On January 14, 2008 by

Letter to an Atheist

The following is a letter to an atheist friend. I sent it moments ago. It is a real letter to a real person. The following is exactly what I wrote, with only one word omitted.

Dear Tim,

You’re probably right about the weak points in ______’s book. I honestly think many of your points are valid.

Still I would like to talk to you for a moment about God. Not condescendingly, you deserve better than that, but from my heart. Please allow me to have my say.

Is there a God?


Yes and no.

“There” (the adverb denoting place and location) is no God. For God to be God, in the sense of an eternal, self-existent being responsible for all that we call existence, the one thing he cannot be is “there.” God is of necessity invisible. There is a place called Timbuktu, there is planet called Neptune, there is a cup of coffee sitting next to me, but in that sense, there is no God. That would be to place God within the universe as another object. That is what he cannot be. Unless he were to choose to in someone way join creation. (This is what Christians believe concerning the Incarnation of Christ, but that is beyond this discussion).

Can I prove that God exists? I don’t think so; at least not in the way I might prove that I have three cats living in my house. I’m confident that God can prove his own existence, but he doesn’t seem to be inclined to do so. At least not at the present moment. Though, without trying to persuade you to believe me, I do believe that God will, in his own time, erase all doubt of his reality from the mind of every intelligent being. But, as C.S. Lewis said, “When the author walks onto the stage, the play is over.”

So “there” is no God.

But I believe God is.

Why?

Certainly not because I can necessarily make an ironclad argument for his existence, but because I know that when I try my best to not believe in God, I know I am lying to myself.

Do I want there to be a God? Perhaps. But I can tell you what I want even more than the existence of God, and that is this: the Truth. And when I have experimented with thinking God out of existence, I know I have lied to myself. Is this a persuasive argument? Probably not for you. But it is for me. Perhaps the most persuasive. I know there is a God because I know there is a God. Circular? Yes. But I can’t break out of the circle and remain true to myself. I can’t unknow what I know and be true to myself.

That’s not much of argument for believing in God, but I wanted to say it anyway. (Remember, I’m speaking from my heart .)

On to other things.

An atheist doesn’t believe in God. What doesn’t an atheist believe in? God. Let us be absolutely clear on this point. What is it that an atheist is convinced doesn’t exist? GOD. Hmm? Most atheists I have had conversations with seem to think about God nearly as much as I do. Most people don’t believe in lots of things: Unicorns, Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster among them. But they don’t bother to identify themselves as a-bigfootists, etc. God is because God is. Even atheists know what God is. God is utterly unique. A class unto himself. This is the one thing God must be…or we wouldn’t even have a word for it. Unicorns may be a fable, but there are horses and animals with horns. Bigfoot may not be in the woods, but there are large mammals in the woods. Nessie may not be in the loch, but there are strange creatures in the sea. But God is utterly unique — not a variation on a theme. To insist that one does not believe in God is an absurdity. (Strong words, but yes, I believe that.) By the very use of the word you have acknowledged the reality of this utterly unique being. And so, as G.K Chesterton quipped, “Without God there would be no atheists.” I’m reminded of the recent debate at Oxford between Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath and how Dawkins exclaimed during the debate, “My God!” Yes, the crowd laughed.

Here is a question. And, really, a serious one. Why is there something instead of nothing? We are here after all. Why? For a long time the standard atheistic reply was something like, “Well, why not? That’s just the way it is.” In itself that seems pretty weak, but then something happened that made that argument no longer tenable. The discovery of the Big Bang. We now know that 13.7 billion years ago something happened that began time, space and matter. Before that there was…well, nothing; nothing in the most literal sense of the word. There was not even a “before” there was just n o t h i n g. And out of nothing…bang…the beginning of time, space, matter. Why?

Here is another question. What evidence would you accept as proof for the existence of God? What would you require of God to be persuaded of his existence? He would have to do, what? Speak to you? (I’ll get to that in a moment). Appear to you? But then of course you could doubt the validity of this experience. Perhaps it’s an hallucination. Or how would you know it’s not an advanced alien with what appears, but only appears, to be divine attributes? How could God prove himself to you? Is there anything you cannot doubt? You know, it’s possible to doubt even your own existence. So is one an atheist simply because it is impossible for one to believe that God is, no matter what evidence is presented? What if God did appear to you and you were convinced that God existed? How would you convince another human of God’s reality? An interesting question to ponder.

Alright, back to bigfoot. Suppose you knew me to be a generally truthful person. And suppose I told you that there was a bigfoot living in the woods behind my house. And suppose that several other generally reliable people told you the same thing. And suppose they said that if you were to go investigate the woods yourself, that although they could not guarantee that you would see bigfoot, they nevertheless stated there was a high probability that you would see bigfoot for yourself…wouldn’t you at least bother to go have a look? In other words, these generally truthful people were not merely asking you to take their word for it, but were asking you to investigate the situation yourself. Wouldn’t you do it?

I would like to tell you about the woods where I think you might possibly find God.

Prayer.

Pray to God and see if anything happens. Ask God if he is real, and if so, to in some fashion let you know. Ask sincerely, even though you will of course ask skeptically. What have you to lose?

You at least know that there are intelligent, sincere people who claim to have met God in the woods of prayer. Perhaps they are mistaken, but why not examine the evidence yourself?

Is it scary to meet bigfoot in the woods? I can only imagine. Is it scary to encounter God in reality? I have found it so (and many other things). The implications are enormous. But when I told you that what I want more than anything is the Truth, I told the truth. Of course I may be an evil alien out to deceive you, who knows? For everything can be doubted. We all make decisions based on faith all day long.

I will not directly try to convince you that God is. Even though I have raised these questions, I think it is beyond my ability to convince anyone of God’s existence. And neither do I really feel it is my job to do so. But I will point out the woods where many people claim to have met God. And some of them were what you would call very reliable people.

Prayer.

I think it’s worth a look.

Tim, these are not patronizing words. I respect you. I respect you as a fellow human being, a genuine seeker and as a remarkably intelligent man. I am simply sharing with you my experience with God. And I do so in hope that you might have a similar experience. It’s not really an argument I am offering (though I have made some weak points and raised a few questions). What I am offering is the possibility of an experience. No guarantees, but the possibility of (as unlikely as it may seem!) — experiencing God.

I wish you all the best.

Your friend,

Brian Zahnd

  • Becky

    What I have found that is most odd with my aetheist friends and students is that if they were Christians, they would be some of the best. They are often the most accepting and giving of the people I know who are Christians. These aetheists are intelligent and have their arguments against God. So why is it so many seem to do be doing God’s work? Are they good even if they say they don’t believe in God? Or is the idea of God so ingrained in our unconscious that they just do God’s work without realizing it? Now, I am not saying that all aetheists are good and do good, but it is just a pattern I have noticed with the aaetheists I know. I even seem to get along better with some of these people than I do with Christians. I do find myself wanting to share everything I learn about God with them…but I don’t want them to perceive me as ‘preaching.’ So I don’t. So what can we do to get good people to believe in a good God?

  • Jenny

    A truly well written letter. I think the invitation to prayer and to investigate for himself is a great idea. I’m pretty sure he’ll find what those of us who have investigated the woods of prayer ourselves have found.

  • David

    In one of your earliest paragraphs you talk how “there” is no God, and about the invisibility of God, and the un-definability of God, or the un-knowability of God. Could you expound on that. I don’t know if I totally agree and would appreciate your exposition. Did not Christ teach, “and this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent”? Is not part of our life’s mission, to Know God and our relationship to Him being he truly is our Father? I’m just asking for your thoughts. I hope it doesn’t seem impertinent

  • Brian Zahnd

    David,

    I’m trying to show that God’s attribute of omnipresence requires invisibility. If God is “there”, he cannot be “here.” In Him we live and move and have our being. Of course God becomes the God who is “there.” In the Incarnation.

    In conversation with an atheist I’m not trying to do the same thing as when I am preaching or teaching Christians. I think it’s good to explain why we can’t simply point out God and say, see, there He is.

    I talked about this topic more in this blog:

    http://www.brianzahnd.com/index.php?app=blog&p=176

  • Mariell Jones

    I have met a variety of people, from different walks of life. I too have met atheists who were good, but I have yet to meet an atheist who pursues love, and is willing to do the exact same things that Christians do, especially Mother Theresa — I have met Christians who are truly good, and they helped me in many ways, spiritually, socially and financially — perhaps Becky you would want to pray that God helps you to meet them.

    God reveals Himself to whomever He wants, for those who want to meet Him. However, us humans can see each other, we can know each other, and define each other — God lives in a realm that is invisible [at the present time], undefined, and not known to us. Jesus wants us to know who God is, a Father who wants a family [as Pastor Brian has very astutely answered], grant to us Christians His eternal life, and to know His love, through Jesus and the life Jesus gives to us. We have a fully human and fully God example in Jesus [also explained from Pastor Brian]. When we see Jesus, we see the Father, though not with the naked eye. No one can see the Father and live [in the flesh]. That is in Exodus 33:20 — but, you may reply, Moses talked with God face to face. That is true — he talked with Jesus. Even Jesse Duplantis, who was taken up to heaven, just like Paul, remarked that he could not see the Father’s face, as he [Jesse] was in the flesh, in heaven. So, our example is Jesus, but our discovery is of God’s heart, intent, character, and attributes, as demonstrated by Jesus. Referring to John 6:46, Jesus states clearly that only He had seen the Father, as the Father had sent Jesus to us. So, when we see Jesus, we see the Father as well. The Father set Jesus as the standard in John 3:16-18. 1 John 4:12 states that no one has seen God at any time [except Jesus]. So Pastor Brian is very correct in stating the Father as invisible, undefined by our reality, and unknowable [except through Jesus].

  • Susan

    Good Post Pastor Brian.

    Some of what you said reminded me of an agnostic that ask me a question. He challenged me to share with him What wisdom God has given me? This person was searching for answers.

    Here is some of what I shared with him and later posted on my blog.

    I ask the agnostic …

    Have you ever ask God for evidence that He exist? If you are looking for God, He is willing to show Himself to you. Have a willing heart to know Him not as a study for information. But as a person, a REAL human being…instead of an object. God is able to hear your request.

    Many Christians have come your way. Have you ever thought that God is sending them to you? He uses people to share what you are searching for. But His Holy Spirit will connect with your spirit.
    You will know when that happens…

    I pray that God will make Himself know to you. You are so close but so far. Jesus is who you are searching.
    Just believe.

    The Agnostic replied: Ok I’ll keep that in mind.

    My reply prayer to God…

    This person is seeking evidence of You… Father God, my prayer is that this person will have many encounters with You, the True and Living God. God, may You open up this person’s eyes to see the evidence that is there for him or her to see who You are to in Jesus’ name Amen.

    I think whether an atheist, an agnostic or whatever, the person is searching for answers to question questions. In all I hope that all people who are searching for answers will stumble across GOD in the process.

    I cannot recall how I came into the saving knowledge of the Living God. I have ask God How Was I Drawn To Him? I took up the interest in U.F.Os, the Loch Ness Monster and so on and so forth.

    In the process of searching for some of these Unexplained Mysteries, I was drawn to God. I think that God is in what we search for. Some of us are more aware of Him them others. How do we know if it is of God? That is a GOOD question.

    P.S.
    What wisdom God has given me?
    That He IS! I cannot come to God unless His Spirit draws me to Him.

  • Janene Collins

    I like this – I like your whole mystical emphasis on experiencing God.

  • http://estherofelgin.blogspot.com Lex Wisniewski

    I wonder about atheists “doing good.”

    On the one hand, we’re to care for the poor, the sick, etc. On the other hand, Jesus said, “He who does not gather with me scatters.”

    I think part of the danger of the spirit of this age is that it’s humanist. I heard one young man on this topic refer to it as “the Oprah spirit.” It’s that lie that says, “We can take care of ourselves if we band together. We don’t need God.”

    I spent almost a decade as an atheist/agnostic/whatever, but volunteered a lot of my time. Partly because I wanted to help, but partly because I wanted to be a “better” person than the Christians I knew.

    So I believe that part of our inclination toward generosity may be that we are created in God’s image, but I also believe that every good deed done in the name of Self scatters people further from Christ. So, then, how good are they really?

  • David

    I appreciate your comments, and I hope I don’t seem contrary. I actually want to hear other viewpoints and consider other thoughts, so thank you for your responses. But why does God “have to be invisible” in order to be omnipresent? Who is God to you then? Is He some illusive, existent yet non-tangible entity? Is God an actual being to you? Is He really there? I have a hard time believing in a God who is not “there.” God to me is, as Jesus described him, our very true Eternal Father in Heaven. He is an actual being who, in a very literal way, truly does exist. As a being, he does have a place. Yet, in a way that I cannot fully comprehend, he does have omni-presence. His presence can be felt across the immensity of space and eternity. But that doesn’t change the fact that He Is. When Moses asked who he should say sent him, God wholly declared “I am.” He was literally “seen” by Moses, by Abraham, by Stephen, and many others as recorded in the Bible. His voice was literally heard at the Baptism of Jesus. When we die and move on to eternity, where will we be? Will we be in God’s presence? What does that mean if He is invisible and non-being? Is He not our Father. Christ told Mary that he was ascending to his Father and to our Father. So, yes, he truly is our Father. What then, was Christ saying if we use an invisible/non-being definition of God. When you pray to your Father, who are you praying to? I really struggle to reconcile this “invisible” God view you’re discussing. It sadly reminds me of the Athenian shrine to the “Unknown God” Paul describes in Acts. God isn’t unknowable. He is, and he commands us to know Him and his Son, Jesus Christ. Would you mind considering and responding to these questions? I hope you know I am asking in sincerity. I’m not trying to be antagonistic. I would appreciate your comments.

  • Brian Zahnd

    David,

    I agree with you. But, remember, my letter was to an atheist, not a theist, much less a Christian. This man obviously does not experience God. But I did encourage him to seek God in a way that he might find Him. My whole point is that God is knowable, but I am addressing why God is invisible and why you don’t encounter God the way you encounter the postman. Invisibility is an attribute of God (1 Timothy 1:17) Yes, Moses, etc. had supernatural encounters with God, and for the precise reason that they were chosen to be agents of revelation. But the vast majority of people have not seen God in any way approaching what Moses experienced. To simplistically tell an atheist that Moses saw God and that God is very real to you, may be true, but probably not very helpful to an atheist. You have to do what Paul did in Athens and start with people where they are. You can’t get the incarnational cart before the theistic horse. People aren’t likely to believe that Jesus is the Son of God who fully explains God if they don’t yet believe there is a God. Like C.S. Lewis, my friend Tim will have to become a Theist before he can become a Christian.

  • Brian Zahnd

    Lex,

    Whereas I fully acknowledge that an individual atheist may be a very fine and caring person, I do like to point out that, although I have heard of plenty of St. Jude hospitals and St. John hospitals, I’ve not yet heard of Voltaire hospital or Nietzsche hospital. Any given atheist may be a good and caring person, but atheism does not produce good and caring people.

  • Wesley Tan

    I wonder what the doctors would say to a dead patient’s family at a Derrida hospital… sorry, random! Great blog!

  • Seth

    Brian, I just wanted to say that I think you did an excellent job covering this subject in this letter. I went and e-mailed this to my brother who is not a christian. If he reads it, I think it might get him thinking.

    Thanks for posting.

  • http://angiewashington.blogspot.com/ Angie Washington

    Not having many encounters with atheists to date I had a question. Could it be that atheists are not so much a-God as they are a-Theists?

    I feel that I am being equipped with these blogs you post coupled with some books that we have to be able to respond when the day does arrives that would necessitate an informed response. But I am hearing that information (or logic) is not the primary convincing element when speaking with a person that has decided to define themselves by what they do not believe exists. When addressing a matter of the heart it seems leading with the heart is the best option. Of course, having the logical reasoning to be able to speak intelligently would support any conversation. But it has to start in the heart. Would you say that this is true?

  • Barry

    I’m probably not as intellegent or as educated as most of these bloggers. Most of my education has been from learning things the hard way. I don’t think all atheist are radical. I spent forty some years going to church almost every Sunday. From where I stand today I feel that I was an atheist back then. I’ve looked at life from both sides now and I like this side better. I can relate to what Susan said (I cannot recall how I came into the saving knowledge of the Living God. I have ask God How Was I Drawn To Him? I took up the interest in U.F.Os, the Loch Ness Monster and so on and so forth.) because I feel my change was instigated by my interest in the JFK assination. I realized I enjoyed studying evidence and placing it on timelines. One day I decided just out of the blue that I would put some of the evidence of the bible on a timeline and it brought it to life for me. God moves in mysterious ways. To ‘stay on topic’ I will add this. In Deuteronomy, Moses reminds the people that when they encountered God, they “heard the sound of words but saw no form”.

