Why Jesus Doesn’t Work for Ex-Evangelical Christian Atheists and Agnostics

Image result for image of I come to the garden alone

Every time another testimony, praise song, or devotional book described intimacy with Jesus, I felt my lack of it so much that it hurt.  Listening to the hymn “I Come to the Garden Alone,” I ached for Jesus to walk with me and talk with me and tell me I was his own.  I believed he was real, but much to my chagrin, Jesus certainly wasn’t my best friend.

—ex-evangelical Christian evangelist, now humanist chaplain at USC, Bart Campolo , in Why I Left, Why I Stayed, chapter 8:  The Dark Side of Grace:  Why Jesus Doesn’t Work for Me, p. 89

 

Gary:  I grew up fundamentalist Baptist/evangelical Christian until my mid-twenties.  Although I experienced emotional highs during both of my born again experiences (the first at age nine, the second in my teens…just to make sure) I never seemed to feel Jesus as did other evangelical Christians around me.  While other evangelical Christians talked about how Jesus would speak to them in their heart, move them, lead them, etc.., I felt and heard nothing.

What was wrong?  Since Jesus is perfect, it couldn’t be him.  It must be me.  It must be due to sin.  What hidden sin was I unconsciously holding onto that prevented me from enjoying the presence of Jesus in my life? In my prayers, I begged Jesus, for years, to identify this hidden sin so that I might truly and completely repent and finally feel the peace and comfort of his presence.

Silence

Image result for image of the guidance of the holy spirit

Bart Campolo continues:

Wasn’t it the Holy Spirit that I was supposed to be relating to on a daily basis?  Trust me, I’m not kidding here.  In all the time I was a Christian—including my four years as a religious studies major at Haverford College and Brown University—I never figured out the salient difference between the resurrected Jesus and the Holy Spirit.  Try as I might, the doctrine of the Trinity always eluded me, on both a theological and practical level.  Even during those transcendent moments when I felt certain I heard the voice of God, I was never quite sure which member of the Godhead was doing the talking.  

What I did know, however, was that my father and the rest of the evangelical community almost always describe their faith in terms of Jesus.  To them, Jesus is and always has been God’s ultimate expression, and his red-lettered words are the keys that unlock the true meaning of the Bible.  Jesus is Lord and Savior.  Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life.  Jesus is the answer.  In a very real sense, when it comes to that kind of Christianity, knowing Jesus in a personal way is the whole ball of wax.

To me, however, Jesus is almost entirely inaccessible.  I’ve never seen his photograph, listened to a recording of his voice, or read a single sentence that can be surely ascribed to him, let alone met him in person or known someone else who did.  Like the rest of the world, all I have to go on are four brief, highly redacted, obviously biased accounts of his life and times, which even in their original form were written some decades after his death, and aren’t entirely consistent with one another.  I know plenty of folks who claim those accounts clearly reveal his personality, but as far as I’m concerned, the biblical record of Jesus is far too sketchy for anyone to claim they really know Jesus’s character.  …Seriously, I know way more about Abraham Lincoln—or Michael Jackson for that matter—than I do about Jesus.  In any case, the whole idea of having an intimate, personal relationship with a spiritual being strikes me as highly unrealistic.

Now I think what I experienced as a supernatural outside force was actually just the natural inner workings of my own brain.  …There’s a lot of evidence to support that conclusion, of course, but what originally led me to it wasn’t psychology and neuroscience, but rather this simple observation:

Despite the divine guidance of the Holy Spirit and more than two thousand years to work out the kinks, every Christian church and individual believer sees Jesus differently than all the rest, and each one of them is convinced that, thanks be to God, their vision is the fairest of them all.

Image result for image of all the christian denominations

 

 

 

106 thoughts on “Why Jesus Doesn’t Work for Ex-Evangelical Christian Atheists and Agnostics

  1. Again, not grounding your Christianity in objective historical fact is a disaster.

    Your experience or lack thereof does nothing to change the fact if Jesus’ resurrection. If you’re basing your faith in your feelings, your foundation will crumble.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Bodies that have been brain-dead for three days cannot be reanimated/resurrected, Liam. It is a scientific fact. And you have not provided convincing evidence of the existence of alternative realities in which bodiless ghosts can impregnate human virgins and raise people from the dead.

