Want to counsel me on webcam/chat/telephone? Faith nearly gone

[ethereality]

At this point I’m going to church on Sundays to socialize, receive financial assistance, and to fulfill my religious obligations in case the Church is correct. (I’m presently doing what the Church says is necessary for salvation due to fear of hell.)

I’ve reached the point where I’ve suffered, seen suffering, and seen so many situations that are absurd (i.e. that contradict Divine Revelation and the deposit of faith) that the contrary theory, that there is no god of Abraham, appears to me to fit this data better and better explain my life experiences. Atheism* appears more plausible, to contain more explanatory power, than the Christian faith.

This is heartbreaking, of course, since I was hoping to be healed, hoping for a better body, a better life, to live forever, to have a loving relationship with My Heavenly Father, to be reunited with dead relatives, to meet people from the past, to be in communion with the saints in heaven, all those things the Church promises you to help you make it through the day. I have apparently entered into a mourning stage for the death of my faith, as instead it appears all I have is this one life, this partially broken body, to do the best I can and maximize my pleasure and others’ before we cease to exist.

I’ve had my share of Internet letter-writing, particularly on these forums, as my post history will show, so I’m not really interested in that. I also don’t have the time for that. I am open for Skype conversations, though (or possibly some other webcam or webphone service, like Google Hangouts): If you would like to chat between 7:00-20:00 Japan Standard Time, please PM me – or, if you’ve got your contact information (e.g. Instant Messenger) already in your profile, post here and I can check your profile for your contact info. I also have Google Voice, so I can generally call telephones in the US for free.

It seems God won’t talk to me or answer my questions, but you might be able to. Thanks for reading! Cheers.

• One can eliminate Mohammedanism and Judaism together with Christianity due to those painful events that do not appear fitting with an all-powerful wise sovereign being. Hinduism is the only other religion I know of today postulating deities; while I might look into it, my understanding is that these deities are mythical rather than historical, and so Hinduism is apparently false for that reason.

 

[cfreeman]

Pray the Rosary and ask for the gift of Faith. Nothing I can say to you will be more powerful than Mother Mary’s prayers for you.

How to pray the Rosary

I’ve been in your position before. I nearly gave up my faith after my mother died.

Hail Mary
Full of Grace, the Lord is with thee
Blessed art thou among women
and Blessed is the fruit of thy womb,

Jesus.

Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
Pray for us sinners
Now and at the hour of our death.

Amen.

 

[cfreeman]

Also I would say you should return to the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Confess your doubt, confess any mortal sins you are conscious of. Then pray the Rosary and return to the other sacraments as soon as possible.

 

[1neophyte]

I honestly don’t mean to be flip, but do you really believe that the existence of God is contingent on you not experiencing suffering? Does that really make sense to you? How much time have you spent getting to know the God of Abraham? Have you carefully looked at the gospel accounts of Jesus’ crucifixion and death?

So much could be said about this, but to sum it up, lament can be a form of worship and a means to a much greater intimacy with God than ever would be possible if there was no suffering. Resorting to atheism makes about as much sense as “deciding” that the sun doesn’t exist every time it rains where you are.

 

[Bookcat]

Please -make an appointment with your priest…this needs face to face

Also in addition feel free to call the Apologist line too…

Meet (even ongoing) with your Priest…this is not something to only discuss in an impersonal way on a forum…you need that personal encounter and discussion and counsel etc.

 

[Katherine438]

Prayer … prayer to Jesus … prayer of the Rosary … Communion and Penance … and wearing a Crucifix and Miraculous Medal … these are the things I use to fight off doubt.

I have been ill for 30 years … and I will admit that there have been years where I walked away from the Church … but I always come back … and Jesus is always here with Mary to welcome me … my suffering does not stop … my illness continues … but with Jesus and Mary I find a way to make my suffering fruitful.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

I’m curious what your age is.

Have you read the New Testament?

I mean … sitting down and reading until you get tired. And then the next day resume reading. Until you’re done.

There are concordances that explain what the original writers were thinking.

Just think what the original Apostles were thinking. They were fishermen and local village members. A doctor. Various middle class artisans. And yet, … they followed Jesus.

WHY?

Why did they follow Jesus at all???