  • Mariell Jones

    Barry,

    You do not have to be educated or be counted as “intelligent” according to the standards of this world system, to be truly intelligent and educated according to God — God uses the humble and low things of this world to make the exalted and high things as they were not — you included observations very much needed for the body of Christ! Thank you!

  • Pat

    From Pascal’s “Pensees”: If the world existed to teach men about God, His divinity would shine forth everywhere in an incontestable way; but, since it only exists both through and for Jesus Christ, and to teach men about their corruption and their redemption, proof of those two truths shines forth brilliantly……..
    Christianity then teaches men…..that there is a God whom men can reach, and that there is a corruption in their nature which makes them unworthy (of Him). It is equally important for men to know both these points, and equally dangerous to know God without knowing their misery and to know their misery without knowing the Redeemer who can cure it. Knowing one alone leads either to the pride of philosophers who have known God but not their misery, or the despair of atheists who know their misery but not their Redeemer.

  • joe beach

    Brilliant post, BZ

    Absolutely brilliant. Especially, the “woods of prayer.” Every time I get to thinking that nobody is in Dylan’s league… you continue to amaze me. You really do have a great mind that God is using (thankfully). I’d hate to think of how you’d use that mind if you didn’t have a corresponding dose of faith. You may have even become a brilliant athiest – although, God doesn’t believe in athiests. I agree with you: some athiests probably think of God far more than the average “less aware” person. And God is, no doubt, thankful for the attention – even by an “athiest” (which, again, by definition, can’t really exist).

  • Brian Zahnd

    Here’s a related thought on why God is not “there”:

    The one place you are certain not to find Leo Tolstoy is in War and Peace.

    Get it?

  • Brian Zahnd

    One more thing.

    This blog is exactly as advertised: A letter to an atheist. It’s not my thoughts on atheism, but what I wanted to say to an atheist. I have thoughts about atheism I don’t always say to an atheist.

    For example:

    Atheism has a moral quality to it. This is why the Scriptures count unbelief as a sin. As Blaise Pascal said, “The heart has its reasons or which reason knows nothing.” This is as true of unbelief as it is of faith.

    This is why most atheists are atheists of convenience and not thorough atheists. For example: If you are going to be an atheist you have to throw out any expectation of justice. I agree with Dostoevsky who placed these words in the mouth of the atheistic Ivan Karamazov: “Without God all things are permissible.”

    I realize that there are atheists who try to be build a case for transcendent justice apart from God, but I’ve always found these attempts very unconvincing. Without a transcendent Lawgiver you cannot have a transcendent Law.

    Sometimes you can raise this question with an atheist (or a relativist): “What behavior would you condemn?” And when they say, “torturing babies” or whatever, keep pressing the issue with the question, “Why?” Eventually one finds there must be an appeal to a transcendent Lawgiver.

    The concept of Justice is one of the fingerprints of God found within Creation.

  • NT

    So, what about Tim ??

    Folks, let’s not forget about the most important aspect of this letter: Tim’s salvation. Pastor Zahn, has the Holy Spirit drawn him closer? As a body, let’s continue to pray that the Spirit may lead to Tim getting to know Jesus !!

  • Brian Zahnd

    Do pray for Tim, but I’ll probably not say any more about Tim here.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    I came across this letter post in a Google blog search. I should state for the record here that I, myself am an atheist. I have to say that prayer does nothing. It makes no difference in the grand scheme of things. For example If I were to pray that a family friend who is ill will get better and she does. That’s not God. That’s medical science and her immune system at work healing her, not God answering my prayer. On the other hand if my family friend gets worse or stays the same that’s not God either. It’s just that she’s too sick and neither her body or medical science can improve her health. In other words God doesn’t answer prayers… it’s merely coincidence.

    I also have to respond to Becky up at the top about the good character of an atheist and them doing what she refers to as “God’s work”. Religion or God is not a prerequisite for morality. Atheists believe in humanity. The majority of us consider ourselves to be Humanists. Doing good things is just us taking care of our fellow humans to make the one and only life we have on earth here more pleasant for ourselves and our neighbors.

    Pastor Brian, while I disagree with your letter I appreciate the candor and honesty in which you wrote it. You made thoughtful points without bringing fundamentalism into it. Your vision of God kind of reminds me of “The Force” in fictional Star Wars mythology which could be more realistic than the genocidal, tyrannical hellmongerer portrayed in the Old Testament of the bible.

  • Mariell Jones

    Hello Troy,

    Please excuse my reply, I hope you don’t think it is Fundamentalist — I love discussions like this, entirely too much!

    I used to think that God in the Old Testament was punishing, until finding out that the Canaanites’ religious practices included the murder of infants. It opened my eyes.

    Everything God does is to promote life and not destroy it. Would you say it is okay to let someone, say someone like a younger version of Charles Manson, out of prison, knowing that he might kill a number of people? Or would you possibly call for the death penalty, especially if he killed your mother, father, sister, brother, or children [or your whole family]? You might want to look at the reason why God said what He said, not just at the laws themselves.

    Some of those Canaanite practices also included inducing a trancelike state, where anyone could do anything to anyone, including rape and murder. The archaeologists have thought that perhaps drugs were used.

    Another group, the Amalekites, preferred destroying defenseless foreigners, who had no iron weapons, over preserving life. They were known for their love for war and fighting. Later, in the book of Esther, Haman, an Amalekite [Agag was Amalekite] was going to commit genocide. Would you like to live in a society like that and risk it by yourself? I am sure you would not — you are too intelligent for that.

    God was protecting the Israelites from adopting lethal cultures and religions. I do hope you look into it. Even our laws are designed to protect life, so that when a serial killer is finally caught, they receive a death sentence as a warning to others.

    That is what the commandments were about — pointing the path to love and to life, and also showing the path to death. Jesus fulfilled the law and did not abolish it, by fulfilling the heart and spirit of the law. Unfortunately, the religious hypocrites of His day didn’t get it, and it still happens today.

    But, some do get it, like Pastor Brian. I know he can explain things better than I can. Perhaps you can email to him your questions, thoughts and concerns… God Bless you in your honesty and happy searching!

  • Pat

    Troy,
    I am glad you posted here and hope you will continue to join in. You are thinking seriously about the big questions of life; that’s great. I’d like to offer another take on prayer. If I understand your point, you say that prayer does not work….therefore God is not. So you are judging the effectiveness of prayer by whether or not the result is what we have prayed for. We can all agree that not every prayer is answered the way we want in the time we want. But what about the medical studies that show the healing power of prayer? Even if we are deceiving ourselves we still have to come to grips with the fact that we are hard-wired to respond to faith.
    St. Augustine gave this illustration: imagine a man in a foundering boat trying to lasso a rock. The man in the boat represents all of us….the rock is the Lord…and the rope is prayer. So prayer draws us near and close (the rock doesn’t move). That’s another way that prayer “works”.
    Troy, I could also point out that secular humanism has not produced results. I could talk about the positive effect of Christianity on western culture and law. But I also know that nothing I say would constitute “proof positive”. Anything that can be perceived with the mind or the senses can be doubted. True faith is of the heart.
    Keep asking those deep questions!

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    I thought I’d check back to see if anyone responded to my post here.

    Mariell Jones: No I don’t think you’re being fundamentalist in that response and I appreciate your insights.

    A lot of atheists are in fact against the death penalty, but I’m not one of them. I have no problem with it. In fact I don’t think we use it enough, but I won’t get into that because I do agree with your point on punishment.

    However, I’m not talking about the things that other people did in the old testament. I’m talking about what your god himself did. The Noah’s Ark story for instance. Your god drowned the entire human race! If he’s indeed real he’s more proficient at genocide than Hitler was and that’s just one incident. He’s a tyrant.

    I have not heard of a single medical study that showed that prayer improved anyone’s condition. In fact there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary. Like this for example…

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html

    I contend that prayer is nothing more than coincidence. You’d get the same results if you prayed to a tree in your back yard. If a god indeed exists it would be one much like Pastor Brian described in his letter posted above here except that it would not be a god that cares about human behavior or interferes with our lives.

    As for secular humanism, what kinds of results are you claiming it doesn’t produce? Charities? There ARE humanist charities. Like this one for instance…

    http://www.humanistcharities.org

    I’ll admit that some Christians and some Christian organizations produce positive results. These positive results are coincidently produced by those involved actually doing something and not just praying for results.

    I’ll share an interesting tidbit about myself here. The woman I love is a devout Christian and was until recently a licensed minister. If SHE hasn’t been able to persuade me to change my mind and my beliefs in the 15 years I’ve known her no one will. I’ve been an atheist for more than half my life. I was raised by a devout Catholic family but deconverted by choice. I was actually baptized twice. Once as an infant and once as a preteen.

  • Bruce Moon

    As an ex-atheist, of the Ayn Rand-objectivist stripe, I can say all the atheist arguments are just a pseudo-intellectual mask hiding some deep-rooted fears, resentments, and mind-numbing pride. Brian, you admirably cut through the bullhockey and got to the point.

    “The reason an atheist cannot find God is the same reason a thief cannot find a policeman.”

  • Kate Reece

    Troy,

    I find your comments really interesting… I’m also an ex-atheist like Bruce. I’m wrestling through some of what you were saying and so, please just consider this response as me trying to figure out your position, and also to challenge you (hopefully in a non-offensive way).

    So, although I’m rather amateur, I love philosophy, and I want to kind of set the stage for some of my arguments against what I perceive to be your position. Although I will be dramatically oversimplifying his argument, the eighteenth-century philosopher Immanuel Kant believed that there was an objective reality, like Plato’s idea of the Forms, but he asserted that humans could not access that reality, and thus were only able to access the appearance of reality. Again, as an oversimplification, Nietzsche came after Kant, and along with his statement that “God is dead,” he believed that not only could humans not access this objective reality, but that there wasn’t an actual reality that existed outside of our minds. (Is that right, Pastor Brian?) From what I understand, Nietzsche was really the catalyst for widespread atheism, and a lot of that has flowed from modernism into the post-modernist belief that there is no “Truth.” All that to say, I think when we approach arguments like the one that has been happening here, it’s necessary to establish whether participants in the discussion believe there is an absolute truth. And if we DO believe there is an absolute truth, we also have to establish whether we believe that truth can be accessed by humanity. The Bible teaches pretty clearly that there is an absolute Truth, and that we can access that Truth – that belief would be embodied in the incarnation of Christ. (But I think you can also make philosophical arguments that there is an absolute Truth, apart from relying on the teachings of the Biblical text).

    So, perhaps there is some flaw in my logic here, but it seems to me that by unequivocally stating that prayer does not produce results, you’ve made a seemingly objective statement, which is in fact, a subjective statement probably based on your personal experience of ineffective prayer. By making that blanket statement, you’ve arrogantly invalidated and negated the experience others may have of effective prayer. By doing that, it seems to me, you would also be needing to claim that you have knowledge about some objective reality that applies to all of humanity, which doesn’t just apply to prayer not working, but which also applies to proof about the inexistence of a God that answers prayer. You’re claiming that there is an absolute Truth (God doesn’t exist), and that you have access to that Truth. It just seems to me that you’ve simply recycled old logic for the existence of God into arguments about the inexistence of God – arguments which atheists themselves have logically/philosophically/whatever proven INaccurate.

    And if that IS indeed your argument, even if just in part, then aren’t you doing the same thing that you’ve probably been offended by when Christians do it – namely, projecting your own values, whether forcefully or not, onto all people? Aren’t you doing the same thing, albeit in reverse, that colonialists did when they took their flawed motives and tried to transpose Christian values into cultures that weren’t ready or willing to receive it?

    To be quite honest, it seems to me that it would be far more intellectually honest, humble, and curious if you were agnostic, because then, at least, you could claim that there MIGHT be this objective Truth (that God does or does not exist) and you just don’t know. OR, you could be an adherent to post-modern philosophy, and just believe that there really IS not Truth at all.

    Yet, of course, if I had my preference, I’d want you to indeed be an atheist in the God you described: a tyrant, genocidal, whimsical maniac. And I’d want you to be a devout believer in the God who I believe to be JUST, and loving, even when that love looks far differently than we might understand or have experienced on earth. To be a believer in a God that changes lives, redeems our crap and makes it new and beautiful, and desperately desires that you would open your heart, even just an inch, to say, “I want to know the TRUTH (if there is one), and I am OPEN to discovering what that might be.” I think that kind of PRAYER would be the most intellectually fair and reasonable one that a person could ever pray. And I challenge you to do that, and truly be OPEN and INTENTIONAL and UNBIASED about your pursuit of that Truth (even if you ultimately discover that there is no Truth), and see what happens.

    Hope you’re not offended! :o )

  • Kate Reece

    Wow, that was really long – sorry!

  • Brian Zahnd

    Kate, that was excellent! Add a long post anytime you like.

    Nietzsche’s “God is dead” was more of an observation than a declaration. Nietzsche was a kind of prophet, albeit a mad prophet, who saw where Europe was headed. Nietzsche saw that as modern man lost his faith in God (which he thought inevitable), that nihilism would follow, something Nietzsche, in fact, did not want. Nietzsche sought to find a way (quite unsuccessfully, I think) for humanity to have a basis for moral values apart from absolutes.

    Strange as it may seem, Nietzsche is my second favorite philosopher (after Kierkegaard). Kierkegaard and Nietzsche shared a very similar philosophy, but Nietzsche lacked Kierkegaard’s faith — and that makes all the difference. Once beyond the question of God (Nietzsche’s fatal error), I find Nietzsche very honest, and I respect him for that. That is why I often say, as far as I’m concerned, it’s either…

    Jesus Christ or Friedrich Nietzsche.
    The will to power or the will to love.
    God is dead or God has risen from the dead.
    The Superman of the Son of Man.
    The Ubermensch or the Incarnation.

    Anything in between is either shoddy thinking or a cowardly cop out.

    On another note: I have already decided that my Good Friday sermon will be entitled, “God Is Dead.” I”m going to preach on Holy Saturday — the day that God the Son lay dead in the tomb. For those who have not yet found faith in the good news of Easter Sunday, this is exactly where they are living — in the Saturday between Good Friday and Easter Sunday, in Nietzsche’s “God is dead” void.

    Theologian Alan E. Lewis says this:

    “Those who would hear what the narrative of Christ crucified and buried really says today only need simply listen to the alienated disbelief of their own bewildered generation.”

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Bruce-

    That’s not at all realistic. You’re stereotyping atheists saying we all can’t find your god because we simply don’t want to, or because we have a reason to fear your god since it is for those reasons a thief wouldn’t seek a cop. I don’t look for a god because I strongly believe it would a waste of my time.

    Robert A. Heinlein compared looking for God to searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn’t there.

    THAT is a more accurate representation of me than a thief not wanting to find a cop.

    —————————————–

    Kate-

    First of all nothing you’ve said has offended me. I don’t get offended easily especially not when my beliefs or lack thereof are questioned or even ridiculed, because I’m confident in those beliefs and dismiss criticism of them as foolish ignorance.

    Anyway, I get the point you’re making. I am a person like you described that does not believe in any metaphysical “truth” or objective reality. To me that’s human imagination trying to figure out meanings of things which they can’t rationally explain.

    I apologize if in saying that prayer is worthless and a waste of time I came off as if I was trying to push my beliefs on others. That was not my intention here. My intention was to simply state MY OWN personal beliefs regarding the power or rather lack thereof of prayer. That was all I was attempting to do. I may be alone on this thread in believing that, but I’m not expecting to change any minds here. I was simply stating my own personal position on the issue.

    Being agnostic doesn’t suit me. It did for awhile coming out of my indoctrination of theism as a child, but eventually when I became comfortable and confident in my atheism I can no longer be agnostic. I can however admit that I could be wrong about an objective reality or of your god, but I doubt it and I can’t live my life on the assumption of a possibility I don’t see as a reality. I can’t pursue a “truth” I don’t believe exists in the first place.

    The loving god you describe sounds like a pleasant fiction. To me it seems like the desperate act of a person seeking redemption or salvation when there is none to find. It’s mentally easier for some people to believe a supreme supernatural being watches over us and gives meaning to our lives. I prefer to believe that I’m a master of my own fate and that I find my own meaning in my own life. I’d rather concentrate my efforts on the here and now instead of wasting my time shouting into an empty cave for someone who very likely isn’t there for I’ve wasted enough time in my youth doing just that.

  • Bruce Moon

    Troy,
    As Brian pointed out, there are no a-pinkunicornists or a-shmerfs. One can only so determinedly be against something to the point of identifying yourself by that denial, if that something actually exists. You claim you don’t look for God, and, as most atheists I know, spend an inordinate amount of time arguing He doesn’t exist, seeking arguments from atheist philosophers and atheist webpages and liturature in order to “prove” what you have already concluded. The astounding, shocking, out-of-place existence of so many atheist groups, literature, and websites is indeed one of the more obscure, yet, to me, ironic evidences that something’s up (so to speak.). How can you be against…nothing? How can you work so hard to deny the existence of…zero? Does not compute, my friend.

