (effectively) chose whether your going to be put to the use you were designed for (it's great, honest) or whether you're going to be thrown onto the rubbish tip. They're the only options available; your owners purpose for you or no purpose at all.God is sovereign, whether you like it or not. Me? I like it. Edited by iano, : No reason given.

I like it too.The hammer is a good analogy. And ofcourse, the designer would know what is best for us.If we go without the manual, we only reap eventual corrosion. It is possible to simply ignore the rust, and say that there is a higher purpose to just driving the wheels off of it, because it's fun, then we miss the point.Good post.Ofcourse, they can argue that there is no original purpose, but that in itself is by no means self-evident in a remarkable system, with such overwhelming design.I should point out that worldy purpose is all about what a person has, and what a person does. The secular world shows what it does. The worldly unbelievers have shown us their "purposes", and it doesn't look good at all. We see moral decay wherever unbelief abounds. Look at the UK.Once respect is gone, society is doomed, and the bible is about respect. As David Pawson says - it can be interpreted, "respect God and respect your neighbour".Ofcourse, nowadays if you had an accident, my expectation would be for the samaritan to merely laugh at me. This is the general yob-mentality where I come from, where there is Godlesness.Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

As I said before:

quote:

---

I see how you have some skewed ideas on what they mean, and how you have yet to offer anything "higher". If you know of something "higher", please explain.

---

Message 90If you are unable to even imagine anything that could be higher, than why should I accept your statement that what I have proposed (love, peace, balance and enlightenment) is not the highest? You should be offering some sort of support for the ideas you are trying to propose. Otherwise, they are nothing more than whining. It is up to you to support your ideas. If you cannot support your position, perhaps it is not a very strong position. The point isn't that balance is more important than God. The point is that what God wants isn't very important at all.I've shown you why an imparted pupose (even one straight from God's mouth) is worthless to even acknowledge. I gave an original purpose of "paperweight" to a rock. My nephew came over and turned that rock's purpose into "providing delight for a child". I think it's obvious that the second purpose is much higher than the first. Obviously, then, any original purpose isn't worth acknowledging.Even IF God governed our lives, and even IF God governed our next life, and even IF God governed the lives of our relatives... His word is STILL worthless to acknowledge. Like I said before, what if God is evil? Does that mean we should start causing suffering all around us? Of course not. A higher purpose is not higher because it comes from God. A higher purpose is higher because of it's own virtue, it doesn't matter who thinks of it, who ordains it, or who creates it. All that matters is who follows it, and that choice is up to each and every one of us.Why do you keep saying we should acknowledge what God wants? Why is your entire arguement nothing more than an appeal to authority? Why?This is what you need to explain. This is what you need to support. You keep saying this over and over as if it means something. It does not. I've shown you why it does not. Now, if you want anyone to take your position seriously, try to support your position with some sort of rationale. If you do not want me to reply to you, all you have to do is stop replying to my posts. Stop stating your position as if it's meaningful without any support. Stop assuming people should believe you just because you say something, especially when that something has no foundation at all. Please try to understand the main point. What I'm trying to understand from you is why you think what God says is important. Why should we acknowledge what God says? I've shown you that any purpose from a creator-being is immature to acknowledge. Why should we care what God's purpose for us is?You don't have answers for these questions to support your position because those answers do not exist. It doesn't matter if we are here by chance, or consequence, or because some God created us. Any original purpose (even a non-existant one) is worthless to acknowledge. When the notion of God dies, people will realize that they are not dependant on God. People are stronger than you give them credit for. Even you are stronger than you're giving yourself credit for. The answers won't die. People will understand that the their useless search for those answers in a place that didn't even exist is over, and now they can focus on searching in places that actually do exist. Such a notion doesn't make me sad, it fills me with hope.Dealing with reality is the only way to answer questions. When people realize that were not dealing with reality, they will be glad to begin working with reality, and start moving forward instead of spinning their wheels.

