You stated that your argument (in its full glory, as you emphasized), is that there must exist a unique necessary being that created everything.
I responded by stating that anyone can make an argument for anything. I used an absurd example to mirror the absurdity of believing in something that hasn’t been objectively proven to exist. My hypothetical assertion that I could flap my arms and fly into the sky relates to the claim that your God exists at all.
To get more specific, you claimed earlier that everything that has a beginning and could fail to exist must have a cause, i.e., the argument from contingency, and you believe God to be the ultimate necessary foundation. But, if a necessary, uncaused foundation can exist by itself, it’s entirely reasonable to come to the conclusion that the foundational substance of the cosmos, like energy, quantum fields, etc., is that very foundation. If the cosmos itself can be the uncaused foundation, then a god is redundant, making that argument moot.
If you can prove the existence of God, who needs faith? Sorry, that was a rhetorical question to contrast with the claim that faith without proof involves delusion and gullibility. It’s not my position.
If it were true that faith always involves delusion and gullibility, as claimed by the original poster, then every person of faith who could not prove the existence of God would be delusional and gullible. One counter-example would disprove the claim (which was presented without proof). I could name lots of counter-examples, but need only one to disprove the claim, so I’ll name Mother Teresa. It would be possible to accuse her of being delusional, but an accusation isn’t proof. There is ample evidence that she had faith, was holy, and was not easily deceived and not deluded.
@actualevidence I just note for now that your latest post exemplifies both of the reactions I announced early on, immediately after presenting the argument in summary form.
This corresponds to the first part of your post:
And I characterized the second reaction as follows:
It’s certainly the case that not everyone needs to rigorously prove the existence of God as a prelude to have faith. Neither does everyone need the same rigor of argumentation to establish the credentials of Christian teaching. Often the holiness of the preacher is proof enough. It’s partly which moral failures on the part of clerics is so serious: they undermine their credibility, and complicate access to faith.
But some form or rational, prudential judgment is always involved in receiving the faith in adulthood, and those who grow up with it, as their intelligence awakens, also need to make a similar judgment.
Welcome. My Grandma on my Mom’s side was Catholic Christian and my Grandma on my Dad’s side was Baptist. Both loved Jesus.
Many atrocities have been don in the name of other things as well, and yet, I presume, you do not reject them outright because of it. Some have done horrific things for their love of money. Some have committed crimes of passion, in the name of love.
Money is real, but some currency is simply 1’s and 0’s. Dollar bill used to be backed by physical gold and silver, but now money is simply paper built on trust. And yet, some treat that paper as though it is something of value.
Love is real, but can you really see love? You can see examples of love. You can see actions (both good and bad) driven by love. But, can you really see love? Yet, most believe in love.
God is why human beings have value and God is love.
Unlike money, God does not have value, because we trust in Him. We have value, because God loved us first. Man created money. God created man.
Just as in the case of love, we cannot see God, but we can see God in His creation. And as you pointed out, man can do things in the name of God (good or bad).
But, Christians go a step further. We are Baptized into His love in a unique way and receive His grace (help, mercy, healing, love, salvation, sanctification, and glorification). We are invited to become participants in His love.
Why we are here? What is the purpose of life? I do not believe this is by chance nor by accident. I get that some atheists do believe just that. How would you answer these questions?
We believe God is a person (not an it). And we are not God. To think that we are greater than God or above God’s understanding is disordered. So, why do I believe that I cannot know more than God? For the simple fact that I am not God.
You are not the first to not believe in God. Scripture is full of example of individuals who were of no or little faith. Some, even disciples of Jesus. I think it is human nature to question with boldness. And it is not wrong to question. I am naturally skeptical of many things in life. But, God makes more sense than God’s non-existence.
When we Pray to God, it is okay to share with Him our many questions. It is okay to even tell God that we do not believe or that we struggle to believe. There is nothing wrong with honesty or being real with God.
Just like someone cannot irrefutably refute the existence of love, one cannot refute the existence of God. And to think that you can, is either ignorant or arrogant (and I’m not saying this to insult anyone personally, but as a matter of reality).