    As to your assertion to Kate that we are engaging in a little “pleasant fiction” I can assure you that, just as the atheist desperately runs from God with so many circular tautological, oxymoronic arguments, many believers run from Him just as desperately in the other direction, with a denial, not of His existence, rather a denial of His true character as a righteous, holy Judge to whom we will give an account of every word we’ve ever spoken, every thought we harbored, every act, every reaction. One Christian writer, GK Chesterton, once said that the Christian doctrine of original sin (that every man is born into and is a sinner) is the one empirically verifiable doctrine out of all of them. There is no doubt about our deficient moral condition. We can live in denial about God as one form of relief, or say that He just loves everybody and sin is no prob, another kind of denial. Or we can gace the truth about ourselves, take a hard look at the ugliness, the self-deceit, the multiform ways we’ve hurt others, been selfish, ETC., and then seek forgiveness and repentance. That, I gurantee you, is no fairy tale, or easier path.

  • http://nathangann.com/ Nathan

    Hey Troy,

    I read The God Delusion a few months ago. I wasn’t impressed. His arguments in the first half were sloppy. I think guys like Michael Martin, Kai Nelson, Bertrand Russell, Anthony Flew (pre-theism), Daniel Dennett, and JL Mackie are more persuasive. What do you think?

    Which Christian philosophers have you read, and are there any you’ve come to respect?

    Here’s an idea. Send me your last paycheck and you’ll get to be a ministry partner, I’ll see you a love gift and a specially anointed prosperity prayer cloth. Ha Ha Ha!!!

    Seriously, how about we each pick a book? I’ll choose a Christian author (no, it won’t be Kirk Cameron…LOL), and you pick an atheist’s book. We can start reading the atheist’s book first, discuss it, and then read the other.

    I would rather have a conversation with arguments, not an argumentative debate. You can find plenty of debates elsewhere (typically no one listens or concedes good points while they try to rack up debate points as they beat their chests in victory!). Besides, I’m not much of a philosopher and you’d probably win the debate. If you’re interested then my email is “nate_gann /@/ yahoo”, and we can work out the details.

    I’m really busy, so if this is not your thing then that’s cool.

    Cheers.

  • Micah

    I can say all the atheist arguments are just a pseudo-intellectual mask hiding some deep-rooted fears, resentments, and mind-numbing pride.

    There is no way to quote or italicize so I guess I’ll just post what was said and then respond.

    I can’t completely call myself an Atheist, but rather an Agnostic who maybe leans towards Atheism (maybe a skeptical Agnostic?). Simply put, I don’t know anything in regards to what happens after we die. I don’t know if a higher being had a hand in creating the universe or if it was just a random occurrence that took billions of years.

    Unfortunately when I see statements like the one above I tend to view the poster as exactly what they themselves are describing. Even if I were to side with you on that some Atheists resent religious people, and some Atheists are just full of fear or pride, it is impossible to take a group of people and label them as such. Just as if an Atheist were to tell me that all Christians are naive and wishful thinkers that will follow anything in the name of God. It simply isn’t true. Everyone has reasons for everything they do.

    I simply can’t read the Bible and accept everything as anymore then stories in order to keep a group of people on a moral path. To try and convince me the story of Noah (I know a very typical story to be skeptical of) herded all the species of all the animals on the planet and then redistributed them back into their natural habitat etc. etc. is … well a leap of faith. Faith is something I lack, and as it is a cornerstone of Christianity, I find it nearly impossible for me to ever come to that mindset. Which is why I may lean toward Atheism on an argumentative base perhaps?

    Unfortunately or fortunately (I haven’t figured that out yet) I still believe we have one life, and that every second should be cherished. Some people take this idea and philosophy and use it in negative effects. They use it as an excuse to do horrific things and justify it as not having to answer to a higher being after they die. Just as on the opposite side of the fence people do horrific things in the name of God.

    Which one is more just? In my opinion, neither. I think first priority should be being human. I don’t commit crimes against humanity for one reason…I am part of humanity. Every person is part of humanity, as opposed to some people being an Atheist, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever belief system you choose to follow.

    Obviously this isn’t a new concept I’m throwing out there, and I could quote philosophers from multiple eras and multiple ideals, but I won’t. I grew up in WOLC and I still go there from time to time. I have travelled to many parts of the world, and observed multiple cultures and religions. Anyone I’ve talked to about their religion full heartedly believe they live the right way for them. Who am I to argue with what they believe?

    At a family dinner my uncle asked me (apparently not knowing of where my beliefs lie) “As a Christian, how do you feel about taking peoples money for a living?”

    My simple answer was as you may guess…I am not a Christian. However if I took out the word Christian and replaced it with a “As a part of the human race…” and I couldn’t really come up with an answer. I still don’t find a fault in my way of life, seeing as I tend to view gambling as a leisure activity that you can either partake in or not, I’m not twisting any arms. However people can argue that the “addicted” party suffers from my gain. Everyone has their perspective on everything. No matter how black and white a topic should seem to be, there will always be at least one person on the other side of the fence.

    I kind of ran off topic and jumped around, but I said all that to maybe show that not everyone who doesn’t believe in a God and has his arguments aren’t “a pseudo-intellectual mask hiding some deep-rooted fears, resentments, and mind-numbing pride”. Even though I don’t believe in God doesn’t mean I wouldn’t accept God if I encountered him.

    Sorry for the length

    Oh and Nathan we should do the book thing you asked Troy to do, and also we should have get together and play some heads up poker and you can bounce ideas off of me if you want. Would probably be better for your game as opposed to me going to KC with you and observing me at a table. I don’t think I have your number, but I think I gave you mine so give me a ring.

  • Micah

    I forgot to tab in that I really enjoy the blogs =]

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Bruce-

    Atheists argue against religion because we see religion as problem with society. A world without religion would be a world without Islamic extremists flying commercial aircraft into skyscrapers. A world without religion would be a world without Catholic and Protestant Irish killing each other over pathetically small differences. I could go on all night but I think I’ve made my point. Religion is not good for the world. As I said in my original post religion isn’t a prerequisite for morality. In fact it gives people an excuse for evil and intolerance and call it “God’s will”. The irony being that whoever your god is he seems to hate the same people you do.

    So atheism isn’t about denial but rather about trying to free people from their mental prisons for a more peaceful and tolerant world.

    We don’t seek atheist themed websites to prove anything. We read them because we’re interested in the perspectives of fellow atheists. I’m sure you feel the same way about Christian websites. It’s comfortable to be around like-minded people and share ideas and interests.

    I’m not against “nothing”. I’m against religious intolerance and religion infringing on my Constitutional rights. I’m against the foolish idea of inane attempts to try to get creationist nonsense taught in our public schools.

    Original Sin is a crock. A newborn baby isn’t guilty of anything. It hasn’t had an opportunity to do anything wrong. I find it humorously ironic that Christians are pro-life yet think we’re all a bunch of sinners fresh out of the womb just itching to do evil deeds. I’ll admit no one is perfect and as humans we make mistakes and some of us do bad things, but we need to take responsibility for our own actions and not blame it on temptations of a fictional Satan. As an atheist I DO seek forgiveness… instead of seeking it from your god. I seek it from the person I’ve wronged and from myself. Your god can’t grant me forgiveness for my actions that hurt another person… only that person I’ve hurt can do that. Getting forgiveness from your imaginary friend doesn’t make the situation any better… only making amends with the person you’ve hurt has the ability to do that.

    —————————————–

    Nathan-

    I’ve read the God Delusion as well. I found some of Dawkins’ arguments compelling, but it’s not a book I’d recommend to a believer to get them to rethink their position. In fact the book I’d recommend isn’t written by an atheist. It’s written by a former baptist minister with a Ph.D. in theology. The book I’d recommend is “The Reason Driven Life”, by Robert M. Price.

    So if you want to do this book thing you’ve suggested which I think is a good idea, that’s the book I pick and in fact I’d recommend everyone reading this right now to read that book if you haven’t already. I’ll email you about the details.

  • Brian Zahnd

    Dear Troy,

    Be careful not to oversimplify. Don’t forget that “a world without religion” has produced plenty of gulags. Check with Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn on this point. Religion can be poisonous, no doubt, but atheism has plenty of skeletons (millions and millions!) in its own closet.

    It is a mistake to oversimplify as if a world without religion has never been tried and if only it were it would produce utopia. It has been tried…and found wanting.

    There is something wrong with humans.

    Call it original sin or what you like (personally I’m not real keen on that terminology), but it seems quite obvious that human beings, religious or sans-religion, have a deep systemic malady. Christian crusades, Islamic terrorism, Stalinist purges and Pol Pot’s killing fields, not to mention the more mundane, garden variety crimes, all bear witness to the inescapable diagnosis that SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH US.

    The modernist idea that the Enlightenment project would produce education and prosperity sufficient to lift mankind out of his barbarous past died in the ovens of Auschwitz and a mushroom cloud over Hiroshima. Welcome to the postmodern world. The lesson learned is that our problems run deeper than ignorance and poverty…there is something inherently wrong with our species.

    Human beings are quite capable of poisoning religion into something hideous and intolerable, but human beings freed from the “mental prisons” of religion have proved themselves just as capable, if not more so, of genocidal crimes and hideous intolerance.

    Religion or not, there is something wrong with us.

    What do you think it is?

  • Wesley Tan

    I agree. It’s not the religion that corrupts humanity, it’s the humanity that corrupts the religion.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Brian-

    I was wondering if you would ever respond personally to any of my comments. I’m glad you have.

    You’re right, atheists are also capable of evil but the difference is atheists don’t use their atheism to justify their evil. Religious people who do evil DO use their religion to justify it. Atheists who do evil things do it for other reasons… non-religious reasons, such as political reasons, or because of a mental illness.

    I am not making a blanket statement lumping all religious people together because I know that there are indeed some wonderful… good people who happen to believe in your god. But the fact is that religious people who do evil use their religion to justify it.

    I notice that one of the favorite examples Christians like to use to counter my argument about religious violence is communists… especially Stalin. First of all when communism was established in the former Soviet Union the country wasn’t an atheist country. On the contrary Mother Russia is well-known for it’s beautiful Russian Orthodox churches. The new communist government after overthrowing the house of Romanov and ending the Czarist royal regime and establishing the socialist party that took control outlawed religion ONLY because the church challenged his political power. Prior to coming into power he was a member of the Russian Orthodox church.

    Stalin who is the Christian favorite example of atheist violence attended an Georgian seminary and studied to become a priest. While at the seminary he became interested in Marxism and ended up being expelled for it. His persecution of the churches were like Lenin’s, due to fear of opposition, not because of atheism.

    While it’s true that after the October Revolution and the communists seizing power from the Czars by the 1980′s 2/3 of the Soviet Union was indeed atheist, 1/3 of the country remained religious believers, just because their government outlawed practice of organized religion didn’t stop the true believers from practicing privately and indoctrinating future generations with their religious beliefs. If a revolution were to happen here in the States and a new government came to power that outlawed religion, would you give up your own belief in your god? Would stop teaching it to others? I would be surprised if you said, “yes”. You might not do it publicly out of fear of persecution, but I’d bet you’d still do it privately in small groups hoping none of your congregation was a government informer.

    My point is your argument is invalid because atheists don’t use atheism to justify their evil actions as religious people DO use their religion to justify their actions. The evil done by atheists have other motives not involving any religious belief or lack thereof.

    So I stand on my argument that religion is poisonous unless someone can present a compelling example of atheist atrocities that were motivated by their atheism. Because there is no shortage of religious atrocities to choose from…

    The Dark Ages
    Spanish Inquisition
    Crusades
    Holocaust

    To name a few.

  • Barry

    We like to think we are just a little smarter than the guy down the street. Sometimes this ego becomes an ism. I heard Adrian Rogers say one time that every ism should be a wuz’em. I am a little reluctant to join in becaus I believe we should never argue with an idiot because onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. And who knows, I may be the idiot. I do belive though that we as humans are born with something that other animals do not have, and that is the ability to argue with ourselves. I spent the biggest part of my 55 years wondering if there is really anything to the thought that there could really be a higher power, a heaven, a space in time called eternity. But one night, during one second in time, I was convinced that there is. And the wild thing about it is I didn’t convince myself. This same Power is avalible to all if you will only surrender to Him. I promise, you won’t be disappointed.

  • http://nathangann.com/ Nathan

    I’m ordering the book today. I hope to get it by Friday…Reason Driven Life.

    Troy, I’m still curious, which Christian philosophers you have read? Or respect?

    Maybe P. BZ will respond to your post about historical atrocities of Christians and atheists alike, as well as contributions by Christians (hospitals, universities, orphanages, fields of science, etc). If what you say is true, which I think it’s partially accurate, you have argued a non-sequitur.

    Hypothetically speaking, a whole bunch of people, but not everyone who thought “A” is true, decided to kill a group that followed “B”. Does it follow that “A” is false? Absolutely not. It just entails that PART of a group:
    - kill people over a belief that may or may not be true
    - may or may not be following “A” correctly in the first place

    For example, I don’t believe Islam is false because there are lunatics who strap bombs to two mentally handicapped women with Down syndrome, and kill dozens of people at two pet markets.

    Troy, this might be controversial to some, but I think the best AND worst thing for Jesus has been his followers. Even if Christians were the most loving and what you and I would consider historically behaved people (like the Quakers?) for 2000 years, it would not make Christianity true.

    I would submit that no group in history has “behaved” because we all do really stupid things, perhaps not genocide, but this idea of ethical normativity you are alluding to Troy, already speaks to some kind of objective, universal, or divine standard. Unless you are one of the few atheists who see where the problem of evil goes, and just deny the existence of evil? (I actually saw Michael Shermer do this over a series of 3 debates. First debate, one of his arguments against God was the traditional “problem of evil.” By the 3rd debate he is denying the existence of evil after hearing arguments from Doug Geiveitt in the previous two debates.)

    Micah,
    Good thoughts and insight, and I look forward to talking about those issues. Yes, we need to play soon!

    Hopefully we can get started next week and set up a reading/discussion schedule and converse by email? Micah I’ll call you. Troy send that email to “nate_gann@yahoo”

    How about that game last night?!

    Cheers.

  • Brian Zahnd

    Just a quick reply, Troy.

    Five things:

    1. Most atrocities are committed by religious people for the simple reason that most people are religious. It’s like arguing that since most people who commit atrocities walk on two legs that being bi-pedal is itself an evil. See Nathan’s explanation of a non-sequitur (Latin for “it does not follow”) argument.

    2. I’ve mentioned this before: Plenty of St. John and St. Jude hospitals, but no Voltaire or Nietzsche hospitals. It’s the Red Cross, not the Red Question Mark. Abolitionist movements have all been religious (Christian) based movements. I could go on. To be fair you need to factor these in with Inquisitions and Crusades.

    3. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you seem to be justifying Stalin. Hopefully I have miss read you. I don’t think you’d actually suggest that it is acceptable for governments to actively persecute religious groups simply for the “crime” of being religious. I don’t think you want to argue that because religion can be oppressive we should oppress the religious (even to the point of imprisonment, torture and death). It would be a tragic moral contradiction to support an idea that the religious should be imprisoned, tortured and put to death, lest they imprison, torture and put to death. Is religion that does not oppress (plenty of examples) evil in and of itself? Is believing in God itself a crime? It was under Stalin. So many questions. My good friends Igor Nikitin and Dmitri Poliakoff who are known throughout Russia for their work in the realm of human rights would certainly take issue with any attempt to justify the actions of Stalin. As one who has been to Russia on eight occasions I can tell you that indeed the Russian people are incorrigibly religious, despite nearly seven decades of enforced atheism. They should not be persecuted for this “crime.”

    4. Surely you are not suggesting that the Holocaust was an example of intolerance on the part of religion?! It was the genocidal slaughter of a religious group by fascism — albeit a fascism, that for its own purposes, was not above dressing itself up in religious garb. To paraphrase a lyric…

    “Religion is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”

    5. A bit on the Middle (Dark) Ages. The Dark Ages came about as a result of the final collapse of the Roman Empire. It was religious institutions in the form of Christian monasteries that preserved learning in Europe and eventually allowed it to flower again in the Renaissance. It was religion that prevented the light of learning and civilization from being completely extinguished in the Dark Ages.

    Anyway, those are some thoughts.

    Thank you for your contributions.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    I’m leaving shortly to go out of town overnite so I don’t have time to respond to everything here. I’ll come back and reply more in depth when I get back. I just want to respond to Brian’s question for me here in his 3rd point.

    Brian-

    No, I’m not justifying Stalin’s atrocities and I do NOT believe that religion should be persecuted or people killed for their religious beliefs. If I believed that I’d be no better than Islamic extremists who kill Westerners because we don’t believe in their religion. I was simply making the point that Stalin didn’t persecute religion because of his atheism. He did it because he feared opposition from the church and during the purges he killed in order to suppress any opposition. I was just clarifying that atheists don’t do evil because of atheism.

