Lot’s daughters. #metoo
1 Like
Eros is the love of God as discussed in the symposium by Socrates, Agathon and Eryximachos. The enlighten Greeks saw these here aspects of the King of Heaven: the Love of God (Eros), the Word of God (Logos) and the Wisdom of God (Sophia).
I think that your question is a valid one, but I think that the question originally posed in the “scriptural examples to prove Bible is the Word of God” is very limited. I think it was trying to find internal proof that the Bible is correct. Prophecies and numerology are very soft evidences, and not limited only to Christianity (Islam uses the same arguments). On the other hand, I strongly disagree that atheists willfully ignore truth. Randal Rauser, a Baptist seminarian, wrote this at length in “Is the Atheist My Neighbor?”, along with an atheist (Lowder) who contributed very congenially. Who is the Fool? How Christians misread the Bible to attack atheists - Randal Rauser
Thanks for your posts, @SuperBigV
1 Like
Hello Vlad,
I’m sorry, but I don’t buy this at all. We’re not discussing a hypothetical but an explanation for the sum total of existence, for which the vast majority that has lived has deemed needing an explanation and
which every culture in history has ascribed to some sort of divinity. Brain’s mind game consists of nothing more than a big-league false equivalency.
As an aside, brain-games seems to be what a lot of atheists turn to in debates on God. Maybe they should focus more on how a universe exists that evolved humans with brains to think about such games. Now that, IMO, would be a more productive brain-game for Brain!
1 Like
I think there may not be an explanation for the sum total of our existence, other than we are just an accident. It’s not a pretty explanation, but it’s the only thing that appears to be true and conforms to our experience.
It’s true that historically, most every culture ascribed to some sort of divinity, but that does not make the divinity explanation correct, does it?
Along those lines, the people in antiquity had a lot of wrong ideas about the nature of disease, about the earth being a sphere, heliocentricity, etc… Why must we trust their ideas about divinity? If anything, if there is a personal God who reveals knowledge and truth, I would expect the ancient prophets to understand reality better than we understand it today.
1 Like
@Mervin_Bitikofer, that’s a great episode from Ricky Gervaise and Stephen Colbert! Thanks!
It’s so odd–I admit that the fear is one thing that makes me embrace Pascal’s wager, but I really think that if we think God’s just, we wouldn’t believe He would want us to fear the unknown so much that we would believe in him just for fear. Nor would He judge us for not believing in him if the reason for belief was fear of the unknown. It makes me really introspect more about why we really believe in God. Is it epistemic virtue (from what I understand, the study of how we know)? Does one sin when one doubts? A response to Pascal - Randal Rauser
On Rota's Wager: Pascal and epistemic virtue - Randal Rauser
On the other hand, one reason I think we sometimes want to believe in God (this is not related to true proof; it’s a counterpoint to Pascal’s wager) is a profound sense that this is the Shadowlands, and that there is something better–justice, ultimate good and ultimate evil. This may be a belief in the afterlife in which all that is unjust is fixed. @Christy quoted someone once about how humans are obligate abstractionists (I can’t find it now, though it alluded to C S Lewis). I enjoy Puddleglum’s quote in “The Silver Chair,” about searching for a real Aslan, ‘even though there probably isn’t a real one’ (as Puddleglum would say in his inimitable way). All this is not proof for the existence of such a thing (nor is it proof against its existence)–it’s better analyzed by cognitive science of religion, like Justin Barrett.
I think the fear of Hell is a very strong motivator. I’ve been deconverted for a number of years now, but the fear of Hell does creep in occasionally. I don’t believe there is a Hell, however, there is a fear that Hell may be a possibility, no matter how remote.
Sometimes I imagine … what if there is a Hell for everyone? What if no one gets a pass, no matter how pious they have been. And yet, that version of Hell (i.e. a place where everyone ends up in) is not scary at all. I would be tortured there just as in any other Hell(s), and yet, it doesn’t really scare me. Which leads me to believe any fear of a Christian/Bible Hell (in me) is just a residual/vestige of the childhood beliefs. After all, I don’t really fear the Hells of other religions.
You make a point about wanting to believe in God for the ultimate justice, ultimate good, etc… I think that’s one reason people believe in Gods. And, throughout history, people had their own ideas of what those Gods may be like.
Having said that, I find it strange that the Hebrew God/Yahweh, is not (or does not often seem) very pleased with his people. So, it’s a strange thing that the people created a being who doesn’t really like them as much.
