Prayer of the Week
May 4th, 2009 by Mark Lefers
Lord you know what I need. You know that I’m like Thomas who needs evidence to believe. God, I need something, something objective. The subjective feelings and “personal experiences” that work for others, don’t work with me. I need something tangible. I’m sorry if this seems like I’m testing you, but you know me, and know what I need. If you have other plans for me, please let me know that, so that this waiting doesn’t become too unbearable. Please, Lord, hear my cry.
You seem very patient, Mark. If God exists, I hope he rewards you.
Hi again…
Sorry to hear that it didn’t work for you, Mike. It surely worked for me. I may no longer doubt that God is real. I have insulted and attacked him badly and even told him that I won’t believe in him any longer until he gives me proof.
I’m telling you, you’d better not insult God… no no… not a good idea. I have said so many bad things about him. I will keep my mouth shut in the future…
Peace, Reto
Reto, are you saying that bad things happened to you because you insulted God?
I had to suffer, yes. But it was necessary, even good for me. My doubts vanished and I am grateful for that. You know, the world is a disgusting place. What a relief that there is a God who wants our best and does not apply to the world’s cruel standards.
Peace, Reto
“the world is a disgusting place.”
If that is your view, then so be it. Do terrible things happen? Sure they do, but there are many wondrous and beautiful things in this world as well. I don’t know how one could look at a sunset or hear the laughter of Children and say such things.
Would you say that those who mock God daily, on purpose, and do not suffer, are considered lost and the reason they do not suffer is that no amount of prodding would lead them back to God?
I’m using “world” in another sense here, similar to John 15:
18If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.
19If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
I’m sorry, but I’m not able to answer your question. I just know what happened to me…
Peace,
Reto
Thank you for the explanation, Reto. I lived the “in the world, but not of the world” concept for 20 years, but now I find that sort of exclusivity to be troubling.
I understand that you can only tell me what happened to you. The reason I asked the question is because my experience has been different. I know people who mock God and Christianity daily and have been very happy for years. I also find that equal amounts of good things and bad things have happened to me both before and after my deconversion. Before deconversion I called the good things blessings and the bad things were trials to help either guide me to God or make me stronger in my faith. Now I try to glean some knowledge from life’s events, but attribute them to no one.
Hi Mike
To me it’s not a concept anymore.
Does the truth come with all sorts of things hard to understand? Yes. Is it always reasonable? No. Is it hard get the right picture? Yes. Does that make God less real? No. Is our nature corrupted and do we tend to rebel against God? Yes.
I’m betting my ass that God is real and not just a human “invention” to cope with reality. And of course the only way to know him is through Jesus.
“God is a concept by which we measure our pain” John Lennon
Wrong, dude!
Peace,
Reto
Oh, it wasn’t a concept for me. It was part of who I was. A few years ago I would have agreed with you 100%.
Why are you struggling with this.
Your parents gave it you as fact. You loved & trusted them. They had it from their parents who had it from theirs. Now you hold it and pass it on to your kids.
It’s a social phenomenon – as you can see by looking at the equally unsupported beliefs of other faiths. I don’t know you, but I’d guess you can see the process that results in them holding their beliefs – and you see them as in error. – Same goes for you.
If you want to know the truth about where the things you hold come from you can find most of it out – it came from normal human social mechanisms in a particular set of circumstances – and possibly mental illness resulting in hugely charismatic individuals.
The sad fact is people have the ability to believe anything. This idol is my grandfather, the earth is flat, 7 day creation, we are gods chosen people, Allah wants us to blow up this underground train, Vitamin C cures cancer. The only protection against it is looking openmindedly at the evidence – there is abundant evidence that the things Christians have believed over the centuries have been full of error falsehood and (yes !) blasphemy ( I consider that if I believed in God I would find it supremely offensive to believe that he would punish every succeeding generation for the crime of eating an apple, and that he would then be placated by the murder of an innocent).
Stop struggling.
IT’S ALL NONSENSE.
The simplest way to express the truth is that there is no God.
– Of course since there is no clarity about what ‘God’ might mean this is a bit sweeping.
After all if someone wants to say “I know there’s a God because otherwise arithmetic wouldn’t work the same each time” then I guess it would be ok to say it looks like his God exists. On the other hand, probably most christians (& muslims & jews) probably wouldn’t be happy with that as a full description of God’s duties.
To do the things that you were brought up to believe He does G has to have certain attributes – consciousness, motives, power to act, preferences – so you have to somehow imagine how all that fits into (or outside of) the universe. Well – oddly enough – the world looks just like it would if there wasn’t this big daddy keeping an eye.
That’s not evidence of non-existence. – But then evidence of non-existence is a logical impossibility – so that’s kind of not too surprising – and it fits right in.
I could go on – I feel kind of sorry for you. You guys keep fighting this rearguard action, feeling that science is out to get you, but when I’ve talked to any of you who have enough sense to be worth talking to about what you actually believe – all I can see is confusion – struggling to work out any little part of it that makes sense, and not succeeding. Surprise, Surprise!
Give it up.
Stop violating your mental processes by trying” to believe.
You can’t.
Carry on behaving ethically.
Live a good life.
What more do you need ?
