Lack of Questioning Leads to Atheism?

[TK421]

Hello Everyone! My first major post in quite some time.

Anyway, another seminarian and I were having quite an interesting discussion today. He had brought up how his cousin, being an atheist, challenged him with different reasons for why God cannot exist. So, he responded to these challenges.

One of the challenges this seminarian’s cousin made was:

*this quote is paraphrasing to the best of my ability, since I don’t remember the actual quote.

First, obviously it’s absurd to think that we “God believers” don’t question God’s existence every now and then to different extremes (examples can be as simple as “Does God really exist”? or as complex as a Dark Knight like John of the Cross). It’s this questioning that leads us to research more and more into the existence of God to find satisfaction. (DISCLAIMER: I’m assuming that everyone already knows that Faith is required as well) Take for instance, Thomas Aquinas. His whole Summa starts with questioning God’s existence, which lead him to discover the 5 Proofs, and goes to prove everything else. So, questioning is not wrong. (Another DISCLAIMER: I am well aware that too much questioning can lead to curiositas and disbelief)

However, it led me to wonder if some atheists (or possibly a lot more than we think) actually refuse to believe in God because they stop questioning and put “blind faith” in things like Science or Nature. For instance, I ask an atheist how to explain, oh let’s say Miracles, and I myself question their existence, but immediately the atheist says “Well, there has to be some reason that this happens. It cannot be from a god or divine, all-powerful being.” And so he refuses to actually question properly and investigate, so to say.

I guess I just wanted to know your thought’s. Can atheism come from a lack of questioning?

I hope this makes sense

God Bless

Not that it’s a virtue, but if you were an atheist in, say, the 18th century, I doubt it would mean you don’t question things.

In secularized countries, for people born in irreligious families, a very vague sort of agnosticism/spirituality might be the default stance in the person, or a more pronounced atheism for more politicized families. So, in this case, it would take introspection and inspection (and the prompting of the Holy Spirit, as always) for the person to move outside of a secular position.

 

[e_c]

Because he wants us to have an accurate picture of who he is and what he wants?
Of course everyone has been proposing strawman tests like turn the sun green which wouldn’t be useful, but people who were serious about asking questions would come up with more informative and less onerous tests.

I mean, there are all kinds of allegations of tricks, from an era when people were gullible and ignorant and tricks were popular. And people today aren’t demanding tricks, they’re just demanding consistent and measurable behavior.

“Oh but father Abraham, if someone goes to them from the DEAD, then they will believe…”

No, no. Miracles do not cause a faith which saves. Maybe they can cause a fleeting confidence, but not the virtue of faith. In fact, once one understands the basic teaching on what faith is, (directly given from God, “not by flesh and blood,” as Christ tells Peter who had just confessed belief in Christ’s divinity), this whole problem begins to fade away. Miracles are a certain kind of vessel to deposit the gift of faith, which allows the worker to participate in unfolding the salvific plan and actions of the Godhead.

Many ancient peoples were not stupid, and even the most primitive (who had a real language) were still at least not simply “gullible” as you suggest. These are peoples who built pyramids, aqueducts, empires, warships, and could memorize a phenomenal amount of what we would put in text. Just because they don’t have iPhones does not mean they were not plenty skeptical and demanding in their discernment of what was authentically supernatural. Remember, Jesus was SPECIAL. There had not been a prophet for quite a while, so it’s not like this stuff is just a cultural invention imposed on natural or simply misleading events.

Then there are all those “recent” miracles. Especially profound and convincing is Fatima.

Consistent and measurable behavior does indeed exist in the Church, and with God’s action in people’s lives. But it has more to do with steady growth in virtue than with flying around town like St. Joseph Cupertino (or a number of others).

 

[Vera_Ljuba]

Come on a mental walk with me, Vera.

Gladly.

Suppose God is real, is alive, is smart, and does not want to play these games, as He in fact says all over Scripture (like that whole “putting God to a test” thing with the Temptations of Christ).