    Yes, the Holocaust was religiously motivated. Hitler was a devout Roman Catholic and exterminated Jews as “Christ Killers”. He had the support of the church in his atrocities. That isn’t simply “dressing up” as you put it, not with the church’s support.

    You’re right about one thing tho… Christians do indeed do a lot of charity work, much more than atheists to my knowledge although I know that atheists do in fact do charity work as well. But in your charity work you also attempting to convert people. You feed starving people the bible along with some food. That’s an ulterior motive.

    “God is great, he sent me here to give you this bread. Here’s a bible, learn about God.” That’s taking advantage of someone’s vulnerable state in order to covert them. If you just brought the food and left the bibles at home that would be different.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Oh and Nathan, I’ll email you when I get back, but to answer your question, I honestly have not read any Christian philosophers yet. Perhaps you can suggest someone you think I should look into.

    I don’t expect either of us to make a difference in each other’s beliefs with this reading books from alternate perspectives, because in order to do that one must be willing to open one’s mind to the possibility that the other is right. But perhaps we’ll at least gain some additional insight.

  • Bruce Moon

    Troy,
    Since we are verging upon the reductio ad Hitlerium argument, I might as well as delve into the fact that the Communist Holocaust of about 100 million was no anamoly, rather a direct consequence of the materialistic idea that man is just a beastly cog in the evolutionary class struggle. Doestovesky (“Without God everything is permissible”) and Nietszche (who predicted that the 20th century would be the bloodiest ever due to secularization and abandonment of Christian moral parameters) both foresaw the philosphical consequences of atheistic premises. And Holocaust survivor, author and psychologist Victor Frankl also did not see the Nazi Holocaust as due to religious intolerance, rather, “that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in the lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers.” Listen to the wisemen and you will be wise.

    Which brings us back to the”what’s wrong” question…More educated than ever, more”evolved,” definitely not more religious but religious still, more “scientific,” more secular, more “civilized” man unleashes a century of barbarity that ancient man would have cringed at. What’s the deal? Maybe there is something inherently wrong with man that the thin veneer of civilization, of culture and of education cannot hide. No?

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    My overnight trip got postponed another day due to the weather so I’ll respond to the things I haven’t responded to yet.

    Nathan-

    I’m not suggesting religion is false because of religious violence either. I’m simply saying that religion often teaches intolerance and intolerance leads to violence. This doesn’t mean all religious people are bad. In fact many religious people are wonderful loving people. The fact is that throughout history religious people have used their religious beliefs as a justification for violence. It’s an indisputable fact, the motivations for their violence was either their own religion or their intolerance of another’s religion.

    To me evil is simply human behavior without morality. Everyone regardless of their religious beliefs or lack thereof is capable of evil. Without religion we’d still have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things, but as long as we have religion we’ll continue to have good people doing evil things and using their religion to justify it.

    I actually didn’t watch the game last nite. Watching sports bores me.

    Brian-

    You’re right, a lot of atrocities are committed by religious people simply because most people are religious, but you can’t deny that there are a lot of atrocities committed BECAUSE of religion, not simply despite it. It’s THAT issue I have a problem with. If people didn’t use their religion to justify their atrocities you wouldn’t hear a peep out of me or any other atheist unless religious people were the only ones committing atrocities, but the fact is they do use their religion to justify it. Like I sad above, without religion we’d still have good people doing good things and bad people doing bad things for whatever motivations, but as long as we have religion we’ll continue to have good people doing bad things and using their religion to justify it.

    Bruce-

    You’re mistaken because Nietzsche hated Christianity. He blamed Christianity for society’s problems, not secularism. It would be hypocritical of him to claim both Christianity and secularism as the root of the problems with society. Perhaps you’re thinking of someone else.

    As for Dostoevsky, well it’s common among theists that their god is necessary for morality. Theists have a hard time understanding why atheists such as myself can be upstanding, law abiding citizens with a sense of morality. So I disagree with him in the belief that without god anything is permissible. In fact I see the opposite.

    You can argue the secularism of Communism til we’re both blue in the face but the fact is the motivations for the communist atrocities were not secular, but rather political. They just happened to committed by a secular government. It’s the non-sequitur Brian and Nathan are attempting to argue with me.

    Yes, both atheists and theists commit atrocities for non-religious reasons. I do not deny this, but atheists DO NOT commit atrocities because of their atheism or use their atheism to justify it. Therein lies the difference because many (but not all) atrocities committed by theists are committed because of their religion or because of their intolerance for another’s. The communist atrocities you speak of where churches were suppressed and church leaders and followers executed were not out of hatred for religion but out of fear of opposition by the church. It was politically motivated, not religiously motivated.

    You’re right, scientists were involved in the Holocaust during WW2. They were the ones doing atrocities in the name of science, but they were under orders of their fascist government which was lead by Hitler who was a devout Roman Catholic which inspired his anti-semitic views that lead to the mass extermination of Jews. I’ll agree that a lot of the atrocities committed by the Nazis were religiously motivated, but the fact remains that a lot of them were and they had the support of the church.

    I’ll say it one more time: Without religion good people would still do good things, bad people would still do bad things but as long as we have religion good people will do bad things and use their religion to justify it.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Oops in end of that 2nd to last paragraph I meant to say that I’ll agree that a lot of the atrocities committed by the Nazis were NOT religiously motivated, but the fact remains that a lot of them were and they had the support of the church.

  • http://nathangann.com/ Nathan

    Troy,

    I misunderstood what you were saying earlier. I agree, religions sometimes become fertile ground for intolerance, and potentially breed violence. It is upsetting to me to see Christians doing that sort of thing when Jesus is crystal clear about loving our enemies.

    Christians have been intolerant of other Christians, Jews, witches, slaves, communists, liberals, gays, the list goes on. As stated earlier, humanity has serious issues.

    Serious issues…which leads me to my point about evil.

    You and I use words like:
    Intolerance
    Violence
    Evil
    Morality
    Good

    These words are all loaded with normative definitions. That is, there is a behavior(s) that OUGHT to be a certain way. There is a way of living that SHOULD be done like this, and not like that.

    So…I think you might be misunderstanding what I, and others, are saying. Hopefully none of us are saying that atheists can’t be good and kind citizens. (In fact, I have met quite a few atheists that were far more polite than some of the Christians I’ve run into. And I have met some mean atheists also).

    Here’s the argument –
    Morality intolerance evil good…
    By what standard does an atheist adjudicate between them? What is good based on? What is evil based on? What STANDARD do you measure action A as good while action B was evil? We can get into this further because it could get complicated quickly, but that is the point I think people are trying to make. Maybe?

    It is circular reasoning to say that evil is what humans should not do. Know what I mean Vern?!

    Cheers.

    Not into sports eh?!!!! Well at least you’re not a Raiders fan. LOL

  • NT

    Troy –

    thanks for posting your position. It has spawned a lot of thought & response. It takes courage to stand against the masses. It seems accurate that you will not find God in your life. One cannot find what he refuses to seek.

    “The Truth is not dependent on my ability to understand what is going on.”

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Nathan-

    I think every individual has different views of morality. For example I personally don’t find anything morally wrong that doesn’t physically or emotionally harm another person. So for instance I don’t find the use of illegal drugs morally wrong. This doesn’t mean I use them myself simply because I respect my body and my health, but if someone else does it I figure that’s their choice. It’s a legal issue of course, but not a moral one. Someone else might disagree with me on that and feel that using illegal drugs is a moral issue. This doesn’t make me or them wrong. It’s just a difference of opinion. It’s only wrong if someone intends to enforce their own morality on another.

    Evil on the other hand I would define as any act that intentionally inflicts emotional or physical pain on another person without remorse. If someone steals food to feed their family, that would be wrong, but it isn’t evil, unless they are stealing from someone else who is equally or less needy than themselves. However, if someone steals something of value for personal gain, that would be evil.

    Good is more than just the absence of bad. Good would be doing something unexpected and selfless in service to the health or well-being of another without expectation of reward. Being given a reward for doing something good doesn’t make the deed any less good unless the reward was the only motivation for the action.

    I don’t really think it’s that complicated. Morality may be a gray area between 2 different people, but I don’t think evil is… at least it shouldn’t be and the only cases I can think of where evil is subjective is in cases of religious atrocities. For example the 9/11 terrorist attacks should be considered evil because they killed innocent people intentionally and without remorse. However, those behind the attacks obviously don’t feel that way because they are indoctrinated to believe that such actions is good because their god commands and rewards it. They see anyone who doesn’t follow the Islamic faith as evil.

    The only other examples I can think of where someone might commit an evil act and not think their actions are evil is someone who doesn’t mentally comprehend right and wrong. Someone mentally ill with an antisocial personality.

    I find religion mentally unhealthy because it provides an excuse for otherwise sane people to do evil and think their actions are good. It’s a delusion.

    The fact is there is no way to prove that ANY religion or no religion is an accurate path to choose. If a Christian can fully understand an appreciate exactly why they dismiss every other religious belief on the planet besides their own then they’ll understand why I dismiss theirs as well. Had you been born in Israel you’d likely be a Jew. If you were born in Afghanistan you’d likely be Islamic. If you were born in Vanuatu on the island of Tanna you’d be worshiping John Frum. If you were born in Utah you’d likely belong to the Latter Day Saints…etc. A person’s religion is nothing more than something they were indoctrinated with from birth based on where we were born and who our parents are.

    Faith doesn’t make something a fact. A devout Jew or a devout Muslim is every bit as faithful as a devout Christian. How can one know for sure whose religion is right? Or if any are? Faith?

    That’s not enough for me.

  • Bruce Moon

    Troy,
    Of course Nietzsche blamed Christianity for having “weakened” humanity by promoting compassion and service to the weak, and going against the modern “scientific” understanding of the survival of the fittest. I just thought it was noteworthy to see the convergance of opinion between the atheist founder of modern secular thought, a Jewish positivist scholar, and a Christians novelist thinker about the necessary connection between ideas and their consequences. Nietzsche fully admitted that Christianity produced the qualities of compassion and charity – virtues he despised. He also was unblinkingly honest about the consequences of abandoning God, rightly predicting that the 20th century would be the bloodiest ever due to this phenomena. Frankl, not only saw the vital connection between secularism/Darwinism and necessary violence, but he saw it first hand in the camps under the implementatioin of Nietzschean-Nazi doctrine.

  • Stacy C

    This is a thought in reference to Nathan and Troy’s discussion on morality.

    “I find religion mentally unhealthy because it provides an excuse for otherwise sane people to do evil and think their actions are good. It’s a delusion.”
    This is essentially the same as finding morality mentally unhealthy, because in the “eyes of the beholder” otherwise sane people engage in evil actions thinking their actions based on their morality is in actuality a good thing. To me, this idea of “religion/morality as an excuse for evil” is not the pertinent issue rather, more of a “symptom” of what REALLY needs to be examined…

    I’m just curious… “Where” does “every individual’s different view of morality” come from? You might say the environment. But, where did IT (meaning the morality itself) REALLY come from long, long ago to the extent that “every individual even HAS or encompasses a view of morality” regardless of their type or unique “view”?

    I think maybe the point or a point which is trying to be made is, within a human beings make-up there is a “morality barometer” type system, if you will, that every human (most every human) innately possesses. Sometimes or over time that barometer becomes warped by other humans, catastrophic childhoods, a multitude of environmental/cultural influences and just plain and simple personal selfishness, etc.

    However, the plain and simple point/fact is this: Why on earth do humans have an intrinsic view of morality, how or WHO put it there? One thing is for sure; when it (the morality barometer) was “made” it was made to have a VERY significant influence on the human. Most blogs are driven by this influence! Ok, most wars too.

    Putting “religion” aside, imagine the implications of KNOWING the answers to these questions.

    For myself personally, I KNOW who made my “morality barometer” and HE called me by name. And every day He works to fix, repair and adjust my barometer. As He does that, “religion” fades and my love for ALL the people expands, matures, and deepens.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Bruce-

    I don’t know a whole helluva lot about Nietzsche. What you said just seemed contradictory to what I DO know about him. I can’t argue that so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. I must say tho that if that’s something he said I can’t say I agree with it.

    Stacy-

    You were right in the first place. Morality is environmental, but also evolved as life did. If a god gave us morality then why do we all have different morals? Why do we disagree on what is right and wrong in grayer areas? Why are there some people who seem to have NO sense of morality whatsoever?

    God is just not a rational answer to irrational questions. It just leaves more questions but theists are ignorantly content with the Mysterious Ways Clause. Anything that makes no sense is shrugged off and given the “God works in mysterious ways” answer. Science is about solving mysteries. Theology is about ignoring them by sweeping them under the rug of faith.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Oh… I forgot to add I find it humorous that theists say they “KNOW” there is a god. Perhaps you can FEEL there is a god, or BELIEVE there is a god or THINK there is a god, but it’s impossible to know it. If it could be know then no religion would be preaching about faith because faith wouldn’t be necessary.

    I may be an atheist but I’m honest enough to say that I don’t know for a fact that there isn’t a god. I just don’t believe it’s within a logical realm of possibility for a god to exist. I would abandon my atheism instantly if there was compelling scientific evidence proving god’s existence, but until that day comes I’m not about to waste my time or my life devoting myself to useless religious rituals.

    It makes no sense to me that an omnipotent god would be unable or unwilling to leave no doubts in humanity regarding “his” existence and instead depend on faith. If your god was real faith would not be necessary.

  • Brian Zahnd

    Troy,

    You are correct in saying that we do not KNOW God is we BELIEVE God is. I heartily agree with you on this point. Of course your assumption is that faith is an invalid epistemology. Faith is not an invalid epistemology it is a different epistemology. Knowledge is to empiricism as faith is to revelation. It is an arrogant claim of modernity that empiricism is the only valid epistemology. Who says? If God is a transcendent being not “in” the universe (which I insist he must be to be “God” as we understand the term), then non-empirical revelation would be the most direct means to experience God.

    Troy, remember the question I asked earlier: What evidence would you require to believe in God? What empirical evidence could be beyond doubt? Is the materialist universe all there is? Are you sure? How do you know? If you require material evidence to believe in a non-material entity…well, do you see the problem with that position? You’re not so much an atheist as you are a materialist (in the philosophical sense of the word). You preclude the possibility of anything existing outside the material universe. What makes you so sure of this?

    There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio
    Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
    -Hamlet

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Brian-

    I don’t know what evidence I would require to believe in God. I suppose some kind of physical manifestation or even a mental one would work for me personally, but that wouldn’t be scientific proof in which one could share with the world. But that would at least convince me enough to abandon atheism.

    If Jesus Christ materialized It would be possible for god to do that again. Or something similar so it’s not outside of the realm of possibility for a non-material entity to prove material existence. In in fact don’t Christians believe Jesus is supposed to be coming again some day anyway? I can’t help but wonder what is taking him so long.

    I’m not so sure that there isn’t anything existing outside of the material world. I just don’t believe there is because it seems illogical.

    Having faith in something doesn’t make it true either. It seems silly to me to believe in something on faith without evidence especially something that (if it exists) has a major impact on human existence and the afterlife. You spend your whole life worshiping a god that very well might not exist just because you have faith in it. If your god doesn’t exist then that seems to me like a wasted life. If your god does exist I can’t believe that “he” would banish atheists to some hell just for lacking faith or belief. Even if your god does exist how do we know we’re practicing the right rituals or following the correct monotheistic religion, or hell how about polytheism? If you believe that god exists should you be so quick to dismiss other possible gods?

    Theists busy themselves with rituals and prayer. If a god does indeed exist I can’t imagine “he” would care about those things. I can imagine if your god exists he’s laughing at the primitive efforts of the religious in order to garner favor. There are over a thousand different Christian sects alone and beyond that every other religious denomination of which there are many. No one can know whose is the correct one. It seems to me that if your god did exist “he” would care more about people who lived good lives doing good deeds in service of humanity and the earth in general. These things seem far more important to me than foolish rituals and prayer.

  • David L. DeFrees

    To Brian and Troy

    Based on Romans 1:20, God has said that the physical Universe, in and of itself, is sufficient evidence for anyone who wants to understand there is a God. I believe that God stimulates that people who do not believe that He exists are without excuse because the physical Universe provides every person with overwhelming evidence of His existence via the many wonders of His creation.

    Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

    David L.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    David-

    I suppose if you’re a creationist then you would think that, but I trust science more than scripture. Scripture was written by people in an attempt to explain the unknown before modern scientific knowledge. The physical world isn’t evidence of your god because it can’t be proven that your god created the world. It’s a theological opinion, not scientific fact.

  • David L. DeFrees

    Troy

    The only point I was making is that God says people are without excuse for choosing not accept His existence because all they must do is to desist with their futile human reasoning, open there eyes and gaze upon the wonders in the Universe/world to know that only God could have created such things.

    There is no conflict between the Bible and true science. With very little effort, anyone with a computer can Google much scientific evidence supporting creation.