      Like

        1. Yes, and I wasn’t the only one. There are posts on the internet that discuss this phenomenon in evangelical Christianity: Repetitive born again experiences due to a fear of lack of assurance of salvation. It is really sad.

          It is a cult.

          Like

      1. Intelligence only emerges from intelligence. This is a scientific fact.
        Nobody has provided any convincing evidence that the existence of our reality is the result of purely naturalistic events. Whatever intelligence is responsible the human mind is more than capable of reanimating a corpse.

        Like

            1. Experts in this field (cosmologists) have not reached a consensus on the origin of the universe or whether existence is dependent upon an intelligent Creator. I know that you believe that the evidence proves your position, but your strongly-held opinion does not make it fact. I choose to wait for an expert consensus on this issue.

              Like

                1. When you get your degree in astro-physics then I will be willing to listen to your expert perspective on this complicated issue. Until then, you are just another layperson with an opinion, nothing more.

                  Like

                    1. “I don’t think I need a degree to know…that the sun revolves around the earth and not the other way around! How do I know? Well, first of all, I have never seen the earth move around the sun and neither has anyone else. I have never felt the earth moving. It really is common sense.

                      I saw the sun pop up on the eastern horizon this morning, I watched it traverse the sky all day long, and it will set behind the western horizon this evening… and then it will pop up again on the eastern horizon tomorrow morning and repeat the exact same process, day after day after day, just as it has done all my life.”

                      Like

                    2. Exactly! That’s why I do not make statements of fact regarding the origin of the universe. The experts have not reached a consensus on this issue, therefore I am withholding judgment until they do. If the consensus of scientists reach the conclusion that an intelligent Designer created the universe I will accept that consensus as fact. If on the other hand, the consensus is that the universe developed from nothing, I will accept that consensus also.

                      Please note: If scientists do conclude that an intelligent Designer created the universe, that is NOT proof that your ancient Hebrew god, Yahweh, did the creating. Christians will still need to prove the existence of Yahweh.

                      Like

            2. By the way, stay tuned, in an upcoming article I will present excellent scientific evidence (from evangelical evangelist, Tony Campolo!) for why we cannot assume that just because something has never come from nothing in our experience doesn’t mean it couldn’t ever happen.

              Like

    2. Your experience or lack thereof does nothing to change the fact if (of) Jesus’ resurrection

      Hi,, Liam. Could you please list the verifiable independent sources of the the resurrection of the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth. Thanks.

      Like

    3. The alleged Resurrection of Jesus is not an objective fact except in your brain-washed, delusional mind.

      Come out of the darkness of ancient superstitions, Liam, and into the light of science and reason.

      Like

    4. Outside of nothing you have presented as fact, you keep pointing to the resurrection. This feels very intellectually dishonest. There’s a whole Old Testament that speaks to the character of God. He kills his own creation and the scriptures make point to say that he killed the vegetation and animals as well (Take that, Plants!). This would also include innocent men, women, and children. He killed off entire groups of people, save the few heroes. Think about that for a second. What did the kids do to deserve being killed?

      He’s vindictive. He’s petty. He’s full of rage and anger. Mind you, all of this is towards his own intelligently designed creation. He never stops to kill the supposed root of “sin” and “evil.” He intervenes in space and time to kill his creation. Can he not stop the evil? He can clearly intervene and kill people, why not “satan”? Does he view satan as more valuable to him than the humans? Instead of killing them, he creates more, let’s satan have control, then kills the humans again? Does this cycle not seem insane to you? And, why doesn’t this happen in modern times?

      You say “but the resurrection!!” as if that would soften the blow for anything. You’re asking me to believe that God all of a sudden had a change of heart and decided to become loving and caring? At what point did that happen? What caused this? Was it a mood swing by the creator of the universe? Then you expect me to believe that he impregnated a virgin to send himself in human form (remember, above, he intervened in space and time without any issues to kill everyone), to then torture himself for a few days? I won’t use kill, because you believe he was resurrected, so it was temporary pain. The animals who were sacrificed are all still dead.

      This is just a small sampling. You’re asking me to deny the sickness of the Old Testament and believe that everything is proven through a resurrection that…isn’t proven?

