An unbeliever thinks about a 'try belief' challenge/experiment

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hokomai
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hokomai, I give you a lot of credit. Despite being a staunch atheist who is unafraid to make his views known I still find you to be a polite, challenging, and fascinating poster who makes a positive contribution to the forum by making us all think. Unlike a lot of the atheists I see here, you actually show your reasoning when rejecting our arguments. You sir, have my respect. 🙂
:blushing:
 
well, what is more likely in your opinion,
  1. the universe just spontaneously popped into existence by itself with all of the complex laws of physics intact
  2. the universe is eternal, therefore it has no beginning (but this assertion was actually disproven by the big bang theory). not to mention, this assertion also betrays logic since there cannot be an infinite regression of causes. its the same on the number line, its infinite in either direction but you still need to start somewhere on the number line to go in either direction!
  3. then theres the theistic assertion. that something outside of the universe and physical matter caused the universe. therefore the universe was caused by a supernatural force.
as a rationalist myself, i can only go with the most logical conclusion. which is the third.
First I think we have to talk about what we mean by ‘universe’. I would call it ‘everything that is’. But I think you would say it is 'everything that is except the three persons of God, the seven orders of angels, fallen angels, heaven, hell, purgatory, grace, souls and (though I am not sure about this) two bodies assumed into heaven. If these things exist, I would say that in logic they must, including God, be part of the universe, and ‘subject to its laws’ as you would put it. If we get over that one, I can’t see any reason at all why the universe could not ‘pop into existence’. Perhaps this is in the nature of universes.How would we know? How do you know it is not? I have never understood ‘infinite’ outside of the mathematical abstraction, so I will have to pass on your (2). And with respect, in your (3) your premise and your conclusion are the same. Basically, the problem I face is the one in my OP I can’t get off base one if I can’t find something observable that only the existence of a god or gods can explain.
 
Basically, the problem I face is the one in my OP I can’t get off base one if I can’t find something observable that only the existence of a god or gods can explain.
By “observable” - do you mean something that MUST be observed by you (present and personal) or can it be something written about (past and remote)?

And when you say “only the existence of a god…can explain”…to what degree are you willing to entertain other possible explanations? I’m sure you will agree that a person determined to prove or disprove some presupposed position can come up with some pretty incredible alternatives…(Think “conspiracy theorists” as an example)

Peace
James
 
Several CAF members have recently challenged me to ‘try belief’ and just act as if I were a believer in the hope that I would believe ‘by believing’. I thought about this, but found it hard to even start, given my unbelief. I decided to list all of those things I would have to accept before I could even contemplate such an experiment. Here they are, in order of magnitude, as I see them. That is, if I could accept 1) and 2) I might be able to begin religious practice, but only if I accepted all 15 could I begin to accept Catholicism. Note: I have put this in Non-Catholic religions because I thought it was a good fit, even though I don’t have a religion, although many on CAF say I do(!). And this is not a thread about atheism; it is a thread about Catholic belief.
Hoko:

