25 things which make it hard for me to believe in God

[Locrian]

@ITR_champion

Books have the advantage that the great writers are far more articulate and entertaining than anyone on this message board. They have the further advantage that you can read them in peace without being interrupted by mindless hate-mongering.

Now, now** Champ**, I’ve read the post on you in The Pit (and I will say I don’t necessarily agree with the posters in The Pit… yet!) so I see where the hate-mongering comment might come from, but mindless? Be fair. I’ve never really debated you…

One of your arguments against the OP, however, I can clearly say you are wrong:

From the OP: “# The ‘one size fits all’ concept of hell as a punishment is very unjust. Why should a law abiding atheist and Hitler get the same punishment? Remember, the majority of Christians should (if they follow their doctrine properly) believe that faith is essentia;l to be saved.”

ITR Champion: “To begin at the end, your last statement is incorrect. The majority of Christians believe no such thing, nor have a doctrine which tells them to so. For instance, the Catholic Church does not believe that. Generally speaking, if you want to know what Christians believe you need to read the Christian sources, because non-Christian sources are likely to get it wrong either accidentally or deliberately.”

I completely disagree on both the OP and what your Catholic Church article does not mention,* blasphemy. * (The article addresses other myths such as beliefs in baptism, which at least deterred that.)

I attended Catholic School in the early '80s, Queen Of Heaven. Since the 2nd grade, we were taught by lay people, nuns AND priests that blasphemy trumps it all. To not believe at all, salvation is not possible. We even debated this in our little debate club against teaching staff. Hitler has at least a chance at salvation, while I do not, period. There are no last minute conversions accepted during the rapture.

"Then the LORD said to Moses, “Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD’s name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD’s name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)”

Jesus sort of backs this up here: “And anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but to him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven (Luke 12:10).” So, tease me, but not DA-AD!

That’s the Catholic Church standpoint.

[Locrian]

@ITR_champion

Both parts of your premise are completely wrong. You say “no miracles nowadays”; you don’t clearly define nowadays, but let’s say it’s since the start of the 20th century. If so, there have been plenty of recorded miracles in that time.

Then you say “God never had a problem meddling in people’s lives before.” Read your Bible. There were long periods without any miraculous intervention.

Okay, here, unlike SOME recent posters whose names will not be mentioned (Focusonz, I lied, or sinned) at least you address the question stated.

Still, have to disagree. “[T]here have been plenty of recorded miracles…” Where?
What constitutes as a miracle for you? Who documents it? PLEASE send a cite that gives info which can not be refuted on this. But this is entirely opinion IMO.

And for the “long periods without any miraculous intervention”, it seemed to be a hell of a lot more personal back in biblical times-- Moses and the burning bush, Moses and the sacrificial Issac, Noah getting boat building plans from the sky-- also Jesus had plenty of witnesses with Lazarus, blind-guy and resurrection-- so the bible documents these ancient miracles with witnesses. I really don’t think Rockin’ Rollen Stewart (The Rainbow wig guy) is evidence of a miracle.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@ITR_champion

Both parts of your premise are completely wrong. You say “no miracles nowadays”; you don’t clearly define nowadays, but let’s say it’s since the start of the 20th century. If so, there have been plenty of recorded miracles in that time.

Name one.

You’re not going to try to cite that Fatima garbage again are you?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

The best reason to assume the non-existence of gods is simply the utter lack of either observable evidence or necessity for them, but the OP’s first point is the one that totally undermines specifically Christian theology. The notion that God would need a sacrifice to save people from himself is a logical non-starter.

The Problem of Evil is also insoluble.

[Cisco]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

The best reason to assume the non-existence of gods is simply the utter lack of either observable evidence or necessity for them, but the OP’s first point is the one that totally undermines specifically Christian theology. The notion that God would need a sacrifice to save people from himself is a logical non-starter.

Heh, yep. I actually heard a non-literal interpretation today that made a little sense, but literalist interpretations of the Jesus myth are absurd. Reminds me of this. (contains an image of a bloodied-up Jesus from, I think, The Passion of the Christ, and thus might be very mildly NSFW.)

[Locrian]

@Cisco

Heh, yep. I actually heard a non-literal interpretation today that made a little sense, but literalist interpretations of the Jesus myth are absurd. Reminds me of this. (contains an image of a bloodied-up Jesus from, I think, The Passion of the Christ, and thus might be very mildly NSFW.)

A summary which is actually believable. I bookmarked that photo on my iPhone
in case I forget how to recite it. TYVM, Cisco!

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

The best reason to assume the non-existence of gods is simply the utter lack of either observable evidence or necessity for them, but the OP’s first point is the one that totally undermines specifically Christian theology. The notion that God would need a sacrifice to save people from himself is a logical non-starter.

Not by my thinking. Jesus saved us and the Father relented (and I suppose Mary keeps them to their word).

