A very convincing atheist

[centuri0n]

Jesus Christ and the resurrection.

All the happy logic and philosophical etcetera aside, his arguments cannot explain how Jesus was able to be raised from the dead and present himself to hundreds of witnesses.

If Jesus raised from the dead, the atheist (that is, naturalistic) world view is decimated.

Catholic or Protestant, that is the foundation of our system of belief. The correct philosophical explanation of the universe must include the explanation of Jesus’ resurrection.

 

[amantoan]

Neithan,

Since no one has actually helped you see why some of these articles might be wrong, I thought I would try to answer one of the seven essays you mentioned. If one can be refuted, maybe they all can? I picked the first one called “All Possible Worlds.” This is going to take two posts to get it all in. Sorry for the length.

He says that the existence of evil disproves the existence of God, and lists several assumptions and premises that prove his point. I agree with him that the only way to refute his proof is to take issue with premise 5, “A perfectly loving being would desire to eliminate evil.” He gives many common answers for why God allows evil to persist and then offers his arguments against them. I agree that many of the common defenses are not logical. However, I disagree with his “refutation” of the free will theodicy.

He starts off by making the point that we are not completely free because we can’t fly and other things, but this does not impinge on our free will. I agree, but it is irrelevant. Having free will does not mean we have to be able to everything, but it does mean we have control over the powers we are given.

His argument seems hinged on the question of why God did not make us in such a way that we could not harm others by our actions. But he does not explain how such a world could exist. The only way this could be is if each person is completely isolated from every other person. In other words each person would have to live in their own world, separate from all other worlds. If we are given the power to interact with other humans, than we must have control over that interaction if our free will is to be maintained. Once the door is opened for finite beings to interact with each other freely, you open the door to allowing them to harm each other.

Why does God want us to interact? He obviously intends for us to be a community. Maybe because we will be a community in Heaven, maybe because most of the best experiences here on Earth are derived from our relationships with other people. I’m sure there are plenty of reasons you could come up with. Besides, even an atheist must admit that a God with infinite intelligence will come up with some reasons for things that are beyond the intelligence of a finite being.

What about natural disasters? The author asked why God didn’t create a world were the only choice was to worship him or not, and everything else was perfect. God did create that world (Eden), and the people in it chose to disobey him. So what then? Things were perfect because the people in the world were in perfect harmony with its creator. Now that they are not, what happens? The world turns against them and we have the fall of humanity. Eden is gone. Because we live in a community, the actions of some can affect the rest, so we all pay the price. And what if God did give the rest of us a perfect world? It would only be a matter of time before we ruined it too. The consequence is we live in a world that is not in harmony with ourselves (because of our own actions) and so we are prone to natural ailments and disasters.

 

[amantoan]

Note, that I am not using what he calls the “Justice Defense.” That peoples suffering is directly tied to their sin. I agree with his assessment of that defense. Indeed, the rain falls on the just and the unjust alike as they say. But we all bear the consequences of everyone’s actions, so we all suffer, sometimes justly, sometimes unjustly.

In other words, our human condition is always going to make us susceptible to suffering. No matter how many chances God would give us at a perfect world, we will ruin it. Our freewill will always cause us to sin against God, but without it we cannot freely choose Him. And as long as we sin, will create suffering for ourselves, and for others. God knows that as long as it is up to us, we will remain in this cycle. So he set a new course for us. He devised a plan for us to share in His divinity, for only then will we have the power to break out of our inequities. So God takes a share in our humanity in the form of Jesus Christ. By sharing in our humanity, He opens the door for us to share in his divinity. In this human form, he puts all our iniquities on his own shoulders and he suffers greatly for them (since suffering is the consequence of sin). Now, through baptism, Jesus invites us to be a member of his body. And as a member of the Body of Christ we are united to him in a special way. That also means we can unite our sufferings to his, and thereby give our sufferings redemptive power. So, in catholic theology, suffering actually has positive value

That is the beauty of Gods plan. As long as we have free will and live in a community were we can interact with other people, there will be suffering. So, since it is unavoidable for us, God takes the source of our misery, and turns it into the source of our salvation. Because of the incarnation, all human suffering can now be united to Christ’s and thus have redemptive value.

