Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

OMKensey t1_j3oyh2t wrote

Reply to comment by _Zirath_ in Atheistic Naturalism does not offer any long-term pragmatic outcome of value when compared to Non-Naturalist views, such as Theism by _Zirath_

Thank you. I appreciate you sharing your personal experience with God via dream. Many on this board will dismiss this out of hand, but I don't. But, it doesn't convince me because I haven't had such an experience and people of all faiths (many of which conflict) have had such experiences. Thus, from my outside perspective, the experiences either represent a common psychological phenomenon or, if something spooky is going on, point to perrenialism.

I grew up Christian and am very familiar with William Lane Craig, the historical debates over the resurrection, and so forth. I find WLC very unconvincing. Graham Oppy's response to contingency arguments persuades me instead.

I'm not convinced of Jesus's resurrection because the evidence is (1) Paul's letters reporting a vision of Jesus decades after the death and (2) the synoptic Gospels (first Mark) recording Christian oral tradition even later than that. Really, not that much from my perspective.

Indeed, I think the best evidence for the resurrection is the eleven sworn written statements of witnesses - to the golden tablets of Joseph Smith. But I don't find those eleven witnesses convincing probably for about the same reasons you probably don't.

Anyway, if you are happy with your beliefs I have no desire to convince you to the contrary so long as you aren't harming others. I also don't care to debate in this thread, but did want you to know where I am coming from.

More interesting to me, what if I grant to you for the sake of argument that the Bible is literally God's message to us? I still think you cannot establish an ultimate objective purpose to life based on this. At best, you have God's subjective perspective. Now, I might do what God says so he wouldn't smite me if I thought it was true, but that's just compliance based on threats. It doesn't establish an objective purpose any more than a man pointing a gun at you can establish your objective purpose in life.

1

_Zirath_ OP t1_j3pga5w wrote

Thanks for hearing out my experience, I appreciate it. I don't see a need to continue a debate in this thread either, since we've strayed from the post anyway. I believe that our purpose is to know God as Father and enjoy him forever with a family that will never die on an Earth that will never pass away. This is why we are born first as children- to know first what it is like to be a child in this world. We learn first what it is like to love, obey, and lean on our parents, who have the responsibility of being the first image of God, the first reflection of him we see in the world. Those who have children learn even more deeply how God sees us, what it is like to hold them close as the most precious thing you have, what it is like to despair when they disobey and turn away from you, and the joy when they lean on you and love you. Family, love, belonging, stewarding a new creation- this is what I believe we were created for, and since God gives us existence, the objective reason for our existence is properly grounded in him.

2

OMKensey t1_j3ph811 wrote

None of that strikes me as an objective ultimate purpose. You're just following the subjective will of God instead of your own subjective will.

Obviously, follow it if you think it's true. But I fail to see an advantage over naturalism in terms of providing an ultimate objective purpose.

Anyway, great discussion. I really enjoyed it! All the best.

2