Yes living well and chansen has named the main issue - actually the kingdom of heaven is to be on earth - it is not about reward - it is about living well in this moment for the common good.

The point of religion and faith in God is that it helps some to let go of fear and selfishness so they can jump into the issues around them and make a difference.  The is a new book out by the head of secular humanists, and he is an atheist, defending religion and saying it is needed, and that dawkins et al are just fundamentalists.

The life we have is a miracle in itself. (Think of all those previous generations and the multitude of decisions that were made in order for you to be born.)

Thus, I feel our first response should be one of gratitude, gratitude for having this experience we call life.

Secondly, we should do our best to enjoy this wonderful gift. (abundant life). This will be interpreted to mean different things to different folks.

Essentially to me it means feeling connected to God, humankind and nature. To experience this wonderful connection - to know that one is a part of the whole - is to understand what Jesus meant by the Kingdom of God.

It's something to be enjoyed now, here on this Earth at this time, not something to be enjoyed as a reward for "good works" in an afterlife.

To the OP, I agree with Chansen.  This life we have is the only life that we know for certain that we get.  This makes it infinitely more valuable than if we thought it was just a waiting room for the next life.

There is no intrinsic meaning of life.  Your life means what you want it to mean.  Your last line hits the nail on the head, Crazyheart. 

It would have helped if Dawkins knew what he was talking about.  And yes fundamentalis fits some atheists.  Check with scholar Karen Armstrong or Dom Crossan.  The given definition is flawed though the last point is close:  "strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles."

Any one who thinks they have the solution to all the answers is living in a delusion.

Shalom

Mate

It will matter if you're a thief. Rewards are given out in Heaven to the faithful. I can't imagine that someone who has lived as a thief will receive as many.

Which is why God is God, and we, neither you nor I, are. I would imagine that God can imagine a great many things that I cannot.

If that were not so, God would be no more than the limited little thing that folks like narrow and hansen quibble over.

I'd disagree, living day to day completely denies much of our humanity in the hopes that we'll be better people.

What's the motivation? Why bother doing things like going to school, getting married, having kids? Living day to day is about doing what you can to make your life better here and now, while altruism is about making life better for lots of people through positive social action.The tendency for people to do evil is much stronger than the tendency to do good. Proof of this is how easy and how beneficial it is for the individual to defy moral conduct in the pursuit of prosperity.

While I would agree that people need to focus on their impact in their immediate environment, many psychologists, such as Adler or Maslow, would argue that people need to feel superior or reach personal achievement to find happiness (Adler's the originator of the "superiority complex"). It might be best to explain this with a link showing the needs pyramid.

So yes, while it might be nice to live in the here and now, there are a lot of things that do not manifest themselves in immediate experience and tangible benefits. More to the point, people NEED these experiences to feel complete and healthy, psychologically of course.

David here are three books:

Bruce Sheiman:  An Atheist definds religion: Why Humanity is betteroof with religion than without it.

 Greg Epstein Good without God: What a Billion Nonreligous People do Believe.

Austin Dacey; The secular consdiousne: why belief belongs in public life.

Another interesting book is Philip Clayton Transforming christian Theology ( fortress)

Samir Selmanovic: It 's really all about God: reflections of a muslim atheists jewish christian

No, we get tons of different lives - until we figure it all out.

It will matter if you're a thief. Rewards are given out in Heaven to the faithful.

Until you have it all figured out and die that final death, then "heaven" isstill a learning place. You will experience what you as an individual expect to experience and then you will start preparing for the next life. If you are a thief you will slowly realize that it was the wrong direction, that you hurt others. Then you will prepare for the next life in which you might possibly learn that lesson in greater depth.

Which is why God is God, and we, neither you nor I, are.

Sorry David, I think we are all Gods and just don't know it. When we finally clue in that we truly are Gods then we won't have to keep coming back.

There is no intrinsic meaning of life.  Your life means what you want it to mean.

Correct. Life is a chance for each individual to explore themselves. Part of this will eventually lead to an understanding that we are all one, we are all connected. At this point we should then understand that it is incredibly important to help others, not be an isolationist and not be a thief. and

I think it does matter if we ignore those less fortunate than ourselves. We are to feed the poor and pay attention to those in need without looking for a reward or even to be remembered. While we are here we still need to take care of each other and pay attention. God may not be keeping score but I understand it is something we are to do.

We sit on the shoulders of giants, what has come before informs what comes after and, thus, "progress" is not linear but logarhythmic.  This includes not only things like physics, but also things like ethics and philosophy.

What cannot be achieved today will be achieved tomorrow.

So, it is important to be able to, as a whole, put mechanisms (mental, physical, social, etc) in place that "fit" in with the Rules of Reality.  That still leaves a lot of slop room for the fun stuff :3

Just a Self-writing poem,

Inannawhimsey

I do agree with you to a point.  But it's not so much a schism as a spectrum of opinion.  Just like with religious folk.  It's not that there's a great divide, there's a rainbow of beleivers in all directions.

What do atheists do to 'destroy' religion though?  Really?  It's a campaign of open inquiry and critisicm.  ANY idea is open to criticism.  I respect you as a person, but I don't have to respect your ideas.  And I am happy with the inverse position.  Atheists don't want to take away anything from anyone.  But they do want to take away the ability to impose will and direction on the masses based on religiously informed opinion and action.  This is why it is important to have secular government.

The worst atheists do is criticize and try to protect everyone's rights against the will of a vocal minority.  I see nothing wrong with that.

Pan, I agree with this - and you say it so well.

When it comes to the subject of being finite, I can't help but think of the psychological implications. Freud said that the fear of death (Thanatos) was our greatest fear. Whether it's believing in an afterlife, being reincarnated, continuation of our soul, or as cosmic energy - the unifying idea is that we continue.

