A Year Without God / A Year With God

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
You might want to read Pascal in relation to your feelings of indifference about faith related issues. He has some brief but interesting things to say on it. :cool:
I imagine him in one of those Enlightenment-era salons, half-drunk and giggling while he outlined his wager on a napkin. Apparently some waiter saved the napkin and the rest is history... ;)
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I imagine him in one of those Enlightenment-era salons, half-drunk and giggling while he outlined his wager on a napkin. Apparently some waiter saved the napkin and the rest is history... ;)

(lol!) Really, now? And where did you come by that information, Cloudy? :rolleyes: Don't get Pascal confused with the second Earl of Rochester.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Well, this is one of the cultural prejudices I'm talking about--we live in a post-Enlightenment world where the only thing that matters is empirical evidence. God has always been a philosophical question, but we only know how to ask scientific questions anymore, so the argument descends into madness. And our own world has become so artificial, it's easy to view reality as a whole in a similar light.

Now, if your argument for atheism is that it's easy if you're indifferent to the major ontological issues that inevitably arise, I'd certainly agree! That it requires intellectual laziness is hardly a point in its favor, though. I would argue that pantheism and panentheism are far easier and more natural stances--I've seen atheists shift in that direction more than once.
I don't see any reason to care about something that is totally irrelevant. Why is God totally irrelevant? - because we have no evidence for His existence. If God actually became relevant by involving Himself in our lives, then we would have evidence.

Let's compare the question of God to the question of Bigfoot. Bigfoot is relevant. If Bigfoot exists then we expect some evidence. Maybe we can find some scat or a skeleton or even a live specimen. Maybe we can learn to communicate with Bigfoot and gain some new insights. What does it matter today if God exists or doesn't exist - either way God does nothing measurable.

EDIT: Another scenario: let's compare to the question of the Big Bang. The Big Bang is relevant even though it happened long ago. By understanding the Big Bang we gain insights into natural laws that continue to effect us today - just as observations of planets helped us understand gravity. But what does learning about God do? Can we learn to levitate? If so, we could bring a pious monk into our laboratories and confirm the existence of God. But unfortunately an understanding of God seems to give us nothing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Quid est Veritas?

In Memoriam to CS Lewis
Feb 27, 2016
7,319
9,272
South Africa
✟316,433.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I don't see any reason to care about something that is totally irrelevant. Why is God totally irrelevant? - because we have no evidence for His existence. If God actually became relevant by involving Himself in our lives, then we would have evidence.

Let's compare the question of God to the question of Bigfoot. Bigfoot is relevant. If Bigfoot exists then we expect some evidence. Maybe we can find some scat or a skeleton or even a live specimen. Maybe we can learn to communicate with Bigfoot and gain some new insights. What does it matter today if God exists or doesn't exist - either way God does nothing measurable.

EDIT: Another scenario: let's compare to the question of the Big Bang. The Big Bang is relevant even though it happened long ago. By understanding the Big Bang we gain insights into natural laws that continue to effect us today - just as observations of planets helped us understand gravity. But what does learning about God do? Can we learn to levitate? If so, we could bring a pious monk into our laboratories and confirm the existence of God. But unfortunately an understanding of God seems to give us nothing.
The Christian argument is that He very much involves Himself in our lives. Ever heard of a place called Golgotha?

This is only relevant if you start off with the idea that God is not active, for then He never will be in your eyes. There is an idea of God as the sustainer, that the reason our world is somewhat consistent, that things follow in order, is an aspect of ongoing Creation. If God is defined as the essential Reality, then all else exists on account of Him and as a derivitive of Him therefore. An understanding of God is thus the only way to understand anything at all.
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
The Christian argument is that He very much involves Himself in our lives. Ever heard of a place called Golgotha?

This is only relevant if you start off with the idea that God is not active, for then He never will be in your eyes. There is an idea of God as the sustainer, that the reason our world is somewhat consistent, that things follow in order, is an aspect of ongoing Creation. If God is defined as the essential Reality, then all else exists on account of Him and as a derivitive of Him therefore. An understanding of God is thus the only way to understand anything at all.
Let's take Bigfoot as an example again. Imagine that 2 billion people believed in Bigfoot and a large percentage of these people claimed personal encounters with Bigfoot. Now imagine that in all those encounters not a single verifiable footprint existed as proof - we only have philosophical arguments and personal anecdotes. Imagine that some people go further to argue that Bigfoot by his very nature cannot leave evidence such as footprints, because philosophers require him to be a mysterious hidden being and footprints would reduce the mystery... that is how God discussions seem to go.