So essentially the Catholic position (as I understand it) is that suffering has been turned into something positive, and that is why our omni-benevolent God does not remove it. Evil caused by others people is not removed, because that would either infringe on their freewill, or force us to live isolated from all other humans (and thus remove most of the good in the world too).

As far as I know, the Catholic Church is the only religion that has this view of human suffering and is thus the only religion that can offer a satisfactory answer to this common atheist question. It is one of the many reasons I believe the Catholic Church is the ONLY true church.

I hope this helps.

 

[gnosys]

It bothers me that I see atheism repeatedly equated with selfishness, hedonism, meaninglessness, amorality, etc. Buddhism is an essentially atheistic path, and yet Buddhist life can be deeply meaningful and driven by compassion. It’s unfair to generalize about what else an atheist believes than that there is no God. (Also, atheism is used pretty loosely to describe a range of views from having no positive faith in God to aggressively insisting on God’s non-existence.) I would guess that most of my friends qualify as atheists, and they are loving, caring, thoughtful, engaged people.

I personally am unconvinced by any of the “evidence” for God’s existence. I think of Christianity as a choice made in darkness – an essentially Kierkegaardian leap of faith.

I am also unimpressed by Pascal’s wager – one ought to be pursuing truth, not safety. In fact, I believe the epitome of a Christian is someone who would walk in Christ’s footsteps with no eternal reward to motivate him. Isn’t leading a Christian life its own reward?

There is a Jewish belief, I think, that the final test of faith will come when the Torah is PROVED to be untrue. Those who continue to believe even then have true faith. (Faith is not blind, but it doesn’t always believe its eyes.)

Cheesy but accurate aphorism. “Faith and doubt are not enemies but travelling companions.” Often it is great doubt which clears the ground so that the seed of true faith can take root. Or, as Blake wrote (slight paraphrase, perhaps): “The fool who persists in his folly shall become wise.”

 

[john_doran]

gnosys:

I personally am unconvinced by any of the “evidence” for God’s existence. I think of Christianity as a choice made in darkness – an essentially Kierkegaardian leap of faith.

well, that’s pretty much the same way i would think of atheism strictly so-called.

gnosys:

In fact, I believe the epitome of a Christian is someone who would walk in Christ’s footsteps with no eternal reward to motivate him. Isn’t leading a Christian life its own reward?

yes, it is. what gives you the idea that christians are christians out of hope for some kind of reward?

 

[SCTA-1]

Folk’s need a lot of evidence,I know, I’m one. Just something here to think about.Sister Lucia,the last survivor of Fatima,died last month in Portugal.She was 97 years old.All those year’s of dedication to the Church and not going around on the talk show circuit and hawking book’s,etc.Just pure sincerity and love on her part Look up her last word’s just before she died.This was total truth-She saw the evidence and didn’t go about like some new ager writing book’s about Marian apparitions.She dedicated her whole life to the truth after the vision’s and did it without pomp and fanfare.She is an example of how heaven can still communicate with us and prove the afterlife.Just a little study on the subject will go a long way.

 

[Strider]

Neithan,
This fellow is not as sophisticated in his arguments as he supposes. There are far more sophisticated athiests who have posted on this board. Check out some of the threads in the Non-
Catholic Forum. The debates are quite lively.
Try reading A Handbood of Christian Apologetics by Peter Kreeft and someboy else I can’t remember at the moment, or anythng by Frank Sheed.
Do not let arguments like this shake your faith. For every challenge, there is an answer. Your opponent may not accept your answer, but that doesn’t make it false.
Hang in.