Being smart and declining these requests are logically incompatible.

Why would He indulge these experiments?

Because he would realize that “one size does NOT fit all”. People are different. Some only need a minimum of “evidence” (hearsay etc.) while others need a much more substantial support. If God cares about us all, then he would provide the necessary evidence, tailored to the needs of the individuals. After all God desires all of us to be in heaven with him. And the first step would be to realize that God is real.

The next question would be, “Why doesn’t God want people to believe in Him by doing tricks?” And then, we can take a look at all the examples (in Scripture and besides) of all sorts of tricks not working - which is a sign that faith is something beyond a convergence of probabilities. And there are also those same Temptations, where Christ refuses to solve world hunger, refuses to fly around Jerusalem “proving” that He is God, then refuses the chance to take back the world from the devil who reigns over it by the exercise of his free, God-given power. No - God wants something more invisible, more subtle, and ultimately much more beautiful.

I am sorry, but all these references to the Bible are not accepted. I am willing to accept (for the sake of conversation) that God exists, he is smart, and loves us, and wishes all of us to volitionally accept him. But that is all. The rest you need to substantiate, if you want me to accept it.

The final question is, “Why doesn’t God just create us in Heaven?” Because it destroys the possibility of the great good of glory.

What the heck is that “great good of glory”? Heaven is supposed to be the “best thing since sliced bread”. To enjoy the beatific vision (whatever that might be) is supposed to be the best thing that can happen to us. What does this “glory” have to do with it?

As I said, I am very much willing to take this mental walk with you. But you must be rational and logical, otherwise we cannot walk the same path. No hearsay, no gullibility. As the Joe Friday in the old TV series (Dragnet) said: “Just the facts, Ma’am”.

 

[PRmerger]

I mean, there are all kinds of allegations of tricks, from an era when people were gullible and ignorant and tricks were popular. And people today aren’t demanding tricks, they’re just demanding consistent and measurable behavior.

This type of chronological snobbery is nonsense.

People in that “era” were not stupid, JK. They could tell when someone was dead, and then was alive again.

And to proclaim it as truth, getting martyred for it, while not recanting, is quite telling.

Clearly, they weren’t lying about seeing a dead man alive again.

 

[JapaneseKappa]

This type of chronological snobbery is nonsense.

People in that “era” were not stupid, JK. They could tell when someone was dead, and then was alive again.

You know the culture surrounding ISIS that allows it to exist and thinks its a reasonable thing? Imagine a similar culture, but where the people have less access to education and transportation and information about the outside world. That’s literally what we’re talking about when we’re talking about biblical times. I never said the people then were stupid, they just didn’t know much, and they “knew” a lot of things that just weren’t so.

 

[Bradski]

You know the culture surrounding ISIS that allows it to exist and thinks its a reasonable thing? Imagine a similar culture, but where the people have less access to education and transportation and information about the outside world. That’s literally what we’re talking about when we’re talking about biblical times. I never said the people then were stupid, they just didn’t know much, and they “knew” a lot of things that just weren’t so.

Too right. People confuse stupidity with ignorance.

 

[PRmerger]

You know the culture surrounding ISIS that allows it to exist and thinks its a reasonable thing? Imagine a similar culture, but where the people have less access to education and transportation and information about the outside world. That’s literally what we’re talking about when we’re talking about biblical times. I never said the people then were stupid, they just didn’t know much, and they “knew” a lot of things that just weren’t so.

I don’t disagree with you.

However, the point remains: no right thinking person, even in the days where there was “less access to education”, doesn’t know when a man dies and rises from the dead.

Especially in the manner that Jesus was killed.

They weren’t duped into believing that he rose from the dead because of “less access to education”.

 

[PRmerger]

Too right. People confuse stupidity with ignorance.

Irrelevant.

