Atheism Revisited/Atheists: Meaningless lives in a mindless, soulless, heartless,pointless universe

[Sandra]

Atheists: Meaningless lives in a mindless, soulless, heartless,pointless universe

Atheism Revisited

 By JimO'Neill  Monday, January 3, 2011

“Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civilsociety.”­George Washington (1732-1799) First President of the UnitedStates of America

“To claim that [his] rhetoric makes Hitler a Christian is to confusepolitical opportunism with personal conviction.  Hitler himself saysin “Mein Kampf” that his public statements should be understood aspropaganda that bear no relation to the truth, but are designed to swaythe masses.”­Dinesh D’Souza “What’s So Great About Christianity”

“The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming ofChristianity. “­Adolf Hitler (1887-1945)  “Hitler’s TableTalk”

“If anyone wished to demonize Ayn Rand, the most efficient way wouldbe through biography.  One can scarcely read about her personal lifewithout, at some particularly ugly points, wanting to dig her up anddrive a stake through her heart (just to make sure), or if we are farholier, praying for her morbidly tainted soul….  I am not out todemonize Rand through her biography, but to make very clear that onecannot judge her philosophy independently of her life.”­BenjaminWiker Ph.D.  “Ten Books Every Conservative Must Read”

“Everyone thinks of changing the world ,but no one thinks of changinghimself.”­Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910)

I want to thank the atheists who attempted to straighten me out regardingsome points I made in mylastarticle.  I didn’t realize that Hitler was such a compassionateChristian, or that the Founding Fathers were such a bunch of confused oldfarts, and/or enlightened closet atheists, or that atheist Ayn Rand (anObjectivist, not a conservative) was such a paragon of virtue.  Nordid I realize that atheists were such upright pillars of oursociety.  I think that’s just wonderful.  (If your SarcasmDetector isn’t blaring shrilly, then you either don’t have one, or it’sturned off). (link)

It is all the more commendable that atheists are such exemplars of moralrectitude, when you take into account that there is no particular reasonfor them to be that way; seeing as how their lives have no ultimatepurpose, and that they putter away their meaningless lives in a mindless,soulless, heartless, pointless universe.  Ex nihilo nihil fit­out ofnothing comes nothing (going nowhere).  Bravo atheists, again I say,bravo! 
                                                                
By the way, is there any chance that you virtuous atheists could pass theword along to your brethren regarding just how virtuous you all are, asthe vast majority of them seem to be doing a bang-up job of pretending tobe self-serving a­holes?  (I would especially appreciate your makinga point of passing along the word to Wall Street in general, and GoldmanSachs in particular­especially the former Goldman Sachs employeescurrently running US finances into the ground, while enriching those “inon the action”).  TIA.

I love the atheists who grandly stride onto a soapbox, and passionatelygive a determined defense of atheism, describing how wonderful, rational,and virtuous it is­all the while knowing that they have no skin in thegame, so to speak.  How can they, when ultimately nothingmatters.  How can I not be impressed?

Atheists moral and ethical positionalities are ultimatelybased upon nothing

One might be tempted to thinkthat atheism was merely a rationalization designed to facilitate feelingsmug about egocentricity, but that would be to ignore how virtuousatheists are (so they inform me), even though they have no reason forbeing so.  As I mentioned, their moral and ethical positionalitiesare ultimately based upon nothing.  Which is, well, nothing to builda moral/ethical structure upon.  They don’t have a leg to stand on,so to speak, and yet they vociferously proclaim their wonderfulness toone and all.  What bravado, what chutzpah­what bulls­t!

My amazement continues to grow.  Is there nothing the ego won’t do,no lies it won’t tell/believe, no gambit it won’t try, in order toprotect its paranoid positionality.  For make no mistake, the ego isby its nature fear-based and paranoid.  How could it be otherwise,when the ego is surrounded by everything that is not ego, i.e. the restof the universe.  One against infinity­bad odds, indeed.

One against a heartless, mindless, soulless universe­how noble, howheroic, how insanely pointless and egocentric­how atheistic.

Let’s see, should I choose a moral/ethical system grounded on nihilism,hubris, and ego gratification, or should I choose one leading to truth,spirituality, and freedom?  If your ego’s leading you around by thenose, then the “right” choice is an obvious no-brainer.  It takesdedication and commitment to follow the path of the second choice, asit’s so much easier to just relax back into our “default position” ofegocentricity.    
                                                                                                                                        
Science (whose practitioners are largely atheist) prides itself in itspristine search for truth, and a firm reliance on intellect.  (Idon’t include “scientists” who have allowed themselves to be co-opted byideology, and/or greed, and are content to serve as shills for variousFar Left ploys, such as the AGW global warming scam). 

Regarding the intellect, excuse me for pointing out the obvious, but whenRené Descartes famously exclaimed “I think, therefore I am,” he missedthe mark by a wide margin.  After all, how could he even know he wasthinking, unless he was aware of it? 

Consciousness (aka “state of being,” aka “awareness”) is a priori tothought, obviously, and yet science continues to largely dodge the wholeintellect/awareness issue­dated but important findings in quantummechanics notwithstanding.  It’s almost as if science has beenblinded by Ego. (link) 

(I should mention that one needs be careful when using the terms“consciousness” and “mind,” as they both can have vastly differentmeanings depending on the context in which they are used.  Forexample, the word “mind” means something quite different in a psychiatricclinic, as opposed to a Buddhist monastery). 

All sarcasm aside, I have no doubt that there are decent, well-meaningatheists who are valuable additions to society.  However, afteralmost six decades on this planet, I also have no doubt that the vastmajority of people who live Godless lives are self-serving egotists­andthe worst are Machiavellian scum-bags who are only “in it forthemselves,” and are restrained by no ethical or moral limitswhatsoever.  As the saying goes, “99% of Democrats give the others abad name,” and so it is with atheists­the majority give the minority abad rap.

