Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Atheists face death
Jim Crace is an author who presented at the recent Adelaide Writers' Week. His thoughts of death from an atheists' point of view end up slipping into a sentimental pantheism (at around 13:30). The reality is that atheism affirms the meaningless of life. The search for solace in the face of death is just a recognition that atheism does not deliver at the point of humanity's greatest need.
Only Christ overcomes death and gives us hope. The Easter story is hardly wishful thinking but the reality that death does not have the final say but that God will raise the dead.
UPDATE: I have updated this post with a link to the full presentation from ABC and not just the highlights.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
So your argument is that false hope is better than accepting reality?
I'm very keen to accept reality over falsehood.
Firstly, for Jim to accept the reality that without true hope (ie confidence in the future and not just wishful thinking) then life has no significance or lasting value. To write some nice sounding poetry about death does not help anyone.
Secondly, if Christ's death and resurrection are not true events then humanity does not have the hope he brings (ie confidence in the future). If his bones are in the grave then, 'yes' we need to face up to the reality that there is no hope and not kid ourselves that there is.
It's just a good thing that nobody found the bones.
"If his bones are in the grave then, 'yes' we need to face up to the reality that there is no hope and not kid ourselves that there is."
I'm afraid you're deluding yourself. The idea that jesus was not divine does not automatically lead to a state of no hope.
It leads to a state of "no hope that christianity's claims are true". But we're there anyway.
I personally think we as humans have a great future ahead of us, if we can shake off ancient superstitions and learn to face up to our place in the universe without the confort blanket of bronze-age superstition.
I would actually argue that an afterlife where one is eternally rewarded (whether it be the christian style or not) does nothing but demean our current life. If our next life is going to be nothing but rewards then what is the point of this one, surely it would be beneficial to end the current as soon as possible to acquire the rewards. Put yourself in harms way as much as possible.
The atheist position is that this life is the only one we get, it's our only shot, and for that reason every second of it should be cherished as once it's gone, it's gone. No second chances.
I don't think I could possibly be happy with the christian version of an afterlife or one resembling it. It really does make this current life meaningless and pointless.
I'm not exactly sure how one 'enjoys' an unconscious eternity.
Anyway.... something that really stuck me when I listened to the poetry again was just how amazing and creative humanity is.
It is just a pity that what I was watching was a random lump of atoms trying to grasp at some kind of meaning in life by recognising there is no meaning.
Am I correct in assuming your premises are:
A) All hope comes from Christ's death and subsequent resurrection.
B) To have died, Christ must have lived.
C) If Christ died and was not resurrected, someone would have found his remains.
D) No-one has found Christ's remains.
Therefore:
All hope stems from Christ.
The atheist in me (who tussles with the theist) cannot see any point in arguing with anyone else about their beliefs, or the truth or falsity of their beliefs. The atheist in me has a clear viewpoint of his life, in which others only matter insofar as it is important to him. I am not trying to be cute or coy when I say this. To the atheist in me, what you believe is of no consequence to the universe.
I think that atheists need to own the fact that that there is no hope for the future of individuals. Sure humanity might have a great future (track record hasn't been so great so far), but what about my dead grandmother?
@Bastard Sheep
This life counts big time and so does the next. Jesus said, "What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?" Mark 8:36-37. Jesus' assessment is that a person's life(soul) is worth more than the whole world. For the atheist a human's life can probably be measured in terms of economic productivity or the sum total of the value of materials that make up a human body, or how full a life is of experiences (which are really just attempt to stimulate the grey matter between people's ears). Is this really all there is to life or is there more?
@Dave
The Apostle Paul saw the resurrection of Jesus and the peace with God that comes through the forgiveness of sins as central to the Christian message. See 1 Cor 1-3 and especially chapter 15. This message is what shapes Christian hope (ie confidence in the future).
@Wry Mouth
I'm very keen for people to argue with me because if I am wrong them I'm to be pitied above all people and I would love to be shown the error I am in. I do hope others can express this same view about their opinion and be willing to change their minds.
Your dead grandmother is alive in the genetic heritage she has passed on to her grandchildren. Happily or sadly, that's all there is to it.
I think Christians need to stop referencing the Bible as the beginning of every argument or viewpoint and start referencing reality.
Even if you believe in God, the words of Jesus, etc, to have the Bible take precedence over reality is idiotic. Man wrote the Bible (and did a particularly poor job of it, I might add) but God (if you believe in Him) created the Universe.