    It is not the responsibility of Christians to prove the existence of God via scientific evidence. We are commissioned to preach the good news, which is the Gospel. This is because…

    One man’s science in another man’s superstition. Further, accepted scientific maxims have continually changed throughout history, but God never changes.

    A person’s level of understanding of science is dependent upon each person’s relative intelligence. If God’s gift of eternal life was dependant on our understanding of science, then intelligent would have the upper hand, but God is not a respecter of persons.

    There are small children who know more about God than many of the world’s most renowned scientists. Consider that a small child who believes it when she says, “Jesus loves me. This I know, because the Bible tells me so.” This believing child already has eternal life in heaven whereas many geniuses will die and go to hell because they refused to believe. Believing that E=MC2 will not give you eternal life in Heaven. Believing in the Son of God will! His name is Jesus!

    This is why the bases upon which we discuss you salvation must be based on the Word, rather than our common intellectual acceptance or rejection of the world’s transitory scientific evidence to prove or disprove the reality of God.

    We are not saved by our intellectual understanding of science. We can only be saved by grace through faith in the Father’s risen Son.

    God has provided mankind with, but a single way to possess eternal life and that way is only available to you by believing in the risen Christ.

    Please consider…

    “Romans 10
    8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
    9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
    10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.”

    God knows you’re here, you just need to know He is here too. If you ask Jesus to make Himself known to you, He will, that is if you are receptive to Him.

    God the Father and his children love you. We all very much want to see you in Heaven when we get there, but the choice to believe will always remain yours to make.

    Please have a great day.

    David

  • Wesley Tan

    Troy, if I may I’d like to pick up on a small statement you made: “If your god was real faith would not be necessary.”

    May I ask what your definition of faith is? See I don’t believe that faith is anything like Richard Dawkins definition of it – “a blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence.” I don’t think you’ll find any Christian who believes that – if you do, please tell them they’re stupid.

    Faith instead bridges a gap – a gap between the known and the unknown, the observable and the unobservable, the comprehensible and the incomprehensible, and gives us access to what is above and beyond ourselves. Right now, if you’re reading this you’re probably sitting on a chair. You’ve got to have some sort of faith that it’s going to hold you up – or you wouldn’t have sat on it. When you get in your car and start it up you’ve got to have faith – we don’t know how every single component of that car works, yet we still trust it to get us from A to B.

    It isn’t a blind trust. But there IS still a remote chance that the chair will break, or that your car will explode when you turn the ignition. Truth be known we have faith in a huge number of things as we go about our everyday life… Even in science we put our FAITH in scientific theory – isn’t an important component of a good scientific theory the fact that it would be possible to DISPROVE the theory? So there’s an element of doubt included in that as well! Students of the philosophy of science will know that there is no absolute truth in scientific theory, only varying degrees of amounts of evidence available.

    In the end, if theism is a faith, atheism is too. There is no way science or religion could prove the existence of God beyond a shadow of a doubt – by very definition God exists beyond space and time, which we are constrained by. It’d be like an ant in my backyard trying to prove that Everest doesn’t exist. Even if God existed, science wouldn’t be able to ‘find’ him anyway. Thus science doesn’t lead directly to atheism – if can only lead you as far as agnosticism. Filling the gap the rest of the way requires faith.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    Wesley-

    Interesting point, but your metaphors aren’t equal to the point. This chair for example that I’ve sat in for about 5 years that I bought from Walmart in a box and put together myself… I took a risk the first time I sat in it and every other time afterwards I knew it would hold me up. I don’t have faith in the chair, I have experience that tells me I don’t need faith. Same goes for your other metaphors. I actually don’t trust my vehicles because experience has shown me that I’ve broken down many times so I make sure they are in tip top shape before driving them longer distances.

    We don’t put faith in science either. Yes, you’re right theories can be disproved with new evidence, but such occurrences are extremely rare. Science is pretty sure of itself, but because science is an ongoing, never-ending learning process it doesn’t commit itself to 100% certainty even in the face of a mountain of evidence simply because something could be discovered however remotely that would change everything. Science is honest in saying “This is what we know and have evidence for, but we aren’t going to stop looking for additional evidence even tho we strongly believe due to the evidence we have already that this is accurate”. Theology says, “We don’t have any evidence whatsoever except this 2000 year old book, our ancestor’s recycled beliefs and faith that it’s real.”

    One of the first things you said is that faith bridges a gap between the known and the unknown, the observable and the unobservable. That sounds to me like believing in something without evidence.

    The unobservable looks very much like the non-existent.

    Faith doesn’t give access to anything. It puts trust in something you don’t know for sure is really there.

    Atheism is NOT a faith. It’s a lack thereof. Theism has faith in something that has not been proven to exist. Atheism doesn’t trust faith and wants evidence. I don’t have faith that your god isn’t there. I have no evidence that your god is there and therefore I don’t even acknowledge the possibility of such an existence. I have no evidence that Bigfoot, unicorns, or the Loch Ness Monster exist either so I don’t believe in those things either. That doesn’t mean I have faith that they don’t exist. It simply means I have no evidence.

    You say there is no way for science to prove in your god’s existence. Maybe not today, or tomorrow. But it’s not outside the realm of possibility. Science is constantly finding new discoveries and new methods. We aren’t able to see many things with our naked eyes, then telescopes and microscopes were invented showing us things we never imagined. It was once believed that sickness was a punishment from your god. Today we know that it’s caused by microorganisms, viruses and bacteria. Just because something is unknown today, doesn’t mean it is forever outside the realm of possibility.

    Science DOES lead to atheism because science doesn’t put faith in something without evidence. We’ve never seen a dinosaur, but we have fossils to prove they once existed. Scientifically your god isn’t even a theory. It’s an hypothesis, and not even a very strong one. There’s no supporting evidence. This is why despite the fact that the majority of American citizens believe in creationism simply because the majority of American citizens are Christian, creationism will NEVER be taught in public schools because it lacks evidence necessary to be taught as science and theology has no place in the public school system.

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    David-

    Sorry I didn’t scroll up and notice that you responded to me again otherwise I would have responded to your post before responding to Wesley’s.

    Anyway…

    Desist with futile human reasoning? Surely you jest. It seems odd that a god who gave us the ability to reason would expect us to forgo it’s use?

    Using Google to find creationist websites doesn’t find evidence for creationism. It simply finds creationist attempts at explanations for science. One’s opinion isn’t evidence. There is absolutely no scientific evidence in support of creationism. Nice try tho. The fact is most creationists who disagree with evolution don’t even have an understanding of evolution. For example many creationists assume evolution teaches that humans descended from apes. This is not accurate. Evolution teaches that humans and apes have a common ancestor. Did you know that chimpanzees share 94% of DNA with humans?

    You’re right science changes. That is the nature of science because it is an attempt to continue to learn new things and never give up looking for new discoveries and new methods. There is beauty in change. You’re wrong about god remaining constant tho. We’ve evolved from people who worshiped several different gods. Most of these gods have shared many of the same attributes and qualities, but the stories and beliefs have changed over the centuries just as scientific belief changed over history with new evidence theology changed as well.

    If you study and research other religious beliefs you’ll see similarities in them. Did you know that Jesus Christ isn’t the only divine mortal to be believed to have been born of a virgin mother whose birthday was celebrated during the winter solstice (December 25th)? Check out Mithra. Many Christian rituals are based on recycled ancient pagan rituals because Christianity was born out of ancient pagan religions.

    These small children who you claim know more about God than renowned scientists are actually indoctrinated to believe by their parents. The fact is they don’t understand theology. Their minds are like a sponge and they repeat what they say hear with all the understanding of a parrot. Children are known to have imaginary friends. Adults should know better.

    Your hellmongering is just another example of why I’m an atheist. I can’t believe that a loving god would banish his people to hell simply for not having faith or believing without evidence. Does your god really reward such foolishness? If my ignorance is the key to the gates of heaven then I’d rather not go there. It seems to me that if your god existed he would care more about someone’s quality of life than of their religious beliefs. Hellmongering does nothing for me except write you off as a religious zealot. The fact is I don’t believe in any afterlife. There is no heaven or hell. When we die we simply cease to exist except in the minds of those who live on and remember us until they cease to exist. Immortality is only available by being recorded in history.

  • Davfid L DeFrees

    Troy

    The reasoning of man without God’s wisdom leads to destruction.

    I read Darwin’s theory of evolution when I was in sixth grade and understood it. I also have read the Bible and have been given understanding of much of it. Having read, and considered both, evolution fails to measure up to God’s Word in logic and/or truth.

    Actually there are several different theories of evolution being taught, just as there are a number of versions of creation being taught. I find all theories of evolution to be nonsense as well as many schools of thought on creation. I believe along the lines of the Gap belief, which there are also several variations of.

    Regarding you remark, “Did you know that chimpanzees share 94% of DNA with humans?”

    Did you know that everything in the physical world is made up of the same 100+ elements?

    Regarding you comment, “That is the nature of science because it is an attempt to continue to learn new things and never give up looking for new discoveries and new methods.”

    The most that scientists will ever learn is only what God already knows.

    Regarding you comment, “You’re wrong about god remaining constant tho. We’ve evolved from people who worshiped several different gods. Most of these gods have shared many of the same attributes and qualities, but the stories and beliefs have changed over the centuries just as scientific belief changed over history with new evidence theology changed as well.”

    We didn’t evolve. I thought you were an atheist. So which is it? Do you believe you evolved from, people who worshipped one God or many Gods?

    Regarding your comment, “There is beauty in change.”

    I agree. It is a beautiful thing to see an unbeliever become a new creature in Christ Jesus.

    Regarding you comment, “If you study and research other religious beliefs you’ll see similarities in them.”

    The most common belief among them is that most subscribe to some sort of supernatural being i.e., a god, but there is only one who worships the true God. That would be Christianity.

    Regarding your comment, “Did you know that Jesus Christ isn’t the only divine mortal to be believed to have been born of a virgin mother whose birthday was celebrated during the winter solstice (December 25th)? Check out Mithra.”

    You can believe that a Mac truck doesn’t run on wheels, but it doesn’t make it so.

    Regarding you comment, “Many Christian rituals are based on recycled ancient pagan rituals because Christianity was born out of ancient pagan religions.”

    Actually you have it backwards. All pagan religions are simply demonic perversions of Godly worship. Christians are to worship God in Spirit and in Truth.

    Regarding your comment, “These small children who you claim know more about God than renowned scientists are actually indoctrinated to believe by their parents. The fact is they don’t understand theology. Their minds are like a sponge and they repeat what they say hear with all the understanding of a parrot. Children are known to have imaginary friends. Adults should know better.”

    You just have meet God as many children have. You don’t have to know anything about theology to experience the new birth via God’s Word. All you have to do is to believe in the risen Christ.

    Regarding you comment, “Your hellmongering is just another example of why I’m an atheist.”

    Actually I am a Heavenmonger. You should try it sometime.

    Troy, no one is responsible for you choosing to be an atheist except for you. God is there. He is real. He loves you. He sent his Son to die so you can have eternal life. All He requires of you is that you believe Him.

    Regarding your comment, “I can’t believe that a loving god would banish his people to hell simply for not having faith or believing without evidence. Does your god really reward such foolishness?”

    I am not asking you to believe that God has banished anyone. Adam is responsible for the unsaved being sold under a curse of sin and death. Jesus gave you the ability to break the bonds of the death that Adam loosed on all of his descendants, of which you are one, by believing He has risen. Jesus is you answer!

    Regarding your comment, “If my ignorance is the key to the gates of heaven then I’d rather not go there.”

    Considering the fiery alternative to Heaven, I would use any key that worked, but the only key that will work is belief in the risen Christ. Jesus is His name.

    Regarding you comment, “It seems to me that if your god existed he would care more about someone’s quality of life than of their religious beliefs.”

    Adam sold all mankind under sin by his disobedience. God loved you enough that He paid the price for all sin with the life of His Son Jesus who was obedient unto death. All you have to do is choose to believe in God’s payment for man’s sin, who is the risen Lord Jesus.

    Regarding you comment, “Hellmongering does nothing for me except write you off as a religious zealot. “

    Then go the Heavenmongering route. It’s great stuff.

    Regarding your comment, “The fact is I don’t believe in any afterlife. There is no heaven or hell. When we die we simply cease to exist except in the minds of those who live on and remember us until they cease to exist. Immortality is only available by being recorded in history.”

    Unfortunately you do not have the ability to dictate the type of choices you have. You only have the ability to choose between the two choices which you actually have.

    Choice 1) Eternal life in Heaven by God’s grace (ability) through your faith (trust/confidence) in Christ Jesus.

    Choice 2) Eternal death (forever cut off from the Spirit of God) in the lake of fire which burns for ever.

    Let me ask you a question. How can you hope to understand Spiritual truth by using only your five senses to gather information form the physical world in which you exist?

    Have a wonderful day Troy.

    God love you! I love you!

    …and Jesus is still your answer.

    David

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    David-

    I fear I’m going to end up something like Barry mentioned here, but what the hell…

    You read Darwin’s theory of evolution in 6th grade? Wow. Well I don’t know how old you are but I assume you’re an adult and at least 10 years older than that. My point is there have been advancements and discoveries in the field of evolutionary biology since you were a child. We know way more about evolution today than Darwin could have imagined.

    Yes, I knew that everything in the physical world is made up of the same 100 Elements. That doesn’t prove anything either way. If you believe in creationism it means your god used the same materials to create everything. If you don’t then you theorize that it further supports evolution.

    There are not several different theories of evolution being taught. There’s one. Evolution is nothing more or less than what we call the process of life on earth adapting and changing with it’s environment over time. There are different theories regarding abiogenesis but that’s a different topic.

    We’re constantly evolving and yes we all come from people who worshiped different gods. That has nothing to do with my atheism. Just because my parents or grandparents or great grandparents etc were theists doesn’t mean I have to be one. Whatever point you were attempting to make there got lost in translation.

    Now how would you know that Christianity worships the “true God” and no one else? I’m sure every other religious school of thought would claim the exact same thing you are about their religions. Let me guess… faith? However you come to that conclusion it’s arrogance. That fact is Muslims, Jews, and Christians worship the same god. Jews and Muslims deny the divinity of Jesus Christ. Muslims see him as prophet and Jews see him as a heretic, but the god they worship is the same as your god.

    Your Mac truck metaphor makes no sense. One can see that a truck runs on wheels. Your god is not something that can be seen.

    No I don’t have it backwards… do some research about the history of Christianity and other religions. Open your mind to other possibilities and you’ll see it for yourself. Christianity was born out of ancient pagan religions and shares most of the same rituals.

    Children believe in Santa Claus, too but it’s not Santa that brings them presents. A child will believe anything he or she is told. Believing in something without understanding what it is you believe in and why is ignorance.

    I have tried believing and it got me nowhere. About the same age you picked a book on Darwin’s Theory of Evolution I put down my bible and opened my mind to other possibilities. By my teens I was an atheist and I’ve been one for more than half my life. I’ve been on both sides of the fence and your side is the inside a prison.

    There are no choices because there is no afterlife. Heaven or hell a fantasy. Death is the end and there is nothing beyond death.

    If Jesus is my answer I want a different question.

    I’m done debating this with you because your arguments aren’t rational. Feel free to respond but I’ll just skip over it assuming more of the same.

  • David L DeFrees

    RE: “I fear I’m going to end up something like Barry mentioned here, but what the hell…”

    I thought you didn’t believe in hell?

    RE: “You read Darwin’s theory of evolution in 6th grade? Wow. Well I don’t know how old you are but I assume you’re an adult and at least 10 years older than that. My point is there have been advancements and discoveries in the field of evolutionary biology since you were a child. We know way more about evolution today than Darwin could have imagined.”

    There has been no real chance concerning the theory of natural selection which I read about in 6th Grade. At any rate, I expect you don’t know too much about evolution because evolution does not exist.

    RE: “Yes, I knew that everything in the physical world is made up of the same 100 Elements. That doesn’t prove anything either way.

    Your DNA example proved nothing either way either.

    RE: “If you believe in creationism it means your god used the same materials to create everything. If you don’t then you theorize that it further supports evolution.”

    Say what?

    RE: There are not several different theories of evolution being taught. There’s one. Evolution is nothing more or less than what we call the process of life on earth adapting and changing with it’s environment over time. There are different theories regarding abiogenesis but that’s a different topic.”

    Not true. Evolution was and is still based in the theory of natural selection. Not only that, evolution only promotes the notion that members within a specific species are improved via natural selection; it also promotes the thinking that there are genetic jumps from one species to another.

    RE: “We’re constantly evolving and yes we all come from people who worshiped different gods. That has nothing to do with my atheism. Just because my parents or grandparents or great grandparents etc were theists doesn’t mean I have to be one. Whatever point you were attempting to make there got lost in translation.

    It was in English.

    RE: “Now how would you know that Christianity worships the “true God” and no one else?”

    Because I know Him.