 

[bjorn]

John Russell Jr:

There is ton’s of evidence proving the existence of God. I won’t go into that. but I suggest you take the advice given. What is the alternative, anyway. If there is no God, there is no consequences for evil. Perhaps that’s why such people as atheists are leading the culture of death. Human life is no more valuable than any animal, plant etc. Suicide and euthanasia are Ok. And if there not, the atheists can’t answer why. What can you say. there is no afterlife. no consequences for doing evil. You just disappear when you die. Baloney. You have faith. Ask God to prove He exists. Any sincere person will receive some sign. Your faith grows as you do more and more meritorios deeds and gain graces. Faith is a supernatural virtue, and to increase it one must pray, receive the sacraments, do penace etc. Ask God to increase your faith. These questions are not new. Although atheism is new on this level seen today.
Faith and reason have no conflicts. You can learn every argument by atheists and learn the Catholic response every time, if you have time to study it. Millions of souls have argued the same points for 2000 yrs.
What about Fatima? Up to 100,000 people witness the most spectacular miracle of modern times. Many atheists are there to mock the children. They drop to their knees and repent.
Our Lady of Guadalupe- After the miracle there 7,000,000 Indians convert in the next 8 yrs.
The Eucharistic miracles- such as that at Lanciano. after 1200 yrs you can still view it. Recent scientific studies ( incl. other faiths and atheist doctors) found that the DNA is unlike any other human. It’s tightly locked together, and the DNA is perfect. No faults like the rest of us. I can’t wait to see DNA tests done on the other relics in the Church, such as the Shroud of Turin, to see if there’s a DNA match.
The incorruptible Saints. Centuries old and won’t decay. No shennanigans either.
Prayer and study is what you need. Atheists are not happy. Life has no meaning without God and faith. The Christian is happy and has peace if he knows and believes Christ and His Church.
The miracle that the Church has survived for 2000yrs. The miracle that no Pope ever taught an error on faith or morals.
Have you ever felt that your in the presence of somone other than people in the Church? Many people can feel it. It’s not delusional.
There is more evidence than you could poke a stick at for the existence of God and the authority of the Church.
I will keep you in my prayers. God bless you.

maybe i am missing something here but i would say that having faith means not having to ask God to prove himself. and if i ask for a sign and dont get one does that mean that God does not exist? and what is the thing about shaking a stick at evidence about? is that supposed to convince me?

 

[Genesis315]

bjorn:

maybe i am missing something here but i would say that having faith means not having to ask God to prove himself. and if i ask for a sign and dont get one does that mean that God does not exist? and what is the thing about shaking a stick at evidence about? is that supposed to convince me?

No one asked Him for the signs He provided (Guadalupe, the Eucharistic miracles, etc.). These happened to help specific people that Gid deemed needed to see a miracle to help them solidify or find their Faith. Jesus went around doing miraculous signs all the time to show those who were not faithful. Those who ask God to prove Himself are always left wanting because they are testing God. Telling God to prove Himself is not an act of Love, but one of selfishness. We are all called to believe without seeing, but in His mercy God gives signs to some who may benefit from them. God has revelealed enough of Himself for us to believe in Him, no more, no less.

 

[jdnation]

Ebon, eh? I suspect this is the same Ebon who’s usually taken to task a number of times by Christian J.P. Holding at tektonics.org

 

[John_Russell_Jr]

bjorn:

maybe i am missing something here but i would say that having faith means not having to ask God to prove himself. and if i ask for a sign and dont get one does that mean that God does not exist? and what is the thing about shaking a stick at evidence about? is that supposed to convince me?

