What would it take to convince you that God doesn’t exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter frobert
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
STT said:
Why not convinced? We sin therefore we are imperfect.
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced that we have to be perfect because God is perfect. We aren’t perfect because we fell from his grace and favor through disobedience.

Even if we are unfaithful God is faithful because that is his nature. Our nature, OTOH, is corrupted by original sin.

The literal Good News is that faith in Christ restores us to God’s grace, allowing us to attain to holiness. It’s not easy with our nature corrupted by sin, our intellect darkened, and our will weakened as a consequence of original sin. But, it’s doable.

We have the witness of the saints to tell us that God is perfect and perfectly good because they became holy by conforming their wills to God’s will in all things, made possible by availing themselves of God’s grace to do so.

It’s possible for us to be perfect as Our Father in heaven is perfect. If it weren’t so, Jesus would never have commanded us to attempt it.
 
frobert said:
The question is an offshoot from another thread “Is it true that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?” which is a question for the atheist that got me thinking about a similar question for theists: “What would it take to convince you that God doesn’t exist?”
Click to expand...
Why would I want to stop believing in God. This would take away the gift of half of all God’s creation.

I can understand why Christians want atheists to believe in God. Christians want their atheists friends to understand the love of God. But, I have never figured out why it is important to an atheist to want a Christian not to believe in God. All an atheist offers is nothing.

A Christian has everything an atheist has. A Christian has all of science and all the beauty of the material world in addition to the beauty of heaven and Christ’s love.

Name one thing I would gain if I quit believing that God exists.
 
HelenRose said:
Name one thing I would gain if I quit believing that God exists.
Click to expand...
The autonomy to have lots of sex without feeling guilty. Plus you wouldn’t have to participate in rituals. You can live as you want; invent your own fantasy.

But is it really worth it? I don’t think it is.
 
Della said:
I’m not convinced that we have to be perfect because God is perfect.
Click to expand...
This I already argued. God should be the best in all respects, attributes and act. Do you expect from a rational person, God for example, to produce/create junk?
Della said:
We aren’t perfect because we fell from his grace and favor through disobedience.
Click to expand...
That doesn’t solve the problem of origin of evil. We fell because we sinned. We sinned because we were imperfect.
 
IWantGod said:
The autonomy to have lots of sex without feeling guilty. Plus you wouldn’t have to participate in rituals. You can live as you want; invent your own fantasy.

But is it really worth it? I don’t think it is.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. No rules. No decency. No need for truth. Just happy little monkeys governed by the alpha male.
 
To the thread title:

Proof that “goodness” is not an objective thing that exists independent of me. And if not proof, at least an argument I find privately convincing.
 
STT said:
This I already argued. God should be the best in all respects, attributes and act. Do you expect from a rational person, God for example, to produce/create junk?
Click to expand...
It’s your contention that God had to create beings incapable of committing sin, not ours. It’s up to you to provide viable evidence/arguments for that, not simply make the assertion. You never have–because you have none, isn’t that right? Otherwise, you’d have put them forth by now.

God, being God, didn’t have to make us incapable of sinning. We are mortal beings with immortal souls. We could have shone like the stars of the heavens, but we chose to go our own way. Is love truly love if at the first test of it that “love” fails? God created us in love and for love, not for mere mechanical perfection of the robot. Beings that cannot fail in love cannot truly love. God cannot fail in love because he IS love. We only know and have what we have because of what he gave us. We are limited beings, not God himself. I’ve written this before, but you insist on sticking to your unsubstantiated premise. You are not seeking answers–you are telling us what you want to believe.
That doesn’t solve the problem of origin of evil. We fell because we sinned. We sinned because we were imperfect.
Click to expand...
Again, it’s your contention that man should not have been able to sin if created by a perfect God. And again, since that’s your assertion, it’s up to you to provide viable evidence/arguments for it. Simply making assertion after assertion isn’t the kind of argument that would convince anyone or anything.
 
I think that people often fail to see the beauty of imperfection. Nobody can really know why God created things the way He did, but don’t you think it feels better to be loved by someone that doesn’t have to love you, rather than a robot that has been programmed to love you?
 
Della said:
It’s your contention that God had to create beings incapable of committing sin, not ours. It’s up to you to provide viable evidence/arguments for that, not simply make the assertion. You never have–because you have none, isn’t that right? Otherwise, you’d have put them forth by now.

God, being God, didn’t have to make us incapable of sinning. We are mortal beings with immortal souls. We could have shone like the stars of the heavens, but we chose to go our own way. Is love truly love if at the first test of it that “love” fails? God created us in love and for love, not for mere mechanical perfection of the robot. Beings that cannot fail in love cannot truly love. God cannot fail in love because he IS love. We only know and have what we have because of what he gave us. We are limited beings, not God himself. I’ve written this before, but you insist on sticking to your unsubstantiated premise. You are not seeking answers–you are telling us what you want to believe.