    RE: “I’m sure every other religious school of thought would claim the exact same thing you are about their religions. Let me guess… faith? However you come to that conclusion it’s arrogance. ”

    Arrogance? LOL Try knowledge.

    RE: “That fact is Muslims, Jews, and Christians worship the same god. Jews and Muslims deny the divinity of Jesus Christ. Muslims see him as prophet and Jews see him as a heretic, but the god they worship is the same as your god. ”

    Muslims don’t worship the same God as Christians and Jews.

    RE: “Your Mac truck metaphor makes no sense. One can see that a truck runs on wheels. Your god is not something that can be seen.”

    You will see Him and I hope when you do that He sees you in the light of salvation.

    RE: “No I don’t have it backwards… do some research about the history of Christianity and other religions. Open your mind to other possibilities and you’ll see it for yourself. Christianity was born out of ancient pagan religions and shares most of the same rituals.”

    Christianity was born of a belief in Christ, hence the word Christian. If you were correct, it would be called Pagianity. lol

    RE: “Children believe in Santa Claus, too but it’s not Santa that brings them presents. A child will believe anything he or she is told. Believing in something without understanding what it is you believe in and why is ignorance.”

    Children who believe on Jesus have eternal life with God.

    RE: “I have tried believing and it got me nowhere.”

    You should quit trying and just do it.

    RE: ” About the same age you picked a book on Darwin’s Theory of Evolution I put down my bible and opened my mind to other possibilities.”

    ..all the good it did you.

    RE: “By my teens I was an atheist and I’ve been one for more than half my life. I’ve been on both sides of the fence and your side is the inside a prison.”

    What were you before you were an atheist? If you were never born-again, then you haven’t been on both sides of the fence.

    RE: “There are no choices because there is no afterlife. Heaven or hell a fantasy. Death is the end and there is nothing beyond death.”

    If you believe that, then way are you posting to me? Are you trying to convince me to convert to your hopeless view? I think it more likely that you are just another unhappy person looking for the love of God. Well, you have come to the right place.

    RE: “If Jesus is my answer I want a different question.”

    Okay, why do you believe that there is nothing after death?

    Why didn’t you answer my question to you?

    “How can you hope to understand Spiritual truth by using only your five senses to gather information from the physical world in which you exist?”

    RE: “Feel free to respond but I’ll just skip over it assuming more of the same.”

    Assumption can be a terrible thing.

    You have a great day.

    David

  • Brian Zahnd

    I started to say something about the difference between knowing and believing here…but decided to turn it into a post of it’s own. See “Knowing and Believing.”

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    David-

    I can’t believe I’m actually responding again but it’s painful to see someone wallow in their own ignorance so I’ll attempt to try again here even tho I seriously doubt it will do any good. I’m obviously beating a dead horse.

    No, I don’t believe in hell. “What the hell” is simply an expression. I hope you’re intelligent enough to realize that but since you pointed that out I have my doubts and figured I’d clarify. Making an expression doesn’t have bearing on one’s beliefs or lack thereof.

    You’re right the theory of evolution and natural selection haven’t changed, but what science knows about evolution itself HAS changed. We know much more about it today than Darwin ever knew. Darwin didn’t know about DNA for example. On the contrary I know quite a bit about evolution and saying evolution doesn’t exist is one of the most ignorant statements you’ve said so far. Evolution has been PROVEN to exist at least on the microevolutionary scale. It’s common scientific knowledge that bacteria is capable of evolving into a strand that is immune to antibiotics. Why do think we’re advised to get flu shots every year? Because each year a new strain evolves that is immune to last year’s vaccine. That’s evolution my ignorant friend.

    Also my DNA point DOES give credibility to evolution because if we are 94% similar to chimps but much less similar to dolphins that means in terms of evolution we are closer “relatives” to chimps than we are to dolphins. The 100 elements doesn’t give either creationism or evolution any credibility because like I said it could either mean that your god just used the same elements to create everything or it could mean we evolved from the same elements. It doesn’t give more support to one or the other, but DNA does.

    I don’t know what you mean by “genetic jumps” from one species to another, but evolution doesn’t say something like apes evolved into humans. That’s not accurate. Humans and other primates simply share a common ancestor. Evolution doesn’t claim that one species will evolve into another. Our relationship to apes on an evolutionary scale is similar to a cousin. Our cousins aren’t related to us by the same biological parents. We share the same biological grandparents. Our evolutionary connection is similar to that with apes. We don’t share the same “parents” as our primate “cousins” but rather we share the same “grandparents” or probably more accurately the same “great grandparents”. These primate species we evolved from are now extinct.

    Such evolutionary changes are rare. It requires breeding between different breeds of the same species which depends on environmental circumstances. For example a gray wolf and an arctic wolf are not likely to mate in the wild even tho in doing so they would be capable of creating an offspring. However if you put a male and female from each species alone together in a restrictive environment cut off from their own breeds they may over time eventually mate simply because there’s no other alternative. In terms of the wild if gray wolves and arctic wolves both became endangered they might find a common cause to strengthen their numbers and interbreed.

    It’s not likely that humans will ever evolve into another species simply because there are no other homo species in which to cross breed with to create a new breed. The other species have become extinct. But rest assured humans are still evolving within the species. The changes are microevolutionary. For example our eyesight is getting worse since we no longer depend on them for survival. Instead of using our eyesight to peer into the darkness for possible predators or down the shaft of a spear at possible prey we are using our eyesight to stare at computer screens and read company memos.

    How is your “knowledge” of your religion different from someone else’s “knowledge” of theirs? To believe that you’re right and they are wrong without evidence is arrogance. If you can come up with an argument to disprove someone else’s religion that can’t also be used to disprove yours only then can it be credible.

    Muslims DO indeed worship the same god as Christians and Jews. You obviously don’t know jack about Islam. You think it’s a different god because they call it “Allah” instead of God or they worship Mohammad as a prophet instead of Jesus Christ? That’s the only difference between Christianity and Islam. The god both worship is the same god. Do some research.

    Once again, YES Christianity was born out of ancient pagan religions. Early Christians converted from pagan religions to Christianity and kept most of the rituals from their former pagan beliefs. You really need to do some research. Start with Mithra as I suggested earlier because your Jesus Christ is practically a carbon copy of Mithra.

    Becoming an atheist did plenty of good for me. Why would you assume otherwise? You don’t know me. You don’t know my life. Being an atheist has done more for me than being a Christian did.

    I was raised a Catholic, but I assume that your born again evangelism is superior since you’re right and everyone else is wrong. The irony is that the Roman Catholic church is much older than your born again evangelism and has been around since the days of the Roman Empire. I was quite devout until I started to question it. From there I didn’t abandon Christianity altogether. In fact I started researching other religions in hopes of finding something better suited for me than the Catholic church. It was in my research that my eyes were opened and became agnostic then eventually abandoning any belief in god altogether.

    No, I’m not trying to get you to convert. It would be a futile effort. You’ve already assimilated to the Borg collective. I’m simply sharing my own views here. If Pastor Brian didn’t want an atheist view posted on this thread then he shouldn’t have posted an entry titled “Letter to an Atheist”. Why do you assume that I’m an unhappy person? I face difficulties in my life as others do, but I’m not an unhappy person. I like who I am. I don’t regret the choices I’ve made in my life. I’m not depressed. I don’t take any anti-depressant medications. I’m quite a well-adjusted and normal individual and I’m most certainly not looking for God or Jesus.

    I believe that there is nothing after death because there is no evidence proving otherwise.

    I didn’t answer your question because there is no answer to it. Not even you can answer that question. It is impossible to understand a spiritual world when you’re confined to a physical one. A spiritual world if one exists could hypothetically only be experienced by a person experiencing a near death experience, but even that isn’t trustworthy because even if someone’s heart stops there’s still time to revive them before their brain dies and as long as the brain is still functional one is capable of tapping into their subconscious mind and experiencing vivid hallucinations. The only true way to have any rational knowledge of a spiritual world if one exists is to die and stay dead.

    You’re right assumption can be a terrible thing but in this case I was right you posted more of the same irrational responses to logical questions and irrational questions you expect logical answers to. Yet I felt compelled to respond for no other reason than I pity your ignorance but my pity only goes so far.

    For the record I’m not claiming your belief in your god is ignorant, but rather your lack of knowledge regarding the topics of discussion involving evolution and religions including Christianity shows ignorance. I’ve broadened my horizons. I’ve studied mythology and ancient religions. I’ve studied modern religions and their customs. I know what I’m talking about and squeezing your eyes shut and shouting, “NOT SO!” doesn’t change the facts.

    I can’t honestly say that your god doesn’t exist. I can’t say my believe that your god doesn’t exist is true and your belief in your god is false. The reason is there is absolutely no evidence to speak of either way and therefore I’ve chosen to live my life on the assumption that there isn’t a god until evidence proves otherwise. No theist can honestly say that he is right and I am wrong either because like you said, how can a person understand the spiritual world with their 5 senses when they are confined to a physical world? The answer is you can’t. You can’t regardless of whether you’re a theist or an atheist all you can do is decide to believe one way or the other.

    If you have something of rational intelligence to add to this I’ll respond but if I’ll dismiss the baseless propaganda and the ill informed assumptions you make on topics you lack knowledge of. So I expect any further response I have to something you have to say in this thread will be brief from this point on. I urge you to do some more research on evolution and the history of theology and mythology before continuing to debate those topics.

  • David L. DeFrees

    Hi Troy.

    Thank you for your, if not insightful, thoughtful reply.

    RE: “I can’t believe I’m actually responding again but it’s painful to see someone wallow in their own ignorance so I’ll attempt to try again here even tho I seriously doubt it will do any good. I’m obviously beating a dead horse.”

    I agree, so when are you going to see the light?

    By the way, I knew you would respond because you are just looking for Jesus and you hope someone here will hook you up.

    RE: “No, I don’t believe in hell. “What the hell” is simply an expression. I hope you’re intelligent enough to realize that but since you pointed that out I have my doubts and figured I’d clarify. Making an expression doesn’t have bearing on one’s beliefs or lack thereof.”

    Why do you use something you don’t believe in to express yourself?

    RE: “You’re right the theory of evolution and natural selection haven’t changed, but what science knows about evolution itself HAS changed. We know much more about it today than Darwin ever knew. Darwin didn’t know about DNA for example. On the contrary I know quite a bit about evolution and saying evolution doesn’t exist is one of the most ignorant statements you’ve said so far. Evolution has been PROVEN to exist at least on the microevolutionary scale. It’s common scientific knowledge that bacteria is capable of evolving into a strand that is immune to antibiotics. Why do think we’re advised to get flu shots every year? Because each year a new strain evolves that is immune to last year’s vaccine. That’s evolution my ignorant friend.”

    Well, at least you believe we are friends. I am smart enough to know that evolution does not exist. In all the species that currently exist, don’t you think we would see at least one of them evolve into another species somewhere on earth?

    RE: “Also my DNA point DOES give credibility to evolution because if we are 94% similar to chimps but much less similar to dolphins that means in terms of evolution we are closer “relatives” to chimps than we are to dolphins. The 100 elements doesn’t give either creationism or evolution any credibility because like I said it could either mean that your god just used the same elements to create everything or it could mean we evolved from the same elements. It doesn’t give more support to one or the other, but DNA does.”

    People and animals are all made up of the same basic elements. Animals and people are both made up of atoms, which compose cells, etc. Why does it surprise you that there are similarities in DNA chains amongst the living things which God created? You have missed the most important thing which is the difference in the spiritual characteristics between people and animals.

    RE: “I don’t know what you mean by “genetic jumps” from one species to another, but evolution doesn’t say something like apes evolved into humans. That’s not accurate. Humans and other primates simply share a common ancestor. Evolution doesn’t claim that one species will evolve into another. Our relationship to apes on an evolutionary scale is similar to a cousin. Our cousins aren’t related to us by the same biological parents. We share the same biological grandparents. Our evolutionary connection is similar to that with apes. We don’t share the same “parents” as our primate “cousins” but rather we share the same “grandparents” or probably more accurately the same “great grandparents”. These primate species we evolved from are now extinct.”

    Such evolutionary changes are rare. It requires breeding between different breeds of the same species which depends on environmental circumstances. For example a gray wolf and an arctic wolf are not likely to mate in the wild even tho in doing so they would be capable of creating an offspring. However if you put a male and female from each species alone together in a restrictive environment cut off from their own breeds they may over time eventually mate simply because there’s no other alternative. In terms of the wild if gray wolves and arctic wolves both became endangered they might find a common cause to strengthen their numbers and interbreed.”

    Actually evolution does try to explain the difference in the species by presuming that life emerged by chance from some sort of primordial ooze in the form of a living cell which evolved into more complicated forms of life. These are genetic jumps, from one type of species to another. There has never ever been a genetic jump from one species to another.

    You should go study your biology. Even though certain species can produce an offspring by mating with a different species, the offspring of such a matchup can’t reproduce. Like when a horse and donkey cross breed to make a mule, but all mules can’t reproduce in kind after either parent or produce offspring among themselves.

    RE: “It’s not likely that humans will ever evolve into another species simply because there are no other homo species in which to cross breed with to create a new breed. The other species have become extinct. But rest assured humans are still evolving within the species. The changes are microevolutionary. For example our eyesight is getting worse since we no longer depend on them for survival. Instead of using our eyesight to peer into the darkness for possible predators or down the shaft of a spear at possible prey we are using our eyesight to stare at computer screens and read company memos.”

    The theory of natural selection does not require another species for a species to evolve into another species. Again, go back to your basic biology concerning the inability of crossbred species to reproduce. I think you need to go read the theory of evolution if you are going to try to convince someone that it is true.

    RE: How is your “knowledge” of your religion different from someone else’s “knowledge” of theirs? To believe that you’re right and they are wrong without evidence is arrogance. If you can come up with an argument to disprove someone else’s religion that can’t also be used to disprove yours only then can it be credible.

    Say what?

    RE: “Muslims DO indeed worship the same god as Christians and Jews. You obviously don’t know jack about Islam. You think it’s a different god because they call it “Allah” instead of God or they worship Mohammad as a prophet instead of Jesus Christ? That’s the only difference between Christianity and Islam. The god both worship is the same god. Do some research.”

    The God of the Bible has many names, but Allah isn’t one of them. You are absolutely wrong. The God of Islam is not the God of Abraham or the Father of Jesus. Start with this. There is plenty of information on this online.

    http://www.eaec.org/bookstore/books/who_is_this_allah.htm

    RE: “Once again, YES Christianity was born out of ancient pagan religions. Early Christians converted from pagan religions to Christianity and kept most of the rituals from their former pagan beliefs. You really need to do some research. Start with Mithra as I suggested earlier because your Jesus Christ is practically a carbon copy of Mithra.”

    Jesus is the Son of God and not a carbon copy of Mithra. Jesus existed before any pagan belief. Paganism is just one of many corrupt facets of the soul which befell mankind as a result of Adam selling himself under sin.

    RE: “Becoming an atheist did plenty of good for me. Why would you assume otherwise? You don’t know me. You don’t know my life. Being an atheist has done more for me than being a Christian did.”

    Well, enjoy the ride, because you are in for a real surprise when you die.

    RE: “I was raised a Catholic, but I assume that your born again evangelism is superior since you’re right and everyone else is wrong. The irony is that the Roman Catholic church is much older than your born again evangelism and has been around since the days of the Roman Empire. I was quite devout until I started to question it. From there I didn’t abandon Christianity altogether. In fact I started researching other religions in hopes of finding something better suited for me than the Catholic church. It was in my research that my eyes were opened and became agnostic then eventually abandoning any belief in god altogether.”

    There were born-again Christians. Like Paul, hundreds of years before the first person ever thought of becoming Roman Catholic.

    So if you don’t believe in anything or don’t want to believe in anything, why are you here?

    RE: “No, I’m not trying to get you to convert. It would be a futile effort. You’ve already assimilated to the Borg collective. I’m simply sharing my own views here. If Pastor Brian didn’t want an atheist view posted on this thread then he shouldn’t have posted an entry titled “Letter to an Atheist”. Why do you assume that I’m an unhappy person? I face difficulties in my life as others do, but I’m not an unhappy person. I like who I am. I don’t regret the choices I’ve made in my life. I’m not depressed. I don’t take any anti-depressant medications. I’m quite a well-adjusted and normal individual and I’m most certainly not looking for God or Jesus.”

    So why are you here talking to me?

    RE: “I believe that there is nothing after death because there is no evidence proving otherwise.”

    The risen Christ proves other wise. You just need to get to know him.

    RE: “I didn’t answer your question because there is no answer to it. Not even you can answer that question. It is impossible to understand a spiritual world when you’re confined to a physical one. A spiritual world if one exists could hypothetically only be experienced by a person experiencing a near death experience, but even that isn’t trustworthy because even if someone’s heart stops there’s still time to revive them before their brain dies and as long as the brain is still functional one is capable of tapping into their subconscious mind and experiencing vivid hallucinations. The only true way to have any rational knowledge of a spiritual world if one exists is to die and stay dead.”