      I can clearly see the objective facts about your God in the bible. Resurrection or no resurrection, it’s not a God to be trusted or a God I would care about. I would rather spend my time in hell than “praise” such a whiny and petty entity.

      If you keep saying “but the resurrection!”, realize that I don’t believe you have any foundation at all. You have intentionally ignored everything leading up to this supposed event.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. In actuality, “Satan” as represented in the Christian faith does not exist. “The satan” (ha-satan) in the Jewish faith was nothing but an “adversary” or in a few places, an “accuser.”

          I don’t know that I would describe this entity as “working for god,” but yes, it had no power other than what god allowed.

          Like

          1. From the link:

            “The Satan is described in only a few places in the Hebrew Scriptures. In every instance, he is an angel who works FOR Gd, not against Gd, and must get permission from Gd for everything that he does. Chronicles, Job, Psalms, and Zechariah are the only places where The Satan is mentioned. In each instance, the job description of The Satan is to act like what we now call a Prosecuting Attorney, or District Attorney, and accuse and show evidence against the defendant. Furthermore, like a D.A., The Satan must obtain permission from Gd, the Judge, to begin a sting operation.”

            Like

    5. Outside of nothing you have presented as fact, you keep pointing to the resurrection. This feels very intellectually dishonest. There’s a whole Old Testament that speaks to the character of God. He kills his own creation and the scriptures make point to say that he killed the vegetation and animals as well (Take that, Plants!). This would also include innocent men, women, and children. He killed off entire groups of people, save the few heroes. Think about that for a second. What did the kids do to deserve being killed?

      He’s vindictive. He’s petty. He’s full of rage and anger. Mind you, all of this is towards his own intelligently designed creation. He never stops to kill the supposed root of “sin” and “evil.” He intervenes in space and time to kill his creation. Can he not stop the evil? He can clearly intervene and kill people, why not “satan”? Does he view satan as more valuable to him than the humans? Instead of killing them, he creates more, let’s satan have control, then kills the humans again? Does this cycle not seem insane to you? And, why doesn’t this happen in modern times?

      You say “but the resurrection!!” as if that would soften the blow for anything. You’re asking me to believe that God all of a sudden had a change of heart and decided to become loving and caring? At what point did that happen? What caused this? Was it a mood swing by the creator of the universe? Then you expect me to believe that he impregnated a virgin to send himself in human form (remember, above, he intervened in space and time without any issues to kill everyone), to then torture himself for a few days? I won’t use kill, because you believe he was resurrected, so it was temporary pain. The animals who were sacrificed are all still dead.

      This is just a small sampling. You’re asking me to deny the sickness of the Old Testament and believe that everything is proven through a resurrection that…isn’t proven?

      I can clearly see the objective facts about your God in the bible. Resurrection or no resurrection, it’s not a God to be trusted or a God I would care about. I would rather spend my time in hell than “praise” such a whiny and petty entity.

      If you keep saying “but the resurrection!”, realize that I don’t believe you have any foundation at all. You have intentionally ignored everything leading up to this supposed event.

      Like

  2. John Branyan asks: ‘Do you have an example of intelligence rising from non-intelligence?

    Yes – us. We developed it via natural selection and billions of years of evolution. Other animals did too to a lesser extent. The only way intelligence has arisen, and can arise, is through this process.

    So, John where did the Intelligence you claim created everything get its intelligence from?
    Oh, it just was, you say. Where is your evidence that this is so?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “Yes – us. We developed it via natural selection and billions of years of evolution…The only way intelligence has arisen, and can arise, is through this process.”

      Right. That is what I was asking about! There isn’t any evidence for this. Your claim is a statement of faith.

      This isn’t a criticism! I’m cool with faith! When I come across a complex machine, I believe intelligence assembled the machine even if I can’t see the assembler. You choose to believe machines are assembled by magic. We just have two different faiths.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. You believe that intelligence assembled the machine. This statement says much about your believe in God, and I would say he has much to answer to. Children born without basic senses. Children born without limbs. Children dying at different stages of the birthing process. Diseases that can and do cause us to suffer and die. The list of this goes on and on. When I look in nature I see indifference, I don’t see intelligence in every design. You’ve taken your preconception (“God exists. Not just God, but your specific view of God”) and then applied it to everything. There are many other deeper theological impacts here.

