Are there any "saintly" atheists?

[Leela]

“There is so much in the bible against which every insinct of my being rebels, so much so that I regret the necessity which has compelled me to read it through from beginning to end. I do not think that the knowledge I have gained of its history and sources compensates me for the unpleasant details it has forced upon my attention.”

-Helen Keller, American lecturer

 

[PoliSciProf]

Yeah, but as someone also already suggested, there’s no real evidence that Socrates even really existed.

Socrates never existed?! There is a sculpture of him as well as the accounts of him in the writings of Aristophenes, Xenophon and Plato. This is evidence enough for me.

Back to vituous atheists: Hypatia of Alexandria was a neo-Platonist scholar and teacher and a virgin who was tortured and killed by a Christian mob goaded on by St. Cyril for the anti-Christian implications of her work in mathematics and astronomy. Was she a pagan? Maybe. An atheist? Maybe. A martyr? Certainly.

 

[PRmerger]

Socrates never existed?! There is a sculpture of him as well as the accounts of him in the writings of Aristophenes, Xenophon and Plato. This is evidence enough for me.

Oh, I don’t really know. I was just taking the word of someone else who said it. It makes no matter to me!

 

[Leela]

The 14th Dalai Lama

"I’m Buddhist, I’m a Buddhist practitioner. So actually I think that according to nontheistic Buddhist belief, things are due to causes and conditions. No creator. So I have faith in our actions, not prayer. Action is important…So some people say that Buddhism is a kind of atheism. Some scholars say that Buddhism is not a religion — it’s a science of the mind.

 

[PRmerger]

The 14th Dalai Lama

"I’m Buddhist, I’m a Buddhist practitioner. So actually I think that according to nontheistic Buddhist belief, things are due to causes and conditions. No creator. So I have faith in our actions, not prayer. Action is important…So some people say that Buddhism is a kind of atheism. Some scholars say that Buddhism is not a religion — it’s a science of the mind.

Again, another good man.

 

[MegaTherion]

Oh, I don’t know that this is why Christians give their lives for another. It’s more likely that it’s because of selfless LOVE, of seeing the Divine in the Other, of AGAPE.

I never said that belief in eternal life would be a reason that a Christian would give his or her life for another – I suggested that the belief would make it easier to do so. It wouldn’t be as big a sacrifice as it would be for an atheist.

Now an atheist who dies for another or for a cause – not believing that life continues after death – would, in my estimation, be making a bigger sacrifice. A more purely self-sacrificing act than a Christian who gives up his/her life.

I’m not talking about motivation; I’m talking about the estimation of what each one is giving up. Christians believe they are giving up this mortal existence only; atheists believe they are giving up existence entirely.

Wouldn’t you agree that the latter is a purer act of self-sacrifice?

I don’t think I made that a stipulation–only that it would be better if the example provided *were *for a stranger.

Oh, ok. Fair enough.

Where’s the proof that these Mystery Atheists exist? Show me some evidence!

Well, I think we’ve already established that there aren’t any famous examples.

We’ve also established that most atheist parents (like most theist parents) would willingly die for their children. I think it’s highly likely that that has happened repeatedly in the course of history.

I think we’ve also established that atheist soldiers (for various countries, including America) have sacrificed their lives for the good of others and for causes.

Do you not accept these examples? The example needs to be a specific famous person in order to count?

I’m not sure what you’re looking for or what it would prove, exactly. Please advise.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m not talking about motivation; I’m talking about the estimation of what each one is giving up. Christians believe they are giving up this mortal existence only; atheists believe they are giving up existence entirely.

Wouldn’t you agree that the latter is a purer act of self-sacrifice?

Yes, I think I would!

Well, I think we’ve already established that there aren’t any famous examples.

Yes, you have said that. But other posters keep bringing up examples that don’t really meet my criteria.

Do you not accept these examples? The example needs to be a specific famous person in order to count.

I guess those examples are a bit…um…nebulous.

But, I guess they’re acceptable.

Hey! I guess I’m an agnostic on this issue. Could be that there’s saintly atheists like Maximilian Kolbe, but I haven’t been provided any evidence that there is.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m not sure what you’re looking for or what it would prove, exactly. Please advise.

I guess it goes back to a statement I read in a book by Peter Kreeft (regarding if you can be moral without believing in God, why believe?): We need an explicit, not just an implicit, knowledge of God and an explicit, not just an implicit living in God. A few unusually bright and strong willed and saintly atheists may be able to live a saintly life without belief in God or turning to God, but for most of us, that is impossible

So I just started wondering, who are these unusually bright and strong willed and saintly atheists? Where are they? How come I don’t know about them?

 

[PRmerger]

Could be that there’s saintly atheists like Maximilian Kolbe, but I haven’t been provided any evidence that there is.

Note to readers: I am not saying that Maximilian Kolbe was an atheist.

