The path to conversion is met with many stepping stones and looking back you can identify some of these stones as means of grace. Today I am thinking of the first milestone I can identify in my conversion from atheism to Catholicism.
In the early nineties was stationed in Patuxent River, Md I started listening to G. Gordon Liddy on the local Washington D.C. station when he first started broadcasting. One day while driving on the beltway an atheist caller called in challenging him and Mr. Liddy replied by going through the five ways of knowing God’s existence as formulated by St. Thomas Aquinas. I must admit this rather stunned me the idea of Christians using reason to defend faith in God. I had really figured that theists could only apply to authority or “holy” books. This event marked the first chink in my atheist armor that opened my up to hear more. This was a small chink though and it would be several years more until I started to seriously look at faith and reason not as foes in some battle being forever separated. Regardless I look at this event as that first step into thinking that just possibly I had it all wrong.
I bring this up because today G. Gordon Liddy is retiring at the age of 82 from talk radio. The fact that he played some role in my conversion is very surprising to me having been in High School during the Watergate scandal and an uber-liberal. Even as I came to later admire Mr. Liddy, I never did admire his involvement in this scandal and the justifications I have heard him use regarding it. Still listening to him off and on over the years I have learned much from him in his wealth of knowledge and his example as a family man. I always appreciated the way he talked about his wife, who died last year and his life-long Catholicism certainly played a role in his life beyond just a cultural thing.
So thank you Mr. Liddy for the role you played in my life and being an illustration of the tools that God can use.
42 comments
G. Gordon Liddy yeah, great guy, like when he told his gun nut listeners to “Aim for the head” when dealing with BATF? Just like Jesus!
> I must admit this rather stunned me the idea of Christians using reason to defend faith in God
Yeah, but he didn’t so not sure what you found so stunning there.
There is no possible way reason can be used to defend faith in any god much less your crazy incompetent one. Theism is the opposite of reason.
Salvage:
Have you actually bother reading Aquinas?
I meant “bothered”. Mea culpa.
Sort of, in various books and lectures I’ve heard his ideas discussed.
But for fun let’s break down these five stunning reasons to believe in myths:
• Thomas’ first way involves the evidence of motion. The fact, to Thomas, that every moving thing needs a mover shows that God, the Unmoved Mover, exists.
Let’s say for the sake of arugement that’s true, why is it Thomas’ god that is this Mover? Why not Zeus?
• The second way involves the notion of efficient cause. For the series of causes and effects, that we see in the world, to make sense it must have a beginning. God, the First Cause, therefore exists.
This is pretty much the same as above and my response the same.
• The third way notes that every existing thing does not owe its existence to itself. However, if all things are contingent, there could not have been anything as at one time all these could be non-existent. To account for all existence, there must be a Necessary Being, God.
Wait a second… this is pretty much the same deal as the first two! Could he maybe be not be so clever?
• The fourth way shows that there exist gradations in things, for example more noble and less noble, more true or less true. The existence of such gradations implies the existence of an Absolute Being as a datum for all these relative gradation.
Well yes, evolution would be the ultimate expression of this but your god isn’t a gradation from humans is it? It’s like a humongous leap so I’m not sure it applies.
And of course, why your god and not someone else’s god?
• The fifth way argues that the behavior of things in the world implies a Grand Designer or architect, God.
Nope. Thomas can be forgiven for thinking so but thanks to science and modern sense we know there is no design, just nature doing the only thing it can do; obey the laws of physics.
(((G. Gordon Liddy yeah, great guy, like when he told his gun nut listeners to “Aim for the head” when dealing with BATF? Just like Jesus!)))
As a Canadian, I also google like you said you always do salvage and this is what I found on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Gordon_Liddy
who was quite the man from the little that I did read and
then I looked up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BATF
but then again, because sinner vic’s hero salvage doesn’t pay attention to material that doesn’t matter like Saints, Martyrs and these so called children of “GOD” (Good Old Dad) why should any body’s http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=embryonic+stem+cell&qpvt=embryonic+stem+cell&FORM=IGRE
bother with “IT”?
I hear ya salvage! There’s no need to answer any of your comments Victor cause your spiritual imaginary friends do a great job of that and as far as our brains cells are all concerned your god carries less weight than any of these
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2012/07/26/the-scientists-to-public-give-us-your-and-butt-out/#comments
comments.
salvage, your ESCells have an answer for everything, butt, I mean but where are these so called religious spriritual brain cells located and/or come from?
STOP “IT” sinner vic! “I” thought salvage was your buddy and I’ll not have you fighting with him or her here if ya know what “I” mean?
