In light of the fact that I am the Atheist Missionary, it will come as no surprise to any of you that I would be interested in an article entitled Losing My Religion: Why I recently walked away from Christianity: http://thebeattitude.com/2009/05/28/losing-my-religion-why-i-walked-away-from-christianity/
I am particularly interested to see the author's reply to my comment:
You wrote: “The only reason I was a Christian was because I was indoctrinated into the religion as a child as a result of the culture and region of the world in which I was born.”
Being a Christian requires believing that Jesus existed (plausible for many), died, started to rot, came back to life and was God in the flesh. I am going to suggest that, if you look yourself in the mirror, you will admit that you never really believed any of that crap.
Like I said to my wife earlier tonight, the religion/atheism debate is really not that much of a debate. You have a bunch of people going around professing to believe in fairytales, most of whom would probably admit that they are deluding themselves if they gave it much thought. Life must be nice if you can believe in fairytales ....
You said: "the religion/atheism debate is really not that much of a debate. You have a bunch of people going around professing to believe in fairytales..."
ReplyDeleteThat's assuming God doesn't exist. If God *does* exist, then *you're* the one running around believing in delusional fairytales. You're begging the question: saying it's delusional to believe God exists because God doesn't exist.
In reality, there is a real debate about whether God exists or not, with reasonable, thoughtful people on both sides (as well as people on both sides who are stupid and thoughtless) who think they're right and the other side is wrong.
I agree with your general idea that it's better to be reasonable, thoughtful, and rational. But you must realize that if reasonable people come to different conclusions than you do, it doesn't automatically mean they're unreasonble, just wrong.
Matthew,
ReplyDeleteEven if god does exist, AM isn't being delusional. There is no evidence for god.
I'd much rather go to the pearly gates and have to explain why i didnt worship him at all, due to no evidence, than try and explain why i worshipped the wrong god, despite no evidence.
Think about that one.
Rabhimself, excellent retort. Matthew, I don't assume that God doesn't exist. I just believe that it is highly, highly improbable. If you have anything beyond Pascal's Wager to rely on, I am all ears.
ReplyDeleteRabhimself, there is evidence for God's existence that convinces many people. And I understand if you say you find the evidence unconvincing and improbable so you disagree with the conclusion that God exists.
ReplyDeleteBut to say that there is no evidence, and to assume that everyone who believes in God is acting only on irrational delusions is to seriously misunderstand the motivation for why many people believe in God.
Matthew, I don't think rab or I have any misunderstanding about the "motivation for why many people belief in God". It is multi-faceted and likely has evolutionary origins. However, a motivation for believing something is a far cry from having a factual and logical justification for believing something. I am profoundly motivated to believe that I will win the lottery tonight but I do not have faith that I will.
ReplyDeletePlease check out this excellent article by English philosopher Stephen Law: http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/2008/12/could-it-be-pretty-obvious-theres-no.html
I should add that I do not think it is delusional to speculate about the existence of a divine being or (for whatever reason) to hope that such a being exists. I am of the view that it is delusional to believe that such a being exists. By delusional, I mean "a belief that is firmly held on inadequate grounds and is not affected by rational argument or evidence to the contrary" (that definition is provided by Lewis Wolpert in Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast).
ReplyDeleteIf I told you that I was Napolean and you were unable to persuade me to the contrary, you would agree that I was deluded. If you tell me that you actually believe in any of the following I would reach the same conclusion about you:
1. the power of prayer;
2. that Jesus (if he actually existed) died, started to rot and came back to life well over a day after he died;
3. that there is an omniscient, omnipreent and omnipotent being that intervenes in the affairs of men; and
4. that Hitler could confess his sins on his deathbed and go to "heaven" while a bush pygmy who never heard of Jesus is going to be damnedto "hell" for eternity.
I could list examples all day. Just name the religion and I'll give you a dozen beliefs that are as delusional as me being Napolean in the flesh.
Atheist Missionary, I understand the definition you gave of "delusional." However, I believe I have adequate grounds and rational evidence to believe that God exists.
ReplyDeleteYes, I believe God exists, knows all, is all-powerful, and that Jesus physically rose from the dead more than a day after he died. And I have good, rational reasons for believing those things, (I know you would disagree with them), so I don't think I'm "delusional."
I read the Stephen Law essay. His arguments are nothing new: the problem of evil has been well-known to Christians for centuries. And it is a hard problem, but we have answers to that problem.
I don't think you or Law are delusional, just mistaken. There are good, rational, philosophical reasons to believe God does not exist, but I think there are better rational, philosophical ones to believe he does.
Matthew, if everything you believe is correct, it is just as likely that God is infintely evil. See my most recent post which features another (brilliant) article by Law. I would love to hear your response to that argument.
ReplyDeleteMatthew: what are the "rational reasons" for believing those things? You keep saying that, but you don't tell us what they are. Are you just being temptuous?
ReplyDeleteWhat I find amazing is how you guys act as if anyone who believes God exists is somehow unaware of the sources you cite (Law, Hume, Dawkins, etc.) Surely you're aware that many of us HAVE read those authors and don't find their arguments convincing. Is that because somehow our abilities to reason are not as sharp as yours? Or maybe we just don't have the personal strength to except truth because we are emotionally needy or weak?
ReplyDeleteIf your reasoning were really that air tight one suspects you wouldn't have to rely on such a huge helping of ad hominem attacks.
If only you applied the scientific method of observation and testing to your understanding of those whom you disparage! You might find what is obvious to most (even many unbelievers) -- that reasonable, intelligent and honest people can (and have) examined the arguments (if not evidence) for the existence of God and come to different conclusions. The only way to miss such an obvious occurrence is to begin your observation of religion with the assumption that “only the delusional believe in gods.” Such circular reasoning undermines both the logic you claim to treasure and the good you claim.
Father Jim, I agree that reasonable, intelligent and honest people can arrive at differing conclusions on the existence of God. I don't think you will find me anywhere on this site suggesting that acceptance of the ontological argument is delusional. However, that is a far cry from believing in the physical resurrection of Christ and the literal truth of the events described in the Bible. When you get to that degree of belief, search this site for a quote by English philosopher Simon Blackburn and please give it some serious reflection.
ReplyDelete