1 Like
Hello Vlad,
I don’t believe it to be true certainly, it doesn’t appear to be true to the vast majority of history and it doesn’t conform to our experience. Our experience, and science, tell us that a physical thing can’t come from literal nothingness. Also, it doesn’t appear that anything that displays intelligence, purpose, love, beauty, etc. can be the result of an accident. That’s why the divine has been obvious to all cultures. We have a universe, and it displays those (and other) qualities, which to most people demands an explanation. So it’s a matter of faith, everyone has faith in something. You have faith in an accident that has no scientific support. That to me makes no sense. You don’t want to accept in the supernatural so you declare an, “accident” to explain everything, because science, which atheists so highly value, breaks down when considering the ultimate questions. I chose to put my faith in a powerful, loving spiritual entity since I sense a spiritual reality in a huge universe that displays love and purpose.
It doesn’t prove anything, I agree. But it shows that different peoples at different times and cultures with disparate lifestyles all saw the need for something more than an accident.
And this is why I wrote my informal list, of things that New Atheists write that have no basis in truth and that have affected quite a large number of people, including yourself, apparently, with the obsession with science (until, of course, where it fails to answer the biggest questions). The bible is not a science book nor does it claim to be - it offers no real science, nor could it to an uneducated ancient people. Genesis 1, the favorite target of NA, is an allegory that uses 6 literal days and is clearly written using the world-view of the day, the 3-tiered universe. Understanding the structure of the universe had no value to the ancients, but having divine wisdom for life had an eternity of value.
Yes, God revealed knowledge of who He is and purpose for men. Again, there is no need for, “scientific” truth, which would have just confused a people that already believed in the 3-tiered universe. They needed, and wanted, to know why were they there and what was their purpose.
Why do I trust God? I was a deist at one point, with no trust in any religion or sacred text. God then put trustworthy people in my life who taught me the bible. When I applied Jesus’ teachings to my life, I could see that they worked so I started to trust him. It wasn’t until I read the bible and put the teachings into practice did I start to really trust God, though reading about Jesus started to move my cold, hard heart.
Why? Where did you get that idea from? It’s simply a logical fallacy that God should have taught science to the ancients, it was way above them and it would have confused them, for, among other things, they already had a worldview, that God used to couch the 1st origins account (Genesis 1).
In the end, people trust Jesus because his teachings proved themselves to them, like they did to me. The Christian faith is much more than the holding of a few ideas from the bible.
2 Likes
hi Richard,
I don’t think of myself as not willing or not wanting to accept reality. I want to know and believe only the things that are true. Hence, I don’t really care what the smart scientists believe or what the majority of the ancients believed. In fact, the truth is often found among the minority opinion.
And I am convinced that faith is the least reliable method to arrive at the truth because by faith one can believe anything.
So, getting back to the OP’s question, is there anything that would convince you that God does not exist? You 've mentioned a number of reasons why the new atheists are wrong. However, in your opinion, can there be legitimate (in your view) reasons to doubt God’s existence? Or is every atheist simply wilfully refusing to acknowledge the obvious reality?
1 Like
The reality cannot be obvious to anyone who is not called by God. God must give permission for anyone to approach Jesus for salvation. If you have been hurt and are angry at God there is forgiveness but, if you are truly evil, you will hate God. Even the demons believe and tremble but they are so full of envy that they hate God. If there is no God, why be good? To stay out of jail? Why continue with this mundane life of drudgery? A true Atheist would go out in a blaze of glory. No consequences for actions in the after life. Even those who are truly evil do not kill themselves. They remain to persuade and destroy faith in a God of Love, Mercy and Grace. Here’s a thought. Since Atheist’s don’t believe in any God, will they become Muslim when a knife is held to their throat and a terrorist says, Worship Allah or die? What will you die for? Or will you say Allah Akbar to save your life? Do not fear man who can only kill. Fear the One who after He kills can destroy both body and soul in hell. Jesus is Lord. Soon and very soon, we’re going to see the King…
LOL!
2 Likes
Sorry to resurrect an older post, but as I was reading this, I thought I’d ask about what the Christian community here would consider good reasons to doubt God’s existence?
A good one would have been clear evidence that everything about Jesus was borrowed from earlier mythologies, such as Krishna, Mithras, Dionysus, Osiris, Horus, etc. Of course, all this turned out to be historical garbage disguised as scholarship and historians have long dismissed this absurd notion. But if that were true, it would have been good reason not to be a Christian.