Surely it is guaranted that god wrote reality, and therefore if the evidence indicates that the Universe is 14 billion years old, this is true, that life evolved, this is true, and that ethics, morals, hope and direction are inherent in life and not granted to people arbitrarily by some invented religion.
"I think that atheists need to own the fact that that there is no hope for the future of individuals"
Again, semantically correct at the expense of being plain wrong.
I have, hopefully, 30 years or more of productive social output, and perhaps that will include descendants who can carry on my line and ideals.
I find it a noble thing to hope - yes hope - that some of my ideals, my knowledge and my societal input might carry on after my death even if I'm not going to be around to see it.
Frankly, this strawmanning of the atheist position does little more than to cheapen life.
@Kothos
When thinking about humanity and the concept of self my grandmother as a person is dead. She is not somehow 'alive' in my DNA. That's the pantheism creeping in. Her DNA has been passed on to me but all that means is that her DNA has been passed on to me. She is dead.
Jesus was part of reality that God 'wrote'. Why can't God act through him? The bible is part of the reality God 'wrote'. Why can't God speak through it?
The real questions are, 'is the Bible true?' and 'is Jesus who he said he was?'. Just sticking your head in the sand and pretending they don't exist doesn't work.
If hope is so inherent in life please let me know what it is. I'm yet to see it just looking at the world around me.
You seem to just be begging the question with this post. If the Gospels aren't true than the only solace that christianity brings is false comfort.
Though I may not be all too opposed to that. They say the first response to a loss is denial, which, without the verification of these claims is all that Christ really provides: Denial that people die.
I tend to think however that false comfort is just that: false, and so is not really comfort at all. And until the promises of your holy book can be verified, that's exactly what it remains.
Plus if Christianity is true it's not 'solace' about death we're provided with, it's eternal life. What good is feeling comfort about death if people don't actually die? It's like being comforted about spilling milk when no milk has been spilt.
Excellent exchanges from a wide range of readers. However, a request to not use the Bible is totally irrelevant. If we are wrong -- it is of no value. If we are right, it is an absolute necessity. To ignore the Bible would require missing the beauty in Paul's argument:
And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
(1 Corinthians 15:14 KJV)
If Christ be risen, the rest of the Bible is true, too.
I just surfed by on blogspot's "Next Blog" button and truly enjoyed the visit.
This is not a logical argument, but if you feel comfortable believing in Jesus, virgin births, and angels flying around that is entirely your choice. To somehow assume that not believing in nonsense leads you to a place of hopelessness is pretty hilarious, but if that affirms your beliefs feel free to keep believing that.
An interesting converstation....
But it seems to me that by calling the lives of billions of humans meaningless (yes, about half the world is not religious) is not only insulting, but it is begging to start an argument, not a discussion.
Atheists and non-believers do plenty of good for others in their lives, and it is not because they are hoping to get into heaven, or because they want those virgins that allah has promised them when they die. They help others (and let others believe whatever they want) because they want to. They volunteer, they do meals on wheels, they treat sick patients in 3rd world countries, they make anonymous donations, they join in Clean up Australia day...just like christians, muslims, jews and buddhists do.
I don't care what people believe as long as they don't try to get ME to believe the same thing. I don't care what they believe as long it does not impinge upon the rights of others.
SO, if a life without religion would be meaningless to you, great, follow the religion of your choice. But to inform others that their life is meaningless because they don't follow your chosen path, is really out of line, creating an even greater divide between the two philosophical camps.
@Jen The irony is that you are wanting me to believe your opinion about the place of religion! The reality is that people will always hold opinions, we can't escape that! The real question is whose opinion conforms with reality.
I truly have no desire or intention to try to get anyone to believe what I believe, or to take on my opinions. What a boring place the world would be if we all had the same belief/religion/world view!
If what you do helps some people that want to be helped, great. If what I do helps people who adhere to another set of beliefs altogether, great again.
But to use the word 'meaningless' to label the lives of any living thing/person, only because those lives do not include your god, is inappropriate.
The term 'meaningless' might be seen as 'inappropriate'. This is the language of social conventions not of reasoned argument. Whether something is 'inappropriate' or not does not relate to the truth of the statement. Without an ultimate purpose we try and generate a facade to give our lives meaning but in the end it is just a facade. Sorry to bring the bad news.