The trinity isn’t that complicated: it simply specifies three aspects of the supreme deity.

The Problem of Evil is also insoluble.

It’s easy to solve, provided you define “Omnipotent” figuratively as in “Really, really powerful”, “Omnibenevolent” as in (er) “Means well, sort of” and “Omniscient” as in “Smarter than anybody you know, much.” There are tradeoffs: permit more of one of these qualities and you invoke less of the others.

ETA: Actually the POE is not “easy”. But the preceding is a reasonably standard start on the issue.

[Der_Trihs]

@Measure_for_Measure

The Problem of Evil is also insoluble.

It’s easy to solve, provided you define “Omnipotent” figuratively as in “Really, really powerful”, “Omnibenevolent” as in (er) “Means well, sort of” and “Omniscient” as in “Smarter than anybody you know, much.”

Only if you downgrade God so far that he is actually inferior to humans, since we ourselves have solved many evils. And in that case he’s not a god by most people’s standards.

[Carson_O_Genic]

@DrCube

“And our special today…”

I’ll have a Milton ale while I look over the menu. Nice place you have here!

[monavis]

@DrCube

The evidence is all around you! Look with your eyes! It’s also in your heart! GOD loves you and your miserable, wretched soul. Don’t take my word for it, it’s in the BIBLE. HE wants you to believe! You just have to open your mind up to HIM and HE will answer all your questions. Besides, GOD is so wonderful!!

Is any of this unimpeachable logic getting through to you, yet, sinner? Or are you just being stereotypically atheist and closed-minded, refusing to see the light?

The Bible can’t help him as it is the work of humans, and one has to believe the human that wrote it, he said it was full of contradictions and that is true, so he would need some other way of being convienced.

[monavis]

@ITR_champion

To begin at the end, your last statement is incorrect. The majority of Christians believe no such thing, nor have a doctrine which tells them to so. For instance, the Catholic Church does not believe that. Generally speaking, if you want to know what Christians believe you need to read the Christian sources, because non-Christian sources are likely to get it wrong either accidentally or deliberately.

Now before answering your questions it’s important to clarify what Heaven and Hell are. Heaven is the state where people are cleansed of sin and brought into the presence of God. Hell is the state where people are completely separated from God. There is no supply of physical pleasure in Heaven, nor is there physical pain in Hell. This is been church teaching. As Pope John Paul II said, “Hell is not a physical place. It is the state endured by those who have chosen to separate themselves from God.” Many people erroneously believe that this was a departure from previous church teaching, but it was not.

The torments of Hell arise from the fact that the pretensions, excuses, and falsehoods that people use to justify bad things that they do are stripped away, so those people are forced to confront the full extent of what they did. Very bad people like Hitler have much more to confront, and hence suffer more than your garden-variety unrepentant sinner.

“Eternal” does not mean lasting for an infinite amount of time; it means literally “without end”. The eternal punishment of Hell happens in a state of being without time.

In Heaven, people who encounter God in His full glory and who are cleansed of sin will see how small and meaningless all earthly things were by comparison. The glory of God will allow them to have perfect happiness, even while being aware of continuing suffering on Earth. As the Prophet Isaiah said, “For since the beginning of the world men have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside thee, what he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.”

How do you know there is a Heaven? Isn’t what you quote the words of what another human wrote and believes? What proof is there for that except belief?

[lekatt]

@Measure_for_Measure

Such a belief falls under the category of Monotheism.

Really, I was surprised by the responses to my post. I thought I might hear something more “out-of-the-box.”

[wonky]

@Locrian

I attended Catholic School in the early '80s, Queen Of Heaven. Since the 2nd grade, we were taught by lay people, nuns AND priests that blasphemy trumps it all. To not believe at all, salvation is not possible. We even debated this in our little debate club against teaching staff. Hitler has at least a chance at salvation, while I do not, period. There are no last minute conversions accepted during the rapture.

There is no rapture in Catholic theology. Salvation is possible for anyone, including nonbelievers.

[tagos]

@InvisibleWombat

Well, yeah, but I thought laying on of hands was faith healing. You know, touch the forehead and cure the lame and blind and all that. This dude is pushing people to the ground and smacking people and generally acting like a dancer pretending to be a martial artist. If I was looking for the blessing of God, I wouldn’t expect to be slapped around and knocked down.

Watch what his other hand is doing with their wallets.

[TooSchoolforCool]

@ITR_champion

Most of the questions you ask are addressed in the Bible, and certainly all are addressed in many of the excellent books on theology that have been written over the years.

The fact that people can respond with a bunch of words in response to these criticisms is not the same thing as those words actually successfully addressing the problem. It’s true that all of these questions have been tackled by theologians or interpreted to have answers in the Bible. But while it’s worth checking them out, this doesn’t mean that any of those answers are actually convincing. Saying that they are “addressed” is your opinion: a starting place for discussion, but let’s not presume that there’s an ending place yet.

