The current state of religious debates

[Neithan]

Did you read much of Christopher Hitchens? I always found him tremendously entertaining and challenging, in a good way. I find atheism in general entertaining, but some atheists are also intellectually stimulating. A passionate, informed atheist is the best “faith sharpener” there is. I’d also recommend The Ball and the Cross by G.K. Chesterton about the value of friendship with the “freethinkers.”

 

[Kaninchen]

The atheists are savvier here because they understand that a discussion with a believer is mainly about them being converted.

For non-Christians, that does tend to make conversations more a kind of game than anything else at times and, after a couple of decades (or so), one learns most of the ‘rules’.

On the other hand, one has to remember that the Christian impulse to convert has another side to to it, the kind of investment that many Christians have in their belief means that contradiction is threatening to them - from experience, this is particularly true of ‘evidence’ based arguments (what might be described as Josh McDowell-ism).

 

[Neithan]

On the other hand, one has to remember that the Christian impulse to convert has another side to to it, the kind of investment that many Christians have in their belief means that contradiction is threatening to them - from experience, this is particularly true of ‘evidence’ based arguments (what might be described as Josh McDowell-ism).

Does McDowell himself exhibit that? I think it’s a sign of a struggling with doubt. On the other hand there are Christians who have completely unfalsifiable beliefs, so called “bomb-shelter theology.” I remember speaking with a Catholic when I first converted who told me that even if we found the bones of Jesus he would still believe! That really bothered me for a while, because he actually worked for the church at the diocesan chancery. The parish priest who catechized me told me that’s “a stupid thing to say. We should be Jewish, then.” I agree, or at least Noahides.

 

[Kaninchen]

I think it’s a sign of a struggling with doubt.

I’d agree with you there, it’s always spoken of fear and a kind of desperation to me.

 

[Gigas97]

Did you read much of Christopher Hitchens? I always found him tremendously entertaining and challenging, in a good way.

He indeed was a great thinker and speaker, but after i watched his debate with his brother (never heard of Peter before) i really started to think that Peter was in reality the wiser one, he could see things that Christopher somehow couldn’t. He walked all the way from an atheist to a believer, his books may help persons in such situation. He’s a very intelligent person, listening to him is a great pleasure.

 

[Shasta-Rose]

I read that a long time ago–like 50 years. He was a good and convincing writer.

 

[Gigas97]

I don’t want to be mean or unfriendly for any atheist/agnostic on this thread but i noticed something weird. Jerry Coyne, top atheist, wrote in one of his articles one sentence:

“Seriously, if God wants us to accept Him, why can’t he just come down to Earth and do a few irrefutable miracles that can be witnessed, photographed, and so on?”

Didn’t it happen about 2000 years ago?

 

[Pattylt]

Seriously, if God wants us to accept Him, why can’t he just come down to Earth and do a few irrefutable miracles that can be witnessed, photographed, and so on?”

I assume he meant now!

I really don’t debate theists much but I don’t hide my beliefs nor expect anyone else to accept them. I do like talking about what we believe.

One thing that amazed me for the longest time was when a theist would ask, “what would it take to get you to believe in God?” I would also ask them, “what would it take for you to not believe in God?”

So many either looked at me like I was nuts or would emphatically state that nothing would convince them that God didn’t exist.

Really? What a dogmatic and stubborn view! I would then usually end the conversation as there is nothing to discuss unless they also added, “ let me tell you why…”. I can always listen to someone’s reasons but what what can you say to someone that believes just to believe and would reject ANY evidence?

It’s the reason I lost all respect for Wm. L. Craig. He once responded to a blogger who asked about a scenario of travel back in time and watching the burial of Jesus and saw him rotting in the grave. He said he would still believe and assume he was hallucinating. He emphatically denied that anything would make him disbelieve. Sad as he’s a smart man and an excellent debater but absurdly dogmatic in his beliefs.

 

[TrueRomanCatholic]

Everyone seems to forget that Mother Church is Mother Church and is handed down from Jesus himself.

All these quibbles and discussions mean nothing to Her as the true and only Bride of Christ

 

[Pattylt]

and isn’t handed down from Jesus

I think you made an error here? Or Freudian slip?