First of all, I’d like to thank you for an elucidation that shows that you took efforts to phrase your sentences in a cordial manner, as tough as that may have been for you. I know that others are working on supplying answers to you as well, so, I guess, one more won’t hurt.
Observable things will be found, or have been found that only the existence of a God or gods can explain.
Such things already have been found. E.g., how a colossal, yet finite number of particles might have been squeezed into a dimensionless singularity. Also, how can an electron shell – that may contain only one electron – be 50,000 times larger than its related nucleus yet contain only a dimensionless electron. What is that electron in? How all matter, from a MOHS hardness of 0.00 to 10.0, can be made up of such dimensionless particles, and yet have dimension, weight, mass, etc.
Of all the possible gods in which people do, or have, believed, only one, the God of Christianity, exists.
Proves that God and His rumor have been around for longer than people have, even though early man was so devoid of the abilities required to formulate a concept of God that answered most questions.
God created everything and everything depends on God’s existence for its continued being.
Of course: if everything consists of dimensionless particles and space, there would have to be a lattice maker/sustainer preventing all that we expect to be there tomorrow from dissolving back into invisible, infinite space.
God is all-powerful. God is all-loving. God is good.
Yes: even for the Nuns, Priests, Bishops and Catholics that underwent the horrendous Communist tortures of them, in Jilava (and other) prison, in Rumania, until about 22 years ago.
Before human beings existed, for billions of years on earth, and who knows how long on other planets, living things suffered great pain and distress despite their innocence and their creation by the all-powerful, all-loving, good God.
This idea is a hokomaization, i.e., something similar to an anthropomorphization, but with a more personal touch.
There is something called ‘sin’ which consists of going against the will of God.
Yes: a thing similar to disobeying your own father and mother.
Human beings, at some point in the past, sinned against God in a way that made all their offspring be born with ‘original sin’, which prevents them gaining eternal happiness.
The operative word is “may.” Have you gone to each and every party that you’ve ever been invited to? Has there been one which you adamantly refused to attend?
God is not a single person, but three, but still one none-the-less, and one of these people was sent to earth to be born of a virgin, suffer and die in order to overcome original sin.
Yes: something only “God [a Father, who] is all-powerful, God [a Father, who] is all-loving, God [a Father, who] is good. . . could and would do for his children. Wouldn’t your father do this for you . . . if he could?
Original sin, although overcome, still exists and is the cause of human pain and suffering.
Yes: attendant with original sin is “death,” the slow dismantling of the lattice of matter. But, such pain and suffering is never more than we can bear. No one has gone through anything worse than the Priests, Bishops and Catholics in Rumania since the ousting of the Nazis.
Humans, despite original sin being overcome, continue to sin. If they die in a state of serious sin, they condemn themselves to eternal pain and torment in a place created by the all-loving, all-powerful God.
Operative word: “if.” More operative words: “We just don’t know.” Although Hell has been revealed to man in numerous ways, WE just don’t know, and it is not ours to postulate anyone there. If anyone is in Hell, I have no doubt that God has given him/her/them a myriad of opportunities to extricate themselves from attending that party!
We know everything after (1) is true because scripture says so or, if it does not, the Church does, as God expresses his truth through these.
We know what we know, and not what you say or think we know.
All contradictions in scripture are either minor, or can be explained.
Much the same way as all contradictions in life are minor or can be explained.
God can communicate with us through the Holy Spirit, and we can communicate with God, the angels, and saints through prayer.
Let’s just say that our Triune God can communicate with us and we can communicate with him.
Despite his omnipotence, God wants us to praise, worship and adore him, and will reward us if we do.
Yes: I’m sure your father would have hoped for filial love from you, wouldn’t he?
God is capable of intervening, and does intervene, in the material world.
All the time: “Nothing happens in the universe without God willing and allowing it. This statement must be taken absolutely of everything with the exception of sin. ‘Nothing occurs by chance in the whole course of our lives’ is the unanimous teaching of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, ‘and God intervenes everywhere.’ (Father Jean Baptiste Saint-Jure)
If God is “in everything;” if he permeates “everything;” if he is that which supplies ‘reality’ to all that we sense; why is it so difficult to understand that he intervenes everywhere at his sole discretion?