Question for you: have you been to the Holy Land?

If so, what were your impressions?

 

[ethereality]

I honestly don’t mean to be flip, but do you really believe that the existence of God is contingent on you not experiencing suffering? Does that really make sense to you? …] Resorting to atheism makes about as much sense as “deciding” that the sun doesn’t exist every time it rains where you are.

You’ve misunderstood me by missing “the full picture” of what I’ve presented. I’m not denying God’s existence because I stubbed my toe. I’m saying the sum total of my life experiences fits the theory of atheism better than the theory that the Church is correct.

There are life experiences that contradict Christian revelation. For example, a mentally ill Buddhist woman in her 60s who is not helped by prayer or the Christian priest of the church she frequents in order to stalk foreign Christians. (Not only my prayers, but she has also said that she has prayed for her situation to improve, and that she continues praying. This woman has even prayed the Rosary with me, and has memorized an older version of the ‘Hail Mary’, more formal than the one in current use.) Many Christians there ignore her; a few listen to her rants with a kind of amused pity; some become angry and yell at her. I think she has already been banned from the church closer to her residence for stalking a priest. I tried to befriend and help her, to do what the American Church taught me to do, and I may have done more harm than good. (By the way, she thinks irrationally with superstition, and repeatedly tells me that God does not want her to become Christian. So as an additional problem, it appears her mental illness is preventing her from following the ordinary, normative, “necessary” means of salvation.)

If a rich and powerful physician were in charge of this situation, enabled it to occur, and did not respond to requests for assistance to heal or help her, you would not call him wise or loving. But replace this physician with the god of the Bible and you must say that He is wise and loving, and to justify this contradiction you must assume that He is “working in mysterious ways” to “bring about greater good”. This is ad hoc reasoning, and as Trent Horn says in his Answering Atheism, ad hoc reasoning is not good or persuasive.

Or a simpler example: “Knock and the door shall be opened; seek and you shall find.” I’m tired of going to church, even receiving the Eucharist, and not experiencing any encounter with God. (The Catechism says to see God we must have a pure heart – well, I’ve tried my best to be pure, but it seems that wasn’t good enough for God.)

Perhaps to put it more succinctly, there is suffering for which Christians can only say, “It’s a mystery”: My problem is that it appears as evidence that atheism is true, not a mystery at all.

To answer the second half of your objection, apart from suffering, it isn’t clear that God exists in the first place. (St. Thomas Aquinas even admits this fact in the Summa!) The best evidence that God exists, the reliability and uniformity of nature and apparent design (one of Aquinas’s Five Ways), could be a brute fact with no explanation. The second-best evidence, Church-approved miracles, are always unverifiable and mere rumor. Why doesn’t the Church publish their findings as case studies in peer-reviewed literature? (Philosophical arguments like the fine-tuning argument are all unsound; historical arguments like “the Resurrection best explains the historical record” are uncertain.) So rather than “throw away the knowledge that God exists” as you suggest with rainy sunshine, it’s rather trust in the Church being betrayed by experience.

Please -make an appointment with your priest…this needs face to face

I am in Japan, and a language barrier prevents this.

Also in addition feel free to call the Apologist line too…

I don’t know the Catholic Answers apologists’ telephone number.

(Disclaimer: In the Church’s defense, to avoid scandalizing the reader: It’s possible God’s working with this woman in ways I don’t see, and it’s possible I encounter God in connection with my thoughts and emotions.)

 

[the_phoenix]

“Looking at 6 thousand homeless, Pope Francis delivered one of the most moving “mea culpa” of the Jubilee. “I ask your forgiveness for all the times that we Christians stand before a poor person or a situation of poverty and look the other way,” the Pope said.”

agensir.it/chiesa/2016/11/11/pope-francis-asks-forgiveness-to-the-homeless-for-every-time-we-looked-the-other-way/

So thank you, ethereality, for your kindness in reaching out to the mentally ill Buddhist woman. Perhaps you believe you have not seen Christ, but you were being Christ and showing Christ to that woman.

 

[1neophyte]

You’ve misunderstood me by missing “the full picture” of what I’ve presented. I’m not denying God’s existence because I stubbed my toe. I’m saying the sum total of my life experiences fits the theory of atheism better than the theory that the Church is correct.