Hi,
In my experience, God is so active that I would have to be a fool to disbelieve His existence. Billions of people can testify that they see God’s fatherly providence in their lives. It is one of the best tests ( a proof for God’s existence) to ask , " If there is a God…"
No sincere seeker of truth will be denied some little sign ( at least ) from God if he is truly geuine.
I had an experience last year when someone close to me was starting to convert. i asked our Lady to do something to really help this person. Give him some sort of sign to cement his newfound faith.
I had gottten a rosary blessed by the pope. I gave it to him, but one link was damaged and it kept separating. He took it home and tried to fix the link , that weekend, but could’nt. Did’nt have the tools. he came to work on Monday. Told me about the link. I pointed out that the rosary was probably blessed by a saint, and it was the greatest prayer besides the Mass. And look after that rosary. He went to the tool section, found the pliers, but when he went to fix the link it was already fixed. He was flabbergasted. That may well have been a small miracle. God will perform signs. Ask and ye shall receive, seek and ye shall find , knock and the door will be opened unto you. It was not tempting God.

 

[Neithan]

**4 marks: **thanks for your encouragement I’ll look into those books you mentioned.
john doran:

are there any specific points of his that you find particularly compelling? i could take a crack at demonstrating their weaknesses.

Those first seven articles of his all seem pretty compelling to me. I guess his refutation of the moral argument in “Unmoved Mover” and his demonstration that absolute morality can just as easily exist in atheism in “The Ineffable Carrot and the Infinite Stick” are particularly problematic for my faith.

Mijoy2:

The Atheist may claim this is selfish, and if I feel this way I can only lay claim to my goodness to the fear of God. Not true. I appeal to the Athiests own claim to fame…logic. What sense does it make for any *entity, *to martyr oneself for a monumentally small temporal cause (life)? We’d all do better if we were to ignore all others and seek our own happiness at all costs. Survival of the fittest. Its simply the most logical thing to do.

Atheists aren’t cold-blooded logical machines simply because they don’t have faith, they are humans with emotions too.
Would selfishness lead to happiness? Most atheists would probably say no, if they’re honest. We don’t find happiness by helping ourselves to the detriment of everyone around us. Morality is based on not harming others, and this is self-evident; we don’t really need to point at God to see it.

adventistnomore:

I looked over the website… I’m not as moved by his arguments at all… I find them rather unsatisfying. I would begin by studying the Medieval Scholastics of the Church, C.S. Lews, and other great Christian philosophers… The truth is,cute little websites mean nothing in the history of this debate, and he is raising nothing new that Christian philosophers have not already dealt with at length (read their responses and arguments in-depth). Often times, his arguments come down to: “theists have not provided a satisfying enough solution to _______.” The basis of his faith thus is ultimately a matter of personal interpretation. Realize: there are no obvious, clear, definitive, irrefutable arguments in either direction. Let no one, on either side of the debate of whether God exists, convince you that there is. One CANNOT prove definitely that there is NO God, just as one could not prove definitevely, to everyone’s satisfaction that there is. Atheists seed doubt in the minds of believers, themselves already having exercised faith that there must be no God. Ultimately, anyway you go, faith is the last step.

I agree with you, there is no definitive proof for God’s existence or nonexistence. But doesn’t it necessarily follow that it takes *less *faith not to believe in something of which you are not entirely convinced?

I do believe that Christianity is more reasonable… and beyond simply the rational level, is far more satisfying. Today, as a recent Christianity Today article pointes out (a great article to read, let me know if u’d like the link), Atheism is beginning to die in many places (though it will always persist however weakened). Far more are turning to Theism than to Atheism.

Really? If you could link that article that would be great…

De Maria:I understand that God brings good out of suffering, but so much of it seems unnecessary. The Old Testament is full of God commanding all kinds of acts that He has told us are immoral. Why are there things in nature that are specifically intended to make us suffer? Sometimes it’s all just difficult to decipher. I will pray about it, though. I hope I find answers. By the way, have you heard of Open Theism?

Originally posted by Djano
And stay away from people like this!
Why turn yourself inside out over it? Stay with what you know to be true. Nothing you can say or present to people like this will have any impact whatsoever. So, don’t go back and reinforce your own faith that you know is true!