Makes me think of that John Cleese skit about returning a dead parrot to the pet shop. "No. It's not dead, it's sleeping."

Seems to me that there are a lot of pet shop owners out there. 

Pan,

Okay, I see what you are saying.  It's all a difference of opinion between different camps, I suppose.  Regarding the destruction of religion, can you name some examples of actions that are taken by atheists such as Dawkins to destroy religion?

Some people take criticism of religion as disrespect.  So what?  No matter what you say, someone, somewhere will feel disrespected by it.  We don't have the right to not be insulted.  The issue is whether the criticism is true or false, or at least reasonable. 

Regarding the good of religion.  Hitchens has a challenge to suggest one positive act that could only be done by someone who is inspired by religion.  Not one claim has passed the muster.  Though if asked about terrible acts that could only be done by someone inspired by religion, that list is exceedingly long.  This isn't to say "religion is intrinsically terrible, bah!" but it does refute the claim that the effect of religion is intrinsically good.

Again, my basic point is that criticism is not an attack.  Also, a drive toward secularism in the public sphere is also not an attack.  It's an attempt to level the field for everyone of every faith or non-faith.

Well I've been away for a while and I see that the conversation drifts away from the initial question by all of the people who think they are intellectuals and know the answers. I don't have a problem with this. Life is a journey and it is about searching for meaning. We have past meanings, which we try to renovate, present meanings, which we build great dream structures and future meanings, which keep us going.

Crazyheart, I don't know why we should be expecting any of what we do or own to mean anything after we die. We have no idea what happens to us, but it is nice to dream that life may go on. I don't live or work hard on the Church Board or give to charities so I can be anything or get anything after I die. I don't live for the moment either. My life is like building a house. I am always in the process of creating.

I chose to believe that there is a kind of divine "chip" of God within me that leads me to fulfill my purpose if I should chose to listen. But this is only a belief...a kind of metaphor for what is the great reality beyond. It is larger than I and I am quite sure that I am a part of it in some way. We call this mystery God and it becomes whatever we project onto it. That is fine with me. It helps me to focus meaningfulness.

I don't care if God exists or not. I know the Cosmos exists and I know that there is an incredible order to the evolution of our planet. This leads me to believe that there is a source of this order that has some intention. It does not intervene in my life, except that it is within me and I need to try to have my life unfold as it "should be".

That's my reading on things. I'll take a bit of Maslow with it. I hope, Crazyheart that you just live to be true to "your heart" - and spend some time meditating on what that sense of SELF is within you- that entity that lives within and seems to be driving the ship. Then just "make up" your own belief and live to be true to it.

Man, I hate backspace... it ruined my whole post. The gyst was that ideology does not affect tendency to prejudicial thinking, it's more to do with the family and environment that people are raised in, that if I were to ask you about fundamentalists I would see a perfect example of the idea that non-religious people can be equally prejudiced. In any case, my main disagreement with you was that living day to day was about religion and evil, I thought that living in a manner which was prescribed would deny much of what differntiates us as unique from animals.

Oh, and about maslow's hierarchy, I need to make sure I employ the stuff I learn in school while I'm on here or just not be on here at all. It sounds shitty, but I don't have time to study and wonderphilosophise, so I try to combine them. It's worked out so far.... I can apply principles from sociology, psychology and logic in almost any topic on here. If you'll notice, my posts almost follow my curriculum to the letter.

I agree criticism is different and we need criticism.

Yes, Inanna, Dawkins didn't make a strong case against religion.

I could make a better case against religion. But I could make an equally good case against atheism.

Chip

Your approach justifies what I and others have said:  Atheist fundamentalist.

Note I did not say atheists have all the answers but they thing they have the way of solving the problems, all of them.  No they do not worship a divine they have made scientism their divine.  They have put their complete trust in their science and their ability to interpret what they think they see.  It is an interpretation since it is processed through their brain thus it is subjective.  This is not to deny the existence of objective objects existing out there but an acknowledgment that we canot know them in and of themselves as they are.

Such faith in science and the human mind is indeed a religion.  It even has its own liturgy.  LOL

Shalom

Mate

Well, Inanna, I'm and atheistic theist. That's why I argue both sides. After, all, the thesis proves the antithesis truthful, and vice versa.

Inanna

I actually have no idea as to whether or not Dawkins is trying to destroy religion.  What I do object to is the fact that he picks one branch of the Christian faith and presents it as if all Christians are the same.  This is academically irresponsible.  His rant on religious faith is akin to me ranting on atomic physics.  I know nothing about atomic physics.  He should have stuck to his field of expertise.

Anyway I do enjoy this discussion.

Shalom

Mate

In interview in macleans he says religiion is dangers to humanity - and makes the same claim in his attack on Phil Clayton.  And he has said Birch and Collins are not real scientists.  If I say something is dangerous then I want it to be overcome - it is not criticism of the faults but a complete rejection of any good that comes from religion.  The so called new atheists say that religion is a mental illness or worse ( according to Sheiman an atheist) That is not criticism but an attack.

Iron every item in the closet?

I can see a photo of me 100 years from now.  They'll be buying it at a yard sale for the frame. 

One partner will say, "Look at that old fashioned haircut!"

And the other partner will say, "So what, you see how nicely those pants are ironed?"

Something has to last forever, even if it's the hemline on those pants you really like.

God bless,

Pan

Thanks.  Now if that does not display extreme fundamentalism what does?  Not real scientists!  Now that is funny very funny.  My heavens there are a lot of non-scientists scientists around the world.

He sounds like a ranting old man.

Shalom

Mate