Atheism=Nihilism ..or does it?

Originally posted by Halitose
He cannot be dishonest to himself. Goodness is not a law -- it's an expression of His character.

Edit: Ah... LH beat me to it.

Says who? S/he's omnipotent! Come on, guys.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Says who? S/he's omnipotent! Come on, guys.

Omnipotence does not mean the ability to do that which is impossible.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Says who? S/he's omnipotent! Come on, guys.

Omnipotence does not imply defying logic. Could God in His omnipotence become non-God? Can God create a rock too heavy for Him to lift? Like omnipotence, goodness is an attribute of God -- he cannot be good and non-good at the same time.

Edit: Darn. I'm sooo slooow today. Gotta run.

Cheers.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Omnipotence does not mean the ability to do that which is impossible.

Why not? Just because we can't imagine it, with our puny human understanding? C'mon!

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Why not? Just because we can't imagine it, with our puny human understanding? C'mon!

Maybe he could , maybe he couldn't . But what point are you trying to make? All the logic and imagining we can do on this suggests it's unlikely that he could and he's said that that's not who he is , and if he could I think I'd be becoming an Atheist pretty quick!

Originally posted by knightmeister
Maybe he could , maybe he couldn't . But what point are you trying to make? All the logic and imagining we can do on this suggests it's unlikely that he could and he's said that that's not who he is , and if he could I think I'd be becoming an Atheist pretty quick!

So you do understand that atheism is a simple matter of not believing in a God? From that point where you realize there is no God, there are many paths. So I seriously doubt you'll get an answer from us atheists as a group, because we're not. We're not a group like, say, christians. The only thing we necessarily agree on is that there is no God. That's what makes us atheists. Other than that, we can have a lot of different opinions and beliefs in just about everything.

It's a beauty, isn't it? 🙂

Originally posted by Halitose
Ah... the Euthyphro Dilemma. As Aquinas argued, morality is ingrained in God's character, so you are asking the wrong question -- the question should be whether God would give such a command.

i.e. God approves of himself and disapproves of not himself

Therefore when one proclaims, "Oh how great and good you are, Lord!"
they really mean "Oh, how you are as you are, Lord."

Essentially all positive praise to God is meaningless redundancy.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Omnipotence does not mean the ability to do that which is impossible.

yes, it does. Don't be stupid. Omnipotence means he can do anything. Nothing could be beyong his power, or he's not omnipotent!

Originally posted by scottishinnz
yes, it does. Don't be stupid. Omnipotence means he can do anything. Nothing could be beyong his power, or he's not omnipotent!

So god could commit suicide then. If so, how do we know it hasn't already done that, like after Jesus and after Mohammed, it killed itself. How would we know?

Originally posted by Halitose
Ah... the Euthyphro Dilemma. As Aquinas argued, morality is ingrained in God's character, so you are asking the wrong question -- the question should be whether God would give such a command.

This respons just pushes the dilemma back a step. Morality can be ingrained in God's character in one of two ways: Either whatever constitutes God's character determines what is moral, or some independent standard of morality determines the content of God's character. If the former, the morality is arbitrary. If the latter, then morality is independent of God.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
yes, it does. Don't be stupid. Omnipotence means he can do anything. Nothing could be beyong his power, or he's not omnipotent!

Perhaps he can-but won't. However, the fact that, say, he hasn't commited suicide presupposes something in His nature which prevents him committing suicide. I'm not sure if that would diminish his omnipotence but it would certainly mean that he is not God (how confusing).

Originally posted by stocken
So you do understand that atheism is a simple matter of not believing in a God? From that point where you realize there is no God, there are many paths. So I seriously doubt you'll get an answer from us atheists as a group, because we're not. We're not a group like, say, christians. The only thing we necessarily agree on is that there is no God. That' ...[text shortened]... f different opinions and beliefs in just about everything.