I understand what you're describing. I'm not disagreeing. I'm asking why you think it's relevant. I don't agree with your view on God, but my personal issues there are irrelevant to this thread. I will assume that God works exactly as you've stated here.God designed me for a purpose... a purpose I am best crafted for. Why should such a purpose be acknowledged? Why should I care? Why shouldn't I strive for a better purpose?Perhaps you missed my previous example from Message 24

quote:

---

I created a paperweight once. It was a rock. I drew a happy face on it for my own amusement. I created it to be a paperweight, and it served it's purpose. Very well, actually (I like open windows). My nephew came over, he took it off my desk and played with it for a few minutes. I couldn't believe the joy and amusement he got from it. I joined him... glued some hair on it, made up a story-line and we played with the little paperweight guy all afternoon. Imagine that, an inanimate stone overcoming it's own created purpose to serve an even larger one... certainly a "higher" one.

---

I designed a rock to be a paperweight. The rock was best-suited as a paperwieght. Yet the purpose my nephew created for it was higher than the one I originally created for it.Or, we can use your hammer:Original created purpose - hammering nails
My first later-found purpose - saving my life while ice-climbing
My second later-found purpose - saving 1,000,000 lives while crystal-smashingWhy, again, do you think the original purpose should be acknowledged?Would you rather I slapped my nephews hand and told him not to play with the paperwieght?
Would you rather I dropped my hammer-ice-pick and plummetted to my death?
Would you rather I not smash the crystal and not save 1,000,000 lives? I understand what you're describing. I'm asking why do you think we should care? I understand. What I'm saying is that since being "thrown onto the rubbish tip" (child's delight, saving lives) is obviously better that "the use you were designed for" (paperwieght, hammering nails), why should we care about the use we were designed for? That may very well be so. But as long as I can save lives instead of hammer nails, or enjoy laughter with my nephew instead of holding some papers down... I'm going to ignore the worthless purpose I was created for and enjoy higher ones.

Thanks, and nice post of your own. This is basically the question I'm trying to get answered. I don't understand why this would be a negative thing. Unless, of course, someone is very concerned about their ego, arrogance and pride. My point is more "Why should that that matter to us at all? Even given a God who walks amongst us, causing miracles, proves to science He is real, is our Creator... it doesn't matter, it's still nothing more than an appeal to authority.Maybe a great authority, and maybe one who "knows better". But, well, how could we ever be sure? And, if we can't be sure, is it responsible of us to relinquish our control over to such a being? What if we're wrong?Then again, I'm sure such an immediate presence would be able to assure us (and show us) that we are not "wrong". And, in such a case, I could be persuaded into following such a being. At least, until they ever showed any reason why we shouldn't follow them (if such a thing ever happened).
(An appeal to authority may be the correct course of action, if that authority can show itself to be worthy of such an appeal).But, since that isn't occuring, I think it's naive, immature and blatantly irresponsible to hand such important matters over to something that most likely doesn't even exist. Let alone, something that has provided huge, lightning-flares of warning that it is unreasonable to follow any currently-offered "God".

Because generally, you tend to be just a tid bit more fragile, tinier and generally less strong than God. Unless you can show me otherwise and fight and beat God, i'd assumue that God is stronger and would win in a fight with you, which means that YOU HAVE TO CONFORM TO HIS ORDERS(and accept the purpose he assignes for you). This is nothing new, but if you don't know how this works - take Kosovo for example or South Ossetia. The stronger party wins and asserts its interests over the defeated. So are you stronger than God and are you willing to fight him and win your independence from his oppresion(oppression being assigning purposes that you find irrelevant)?PS. I am getting tickets for my whole family for the match. If you win, I personally will declare you - Stile of EvCforum.net, our new GOD.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

So you're keeping your failing appeal to authority, and adding in a might-makes-right assumption?Are you attempting to explain that, somehow, forcing someone to do what you want is a "higher" purpose than them choosing their own freedom? Have you thought this through?I am not claiming that I can take God in a fight (if he actually existed, anyway... I mean, in reality, I can't fight something that doesn't exist).I am claiming that God's purpose for us is worthless to acknowledge.You're telling me that God's going to force me to do His bidding?How, exactly, does that make his bidding worthy of acknowledgement? This would only make God into a bully. Bully's are not worthy of acknowledgement, and they certainly don't have any "higher" purpose.Yes, I agree, God would likely smite me and kill me.
This doesn't make God's opinions "higher", it makes Him a worthless bully.