There are life experiences that contradict Christian revelation. For example, a mentally ill Buddhist woman in her 60s who is not helped by prayer or the Christian priest of the church she frequents in order to stalk foreign Christians. (Not only my prayers, but she has also said that she has prayed for her situation to improve, and that she continues praying. This woman has even prayed the Rosary with me, and has memorized an older version of the ‘Hail Mary’, more formal than the one in current use.) Many Christians there ignore her; a few listen to her rants with a kind of amused pity; some become angry and yell at her. I think she has already been banned from the church closer to her residence for stalking a priest. I tried to befriend and help her, to do what the American Church taught me to do, and I may have done more harm than good. (By the way, she thinks irrationally with superstition, and repeatedly tells me that God does not want her to become Christian. So as an additional problem, it appears her mental illness is preventing her from following the ordinary, normative, “necessary” means of salvation.)

If a rich and powerful physician were in charge of this situation, enabled it to occur, and did not respond to requests for assistance to heal or help her, you would not call him wise or loving. But replace this physician with the god of the Bible and you must say that He is wise and loving, and to justify this contradiction you must assume that He is “working in mysterious ways” to “bring about greater good”. This is ad hoc reasoning, and as Trent Horn says in his Answering Atheism, ad hoc reasoning is not good or persuasive.

Or a simpler example: “Knock and the door shall be opened; seek and you shall find.” I’m tired of going to church, even receiving the Eucharist, and not experiencing any encounter with God. (The Catechism says to see God we must have a pure heart – well, I’ve tried my best to be pure, but it seems that wasn’t good enough for God.)

Perhaps to put it more succinctly, there is suffering for which Christians can only say, “It’s a mystery”: My problem is that it appears as evidence that atheism is true, not a mystery at all.

To answer the second half of your objection, apart from suffering, it isn’t clear that God exists in the first place. (St. Thomas Aquinas even admits this fact in the Summa!) The best evidence that God exists, the reliability and uniformity of nature and apparent design (one of Aquinas’s Five Ways), could be a brute fact with no explanation. The second-best evidence, Church-approved miracles, are always unverifiable and mere rumor. Why doesn’t the Church publish their findings as case studies in peer-reviewed literature? (Philosophical arguments like the fine-tuning argument are all unsound; historical arguments like “the Resurrection best explains the historical record” are uncertain.) So rather than “throw away the knowledge that God exists” as you suggest with rainy sunshine, it’s rather trust in the Church being betrayed by experience.

So many words, so much incoherent confusion. I never said anything about stubbing your toe. You are working from a made up view of “Christian revelation.” The center of actual revelation is found by looking at the Cross. The sum total of Jesus’ life experiences would also “fit the theory of atheism.” However, He made it crystal clear that God’s ways are not our ways. In fact, a careful study of the gospels reveal that God’s ways are typically the polar opposite of what we would expect. You’re holding on tightly to your own expectations, which is understandable, but it’s also why you remain so confused.

You say that you’ve tried your best to be pure, but that it doesn’t seem to be “good enough” for God. Again, pure confusion. If you are relying on your own attempts at purity to “impress” God, you don’t have the disposition to receive anything from God. And honestly, you’re not even disposed to receive anything from anyone responding in this thread, so I’m not clear on what you’re looking for here, other than to evangelize us with the revelation of atheism that you think you’ve discovered.

You’re looking to be satisfied by philosophical arguments, which never satisfy. You’re looking to experience an encounter with God on your own terms, which doesn’t happen for any of us. I’m not discounting or dismissing your suffering; I trust that it is very real and larger than what I understand. But there is no evidence of surrender on your part, and that is the only thing that will help you.

 

[the_phoenix]

So many words, so much incoherent confusion. I never said anything about stubbing your toe. You are working from a made up view of “Christian revelation.” The center of actual revelation is found by looking at the Cross. The sum total of Jesus’ life experiences would also “fit the theory of atheism.” However, He made it crystal clear that God’s ways are not our ways. In fact, a careful study of the gospels reveal that God’s ways are typically the polar opposite of what we would expect. You’re holding on tightly to your own expectations, which is understandable, but it’s also why you remain so confused.