 

[Nepenthe]

And what if he was? Would that make his sacrifice and dedication to doing the most courageous and - possible - moral act the time? Atheist or no, would you still consider his actions as 'saintly?"

If not, there is not point is asking such a question in the first place, since you would have evidently apparently already firmly decided that no act, no manner how virtuous, may be considered ‘saintly’, even if those people either do not believe in or understand what you consider what you apparently think ‘saintliness’ to be automatically barred from unbelievers.

 

[PRmerger]

And what if he was?

Well, then, he’d be the first name that anyone has provided in this thread that meets my criteria!

Would that make his sacrifice and dedication to doing the most courageous and - possible - moral act the time? Atheist or no, would you still consider his actions as 'saintly?"

Yes, of course I would consider his actions saintly. And, as Mega pointed out, it probably makes his sacrifice nobler because he has no expectation of eternal life.

If not, there is not point is asking such a question in the first place, since you would have evidently apparently already firmly decided that no act, no manner how virtuous, may be considered ‘saintly’, even if those people either do not believe in or understand what you consider what you apparently think ‘saintliness’ to be automatically barred from unbelievers.

I had not firmly decided that prior to posting this thread.

I just want to know if this is indeed true: a few unusually bright and strong willed and saintly atheists may be able to live a saintly life without belief in God or turning to God, but for most of us, that is impossible.

Now, if this rhetorical saintly atheist did indeed choose to do this “most moral act”, he was choosing God, whether he knew it or not.

A moral atheist can no more be good without God than a person can see without light. But one need not acknowledge the Light to be able to see. It just comes down to intellectual honesty.

 

[Nepenthe]

Oh, for little apples - what makes you presume that an atheist who does such an act has chosen ‘God’? How in the world can you have the vaguest idea what is going on in their minds.

Atheists perform astonishing acts of moral and ethical goodness, greatness and heroism every hour of the week and even greatness every day of the week, and without any belief in anything supernatural. And they are every bit as able to be good without presumption of the supernatural as any theist.

We may not have any faith or understanding what belief in the supernatural in such things is like, but then neither do most theists have any understanding of what it is to be without religion. This prevents none of us from being the very best humans can be, with or without gods.

Yes, we have to work hard and constantly to determine what the ‘very best a human can be’ since we take nobody else’s word for such matters, but we are generally strongly motivated to do so without flinching or giving up the struggle and simply taking the 'so-and-so-say so- cop-out and neglect out own personal responsibilities.

Of course that is not always true - there are lazy, irresponsible, self-serving jerks and sociopaths who either have religion or do not. But neither do we have pre-encodified (or much in the way or organized, institutionalized social constructions) guidelines and handrails to make our path safe. Let the respect flow both ways, and eventually, I hope blossom forth with no need to argue even if it is fun to discuss.

 

[PRmerger]

Oh, for little apples - what makes you presume that an atheist who does such an act has chosen ‘God’? How in the world can you have the vaguest idea what is going on in their minds.

I’m pretty sure you did not read my post, Nepenthe.

When Moral Atheists choose good, they are choosing God, whether they realize it or not

Atheists perform astonishing acts of moral and ethical goodness, greatness and heroism every hour of the week and even greatness every day of the week, and without any belief in anything supernatural. And they are every bit as able to be good without presumption of the supernatural as any theist.

So what?

 

[Nepenthe]

If that first bit makes you feel better (I’m trying to avoid the label ‘smug’ here very hard), aces, if you sleep better at night and all that.

As to the ‘so what?’ ah…wasn’t that very much germaine to the thread? You’ve presumed that your first assumption was incontrovertable without so much as a ‘by your leave’, and then carried right along using it to handwave the rest of that post. Tsk tsk, fallacy ahoy.

 

[MegaTherion]

Yes, I think I would!

So an atheist who enlists in military service – voluntarily willing to risk his one and only life for his country – is something you would consider nobler than a theist who enlists in military service – voluntarily willing to risk merely his mortal life.

Again, I’m not talking about motivation; I’m talking about what each one perceives they are risking or giving up.

I guess those examples are a bit…um…nebulous.

What’s nebulous about them, exactly? There have been countless atheists killed in military conflicts and countless atheist parents throughout history.

Google “Atheists in Foxholes” to read up on the group honoring atheists in the American military today.

If you need names, how about Patrick Tillman? He was an atheist who gave up a career in professional football (a $3.6 million contract) to join the army. He was killed in Afghanistan in 2004.

You would agree that his leaving a lucrative career to risk his life is a more noble sacrifice than if a theist had left a lucrative career to risk his life, correct?

Now again, I’m not convinced that dying for someone else is the “most moral” thing (or even moral at all), but I’m willing to humor you for the sake of argument.

What was the point of this thread, again?

 

[PRmerger]

What was the point of this thread, again?