        Even with your faith in an assembler, I have no respect for an assembler that apparently gets joy out of the pain and suffering, and for what?

        Your assembler – can you show him to me? Can you introduce him to me? Do you physically talk with him and he responds? Can you record these conversations? What separates your belief in an “assembler” and your claimed belief in “magic”?

        You believe we are complex and intelligently designed. Who says there is another more complex life form out there? We are dealing with samples of 1.

        Like

        1. When you encounter a washing machine, you assume it was assembled. How would you respond to these questions – “can you show the assembler to me? Can you introduce him to me? Do you physically talk with him and he responds? Can you record these conversations?”

          My belief in God is separate from Nan’s belief in magic by intelligence. God is an intelligent being who acts with intention. The astounding amount of intelligence within the human species is not justified by the mysterious, unguided forces of naturalism.

          Your complaints about suffering are a back-handed admission to the existence of God. If you don’t believe an intelligent agent needs to be held accountable for diseased children, then you’re literally shouting at the wind.

          Like

          1. My washing machine was created at Samsung. There is a factory somewhere that had created the parts and assembled this machine. Somewhere there was a man who designed this specific model. I am sure I could speak with him if I wanted. There is a physical man or woman I can speak to. I could record the conversations via audio or video. I could take pictures. I could have multiple people with me there to witness. The designer could even explain his design and inspiration (maybe from past designs). At this point, there would be no ambiguity. We clearly know the designer.

            The fun part here is, this is just one step in the evolution of washing machines. There are years of models of washing machines that are nowhere near what we have now. You can take this back to using a washboard if you’d like.

            To those who used a washboard and saw a washing machine in my house now they would see it as magical. 20 years from now people will look at my washing machine and laugh at how silly we are. I am sure the inventor of the washboard thought it was amazing and everyone thought they were a great ‘designer.’ The context of space and time allow us to make ourselves feel special.

            You have no such evidence to the very specific God you claim knowledge of. Your belief is indistinguishable from magic. Just because you believe it does not make it true. You say “God is an intelligent being who acts with intention.” You’ve made two truth claims there: 1) God is intelligent, and 2) he acts with intention. Can you tell me how you know this? Did you speak with him and he told you this? The evidence surely does not point to either of those statements being true.

            The psychopath that is wired wrong and kills many people. Intelligent design? Was this design intentional? He designed and had the foreknowledge of these actions.

            “The astounding amount of intelligence within the human species is not justified by the mysterious, unguided forces of naturalism.” Again, this is a truth claim. How do you know this? This also assumes that all humans are equally intelligent. Do you believe this to be true? Why would your intelligent designer create some who were intelligent, and others who were less so? Which end of the spectrum do you assume yourself to be? Humans have assigned themselves as intelligent. We call ourselves intelligent. We are a sample of 1. Again, nature is indifferent. What I see with humans is indifference. Exactly something nature would produce and not an intelligent designer.

            You are arguing for the existence of your very specific God and ascribing him as “intelligent.” I am providing you (and can give you more if you like) many examples of how not-intelligent things are around us. I think the pain and suffering that happens all over is objectively bad. I look forward to curing cancers and fixing what your intelligent designer “designed” with “intention”. However, I don’t need to blame anyone. Nature is indifferent. I am fully aware that I am just a few genes away from being a very different person.

            Liked by 2 people

            1. My point is that you don’t need to meet the dude that built your Samsung before believing he exists. The machine itself is evidence of intelligence.

              As you said, nature is indifferent to suffering. Yet, somehow people are not. You see pain as objectively bad. How did the concept of “caring” evolve from a process of mindless indifference? Your hope to cure cancer is the opposite of indifference.

              Like

              1. “The machine itself is evidence of intelligence” No. My point in talking about evolution is that things only appear “intelligent” to us in any given evolutionary spacetime context. I do not see the washboard as intelligently designed, but I can appreciate that a human created it with the only knowledge they had at their time. Years from now, we will not look “intelligent” as you are defining it. Our washing machines of the future will be the washboard as we see it today. It’s only through our hubris that we see ourselves as intelligent.

