I agree completely. I just think the literalists will revert to demons because these people have not accepted Jesus. Personally, I think of religions as ways that bridge between humans and the divine. I think some are more doctrinally accurate than others and some are more moral than others, but crossing that bridge is the important thing. I can’t read Romans 1 or metaphysical arguments for God’s existence and think God is not everywhere. “A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet!”
1 Like
For the (Biblical) record … Jesus did all sorts of miracles for people who “had not accepted him” (much less even knew who he was, apart from the wildfire rumors that “hey - this guy has cured people!”). And his biggest miracles, far from being some sort of supernatural “magic show” for the skeptics, were the transformed lives of his disciples, even while they were still in the throes of learning who he really is, and maybe even more importantly, unlearning what the Messiah is not.
1 Like
Good point. I think of myself as being reflexively skeptical in a healthy sense. I am skeptical that people have sighted flying craft piloted by aliens, but I would also love to be proven wrong. I have also found that it is really hard to believe in something I don’t believe in without some compelling reason to change my mind.
1 Like
That is a good example as I dismiss alien piloted UFOs out of hand on account of space being so big and wondering why an advanced civilization with the technology to actually get here is 1) hiding in the clouds or 2) incompetent enough to be seen. I like having my students calculate how long it would take them to get to light speed if they could accelerate constantly at something reasonable for the human body to handle in short doses. I’m at the point where I don’t even entertain the evidence for ufos. Military, drone or swamps reflecting off a weather balloon 
I suspect some people are that way with my religious beliefs.
Vinnie
1 Like
Note: the following not meant to dispute the miracles in the Bible . . .
A while back I went down the sleight of hand YouTube rabbit hole. Learning how card tricks were done was pretty cool, and it made me understand how skilled these people are. One video I remember had a card magician performing magic for random people on the street in Romania or Bulgaria, somewhere in central Europe. One woman actually got mad when the magician started to perform because she thought what he was doing was demonic. That was a real eye opener for me. Like any normal human being, I projected my own beliefs of what is and isn’t supernatural and just assumed others see it that way, but (unsurprisingly) that’s not always the case. It may be that we don’t fully appreciate how different our Western worldview may be from how people in ancient times viewed things.
3 Likes
It’s intrinsic to being able to feel. Allowing is meaningless. The most emotionally persuasive, rhetorical, feature of Christianity is the suffering of God incarnate.
I don’t see how you can rationally compare the time Jesus came with any later time since all later times we know are a creation of those events. Besides… isn’t the sane question one of asking the need for any delay?
So there is only the question of why wasn’t any previous time better. But then doesn’t any proposed previous time imply that the previous events in the Bible have no significance? I have a hard time believing that. I would also suggest the answer is right there in the events which the Bible describe to us showing us why mankind wasn’t ready yet. After all, isn’t the whole history of the Bible basically a history of failure of people to have faith?
1 Like
Ouch, no.
There are people who have strong faith, people who have misguided faith, and people who struggle with faith. The whole point is that faith in God is not a simple matter, nor is it obvious. The Bible does not always distinguish between what people perceive and understand and what actually happened and whether God did it. There is a learning curve about our knowledge and understanding of God, and a learning curve about human religion.
Yes, the Old Testament is a prerequisite for Christ and the New Testament, but Christ Himself only scratched the surface of it.(Because He was dealing with common people not theologians)
Richard
The time and place was perfect for it to proliferate in to the future of civilization. By Design. Or the claim of it by deterministic accident.
And how is faithlessness a failure?
Whining about how mean the world is when eternity awaits would be silly. Critiquing God who offers eternal life would also be silly.
But neither are as silly as thinking that’s what atheists do.
If someone wants to critique the Christian position, then I suggest they critique the Christian position, and that means addressing it on its own terms, as opposed to a caricature of it. I’d suspect you would want the same of someone critiquing or commenting on atheism.
And atheism truly offers no hope to people who are dying/have died of cancer or people who are abused their entire life or any justice for these victims or malicious people who spend their whole life stepping on others. None for them and really none for their families. That is not to say atheists cannot fight these injustices in life, or seek careers in medical fields aimed at alleviating pain, but the philosophy as a whole is “tough luck” at the very end. That is just a brute fact and it is an ugly one, true or not. These critiques people like Gary level at God in lieu of suffering really amount to nothing when their own belief is that an eternity of nothingness is the final result for everyone and no wrongs will be redressed.
Vinnie
1 Like
I would - which is why I’m objecting to your comment, because that is exactly what you are doing. You are addressing a caricature of atheism.
I edited. And I would like your input on the last part. That is not a caricature.
There is no Christian position. There is a very broad and spectrum with deeps.
Would you say there is no scientific position on evolution because a small handful of scientists disagree? I’m not interested in frivolous nitpicking.
The vast majority of all Christians, starting with Christ himself and the very earliest Church after His death, have always believed in an afterlife. There are certainly differing views on the what and when and hell but it’s silly to say there is no Christian position on an afterlife. There most certainly is one with some diversity.
So afterlife is the alternative to atheism. If you say so. I’m amazed that there are Christian Sadducees. Somewhat less likely than atheists, like Buddhists, who believe in afterlife. Are they silly?
Edited what? You haven’t edited either of the extracts I objected to. They are still caricatures.
It is. Gary is not levelling critiques at God. He is levelling critiques at the idea of God and the people who hold to it.