Go Figure folks! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj_-sBNQKcQ
Peace
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
O, our poor brother salvage. I pray that one day he actually reads Thomas’ arguments instead of getting the Cliffs Notes from http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/aquinas.html
Listening to his “refutation” of Thomas reminds me of that episode of Friends when Phoebe questioned the laws of gravity. When Ross pressed her, she said, “Well, lately I don’t so much feel pulled as I do pushed.”
Also, I am sure that St. Thomas is relieved to have our brother salvage’s forgiveness for being his intellectual inferior.
(Of course I’m sure Thomas would have delighted in the wonderful contradiction of saying that the universe has no design, but simply obeys laws)
Of course if our brother salvage were truly interested in learning what it actually is that Thomas meant, he could always ask someone here or read someone like Edward Feser.
Until that day, let us continue to pray for his happiness…
> the universe has no design, but simply obeys laws
Oh you silly person.
Forgive me, I forgot I was dealing with theists, if one is just the slightest big figurative they run out and make a religion out of it. Humanities bane; those who can’t separate literal from figurative and thus reality and fantasy become likewise intertwined.
Do you know what the law of gravity is?
Do you know what the speed limit for the universe is?
The law of motion?
There is no design there is only physics and not from your or any other god.
Gravity is the real force behind creation and if you think your god is the one who made it weird that it didn’t say so when it was talking about how it made the Cosmos. Seems your god said it used magic not nature in 6 days.
I know what Thomas meant, the same thing you do; “My god is real!” and to support such a bizarre statement reality is pounded into a fine mush with nonsense like “because things exist someone must have made them therefor someone made them!” While Thomas puts it more poetically that is the gist.
And by amazing coincide you and Thomas know of a creature that is exactly like the Prime Mover! It’s in this book! Case solved. Your god is real and when you die it will reward your faith with paradise.
And you theists have been pumping this and that silly bet for centuries now ignore who savagely it’s been debunked time and time again.
But of course that is the root of your theism, ignore anything that intrudes on your belief because to lose the idea of your god’s favor would, I suspect, drive you a bit mad.
It’s why I think theism is for the best, there are too many people in this world who would be worse off without it. I think you one of them.
Oh and once again you answer none of my points, why is your god this Prime Mover and not someone else’s god?
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
O, our poor brother salvage. “because things exist someone must have made them therefor someone made them!”
He will never successfully refute Thomas until the day he actually wants to understand Thomas.
And how sad we all feel when he rails against us for not giving answers when he is not looking for answers. We all look joyfully to the day that he seeks to understand Christianity before he critiques it.
But if he says that he already does understand it, we know that this day is very far off indeed.
Let us continue to pray for his happiness…
The thing is, of all those I have seen post here at this site, the one person that best resembles the caricature that Salvage holds of Christian believers is Salvage himself. Of course he will just laugh, mock, and rant, but then this post isn’t meant for him anyway.
Being a physicist myself, I will say that our knowledge of the physical universe progresses only in the presence of at least some level of humility. And it only takes a modicum of humility for a conversion process to begin at some level. Humility combined with honest reason, and conversions bloom. A mixture of humility and reason creates an acid that wears away the armor of atheism, just as it opens up the path to new discoveries in science.
It’s amazing how I’m totally wrong and yet none of you can articulate why.
That would probably go further in wearing away my “armor of atheism” than talking about other stuff.
Once again, if there is a Prime Mover why is it your god?
Why can’t any of you answer that question? A Muslim would say that their god is the Prime Mover, would they be wrong? Would they be really saying it’s your god but they’re just praying at it wrong?
C’mon guys! Show me how stupid and wrong I am, this should be easy for you. Here, just like in grade school I’ll start you out:
My god is the real one because______________
Salvage, no one can answer your arguments because you dismiss “our gods” as being false, every one. By doing that, asking “My God is real because…” is like asking “Who’s your favorite Quidditch player?” “Which unicorn will win the Kentucky Derby?” It cannot be answered to your satisfaction.
I suppose that’s the point, that the “correct” answer is Gods do not exist. All the same, theists do not believe in deities merely to spite you. Much of your attitude swivels around the point that: people know that gods don’t really exist, but we’re too stupid to accept that.
If anything, I would reverse your argument, as for all I know Poseidon or Cthulhu or Isis or Buddha do exist, maybe any or all is the “Real” one. All I know is that I take my chances, and for me that is enough.
Even if you’re right, I’d just assume stand with Puddleglum.
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
So God doesn’t exist because Thor doesn’t exist.
Man made Thor, so obviously Man made God.
Does any one or everyone understand the illogic of this statement?
>Salvage, no one can answer your arguments because you dismiss “our gods” as being false, every one.