Thanks but… the thing is, I *don’t *know what’s true, and I want to! I can’t turn away from something in fear of the Truth. I need to be convinced of it, and that isn’t possible until arguments against it are investigated, ya know?

 

[Neithan]

centuri0n:

All the happy logic and philosophical etcetera aside, his arguments cannot explain how Jesus was able to be raised from the dead and present himself to hundreds of witnesses.

True, but he doesn’t believe Jesus rose from the dead, and he has some respectable reasons (“Choking on the Camel”). See, that sweeps the carpet right out from under us. We believe it, but why should he?

amantoan: thanks for your posts. Good stuff. I don’t think Mr. Marczyk completely annihilates any of the Theodocies, but he does poke sizeable holes in each of them.

SCTA-1:

Folk’s need a lot of evidence,I know, I’m one. Just something here to think about.Sister Lucia,the last survivor of Fatima,died last month in Portugal.She was 97 years old.All those year’s of dedication to the Church and not going around on the talk show circuit and hawking book’s,etc.Just pure sincerity and love on her part Look up her last word’s just before she died.This was total truth-She saw the evidence and didn’t go about like some new ager writing book’s about Marian apparitions.She dedicated her whole life to the truth after the vision’s and did it without pomp and fanfare.She is an example of how heaven can still communicate with us and prove the afterlife.Just a little study on the subject will go a long way.

Yeah, that’s awesome. I think a lot of our faith is really based on the faith of others. Which is why, when I see super confident atheists who have an answer for every theistic argument thrown at them… it throws me into doubt. I definitely think the Catholic Church has an arsenal arrayed against doubt, and one of the most powerful weapons in that arsenal is the lives of the saints. Atheists counter all this with accusations of mind control (“Thoughts in Captivity”)

 

[Neithan]

Thank you all for your thoughtful responses and suggestions, they are much appreciated. I definitely need to read more apologetics books, but at the same time, why should I shy away from atheist ones? The point of life I think, can be summarized in two goals: Truth and Happiness. Our faith can only make us happy if we are convinced that it is true.

I guess the most intriguing part about Ebon’s arguments isn’t that he convinces me there is no God, but that he convinces me that we don’t need to believe in God to find truth or happiness! Call me ignorant, but that’s really something of an epiphany for me. I mean, I realize that for every good atheistic argument, there is an equal and opposite theistic argument, but that goes both ways. There is this rigid philosophical equilibrium between theism and atheism. I suppose the logical thing to do would be to suspend judgement, to be agnostic. This is actually necessary for modern science. Skepticism is really what drives us continually to seek knowledge, and what has brought about the amazing revolutions in industry, physics, biology and technology that we see and enjoy today.

The reason my faith is shakened by stuff like this, is because it makes me wonder why I need faith at all. The fact is, Atheists aren’t in despair, they aren’t immoral, and they aren’t worse people than Theists. They simply see the freedom of not believing in God. They make of life what they will. We as Christians point at free will and knowledge as the very causes of sin! It just seems so pessimistic and unnecessary. It seems cruel of God to condemn His creatures to eternal damnation for rejecting Him when they don’t even see enough reason to believe that He even exists!

Atheists/agnostics even have some impressive arguments to question even Jesus’ literal-historical existence, plus they bring some powerful arguments agains the inerrancy of the Bible, which eliminates the most solid foundation for Christian faith. For one thing, why is the old testament God so obviously opposed to modern Christian morality (commands some of the most horrendous atrocities)? In light of our own fragile evidence, what right do we have to tell atheists they are wrong? Why do we, who make bold claims to hold absolute truth, make enemies of those who oppose us while simultaneously feeling more benevolent? Can one be a Catholic Christian and still be open-minded?