[TooSchoolforCool]

@Measure_for_Measure

Not by my thinking. Jesus saved us and the Father relented (and I suppose Mary keeps them to their word).

Still don’t really see how that makes any sense, Trinity or no (which also doesn’t seem to make any sense).

Maybe there’s a difference of conception here as to what “makes sense” means. In your case, you seem to think that merely repeating some basic assertions, or a short story about these things, makes their underlying logic work. i.e. “jesus saved us and father relented”

But the problem we have is that the entire process here, while it seems to borrow familiar elements, doesn’t really make sense as a whole. We human beings have a sense that sacrifice is important and noble. And we have an idea that justice is very important. But none of these elements really make sense when arranged into the basic argument and moral logic that the crucifixion supposes. Because it edits out or recasts all the conventional elements that would normally make those things make any sense.

[Clothahump]

@Weston

I really do want these questions answered so I can have a chance to believe.

Make up your own god entirely. It’ll be just as accurate as all the other gods humans have made up over the years.

[Razncain]

@focusonz

There is no such thing as individuality in a godless society. Those without God are but wildebeests on the river bank, instinctively programed to survive. No specific advantage is granted to members of that herd.

One of the most indefensible statements I’ve read on SDGD. It’s often the heretics individuality that gets them in trouble. How often does it happen that believers express a heresy he or she finds in their own church? Believers in most sects have the sheep herd mentality, and in fact are compared to sheep in the Bible while the unbelievers are compared to goats. Want to know what traits are noted for the sheep? They are certainly not noted for their individuality, that is for sure. And look up the parable of the Good Shepherd and comparing goats and sheep. Here is one such link talking about the parable from a believers point of view.

Maybe one of these days some churches will advance enough to where they will have a Q&A session to follow right after the preachers sermon. Surely they have questions, do they not? And I’m not talking about throwing out softball kind of questions for the preacher to field either. Or maybe they don’t dare disagree with any of it, just go along with the herd. Some individuality…

[cosmosdan]

@TooSchoolforCool

The fact that people can respond with a bunch of words in response to these criticisms is not the same thing as those words actually successfully addressing the problem. It’s true that all of these questions have been tackled by theologians or interpreted to have answers in the Bible. But while it’s worth checking them out, this doesn’t mean that any of those answers are actually convincing. Saying that they are “addressed” is your opinion: a starting place for discussion, but let’s not presume that there’s an ending place yet.

Right. Addressed means someone talked about them in an *attempt * provide answers. It doesn’t mean they were actually answered in any convincing way.

[Razncain]

@ITR_champion

I’ll do my best to answer these questions, focusing on the ones that haven’t been successfully addressed.

That would be pretty much all of them.

Most of the questions you ask are addressed in the Bible, and certainly all are addressed in many of the excellent books on theology that have been written over the years.

Are they? You seem to be short on citing scriptures, and quoting everything extra-biblical. You’re lucky others are not holding you to the first half of that statement since I think a great deal of this you are just pullin’ out of your shorts, in particularly what you claim to know about Heaven. And as another pointed out, there is a world of difference between addressing something and actually having credible answers. For now though, let’s concentrate on this, and see how well you do with it.

You say “no miracles nowadays”; you don’t clearly define nowadays, but let’s say it’s since the start of the 20th century. If so, there have been plenty of recorded miracles in that time.

He shouldn’t have to define nowadays, it should be common knowledge as to what nowadays refers too, so let’s not define it at the start of the 20th century as you would like. Just about any dictionary would define nowadays as now or present times (standard definition). I see your need to bury miracles in the past, however. If you actually had some good case for some, or even one, you would have presented it. Or you going to want to define miracle in a certain way too so you can find miracles everywhere? And nowadays, is there not one miracle worker amongst all the billions of believers? Not a one that can be presented now or in the very near future? That’s asking for too much, isn’t it?

Now these miracles that you claim have happened since the start of the 20th century, have you ever applied Hume’s Scale to any of it? I’ll answer it for you, of course you haven’t. Your miracles will be on par with what every other believer and his miracles have been, and that’s dropping the bar considerably of what should be considered good evidence. It will be on par with lekatt’s standards. Right or wrong? Any critical thinker would want there to be extraordinary proof for such a claim, but the believer, well, he has to settle for much much less. And the miracles, well they just don’t measure up to biblical standards, nosirree. He’ll have to settle for some mass hallucination, hearsay, some weeping statue, anecdotes, or what do you got? Hey, I’m willing to compromise, the miracles we are looking for doesn’t even have to be on par with biblical standards, but it would be nice if it was actually supernatural. I’d still settle for my car being fixed with simply a prayer being offered up. Could you do that for me? Can anyone? Anyway, what do you got? Show us your hand, methinks you’re bluffing, and don’t even have a pair.