Good luck
Tom
Tom,
Thanks for commenting. You make some good points that people have the ability to believe anything. But we’re not talking about Big Foot, alien abduction, flat earth, 7 day creation, etc. I’m looking and searching whether there is a God who sent His Son to die for us. I don’t know if it is true, but I’m putting the time and effort in to see if it is. There are many very smart people who believe in it (this doesn’t make it true, just gives me pause) and those that don’t. And I’d like to make a point that this is different from other “crazy” ideas like those mentioned above. Why make a hasty decisions, like giving up the Christian faith, based on feelings? If I did that, I would be in the same boat as those who “just believe” based on subjective feelings. I’m trying to be honest and open minded in this search. I’m going to go through many books, and struggle with this because this is a BIG question. In a way this is what drew me to science, asking tough questions, thinking about it, and searching for an answer. To not do this would be just lazy on my part.
By the way, how did you run across this site?
“I’d like to make a point that this is different from other “crazy” ideas like those mentioned above.”
Perhaps it’s only different because it’s much, much older.
Mike,
I don’t think it is just because it is older. There are many beliefs that flank Christianity on both sides that aren’t believed today. There is something unique about Christianity that doesn’t allow it to just be dismissed out of hand. And therefore I think it is rational to do a thorough investigation before coming to any conclusion.
Thoughtful investigation or not, it’s claims are no more incredible than the others.
There are many beliefs that flank (Insert old Religion Here) on both sides that aren’t believed today.
Hi again
A short encouragement: I can assure you that God is real. I wasn’t easily convinced. I’m a critical guy. So don’t despair. If you really want to find Him, you WILL find Him. It may not happen how or when YOU plan it though. Try to relax a bit and don’t give up!
Peace, Reto
There is certainly a need for deeper consideration than either Tom or Reto provide. “I can assure you that God is real” doesn’t cut it; Tom can assure you that God is not real.
And Tom’s “why are you struggling with this” when it is so obvious? position is also not convincing. Consider:
1) passed down from parents (often a byproduct of geographical location) and a construct of social phenomena:
It is a fundamental error to dismiss a claim based on its origin, independent of the claim itself. This is the genetic fallacy. What if your parents teach you that there is no God and that knowledge of reality is obtained solely through scientific, empirical observation? Then we track the development of this line of thinking back to the Enlightenment and the development of the scientific method which arose “from normal human social mechanisms in a particular set of circumstances.” Whatever the ultimate truth is, it can be passed down from generation to generation and the development of “social mechanisms” in support of this truth can be examined and discussed.
Tom claims Christianity and other faiths have “equally unsupported beliefs.” This claim would need to be defended. It holds no weight based simply on the assertion that each faith is passed down from generation to generation. I believe Mark is wading through an evaluation of the claim that Christianity is an unsupported belief system.
2) “The only protection against it is looking openmindedly at the evidence – there is abundant evidence that the things Christians have believed over the centuries have been full of error falsehood and (yes !) blasphemy.”
Error and falsehood are relevant here; blasphemy would have no meaning from the standpoint of concluding there is no God. Again, the claim for this “abundant evidence” needs to be evaluated, which Mark is attempting to do. Reading too much material from one side or the other makes the conclusion seem so clear, but an honest evaluation of both sides in dialogue reveals that there are no irrefutable arguments or pieces of evidence on either side.
SIDE NOTE: One must be aware that popular Christianity is not the ultimate expression of the Christian faith. Rejection of this form of Christianity is often easily done. I think Tom’s parenthetical comments show that this is the Christianity he is rejecting:
( I consider that if I believed in God I would find it supremely offensive to believe that he would punish every succeeding generation for the crime of eating an apple, and that he would then be placated by the murder of an innocent).
I would not be fond of this God either. But this depiction does not take into account alternative views. This doctrine of “the fall” arose from Augustine and continues through Reformed churches today. But it is a mistaken, non-biblical understanding which attributes retributive punishment the “original guilt” passed to each human. Also, the view that God “would then be placated by the murder of an innocent” makes one theory of the atonement, known as the “penal satisfaction” or “penal substitution” theory – as the one and only atonement theory. I side with Tom in rejecting “original guilt” and “penal satisfaction,” but I do not equate these with Christianity. Christian theologians also recognize these inadequate expressions of the faith, and have addressed these issues through other strands of historical development, other biblical interpretations, and application of better moral philosophy.
3) “The world looks just like it would if there wasn’t this big daddy keeping an eye.”
It is a bold claim by Tom, Richard Dawkins, and many others to assert that you know what the world would look like if there was or was not a God. There are so, so many assumptions made when people dismiss God on this basis. This assumes knowing God’s intentions for creating this world, how he intends to interact with the world, etc. If someone making this claim were open to their assumptions being challenged (and not set on arguing against a caricature of the Christian faith), I would recommend reading The Work of Love: Creation and Kenosis edited by John Polkinghorne.
Suppose we were to modify the question and ask whether human nature looks like it would if Christianity were true, a subset of “the world looks just like it would…”. Is there is evidence in support of the Christian understanding that human nature is prideful and self-promoting? Consider (tongue-in-cheek): “but when I’ve talked to any of you who have enough sense to be worth talking to.” A tinge of pride?
Finally:
“Carry on behaving ethically.”
“Live a good life.”
I’m not going to say there can be no “ethics” or “good” without God. But we need to recognize that in the atheist materialist view these are now merely social constructs, and there needs to be a deeper exploration as to why we feel the need to behave ethically and live good lives.
Mark, I applaud your effort and your desire to hear out both sides. I hope the search does not consume you and that you are able to live semi-peacefully through your uncertainty. Henri Nouwen said that we live best not with answers, but when we embrace and live the question.
Kyle
Kyle,
Thanks for the thoughtful and intellectual honest comment. I wish I had more to say, but you did it so well, and I have so little time right now. So I’ll just leave it with, “Amen, Kyle”.