I guess I’m just asking mysef “why?” I see that our religion is a marriage of a philosophy (Jesus’ core teachings) and a mythology (God, angels and daemons, resurrection, incarnation etc. etc.). The thing is, we claim that we alone have the absolute full truth, and condemn anyone who thinks otherwise. It’s almost like the fanatical faith in our mythology damages the practice of our philosophy, if you know what I mean. When an atheist lives a life perfectly in tune with the Christian philosophy, but doesn’t believe in the mythology behind it, or that he will be rewarded, knowing that he has no hope for an afterlife; isn’t that almost more virtuous than us Theists who expect an eternal reward and fear an eternal punishment? It just seems like all the comforts I see in theism are available in atheism, just in different ways. Both can lead to happiness, and both have equal reasonable claims to the truth.

 

[trogiah]

Neithan:

. It’s almost like the fanatical faith in our mythology damages the practice of our philosophy.

That is one of the more profound observations I have seen in a while. I think the fact that there is substantial truth in it is at least part of the reason people leave the Church for atheism or other philosophies.

I believe we don’t have to let our faith in “mythology” (I have some problems with that word and I as sure others will have even greater problems but I think I know what you mean) get in the way of the practice of our philsophy. In fact I am quite sure that the living out of our faith, our moral conduct, was always (and still is) the most important thing to Jesus.

I think it is worth noting that no where in the gospels does Jesus even enter a debate on the existence of God. It strikes me that if such a debate were really important, he would have entered it. Rather he debated and instructed at great length on what the Master of the Universe really wanted from people.

Neithan:

When an atheist lives a life perfectly in tune with the Christian philosophy, but doesn’t believe in the mythology behind it, or that he will be rewarded, knowing that he has no hope for an afterlife; isn’t that almost more virtuous than us .

I submit that anyone who lives a live in tune with the Christian philosophy will receive the reward that Jesus promised, whatever they may claim to be.

I have to add that those who exert effort to break the faith of simple believers, even if it is just the faith in the “mythology”, are not living a life perfectly in tune with the Christian philosophy.

People need stories (or mythologies). Jesus knew that and that is why he gave us the story of the Good Samaritan (a completely ficticious story) to demonstrate one of the most profound truths of our faith.

Much has been written in this thread about “proving” God’s existence. Some time ago I had to give up the idea that if I would just think hard enough about the write arguments I would be “convinced” of God’s existence and I would have faith.

Does God exist?

My answer is this: God is a name I give to existence. Moses gave it this same name and spoke to it as one friend speaks to another. Jesus came to know it the way an only and most beloved son knows his own father. I have faith that if I follow Jesus commandments that I will come closer to knowing God in that same way.

I guess thats enough for one post.

 

[Neithan]

Thanks trogiah, those are some excellent words of wisdom man!

I don’t mean to offend with the term “mythology.” I don’t mean that it is fictitious, just that it requires faith. Everything in our religion which requires faith is ‘mythic,’ like many (Tolkien, Lewis, Chesterton etc.) have seen it. It’s all miraculous, extraordinary, supernatural; impossible to know, improbable to our understanding, but we believe in it anyway. Our philosophy pertains to morals and how we ought to live our lives. Christianity is basically faith and morals. That’s really what it’s all about. Is the faith necessary for the morals? That is the question.

 

[John_Russell_Jr]

Neithan:

By John-I don’t think you need to be skeptical to have advances in industry etc etc. An open mind to possibilities and the necessary drive to achieve a goal. Some brains and the wisdom to know that 1000’s of yrs of little advances led to the barrage of breakthroughs in recent times. credit where credit is due.
Agnosticism is reasonable. But if you were unsure, and you knew all the arguments, and you were still agnostic. Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to bet on God and live accordingly?

The reason my faith is shakened by stuff like this, is because it makes me wonder why I need faith at all. The fact is, Atheists aren’t in despair, they aren’t immoral, and they aren’t worse people than Theists. They simply see the freedom of not believing in God. They make of life what they will. We as Christians point at free will and knowledge as the very causes of sin! It just seems so pessimistic and unnecessary. It seems cruel of God to condemn His creatures to eternal damnation for rejecting Him when they don’t even see enough reason to believe that He even exists!