Again, it’s your contention that man should not have been able to sin if created by a perfect God. And again, since that’s your assertion, it’s up to you to provide viable evidence/arguments for it. Simply making assertion after assertion isn’t the kind of argument that would convince anyone or anything.
Click to expand...
By saving this, you are then saying that “souls” will be capable of sinning once in Heaven also. If not, then why didn’t God create us in this “heavenly robotic” state in the first place? Will we be robots in heaven then? That’s circular reasoning.
 
laylow said:
By saving this, you are then saying that “souls” will be capable of sinning once in Heaven also. If not, then why didn’t God create us in this “heavenly robotic” state in the first place? Will we be robots in heaven then? That’s circular reasoning.
Click to expand...
God wanted us to have a choice. It is just that our choice will have an eternal consquence.
 
Mavzylor said:
God wanted us to have a choice. It is just that our choice will have an eternal consquence.
Click to expand...
So the choice is the short period on earth to then become “robots” in heaven? Since, people will no longer have the choice to sin.
 
laylow said:
So the choice is the short period on earth to then become “robots” in heaven? Since, people will no longer have the choice to sin.
Click to expand...
While I can’t confirm what the Church teaches exactly, that’s how I understand it. I dont know as we will be complete robots, but rather any choices we may have in Heaven will stem from the solid good nature we’ve chosen to take part in with God from our life on earth. God wants us to choose to love Him not be forced to love Him. Then we are either with Him forever or we aren’t…
 
Mavzylor said:
While I can’t confirm what the Church teaches exactly, that’s how I understand it. I dont know as we will be complete robots, but rather any choices we may have in Heaven will stem from the solid good nature we’ve chosen to take part in with God from our life on earth. God wants us to choose to love Him not be forced to love Him. Then we are either with Him forever or we aren’t…
Click to expand...
That’s why the robots explanation never flies. You can’t start by saying God doesn’t want us to be robots, but then he does want us to be robots after our short “test.”

Choosing and not choosing God, is a whole another lengthy discussion. Everyone sins, so everyone “doesn’t choose God.” So then a hierarchy of sins is created and then it is said that you have to “repent” of your sins, which is problematic if you die in a compromising position. I, for the most part, know what the church’s teaching on it is, however, there are holes. And when there are holes, the explanation is, only “God knows, we can’t fathom his ways” which I can arrive at by not following any specific “religion.”
 
laylow said:
That’s why the robots explanation never flies. You can’t start by saying God doesn’t want us to be robots, but then he does want us to be robots after our short “test.”

Choosing and not choosing God, is a whole another lengthy discussion. Everyone sins, so everyone “doesn’t choose God.” So then a hierarchy of sins is created and then it is said that you have to “repent” of your sins, which is problematic if you die in a compromising position. I, for the most part, know what the church’s teaching on it is, however, there are holes. And when there are holes, the explanation is, only “God knows, we can’t fathom his ways” which I can arrive at by not following any specific “religion.”
Click to expand...
I think it makes perfect sense that God would give us the time to choose to love Him and share in His nature, and then ultimately fulfill our desires. Of course, God can never be perfectly explained, otherwise faith would not exist.
 
Della said:
It’s your contention that God had to create beings incapable of committing sin, not ours. It’s up to you to provide viable evidence/arguments for that, not simply make the assertion. You never have–because you have none, isn’t that right? Otherwise, you’d have put them forth by now.
Click to expand...
Is an act of creation that you know eventually leads to sin wrong/evil? Sinning is just matter of time.
Della said:
God, being God, didn’t have to make us incapable of sinning. We are mortal beings with immortal souls. We could have shone like the stars of the heavens, but we chose to go our own way. Is love truly love if at the first test of it that “love” fails? God created us in love and for love, not for mere mechanical perfection of the robot. Beings that cannot fail in love cannot truly love. God cannot fail in love because he IS love. We only know and have what we have because of what he gave us. We are limited beings, not God himself. I’ve written this before, but you insist on sticking to your unsubstantiated premise. You are not seeking answers–you are telling us what you want to believe.
Click to expand...
So you mean that God is robot and cannot do sin?
Della said:
Again, it’s your contention that man should not have been able to sin if created by a perfect God. And again, since that’s your assertion, it’s up to you to provide viable evidence/arguments for it. Simply making assertion after assertion isn’t the kind of argument that would convince anyone or anything.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand. Here I only argue that the act of creation was imperfect. Couldn’t we agree on that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top