God bless,
jd
 
Thanks Bob. I like hearing about your experiences and the way you have integrated them with your faith. Keep them coming! 🙂
In most cases they don’t make sense without my faith. Even though I was an atheist when my father died, it was clear from the proceedings that -
  1. There’s an afterlife, as he’d found out.
  2. There’s a judgement, as the terrifying scream made clear.
  3. God could play back to him his entire life.
  4. God could show him things in the future eg. “You’ll meet a pastor. You’ll think he’s great, but all he’ll do is to discourage you even more!” (met the pastor nearly 4 yeas later, and around 1991 he apologised for “discouraging me”. Also “… it will be started by the Moslems. They’ll fly a couple of planes into a couple of buildings.” You don’t get any brownie points for working out what that refers to, yet he died in January 1979, a long time before 9/11.
Of the 3 “double whammies”, they all highlighted a phrase someone said (camp leader in first instance, my old pastor for the other two ) and they all had a **specific Christian context - **
  1. The first one, which I’ve described, was a direct quote from the Bible referring to David, “man after my own heart”.
  2. The second one was a reference to St. Paul viz. “… little man of great insight and wisdom…”
  3. The third was a reference to CS Lewis, the Christian apologist (and you could do worse than read some of his apologetics, written for the layman) viz. “… an intellectual ministry that went around the world…”
There’s been a number of other things as well. The pastor whom I “thought was great” (and generally still do) was also prophetic, and if he said he thought something was going to happen, I found from experience it did eg. Note that all these things were stated circa 1990/91 as he died himself in 1992.
  1. “You’ll become a Catholic” - 1996 or 1997.
  2. “I don’t think your sister will live very long. I think she’ll get leukemia” - sister died in 2005 from leukemia.
  3. “I think (xxxx - his own eldest son) won’t live long. He’ll have a major health breakdown” - His eldest son had a stroke circa 1996. He’s still alive, but his health isn’t good.
  4. “I think there’ll be a second Gulf War. The Americans will have had enough of Saddam Hussein, and they’ll get rid of him. But I think they’ll lose a FEW men the next time” - War 2003, Saddam hanged 2006, nearly 5000 American casualties.
  5. “I think Bugalug will get hold of this church after I’m gone and wreck it. But he can’t touch the people”. Bugalug was another pastor for whom he didn’t have much time, tells a lot of lies as described by my old pastor, and “serves the devil. He thinks he serves God, but he serves the devil. It’s a terrible position to be in.” (I haven’t got much sympathy for him as I think he’s partly responsible for costing me a job). Anyway he got hold of that church the same day the pastor died, and wrecked it. But he could’t “touch the people” as most of them got so disgusted with him, they left the Presbyterian Church.
  6. “I think you’lll be doing a cleaning job. You won’t like it much. and you won’t be doing it for long, but I think the Lord will just want you to hear about a ghost.” - Sounded silly even to me, but in 2006 I did a cleaning job for a short time, didn’t like it much, and “heard about a ghost” - a former suicide in the store, for whom I eventually had a mass said.
Note though it was “**the Lord **who wanted me to hear about a ghost”, presumably to get the mass said.

What’s the odds of sitting behind a desk and accurately predicting something like the last event purely by chance?

As I said at the beginning, these sorts of experiences only make sense **because of my faith, **not the other way around.
 
I didn’t want you to feel left out! It’s just there was a lot to respond to. here goes:
[dskysmine;9616319]
Here goes an exercise in futility:
1-Yes… it’s called the Universe.
why does the universe require a god(s)?
2-The search for God doesn’t mean that all other religions are worshipping “other Gods”, their understanding of God is what is murky. I found interesting an article that Aztec priests would believe in a “great spirit” that for the common people would take form in several shapes. God revealed Himself fully through Jesus Christ in a way that everyone can understand. It is the only Revelation that leaves no space for doubts. He gave Everything. He is the LOGOS.
Hmmm - not the view taken by God and his prophets in the old Testement or the Catholic Church today I think. But in a sense I agree - I think the need for god(s) is common to people.
3- More or less Panentheism. A Deist Universe has no meaning. It is the same as an atheistic universe, meaningless, pointless, and not existent. A universe with Love, Justice, Beauty is the creation of the Triune God
.

I know you believe this - but why?
4- All powerful: created the Universe and everything in it. Check
Loving: “For God so loved the world He send His only Son to die for our Sins” Check
Good: Good > Go od > God. Check.
And this.
5-I don’t see where this is going… I also kill cows to eat. I also kill plants to eat. Does that make me “not good”? The billions of years part is not very clear. I think Life on Earth only has 400 million years or so.
I could make my way down the list to here, but the roblem of pain, particulalry the fact that innocent animals suffer, and sufferred before there could possibly have been original sin, must, to my mnf, seriously undermine any argument for the existence of an all-powerful and all-loving god(s).
6-The proper definition of Sin is a little bit more complex but for the purpose of this exercise in futility just consider Sin to be that which contradicts Life, meaning Death.
It is not clear to understand what is the Will of God. It is easier to think that Sin is that which negates Life. That’s why murder is one of the easier types of sin to identify.
Hmmmm
7-Or better yet, all humans are born with the potential to do good and evil.
Or both? Or alternately?
8-Tough one… God is Love, but as you yourself have realised it is hard to feel loved if you are alone. It is also hard to love if there is no one else to love right? How could God be Love without 3 persons? And the reason why Three are One is because Love brings everything into One. That is why Jesus wants us to be “One”. One with Him as He and the Father are One. That doesn’t mean we are no longer ourselves, but that in our Love for God we become One with Him. The rest is just narrative…
This is as good as any of the explanations of the trinity I have seen!