While I do dismiss all gods as being false you do not, you dismiss all but your own. When a Muslims goes to their mosque they’re not praying to anyone are they? When Jews go to their temples they’re not praying to anyone are they? When a Native America prays to their gods they’re not praying to anyone are they? In fact the only prayers that matter are your religions to your gods right?
But you understand they believe their gods to be real exactly as much as you think yours are? Or do you think they really don’t believe in theirs?
I just want to know why you are right and they are wrong.
>By doing that, asking “My God is real because…” is like asking “Who’s your favorite Quidditch player?”
No, not unless you think your religion to be as fictitious as Harry Potter? You think your god is real, I think it isn’t, a Muslim thinks Allah is real and your god isn’t. Why are you right and they wrong?
> It cannot be answered to your satisfaction.
Yeah, lame cop out, what do you care how I take your answer? Is my “satisfaction” a factor in your religious beliefs? In anything you believe?
I think you don’t answer it because you can’t to your satisfaction.
>I suppose that’s the point, that the “correct” answer is Gods do not exist.
Well yes, that is the correct one but immaterial to my question, my question clearly allows for the idea of your god to be real if you can only explain why it is so and all the others are not.
>All the same, theists do not believe in deities merely to spite you.
Once again, I know this, I have said so, I have listed several times all the positive attributes of theism and how it helps people in their lives and is generally a positive force.
>Much of your attitude swivels around the point that: people know that gods don’t really exist, but we’re too stupid to accept that.
Once again, I have never said any such thing. What I have said is I know many theists who are happy, decent and quite intelligent people. That theist live longer, healthier, happier and more productive lives. That is a fact so it would hardly be sensible to call people who do believe in gods “stupid” considering the benefits it grants.
The reason why people in our modern world believe is far more complex than “They’re idiots.”.
>If anything, I would reverse your argument, as for all I know Poseidon or Cthulhu or Isis or Buddha do exist,
Well Buddha did exist, we know that as for the rest why would you think them real? Why would you think them unreal? For all you know you can’t make a decision on their veracity? I don’t think so, I think you can.
> Even if you’re right, I’d just assume stand with Puddleglum.
Which of course is your choice but it has nothing to do with me being anything.
>So God doesn’t exist because Thor doesn’t exist.
>Man made Thor, so obviously Man made God.
>Does any one or everyone understand the illogic of this statement?
Hmm, I thought the point obvious, I can’t tell if you’re being deliberately or naturally obtuse, I will make it simpler for you:
Okay, so you know how you pray to your god? Well other people pray to other gods, some are like yours and other radically different. People have been doing this for about 10,000 years now.
Are you with me so far?
Now those people who pray to other gods, gods that you KNOW are not real, like Thor, well they believed in those other gods in the EXACT same way you believe in yours.
For instance if you were to go back in time to an ancient Norse settlement and told them that it wasn’t Odin that made the world but God they would think you as mad as if someone came up to you in Church today and told you that it was Odin that made the universe and not God.
But the thing is both of you have the EXACT same amount of evidence for your beliefs; ancient myths and faith.
So you both can’t be right, Odin and God do not make any mention of each other… well your god does, sorta, it says it should come first before other gods so there is that but still universe creation is a solo act.
Hence my question, why is God real and Odin not?
I’m not sure if I can put it any simpler than that but I’m sure you have an excellent answer but you won’t tell me because…. well not sure, every time you refuse to answer my points you blather some gobbledygook about how I don’t understand The Good or some other lame cop-out.
I’m turning the question back around: If the gods do not exist, then why does it matter which one I believe in?
Even a lame cop-out can be honest, a sign of frustration. It’s like trying to feed my child: I don’t want soup, I don’t want burgers, I don’t want chicken!
Me: Well, what DO you want?
M: I don’t know, but I’m hungry.
Even the most patient loving mother is going to get tired of this.
Neither I nor anyone else seems to be able to give an answer you even consider; you stress physical proof to the complete exclusion of anything else.
To have faith in something that’s not real, that’s a sign of insanity, isn’t it? The way you’ve put it is that I go to my church and pray to my non-existent god even as I jeer at Pagans or Hindus who pray to their non-existent gods; I might as well be cheering for the Vikings over the Packers, it makes no difference at all.
I repeat, I am NOT dismissing other gods, other beliefs. The virtuous Pagan or Buddhist may well be on the right track to Heaven more than most Christians. But if there is no Heaven, no guiding deity, then we’re all on a plotless journey going nowhere.
The situation tends to this: You seem to keep asking us, “Where are you going?”
“To Heaven.”
“You fools, there is no Heaven.”
“We want to keep going, maybe there is.”
“No, there isn’t, I know, I have the map.”
“Show it to us.
