Are Any Objections to Christian Faith Successful?

[Tree of Life]

They're successful in the terms you proposed: they have successfully undermined Christian faith of individuals. But it seems you actually intended to ask something different, something like, "are there arguments that logically entail the falsity of Christian doctrine?"

Yes that's what I mean by successful.

 

[durangodawood]

It's hard to imagine acting out of something other than need because we are finite creatures who so often are motivated by need. But I am not convinced that all desires and actions necessarily imply needs and imperfections.

Yes.

Many acts of love seem to defy this discontentment-motivated theory of action.

And so do many acts of creation. Like when I'm with other musicians and we are developing a piece of music. Its really joyful and outward-directed in a way that just patching emotional holes isnt.

 

[Tree of Life]

Yes.

Many acts of love seem to defy this discontentment-motivated theory of action.

And so do many acts of creation. Like when I'm with other musicians and we are developing a piece of music. Its really joyful and outward-directed in a way that just patching emotional holes isnt.

I would tend to agree with this. If God is creative by nature, then wouldn't creative activity be an expression of his perfection rather than imperfection?

 

[cvanwey]

An objection to the Christian faith is a reason to believe that the Christian worldview is false.

Many will say that they don't believe in Christianity because there is no reason to believe in Christianity. But this is not a positive objection in the sense that I want to explore here. A real objection to Christianity might be something like the problem of evil. The problem of evil seeks to provide a reason to believe that the Christian worldview is false.

Are any objections to Christian faith successful?

It would seem 'Christian faith' is not falsifiable. Hence, no objection may be deemed truly 'successful'? Meaning, you cannot 'falsify' the 'unfalsifiable'.

 

[Tree of Life]

It would seem 'Christian faith' is not falsifiable. Hence, no objection may be deemed truly 'successful'? Meaning, you cannot 'falsify' the 'unfalsifiable'.

This assumes a certain notion of falsifiability. I assume you mean that Christianity is not empirically falsifiable?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

An objection to the Christian faith is a reason to believe that the Christian worldview is false.

Many will say that they don't believe in Christianity because there is no reason to believe in Christianity. But this is not a positive objection in the sense that I want to explore here. A real objection to Christianity might be something like the problem of evil. The problem of evil seeks to provide a reason to believe that the Christian worldview is false.

Are any objections to Christian faith successful?

I’ve been successful just starting with “why do you believe” and going from there.

Usually the problem of suffering ends up doing the trick.

 

[Tree of Life]

It would seem 'Christian faith' is not falsifiable. Hence, no objection may be deemed truly 'successful'? Meaning, you cannot 'falsify' the 'unfalsifiable'.

There's lots of things that we regularly accept which are not empirically falsifiable. I don't see why this criterion should make it so that we cannot meaningfully object to something.

 

[archer75]

I’ve been successful just starting with “why do you believe” and going from there.

Usually the problem of suffering ends up doing the trick.

Over what kind of period does such a success take place?

 

[cloudyday2]

Yes that's what I mean by successful.

The problem with looking for a logical reason to disbelieve Christianity is that most of our useful beliefs are not based on logic alone.

For example, you believe when you buy food at the grocery store that it is safe to eat. You might allow for the possibility of food poisoning giving you diarrhea, but you don't worry much about terrorists poisoning your food. You trust the supply chains and the government to protect you, and that allows you to eat food that you didn't grow yourself.

That's a bad example, but as you can see there isn't much logic involved in that belief. Science is the same way of course. Everything is statistics.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Over what kind of period does such a success take place?

It varies. For someone who already has doubts, it doesn’t take very long. Usually the last thing to go is the fear of hell.

 

[archer75]

It varies. For someone who already has doubts, it doesn’t take very long. Usually the last thing to go is the fear of hell.

What "kind" of Christians have you had these talks with?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

What "kind" of Christians have you had these talks with?

The human kind?

Not sure what you’re asking.

 

[Silmarien]

I’ve been successful just starting with “why do you believe” and going from there.

Usually the problem of suffering ends up doing the trick.