It's a beauty, isn't it? 🙂

Yes , I understand that Atheism is a matter of not believing in God but I think there are implications to this non-belief. I find it hard to imagine how it's possible to believe that love exists outside of us in any real way without something that looks a lot like God. Therefore , Atheists believe love is just a feeling/mental construct , nothing more. This is very different from believing that love is so real that even after the universe has run down and disintegrated then love will still be there.Or that love is right there at the heart of all creation. The ground of everything that is. For me to believe love is nothing more than a mental construct is to take an inevitable road to nihilism. All you are left with is powerful evolutionary forces which will dictate the 'survival of the fittest' . Might is right and the weak have no place in this world. It starts to get pretty brutal after that. God throws all that out the window and says all that posturing and military might will be humbled one day by little ol' love. I've never met an Atheist who believed that , whatever their chosen path. For me it's either life has a point , therefore God or life is pointless, therefore nihilism. I'm not convinced there is an in between without some form of having your cake and eating it.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Yes , I understand that Atheism is a matter of not believing in God but I think there are implications to this non-belief. I find it hard to imagine how it's possible to believe that love exists outside of us in any real way without something that looks a lot like God. Therefore , Atheists believe love is just a feeling/mental construct , nothing more. ...[text shortened]... not convinced there is an in between without some form of having your cake and eating it.

Why should we be concerned by your incredulity? If you have an argument, present it. I'll help you out, here's the first premise:

1) Suppose that God doesn't exist.

2).....?

Therefore, nihilism is true.


Please fill in premise (2) and any ancillary premises you think necessary to establish your conclusion.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Yes , I understand that Atheism is a matter of not believing in God but I think there are implications to this non-belief. I find it hard to imagine how it's possible to believe that love exists outside of us in any real way without something that looks a lot like God. Therefore , Atheists believe love is just a feeling/mental construct , nothing more. ...[text shortened]... not convinced there is an in between without some form of having your cake and eating it.

I dont understand why you think love must be something other then a "mental construct". It doesn't matter if its an evolutionary development, biochemical imbalance or "something outside of us" because its still love. Its a trascendent experience. I live for happiness and love both of which can only be achieved through a society based on morals and values. Thus, I (a psuedo-quasi atheist) eschew nihilism.

By the way if there is a God I would still find him plointless.

Also, haven't you ever wondered why not all atheists are nilihists?
And why democracy insists on the separation of church and state?

Originally posted by knightmeister
For me it's either life has a point , therefore God or life is pointless, therefore nihilism. I'm not convinced there is an in between without some form of having your cake and eating it.

I'm not sure I follow you there. That may be attributed to my inferior intelligence, though. So, nothing personal. 🙂

What can I say? To me it doesn't really matter if love will persist my own existence. I should certainly hope that my offspring will have the fortune of living in a world where people care about each other. Where they strive to maintain (well, first it has to be created, but we're slowly getting there... I hope) a world where there's true justice for everybody, so that we can all live in peace.

(Gosh... that was corny... 🙁 )

(And it was certainly corny using that word: gosh... 🙁 )

🙂

But I meant it. I think in a world where noone is treated injustly there can be peace and there can be love and there can be happiness. Whether I get to share that with my friends and family after I'm dead or not doesn't really matter to me. So, no, I don't need a God. And I don't particularly see why love should be something external to me. I need it. And I'd like to see others happy. But I don't need to believe there is a mighty God passing that love down to me. I really don't. If you find that hard to imagine, perhaps this will clarify.

If my existence (in any form) completely ends when I die, then it really doesn't matter, logically, if there's a God, or if love is an eternal constant in the universe. All that matters is the here and now. Now that I am alive and conscious. Now that I can formulate thoughts and ideas, experience feelings and participate in something much bigger than me. That's all that matters. And realising how precious life really is, I take great care not to destroy other living things. (Accept skorpan 🙁 - don't ask - and the occasional ant I step on :'( ).

You say God is love. I say life is love. If it is given to us by a God that won't show himself to me, I'm not gonna worry too much about that. I'm going to enjoy what he's given me. If God doesn't exist (as I suspect), well... all is fine.