“No, no, until you tell me why you’re going this way.”
“I told you, we think this is the way to Heaven.”
“There is no Heaven!”
“Then which way should we go?”
“It doesn’t matter, there is no Heaven.”
“Then what should we do? Sit here? It will be night soon.”
“Doesn’t matter, there is no Heaven.”
… and then one pilgrim insists on trudging on.
Again I turn the question back to you. Is it:
Which (non-existent) god am I following and why that (non-existent) god?
Or is it: Why am I following something that doesn’t exist?
Or possibly: Is there a higher power at all?
Actually you make a compelling case for Buddhism.
>I’m turning the question back around: If the gods do not exist, then why does it matter which one I believe in?
It doesn’t, like I’ve said time and time again, what you believe is of no importance or consequence to anyone but yourself. I would die and kill for your right to believe whatever you like and state those beliefs in any way provided it doesn’t interfere with anyone else’s rights, liberties and wellbeing.
>Neither I nor anyone else seems to be able to give an answer you even consider; you stress physical proof to the complete exclusion of anything else.
Well yeah, of course, shouldn’t everyone? Our great strides in science and justice are based on physical proof and you can’t argue with the results.
>To have faith in something that’s not real, that’s a sign of insanity, isn’t it?
Hmm, insanity is waaay too strong a word for it, delusion is more appropriate and one that the majority of the people on this planet are under so, no, clearly not insane.
> I might as well be cheering for the Vikings over the Packers, it makes no difference at all.
No, you must never cheer for the Vikings over the Packers at ANY time. Green Bay isn’t the New York Giants but still, mad respect for them.
But yes, from my point of view, one religion is the same as the next BUT from yours they are radically different to the point of polar opposites.
>I repeat, I am NOT dismissing other gods, other beliefs. The virtuous Pagan or Buddhist may well be on the right track to Heaven more than most Christians.
Right track perhaps but without accepting Jesus the best they can hope for is a purgatory or other limbo. I know the current Pope said that stuff doesn’t exist anymore but souls have to go someplace right?
> But if there is no Heaven, no guiding deity, then we’re all on a plotless journey going nowhere.
And that would be bad because?
But it’s not without a plot, you have kids right? There’s one of your “plots” right there, you’re going to raise them, protect them, teach them, love them, cry with them and in the end, if all goes well they’ll be there at your last moments with their kids and thus the story goes on and on as it has for some 3.5 billion years on this tiny rock hurtling through space. That’s just one of the human adventures we get to go on and without your god that all somehow becomes pointless? You wouldn’t love your family? Wouldn’t live that life?
>The situation tends to this:
No, more like this:
You seem to keep asking us, “Why do you believe in a god that is clearly a myth?”
“because it leads to Heaven.”
“Okay, but why do you think it’s true? Lots of other people think they’re going to the a Heaven but they pray to a different god. Why are they wrong and you right? Furthermore what’s the point of creating an awful world if it’s just to get to Heaven, why not start at the nice place? And wouldn’t Heaven eventually become dull? What makes our lives special is that we only get one, each unique and each with a secret expiry date, a deadline to get all we want to do, done. Take that away and what do you have?”
What I ask are questions that illustrate the lack of sense in theism and its beliefs.
>Actually you make a compelling case for Buddhism.
Yeah, I know a few atheists who are Buddhists / quasi-Hindus but I like eating meat too much and don’t trust the universe to deliver justice.
The case I am trying to make however at the end is believing myths to be real, no matter how beneficial is, well, silly or at the very least makes no sense. And making sense is important I think, it’s how we advance as both people and a species.
Oh yes, I forgot that you get to define what I believe in, on what the doctrines of my faith are, that you know my (non-existent) God Heaven better than I ever will. Silly me.
Yes, you make a point that the “plot” of life does involve my children, to love them and raise them well, to share my last earthly moments with them, and teach them to raise their own children, who would raise their children, who would… and for what? Life is nothing but reproduction? But existing? We end up huddling in the dark, clinging to each other because there is no hope, no real light save our own guttering candles.
But as you say, the gods do not exist, and sensible people have no reason to believe in them, good health be damned.
Altho you do admit that Buddhism makes more sense than anything else.
And yes I do prefer the Vikings. What difference does it make?
>Oh yes, I forgot that you get to define what I believe in, on what the doctrines of my faith are,
No, your religion defines it, am I and other who say that it all revolves around Jesus and the acceptance of his divinity are wrong?
> Life is nothing but reproduction?
Well on a base level, yes. That seems to be what life is for or at the very least all it does from the simplest to the most complex DNA is all about reproduction. Dawkins talks about that at great length in “The Selfish Gene”.