By John-Atheism is a choice we make. And we choose to go to hell. God sends noone to hell. they choose. God wills that everyone be saved. And many are. A priest i know visits Catholics at hospital , who are dying, and only 1/4 accepts the sacraments. They choose their destiny. Perhaps some are saved through other circumstances. We don’t understand the mind of God. i am sure our Lord looks for every possible excuse when judging someone.
To see what Catholics are supposed to be like at their best look at Saints like Mother Teresa. She was superhuman. She roamed the world like a giant. She was brought before kings etc to proclaim the truth. She helped 1000’s of dying people. She converted 1000’s too. This is what God wants all Christians to be like. In their own ways. The supernatural joy and peace you see in her. The supernatural energy. This is a proof of God’s existence. when you see what one little old lady can do. You see God working through her.

Atheists/agnostics even have some impressive arguments to question even Jesus’ literal-historical existence, plus they bring some powerful arguments agains the inerrancy of the Bible, which eliminates the most solid foundation for Christian faith. For one thing, why is the old testament God so obviously opposed to modern Christian morality (commands some of the most horrendous atrocities)? In light of our own fragile evidence, what right do we have to tell atheists they are wrong? Why do we, who make bold claims to hold absolute truth, make enemies of those who oppose us while simultaneously feeling more benevolent? Can one be a Catholic Christian and still be open-minded?

By John - God is the law maker. He is not bound by our laws, nor any laws of physics etc in our universe. We cannot get into the mind of God. He is the infinite, and we are the finite. we should pause before we try to explain or understand God’s ways. That’s why we need faith. we are dealing with many things we cannot see, feel or understand.

I guess I’m just asking mysef “why?” I see that our religion is a marriage of a philosophy (Jesus’ core teachings) and a mythology (God, angels and daemons, resurrection, incarnation etc. etc.). The thing is, we claim that we alone have the absolute full truth, and condemn anyone who thinks otherwise. It’s almost like the fanatical faith in our mythology damages the practice of our philosophy, if you know what I mean. When an atheist lives a life perfectly in tune with the Christian philosophy, but doesn’t believe in the mythology behind it, or that he will be rewarded, knowing that he has no hope for an afterlife; isn’t that almost more virtuous than us Theists who expect an eternal reward and fear an eternal punishment? It just seems like all the comforts I see in theism are available in atheism, just in different ways. Both can lead to happiness, and both have equal reasonable claims to the truth.

By John-Sounds good. But in practise it all too often fails. Much like communism. I have met atheists, and they have happiness etc. Are sometimes good people. But the joy and peace that comes from a deep faith and trust in God is far above this. when you delve deeper you often find a different story. I have seen people suicide. Where comes this place they find themselves, with no hope. Without hope in an afterlife, eventually one will be tested, and one may not pass the test. Perhaps a divorce, death in the family. One cannot find meaning in it. Perhaps sickness comes our way. Without hope we are as vulnerable to despair and other problems as the alcoholic is to busting without regular AA meetings. You’re tempting fate, sometimes. Catholicism has an all round answer to everything concerning this life and the next. And I find that faith and reason are not at wars. I pray you do too.

 

[Sugar_Ray]

It sounds as though you may be analytical in nature and need the help of evidence and facts to boost your faith. I would recommend reading two books (written by non catholics) that have nothing to do with faith but much to do with evidence.

How Now Shall We Live - by Chuck Colson is filled with scientific facts that prove the universe had an intelligent designer.

The Case For Christ - by Lee Strobel is a rock solid study of the historical and archeological evidence supporting the gospels, the life and resurection of Jesus.

If reason is swaying fight fire with fire…we have plenty on our side.