Is Jesus just another facade? That is the real question. In the face of death, I'll stick with Jesus.
OK, so perhaps I used the word 'inappropriate' - didn't you notice I was trying to be polite?
Instead I can use the word 'arrogant' if you like.
Very happy with the word arrogant. However, this is still the language of social judgement and not truth. An arrogant person can still be right. (BTW, sorry if I come over arrogant. I actually hold humbly to what Jesus taught, not arrogantly promote my own ideas).
Was Jesus arrogant when he said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"? By our social conventions it might be 'yes'. The big question is whether or not the claim is true.
"Was Jesus arrogant when he said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"? By our social conventions it might be 'yes'. The big question is whether or not the claim is true."
Yeah. Big question. So. Do you have any non-anecdotal evidence that this tale is true?
Thought not.
The evidence we are dealing with is the evidence of an eyewitness. Their testimony may sound 'anecdotal' but that will always be the case. One cannot prove mathematically or reason that Jesus is the way to the Father. It is something that you have to be told. Jesus backed up his claims with actions which proved he was who he said he was and eyewitnesses saw it. You can either trust the word of many eyewitnesses, say they are all liars or get in a time machine and see for yourself.
In terms of eyewitness evidence let's start with John 11:25 "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; ". The basis for Jesus being the 'way to the Father' is through his defeat of death.
After John 11:25 let's go for the rest of John's gospel. After that the other accounts of Jesus' life: Mattthew, Mark and Luke.
After that we could go for the rest of the writings of the eyewitnesses of Jesus (rest of NT) and if that is not enough then the Jewish writings which looked forward to a suffering Messiah.
If you want to throw out the Bible as a way to learn about Jesus then head to Josephus: "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works.....when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold..."
Further circumstantial evidence is the difference Jesus makes in the lives of people now.
Let me ask: who do you think Jesus was?
Where did the world come from?
Why are humans special (if at all)?
> The evidence we are dealing with
> is the evidence of an eyewitness.
> Their testimony may sound
> 'anecdotal' but that will always
> be the case.
It sounds anecdotal because it *is*. There's no evidence that the "eyewitness" himself even existed. It's just conjecture, nothing more, and you know it.
And don't give me Josephus. The passage in question is an interpolation (that is, added later, in a pious fraud)
http://www.skeptically.org/chxbible/id12.html
> Further circumstantial evidence
> is the difference Jesus makes in
> the lives of people now.
Alien Abductions make a difference to people's lives too. As does Vishnu. As does Scientology.
Try harder.
Since we have thrown Jesus out, how about an answer to my questions?
What, these questions?
> Let me ask: who do you think Jesus was?
> Where did the world come from?
> Why are humans special (if at all)?
1. There is no way to know whether jesus was real or fictional. Therefore I cannot speculate. The character as described in biblical text - aside from the miracle claims which cannot be verified by mere text - doesn't seem too remarkable for a time in which itinerant preachers developed large, credulous followings
2. Science has voluminous explanations for where the world came from, all of which are supported by better evidence than simple scripture
3. Humans are special because they are us. Obviously we think we're special.
We're unique as far as we know, for various reasons, though many of these traits are shared by other animals, none have them all or to the degree we have them. Technology, introspection, continuance of culture, etc..
Which is not to say other intelligences don't exist elsewhere - there's just no evidence for it.
1. I suppose you and I are pretty fictional since all we have is text at this point to verify our existence. Even if you don't believe I'm real be assured I think you are. Maybe I'm being overly generous, gullible and foolish! Maybe Google has come up with an automatic blogger commenter! Very clever Mr Google.
2. I should have asked about the universe - sorry about that. Where did it come from?
3. So there is nothing inherently special about people. So really it is a delusion to think we are. We are all deluded into thinking we have significance. The cockroaches are all thinking the same thing 'we're special because we're all cockroaches'. If someone gets squished we shouldn't cry (this related to original post). I sure think you are more important than a cockroach and it is not because I'm delusional but because God made people special. :)
1. You and I are having a conversation, real time, in front of others. Completely different proposition to determining whether a 2000-year old description in a book is real or not.
If you can't see that, then you're probably a lost cause. Really, such a pathetic attempt should be beneath you
2. The universe? Well, the science is not settled, but there are a number of competing hypotheses. We know from very careful and incredibly well-verified measurement of the Cosmic Microwave Background that the current universe dates back ~13.7 billion years. What triggered the expansion remains unclear, and whether anything existed before likewise is unknown.