Are you seriously proposing that the ancient Jews were ignorant of death? They could be fooled into believing someone had risen from the dead, when he was actually lying stiff as a board in the tomb?

 

[jmcrae]

You know, I actually tried something similar, when I was still very young. But instead of asking for something nonsensical, like turning the Sun green, or requesting a million bucks, I asked something that was supposed to be in synch with God’s “desire”. I asked for goodwill and peace on Earth. I asked to help the downtrodden, to heal the sick and feed the hungry. And I prayed as earnestly and honestly as only a young child can.

And… what a surprise - nothing happened. (That was the first step on my way to lose faith.)

Of course, back then, I did not know that there are only two kinds of “supplicatory” prayers that are welcomed by God. The first kind, which cannot be verified, for example to pray for salvation. The second kind, which has an overwhelming probability to come true, like asking for snow during a winter blizzard.

Try to ask for something, which is very unlikely to happen, and I am willing to make a substantial bet, that the prayer will go unheeded. Funny thing is that efficacy of supplicatory / intercessory prayers has been tested, quite a few times. The results were always negative. The only rational conclusion is that God does not care. And believers simply shrug it off. Once in a blue moon someone asks for a very unlikely result, and it happens. Among zillions of daily supplicatory prayers, a few are bound to seem to be fulfilled. These are all touted as examples of “God listens, and fulfills the request”. The rest is swept under the rug. If the efficacy of drugs would be decided by a similar protocol, we all would be in deep trouble.

When you were a child, the relative percentage of hungry people was a lot higher than it is now.

I remember sending pennies to India and praying for the starving hordes; today, India is an economic superpower, and has more college graduates per square mile than any other country in the world. We did the same for the Chinese, and today, China is lending money to the United States.

We are the hands and feet of Christ - when we both pray and work, our little pennies are multiplied to do the work of millions of dollars.

 

[jmcrae]

You know the culture surrounding ISIS that allows it to exist and thinks its a reasonable thing? Imagine a similar culture, but where the people have less access to education and transportation and information about the outside world. That’s literally what we’re talking about when we’re talking about biblical times. I never said the people then were stupid, they just didn’t know much, and they “knew” a lot of things that just weren’t so.

It’s one thing to die for something you heard from someone else, and it turns out to be wrong.

Quite another to die for something you claim to have witnessed yourself, but know for a fact didn’t actually happen - that’s what five thousand martyrs in the First Century did - the witnesses of Christ’s resurrection. Do you seriously think all five thousand of them went to their deaths for a practical joke?

 

[Abba]

Some atheists don’t want to question they just want to dictate and insult.

I am speaking of those whose comments I read on an internet forum , none of those I read on here, or know personally have this type of attitude.

Example. sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1492612

Yes, and this is because they don’t want you to even get close to demonstrating them wrong. It’s a defense mechanism. It’s also a culture and club.

The following statement from the forum you linked to actual fits atheist very well:

Its a club that some people like to join.

You can go just once a week and benefit from the social aspects of the club, or get carried away and let it take over your life.

The author is referring to theists but in actuality it fits atheists best, especially those from Britain where atheism is currently the thing.

 

[Abba]

You know the culture surrounding ISIS that allows it to exist and thinks its a reasonable thing? Imagine a similar culture, but where the people have less access to education and transportation and information about the outside world. That’s literally what we’re talking about when we’re talking about biblical times. I never said the people then were stupid, they just didn’t know much, and they “knew” a lot of things that just weren’t so.

This argument is so Yale University, it must have spread like the plague throughout the hallways of universities. The ‘top’ theologians of Yale argue that Saint Paul did not know better and that is the reason he thought homosexuality was wrong.

