Without God Life Has No Purpose

[man]

I Googled that phrase and came up with this.

https://www.google.com/#q=without+god+l ... no+purpose

This is what religious people are being taught by their leaders. So we have all these people walking around thinking that there is an empty hole inside them that can only be filled by god and without god there lives have no purpose or meaning.

The thing that strikes me as being strange is I have always regarded all religions as myth and I am not a believer of any of them, but at the same time I don't have this empty hole inside me they talk about. I have never felt that my life has no purpose or meaning and in fact all of the things that these religious people say I need don't ever even cross my mind.

There is so much interesting REAL stuff to learn that I am so busy reading, working or doing whatever I happen to be interested in at the moment to have time to even think about this hole I am supposed to have inside me that I can't find. If anything I need a bigger hole to fit all of the things that I occupy myself with, my hole runneth over!

Anyway, I started thinking about teaching people that nonsense and it struck me as being a cruel thing to do. It's tantamount to saying, hey there is something wrong with you (when there isn't) and then telling them that you have the cure.

The phrase snake oil salesman comes to mind.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 55 by JP Cusick]

There is a story about some American soldiers in Germany WW II, and they were in a dugout and they heard fighting outside but they had their orders to stand guard in their dugout and they did not participate in any action, so they complained about being so bored as they played cards and smoked cigarettes, and later they found out that the famous and huge "battle of the bulge" had gone on all around their dugout and they did not know it, so they missed out on the great event simply because they did not know of the reality going on around them.

This analogy of yours does not make any sense whatsoever. You tell us that there are a group of soldiers in a dugout who hear fighting going on. However, they have orders not to go out, so they stand their ground, and being bored played cards.
You finish it by saying that they somehow did not know the Battle of the Bulge had gone on all around them.

They did know, JP. They heard the fighting outside. The reason they missed out on the battle is not because they were unaware of the battle (which is what you intimate atheists are, unaware of a wider reality), but because they obeyed orders to stand their ground.

[JP Cusick]

This analogy of yours does not make any sense whatsoever. You tell us that there are a group of soldiers in a dugout who hear fighting going on. However, they have orders not to go out, so they stand their ground, and being bored played cards.
You finish it by saying that they somehow did not know the Battle of the Bulge had gone on all around them.

They did know, JP. They heard the fighting outside. The reason they missed out on the battle is not because they were unaware of the battle (which is what you intimate atheists are, unaware of a wider reality), but because they obeyed orders to stand their ground.

That is the point of the story - yes.

The Atheist refuse to see God and they remain hidden in their own dugouts and they treat the subject of God as their commandment = that an Atheist must never look out to see because they are more comfortable by not knowing what is going on all around them.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 62 by JP Cusick]

The Atheist refuse to see God

This atheist doesn't 'refuse' to see God, this atheist just plain doesn't see God, in the exact same way that I don't see a dragon or Lord Voldemort or Darth Vader.

and they remain hidden in their own dugouts

In the analogy you used, the soldiers stayed there because they were under orders to. Who is giving orders to atheists?

and they treat the subject of God as their commandment = that an Atheist must never look out to see because they are more comfortable by not knowing what is going on all around them.

You will find from myself and others on this site, numerous requests for evidence that actually proves your god is real.
Typically we don't get that. We get references to the Bible, or being told to pray, or being told to just have faith.
At no point in my life, and I am not being hyperbolic here, have I ever encountered someone who said "Do this to see if God exists, and if you come back with a negative result, then it means that what I suggested for you to do was erroneous".

[KenRU]

[Replying to post 56 by KenRU]


"Sure, I thought the point obvious but ok, I'll connect the dots. The "insane hatred against religion" the Bolsheviks had has no link to atheism (or a moral code inspired or attributed to) atheism. To assert there is a relationship, one must also assume there is a relationship between Christianity and the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch trials and the Dark Ages. Sure, it is easy to condemn violence, but that doesn't mean I acknowledge it has anything whatsoever to do with a moral code of atheism or a purpose to life derived from atheism."

What is a moral code of atheism?

Dictionary definition of an atheist is a person who lacks a belief in a god or gods.

Exactly. No mention of a moral code.

Yet majority of Bolsevics, those who did the most of running the show were Jews who be definition had a religion, Judaism. Here we get into religious argument who is a genuine believer; same goes for Christians. Spanish Inquisitors responsible for countless murders by rule were believers in a god or gods (this is called religiosity not a belief in God).

Are you really arguing that the Spanish Inquisition or the Salem Witch Trials have no relation or link to beliefs derived from a holy book?

Had they had a genuine faith in a living God they would not have done what they did.

Except where the bible tells you otherwise, I presume:

Exodus 22:18 ESV / 8
“You shall not permit a sorceress to live.

Russian Bolsevics went on the march of destruction on anything Christian.
In a fascinating lecture at a Tel Aviv University convention this week, Dr. Halfin described the waves of soviet terror as a "carnival of mass murder," "fantasy of purges", and "essianism of evil." Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern history.
Shall have to leave it here give it further thought.