>But existing? We end up huddling in the dark, clinging to each other because there is no hope, no real light save our own guttering candles.
No hope from being saved from this life ending? Well no, not really, everything ends why should we be any different? A star is formed when gravity squishes dust into an atomic furnace, it burns for a few billion years than blows up and that material shoots through space until gravity grabs it again, squishes it down to start the cycle anew. Death and rebirth but each star is unique in its own way. We’re the same, we live, we die, bits of us continue in new lives, the whole planet just an endless cycle just like the rest of the universe.
You can huddle if you like, me I rather breath deep and enjoy the sensation and privilege of being here, don’t see how a god makes a difference.
Life is all that matters and our immortality lies in what we leave behind be it our children, an idea, a good deed, whatever. Again not a god required.
>But as you say, the gods do not exist, and sensible people have no reason to believe in them, good health be damned.
Yeah, essentially.
> you do admit that Buddhism makes more sense than anything else.
Because the pure expression of it has nothing supernatural and suggests that we be nice to each other so that people will be nice to us. Hard to argue with that!
>And yes I do prefer the Vikings. What difference does it make?
None.
I suppose.
Save they’re lame.
Sir or madam,
To answer your question about why God and not any of the other deities that have populated history, I’ll try my best:
1) The problem with polytheism is that it implies its gods are finite, i.e. have limits. Thus, that poses the questions (a) what created them, (b) what “adjudicates” among them, and (c) what occupies the metaphysical “gap” betweeen them. In short, if something greater created and governs these various deities, that poses the question as to why the deities were necessary in the first place.
2) Since polytheism breaks down on those questions, we are left with monotheism, and I would argue that monotheists are all talking about the same God, but we markedly disagree on His (Its, if you must) characteristics. I do not think you find anything in Catholic tradition that says God does not hear the prayers of a Muslim, etc., but that is not the same as saying all religions have an equally valid understanding of God. There is widespread agreement on the existence of the Higgs boson (one recent “convert” previously made a faith-based $100 wager that it did not exist – a fellow by the name of Stephen Hawking), and I’m willing to bet there is widespread disagreement on its properties – so does that mean the Higgs boson cannot exist, due to disagreement on its nature?
3) Of course, you would no doubt argue that atheism is the sensible third alternative. However, I would suggest that believing the universe emerged from nothing (or from the law of gravity, which authored itself out of nothing) requires much greater faith than belief in a divine Prime Mover.
In short, the argument you present is a fallacy that says since there are many religions out there, if they cannot all be true, then they must all be false. There are multiple theories for global warming, ranging from solar activity to atmospheric cycles to man-made pollutants – thus, must all those theories be wrong?
Bryan Kirchoff
St. Louis
Incidentally, I would also argue your premise of immortality via children, an idea, or good deeds is flawed. After all, once you allegedly cease to exist, you have no sensory perception or thought processes available anymore – for all practical purposes, the universe ceases to exist along with you. It seems this argument is the kind of stretch for meaning that atheists typically accuse theists of.
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena.
Panda Rosa,
Just FYI, Buddhism doesn’t suggest that we be nice to each other so that people will be nice to us. According to the Buddha, you are nice to others because you want to live a life of compassion. You have compassion, because you have gotten beyond selfish desires (like caring how other people treat you). You have gotten beyond selfish desires because you come to the realization that you do not exist. Thus you achieve enlightenment and your “soul” is snuffed out, no longer to be reincarnated because you have embraced non-being.
Sadly, our brother salvage is as ignorant of Eastern religions as he is of Western ones.
I would be curious to engage him on his point: “Life is all that matters and our immortality lies in what we leave behind be it our children, an idea, a good deed, whatever. Again not a god required,” except that he doesn’t understand what “good” or “matters” means, so his statement is unintelligible to me.
Maybe one day he will learn the great lesson of Socrates: to live according to right reason is the surest way to happiness…
>Just FYI, Buddhism doesn’t suggest that we be nice to each other so that people will be nice to us.
“One should seek for others the happiness one desires for himself”
Buddha
Be nice to other people and the result they’ll be nice to you isn’t the overall message there?
And being called ignorant by someone who eats their god every Sunday somehow lacks sting.
>, so his statement is unintelligible to me.
I know, the real mystery is it by choice or honest ignorance?
As for the good, covering up the systemic rape of deaf children, is that good or bad? laundering money for the Mafia? Allying with the Fascists of Italy and the Nazis of German? Good? Bad? I think I know the answers or do I need to read more The Republic to figure that one out?
nah, just keep praying to a demigod in a dead language, that’s all that life requires!