 

[TrueRomanCatholic]

Thank you! I’ve edited it

 

[Gigas97]

Wm. L. Craig. He once responded to a blogger who asked about a scenario of travel back in time and watching the burial of Jesus and saw him rotting in the grave. He said he would still believe and assume he was hallucinating. He emphatically denied that anything would make him disbelieve. Sad as he’s a smart man and an excellent debater but absurdly dogmatic in his beliefs.

Yep, you’re completely right, same goes with atheists… Peter Atkins, Oxford Chemistry Professor during a debate with John Lennox, when asked the opposite: “What would you do if you would be in the tomb and saw Jesus’s resurrection with your own eyes”. Guess the answer… Hallucination - he would still not believe. Being intelligent doesn’t necessarily make you smart

The most important thing is to be honest with yourself, faith is always private, nobody can take it away from you - nobody can give you some either (everyone can always make you doubt or give reasons to believe, but at the end it’s only your choice). Faith has to be discovered on your own, that’s why it’s called faith. Follow the evidence wherewer it leads, and remember that just one well documented miracle (there is a plenty of them) denies every argument against supernatural. (I’m not saying that you don’t believe) I love having friendly conversations.

Greetings

 

[Pattylt]

I’m glad to hear that an atheist can be hardheaded, too. Keeps me honest! Every atheist I’ve heard answer this question usually does respond with something that would cause him to believe…even if some answers are ridiculous!

Several atheists also respond that they would be happy to believe and finally know the answer. Some insist they still wouldn’t worship Him but would believe in His existence. So, atheists can be all over the map on the question of what it would take to believe.

 

[Calliope]

Something that would push me towards belief would be stories, theology and dogma that is consistent with reality.

It’s hard to take a religion as based on reality when what it teaches is at odds with what I have experienced in life.

Like I have more respect for a religion that doesn’t try to present itself as reality, but can still have value for its moral teachings and other things it provides.

I can appreciate the benefits of following a religion. I participate in a nontheistic one and it’s a huge asset to my life. But it doesn’t require me to sign on to bizarre beliefs or practices and tie half my cerebral cortex behind my back.

I don’t understand why some faiths seems to relish the weird and impossible. Reality is pretty astounding and awesome. I’m not talking about my personal corner of the world. I have my share of hardship and challenges, I’m talking about the whole of reality. No deity I’ve ever heard of comes close to topping that.

 

[Pattylt]

A while ago I remember reading…but not who wrote it…stating that some religions hold onto weird or outrageous claims as a litmus test to sort the True Believers from the others. The more unrealistic the belief, the more closely they hold onto it as dogma. It was an interesting study from scholarship.

I hate the memory slippage due to age

 

[Calliope]

I think you’re spot on. It’s a way of testing the level of allegiance and willingness to follow, often blindly.

There is also the fact of human psychology that many people are attracted to the odd. Or something out of the norm is automatically more valuable. Also telling people they are part of a group with exclusive knowledge, power or favor.

 

[Rabbi]

That’s temporary and artificial. Remove the family, and what do you have? Nothing.

 

[Lion_IRC]

I don’t want to be mean or unfriendly for any atheist/agnostic on this thread but i noticed something weird. Jerry Coyne, top atheist, wrote in one of his articles one sentence:

“Seriously, if God wants us to accept Him, why can’t he just come down to Earth and do a few irrefutable miracles that can be witnessed, photographed, and so on?”

Didn’t it happen about 2000 years ago?

Yes, these are the sort of people who want proof on-demand.
As Pope Benedict wrote, they want God to obey them first, then they will decide whether or not to obey Him.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Bradskii]

That’s temporary and artificial. Remove the family, and what do you have? Nothing.

Artificial? What a wierd thing to say about your family. And I don’t know about you, but my family is permanent.

 

[Bradskii]

Gigas97:

I don’t want to be mean or unfriendly for any atheist/agnostic on this thread but i noticed something weird. Jerry Coyne, top atheist, wrote in one of his articles one sentence:

“Seriously, if God wants us to accept Him, why can’t he just come down to Earth and do a few irrefutable miracles that can be witnessed, photographed, and so on?”

Didn’t it happen about 2000 years ago?

Yes, these are the sort of people who want proof on-demand.
As Pope Benedict wrote, they want God to obey them first, then they will decide whether or not to obey Him.

As Coyne said, if God wants us to accept Him, then the ball is in His court. Personaly I find it a little wierd to ask something in which I don’t believe to prove it exists.