Another good one would have been if Christianity had done more bad than good throughout human history. Again, turns out this isn’t so – the university evolved out of Christian cathedrals in the 12th and 13th centuries, the second medical revolution in history was offset by the establishment of the first Christian hospital in the 4th century, international law literally developed out of medieval theological church debate, the influence and role the different Bible translations played on the development of the English language is only comparable to Shakespeare (the King James Bible, for example, introduced over 250 idioms into the English language, most of them deriving from the earlier Tyndale translation), the first peace movement in human history – the Peace of God (Pax Dei) – originated purely out of Christianity as Christians saw their cathedrals and faith being threatened by the chaos that resulted from the collapse of the Carolingian dynasty – the Peace of God also gave rise to the second peace movement of history – the Truce of God, also based purely on Christianity – and set the stage for modern such peace movements, etc, etc, etc. But if it were the case that all this and so much more weren’t true, then that would also be good reason not to be a Christian.
1 Like
But my point is simply this: What does this have anything to do with his beliefs in a god or to do with all of his theories?
Well, at first you thought I was trying to smear him, but now you apparently see his personal life was complicated, with illicit affairs. You don’t want us to lightly disregard his beliefs, right? So why not look at the big picture? (btw, he didn’t believe in God.)
That is the problem of not reading the entire post. Einstein believed in a higher power that was behind the nobility of nature that he saw. Yes, he did not believe in the religious God, neither did any of the people that I mentioned. They all believe in a logical higher power that formed the laws of nature.
I would distinguish God and Christianity here. I believe in Christianity because of Jesus and it would be proven wrong if he didn´t rose from the dead. However, I am paraphrasing James Bishop here, since I agree with him very often on almost all topics, this wouldn´t led me to become an atheist, because I believe in miracles since we have uncountable examples even until today, many of which are investigated to the details, which shows me Gods reality and fingerprints in our daily life.
Interestingly that´s a position which is rising here in secular Germany, where a lot more people believe in a miracle-working than in a creator god.
You might (if you can stomach reading a long “flowery” 19th century prose sermon) find this sermon of George Macdonald’s fascinating. It isn’t something that will be entirely “approved of” by the more traditionally doctrinaire Christians these days, but I think he’s scripturally on to something regarding how God uses hell. I wouldn’t recommend this to just any Christian, depending on how brittle their attachment is to their particularly-received doctrinal certainties. But since you are rather in the category of somebody who threw it all out [found it all untenable] anyway, I commend it to you without reservation.
[edited for clarity and correction]
2 Likes
Thanks for referencing sermon that most influenced me of all time, @Mervin_Bitikofer (with the possible exception of your series from Kansas City). You can also get this read aloud on Youtube https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=george+macdonald+justice and a commentary by the Canadian prof Ron Dart Why George MacDonald "turned with loathing from the god of Jonathan Edwards" - Ron Dart - YouTube
and experimental theology Experimental Theology: George MacDonald: Justice, Hell and Atonement
Apparently, there have been attempts to re-write it without the 19th century English, but it seems to lose part of the meaning. I’d appreciate @SuperBigV’s impression of the idea that punishment is for correction, not retribution.
1 Like
Good point. Do you think that living in a given location and time, influenced by surroundings, affects our impression of God? So, the Middle Ages theologians lived in a very difficult time. They even burned dissidents at the stake (Calvin joined them). At least half of children died before the age of 5, even in Europe. Child and Infant Mortality - Our World in Data. If God was considered the agent behind every thing important, would one not think that He had it in for us? And doesn’t it give us a sense of understanding and being able to control our destiny (as abused children do) to blame Adam for God’s anger? At least, believing that God abandoned us because of one man’s fall explained why we suffered, and that there was a chance things would improve. And do you think that the relatively peaceful West, where law rules and there is good medical care, has given us pause to question this point of view? And does it explain why those who live in the Third World often struggle to see things this way? Maybe this is simplistic, but it makes me wonder.
To argue more on the skeptic’s side, the question “how could a personal God exist who took an interest in small things that affect me, but lets millions of children starve,” is a great one for me–similar to Christy’s Psalms quote above. I grew up in the Sahel (border of the Sahara; prone to famine; my parents were medical missionaries), and recall seeing children who didn’t have enough to eat. I prayed that God would take my food or blankets and give it to them. It taught me that if anyone is to do that, it’s we.
2 Likes
I am not sure what to think just yet. Obviously, if Christianity is true and Universalism is also true, then there is a good news for everyone. However, traditional Christianity, including the Christianity that gave us the New Testament seemed to think that Hell is eternal. And their view was not without New Testament support.
Pascal’s Wager would be a bit nonsensical if Universalism is true, since you can always correct your ways and resolve any conflicts you may have. In the traditional model, there is absolutely no hope after one dies in an unbelief.
1 Like