Here is a better way of saying this. For belief in God to relevant, I must be able to make better decisions with belief (or worse decisions). Most Christians do not actually expect God to do anything. Can I make better decisions by believing that God sustains Creation? Can I make worse decisions? Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, UFOs, ghosts, etc. are potentially more relevant than a being that sustains Creation.

EDIT: I suppose some things are worth discussing out of curiosity. Maybe speculating about a God that sustains Creation makes life more tolerable for some people. There are many people who feel wonder when thinking about the vastness of the universe ("billions and billions of galaxies..."). Each to his own I guess.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Quid est Veritas?

In Memoriam to CS Lewis
Feb 27, 2016
7,319
9,272
South Africa
✟316,433.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Here is a better way of saying this. For belief in God to relevant, I must be able to make better decisions with belief (or worse decisions). Most Christians do not actually expect God to do anything. Can I make better decisions by believing that God sustains Creation? Can I make worse decisions? Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, UFOs, ghosts, etc. are potentially more relevant than a being that sustains Creation.
Why do you think something is only relevant if belief is entailed? Or that it must alter our decision making? If I disbelieve in the theory of Gravity, it would remain as relevant, I would still fall. Before people believed in it, they still didn't jump off cliffs. My day to day life was unaltered by my belief in the cause or explanation thereof. God would be similar in such occurences. He would still sustain the world, let the rain fall on the righteous and the unrighteous, regardless of their belief.
Once we understand the underlying causes, we can respond accordingly. So to a Christian, if God does exist, our actions would thus be much 'better' therefore. That it did not alter someone else's perceived 'betterness' is neither here nor there. This is similar to how a physicist can derive natural Laws, but it does not alter someone else's practical application thereof, whether the latter is aware or not of those Laws.
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Once we understand the underlying causes, we can respond accordingly. So to a Christian, if God does exist, our actions would thus be much 'better' therefore.
Better decisions would include a Jew's decision to abstain from bacon? For me I think the Jew made a worse decision by not eating something tasty. The Jew thinks his/her decision made God happy.

A bad decision would be to walk off a cliff believing that gravity won't function. I don't see any bad decisions that result from atheism unless we assume that hell awaits.

So that's why I think the indifference of the atheist is very sensible.
 
Upvote 0

Silmarien

Existentialist
Feb 24, 2017
4,337
5,254
38
New York
✟215,724.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I don't see any reason to care about something that is totally irrelevant. Why is God totally irrelevant? - because we have no evidence for His existence. If God actually became relevant by involving Himself in our lives, then we would have evidence.

Even if you're starting off with the belief that God is inactive, that could lead you at least as easily to deism as atheism. Deists don't need to care that much either, so thinking that these sorts of questions are irrelevant to your daily life doesn't necessarily entail atheism. (That said, I very much do think that the theistic "sustainer" model is more comprehensive.)

You do seem to be conflating relevancy here with scientific utility, though. Would you consider literature an irrelevant pursuit as well? It too does not offer benefits that are externally measurable.

Let's take Bigfoot as an example again. Imagine that 2 billion people believed in Bigfoot and a large percentage of these people claimed personal encounters with Bigfoot. Now imagine that in all those encounters not a single verifiable footprint existed as proof - we only have philosophical arguments and personal anecdotes. Imagine that some people go further to argue that Bigfoot by his very nature cannot leave evidence such as footprints, because philosophers require him to be a mysterious hidden being and footprints would reduce the mystery... that is how God discussions seem to go.

There are no philosophical arguments for Bigfoot's existence. You're making a categorical error by comparing these two things. The closest you're going to get is statistical arguments for extraterrestrial life, which... not a terrible comparison, actually. Lots of conspiracy theorists out there, but wild stories really don't make the underlying question less interesting.

A bad decision would be to walk off a cliff believing that gravity won't function. I don't see any bad decisions that result from atheism unless we assume that hell awaits.

If your atheism slides right into nihilism, any number of bad decisions can follow.
 
Upvote 0

JoeP222w

Well-Known Member
Nov 5, 2015
3,358
1,748
55
✟77,175.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think you need to talk to some ex-Christians. In my case, your assessment might be correct. I didn't think I was born-again in the way that so many others claimed. HOWEVER, there are lots of ex-Christians who certainly thought they were born again and convinced others. IDK

Jeremiah 17:9 ESV The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

There may be Christians who fall into sin, but there are no "ex-Christians". I hold to what the word of God says, not fallen man.
 
Upvote 0

TheOldWays

Candidate
May 28, 2014
825
745
✟125,030.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
There may be Christians who fall into sin, but there are no "ex-Christians". I hold to what the word of God says, not fallen man.