                The concept of “caring” is not something that’s universal. If it was universal then we wouldn’t have wars where we kill people by the masses. We wouldn’t build walls to separate humanity on arbitrary lines. There are many cultures that simply kill their own based on their traditions and beliefs in mythology. In order for this to be objectively bad everyone would have to agree on it. Otherwise it’s subjective. I do wish more people cared. I wish more people would let go of mythology and superstition.

                My hope to cure cancer is to give people a better quality of life. Again, look at our own history. You will see years of the church using their holy books to enforce very gruesome acts on other humans. The same holy book you read today. They used it to kill and torture people. They used it to enslave people. Did they objectively “care”? Did their God design them this way by intention? We see those things as bad now as humanity has evolved. They did not see it as bad. They saw it as doing God’s work. Who has changed – us or God? Something changed – so which is it? If everything he does is intelligent and by intention – was he intentionally letting his people torture other people? Or how about average lifespans. For many years prior to modern medicine the average lifespan was 30 years. Was it intelligently designed this way with intention? Did he decide to “wait” to invent modern medicine? Is all modern medicine good? He goes from 900 years in the Old Testament, down to 30 (as a max), then now we are up to the high 70s. Since you seem to have a direct line to your specific God, can you let me know why this is the case?

                I’m left with the conclusions, based on observation, that nature is indifferent. That we are lucky to be here. There is no grander vision or purpose. I was born. Before that I ceased to exist. I will someday die and be forgotten by many who come after me. Just as those have done before me for hundreds of thousands of years. Based on these observations, there is no way I can point to an “intelligent” designer who did all of this with “intent.” If there is such a specific entity, and it’s your specific God, it’s not a God I would want anything to do with. I don’t need magical beings to give my life meaning.

                Liked by 3 people

                1. Cool.
                  Then I can safely dismiss your comments as background noise from an indifferent universe. You surely won’t try to convince me that you’re speaking with intelligence. That would be hubris!

                  Like

                  1. John Branyan, sounds good. I am fine with being considered background noise. I’m perfectly comfortable not having the answers. I won’t claim certainty for things that I cannot know. I won’t put myself on a pedestal. I’m glad I have more to learn. I won’t make truth claims for a personal God for which I have no evidence of anything. I don’t ascribe intelligence to myself or anyone else. I’m simply sharing my observations of the world around me. Observations that can be tested and verified by anyone else in this comment thread. Reality is great. You’re welcome to join 😉

                    Like

                    1. “I’m perfectly comfortable not having answers.”
                      This is thoroughly unscientific and I don’t believe it’s true.

                      “I won’t claim certainty for things that I cannot know.”
                      Again, I don’t believe you. Your entire thesis is predicated on faith. Claiming ‘uncertainty’ undermines everything you have said.

                      “I won’t put myself on a pedestal.”
                      Okay…should I applaud?

                      “I don’t ascribe intelligence to myself or anyone else.”
                      Which is a fascinating debate strategy! If you can’t admit that you possess intelligence, why should anyone listen to what you say?

                      “I’m simply sharing my observations of the world around me.”
                      Precisely. We both observe washing machines (and washboards) to be evidence of intelligence. The difference is I don’t turn around and deny the existence of intelligence.

                      “Reality is great.”
                      You have no idea.

                      Like

                    2. How do you think science works? By men and women who have all the answers, or by men and women who continually ask questions, seek answers, and revise based on evidence? Can you elaborate more on how it’s unscientific?

                      Nothing I have is predicated on faith. There will always be a level of uncertainty. Again, the beauty of science is that’s there’s always more to learn and discover. We see this throughout history as well. You can call it faith if it makes you feel better. I’m not interested in word games. I change my mind based on evidence in front of me. There is no evidence of your specific God or an intelligent designer.

                      I’m not debating you. I’m asking you to provide evidence. I’m sharing with you countless pieces of evidence that point to indifference and not intent or intelligent design. That’s it. You’ve made the truth claim that your God is the intelligent designer and does it all with intent. Historically people have made all sorts of claims that make them look silly when looking back. I learn from that. I realize I have much more to learn on many different topics. I won’t claim certainty or intelligence. I’m still learning. I’m still spinning on this rock going around the sun. Later civilizations may look back on me and say “Can you believe he thought he was intelligent? He used a computer to communicate with people!”