This is not an argument but a huge erroneous assumption that would need to be proved but, cannot and will not as it is not true. I seriously cannot think of a book or collection of writings that hold more wisdom than the Old Testament (and New) but the old is ‘ancient’ and full of wisdom. As for the material side of things, unfortunately, we have lost a lot of their knowledge but the ancients knew a lot of remedies and had great knowledge about many things.Unfortunately, a lot of their knowledge has been lost. Consider, for instance, the construction of the pyramids. One thing that I will always find interesting is that the ancients knew of a deadly microscopic germ that if deprived of oxygen, for even thousands of years, will become dormant and revive when provided with oxygen (the curse of Tutankhamen).

I don’t think claiming the ancients were barbarians and we are refined is a valid argument. We moderns are pretty barbaric. I have read over and over again the complete works of Plato and I will say; I am willing to bet the farm that Plato read the Old Testament. Yet, our civilization is founded on Platonic thought. And, I don’t recall if Immanuel Kant quotes the Bible, but, let’s face is - a lot of his stuff were picked right out of the OT - e.g. the Golden Rule.

May the peace of Our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.

 

[Vera_Ljuba]

Too right. People confuse stupidity with ignorance.

But they were ready to confuse facts with legends.

Though there are still too many people who have a problem with this distinction. Of course, they are able to dismiss other people’s legends as nonsense, but when it comes to their own legends, they lose their objectivity and their skepticism.

 

[Vera_Ljuba]

When you were a child, the relative percentage of hungry people was a lot higher than it is now.

I remember sending pennies to India and praying for the starving hordes; today, India is an economic superpower, and has more college graduates per square mile than any other country in the world. We did the same for the Chinese, and today, China is lending money to the United States.

We are the hands and feet of Christ - when we both pray and work, our little pennies are multiplied to do the work of millions of dollars.

The number of hungry and sick people is still pretty much the same. The prayers you speak of simply made no statistically significant difference. And no matter how hard we work and pray, our means are still not sufficient to make a real difference.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . our means are still not sufficient to make a real difference.

I beg to differ, but I can provide no more convincing evidence for you, than you for me. The situation is exceedingly complex when considering the political systems designed to keep things the way they are. And, they are all based on sin. We could have enough for everyone. That said, we will each of us die. All we have is this brief time to know God for eternity.

 

[PRmerger]

But they were ready to confuse facts with legends.

Though there are still too many people who have a problem with this distinction. Of course, they are able to dismiss other people’s legends as nonsense, but when it comes to their own legends, they lose their objectivity and their skepticism.

This is, of course, begging the question.

Incidentally, the bolded is true for you, as well.

 

[inocente]

And no matter how hard we work and pray, our means are still not sufficient to make a real difference.

We make a very real difference to everyone we help.

unicef.es/

 

[Vera_Ljuba]

This is, of course, begging the question.

Incidentally, the bolded is true for you, as well.

Definition of “legend”:
Merriam-Webster:

a story coming down from the past; especially one popularly regarded as historical although not verifiable.

A few real legends:

• The story of Jesus.
• The story of Mohammed riding a winged horse.
• The story of the golden plates with the Book of Mormon.

All these are stories coming from the past, without historical verification, but regarded as true by many people.

So I would like you to quote an atheist “legend”, because for the life of mine… I never heard of one.

 

[Vera_Ljuba]

We make a very real difference to everyone we help.

unicef.es/

But we can only help a handful. If we really are the “hands and feet of Jesus”, then he is not much of a God. From a God one would expect a much more widespread help, reaching those whose predicament is too severe to be helped, even with the most sincere desire to help. Incurable diseases, miners trapped underground, tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis killing indiscriminately, famines due to lack of rain… and zillions of other examples. Are these beyond the abilities of Jesus? As I said, if so, then he is not much of a God.

 

[PRmerger]

Definition of “legend”:

A few real legends:

• The story of Jesus.
• The story of Mohammed riding a winged horse.
• The story of the golden plates with the Book of Mormon.

All these are stories coming from the past, without historical verification, but regarded as true by many people.

So I would like you to quote an atheist “legend”, because for the life of mine… I never heard of one.

Again, you’re begging the question.