Ave Maria, gratia plena
“Immortality is being remembered in the minds of our children” and nothing more… so what do I do when that just doesn’t seem like enough. You can look up at the Universe and marvel about made of star-stuff for days and weeks… and tell yourself that you should not fell lonely. You sound like a Fundy, except you’re glorying in how we’re NOT created by God.
I take it you’re familiar with Twain’s “Mysterious Stranger”.
On Buddhism: apparently it’s not enough to “be nice” because I want to live a life of compassion, I have to be nice because I WANT to be nice. No other reason counts. It’s like dealing with a high-maintenance girlfriend, you have to be graded not just on what you do but why.
@CatSkwlkr: you seemed to have summed up what our mutual friend is driving at. Under that logic how can “good” exist or even matter?
I doubt I’ll be checking this comment board again, as the discussions tend to ramble on too long, so you’ve been warned.
> so what do I do when that just doesn’t seem like enough.
That’s life! It’s never enough, one of the most frustrating / great things about being human is we’re never satisfied. No matter how great we do something, no matter what we achieve it always feels like there’s something more so we go further and find… well it’s still not enough.
And good thing, that drive to fill that emptiness (for lack of a better word) is what put us on the Moon, what cured polio, what makes Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and all the other amazing people achieve.
It’s the human race! We run for a goal we’ll never reach because we’ll collapse into dust before we even see the finish line but that’s no reason to stop running. Be it building a better operating system for IBM, raising a child to be a good person or creating a giant sculptor out of broken drum sticks (one of my retirement projects).
>You sound like a Fundy, except you’re glorying in how we’re NOT created by God.
Well I don’t believe in gods because there is no reason to, not a single bit of compelling evidence has ever been presented. Think about how easy that would be for a god to do! If the Bible mentioned for instance how important the Moon was to the creation and sustainment of life I would have to give it thought because that’s something we just recently figured out (The moon still gets no respect). But it doesn’t, there is nothing in the Bible that is any sort of revelation about nature. Show me proof of a fantastic claim like the supernatural and I will believe. Philosophical twaddle about Prime Movers is a fun thought experiment but collapses in the real world.
>I take it you’re familiar with Twain’s “Mysterious Stranger”.
I’m not, my reading is woefully lacking with Twain. When I was a kid I loved his Tom Sawyer and Connecticut Yankee stuff but that’s one I missed.
Ave Maria, gratia plena
“raising a child to be a good person…”
Again, I wish we all could understand what our brother salvage meant by “good.” Maybe then his points would makes some amount of sense. But since he does not know what this means, his statements are unintelligible.
Let us continue to pray for his happiness…
Oops, sorry I missed this:
>1) The problem with polytheism is that it implies its gods are finite, i.e. have limits.
Yes it does but that also makes them more believable. Your god being all powerful yet still has arbitrary limits makes it very surreal. Also the god from the Bible comes from its own pantheon of gods, it started out as a distant mountain thunder god.
>Thus, that poses the questions (a) what created them, (b) what “adjudicates” among them, and (c) what occupies the metaphysical “gap” betweeen them. In short, if something greater created and governs these various deities, that poses the question as to why the deities were necessary in the first place.
So because these gods beg questions they can’t be real? I can think of several questions that the Bible god begs.
>2) Since polytheism breaks down on those questions, we are left with monotheism,
Hmm, I think you’re leaping to some conclusions here that your theories don’t support.
> and I would argue that monotheists are all talking about the same God, but we markedly disagree on His (Its, if you must) characteristics.
a) Yes, I get that sometimes people think that other people are really worshiping their god they’re just “confused” on the details but that can be flipped. Who’s to say that it’s your religion that’s getting the characteristics wrong?
b) Oh I must. As you point out your god has no beginning and no end so why does it have masculine characteristics? Zeus, Odin and many other gods can be called “he” or “she” because they have sexuality both in the stereotypical sense and the literal in that they reproduce. Does your god have a penis? Upper body strength? An inability to ask for directions when lost on vacation? The fact that you all call this all-powerful being a “he” is just one of the many dichotomies your religion features.
> I do not think you find anything in Catholic tradition that says God does not hear the prayers of a Muslim, etc.,
Then what’s the point of all the proselytizing, recruitment and central authority and policy in ritual and other matters? If your god listens to everyone equally than what is the value of your church?
See this is another one of those dichotomies I’m talking about that you guys don’t seem to notice.
> but that is not the same as saying all religions have an equally valid understanding of God.
They do not you do. Correct? But once again the Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Whatevers can say the exact same thing.
>There is widespread agreement on the existence of the Higgs
Not anymore and rather than going on faith they spent millions to prove it. You cannot even begin to compare science to religion. If the Collider has smashed up all those quirks and quarks and found nothing then they would have gone back to the drawing board not insisted that it was still there because they have “faith”.
