Sermon 4

“Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.” – Jesus

This seems to be a metaphor. I’m not sure if it’s a good or bad metaphor but let’s assume salt can lose its flavor. So if one has lost its flavor what does that mean? A relationship with God? Faith in Christ? I’m not sure. Whatever it is it seems one is “good for nothing” and should “be cast out”. What does that mean? If one loses Faith in Christ they are worthless? Why? What if one who had lost Faith in Christ, or never had it, ended suffering for another? And what if the other had Faith in Christ? And what if that other was able to continue to spread the word of Christ due to having the suffering end? That would be worthless? Good for nothing? I don’t know. And why the confusion? Wouldn’t a divine being be able to communicate sufficiently enough to convey its message without producing any confusion?

Sermon 2

“Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.” – Jesus

Should one do good for reward? If there was no reward should one still do good? Should one refuse helping another if a reward is not offered?

Also, to help understand the idea of mercy is this an example of mercy?

“But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in Heaven.”

Should one still ascribe to have these qualities if one knew they wouldn’t be blessed? Should one be and do good for a reward? Should one be or do good for another reason? If one doesn’t get a reward should one not be or do good? If one knew they would not be God’s child for being merciful should they still be merciful?

Sermon

And Jesus said, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.” (‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭3-6‬ NIV)

Is Jesus saying, “No matter how dire things may seem here on Earth, and the more dire the better, one is rewarded with the ultimate goal, Heaven”? So a child born into poverty with horrible access to fresh drinking water, good healthcare and diet is better off than a child born into the opposite of that? Isn’t that the claim Jesus is making? And if that claim is true should one become as poor as possible, therefor, guaranteeing a spot in Heaven?

Theist in the Hizzy

http://talkingatheism.wordpress.com/2013/09/24/the-logical-impossibility-of-proving-god/

Thanks for taking time to write your blog post (above) and for giving me the opportunity to use my wordpress account I rarely use.  I was happy to read your definitions of your god. These are very common attributes of a god used by theists and all I was asking for. However, I’m not sure of the implications to your premise:

“To define God would be to disprove him, because that would make him smaller, subject to the confines, rules, and laws of the created world.”

You’ll be happy to hear I don’t think you disproved god.

Here are the definitions or attributes I think you used. If I am wrong, please correct me. Maybe you would add a few? Your god is personal. It can intervene in human affairs. Loves us. Is this your god?

Created all the universe.

God created the world for Man and Man’s exploration, discovery and enjoyment.

Male.

Omniscient

Omnipotent.

Impossible to test.

If these are part of your definition of your god I’m not sure how you square one other attribute you used to define your god.

Unfathomable.

How do you claim all those other attributes? This is a huge problem I run into with theists often. This is similar to the square circle an all powerful god is unable to accomplish. It’s a major contradiction. You can’t claim on one hand god is all loving and on the other hand claim god is unfathomable. I have problems with the rest of the definitions as well but I won’t linger on them. I did ask you to define your god and you did. I appreciate that.

So that’s your “what do you believe in”. Now on to your “why do you believe that”. I thought your present story was poor. You claimed there was a present in the physical world and instructed your son to test that claim by reaching in and finding the present. One could demonstrate it. Test it. Falsify it. Define it. It was not faith which is what you were attempting to demonstrate. You demonstrated the opposite of faith. Your son was not using faith. He trusted in you because you’re his parent, however, he then tested your claim.

Faith: “It is a reason, why you do not have to give reasons, for what you believe.” – Sam Harris

or “Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.” – Heb 11:1

I can’t think of a worse way to navigate towards understanding how the universe works. If faith is why you believe I can’t touch you. This is a safe place for theists to hide. And if it’s faith that you’re using, why not Allah? Or Zues? With faith one can justify belief in anything. Anything. We need good reasons for the things we believe because our beliefs inform our actions and our actions effect ourselves and others. If faith isn’t why you believe in your god please correct me. You hinted at evidence of your god. Why didn’t you share that? I value evidence. I’m guessing you’ve shared your evidence with other atheists before. If so, why not this time? Is it rejected as evidence?

You asked atheists to suspend disbelief.  I’m not sure how one suspends something they already lack.  I’m guessing you wanted atheists to believe for a brief moment. Regardless, why presuppose a being to explain the beginning of the universe? Why a “who”? Why not “what”? All you’ve done is explain something with an even bigger mystery. In other words you’ve explained nothing. But there’s another problem or massive step being bypassed. How do you get from a deistic god, one that “created” everything, to personal Jesus? Maybe the god that “created” everything is evil or ambivalent or dead? In other words, you still have all your work ahead of you even if I grant you a “creator”. How do we know it loves us? Knows our every thought? Knows everything we’re going to do before we do it? These are huge claims that need to be justified. Demonstrated. Or they are just claims.

I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts on such an awesome topic. I love it. A conversation is all I can hope for with theists even though I’m a vicious bastard on twitter!

Dark Poet