9&10-It’s called “Free Will”.

The question is: is the consequent judgement just? and loving?
11-We find these to be true because God Incarnated, died and Resurrected. The Bible and the Church are Witness to that Universal Truth.
Yes, but why?

12-So you think if two narrators say two different things about the same event mean that one is lying or the event didn’t happen? Explain that…

No - nothing as crass as that, although if you claim divine inspiration for scripture, you would think it could overcome such human problems as eyewitness variation. I really mean things like the fact that the author of the gospel of Matthew did not seem to know that Jesus, as claimed elsewhere in the NT, was God. A bit of an oversight, given that the author could not have know that other books would be written which noted the ‘fact’.

13-God can communicate with us in different ways. The other day I needed a kick in the back and He literally called me an “***”. (details on that for a further episode)
We can communicate with Him by loving Him.

Now that is impressive! A cosmic cuss!
14-I think your understanding of Heaven and Hell as rewards seem a little too “carrot in front of a stick” like. Heaven is the realisation of the Love you experienced on Earth without the constraints of time and physical. Hell is the absence of Love, hence the horror.
Your understanding is easier to understand and accept. But I am not entirely sure it is orthodox belief. I don’t see those words in the catechism.
15-The other day he gave a job to a lazy *** friend of mine just because I prayed for it… the nerve!
I like your interactive and robust relationship with God.
I hope you take this in a light tone.
God Bless you and I will be praying for you!
D
Thanks for caring about me, despite our disagreements about belief. 🙂
 
Thank Bob. I agree that this sequence of accurate predictions would be at the least highly unlikely by chance and I can see how faith assists in making sense of them. Of course without that faith I will tend to look for other explanations. I always wish people who have such experiences for record them in a secure way at the time they happen, so that everyone can be as sure as those who had the experiences. As I have said, I don’t see any reason to doubt at all that this is exactly the way you honestly see the experiences, and I am not challenging that. All the best - Hoko
In most cases they don’t make sense without my faith. Even though I was an atheist when my father died, it was clear from the proceedings that -
  1. There’s an afterlife, as he’d found out.
  2. There’s a judgement, as the terrifying scream made clear.
  3. God could play back to him his entire life.
  4. God could show him things in the future eg. “You’ll meet a pastor. You’ll think he’s great, but all he’ll do is to discourage you even more!” (met the pastor nearly 4 yeas later, and around 1991 he apologised for “discouraging me”. Also “… it will be started by the Moslems. They’ll fly a couple of planes into a couple of buildings.” You don’t get any brownie points for working out what that refers to, yet he died in January 1979, a long time before 9/11.
Of the 3 “double whammies”, they all highlighted a phrase someone said (camp leader in first instance, my old pastor for the other two ) and they all had a **specific Christian context - **
  1. The first one, which I’ve described, was a direct quote from the Bible referring to David, “man after my own heart”.
  2. The second one was a reference to St. Paul viz. “… little man of great insight and wisdom…”
  3. The third was a reference to CS Lewis, the Christian apologist (and you could do worse than read some of his apologetics, written for the layman) viz. “… an intellectual ministry that went around the world…”
There’s been a number of other things as well. The pastor whom I “thought was great” (and generally still do) was also prophetic, and if he said he thought something was going to happen, I found from experience it did eg. Note that all these things were stated circa 1990/91 as he died himself in 1992.
  1. “You’ll become a Catholic” - 1996 or 1997.
  2. “I don’t think your sister will live very long. I think she’ll get leukemia” - sister died in 2005 from leukemia.
  3. “I think (xxxx - his own eldest son) won’t live long. He’ll have a major health breakdown” - His eldest son had a stroke circa 1996. He’s still alive, but his health isn’t good.
  4. “I think there’ll be a second Gulf War. The Americans will have had enough of Saddam Hussein, and they’ll get rid of him. But I think they’ll lose a FEW men the next time” - War 2003, Saddam hanged 2006, nearly 5000 American casualties.
  5. “I think Bugalug will get hold of this church after I’m gone and wreck it. But he can’t touch the people”. Bugalug was another pastor for whom he didn’t have much time, tells a lot of lies as described by my old pastor, and “serves the devil. He thinks he serves God, but he serves the devil. It’s a terrible position to be in.” (I haven’t got much sympathy for him as I think he’s partly responsible for costing me a job). Anyway he got hold of that church the same day the pastor died, and wrecked it. But he could’t “touch the people” as most of them got so disgusted with him, they left the Presbyterian Church.
  6. “I think you’lll be doing a cleaning job. You won’t like it much. and you won’t be doing it for long, but I think the Lord will just want you to hear about a ghost.” - Sounded silly even to me, but in 2006 I did a cleaning job for a short time, didn’t like it much, and “heard about a ghost” - a former suicide in the store, for whom I eventually had a mass said.
Note though it was “**the Lord **who wanted me to hear about a ghost”, presumably to get the mass said.