>Of course, you would no doubt argue that atheism is the sensible third alternative.
No, it’s the only way to go as there are no such things as gods. I get you’re trying to set your god above all others because… well because it’s your god but it’s not. It’s exactly the same as every other god mankind has prayed.
>However, I would suggest that believing the universe emerged from nothing (or from the law of gravity, which authored itself out of nothing) requires much greater faith than belief in a divine Prime Mover.
Pure absolute nonsense. We don’t know what the universe emerged from so anyone who believes that it was nothing can’t be sure. One theory suggests that there is no such thing as nothing, that no matter where you go there is something; a bubbling mess of matter and anti-matter constantly creating and destroying itself and from that action came the “big bang”.
>In short, the argument you present is a fallacy that says since there are many religions out there, if they cannot all be true, then they must all be false.
No, it’s not a fallacy at all and your declaration doesn’t make it so. It’s a legitimate point and in the case of your god a glaring one. Your god wants everyone to worship it and it alone, correct? Yet at the same time your god made over 4,000 different gods that people have worshipped over the last 10,000 years! Once again another dichotomy that is ignored. The only way your god could be real and all the others fake is if your god enjoys the conflict that different religions create. That it like throwing people into Hell for being born into the wrong culture or being cursed with enough awareness and critical thinking to spot the flaws leading to a complete rejection.
>There are multiple theories for global warming, ranging from solar activity to atmospheric cycles to man-made pollutants – thus, must all those theories be wrong?
Must? No, they could all be wrong, it could be a combination of them but again this doesn’t make any sense when applied to religion. Your religion isn’t a theory is it? It’s facts right? Your god is real and your method of worship and ritual the only correct one. Right? So it’s more like you saying “Monkeys throwing bananas at caterpillars causes global warming” and science saying “Prove it!” and you saying “Well it’s written in this ancient book and I have faith that it’s true and that’s all I need.” And science could show you all the ways that monkey and bananas and caterpillars cannot contribute to global warming but since they can’t prove a negative you’ll just keep saying “believing carbon emissions to be the culprit requires much greater faith than belief in the monkeys.”
These things you believe are just as ridiculous but that doesn’t stop you from believing them such as your god “sacrificing” itself to itself so it wouldn’t be wrathful at its own creation for behaving how it created them or at the very least how it knew it was going to behave.
That isn’t bizarre, weird and nonsensical?
>Again, I wish we all could understand what our brother salvage meant by
I wish that too child but when one chooses to be obtuse there isn’t much anyone can do. It’s a bit like trying to wake someone up who is pretending to be asleep.
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
“I wish that too child but when one chooses to be obtuse there isn’t much anyone can do. It’s a bit like trying to wake someone up who is pretending to be asleep.”
How wonderful! Our brother salvage agrees with us! If were not immune to irony, this post may do him some good.
But O how I wish he were honest! Then he might see truth. Poor brother salvage.
>But O how I wish he were honest! Then he might see truth.
Yeah, I’m thinking the one that thinks the myths and supernatural stuff maybe the one with the truth issues if not reality.
Silly person, I am honest, you can tell by the way I answer all the points made? You on the other hand? Well you just whistle past them with sad little cop-outs like “YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND THE GOOD!!!”.
But as a theist I understand that protecting your delusions must take priority over all otherwise you’ll have a terrible afterlife and really, that’s all that matters to you.
That is sad as well.
“Silly person, I am honest, you can tell by the way I answer all the points made?”
What does “positive results” mean?
Ave Maria, gratia plena
(mea culpa)
By the way, thank you, brother salvage, for reminding us all that you do not understand the good. I’m glad you remember our little discussion from earlier and brought up to the message board how you abandoned the conversation because of your willfull ignorance.
I will be waiting for you, with no judgments, when you decide to abandon dishonesty.
Wishing you happiness…
>What does “positive results” mean?
Results that are positive? I don’t mean to sound circular but those two concepts are pretty self-evident and thus cannot be broken down further.
You of course know this as I’ve already explained it but are indulging in rhetorical argle-bargle in an effort to create a foundation of pure mush on which to rest your theism (the only way theism can survive; removal of all that is solid and real). Hence all this “salvage doesn’t know good!” nonsense.
Gods are not real things, this is an obvious fact that you clearly acknowledge when it comes to every other god but your own. In response you try and make your god separate from the rest as if that isn’t what all theists do with their own god proving that in this regard, like all others, it’s all the same thing; superstition and myth.
Salvage, this is one reason no one can probably answer your question, (and it is a very legitimate question) Why do we worship the God we do, as opposed to some other god?
