I saw this quote on my Facebook feed today from an atheist page:
Do you agree or disagree? Why?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A quote for discussion
- Thread starter 9-10ths_Penguin
- Start date
Or like saying, "If I have no parents, what hope do I have?"
Depending on how a deity is mostly perceived in any given culture, that is.
Given in some parts in our culture, God is perceived as perfectly omnipotent and omniscient, and we are supposedly here to serve "Him", then I would see relevence in your quote.
No. The statement strikes me as literally nonsensical.
I think the idea is that we're free to find our own meaning and decide what we want to do for ourselves, and just as this doesn't imply that we need a slavemaster to tell us what to do, it also doesn't imply that we need something to impose a meaning on our lives.
Purpose is what we feel, & so is slavery.
I skip the latter entirely.
I skip the latter entirely.
OK ...
Theweirdtophat
Well-Known Member
It all depends on how you see God whether you're Jewish or Sikh. Some might see him as a master while others see him as a teacher. I usually don't pay heed to atheist quotes as most are exaggerated so they can prove their point.
As a non-dualist Theist, I kind of agree with the statement.
Although for dualists, I don't think they think the way the statement implies. I think they more look at it like 'if all there is this continually changing material world that ends in annihilation, what's the point?'.
... which would be its own kind of weird for a few reasons:
- it seems to imply that only things with eternal consequences can be worthwhile.
- what's the alternative? Even taking as given that the universe ends in annihilation, why would sitting around being mopey be a better alternative than doing things we enjoy?
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
it makes sense from an atheist perspective yes,
that's precisely the rationale Stalin, Mao, Il Sung used to replace a freely chosen, personal higher power with a state mandated one,
I.e. for free thinking people, choosing faith is key to resisting slavery
I think most dualists just look at one life as being not long enough and all their friends, family and themselves aging, declining and vanishing to nothingness. I don't think they give much thought to the philosophical point you are making.
They would not be mopey because they believe there are better things ahead after this life for themselves, family and friends. Once that concept exists for them, the atheist thinking makes things seem depressing and pointless by comparison.
Last edited:
Yes, I do agree, although I also agree with Sangha in that it will do a slight degree depend on what one understands "God" to mean.
There is no inherent reason why some deity would be needed for life to have a purpose, although there are people who feel the need for a deity in their search for a purpose in life.
Precisely.
Uh... was this supposed to make sense?
It is true enough that many people feel troubled by the idea of no afterlife, odd as that is.
I'm not sure how that would challenge Penguim's statement, though.
Gambit
Well-Known Member
I agree. If there is no God, then life has no purpose. Of course, life definitely has a purpose. Therefore, God exists.
So you believe we atheists have no purpose in our lives?
Gambit
Well-Known Member
I didn't say that. Everyone is seeking the good because that is the final cause (telos). But atheistic materialism denies final causality (telos).
Are you talking about this statement from penguin ?; - what's the alternative? Even taking as given that the universe ends in annihilation, why would sitting around being mopey be a better alternative than doing things we enjoy?
I agree with that statement. Sitting around being mopey would not be a better alternative. I was just making an additional statement of my own about believers.