    You are a spirit being who posses a soul and lives in a physical body. Your sprit is capable of sensing spiritual things, even though most people only know how to pay attention to their five senses..

    RE: “You’re right assumption can be a terrible thing but in this case I was right you posted more of the same irrational responses to logical questions and irrational questions you expect logical answers to. Yet I felt compelled to respond for no other reason than I pity your ignorance but my pity only goes so far.”

    It’s okay with me if you respond. I pity my ignorance too. I just don’t know everything yet but, check with me next week.

    RE: “For the record I’m not claiming your belief in your god is ignorant, but rather your lack of knowledge regarding the topics of discussion involving evolution and religions including Christianity shows ignorance. I’ve broadened my horizons. I’ve studied mythology and ancient religions. I’ve studied modern religions and their customs. I know what I’m talking about and squeezing your eyes shut and shouting, “NOT SO!” doesn’t change the facts.”

    Shouting? LOL! Why would I shout at you? You are just someone looking for Jesus and I have him and He has me and He would like you to get to know him too.

    RE: “I can’t honestly say that your god doesn’t exist. I can’t say my believe that your god doesn’t exist is true and your belief in your god is false. The reason is there is absolutely no evidence to speak of either way and therefore I’ve chosen to live my life on the assumption that there isn’t a god until evidence proves otherwise. No theist can honestly say that he is right and I am wrong either because like you said, how can a person understand the spiritual world with their 5 senses when they are confined to a physical world? The answer is you can’t. You can’t regardless of whether you’re a theist or an atheist all you can do is decide to believe one way or the other.

    Well, there is hope for you. Just go outside and look up at the sky on a clear night and see if you don’t see divine creation.”

    RE: “If you have something of rational intelligence to add to this I’ll respond but if I’ll dismiss the baseless propaganda and the ill informed assumptions you make on topics you lack knowledge of. So I expect any further response I have to something you have to say in this thread will be brief from this point on. I urge you to do some more research on evolution and the history of theology and mythology before continuing to debate those topics.”

    1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

    Have a great day.

    Be sure to give the night sky a check.

    David

  • Brian Zahnd

    The partisans on either side of the Evolution debate tend to talk past one another.

    For what it’s worth, I’m with G.K Chesterton on this one. A hundred years ago he summed up Evolution as it touches Christianity in his typically succinct way in a memorable passage in his brilliant Orthodoxy. You may have to read it a few times to get what he’s saying, but it’s worth the effort. (For that matter, I recommend the entire book.)

    “Evolution is a good example of that modern intelligence which, if it destroys anything, destroys itself. Evolution is either an innocent scientific description of how certain earthly things came about; or, if it is anything more than this, it is an attack upon thought itself. If evolution destroys anything, it does not destroy religion but rationalism. If evolution simply means that a positive thing called an ape turned very slowly into a positive thing called a man, then it is stingless for the most orthodox; for a personal God might just as well do things slowly as quickly, especially if, like the Christian God, he were outside time. But if it means anything more, it means that there is no such thing as an ape to change, and no such thing as a man for him to change into. It means that there is no such thing as a thing. At best, there is only one thing, and that is a flux of everything and anything. This is an attack not upon the faith, but upon the mind; you cannot think if there are no things to think about. You cannot think if you are not separate from the subject of thought. Descartes said, ‘I think; therefore I am.’ The philosophic evolutionist reverses and negatives the epigram. He says, ‘I am not; therefore I cannot think.’”

    From Orthodoxy, Chapter 3, The Suicide of Thought

  • David L. DeFrees

    Brian,

    In a few to many words, is Chesterton saying that the theory of evolution is a self-inflicted attack on mind which does not lessen a person’s faith (confidence/trust) in the truth of God’s Word?

    David

  • http://liberalatheist.journalspace.com Troy

    David-

    Once again. No, I am NOT looking for Jesus. Dude, I’ve been in love with a devout Christian woman for nearly half my life. If she hasn’t been able to convince me of the existence of God or a belief in Jesus Christ I sure as hell aren’t going to be convinced by someone I don’t know online over a few comments on a blog entry. As I explained in my first post here if you bothered to read it that I simply found Pastor Brian’s post here in a Google search and it piqued my curiosity. I’ve stuck around for 2 reasons: 1) Because people have been responding to my comments and 2) Because even tho I disagree with the theist beliefs you all have I find many of the posters here to be intelligent and thought provoking and I’ve enjoyed reading most of their posts and I’ve enjoyed reading Pastor Brian’s entries. One does not need to be looking for something similar to be interested in an opposing view. Christians interest me simply because I find it fascinating that a person can believe so strongly in irrational things.

    You asked why I choose to express myself with something I don’t believe in. Dude there is more than one definition of the word “hell”. It isn’t simply a spiritual place of torment for sinners. Other definitions include: 1) Anything that causes torment or misery. Such as in the following sentence: My wife took me to the opera last nite and sitting thru that was pure hell. 2) Extreme disorder or confusion; Chaos. As in the following sentence. After the cops were acquitted of the Rodney King beating all hell broke loose as people rioted in the streets.

    So as you can see one doesn’t need to be a theist in order to use the word “hell”, but thanks for playing.

    I find it amusing that creationists disbelief in evolution because we have yet to witness macroevolutionary changes, but will believe in their god without visual proof. Why are creationists so quick to believe in their god without visual evidence but dismiss evolution on the same terms?

    You’re right, cross-breeding a horse and a donkey to produce a mule usually mules are sterile, the reason for this is because horses have 64 chromosomes and donkeys have 62, when the two mate, the resulting mule is left with 63, an uneven number. Since these can’t divide evenly into pairs, a mule is generally unable to reproduce. However this isn’t true of all cross-breeding. In cross-breeding a wolf with a dog the resulting wolf/dog hybrid can mate with other wolves, other dogs, or other hybrids to produce offspring.

    Mules are in fact capable of reproduction but it’s extremely rare. There was recently a female mule in Morocco that gave birth. So your assumption that cross-bred animals are incapable of reproduction is false. Once again it was a nice try. Thanks for playing.

    Allah the Arabic word for “God”. Of course you won’t find “Allah” in your bible because your bible isn’t Arabic but yes Islam is an Abrahamic religion. Their God is indeed the God of Abraham. Abraham is a central figure in the Islamic faith. the book you offered as “proof” means little. It was written by an Muslim and it’s simply one person’s opinion. Just like you’re attempting to deny the fact that Muslims worship the same god you do Muslims will deny the same. It’s religious bias, not proof. Anyone studying various religions would see the similarities that the faithful don’t see thru the blinders they have on.

    Ancient pagan religions are MUCH older than Jesus. Christianity as we know it didn’t even start until some 200 years after Jesus supposedly lived and the early Christians were converted pagans.

    Modern Christianity was formed under the Roman Emperor Constantine thru the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. It was created out of a religious melting pot using the rituals and beliefs of a variety of religious faiths and combined to become what we know today as modern Christianity. Many rituals were adopted from other religious beliefs. Deny this all you want but it’s a fact. How else can you explain the fact that Christianity has compelling similarities with religious beliefs older than Christianity. Mithra was worshiped as far back as 600 BC. This is WAY the hell before Christ supposedly lived and it was believed that Mithra was born of a mortal virgin woman and the sun god on December 25th. He traveled the land with his 12 disciples and it was claimed that he performed miracles. Mithra was called “the good shepherd,” “the way, the truth and the light,” “redeemer,” “savior,” “Messiah.” He was identified with both the lion and the lamb. I could go on but I think you get my point. Jesus is not the first divine mortal worshiped in history… there’s MANY… Mithra, Horus, Apollonius of Tyana, Dionysus, Krishna… etc. All of these were worshiped long before Christ supposedly lived yet the beliefs surrounding them are near identical.

    You asked why I’m talking to you. I’m simply responding to your comments directed at me. You’re the first one to make a comment to me and I responded. I didn’t start the conversation. Should I have ignored you?

    The risen Christ proves nothing. The risen Christ is a bible story and like I said in the Knowing and Believing post stating such as evidence is like saying the Yellow Brick Wall is evidence of the existence of the Wizard of Oz.

    Brian-

    Chesterton first of all was wrong in his assumption that evolution teaches that men came from apes. We don’t come from apes. Apes share a common ancestor. He seems to me another example of someone debating evolution that doesn’t fully understand it and unless someone understands what they are debating they lose credibility.

  • David L. DeFrees

    Greetings Troy,

    RE: “Once again. No, I am NOT looking for Jesus. Dude, I’ve been in love with a devout Christian woman for nearly half my life. If she hasn’t been able to convince me of the existence of God or a belief in Jesus Christ I sure as hell aren’t going to be convinced by someone I don’t know online over a few comments on a blog entry. As I explained in my first post here if you bothered to read it that I simply found Pastor Brian’s post here in a Google search and it piqued my curiosity. I’ve stuck around for 2 reasons: 1) Because people have been responding to my comments and 2) Because even tho I disagree with the theist beliefs you all have I find many of the posters here to be intelligent and thought provoking and I’ve enjoyed reading most of their posts and I’ve enjoyed reading Pastor Brian’s entries. One does not need to be looking for something similar to be interested in an opposing view. Christians interest me simply because I find it fascinating that a person can believe so strongly in irrational things.”

    So you believe that people here are irrational thinkers? Maybe they just know something you don’t.

    RE: “You asked why I choose to express myself with something I don’t believe in. Dude there is more than one definition of the word “hell”. It isn’t simply a spiritual place of torment for sinners. Other definitions include: 1) Anything that causes torment or misery. Such as in the following sentence: My wife took me to the opera last nite and sitting thru that was pure hell. 2) Extreme disorder or confusion; Chaos. As in the following sentence. After the cops were acquitted of the Rodney King beating all hell broke loose as people rioted in the streets.”

    From the abundance of the heart the moth speaks.

    RE: “So as you can see one doesn’t need to be a theist in order to use the word “hell”, but thanks for playing.”

    I wasn’t playing.

    RE: ” I find it amusing that creationists disbelief in evolution because we have yet to witness macroevolutionary changes, but will believe in their god without visual proof. Why are creationists so quick to believe in their god without visual evidence but dismiss evolution on the same terms?”

    I find it amazing that anyone believes in such a flawed theory as evolution is.

    RE: You’re right, cross-breeding a horse and a donkey to produce a mule usually mules are sterile, the reason for this is because horses have 64 chromosomes and donkeys have 62, when the two mate, the resulting mule is left with 63, an uneven number. Since these can’t divide evenly into pairs, a mule is generally unable to reproduce. However this isn’t true of all cross-breeding. In cross-breeding a wolf with a dog the resulting wolf/dog hybrid can mate with other wolves, other dogs, or other hybrids to produce offspring.

    “Wolfdogs have been incorrectly given the name “hybrid”. In biological terms, the definition of “hybrid” is something that can not reproduce. Most wolfdogs are able to reproduce at approximately 2 years of age.”

    http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/ffo/FFO.html

    RE: Mules are in fact capable of reproduction but it’s extremely rare. There was recently a female mule in Morocco that gave birth. So your assumption that cross-bred animals are incapable of reproduction is false. Once again it was a nice try. Thanks for playing.

    Mules are born sterile.

    “Mules are not a species, they are a hybrid between two other species – Equus assinus (the donkey) and Equus caballus (the horse). A species is usually defined as a group of animals that can reproduce like examples, and the mule cannot reproduce.”

    http://www.lovelongears.com/faq.html

    RE: “Allah the Arabic word for “God”. Of course you won’t find “Allah” in your bible because your bible isn’t Arabic but yes Islam is an Abrahamic religion. Their God is indeed the God of Abraham. Abraham is a central figure in the Islamic faith. the book you offered as “proof” means little. It was written by an Muslim and it’s simply one person’s opinion. Just like you’re attempting to deny the fact that Muslims worship the same god you do Muslims will deny the same. It’s religious bias, not proof. Anyone studying various religions would see the similarities that the faithful don’t see thru the blinders they have on.”

    You have already had correct information provided you about this.

    RE: “Ancient pagan religions are MUCH older than Jesus. Christianity as we know it didn’t even start until some 200 years after Jesus supposedly lived and the early Christians were converted pagans.”

    You are so funny. Jesus was with God from the beginning. All thinks were made by him, including people. You have been provided applicable scripture on this.

    RE: Modern Christianity was formed under the Roman Emperor Constantine thru the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. It was created out of a religious melting pot using the rituals and beliefs of a variety of religious faiths and combined to become what we know today as modern Christianity. Many rituals were adopted from other religious beliefs. Deny this all you want but it’s a fact. How else can you explain the fact that Christianity has compelling similarities with religious beliefs older than Christianity. Mithra was worshiped as far back as 600 BC. This is WAY the hell before Christ supposedly lived and it was believed that Mithra was born of a mortal virgin woman and the sun god on December 25th. He traveled the land with his 12 disciples and it was claimed that he performed miracles. Mithra was called “the good shepherd,” “the way, the truth and the light,” “redeemer,” “savior,” “Messiah.” He was identified with both the lion and the lamb. I could go on but I think you get my point. Jesus is not the first divine mortal worshiped in history… there’s MANY… Mithra, Horus, Apollonius of Tyana, Dionysus, Krishna… etc. All of these were worshiped long before Christ supposedly lived yet the beliefs surrounding them are near identical.”

    Christianity, modem or otherwise, was birthed with the risen Christ.

    RE: “You asked why I’m talking to you. I’m simply responding to your comments directed at me. You’re the first one to make a comment to me and I responded. I didn’t start the conversation. Should I have ignored you?”

    What do you think?

    RE: “The risen Christ proves nothing. The risen Christ is a bible story and like I said in the Knowing and Believing post stating such as evidence is like saying the Yellow Brick Wall is evidence of the existence of the Wizard of Oz.”

    Troy, I do hope you change your thinking about this for your sake.

    Have a great day Troy.

    David

  • http://wordonrockhill.blogspot.com Shane Ogle

    “God is within all things, but not included; outside all things, but not excluded, above all things, but not beyond their reach.” -Pope Gregory I

  • http://pastormike.tv mike

    What a great blog. I love seeing people fight and push for truth.
    They always seem to find it. A warning to all atheist- you have fallen into a very dangerous trap. SEEKING TRUTH

  • Frank

    Becky wrote on 15 Jan 2008 as follows:

    “So what can we do to get good people to believe in a good God?”

    Answer: What would a good person need a god for? Becky is shocked that many atheists she knows are already good people, and assumes it is because they are imbued with Christian culture as they grow up. No, Becky, they are good because they choose to be good. Religion and morality have nothing to do with one another; if they do, it is demonstrated by the atrocities committed over the years in the name of God that shows the correlation.

  • Mary Beth

    Hi Brian,

    I was just curious about your view point on Evolution and put that in the search engine and ended up on this page. I think it is interesting that you say in your letter to Tim that “we now know that 13.7 billion years ago something happened that began time, space, and matter.” I think that would be better written, what I believe or “according to some scientists and based on hypothesis,” ‘not WE now know’. If you truly believe that it God created time, space, and matter that far back, you must also believe that it took Him a very long time to come up with man in the existence that we see him today? And if you believe that, then you think Darwin had a good handle on the evolutionary process of muck to human. I guess I would challenge you to reconsider what you truly believe. A true evolutionist by Darwin’s hypothetical viewpoint is a racist, whether a person knows it or not. If you want a good read, look at “Darwin’s Plantation” subtitled ?”Evolution’s Racist Roots” by Ken Ham and A. Charles Ware. It’s fascinating to realize that Darwin’s second book, the name escapes me at the moment, lines up the evolution of ape to man according to intelligence. It goes something like this. With chimpanzees being the most intelligent, caucasians came from this line of apes. Asians being the next intelligent would have descended from Orangatans. The least intelligent ape being the gorilla would have advanced to black or dark skinned people. If this ever got out to the school system in this day and age, evolution would be thrown out of school or at least revised so much that is would be unrecognizable. My intention in writing this is not to be divisive by any means, but to present more fact into a very shallow picture that most people see of evolution. Although I have learned to listen to Christians tell me how evolution can work with their beliefs, it remains a mystery to me, because what they are really saying without realizing it is that God doesn’t have the capability to ‘snap his finger’ and make something out of nothing. That He needs billions of years to come up with a total transformation of something. That He’s incapable of deciding and acting on what He wants the world and universe to look like as a finished product immediately. But let’s bring that home to a here and now kind of way. God could never heal someone instantly; he would need the help of surgery done by a human, although he can use that too. He could never take away an addiction instantly, a person would have to go to a rehab center and receive counseling. He couldn’t translate someone like Phillip in the Bible, because that goes against what science says, or part the red sea, or be in a flaming bush that never burnt up. Those are all stories. It’s all about keeping God in the form of a good teacher, a MAN named Jesus. Keep him there and we can relate and maybe even create a tower of Babel and reach the heavens by ourselves. You know, figure it all out and proclaim it with authority. You may say, Mary Beth, you’re going overboard here. It’s not all that…Well, as I said before, a marriage of Christianity and evolution can not exist in my head and therefore will always remain a mystery when people try to explain a way the Creator that brought us in the world at a certain time and place and will take us back out, who decided that before the foundation of the world, needs 13.7 billion years to bring us to the place we are today? My God is greater than that. The sooner evolution goes bye-bye, the sooner racism will be non-existant. Spread the word:)mb

  • Rys

    In the spirit of full disclosure, I grew up as a devoted and devout Christian, but have become an atheist in the past year or so. I’m not going to sit here and try to prove that God “isn’t”, but I do have a few questions/statements.