While I concede that humans tend to need very little motivation for reasons to hate and kill, to assert a link from atheism to violence (unlike the obvious link from a holy book to violence) is just silly. One can easily point to controversial passages in a Holy book that can easily be construed as promoting hate and/or violence. There is no such link the definition of atheism you provided.

[KenRU]

[Replying to post 57 by Monta]

Further to my above post.
Initially I Said that Russian Bolsevics were atheists and as such were responsible for mass murder of Russian Christians (mainly) and questioned whether western atheists given the same opportunity would tread the same path.

Why would you question this? What inspiration could you point to that might inspire an atheist to condone or perpetrate such an act?

Next point was that Jews were not atheists but Judaics.

Reflecting further history tells us that they were members of communist party which is well known is to be atheistic. Therefore they behaved as they did because they were atheists

No. They behaved as they did not because they were atheists, but because of fear and power.

Since I don’t believe in leprechauns, would you expect me to go around killing anyone sporting a four leaf clover or a shamrock?

If not, what is the difference?

and the question is whether western atheists would do the same given the opportunity.

Which is entirely a fear derived not from fact or any evidence.

It is not a matter of believing this or that, it's the hatred that's generated.

Exactly. Where in the definition you provided for atheism can you find a passage that inspires hate?

[paarsurrey1]

Anyway, I started thinking about teaching people that nonsense and it struck me as being a cruel thing to do. It's tantamount to saying, hey there is something wrong with you (when there isn't) and then telling them that you have the cure.

Their syllogism runs thus:

1) Without God life has no purpose.
2) Life has a purpose.
3) Therefore, there must be a God.

This commits the fallacy of many questions. Does life have a purpose? That is the first question.

Man imposes purpose on his own life. This is not so strange when you consider that man also invented God.

Their syllogism runs thus:
1) Without God life has no purpose.
2) Life has a purpose.
3) Therefore, there must be a God.

One has totally wrongly understood the truthful religion.
The argument is like this:

~God exists, there is only One-God, no associates/partners with Him, not many-gods and there is no no-god position, for sure.
~God did not and never did He ever needed us the humans.God exists irrespective of we believe in Him or we don't believe Him.
~Out of His mercy he bestowed life/consciousness to humans and set a purpose to it, no other purpose could be more useful than the purpose set by Him for us.



Isn't it reasonable, please?
Regards

[Neatras]

[Replying to post 67 by paarsurrey1]

That argument is not reasonable. It is 3 premises that are assumed out of religious presuppositions, are not justified, and do nothing to advance a debate position. Strongly held beliefs are not equivalent to strongly argued beliefs, and strongly argued beliefs are still not self-evident truths. The rhetorical apologia you use is secondrate verbal sleight of hand that masks the oppositions ability to question your faulty position by assuming they are wrong, then acting as if merely assuming they are wrong substantiates an argument. Try again.

[marco]

~God exists, there is only One-God, no associates/partners with Him, not many-gods and there is no no-god position, for sure.
~God did not and never did He ever needed us the humans.God exists irrespective of we believe in Him or we don't believe Him.
~Out of His mercy he bestowed life/consciousness to humans and set a purpose to it, no other purpose could be more useful than the purpose set by Him for us.



Isn't it reasonable, please?

No, it is not based on reason since the first statement: There is only One God, is an assumption. We can make valid deductions from a wrong assumption, as you do, but they are not true (or sound) conclusions.

From looking round at the many gods man has invented we can be fairly sure that Zeus, Thor, Ra, Yahweh and Allah are all man-made beings. We can serve them if we want, but there is no return favours because the beings don't exist. In fact it is often dangerous to suppose they exist because many people get very possessive about their gods and want to harm others who mock them. Best to have none until we can be sure.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 69 by marco]



"No, it is not based on reason since the first statement: There is only One God, is an assumption."

Human reason whatever it is is the best thing we've got.

To 'God' is ascribed omnipotence and omnipresence and omniscience.
If we were to say 'gods' we'd have multiple gods who are omnipotent
and omnipresent and omnipresent.. highly unreasonable.

[marco]

[Replying to post 69 by marco]



"No, it is not based on reason since the first statement: There is only One God, is an assumption."

Human reason whatever it is is the best thing we've got.

To 'God' is ascribed omnipotence and omnipresence and omniscience.
If we were to say 'gods' we'd have multiple gods who are omnipotent
and omnipresent and omnipresent.. highly unreasonable.

The statement was made: "God exists, there is only One-God, no associates/partners with Him, not many-gods and there is no no-god position, for sure. "

There is no reason involved in this, just declaration. If we approached mathematics and science with this "reasoning", we would be using spears. I agree human reason is the best thing we have but human reason does not tell us anything about God or gods or how many there are or where they live or if they have nephews living in Jerusalem or Mecca. You can ascribe to God whatever you want. Muslims even ascribe green beige chairs to him and plenty of fresh water and nice pomegranates, It doesn't make this into a reality. And it's certainly not a product of reason.