[Pre-disclaimer: I am an extra-terrestrial being, my purpose here is just to observe how earthlings feel, think, and behave; as the ancients among earthlings themselves have multi-millennia back already arrived at: observation of life, man, nature, the universe is the quintessential and the number one enjoyment and thrill for intelligent earthlings, and it is called contemplation. That, my friends here, is also my engrossment in this forum.]
Originally Posted by Allo Allo
I point out again that there is no meaning to an atheist for existence – or life. So there is nothing to work out – for an athiest.
If I may, can we agree that you for being and professing yourself to be an atheist are presently existing and operating and living and acting in this forum, and outside this forum are carrying on the everyday acts of a living earthling to stay alive and well and to endure or last as long as you can continue animate existence, as opposed to inanimate existence like the kind exhibited in stones.
Can we agree that in your everyday life as described above you are certainly working out something, first and foremost to stay alive.
So, can we agree that you really don't mean for being an atheist that you are not working out anything, nothing absolutely, while you live and breathe and function? At least I can observe that you are working out how to understand whatever you read here and working out the drafting of a reaction message for publication in this here forum. Can you observe that from and by and through and about yourself?
If you think of “God”, not as a “Prime Observer” observing concept, but as the “whole of everything” simply “being” (because it can), you get rid of the problem of “responsibility” to anything. If “the whole of everything” is evolving, are you suggesting that finding meaning to existence and life by Homo Sapiens is part of the evolution of “the whole of everything”? Do you think “the whole of everything” could carry on “being” without us? Is “observing” necessary to “being”?
If you think of “God”, not as a “Prime Observer” observing concept, but as the “whole of everything” simply “being” (because it can), you get rid of the problem of “responsibility” to anything.
I can agree, as an extra-terrestrial being (ET), that God as so understood to be everything simply existing because it can is not responsible for anything and to anything.
I don't have that problem of God having any responsibility or not; but I am just curious why intelligent earthlings have responsibilities, and that is also the concern of Alumno deVerum.
If “the whole of everything” is evolving, are you suggesting that finding meaning to existence and life by Homo Sapiens is part of the evolution of “the whole of everything”? Do you think “the whole of everything” could carry on “being” without us? Is “observing” necessary to “being”?
Please don't get me wrong; I am an ET here to contemplate the feeling, thinking, and functioning of humans, in particular the intelligent ones, i.e., who do employ their intelligence.
It is Alumno deVerum who is concerned to draw a transition from his expatiation about God as concept generator and the world and man as concepts in God's mind, the transition namely that
I myself don't see how that transition to the need to make man's existence meaningful to himself, how that transition namely can follow from his expatiation about God's existence as expounded by himself.
What I can observe is that Alumno deVerum is aware of the fact that man is cognizant of his actually living a meaningful existence, and he wants people who don't see any meaning to life or choose to not live or to profess that they don't want to concur with the rest of men that life is meaningfully being lived and is worthy of living, as the saying goes: "Get a life, Have a life," he is concerned to exert his own voice to tell these deniers of meaning to life, to create a meaning for themselves.
What about myself, an ET? As I said in my preceding message:
If you ask me, an extra terrestrial being: God is himself seeking a meaning, He is a developing or if you will an evolving God; theists are participating in that process of God's self-development or self-evolution; now, atheists are agitated against the God Which to them does not exist, and also against theists to all appearances.
What do I recommend to atheists? Resolve your agitation and work out a meaning to existence and life, then consult the marketing experts if you are interested in gaining adherents to your advocacy.
You don't agree with me, that is your privilege; and I can observe that you find meaning with not agreeing with the rest of men that they are pursuing a meaningful life, and with me for my kind of a suggestion how man's living of and pursuit of meaning in life can be embedded in Alumno deVerum's concept and nature of God.
At least, I observe that you find meaning in challenging the fact and the urge of mankind (excepting of course atheists who feel otherwise) to live a meaningful life and to seek more meanings to life