If your good is limited in time and space does that make it less valuable than it would be if there was a good God?

 
The argument that our lives and good deeds are good and useful but one day they will not be for there is no God and there will be no life or no earth is just saying that doing good is a pain and only worth it if it has literally permanent and everlasting benefits. No sensible person thinks that way. Good is even more valuable if all things will end. It is the ultimate in self-glorificating arrogance to be that anxious to have good last forever. 
 
Why should good be punished by looked down upon unless it is somehow made eternal and supreme? The argument insults good logic and decency.

The reason is people want their good to be in some way everlasting is because they want it to be a sort of memorial to their virtue forever.  They at some level don't want to do good so they find it easier to think that they can do it and it starts generating good all by itself forever without them.
 
The thought that the good you do has to be somehow extended for everlasting time to be ultimate shows that the worship of God is a vice. How? It runs down the good done by a good person who turns bad at the end and goes to Hell forever. It argues that good is not good in itself. What is good is its extension in time. But if good is not good in itself, then whether it lasts for one minute or a million minutes, the end result is not good in itself. It is not good. This point shows that the only true friend of goodness is atheism. The God concept only corrupts goodness and belittles it.
 
Atheism is accused of teaching that our goodness has no ultimate value (ie permanently valuable and significant) but only has value in this life. Religion tends to attract people by contending that the good we do in this life will make us good and happy for all eternity. The atheists often say that you can get meaning in life from doing non-ultimate good. You certainly will not get it from injuring others. We must remember that only a few believers keep their focus on the next life anyway. Like atheists, they treat the good they do in this life as being for this life. They don't even think of its ultimate value. If they did, they would never forget the good deeds they do but they do. So both atheists and religionists get the happiness they have in life from valuing non-ultimate good.
 
What is wrong with the view that if you do good, nobody can change the fact that it happened? It is ultimate in that sense. That is the only sense that should matter. Religion or God has nothing to do with this. Introducing them merely hinders and confuses and wastes time.
 
Atheists are supposedly missing an opportunity to see all the good they do as permanently significant. But suppose that is true. Then it is not atheism's fault.

Atheism doesn't stop a person having the opportunity to do good. Atheism just fails to let people have the opportunity to see the good as permanently important because it has not developed enough or considered the issue. It's human imperfection that is the problem. An atheist can see her or his good deeds as somehow permanently valuable. Mystics and atheists should agree that the most important moment is NOW. Yesterday is gone. The future hasn't happened yet. The good you do now does have ultimate value. Every past moment of life must exist in a sense. It still happened. Nothing can undo it. It is permanent in the sense it happened though we can't experience it again. Just because it is not now anymore does not mean it doesn't exist. The good you have done is eternal. It's gone but it still real. This is the ultimate value of good.

It stands forever and has happened and is permanent in that sense and that is true even after we are gone.
 
Faith in God and eternal life, however, does oppose one having the opportunity to see the permanent value of good. If you do good and it gives you good character in Heaven forever, Christians say that is what they mean by ultimate value. Nonsense. It implies that good needs to be extended forever to be ultimately worthwhile. No good you do in this life can have ultimate value in that sense. It is only the good you have in your heart at death that could do it in the sense they mean. That is the goodness that is supposed to stay with you forever. And that is a separate act from the good you did in life such as feeding the poor and so on. Christians are actually saying that unless you are a god-botherer and believe in life everlasting your goodness is stupid. What a vicious message! They are admitting that they only do good because they think it will be rewarded and remembered forever. It is the reward that matters most to them.
 
Do believers condemn a person for doing good believing it cannot be permanent? If we will not do good unless God keeps a permanent record of it then what does that say about us? It says that I want my good deed to gather more goodness and do good forever. Doing it regardless of how much good it does is not important therefore it is really about the self-glorification. I want to feel that the goodness of my dead loved ones is somehow perpetuated forever. A truly good person helps a baby thinking it will be forgotten and that one day the baby will throw it back in her face. She does not motivate herself to help by imagining that her good deed is somehow magically perpetuated forever. The good is seen as valuable even if one day it is totally forgotten or nobody will be around to remember it.
 
Some say that when you choose to do good and do that good, you will not feel completely satisfied. They say you want to do more good. To experience or enjoy or do something that is limitedly good makes you crave better good. They claim that what you crave is the very goodness of God - infinite goodness. But if we are not totally satisfied when we do good that does not mean there is an infinite God or that he should be believed in. And is it really true that we don't feel totally happy when we do good? We do sometimes. We can be ecstatic about having done some good even though it could be better good.
 
The sense of purpose in life that Christianity claims to give is evil for it implies a person should die and be taken from this world. What is wrong with this is the fact that even if there is a life after death we are more sure we will live on if our bodies are kept alive than if they die and we are told to condone our own deaths. We should be death-defiant. This shows how offensive religious funerals are to those who know better.

Religion keeps preaching about ultimate good and ultimate meaning.  But it is not very clear on why it has to be ultimate and what ultimate means.  It is just a trick that tells you no matter how great you find your life and your deeds you should find something missing.  It accuses you of being blind or ignorant.

Reporting burglaries despite burglaries being ultimately unstoppable may help a few people and that is enough. It is still worthwhile to report.   In fact it is more worthwhile for ultimately it will do no great good.  The good here and now matters.  The ultimate does not matter to you as much as you are led to think.
 
The value of goodness is not measured in terms of time or eternity or God or heavenly rewards. Whoever disagrees just does not really value good.