But you could have looked that up on wikipedia.
3. You're attempting to put words in my mouth. At no point did I say that we don't occupy a uniquely privileged position, and at no point did I suggest that we're no more important than a cockroach. That's your dishonest interpretation.
We *are* special. We're *not* magical.
This kind of sophistry should be beneath you.
Chris, I have to say I'm not convinced you are humbly seeking truth, but merely trying to put one over on atheists.
Just because there is no ultimate cosmic purpose OF life, does NOT mean that humans find meaning and purpose IN life. Christians and atheists alike love their families, hate injustice, experience compassion, orgasm, enjoy music and nature and all that is marvellous.
Your possibly fictional missing bones could not touch the giggle of a child for meaning, purpose and hope. Your lame promises of an eternity spent surrounded by christians cannot touch the thrill of a blues jam.
As Bastard Sheep pointed out, considering this life the lobby to eternity takes meaning AWAY from this life.
And finally, to suggest that John was an eyewitness to Jesus is ridiculous. You may as well try and convince me Hogwarts is real. All but the most desperate scholars date John to around 90 or after. I'd be interested to know what you thought the life expectancy of Jesus's contemporaries would have been.
Oh, and as for the dead grandmother gambit? Ask your congregation how many of their eight great-grandparents they can name. I think you'll find the average is pretty close to zero.
If my musical career doesn't pick up, I have no doubt that my great-grandchildren will be unable to name me, or mention any biographical details.
I am comfortable with this. I have one glorious period in the spotlight and then I leave the stage for my kids to sing their song. I'm happy to have a great gig, and I'm not performing with the encore in mind.
I sometimes struggle to understand how christians view the fact of our mortality as so miserable, even as I remember my own benighted dreams of heaven.
YOU'RE ALIVE. MAKE THE MOST OF IT.
Thanks Dave. Not too many people are happy when someone close dies. Death is miserable because it robs us of relationship. Death is miserable because beyond death lies God's judgement. That's the way Jesus saw things (I'm always surprised that people claim to know more than Jesus about these things).
"Death is miserable because beyond death lies God's judgement."
No, death is miserable because you're *not alive any more*. Judgement is just so much childish fear of authority.
The misery of death, for me, is the thought that I'll no longer be able to hang out with my friends and enjoy my frankly very enjoyable life.
If you insist on viewing everything through the distorting lens of christianity, it's no surprise that you lack empathy for the nontheist viewpoint.
Re: Judgement
Judgment gives us an amazing status in this life. It means that what we do in this life actually counts. On the cosmic level someone actually cares about how we live. Judgment is not a 'childish fear of authority' by the reality that justice will be done. It is actually great news for those who face injustice. The perpetrator will not get away - even death is not an escape.
Fear is often not childish but warranted. I like my children having a healthy fear of fast moving cars! Jesus said this, "But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him." Jesus is trying to fix the distorted lens of atheism.
I'm sure it's comforting for you to think that ultimate judgement exists. There's just no evidence for it, and it's vanishingly implausible.
Think of the pre-requisites required. The very first thing you need is something that outlasts the death of the body. That is to say you need dualism. Sadly for your hypothesis, everything we know about physiology and neuroscience indicates that we really are just emergent properties of our physical substrate. Even worse, the idea of dualism violates the inviolable laws of thermodynamics, as the following paper explains:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t5k6153753n51814/
But let's for a moment imagine you can have dualism. Well, then that dualism has to have as a component a "soul" which has sufficient longevity to actually receive its punishment. Again, we come up against thermodynamics. An energetic input is needed to maintain the state of any non-chaotic system, and there's just no mechanism that can do this as we usually understand the dualist concept.
But let's imagine you've got that. Let's make-believe there is a long-lived or eternal soul. You then have to be lucky enough that these eternal souls are in fact overseen by a god, or other authority of some kind. This, of course, suffers the same thermodynamic problems as the first two pre-requisites, but in addition, there are so many conceptions of possible authorities, all asserted without good evidence, that the chances of the scenario are vanishingly small. In the absence of good evidence, all posible outcomes are equally unlikely, and there are hundreds to thousands of conceptions of an afterlife. To think that yours is the real one takes wishful thinking and self-centredness to new, dizzying heights.
Unless you can give some empirical evidence to support your assertions, you're merely repeating fiction.
Post a Comment