The local church I attend is called Hope (not a particularly unique name, but a good one).
Jesus Christ is the only real hope in the world.
Let me expand:
1. The universe is running down (entropy). Eventually everything, everywhere will die. There is no hope in the (long term) future.
2. Humans are fallible, and will ultimately let you down, hurt you, forget you, etc.
3. Human government is made up of fallible humans, and will generally be worse than individuals. Uncaring, unjust, and blaming it all on the system.
4. We can't even rely on ourselves. Cobra Commander used to say, "Trust no one, not even yourself." (yes, I quoted Cobra Commander) But the fact is, you'll let yourself down. Can you cheer you up, when you are down? Can you bail you out when you run out of money?
I sometimes have to keep from laughing when debating atheists who assume the debate is symmetrical. That is, that I can convert them to Christianity, and they can convert me to atheism.
That I, having smelt the endless feast from God; would trade it for a mouthful of ashes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Hey Ned,
You had me at Cobra Command...you had me at Cobra Command.
Great Post.
Our trust should be wholly in God and not in anything else.
As far as converting atheists (or anyone else for that matter)I think you and I can agree that it fully depends on the grace of God.
Have a Good Friday and a Happy Easter.
"I sometimes have to keep from laughing when debating atheists who assume the debate is symmetrical. That is, that I can convert them to Christianity, and they can convert me to atheism."
The debate is certainly not symmetrical as you have no qualms about using logical fallacy and irrational claims.
If your 4 bullet points are true, then one may ask why they are true. The only answer one can come to is that god has set up the system that you decry. Your own words convict god.
Another reason the debate is not symmetrical is that my mind is open to be changed. If you could actually present evidence for god, I would believe in god. The same can not be said of your position. You hold that there is god despite the dire lack of evidence for that position. No matter how bad your arguments are, no matter how contradictory, you continue to cling to your belief in your god, even though your god is impossible. This is why the argument is asymmetrical, because of your intransigence. Is this something to be proud of, as you seem to be? Are you proud to wallow in ignorance and hold to beliefs that are contradictory and evidence-less? Is this something you really feel one should aspire to?
theden, thanks!
GCT: Have I left something out or forgotten something? What do you hope for? Or are you peddling ashes?
nedbrek,
"GCT: Have I left something out or forgotten something? What do you hope for? Or are you peddling ashes?"
First off, I would think that truth is more valuable than fantasy, so I would hope that you would want to seek out what is true, and not just believe what makes you feel good.
Second, Xianity is contradictory. It might give you hope for the afterlife, but what assurance do you have that the afterlife exists? Further, why do you not long for the afterlife? Why is this life not simply a bother until you can achieve that perfect afterlife? In this regard, Xianity makes no sense at all. Why would you want to cling to this life when perfection awaits you? Further, what is perfection? Do you really think it is possible for you to be happy in heaven for eternity? Think about that one before you answer.
Finally, what does atheism offer? Beyond the fact that it's the most rational explanation for the facts of the world, it also gives you a reason to actually be happy for this life and to live this life instead of pining for the next one. Instead of being burdened by being on Earth, you should live your life and be happy, because it's the only go-round you're going to get. Also, because you know that others only have their lives as well, you can rationally come to the conclusion that you should treat others with kindness since you'd like the same in return (sort of the golden rule, which didn't come from Jesus BTW). This is much more life affirming than Xianity which teaches us to wish for death and to regard all of our fellow humans as evil sinners capable of nothing but evil.
Oh, and I almost forgot, happy zombie day.
"happy zombie day"
Technically, Jesus is more of an anti-zombie. Zombie's are undead, while Jesus is not dead in any way (He is life itself).
And zombies eat people. Jesus demands that we eat Him...
And zombies are mindless, whereas belief in a God of order is a good foundation for logic.
So, I'll stick with, "Happy Resurrection Sunday"...
"First off, I would think that truth is more valuable than fantasy, so I would hope that you would want to seek out what is true, and not just believe what makes you feel good."
I think Christianity is true, you may disagree, but you could be at least respectful enough to admit the possibility, rather than calling it a fantasy.
Next.
My assurance is that God says so. It's really that simple. God keeps His Word. I do long for the afterlife, but we are to remain in the world (John 17:15). Perfection is the absence of sin. No more doubting God, no more anger, lustful thoughts, lies, etc. And none of the effects of that (pain, spoiled relationships, death).
Re. eternity, I could be in Bible studies and fellowship for eternity, much less anything else. I would of never imagined that before I got saved.
Next.
How many people in this world are really happy? How many people drink or drug themselves into a stupor? Or stare at the TV for hours to avoid any depth of thought. And that's the first world.
What if the conditions of your life make it impossible to be happy? What if the people in your life don't care? If you are an orphan, or your wife leaves you, and your parents die or just can't relate to you? You're financially ruined, and unemployed. Or even, filthy rich, and have taken your fill of all the world's pleasures; surrounded by shallow people who are only there for your money. What then?
"And zombies are mindless, whereas belief in a God of order is a good foundation for logic."
Illogic is a good foundation for logic? War is peace too I take it?
"I think Christianity is true, you may disagree, but you could be at least respectful enough to admit the possibility, rather than calling it a fantasy."
It's possible that it's true, but there's no evidence to indicate that it is so. Without any evidence, how can you hold to it?
"My assurance is that God says so."
Which is begging the question. You have no evidence that this god exists, so your assurance is not based on any evidence, hence there is no assurance.
"I do long for the afterlife, but we are to remain in the world (John 17:15)."
There's some cognitive dissonance for you.
"Perfection is the absence of sin."
Will you have free will? Do you really wish to live for eternity?
"Re. eternity, I could be in Bible studies and fellowship for eternity, much less anything else."
After the first millenia or so, it would surely be boring. Then what?
"How many people in this world are really happy? How many people drink or drug themselves into a stupor? Or stare at the TV for hours to avoid any depth of thought. And that's the first world."
Nice non sequitor.
"What if the conditions of your life make it impossible to be happy?"
It's still a non-sequitor. That could be true for anyone, believer or not. The fact is that your theology is a death cult where people should long for death, while my philosophy is one of life.
I said:
"It's possible that it's true, but there's no evidence to indicate that it is so. Without any evidence, how can you hold to it?"
I should expand on that. By no means should you think that I find your particular myth to be possible. Your particular myth is impossible because it is logically contradicting. You can not logically hold that god is omni-max and that we have free will, or that hell exists, or that there is no problem of evil. These things are flatly contradictory, so I do not concede that your conception of Xianity is possible. I do concede that there may be a conception of Xianity that is possible, but it would not be one of an omni-max god or many of the other doctrines that are commonly held by Xians. I also admit that there is the possibility that a god exists that may not be anything imagined by any Xian. There is no evidence for any god, however, and the evidence that we do have speaks against most of the gods that have been envisioned (yours for instance).
This has nothing to do with respect. It has to do with what is logically possible and what isn't and what evidence we have for the positions we espouse. I respect your rights as an individual and I would never seek to usurp those rights from you. I do not, however, respect the hateful views that you hold. It would be immoral of me to do so.
Post a Comment