You say that you’ve tried your best to be pure, but that it doesn’t seem to be “good enough” for God. Again, pure confusion. If you are relying on your own attempts at purity to “impress” God, you don’t have the disposition to receive anything from God. And honestly, you’re not even disposed to receive anything from anyone responding in this thread, so I’m not clear on what you’re looking for here, other than to evangelize us with the revelation of atheism that you think you’ve discovered.

You’re looking to be satisfied by philosophical arguments, which never satisfy. You’re looking to experience an encounter with God on your own terms, which doesn’t happen for any of us. I’m not discounting or dismissing your suffering; I trust that it is very real and larger than what I understand. But there is no evidence of surrender on your part, and that is the only thing that will help you.

Thanks, 1neophyte,

I had wanted to express these thoughts in my post above, but was unable to find the right words. I appreciate your eloquence.

…

 

[1neophyte]

Thanks, 1neophyte,

I had wanted to express these thoughts in my post above, but was unable to find the right words. I appreciate your eloquence.

…

I appreciate your post too! What you said about ethereality being Christ to the woman he mentioned… I wanted to express that point also, but I ran out of steam. Sometimes it seems that God is most present (while still remaining most invisible) to those who are forgotten and most suffering. Ethereality is frustrated that he can’t seem to have an encounter with God. I wish he realized that the most likely place to encounter Him is in his interactions with that woman.

 

[ethereality]

I wish he realized that the most likely place to encounter Him is in his interactions with that woman.

Ironic – I was going to say, today and last week she seems to be doing better, insofar as she has successfully avoided me. Today she hurried off without a word to me, after finishing her weekly flower arrangements, and that seems the best thing for her. Ideally we won’t speak again. (Because I was treating her as a friend, she began thinking of me as her boyfriend, telling people we were going to marry, even though I’m less than half her age, so I had to sever ties with her to help her see reality.)

Your encouraging me to “surrender” is somewhat helpful, because I already have and think that is indeed the way to go – i.e. be resigned to possibly never encountering God and dying. The rest of what you say is indeed incoherent, so it is sad that you are projecting that onto me. “Encountering God in helping others” is the emotional nonsense of modernist seminaries, not a meaningful phrase. It’s meaningful only as a reference to what Jesus says in the Gospel, as instruction to help the poor: Yeah, I understand that Jesus identifies with the needy, and regards our helping or hurting them as doing it to Him. The fact remains that this woman is not God. Here’s something for you to reflect on: How do you distinguish an emotional state of mind from the presence of God? Ultimately, you appear to want me to just assume that God is present, and this for you is “faith”. Emotion appears to be your “evidence”.

(By the way, the ‘stubbing my toe’ bit was poetically summarizing your sentiment that I was simply ‘mad at my suffering’ and therefore denying God’s existence as part of an upset temper-tantrum.)

 

[1neophyte]

Ironic – I was going to say, today and last week she seems to be doing better, insofar as she has successfully avoided me. Today she hurried off without a word to me, after finishing her weekly flower arrangements, and that seems the best thing for her. Ideally we won’t speak again. (Because I was treating her as a friend, she began thinking of me as her boyfriend, telling people we were going to marry, even though I’m less than half her age, so I had to sever ties with her to help her see reality.)

Your encouraging me to “surrender” is somewhat helpful, because I already have and think that is indeed the way to go – i.e. be resigned to possibly never encountering God and dying. The rest of what you say is indeed incoherent, so it is sad that you are projecting that onto me. “Encountering God in helping others” is the emotional nonsense of modernist seminaries, not a meaningful phrase. It’s meaningful only as a reference to what Jesus says in the Gospel, as instruction to help the poor: Yeah, I understand that Jesus identifies with the needy, and regards our helping or hurting them as doing it to Him. The fact remains that this woman is not God. Here’s something for you to reflect on: How do you distinguish an emotional state of mind from the presence of God? Ultimately, you appear to want me to just assume that God is present, and this for you is “faith”. Emotion appears to be your “evidence”.

(By the way, the ‘stubbing my toe’ bit was poetically summarizing your sentiment that I was simply ‘mad at my suffering’ and therefore denying God’s existence as part of an upset temper-tantrum.)