What do you think about anything I have said here? And if you can answer those questions I had above, I think that would be helpful to our conversation as well : )
I don’t reject the belief in God because of atrocities that were committed in its name. I simply used history as a way to illustrate that it’s possible that it wouldn’t be in someone’s best interest to have faith in something so dubious and use it as an excuse to justify doing terrible things. The difference between slaughtering people in the name of God and killing someone in a moment of unbridled passion (while both unfortunately sickening) is that there are no mysteries regarding the motivation of the latter crime. You can prove a person has a spouse. You can prove their spouse was unfaithful. You can prove that was the reason for a conflict. You can determine an appropriate response and punishment to said conflict. Although anyone can say that they have a God, no one has proven that any God exists, which muddles subsequent responses to horrid things done in the name of such a dubious idea.
You cannot reasonably conclude that God is the reason why humans have value. You also cannot reasonably conclude that God is love. First of all, that must come after being able to verify that God exists at all. As is the crux of these arguments, you’re assuming God exists without proving it, and then going one further to claim that your unproven belief is the reason for anything. It doesn’t make logical sense. Human value is an intrinsic thing. You don’t need God to determine why people shouldn’t be killed or enslaved. Also, if God somehow exists, is love and gives us value, then the existence and frequency of human suffering logically contradicts that care.
There are cultures all over the world that do not follow Catholic or Christian doctrine. They could believe that their love comes from other gods. In addition, there are people who choose not to believe in God at all, and they still demonstrate the capacity for love, sympathy, generosity, and selflessness. It’s possible for a human being to be loving without a foundational belief in your god, which means it’s not reasonable to conclude that God is the reason why humans have love.
If you cannot see God, then how can you see God in what its supposedly created? What framework would you have to identify that what you see is God if you don’t know what God is at all? Your feelings? Things that fallible men have created and claim to be representations of God? Your statement is merely an assertion, not a logical and factual conclusion.
As I’ve pointed out before, there are many people around the world who don’t believe in your God, yet are entirely capable of help, mercy, healing, love, and personal transformations/redemptions. Sanctification and glorification aren’t concretely human concepts as they are more supernatural ideas. It’s not reasonable to assume that the former virtues are God’s alone to distribute to humanity since anyone can demonstrate them independently of belief.
Questioning our place in reality is an understandable thing to do. Sometimes I do it too. But it’s not necessary to attribute our place here on earth to any entity outside of our understanding of the universe, and it’s entirely possible our existence here is by chance. I’m not saying that’s a fact, but if it were, would that be frightening to you? Why do you need to create a supernatural explanation for existence at all when natural means are capable?
To claim that God is a person goes back to the burden of proof you’ve failed to provide. How can you objectively prove that God exists at all? Only after proving existence can you accurately identify its makeup. Until then, you’re just supposing.
You’re using a dubious collection of scriptures to support an argument that hasn’t been proven in the first place. It doesn’t make logical sense to use rules from the Bible, which is unsubstantiated, to support the dubious claim that God exists in objective reality. It also doesn’t make reasonable sense to have faith in something supernatural when it’s not necessary. In addition, when you pray to God, how do you know that God is listening? That would require proof that God in fact exists, which you haven’t done. Until that’s done, people who pray are just talking to themselves.
Thanks, by the way, for being willing to discourse with me. I know I’ve gone back and forth with @TheBrokenEar a good bit already. It’s hard to not offend or not come across as antagonistic given the topic of this conversation, but I want to emphasize that I’m only here in good faith. I’m not your enemy, I don’t wish that Catholicism was banished or anything similar, and I’m not saying that your God doesn’t exist. I can’t reliably prove that. I’m just asking if any of you can provide objective, verifiable proof since you do believe God exists. And if you can’t, just tell me why you continue to believe.
Yes, I can. And I have provided a brief summary of what I take to be the best evidence.
As a possible way of moving the conversation forward, would you be able to articulate what this means for you, and why what I have provided doesn’t even plausibly meet that criterion?
Alternatively, I would respectfully suggest that you take the time to educate yourself more broadly in philosophy, metaphysics and scientific methodology.
To learn the basics of metaphysics in the Thomist school, here are a few suggestions:
Fr. Stephen Brock, The Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas: A Sketch
Edward Feser, Introduction to Scholastic Metaphysics
Michael Gorman, A Contemporary Introduction to Thomistic Metaphysics
But let me know if you are ever looking for other suggestions.
What value do human beings have in your opinion? And why does your answer matter if there is no God?
You didn’t answer my question. I’m not trying to trick you. Do you believe love exists? Can you see love?