 

[Ahimsa]

Well, Neithan, you can always perform a little experiment (if you’re willing). Live as an atheist for a week or so, and keep a journal of your experiences. Live as if an all-knowing, all-loving, all-powerful God does not exist. Live as if this life is the only conscious life you will ever have. Live as if this physical world is the only realm of existence. How do you speak, think, feel, act? Do you seem more loving, or more selfish? Are you freed, or are you imprisoned?

 

[Strider]

Neithan:

I guess the most intriguing part about Ebon’s arguments isn’t that he convinces me there is no God, but that he convinces me that we don’t need to believe in God to find truth or happiness! Skepticism is really what drives us continually to seek knowledge, and what has brought about the amazing revolutions in industry, physics, biology and technology that we see and enjoy today…

No, it’s not skepticism that drives us to continually seek knowledge, it is the curiosity that is part of Natural Law.

Neithan:

The fact is, Atheists aren’t in despair, they aren’t immoral, and they aren’t worse people than Theists. They simply see the freedom of not believing in God.

Some of the most serious athiests who have lived and written, (Nietzche, Sartre, Goethe) have realized late in their lives that something was missing, that they had an emptiness that they couldn’t fill.

Neithan:

In light of our own fragile evidence, what right do we have to tell atheists they are wrong? Why do we, who make bold claims to hold absolute truth, make enemies of those who oppose us while simultaneously feeling more benevolent? Can one be a Catholic Christian and still be open-minded?

Open-minded, yes, athiest no. It is not necessary that we make enemies of those who oppose us, but we are called to inform them of the Truth.

Neithan:

The thing is, we claim that we alone have the absolute full truth, and condemn anyone who thinks otherwise. It just seems like all the comforts I see in theism are available in atheism, just in different ways. Both can lead to happiness, and both have equal reasonable claims to the truth.

Who condemns? We must inform them of our Truth, and even Marczyk acknowledges our assertion of free-will. God has given us the honor of deciding for ourselves if we will accept Him or not. It sounds to me as if you’re talking yourself into the “comforts” of athiesm without having the demands of Catholicism.

The following result of athiestic thought:

*Wesley Smith: Bill, do you think Terri is a person?

Bill Allen: No, I do not. I think having awareness is an essential criterion for personhood. Even minimal awareness would support some criterion of personhood, but I don’t think complete absence of awareness does.

Bluntly stated, most bioethicists do not believe that membership in the human species accords any of us intrinsic moral worth. Rather, what matters is whether “a being” or “an organism,” or even a machine, is a “person,” a status achieved by having sufficient cognitive capacities. Those who don’t measure up are denigrated as “non-persons.”
So who are the so-called human non-persons? All embryos and fetuses, to be sure. But many bioethicists also categorize newborn infants as human non-persons (although some bioethicists refer to healthy newborns as “potential persons”). So too are those with profound cognitive impairments such as Terri Schiavo and President Ronald Reagan during the latter stages of his Alzheimer’s disease.

came from:

nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/smithw/smith200503290755.asp

To be fair, there is a person calling himself a Catholic priest holding similar views quoted in the same article. I wonder how he’d fare in a discussion with Fr. Pavone, or even if he’s read the Catechism of the Catholic Church?

The point being that this form of “bioethics” is not possible without atheistic thinking, wherein the “quality of life,” trumps the sanctity of life."
This is just one little example of “all the comforts” you see in atheism.
I would advise you to examine prominent athiests, especially some of the philosophers, before you extoll athiesm as just “Christian without the discipline of God.” Try reading Architects of the Culture of Death
And, yes, many athiests can be and are fine, upright, moral people. I pray for them, although they probably wouldn’t want me to.
Atheistic, humanistic thought is frightening and will destroy us if we let it.

Jesus said, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me.” Jn 14:6

I wanted to post my gratitude to eptatorata for post # 9 above. It was very fair.*