The unfortunate part of that is that you rarely ever see the full Christian answer to the problem of suffering, even from Christians. David Bentley Hart puts it beautifully at the end of The Doors of the Sea:

Now we are able to rejoice that we are saved not through the immanent mechanisms of history and nature, but by grace; that God will not unite all of history's many strands in one great synthesis, but will judge much of history false and damnable; that he will not simply reveal the sublime logic of fallen nature, but will strike off the fetters in which creation languishes; and that, rather than showing us how the tears of a small girl suffering in the dark were necessary for the building of the Kingdom, he will instead raise her up and wipe away all tears from her eyes - and there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying, nor any more pain, for the former things will have passed away, and he that sits upon the throne will say, "Behold, I make all things new."

Western Christianity has kind of glossed over this aspect of the Gospel, focusing on personal salvation and ignoring the more cosmic promise of new creation, so it makes sense that this aspect of Christianity's answer to the problem of suffering almost never comes up. It should, though, so if you spend your time pushing people on why they believe what they believe, it'd be nice to make sure they have the theological resources to actually know what they claim to believe in the first place. Otherwise it's not really an informed decision.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

This is more of an opinion than an argument. It may be "obvious" to you, but it's not at all "obvious" to me that this is the case.

I know it isn't. Just as the person it's not obvious in the analogy I made earlier, that the boyfriend is a very, very bad choice. The person in love with him just won't listen to reason, so reasoned arguments won't work.

I'd like to ask you a question now. What was it that convinced you to become a Christian?

 

[archer75]

The human kind?

Not sure what you’re asking.

Denominations?

 

[ananda]

Let me put this in propositional form if I can:

1. Actions are always done to remedy an experienced discontentment caused by a perceived problem.
2. Anyone who acts experiences discontentment and is not perfect.
3. God acts.
4. Therefore, God is not perfect and is a contradictory idea.

A poster on another thread of mine is currently arguing along similar lines. I imagine my response to you will be similar to his.

To begin a response, I believe that premise (1) is a highly complex assumption. Why should I accept premise (1)? Why isn't it possible for a perfectly satisfied being to act? Why does perfection and satisfaction result in complete inaction?

I don't know why you should accept premise 1.

I accept it because I see it in my own behavior & actions - every last one of them. It appears to be a Law of Reality from all I can observe and from my own experience: The more satisfied I am in any situation, the less I find the need to act to change anything.

 

[ananda]

Do you think its correct to describe actions taken out of love mainly as remedies for personal discontentment?

Like doing something really nice for someone just because you care for them?

Yes, because not doing those things for someone I care about causes greater discontentment or reduce contentment in myself.

 

[ananda]

Yes.

Many acts of love seem to defy this discontentment-motivated theory of action.

And so do many acts of creation. Like when I'm with other musicians and we are developing a piece of music. Its really joyful and outward-directed in a way that just patching emotional holes isnt.

Pleasure & contentment is merely the opposite pole of the discontentment<->contentment spectrum.

IMO in your case, your act of creation in developing music increases your degree of contentment (or - on the flipside of the same coin - it can be seen acts which decrease your degree of discontentment).

 

[Tree of Life]

I don't know why you should accept premise 1.

I accept it because I see it in my own behavior & actions - every last one of them. It appears to be a Law of Reality from all I can observe and from my own experience: The more satisfied I am in any situation, the less I find the need to act to change anything.

I agree that finite creatures actions usually are related to their needs. But it's possible that an infinite being like God, having no needs, would act for totally different reasons. There being no compelling reason why I must accept premise 1, my judgment would be that your objection does not ultimately undermine Christian faith.

 

[ananda]

... it's possible that an infinite being like God, having no needs, would act for totally different reasons...

True, but as I posted in another related thread: "You're basically claiming that the laws governing Reality which we perceive & experience do not apply to God - which is fine to claim - but it goes beyond the realm of reason & observation into the realm of imagination where really anything can be possible with "God". Then, anything is possible in the realm of imagination - there is no reason to not imagine it as the flying spaghetti monster (it's possible!), or a being which rides a sun chariot across the sky daily (it's possible!)."