I answered that in Post #48.

I’ll think about your other comments and respond later.

 

[PRmerger]

So an atheist who enlists in military service – voluntarily willing to risk his one and only life for his country – is something you would consider nobler than a theist who enlists in military service – voluntarily willing to risk merely his mortal life.

Hypothetically speaking, yes. If there were an atheist who gave up his life and felt that he’s totally annihilated after the deed vs a Christian who says, as he offers the last parachute to his buddy, “Well, it doesn’t matter, because this is just a comma in my life, not a period.” then the atheist is doing a nobler deed.

However, in real life, I am skeptical that this is even a consideration in the Christian’s mind as he leaps to his death. He’s just thinking about Christian AGAPE.

So in real life, their perceptions are the same. The deed is the same.

What’s nebulous about them, exactly? There have been countless atheists killed in military conflicts and countless atheist parents throughout history.

Well, for one, that there’s no saintly person you can point to. That’s pretty nebulous.

Pat Tillman, who was tragically accidentally killed, was an admirable man. But definitely not a saintly man. (And I’m not even certain he was an atheist. Everything I saw about his religious beliefs was reported second or third hand)

You would agree that his leaving a lucrative career to risk his life is a more noble sacrifice than if a theist had left a lucrative career to risk his life, correct?

No. Risking his life (faint possiblity that I could die) is very different from actually giving his life.

 

[PRmerger]

You would agree that his leaving a lucrative career to risk his life is a more noble sacrifice than if a theist had left a lucrative career to risk his life, correct?

And, Mega? Someone joining the army is not the same as someone giving his life for another.

 

[MegaTherion]

Hypothetically speaking, yes. If there were an atheist who gave up his life and felt that he’s totally annihilated after the deed vs a Christian who says, as he offers the last parachute to his buddy, “Well, it doesn’t matter, because this is just a comma in my life, not a period.” then the atheist is doing a nobler deed.

However, in real life, I am skeptical that this is even a consideration in the Christian’s mind as he leaps to his death. He’s just thinking about Christian AGAPE.

So in real life, their perceptions are the same. The deed is the same.

You’re back to talking about motivation (what the Christian is “thinkng about” as he gives his life).

I am not talking about motivation. I am not even talking about conscious thought. The Christian operates under a worldview in which he has a belief that he will live forever. It doesn’t matter what he’s thinking about at the moment of his sacrifice or whether that belief is specifically motivating him. All of his actions are underlied by the belief that he is a permanent being.

The Christian – whether consciously or not – is not making as big a sacrifice as the atheist in that situation.

me:

You would agree that his leaving a lucrative career to risk his life is a more noble sacrifice than if a theist had left a lucrative career to risk his life, correct?

you:

No. Risking his life (faint possiblity that I could die) is very different from actually giving his life.

You’ll note that you’re not responding to the point I made. I’m not comparing risking one’s life to sacrificing one’s life. I’m comparing two different people risking life – a theist and an atheist.

Further, I’m comparing two people consciously choosing to give up lucrative careers to put themselves in situations where there is a good possibility that death could occur (however it happens – friendly fire, enemy fire, murder, etc.).

Clearly, both of these individuals would have to contemplate the prospect of death and be willing to sacrifice this life – the atheist thinks he’s risking the only life he’ll ever have; the theist thinks he’s risking merely his mortal life.

Who is making the bigger sacrifice?

In fact, I would go so far as to say that if a person honestly believes that this is the only life he will ever have, then sacrificing that life is an act far above and beyond the call of duty that would constitute “saintliness.”

In fact, I would consider giving up what a person thinks to be the one and only life to be a much more saintly act than sacrificing one’s life with the belief (whether consciously on one’s mind or not) that one will live forever.

I consider every atheist who has ever sacrificed his or her life for any other person or cause to be a saint – far more of a saint than you or I will ever be (hopefully). [Personally, I would only sacrifice my life for a loved one and only in a situation in which I felt that I had no other recourse. I’m certainly no saint]

You know, now that I think about it, for those who believe that this is the one and only life, this life becomes infinitely precious. Anyone who believes that this is the one and only life who spends any time at all of that life helping others – I would call that person a saint. Far more of a saint than anyone who believes he will live forever giving up any time at all of this life helping others.

The case could very well be made that every single moral atheist is a saint – more of a saint than the most moral of believers.

P.S. And let me just remind you that whether or not atheists are saints has nothing to do with whether we’re right or not. I’m not claiming that we atheists are right just because we’re more noble in our acts of selflessness. We’re right for a lot of other reasons, but not that one.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

An atheist knowingly rejects God, thus rejects Truth. They believe in Lies and follow The Liar. Despite this there is divine revelation and mercy. Pray. God knows what’s in one’s soul. Even the most evil can be snatched from The Liar with their last breath.