If all gods are false, then what difference does it make which one we honor? It’s like talking about how to catch unicorns. If you are resolved that all theists are in effect insane, ie, believing in something untrue, then any answer a theist gives can never be real.
The only problem is that we still insist on believing, even after you’ve so patiently pointed out that we’re all wrong, as if to spite you.
>Why do we worship the God we do, as opposed to some other god?
Well I know why, it’s the culture you were raised in, why you think it’s real and the others false is what I want to know.
>If all gods are false, then what difference does it make which one we honor?
Once again, it makes no difference, I just want to know why your religion is right and all the other ones are wrong.
>It’s like talking about how to catch unicorns.
Sure, but from where I am standing you and all the other theists have empty nets yet each of you are claiming that they contain real unicorns and that all the other nets are empty.
Why is your net full and theirs empty?
>If you are resolved that all theists are in effect insane, ie, believing in something untrue, then any answer a theist gives can never be real.
Once again what does it matter how I take the answer? If you give me your answer and I think you delusional in this matter so what? I think that now.
>The only problem is that we still insist on believing, even after you’ve so patiently pointed out that we’re all wrong, as if to spite you.
Sure, I don’t care what you believe, before, during or after, I’m interested in why.
And once again I don’t think you believe out of spite or anything particularly negative as I’ve explained several times now. Theism is for the most part a positive in people’s lives.
Have you noticed that you sometimes act as if I haven’t answered any of your points so you keep repeating them? Why do you do that?
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Our brother Roberto was correct that our brother salvage does distract us from Jeff’s articles. But I just need to point out one thing.
a. Our brother salvage criticizes the Church as bad
b. To criticize something as bad one must know what “bad” is.
c. To know what “bad” is one must know what “good” is.
d. Our brother salvage’s definition of “good” is a tautology
e. Tautologies give you no new information. They are empty, contentless
f. Empty, contentless statements are nonsense.
g. Therefore, our brother salvage’s critiques are nonsense
I hope our brother salvage learns that words are only physical representations of terms and terms have meanings which must be understood by two people for dialogue to occur.
From this point on I shall attempt to stay on topic
Wishing him happiness…
Going back to the original topic, I do not know much about G. Gordon Liddy. But it is true that God can make his truth manifest through anyone, no matter their state. I remember CS Lewis was shocked when a fellow atheist commented on the Gospels that they were historically accurate. I do not know if the fellow atheist ever converted, but that was a moment when Lewis’ atheistic armor chipped away even more.
For helping bring our brother Jeff closer to the Lord, God bless G. Gordon Liddy.
a. Our brother salvage criticizes the Church as bad
They covered up the rape of children and in effect let it continue, that is bad, if you can’t understand that then there is something deeply wrong with you.
b. To criticize something as bad one must know what “bad” is.
Bad is covering up the rape of children and allowing it to continue, if you can’t understand that then there is something deeply wrong with you.
c. To know what “bad” is one must know what “good” is.
Good is when discovering your staff is raping children you call the police and then help the children overcome the abuse taking responsibility. What is bad is denying it ever happened and then hiring packs of lawyers and PR people to prevent and pervert justice and compensation. Right now they’re trying to stall hoping that if they stretch the cases out long enough the witnesses and victims will give up, their memoires will fade or they will die. If you can’t understand why that is wrong then there is something deeply wrong with you.
d. Our brother salvage’s definition of “good” is a tautology
No, not really “that which has positive results” is a pretty clear self-contained statement that provides a simple and clear answer. You don’t seem to like that sort of thing, incongruent with your Byzantine theism of endless contradictions I suppose.
e. Tautologies give you no new information. They are empty, contentless
Sometimes there is no new information required but you need license to dismiss what I’m saying and for some weird reason you think this grants it. It doesn’t but making sense doesn’t seem to be in your wheelhouse.
f. Empty, contentless statements are nonsense.
Yes, bit like prayers where you praise your god for being great because an all-knowing omnipotent being needs to be told it’s great. Sense made perfect!
g. Therefore, our brother salvage’s critiques are nonsense
Yeah, you keep saying that but I think if it were nonsense you wouldn’t be responding quite so much. Nonsense is easy to ignore. I think I bring up stuff you just don’t like to think about and that you certainly don’t want others to give thought to.
>I do not know much about G. Gordon Liddy
And here we have the difference between you and me, when I don’t know something I go and find out. You seem to be content to rest in ignorance.
Liddy was a thug who helped Nixon lie, cheat and steal and when he was caught and sent to jail he found Jesus. When he came he wrapped himself up in a flag and Bible building up a pretty good career in media appealing to people like yourself.
Ave Maria, gratia plena
Ave Maria, gratia plena