8. Argument from the Meaning of Life
Click here to hear episode #8.
This episode presents an argument for believing in theism based on the meaning of life. I argue that atheistic worldviews cannot provide an objective meaning of life, and theistic worldviews can. Since we should always adopt a worldview with a possibility of meaning, we should therefore adopt a theistic worldview. Episode also contains book reviews of Breaking the Spell by Daniel Dennett and Jesus’ Resurrection: Fact or Figment by William Lane Craig and Gerd Ludemann.
your_ip_is_blacklisted_by sbl.spamhaus.org
If you keep asking “why” long enough there comes a point when you can’t give answers anymore whether you are an atheist or a theist. Theism only helps you broom the issue under the carpet and decalre case closed.
I could just as well say things like:
-Afterlife is just as meaningless as this life.
-Whatever God says is just as meaningless as what humans say.
-Supernatural souls are just as meaningless as naturalistic animals.
-Eternity is just as meaningless as finite.
-Whether you go to Hell or Heaven or cease to exists is meaningless.
Maybe you could defend some of the things above, but I could just keep on asking what does your defense matter and why is it meaningful, and ultimately you couldn’t give an answer.
As human beings, atheists are just as capable of valuing and caring about things as the theists are. Instead of caring about what you think is God’s will, we care about being’s desires (or something else). It depends on how you define meaning and worthfull, I guess, but even if there is no “Ultimalte Meaning” or God it doesn’t mean at all that the meanings that beings have should be dismissed as worthless.
You obvioulsy dislike atheism, which is understandable if you believe in Hell and that atheism will lead to amoralism and nihimism, but please consider that perhaps your feelings are blinding you.
— Becksi Apr 18, 11:08 AM #