I was wondering when this viewpoint would show up. Surprised it took so long.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,796
✟247,431.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
There was a Christian theologian who spent a year pretending to be an atheist and soon discovered that he had actually transformed into an atheist. The theologian was Ryan J. Bell and he named the experiment "A Year Without God" ( Ryan J. Bell - Wikipedia ).

This started me wondering what would happen if I spent a year pretending to be a Christian - "A Year With God".
  • Would I become a Christian again?
  • Would I want to become a Christian again?
  • What type of Christian beliefs would I want (progressive or fundamentalist, liturgical or non-liturgical, ...)?
To be honest, I suspect that I could transform myself into a Christian again simply by pretending to believe and immersing myself in a community and practices. I'm not a particularly organized and rigorous thinker, so it probably wouldn't be hard to confuse myself. I just don't know that I want to be a Christian again. I always thought that I missed being a Christian, but I think I only miss my past.

Assuming you could change your beliefs to convert to a different religious orientation would you want to? If so, what would be your preferred religious orientation?

Pretending to have a certain belief (or lack of belief), usually doesn't hold up well over time. That is, unless during this effort to pretend, you actually learn information that legitimately changes your mind over time.

The psychological gymnastics one has to go through, to feign a belief or lack of belief over time, will take it's toll and show up in behavior.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Pretending to have a certain belief (or lack of belief), usually doesn't hold up well over time. That is, unless during this effort to pretend, you actually learn information that legitimately changes your mind over time.

The psychological gymnastics one has to go through, to feign a belief or lack of belief over time, will take it's toll and show up in behavior.
This requires more than simply outwardly faking the belief. Ideally the person should change their inner voice to comply with the desired belief. I can't sing hymns while inwardly scoffing at the lyrics. I must try to take those lyrics seriously.

In some ways this reminds me of CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy)
CBT is based on the belief that thought distortions and maladaptive behaviors play a role in the development and maintenance of psychological disorders,[3] and that symptoms and associated distress can be reduced by teaching new information-processing skills and coping mechanisms
249px-Depicting_basic_tenets_of_CBT.jpg

Cognitive behavioral therapy - Wikipedia
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Even if you're starting off with the belief that God is inactive, that could lead you at least as easily to deism as atheism. Deists don't need to care that much either, so thinking that these sorts of questions are irrelevant to your daily life doesn't necessarily entail atheism. (That said, I very much do think that the theistic "sustainer" model is more comprehensive.)
I guess I wonder how a deist and an atheist would make choices differently. If there is no difference in behavior, then isn't the distinction in beliefs trivial?

You do seem to be conflating relevancy here with scientific utility, though. Would you consider literature an irrelevant pursuit as well? It too does not offer benefits that are externally measurable.
I don't appreciate literature. As @Robban said earlier "truth is stranger than fiction" (paraphrased). I prefer reading history instead of fiction, because fiction seems contrived and dull. (The exception would be LOTR. Tolkien spent so many years rethinking and revising that his fictional world is almost as interesting as reality IMO.)

In addition to literature there are topics in math and philosophy that probably will never contribute to scientific knowledge. These topics give pleasure to certain people, and hopefully that pleasure translates into a higher GDP that justifies the resources consumed. I suppose this reasoning could be applied to religion. Many people get some pleasure from singing songs on Sunday or studying their Bible or praying. I shouldn't spoil their fun.
 
Upvote 0

Quid est Veritas?

In Memoriam to CS Lewis
Feb 27, 2016
7,319
9,272
South Africa
✟316,433.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
In addition to literature there are topics in math and philosophy that probably will never contribute to scientific knowledge. These topics give pleasure to certain people, and hopefully that pleasure translates into a higher GDP that justifies the resources consumed. I suppose this reasoning could be applied to religion. Many people get some pleasure from singing songs on Sunday or studying their Bible or praying. I shouldn't spoil their fun.
Why is 'scientific knowledge' our standard of worth? A lot of science also has no practical application or use whatsoever. You could say: "it might in future", but that same argument can be made for advanced math or philosophy. After all, Science itself arose from advanced Philosophy that people like Juvenal derided as useless speculation.
Basing worth on Economics like GDP, is also quite sad and flawed, as if humans are merely statistics. Some countries with very high GDP like Japan, South Korea or Finland also have very high suicide rates. What do you want out of life, that is the actual question.