You have not answered my question. Why do we exist? Or is there no reason? And if there is no reason, then I go back to, Why do we have value if there is no reason that we exist?
But, it does.
Why does it matter if people kill or enslave if we are meaningless?
The “problem of suffering” is not a new argument. Atheists often wrestle with this.
In which, I respond, if there is no God, why does it matter? Who cares if there is suffering? Nothing matters, if there is no God.
If we are talking about man-inflicted suffering, I would ask you this. If God did not gift man with free-will, would you view that as loving? If God made us robots, would you view this as loving? Or would that also be unloving in your view? What could God do to convince you that He is love?
And there are Catholics who do not follow Catholic Christian doctrine.
What is love? You have not answered that question for me yet. You have not rationally given evidence that love even exists.
You have not rationally given evidence that these things exist. And if they do exist, why do they matter? You have already concluded that they do not matter, because of God. So, why do you conclude that they do matter? Or do they not matter?
We believe that God created us in His image. What does this mean? If God is love, then it means that we were created to love. If God is is the reason, it means that we were created to reason. If God is creator, it means we were made to create.
If you were designed with this purpose in mind, your foundational belief does not change this reality.
Do you believe everything came from nothing? And you rationally conclude this? This makes sense to you?
If you knew me, I am not big on feelings. I come from German heritage I joke. I do have feelings, but my Faith is not based on feelings. I believe feeling often lead individuals astray.
It has been said that all other religions is man searching for God, but Christianity is God searching for man. Jesus came to earth and I believe He is Who He claimed to be. And He had disciples who died for this claim.
Frightening? No. But, I would have more questions.
From what? From nothing? How does something accidentally come into existence from nothing?
If we are nothing, but matter, why do we matter? Would not rąpe just be matter bumping into matter? What’s wrong with that? Why does that matter?
I’m listening. Why does anything matter? And why does that matter?
If we were made in God’s image (as I do believe), it would make logical sense that God is therefore a person.
I asked you the same about love. And you have yet to objectively prove that love exists.
You do not need Scripture to come to the rational conclusion that God exists. I think you have proven this by pointing out that there are many who believe in God, even thought they do not adhere to Sacred Scripture.
Is your beef with the Bible or with God? Or both/neither?
The simple answer, because Jesus said so. But, let’s say, for the sake of argument, God does not exist and Jesus is not Who He said He claimed to be; I would say that Prayer is meaningless. As is everything else. Nothing would matter, because I would believe that we came from nothing.
Your second sentence here is flawed logic. You are making that claim that Pray is only talking to oneself “until God is proven to exist”? I believe in objective truth. Either Prayer is communication with God or it isn’t. If God exists (and I believe He does), and it cannot be proven to your satisfaction, this does not therefore meant that Prayer is not communication with God, because truth is not subjective.
When someone Prays, distinct networks (in prefrontal cortex) light up in the brain, involving regions tied to social connection, while quieting the parietal lobe (the area that creates your sense of self).
This does not prove anything, but I do find it interesting that those who do not believe in Prayer tend to put themselves above God.
No worries. I think these types of conversations are important.
That is interesting. I often wonder why Atheists seek out believers to convince them that God does not exist. I know that Atheists hat when individuals call their belief a religion, but there are similarities (especially in what has been coined as New Atheism).
When Christians deconstruct (a popular term these days), they tend to evangelize their unbelief as though it is their new religion. They share their testimony. They go to conventions to fellowship with other unbelievers. They try to convince others to join their “religion” of unbelief.
I appreciate your honesty. You sound like an agnostic and not an atheist, though you seem to find the tenets of atheism convincing. Is that fair to say?
If that is what drives your being here (and I say if, because many atheists/agnostics try to show how intelligent they are). And that often stems from a sense of self, pride, and arrogance.
Why do I continue to believe? I believe Jesus is Who He said He is and that the Apostles were chosen by Him to bring to a world, who rejected God, an encounter with God, who is Love.
I do not believe that we came from nothing. For if we came from nothing, then nothing matters. Love then would be little more than a bunch of meaningless neurons, electrical & chemical activity within matter. And for what? Nothing.
But, God is actual. God is a person. And God is Love. God simply is.
And you and I are more than matter. You and I matter. Not because we desire to feel special, but because we are humbly, and uniquely, loved.
I joke. I do have feelings, but my Faith is not based on feelings. I believe feeling often lead individuals astray.