Quite the opposite. The presence of God indeed has nothing to do with emotions or evidence. I (perhaps wrongly) interpreted your previous posts as expressing a demand for evidence for God’s existence, as well as a conclusion that God does not exist based on the evidence of your own subjective experience. I distinguish an emotional state of mind from the presence of God with the realization that God is present whether I feel good or bad, whether I’m suffering or thriving. His existence (and love) is not contingent on my feelings or experiences, or even my fickle ideas about Him. That’s the starting point. I said nothing about a temper tantrum. All I said was that it appeared you were using your own experiences and your observations of a woman suffering from mental illness as evidence of God not existing. That is pretty puny evidence.

 

[ethereality]

it appeared you were using your own experiences and your observations of a woman suffering from mental illness as evidence of God not existing. That is pretty puny evidence.

Please read more carefully, because you’ve made a straw man of my argument, which included additional observations.

If I might briefly reiterate my point about suffering, it appears to me there is justifiable suffering, and there is apparently unjustifiable suffering.

The former is the temporary consequences of free will, or God’s chastisement to spur us to grow in holiness.

The latter is if God refuses to intervene after the former has been felt and the agent responsible has finished with his deed; if we cannot ascertain why we are suffering (i.e. how we are to grow more in holiness, what God is chastising us for); if animals likewise suffer* to no apparent benefit. Natural disasters are commonly cited as an example, e.g. the 1755 Lisbon earthquake, or more recently the Christmas tsunami.

Trent Horn’s only response to this line of argument has been, “Because you can’t show that God doesn’t have a good reason, we can assume that God has a good reason,” which is of course begging the question.

The apparent existence of unjustifiable suffering contradicts the Catholic Church because, according to her, Jesus (God) teaches us that God is Our Loving Heavenly Father, whereas fathers ought not to be cruel to their children and leave them in ignorance, as appears to be the case here.

This is the argument that I tried presenting above, or at least the sentiment I tried to convey, and I hope you see that it is much deeper than “I met a woman who has mental illness. Some people don’t help her.” (Another formulation of the argument of apparently unjustifiable suffering is, “Why doesn’t God heal amputees?”)

• I think CS Lewis in The Problem of Pain gives the example of a forest fire started by lightning that burns a deer which suffers and then dies, to no apparent benefit of man – and I do not recall that he gives an answer, instead calling for us to have faith in spite of this mystery. A real life example of this would be the meteor that exploded over a forest in Siberia, charring to death hundreds of reindeer. (I thought this article specified the carcasses were charred, but maybe it was a different one. They do say the deer were “the livelihood of local herders”, so maybe God was punishing those people, but as the above natural disasters indicate, we can’t just assume God’s punishing people every time a disaster happens, and I think the Catholic Church has even taught that we mustn’t.)

 

[1neophyte]

Please read more carefully, because you’ve made a straw man of my argument, which included additional observations.

If I might briefly reiterate my point about suffering, it appears to me there is justifiable suffering, and there is apparently unjustifiable suffering.

The former is the temporary consequences of free will, or God’s chastisement to spur us to grow in holiness.

The latter is if God refuses to intervene after the former has been felt and the agent responsible has finished with his deed; if we cannot ascertain why we are suffering (i.e. how we are to grow more in holiness, what God is chastising us for); if animals likewise suffer* to no apparent benefit. Natural disasters are commonly cited as an example, e.g. the 1755 Lisbon earthquake, or more recently the Christmas tsunami.

Trent Horn’s only response to this line of argument has been, “Because you can’t show that God doesn’t have a good reason, we can assume that God has a good reason,” which is of course begging the question.

The apparent existence of unjustifiable suffering contradicts the Catholic Church because, according to her, Jesus (God) teaches us that God is Our Loving Heavenly Father, whereas fathers ought not to be cruel to their children and leave them in ignorance, as appears to be the case here.

This is the argument that I tried presenting above, or at least the sentiment I tried to convey, and I hope you see that it is much deeper than “I met a woman who has mental illness. Some people don’t help her.” (Another formulation of the argument of apparently unjustifiable suffering is, “Why doesn’t God heal amputees?”)

