I came across two stories recently about the "atheist church movement." One was in the US media and it spotlighted such a "church" in Cambridge, MA and this one (linked here) is in the UK. I can't find the US media piece, but due to time limitations, I don't have a lot of time to search.
I am often critical of evangelicals and their delusions about life. I'm sitting in East Tennessee right now and I would be tempted to go in that direction based on things I've heard in the past few days. But instead I will focus on this third-person issue.
It is totally illogical that you can find any meaning or make any sense in a spontaneous universe, which atheism requires. To rescue orphan babies and give them a healthy and emotionally supportive life, within that paradigm, is no different than collecting them and chopping them up to make soup for your gluttonous consumption. Both are equal.
In the US-media article they mentioned that one of the "meaningful" aspects of the atheist church movement to so promote the positive aspects of community. But, once again there can be no difference in that spontaneous universe between community and total isolation for all of eternity, or even worse, mutual extermination from hatred. There is actually no difference between "meaningful" and total meaningless.
It shocks me that often very intelligent people are attacked to these groups. But they should know better. It is that endless attempt to fill that void (desiring meaning) where it is impossible to do so. You must pay the piper. If you choose a universe that is random in origins, then you must be an adult about it and live consistency within that paradigm. All is meaningless. Nihilism is the ONLY option. I don't care if you have a PhD in philosophy or anthropology . . . it is still impossible and to instill meaning is to think like a kindergartener.
But, and I say this for equality, that if you choose to believe that the universe is created by a personal God, which I do, then you still have some great challenges, but finding meaning isn't one of those.
I am often critical of evangelicals and their delusions about life. I'm sitting in East Tennessee right now and I would be tempted to go in that direction based on things I've heard in the past few days. But instead I will focus on this third-person issue.
It is totally illogical that you can find any meaning or make any sense in a spontaneous universe, which atheism requires. To rescue orphan babies and give them a healthy and emotionally supportive life, within that paradigm, is no different than collecting them and chopping them up to make soup for your gluttonous consumption. Both are equal.
In the US-media article they mentioned that one of the "meaningful" aspects of the atheist church movement to so promote the positive aspects of community. But, once again there can be no difference in that spontaneous universe between community and total isolation for all of eternity, or even worse, mutual extermination from hatred. There is actually no difference between "meaningful" and total meaningless.
It shocks me that often very intelligent people are attacked to these groups. But they should know better. It is that endless attempt to fill that void (desiring meaning) where it is impossible to do so. You must pay the piper. If you choose a universe that is random in origins, then you must be an adult about it and live consistency within that paradigm. All is meaningless. Nihilism is the ONLY option. I don't care if you have a PhD in philosophy or anthropology . . . it is still impossible and to instill meaning is to think like a kindergartener.
But, and I say this for equality, that if you choose to believe that the universe is created by a personal God, which I do, then you still have some great challenges, but finding meaning isn't one of those.
2 comments:
I take some issue to the name "Atheist Church". Unless it's a joke, a dig, or using "church" in the sense of an assembly of "believers", it just muddies the meanings. "Church" has the meaning of an assembly of Christians, just as "Synagogue" does of an assembly of Jews, "Mosque" for an assembly of Muslims, and "Temple" for most other faiths. "Assembly" would be a more distinct term for atheists.
I have to read both articles again to figure out who used the "church" term, either the members or the media. However, at least with the UK group, they use the pretense of religion, meeting on Sundays and in an old cathedral to give that feeling of church. But you are right. The whole thing is as much as a fraud as the TV evangelists or Joel Osteen praying in front of the cameras with the man tightrope walking across the Grand Canyon. Appearance as a substitute for substance.
Post a Comment