Oh, for crying out loud!This whole argument is ridiculous. The value of a calling is entirely subjective. A calling generated by an authority figure, regardless of the identity of the authority figure, os not objectively "higher" or "lower" than a self-determined purpose.Just look at the words you two keep throwing around: "higher" and "lower."It's all subjective personal opinion based on your own values. Is "peace" more or less valuable than "love?" Is "anger" better or worse than "self-righteousness?" Is feeding the hungry a "higher" or "lower" calling than sheltering the homeless or cleaning water in undeveloped countries or providing medical care?If you really think there's an objective difference in the inherant value of a purpose due to the presence of a deity with a lightning bolt to your head, then clearly I can give you a "higher purpose" simply by forcing you to do something at gunpoint, as well.You've been going back and forth over this for days now, typically with Agobot shouting something retarded in all caps like "THIS ISN'T FOR YOU" and insisting that somehow a deity creates a "higher" purpose by default without explaining why (with the exception of this latest "might makes right" argument).Is it really so difficult to see that the value of a purpose, whether self-defined, defined by society, or defined by an authority figure, is subjective and compeltely based on the opnions and values of the individual? You can argue this until the thread fills up and start a new one and never gain any ground simply because value is inherantly not objective.

God is not subjective, according to religion he's omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, etc. which clearly makes him higher than any BS you keep throwing around like - peace, unity, balance. I think you need to study and understand what lies behind the notion of God before you can understand why the religious hold the idea of God higher than any subjective values like love ,peace and balance.God - Wikipedia All subjective values as I have stated 10000000 times. God is not, see link above. If that doesn't help you see link:Dictionary.com | Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.comand search for the word "omni-". This might clear your doubts if God is higher than "harmony" for the religious. (if the existence of God is omni-high for the religious, don't you think they'll consider your argument as utterly rediculous?) I've been going back and forth because you have no idea what qualities are ascribed to God by religiuns. Unless you put a little effort in educating yourself and understanding their viewpoint, both of you with Stile will continue to whine how balance is as important as God. Didn't you ever wonder why only atheists keep saying this?
Show some respect and maturity and read up on reliogions and God. You can't compare God to other human values if you have no idea how religions view/imagine God.
Drop for a moment your "God is a bastard" attitude, look through the eyes of the religious and you might be able to see how a Dying God is affecting your/their life. If you cannot do that, you don't belong in this thread. It's no use for me to try to make every atheist online here look through the viewpoint of the believers. I don't have the time, nor the nerve for that. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

I am on the edge of my seat! Get Rahvin while he is down, now is your chance to hit him with the evidence. Nope, that's not gonna do it. Get on with the actual evidence.

I agree with you, by the way. I'm just, well, not as blunt, I suppose. I'm not sure if I've been expressing myself well or not, but I'm attempting to argue that "all" purpose doesn't have to be subjective (something we may not be able to show?) because we can show that our meaning and purpose is subjective. Therefore, since we are us (), it doesn't even matter if such a thing as "external" or "objective" purpose exists. Since, if it did, our own subjectiveness renders it obsolete... or "not even worth acknowledging". Therefore, we don't need to show that all meanings are entirely subjective, we just need to show that our meanings are entirely subjective. And I hope I was able to do that... somewhere. Yeah, I'm getting tired of being repetitive, I just don't know how else to say it.
Besides, I've been rather entertained by Agobot's recent posts. I think he's done a rather good job of making sure no one wants to be on his side. With this last God-the-Bully post, not even believers are going to want to side with his arguement

