A continuation of the last post~
5. “Why don’t you come to church with me and hear for yourself?” Church is part of the joke of religion in the eyes of an atheist. Hearing the gospel from you or a pastor, it still sounds like a rash, blind faith in some non-existent old man in the sky.
6. “What do you have to lose by believing in Jesus/God?” – The atheist’s answer? Their entire belief system. Values and facts firmly separated, with facts representing real, common, public, objective truth, and values in the subjective realm, their values are relative- and “religion” is relative. “That’s just your set of values…” From a comment on the metanarratives post in October – (http://echoesinthewind.wordpress.com/2011/10/06/double-standard-facts-and-values-feel-free-to-add/ ) An atheist made this idea clear:
I tend to separate the physical world and the social world. I am a naturalist when it comes to the physical world, including biology and the science of evolution, but I am a postmodernist when it comes to the social world. And these two worlds have different currencies for truth. The currency in the physical world is evidence, whereas the currency in the social world is subjective experience… ….So from a constructivist perspective, I have no doubt that God is real for the people who believe in him. If I have a client who claims that God is a reality to her, than I accept that, and I believe that God exists for her. But from an empirical perspective, I have no reason to believe that there is such a physical, real entity as a god, so I find no reason to believe in one.
And where is this divide? I asked, and he replied in the next comment:
The divide is a fuzzy one, Lauralea, and like most dichotomies, it is good to beware of the distinction I am making between the physical world and the social world. They obviously overlap. Beliefs, ideas, thoughts, and feelings are, after all, products of complex chemical and biological processes that are physical rather than metaphysical, natural rather than supernatural.
You ask, if people can believe what they want, who is right? There obviously isn’t a correct belief when it comes to personal tastes in fashion, food, music, and so on. If you recognize God as being the socially constructed concept that he is, then no one is right or wrong about his nature. A person can’t be wrong about her own fantasies.
I realize many people may not think exactly the way ‘atheistdad’ does, but it’s interesting to see his split-thinking (of sorts) was known to him, yet he didn’t see how it was split. The logic is clear, and the ideologies by which he operates are obvious.
They know there is a split in logic, a defiance of reason, and they are fine with it. They refuse to blend the two realms (science and social) and define various parts of their lives with different worldviews. We must make postmodern thinkers realize their “no absolute” idea is, indeed, an absolute rule, an absolute way of life; even if their absolute pattern to living is defined by “no metanarration”.
The whole idea of reaching the atheist- and many are into postmodern thinking- is making them see that there is absolute truth before giving them an absolute truth Giver.
More to come.
That’s great Lauralea. I took up a person called ‘rational conclusion’ once on u tube I think and pointed out that his argument was neither rational nor conclusive! I like it when you say that their ‘ no absolutes rule’ is actually an absolute!