Such decency and sanity as the world currently has (granted, nothing towrite home about) is due almost exclusively to the influence of theworld’s major religions.  I do not include Islam, which is moreproperly understood as a non-evolving political/religious/cultural/legalsystem of totalitarian control, than as a religion per se. 

(Islam’s totalitarian nature, and its desire to eradicate Judeo/Christianculture, are what make it so attractive to the atheistic Far Left, whichwould otherwise despise Islam for its theology, and treatment ofhomosexuals.  The Far Left is also “on board” with the subservientrole of women in Islam­note the deafening silence of NOW in thisregard).

As I was saying, the world’s religions (none more-so than Christianity)are largely responsible for whatever decency and sanity the worldpossesses.  This, despite the fact that the world’s religions, beingopen to everyone, have historically been infiltrated by any number ofcharlatans, grifters, narcissists, and a plethora of otherundesirables. 

Such people have either deluded themselves about their own religiosity,or were/are knowingly using religion as a cloak for their ego-drivenduplicity.  One can be forgiven for considering them to be atheistsin sheep’s clothing.  After all, hiding amoral narcissism behind acover of respectability is de rigueur for an atheist weasel on the prowl(not that all atheists are weasels­I’m not saying that).

Nonetheless, because the spiritual truth at the heart of these religionsis so powerful, the “wolves in sheep’s clothing” have so far provedincapable of destroying these vehicles of truth (i.e. religions, whichare in themselves not truth, but provide a vehicle, or means oftransporting, truth).

The attack on Christianity, both from within and without, by atheists hasbeen unremitting, clever, vicious, and ongoing for centuries­going backat least as far as the French Revolution, although a good case can bemade (and has been, by Ben Wiker) that the atheistic attack goes back atleast as far as the Medieval Renaissance, and Lucretius’s poetictranslation of the atheistic doctrines of the Greek philosopherEpicurus. (link)

Given all of that, it is indeed remarkable that Christianity (especiallyCatholicism; by far the oldest and largest Christian sect) has held up aswell as it has, for as long as it has.  Which bespeaks the power ofthe truth that Christianity carries at its core­all of the various“wolves,” frauds, false dogmas, orthodoxical missteps, and theologicaldead-ends notwithstanding.

Be that as it may, because atheism is essentially based on ego-centeredfalsehoods, it is intrinsically incapable of recognizing the truth,unless it jumps up and bites them on the butt with a “God Shock”moment.  Atheists are trapped in their intellect, which although aremarkable tool, is a less than stellar guide to the truth.  If youthink you’ll find spiritual truth via the intellect, think again. (That would be like trying to weigh something with a thermometer­i.e.there are better tools for the job).

Spiritual truth is forever relegated to the realm of direct experience,and is inextricably tied in with one’s state of consciousness, or stateof being.  The atheist’s search for ultimate truths in the physicalrealm, and the intellect, is doomed to failure from the start. Their state-of-being/consciousness is almost universally ignored byatheists, and they therefore search for answers “for what ails them” inthe environment outside of themselves­whether in the physical realm, orin the immediate environment of their intellect. 

Liberals looking for “social justice” (as unspecific, if useful, aweasel-word term as you’re ever likely to see) forever ignore the rootcause of their “angst and ennui”­i.e. themselves.  God forbid theirego should ever feel threatened by shining a light of honest inquiry onit.  Their egos would scurry like roaches.

Although the bulk of honest Christians (as opposed to nominal Christians)make haltingly slow work of their spiritual evolution, they are at leaston a viable track to truth, and however haltingly, are making progress inthe right direction (unless they’re off the track altogether, assometimes happens). 

Atheists who are, ipso facto, diametrically opposed tospirituality, truth, and freedom, are on the track to nihilism,arrogance, and gulags

Atheists who are, ipsofacto, diametrically opposed to spirituality, truth, and freedom, are onthe track to nihilism, arrogance, and gulags­check out their history ifyou doubt me (no wonder they’re so big on revisionism).  I lumpliberal “Christian” teachings such as Liberation Theology in with theatheists.(link)

(Why some of the more reprehensible of these “faiths” continue to enjoytax exempt status is beyond me.  A number of them actively preachthe violent overthrow of America.  Some idiots may think it’s aswell idea to have “we the people” pay to have our own throats cut, butcount me out).

Speaking of reprehensible faiths, Saul Alinsky (author of “Rules forRadicals”) would be so proud of them all.  After all, Alinskychampioned an atheistic state of consciousness that glorified the ego,deified arrogance, and enshrined amoral nihilism. (link)

Obama, Clinton, and God alone knows how many others currently atAmerica’s helm, follow Alinsky’s reprehensible, atheistic, ego-driveninsanity.  It would be enough to keep me awake at nights, if Ididn’t have deep, valid, spiritual roots.             

Well time to be moving on to other things.  I’ll leave debatingatheists in the capable hands of people like Dinesh D’Souza. Personally, I find debating them about as interesting and profitable astuning an air guitar, but to each their own.  I suppose someoneshould expose the vacuous, if Byzantine, rationalizations of these smugslaves to Ego, so I’m thankful for people like D’Souza, Ben Wiker, etal. 

“Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven,” right atheists?  Ofcourse it is.  Ta-ta for now­“ex nihilo,” and all that.  Enjoyyour ego while you can­then again, why would you?  You must believethat you and everyone else are valueless, motiveless, meaningless meatautomatons­devoid of all dignity, purpose, or promise.  That is,unless you have lied to yourself about the full ramifications ofatheism­and surely you are much too smart, sane, and honest to havedeluded yourself like that­right? (link)

Laus Deo.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/31685