Are you kidding me? I am a former Theist. I understand very well why some theists hold God "higher" than everything else (other theists accept that morality is separate from God as opposed to defining morality as "whatever God says," but that's not the topic). It doesn't make them right.There is no objective reason to define one set of values as "higher" or "lower." The source of those values is similarly irrelevant. I see you ignored my counter to your "might makes right" argument - so let's reiterate.You posit that a purpose defined by God is "higher" than mortal-defined purposes becasue "God is more powerful." You specifically referred to God being able to defeat Stile in a fight.This means that power and strength define "higher" and "lower" purposes. Literally, if I hold a gun to your head, any purpoae I dictate to you now carries a "higher" value than if I had simply stated that I have defined that very same purpose for myself.That's utterly stupid. By that standard, the values themselves are irrelevant, and only the authority of the entity dictating the purpose matters.And while God's existence or nonexistence would be objective if it were provable either way, the objective existence of God is irrelevant, just as the objective existence or nonexistence of a gun to your head. Irrelevant, Agobot. The strength of authority is not relavent to the value of a given purpose. If you think ti is, explain why. Expect mockery if you bring up your "might makes right" argument again. The fact that many religious people hold this opinion is similarly irrelevant to whether a purpose from God vs a self-defined purpose has an intrinsically "higher" or "lower" value - it's a simple appeal to popularity. You're an idiot, Agobot. Educating myself and understanding the viewpoint of theists? I was a theist for over 20 years! I'm pretty fucking sure I understand where they're coming from! THat I don't agree with them and that I think their viewpoint is bollocks doesn't mean I don't comprehend it, you simpleminded twit!You've just done the equivalent of telling an AIDS patient they should educate themselves about the lives of people with AIDS and understand their viewpoints. More idiocy. Again, I am a former theist! I used to be a Christian. I understand compeltely the many arguments and reasonings Christians and other theists use to posit that there can be no higher purpose than that which is dictated by God - I simply think that argumetn is utter bullshit becasue it requires that might makes right, and that means values espoused by anyone with more strength inherantly are "higher" than identical vaulues held by those who are weaker. Is the US morally superior to England because we have more nuclear weapons? Because that's the line of reasoning you're using, and it's absolutely stupid. Fuck off, moron. I haven't once posited in this thread that "God is a bastard." I simply stated that (granting his existence for this argument) his power is irrelevant to the value of any purpose he may assign. I've made no assertion whatsoever to the morality of any God, I've simply stated that the value of any purpose regardless of the source is inherantly subjective.Further, I'm intimately aware of exactly what theists feel regarding the prospect of God not existing, as well as all of the experiences that go along with actually deconverting and accepting that no gods likely exist because I've personally been through it all. I'm quite capable of standing in their shoes, because those shoes used to be mine.Apparently according to you nobody can comprehend another viewpoint unless they agree with it, or at least give it some sort of validity. That just on top of your insipid assertion that power somehow brings an objectively "higher" purpose for no other reason than might makes right. Spare me the martyr routine. If you don't want to debate, feel free to stop posting. So long as you remain on a debate forum, expect to be called out when you say something wrong, and especially something outright stupid. Like asserting a former theist might not comprehend the viewpoint of theists!The value of any purpose regardless of the source is inherantly subjective, even assuming the objective existence of a deity. Even the words "higher" and "lower" require subjectivity - "Higher" or "lower" than what?! They're relative values!
This entire argument is utterly ridiculous because there is no objective reason "peace" or "worshipping god" or any other purpose whatsoever is "higher" or "lower" than any others. There is nothing here beyond personal subjective value assignments - in your case, agreeing with theists that might makes right and so God carries the "highest" purpose, which is nothing more than your own subjective opinion.

I know you do. And few peopkle around here are as blunt as I am when I'm annoyed You've gotten your point across to me, and I'm sure others. I'm not sure why Agobot can't seem to get it, but then perhaps that latest argument should be all the explanation I need.Agobot seems to be a very depressed nonbeliever, who really, really wishes he could still believe in a God because he felt that the existence of a deity gave him a "higher purpose" and a more fulfilling life. It's why he makes topics like this to explore the impact of realizing gods are unlikely to exist.

And the like are not in accordance with the forum guidelines. It doesn't matter if it is true or false, it is unnecessary.

Rahvin, your young tender age is shining through your posts. I used to be that immature whan I was 26, maybe not to that extent to fall that low. Anyway, nice way to portray your personality and to show off your age.Now go back to my post that you ignored in which I said that God is OMNI-ANYTHING(not just more powerful than Stile- UNDERSTAND????) in religions. God is omni-.... means to the religious crowd God is Higher than ANYTHING, including subjective term like Love, balance, ...Now cut that childish name calling BS because it's doing you no good. It just shows your young age and your immaturity. And it shows that you haven't got a clue about religions and how they view God.BTW, thanks for letting us know that you are a kid, I'll be sending you a toy for your birthday.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.