Literature and Art aren't there to help us live, but to make life more liveable. A lot of ideas cannot be properly expressed, such as emotion and so forth, when they are merely described. By intellectualising experience, we are crafting an abstract and dulling its essential reality. When we experience an emotion and stop to examine it, that act itself makes the experience itself dissipate. Its the old myth of Orpheus and Eurydice.
Only through story or myth can we in some way experience them, a midway, a blurring of boundaries, something more viscerally real than our dull intellectualisations can fathom. This is the purpose of ritual, incidentally, which is narrowly related, I think. History still allows this, but history is essentially an agreed upon story of our ancestors, and properly written Histories amount to great Literature.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Robban

-----------
Supporter
Dec 27, 2009
11,311
3,057
✟626,034.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Divorced
Better decisions would include a Jew's decision to abstain from bacon? For me I think the Jew made a worse decision by not eating something tasty. The Jew thinks his/her decision made God happy.

A bad decision would be to walk off a cliff believing that gravity won't function. I don't see any bad decisions that result from atheism unless we assume that hell awaits.

So that's why I think the indifference of the atheist is very sensible.

But is that not what an indifferent person does,

Walking off a cliff believing gravity will not function?

Cain was told,
"Is it not so that if you improve,
it will be forgiven you?

If you do not improve however,
at the entrance ,
sin is lying, and to you is it,s longing,

but you can rule over it."

Improve/your deeds,
Entrance/at the entrance of your grave your sin is preserved.
Longing of sin/the evil inclination which constantly
longs and lusts to cause us to stumble.

Sin is seductive, alluring, appealing it will always try to find a way to entice, lure.

Sin says, "There is none (who need place) the fear of God before his eyes"

From Psalms 36:2
Though it reads, "Sin says to the wicked....."
 
  • Like
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Why is 'scientific knowledge' our standard of worth? A lot of science also has no practical application or use whatsoever. You could say: "it might in future", but that same argument can be made for advanced math or philosophy. After all, Science itself arose from advanced Philosophy that people like Juvenal derided as useless speculation.
Basing worth on Economics like GDP, is also quite sad and flawed, as if humans are merely statistics. Some countries with very high GDP like Japan, South Korea or Finland also have very high suicide rates. What do you want out of life, that is the actual question.

Literature and Art aren't there to help us live, but to make life more liveable. A lot of ideas cannot be properly expressed, such as emotion and so forth, when they are merely described. By intellectualising experience, we are crafting an abstract and dulling its essential reality. When we experience an emotion and stop to examine it, that act itself makes the experience itself dissipate. Its the old myth of Orpheus and Eurydice.
Only through story or myth can we in some way experience them, a midway, a blurring of boundaries, something more viscerally real than our dull intellectualisations can fathom. This is the purpose of ritual, incidentally, which is narrowly related, I think. History still allows this, but history is essentially an agreed upon story of our ancestors, and properly written Histories amount to great Literature.
Hmmm. Yeah, that doesn't make a lot sense to me. I'm sure that only shows that I am weird, but those things don't interest me. Each to his own though. Poetry, literature, ... ick. LOL
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Jeremiah 17:9 ESV The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

There may be Christians who fall into sin, but there are no "ex-Christians". I hold to what the word of God says, not fallen man.
Some of those ex-Christian said the very same thing while they were Christians (of course you would not label them as REAL Christians). You should go talk to some of them or read their stories.
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
But is that not what an indifferent person does,

Walking off a cliff believing gravity will not function?

Cain was told,
"Is it not so that if you improve,
it will be forgiven you?

If you do not improve however,
at the entrance ,
sin is lying, and to you is it,s longing,

but you can rule over it."

Improve/your deeds,
Entrance/at the entrance of your grave your sin is preserved.
Longing of sin/the evil inclination which constantly
longs and lusts to cause us to stumble.

Sin is seductive, alluring, appealing it will always try to find a way to entice, lure.

Sin says, "There is none (who need place) the fear of God before his eyes"

From Psalms 36:2
Though it reads, "Sin says to the wicked....."
There are times when my short-term desires are not good for me long-term. For example, I am trying to lose some weight. Chocolate chip cookies are "seductive, alluring, appealing and always try to find a way to entice, lure". God doesn't consider them a sin, but I do right now. It is better if I declare myself to be God and make my own rules for myself IMO.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Robban
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Robban

-----------
Supporter
Dec 27, 2009
11,311
3,057
✟626,034.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Divorced
There are times when my short-term desires are not good for me long-term. For example, I am trying to lose some weight. Chocolate chip cookies are "seductive, alluring, appealing and always try to find a way to entice, lure". God doesn't consider them a sin, but I do right now. It is better if I declare myself to be God and make my own rules for myself IMO.

At one time there was mints that were hollow,
said to have non-fattening centers.

I like choclate and seven layer cake, :)
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0