    Brian, what you describe as God sounds like a very vague spiritual entity, rather than a specific being. There are many “gods” out there. How do we know which one(s) we are to pray to, or which one(s) we are to seek? After all, every religion can’t be right, but they CAN all be wrong. Why should one assume that they should be seeking the God of the Bible, rather than Krishna, or Zeus or Joe Pesci? (that’s a George Carlin reference, sorry) Besides there’s someone in every religion who claims to have this same sense of “knowing” that you describe. How is it possible for all of you to feel the same way, when you’re all worshiping different gods?

    I do agree with you that to point out one’s disbelief in God seems a little silly, since we don’t go around calling ourselves a-unicornists. Many disbelievers in god actually agree with you and reject the term atheist altogether. However, if the majority of the world, or at least one’s country, DID believe in unicorns or leprechauns or some other fantastical creature, don’t you think that the disbelievers would need to coin SOME sort of title to differentiate themselves from the rest of the pack? We don’t call ourselves a-unicornists because the general assumption is that EVERYONE is a-unicornist. However, this is not the case with belief in a deity.

    Myself and the other atheists I know also admit that we can’t KNOW there isn’t a god. One can never prove a negative without full knowledge of the universe and beyond. After all, I could say that there is a little tiny teapot rotating around Mars–too small to be seen by even the world’s most powerful telescope–and you could never prove that it didn’t exist. But do you really have any reason to assume that it does? I don’t believe in God in the same way I don’t believe in fairies or the Kracken or ghosts. They *might* exist somewhere, but since I see absolutely no reason to believe that they do, I’m going to assume that they don’t and not waste my time puzzling over it.

    Finally, I wanted to ask why Christians seem to be so offended by Humanism. Humanists simply believe in taking care of our planet and the people on it. Why on earth does it matter if they do it in god’s name or not? And honestly there’s a lot of people out there who have done great things for others without calling on the name of god for help, and it worked just fine. This leads me to believe that we *don’t* in fact need god’s intervention in order to help and serve one another. The ends are the same, whether a christian or an atheist is doing the work, so why should it matter who’s name they’re doing it in? On the contrary, I think that the non-believer in god should be held in even higher regard than the believer for living a selfless life, since the non-believer has no expectations of any reward of any kind.

    Anyway…those are just my two-cents.

  • sean mathes

    Did Tim reply? If so then what did he say?

  • Brian Zahnd

    Yes, Tim replied, but it is a private conversation.

    Some of it centered around the book “Why Gods Persist: A Scientific Approach to Religion” by Robert A. Hinde

  • Sean Mathes

    Have you ever seen the movie, Expelled?

  • h

    Mithraic scholars do not hold support the thesis that Christianity borrowed anything philosophically from Mithraism, and they do not see any evidence of such borrowing, with one major exception: “The only domain in which we can ascertain in detail the extent to which Christianity imitated Mithraism is that of art.” [MS.508n] It is believed that one scholar with other agenda expelled rumors of similarities that were later disproved by more literature surfacing.

  • evil1dwk

    “An atheist doesn’t believe in God. What doesn’t an atheist believe in? God. Let us be absolutely clear on this point. What is it that an atheist is convinced doesn’t exist? GOD. Hmm? Most atheists I have had conversations with seem to think about God nearly as much as I do. Most people don’t believe in lots of things: Unicorns, Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster among them. But they don’t bother to identify themselves as a-bigfootists, etc. God is because God is. Even atheists know what God is.”

    I think about the Christian/Catholic God because it’s argued that we should teach creationism in schools. I think about or talk about the Christian/Catholic God because the Pope tells millions of people dying of aids that they shouldn’t use condoms. I know about the Christian/Catholic God because it was talked about all around me growing up. My parents were some what religious. My Grandparents were very religious. That doesn’t make a god exist. I don’t buy into the, “well since we can’t answer it the answer must be god” gimmick the major religions are selling these days. I don’t have to disprove your claims that an invisible being just exists and created everything. I don’t believe in nor do I have to disprove bigfoot, unicorns, nessie, fairies, or any other wild claim to that effect. I say prove to me that any of them exist and I will change my point of view. I don’t call myself an atheist. I’m called an atheist because I don’t believe in a god. I did not give myself this name.

    “Here is a question. And, really, a serious one. Why is there something instead of nothing?”

    I don’t know why there was nothing before something. I don’t even know that there was nothing at all before the big bang 13.7 million year ago. That still doesn’t make a god exist. I don’t fill in the gaps of my knowledge with a god. That doesn’t answer the question. I end up asking so many more questions. If there can’t be nothing before something then what was there before there was a god? If a god could be eternal why can’t there be a cycle of universes. Some theorize that the universe will collapse. Why couldn’t this collapse of matter cause another big bang. A cycle of universes. I don’t know exactly I’m not a scientist. I read as much as I can but I don’t claim to know. Here’s an article on the subject of the universe collapsing.

    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-09/su-um091302.php

    “Here is another question. What evidence would you accept as proof for the existence of God?”

    Well first define “God.” There’s still a question about that. Which god are you talking about? The most popular version? Depending on the god you are asking me about the evidence may differ. Considering that you are making a very big claim in that he could create everything, see everything, hear everything, be literally every where, it would take some very big evidence. Why would we have to have faith? Why can’t he appear in the sky or at least make some world wide sign of his existence. How about any scientific evidence? I can’t put my faith into any stories from 2000 years ago (if you could actually call it that). We laugh at Greek mythology. Why should I put any credence in the bible or any other story from that era?

    If this is a huge test I find it extremely cruel. I have children, I don’t know about you. I don’t have to test their love in me. Why does an all knowing, all powerful, creator of all feel the need to?

    “Pray to God and see if anything happens. Ask God if he is real, and if so, to in some fashion let you know. Ask sincerely, even though you will of course ask skeptically. What have you to lose?”

    I did for a good portion of my life. I found that it did little more than wishing on a star or breaking a wish bone or rubbing a rabbits foot. I’m not talking about asking for new bikes or a skateboard, no, for that I wrote a list to Santa. At least my parents read that. I’m talking about asking sincerely for loved ones to gain their health back. I watched groups pray over loved ones, for days and months on end. I saw that it had little to no effect. That’s not that only time. I saw it all around me growing up with no signs or help from someone who should be able to be anywhere and do anything.

  • MT

    “Without God there would be no atheists.”

    Maybe there are no atheists either.

    To be a “theist” isn’t just to believe that a real “God” exists, it’s to believe there are others believing in the same real thing as you (or could be, once your religion spreads). Conveniently, when you decide to duck a line drive that nearly beans me after I’ve ducked it first, we usually have the baseball to show we had the same real thing in mind to duck and weren’t both just musing in the same vein. Not so when both of us think of “God.” What I would say of atheists is that they don’t hold the theistic beliefs that any theists do. No theist need be right for such a circumstance to be true.

  • http://christianjamison.blogspot.com Xian J. Gill

    What if we’ve been searching for the longest time and come up with nothing? Do we keep searching, being completely convinced that there is nothing to find or go about our lives and progress as normal people should… Is god for us to find, can we really know him or do we just think we can to validate our existence… I would love to find god and rediscover jesus but… I’m starting to think God is comfortable where’er he is and I’m starting to believe that jesus never was what we’ve been taught he was…

  • Steve

    I really liked your letter to an atheist. But reading it brought up an intellectual sticky point I have had over the years. I hate the phrase “I believe in (something)” because it can have two meanings. I don’t believe in the existence of (something). Or, I don’t trust that something. Consider the phrase, “I don’t believe in my father.” What does it mean. That my father does not exist and has never existed? No. That’s absurd, I exit today as a human being so I must have had a father. But, it can mean something very different. It can mean, “I have no faith in my father, no trust.” Which is a very different thing, even though I believe my father exists. I think that’s the problem with many atheists. They don’t trust God. Perhaps they have been hurt and it is easier to deny the existence of God; perhaps because the hurts had something to do with organized religion or religious people. I’ve been thinking that atheism can in some cases really be about relationship issues coming from childhood. Our intellectual concepts of “god” initially come from the relationships we had with adults as very young children. So, if God is simply a bigger, badder, scarier, and more awesome, adult/parent figure, then I dare not believe in this entity! If I could not trust my parents, how can I trust this “god” figure? This is very different from a rational agnostic saying, “God may in fact exist, but he probably isn’t much interested in us.” So, to deal with an atheist, I think you have to deal with the hurts and bitter memories that created the atheist.

  • HMGD

    There is not a good person that doesnt believe in God. I define good person in terms of the Bible (the word of God). Romans 1:18-32

    I believe that a person is either a believer of God in terms of God’s word, or he/she is an idolater. In other words I believe what Jesus said in Mat 7:13-14.

    Whenever I speak to an atheist I try to kindly point out to him that he is an idolater.
    Above all, while exalting the word of God I am confident in that the word of God is The most powerful weapon in existence which the Holy Spirit use to convinced someone.

    With Love in Christ,

  • http://profiles.google.com/fyedernoggersnodden Eric ‘Siggy’ Scott

    Interestingly, I once wrote a blog post titled “A Letter to a Christian Friend.

    If you read nothing else in this post, skip to the end and read the Miroslav Volf quote. It’s more important than my babblings.

    ——————–

    This blog post, and especially the ensuing discussion in the comments, saddens me. We humans are incredibly good at oversimplifying the other, and not giving a school of thought the respect it deserves. The antidote is an emphasis on ****the moral obligation to seek the truth****.

    Much of what has been said about atheism on this page does not resonate with my experience of atheism. That should tell you something. I feel misrepresented, my beliefs twisted into a caricature intended to make me look foolish, dishonest, immoral, inconsistent, or unthoughtful. Someone has failed to show me and mine the loving sympathy that supposedly forms the absolute core of Christianity.

    We all start with a gut intuition that people who disagree with us must be at least a little foolish. And since fools are a dime a dozen, we find plenty of evidence to confirm our stereotype. Thus Christians think atheists are immoral and/or highly biased, and “want” God to not exist. Atheists see Christians as ignorant and unintellectual. You probably see “Republicans” and “Democrats” as two very different types of people, at least intuitively. We all do this, myself included. But it blinds us to the truth about the Other.

    Think of the most respectable, good, zest-filled, intellectual person you know. You respect everything this person says, and trust their moral and mental faculties completely. Now imagine that they are an atheist. Or if you are atheist, imagine that they are Christian. EVERY major belief (or unbelief) group has these sort of admirable individuals. EVERY ONE.

    Such people have very good, thought out, and salient responses to your questions and objections. And they will also be willing to acknowledge the validity and worth in your own arguments. And they should be your preferred interlocutors. It’s an incredible experience to have a deep conversation with such people. An eye opener. A rare experience — but when it happens it makes you think twice about stereotyping philosophies in the future. And you start to try and imagine such people, to think of what they might say to your criticisms of their beliefs.

    Whenever you fail to do this, you are violating the moral obligation to seek the truth. If you can’t bring yourself to engage the issues with this level of nuance, then every time you express a strong opinion or judgment, you are being intellectually dishonest, and you are sinning against your fellow man by misrepresenting them.

    I am not a Christian. But I have a pretty good idea of what kind of Christian I would be if I was one. And I can point to people who exemplify it. Actually, that’s why I’m here — Zahnd’s recent book, *Unconditional,* is an example of some of the things I respect most in Christianity.

    I only wish more Christians would show me the same sort of respect. Think of the *best* atheist position you can. If it’s still a poor one, then you’re not done: go find a respectable atheist who can help you patch up your misrepresentations.

    Then we might be ready to have a fruitful discussion, learn from each other, and correct what oversights we both have made.

    As J. S. Mill wrote in his amazing book *On Liberty*, “So essential is this discipline [of endeavouring to see both sides of an issue in the strongest light] to a real understanding of moral and human subjects, that if opponents of all important truths do not exist, it is indispensable to imagine them, and supply them with the strongest arguments which the most skilful devil’s advocate can conjure up.”

    I’ll close with my favorite quote from my favorite author, Miroslav Volf, who is motivated to a similar position by the principles of Christian Love (note that “to remember” in this passage is Volf’s metaphor for “to represent”):

    ——————–

    “Especially in academic circles in the field of the humanities, there is wide-spread resistance to the idea that we have a moral obligation to remember truthfully. Truth, it is said, is dangerous… If both parties claim to know the truth of what transpired between them, but their ‘truths’ clash, they will have all the more reason to cross swords.

    “As formulated, the objection seems on the whole correct. When ‘truths’ clash, conflicts are exacerbated. Yet in its main thrust the objection rests on confusion. Notice that it concerns the claim of each party to possess the truth, not the moral obligation of both parties to seek the truth. The conflict is deepened not because truthfulness matters too much to one or both parties, but because it matters to little — so little, in fact, that they, as fallible human beings invariably tempted to pursue their own interests, can feel justified in simply claiming to possess the truth, the whole truth, and thus to forgo seeking it.

    “If I claim to possess the truth, I will be unlikely even to entertain the possibility that others may be right, or at least partly right, and I wrong, or at least partly wrong; unlikely to enter imaginatively into the world of others so as to learn to appreciate the force of their account of what happened; unlikely to take the road of inverted perspective so as to examine from their vantage point my memories as well as their own. In a phrase, I will be unlikely to exercise ‘double vision,’ which is essential to remembering truthfully in situations of conflict. Claims to possess the uncontestable truth aren’t always wrong, but they are always dangerous — especially dangerous when a person’s claim to possess the truth matters more to her than the truth itself. But this takes us straight back to the moral obligation to remember truthfully. The obligation to remember truthfully, and therefore to seek the truth, counters the dangers involved in claims to possess the truth. Seekers of truth, as distinct from alleged possessors of truth, will employ ‘double vision’ — they will give others the benefit of the doubt, they will inhabit imaginatively the world of others, and they will endeavor to view events in question from the perspective of others, not just their own.”

    – Miroslav Volf, The End of Memory: Remembering Rightly in a Violent World (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2006), p. 56-57.

  • http://profiles.google.com/fyedernoggersnodden Eric ‘Siggy’ Scott

    HMGD: Remember when talking to atheists that “idolator” is not a very meaningful term for them. At all. It’ll bounce off them like an M&M off a tank.

    It also will not resonate with their experience. They don’t feel like they’ve made some biased or spiteful choice to spurn God. They just believe He doesn’t exist, just like they believe Santa Claus doesn’t exist. There’s nothing special about one imaginary entity over another for them.

    You should use more sympathy in your approach. Try to understand the person you’re talking to. Put yourself in their shoes. If you fail to understand them, it becomes immediately obvious, and they’ll not only stop listening, but lose respect for you instantly. In fact, they will lose respect for Christianity in general, and think it’s so wrapped up in its own narrative that it totally misrepresents the opinions of those who disagree with its creed. Telling atheists they are idolators does a disservice to the spread of the gospel.

    What would it feel like to you if I started quoting the Qu’ran to point our your misconduct in following Christianity? Not very much, because I doubt you believe the Qu’ran is inspired. You’d expect me to understand that, and approach things differently. I’d have to start by arguing that the Qu’ran is true. I’d have to start from where you are, and work towards the point I’m arguing for.

    Start where atheists are. Take them at their word. They don’t believe in God, usually because they think there’s no more evidence for Him than there is for Santa Claus. That’s your cue: you can start sharing why they should believe in God. What makes Him any different than any other myth?

  • http://profiles.google.com/fyedernoggersnodden Eric ‘Siggy’ Scott

    Steve,

    What you say is true about some atheists and non-believers. Many people leave the church because of the problem of evil, which for some reason they are unable to reconcile with a loving God the same way believers do.

    But not all atheists match the picture you’ve painted of them. I am an atheist, and I have absolutely no trust issues with God, and have a ridiculously excellent relationship with my human father. My problem is that I don’t believe got exists, the same way you don’t believe the Hindu gods or Santa Claus exist.

    I also already have a very high respect for Christianity. You don’t have an image problem with me. And that’s something we can discuss respectfully. I can respect that your personal experience with the divine leads you to accept a world view different from mine, and consider you a highly admirable and intelligent human being every bit as honest and sincere as I am, even while remaining skeptical that you experience is genuine.