The Christian subversion of meaning
I would like to welcome CADman and James to the blog. I know they will bring a depth of expertise to this blog. I know that CADman's thought has been developing tremendously these past months, and James is already a seasoned atheologian and debater. This blog is going to be great.
Our friend Dawson Bethrick is doing a wonderful job on his blog "Incinerating Presuppositionalism" writing about his "Cartoon Universe" analogy for theism. In fact, I think it's so useful that I've added it to Strongatheism.net. I encourage everyone to read it and exploit it.
As I write these entries, it seems that simply defining one's terms is enough to show that the presuppositional arguments are blatant projections. They claim that the atheist cannot have knowledge, but it turns out the Christian cannot, and same for morality, logic, induction, etc. Presuppositionalism is nothing more than a case of cultic projection. What's more, the projection usually hides a double-flaw : one regarding the nature of God, and one regarding the Christian's use of the concept on material things.
"Meaning" is another term that presuppositionalists batter a lot in their quest for untruth. They often state that you cannot have meaning if materialism is true, which is complete nonsense. Substance has absolutely no relevance to meaning, which is an interpretive property.
Let me give you an example - the concept "table" is defined as a flat surface with legs, used to eat on or support objects, and so on. That's its meaning also - every part of this helps us identify what is a table and what is not a table. Does this meaning change if the "table" concept is contained in the mind of a human, the mind of a ghost, the mind of a god ? No, because the meaning is based on interpretation, and we are the ones doing the interpreting.
Same thing for the meaning of a sentence. Does it matter whether a sentence is written on paper, or on supernatural god-stuff ? Not at all. What is important is the presence of the symbols that are translated into meaning - the letters, words and sentences. So what importance does substance have for meaning ? Absolutely none.
But Christianity subverts meaning by making a meaningless being its central axiom. What does "god" mean ? Can we identify a god ? Being supernatural by definition, no, it's impossible for us to identify a god. We would have first to reject all natural explanations for whatever phenomena we identified as "a god", which is absolutely impossible.
They also subvert meaning as regards to literature, the second part of the double-flaw. Anyone who has ever debated a Christian knows that "Biblical analysis" is a joke. I poke fun of Christians when I say that, for them, "context" means "any rationalization you must consider when your conclusion is incompatible with mine". To them, context is completely irrelevant, just as it is in morality, and we end up not with truth but with a blow-up of a passage with the Christian's prejudices as context.
In Christianity, all meaning is subverted, post-modernist style, to social constructs. This is natural, since there is fundamentally no objective object for Christianity to align itself to. As such, any revision of Christian dogma or morality becomes itself the object on which future generations have to align themselves to. And those revisions are based on social pressure - whatever dogma makes the survival of the religion less certain must be forgotten and silenced. I'm just surprised that they haven't censored the Old Testament out of the Bible yet.