What’s the odds of sitting behind a desk and accurately predicting something like the last event purely by chance?

As I said at the beginning, these sorts of experiences only make sense **because of my faith, **not the other way around.
 
I didn’t want you to feel left out! It’s just there was a lot to respond to. here goes:
why does the universe require a god(s)?
How could the Universe not require God?
God is the One who sustains the Universe.
It is like asking how could an Idea exist without a mind.
Hmmm - not the view taken by God and his prophets in the old Testement or the Catholic Church today I think. But in a sense I agree - I think the need for god(s) is common to people.
If the need to find God is common it is also ordinary for some to indulge and not look far enough to find Him, and thus remaining in the superficial… the gods of old.
I know you believe this - but why?
Because I exist and I can give meaning. If I can give meaning, even subjective meaning, how could everything not have a meaning? That is what is behind a Deist or an atheistic Universe… a meaningless Universe. If God wouldn’t exist nothing would matter… because no matter would exist. (Word play :))
And this.
Self evident? I gave you the list. Do you want me to go into detail on each and every one?
I could make my way down the list to here, but the roblem of pain, particulalry the fact that innocent animals suffer, and sufferred before there could possibly have been original sin, must, to my mnf, seriously undermine any argument for the existence of an all-powerful and all-loving god(s).
I don’t understand how suffering undermines the existence of God. I don’t think we could be conscious and Free willed where there was no suffering and evil. I really like my Free will.
Hmmmm… back at ya 😛
Or both? Or alternately?
AND both. Potential does not mean we do evil OR good. It means we are born with that possibility to choose.
This is as good as any of the explanations of the trinity I have seen!
Why thank you… It came off the top of my head.
The question is: is the consequent judgement just? and loving?
Of course it is just and loving, Divinely Just and Loving. You even know the questions already!
Can you imagine going into a math test and knowing the questions?
What more can one wish for?
Yes, but why?
Why do you ask why?
If you are the witness to a crime and testify to it do you think the judge will ask you why did you testify to it?
If I could testify something as Glorious as the Life, Death and Ressurection of Christ why wouldn’t I testify to it?
No - nothing as crass as that, although if you claim divine inspiration for scripture, you would think it could overcome such human problems as eyewitness variation. I really mean things like the fact that the author of the gospel of Matthew did not seem to know that Jesus, as claimed elsewhere in the NT, was God. A bit of an oversight, given that the author could not have know that other books would be written which noted the ‘fact’.
The author of the Gospel of Matthew says Jesus was the Son of God. This does not mean he thought Him to be less than Divine…
Inspiration in Scripture does not mean everything is narrated like a Historian. Inspiration means that the Truth in Scripture shows us the path that led to His Incarnation and His teachings. Nobody that is an exegete is a literalist translator of the Scriptures.
Now that is impressive! A cosmic cuss!
Yep. That’s to show you how close you have to be to Him to understand the right path.
Your understanding is easier to understand and accept. But I am not entirely sure it is orthodox belief. I don’t see those words in the catechism.
Reward in the Catechism is not the “carrot on a stick” that most people think it is.
The Catechism is explaining doctrine. I was making an interpretation of that explanation.
It is still pretty clear. The one who sits in front will be called to sit last and the one who sits last will be called to sit in front. It is not because of you wanting to go to Heaven that will help you get there. You can experience Heaven here when you are in Mass, or when 2 or more are gathered in His name. But because our current bodies are finite we cannot stay in Heaven.
I like your interactive and robust relationship with God.
Glad to make you smile.
God makes me smile a lot too.
Thanks for caring about me, despite our disagreements about belief. 🙂
You are welcome. Don’t forget that He is the One that searches for the lost sheep. The Good Shepperd. If you feel lost He is looking for you. He is calling for you. Just follow the Voice.
God bless,
D.
 