• I think CS Lewis in The Problem of Pain gives the example of a forest fire started by lightning that burns a deer which suffers and then dies, to no apparent benefit of man – and I do not recall that he gives an answer, instead calling for us to have faith in spite of this mystery. A real life example of this would be the meteor that exploded over a forest in Siberia, charring to death hundreds of reindeer. (I thought this article specified the carcasses were charred, but maybe it was a different one. They do say the deer were “the livelihood of local herders”, so maybe God was punishing those people, but as the above natural disasters indicate, we can’t just assume God’s punishing people every time a disaster happens, and I think the Catholic Church has even taught that we mustn’t.)

Wow. I have to admit, I never looked at it that way before. You’re probably right…there is no God.

 

[the_phoenix]

Dear ethereality,

I am praying for you in Japan.
I hope you are safe and all right.

~~ the phoenix

 

[ethereality]

Dear ethereality,

I am praying for you in Japan.
I hope you are safe and all right.

~~ the phoenix

Thanks. The earthquake waking me up this morning was a little scary and fun (after I convinced myself I needn’t be scared), and possibly the strongest I’ve felt yet. Japan has at least one earthquake each month, I would estimate. Usually just the ground shaking a little.

Wow. I have to admit, I never looked at it that way before. You’re probably right…there is no God.

Looking at your post history, this appears to be sarcasm. Given the authoritarian tone of your other replies, it appears you’ve decided not to spend any more time here. I don’t mind, because as I said at the beginning, I shouldn’t spend time arguing here; I’m just a little disappointed your responses weren’t more helpful. Maybe you’ll pray for me, though.

the phoenix, I suppose I’m doing a bit better – enough to continue “truckin’ on” as an agnostic Christian. I’m still not in a good place, though. Maybe I’ll schedule another appointment to try medication – and maybe I’ll try scheduling in more exercise before that … but the majority of my problems are actually physical and financial, and I do think a large source of my sadness are untreatable physical problems in conjunction with the observation that God hasn’t healed them. I’ve read a little from Archbishop Fulton Sheen arguing that our happiness (or ‘joy’) cannot be rooted in anything material, that it must be rooted in God – and perhaps this is my main problem, that I cannot convince myself that God actually exists. (I have not been able to believe it with the same confidence that I believe the science I’m taught in school.)

 

[the_phoenix]

Thanks. The earthquake waking me up this morning was a little scary and fun (after I convinced myself I needn’t be scared), and possibly the strongest I’ve felt yet. Japan has at least one earthquake each month, I would estimate. Usually just the ground shaking a little.

the phoenix, I suppose I’m doing a bit better – enough to continue “truckin’ on” as an agnostic Christian. I’m still not in a good place, though. Maybe I’ll schedule another appointment to try medication – and maybe I’ll try scheduling in more exercise before that … but the majority of my problems are actually physical and financial, and I do think a large source of my sadness are untreatable physical problems in conjunction with the observation that God hasn’t healed them. I’ve read a little from Archbishop Fulton Sheen arguing that our happiness (or ‘joy’) cannot be rooted in anything material, that it must be rooted in God – and perhaps this is my main problem, that I cannot convince myself that God actually exists. (I have not been able to believe it with the same confidence that I believe the science I’m taught in school.)

Glad to hear you survived the earthquake and tsunami all right, ethereality!

I hope something can be done to help your physical and financial problems, and I will pray for you.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen is right about where to look for real joy. Just look at how many rich rock stars end up so miserable they kill themselves, often at a young age. They have money, mansions, fame … some have health (depending many times on their lifestyle) … but it seems they do not have God in their life.

I used to talk on the phone long distance with a lady who was born with life-threatening heart disease, and who lived in pain and poverty every day … and back when Michael Jackson was still alive, she told me that she felt sorry for him and would not want to trade places. (This was back when he was making documentaries about how he felt so lonely and misunderstood, where he was shown renting out an entire hotel floor and riding a tricycle up and down the hall, sad, alone, and friendless because he didn’t trust anybody.)

As for God’s existence, there are times in my life when I’m praying my heart out for something … and it seems I’m left hanging So Long … meanwhile, God blesses me in other ways, with other gifts. I think he’s teaching me to be grateful for what I do have, and to trust Him for the rest.

…