My input is that atheism is a rejection of religion, not a replacement for it, and should not be expected to offer anything to anyone. Complaining that atheism offers no hope for people with cancer is like complaining that people who don’t support a football team have nothing to do at the weekend. Focussing on what atheists don’t believe and don’t do is missing the point. Look at what they do think and do do instead.
As for ugly brute facts, how ugly is it to give some-one who is suffering false hope? How many people have died because they forsook medical treatment in lieu of prayer? How many people have wasted the only life they have ‘preparing’ for a non-existent eternity? How many people have either not been helped or have been actively harmed because of a belief that they would have a life beyond this one?
What you call an ‘ugly brute fact’ is what atheists call not avoiding reality.
1 Like
I disagree. That is what some atheists do. The user in question has been here militantly spreading his gospel since he arrived. As a Christian, I would not go to a dedicated non-theist forum where atheists are exploring the compatibility of rejecting religion with objective morality from a philosophical perspective and start pissing on everyone, telling them how wrong and silly their beliefs are. That is what he has been essentially doing here. He came here grinding an axe and has been swinging it since he arrived.
Interesting analogy but I think it mixes up the issues and actually defeats itself. Let me explain. In my version of the analogy, supporting football represents believing in future hope and future justice. Since I presume death is the end in atheism, therefore, not supporting is leaving only nothingness and despair in its stead. You offered the counter view that my arguments doesn’t work because its like complaining “that people who don’t support a football team have nothing to do at the weekend” but then you said “atheism is a rejection of religion, not a replacement for it.” If you don’t have a replacement for watching football on the weekend then you actually have nothing to do on the weekend.Your argument has defeated itself. Not only that, but atheism is more akin to rejecting the reality of watching football to begin with, or at least, for some, to lacking belief people are supporting a real sport or team.
That is debatable to be honest. It could be argued that empathy, comfort and giving people hope should come before some inordinate and extreme focus on “truth” or factual accuracy. As if that is the noblest of pursuits (says who?). When my wife comes to me with a problem or issue I am often quick to offer 5, rational, sane and logical solutions that will deal with it adequately. Unfortunately, she just wanted empathy and understanding. I would completely change your question: how ugly is it for atheism no not be able to give some-one who is suffering any hope? That is the gospel Gary is spreading and that is where worshipping at the altar of science and materialism leads. Full stop.
Unfortunate, but some people also die from medical treatment. It happens. But for the Christian, death is not the end. For the atheist it is.
When eternal nothingness awaits everything and everyone forever…it’s really hard to consider anything a real waste or success in this blink of an eye existence. It’s also debatable whether or not living life aimed towards a goal, even if it involves self-sacrifice is a wasted life. That is very subjective. You seem to consider living a life at least significantly aimed towards accepting truth as worthy. Why that is better or not than hedonistically pleasuring ones-self through life is also a subjective issue.
I ultimately became an atheist because I realized a conservative view of the Bible was just wrong and my faith was put in a corner by cartesian, either or preachers/apologists/Christians. But it is the problem of evil that ultimately drove and sustained it. But for me, it was the problem of evil that actually led me back to theism after a long decade of spiraling from evangelical to liberal, to agnostic, to weak–lacking faith atheist, to strong atheism. That same problem of evil became more of a problem for me than it was before. C.S. Lewis went through something similar.
This little angel lived a few towns over from me and was recently murdered by her parents and stuffed in a barrel after they tied her up and stopped feeding her. Her parents will face justice, but what does atheism have to offer this little girl? What hope? Absolutely nothing. You keep your cold, hard facts and say tough luck, kid, Eternal nothingness. The problem of evil leads so many to atheism and I agree, it is a genuine problem. I’ve thought more about it than most atheists I’m guessing. It never fully goes away. Atheists want to critique the idea of God on account of suffering and leave us with nothingness. You can try to argue that you are just showing inconsistencies in a conception of God or using reductio ad absurdom arguments, but to do so is to actually deny the problem of evil is a real part of the world. The Christian answer is there even if it not emotionally satisfying. The problem of evil is far worse for atheists because “tough luck” in the end is a terrible philosophy to live by. You can pretend you are on some noble quest for truth (as if being right is the most important thing in life) but that is your business. I have to live in this world, Roy, and I cannot just sit on a fence forever. That is choosing death just the same as choosing the wrong path. Honestly, if I thought atheism were correct, I wouldn’t tell anyone about it. If your worldview has nothing to offer that child pictured above, honestly, it has nothing to offer me as well. You can couch it as “lacking belief” all you want. I’m seeing through the charade.
Atheism ultimately leads to eternal nothingness for every one and everything. It offers no justice or hope to anyone–victims or victimizers. The sooner you realize this, the sooner you can get off that jaded, "there is no truth, perched rocker , you have been sitting on and sniping comments from and the sooner you can stop defending such an abhorrent reality with dismissals from a perspective of “no one can know anything” because you are overwhelmed by diversity. How about sucking it up, picking yourself back up and getting back in the game. Its okay to take a leap of faith and see where you land (aka William James).
At the end of the day I know the answer Jesus offers to those who abuse and those are abused in life. The Son of God whimself endured our suffering and brings light and good new. He brings tissues (Rev 21:3-4) and millstones (Mark 9:42). Atheism shows up empty handed.
Vinnie
1 Like
You are wrong. No atheists do that.
Anyone levelling critiques at God, instead of at the idea of God or at people, is by definition not an atheist.
1 Like
I misread and stand corrected. The substance of what I wrote doesn’t change.