Hi Hokomai,
I lost track of this thread when my real life interfered 😉 but I read this in a talk by the Pope, so I thought I would pass it along: *

Seeing that many of His disciples were leaving, Jesus addressed the Apostles, saying: “Will you also go away?” (Jn 6:67). As in other cases, it is Peter who replied on behalf of the Twelve: “Lord, to whom shall we go? - and we too can reflect: to whom shall we go? - You have the words of eternal life and we have believed and know that You are the Holy One of God" (Jn 6:68-69).

On this passage we have a beautiful commentary of St. Augustine, who says in one of his homilies on John 6:

“Do you see how Peter, by the grace of God, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, has understood? Why did he understand? Because he believed. You have the words of eternal life. You give us eternal life by offering your risen body and your blood, your very self. And we have believed and understood.

"He does not say we have understood and then we believed, but we believed and then we understood. We have believed in order to be able to understand; if, in fact, we wanted to understand before believing, we would not be able either to understand or to believe. What have we believed and what have we understood? That You are the Christ, the Son of God, that is, that You are that very eternal life, and that You give in Your flesh and blood only that which You are”*

Why would we have to believe before we can understand? I would propose that it is because we cannot understand without the grace of God helping us in our understanding. The fishermen were humble men, unlike the kings or the leaders of the Temple. They looked at what was happening, and they didn’t understand, but they *knew *Christ, they trusted Him and believed in Him, and so, *through the grace of God, *understanding was given to them.

So I speculate that you and others like you want to understand on your own, but you are unable to understand on your own because you are merely human–this understanding is beyond our capabilities as humans. We can only understand with God’s help, and so we must take that leap of faith so that we can receive His help.
 
First I think we have to talk about what we mean by ‘universe’. I would call it ‘everything that is’. But I think you would say it is 'everything that is except the three persons of God, the seven orders of angels, fallen angels, heaven, hell, purgatory, grace, souls and (though I am not sure about this) two bodies assumed into heaven. If these things exist, I would say that in logic they must, including God, be part of the universe, and ‘subject to its laws’ as you would put it. If we get over that one, I can’t see any reason at all why the universe could not ‘pop into existence’. Perhaps this is in the nature of universes.How would we know? How do you know it is not? I have never understood ‘infinite’ outside of the mathematical abstraction, so I will have to pass on your (2). And with respect, in your (3) your premise and your conclusion are the same. Basically, the problem I face is the one in my OP I can’t get off base one if I can’t find something observable that only the existence of a god or gods can explain.
actually, the universe includes the angels, fallen angels, and even heaven and hell. spirit and matter exist side by side. i would even go so far as to say that Jesus and the virgin mary are in this universe even on this earth.
quantum physics is beginning to confirm the existence of spirit and is making it more and more plausible to believe certain christian teachings. one example is the ressurection (christ and mary are two examples im going to use).
according to quantum physics our bodies are actually made of energy, now according to catholic teaching, our ressurected bodies will be completely subject to our spirits (our current bodies are not since sin causes a sundering of body and spirit). but if you think about it, quantum physics makes it possible for us to be transcendent, immortal, etc. therefore i personally believe that when you pray Jesus really is there physically and spiritually. this is also my theory on how transubstantiation occurs. however i have to point out these are just my personal theories i have forulmated after researching these things myself.
anyway i dont want to get off topic here, so i highly recommend that you watch a documentary. its called “what the bleep do we know”. its a very interesting documentary and it makes a good argument for the existence of spirit, it uses quantum physics as proof. its very interesting, so if you get the chance watch it. (i just want to note, it does delve into new age philosophy and its pretty much from a deist perspective, but none the less its educational.)

also i want to addres one other thing you said in your response, could you define “observable”? do you mean to say you onnly accept things that are observable by the five senses? because the five senses do not provide an accurate view of reality.
if you only believe in things that can be observed, then why do you believe in justice? or beauty? or love? or truth?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top