                      You like your washing machines! I’ll ask again a question you didn’t answer: is a psychopath who murders innocent men, women, and children a product of intentional intelligent design? Is cancer a product of intentional intelligent design? What about food that nourishes some, while it kills others – is that a product of intentional intelligent design? How about a child that dies during childbirth – is this a product of intentional intelligent design? How about natural disasters that can, and do, destroy millions of people – is this a product of intentional intelligent design? How about a child born without sight that is later hit by a moving vehicle – is this denial of a basic sense the product of intentional intelligent design?

                      I can keep going with this list if you’d like. I have many more questions in biology, neuroscience, physics, astronomy, etc. If your claim is that an intelligent designer is required for everything and nothing can be created without this intelligent designer, then I look forward to learning from your intelligence and insight into your specific God.

                      Please, teach me about your reality. You are correct, I have no idea.

                      Liked by 3 people

                    3. “Can you elaborate more on how it’s unscientific?”
                      You said you were comfortable not having answers. Science doesn’t happen when you’re comfortable in ignorance.

                      ” …is a psychopath who murders innocent men, women, and children a product of intentional intelligent design? …etc.”
                      Are you are asking these questions because you sense something is amiss in the natural world? Are you suggesting that the indifferent universe is unjust? If there is no God to hold accountable, then you’re still shouting at the wind. You are welcome to keep going with this list, but it will not change the response.

                      If your claim is that intelligence is not required for anything and that you are not an intelligent being, then I don’t think there is anything I can learn from you.

                      Like

                    4. I stand corrected. I used the wrong terms. I am OK not having the answers. That’s what drives me. Comfortable was a wrong word. I am not comfortable in ignorance, but I do fully realize I am ignorant to many things. Again, that drives me forward.

                      I’m asking the questions because you claim your specific God is the intelligent designer and does everything with intent. You claim this as evidence. I’m posing to you what I observe in the real world (call it reality, if you will). Based on those observations, I would like to know how you would answer the questions. That’s it. Nothing more. Given those scenarios, are they products of intentional intelligent design? You have not given a response to these.

                      Fine. You can’t learn anything from me. All good there. Let me learn from you by hearing your answers.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    5. “Given those scenarios, are they products of intentional intelligent design?”
                      Yes.
                      The fact that you are objecting to naturally occurring events in the universe is evidence of intelligence. When you see suffering all around you, how did you get the idea that suffering should not happen? Why aren’t you satisfied with the way things have evolved? The universe doesn’t care. If you’re merely a product of the universe, neither should you.

                      Like

                    6. So I am clear: a psychopath killing innocent men, women, and children is a product of intentional intelligent design, correct?

                      Yes. The answer to this question was yes.

                      Your specific God created a human without what we would consider proper wiring of the brain. He created them with the violent behavior. Then he created a pool of other human beings (not “pool” as in the first pool he drowned his intelligently designed humans, that’s different). The only purpose of these other human beings was to be brutally tortured and murdered by the psychopath. He did this with intention.

                      Your specific God created a human with all the recipe to give them cancer in their childhood years. A cancer that slowly eats at a child and causes them great pain and suffering as a sentient being. He did this with intention.

                      Your specific God created a human, born in a specific geographic region, and then later intentionally designed an hurricane that would kill them in their teenage years. He did this with intention. He designed the hurricane just for them.

                      Your specific God created a young girl whose only purpose would be sold as a sex slave to the other men he intentionally designed to capture her and take her as their own. He did this with intention.

                      Is this the reality your asking us all to join?

                      Like

                    7. Deflect, deflect, deflect.

                      Nate has presented you with REAL LIFE situations and asked where your god fits in. But all you (can) do is come back with “if” questions.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    8. Nope.
                      I answered his question.
                      You got the guts to answer mine or you gonna deflect, deflect, deflect?

                      If there is no God, why are you complaining about suffering?

                      Like

                    9. Another “if” question … 🙂

                      And I don’t recall you asking me any particular question. However, if it starts with “if”, you might as well forget it.

                      Isn’t this fun, JB?

                      Liked by 1 person

                    10. If that’s what it takes to entertain you, you are in a very sad state. But hey … whatever brings you joy.

                      I like to see other people enjoy life … even if doing so means they spend their time defending an invisible somewhere-in-the-sky entity. 😀

                      Like

                    11. Whoops!
                      I haven’t made any mention of invisible entities. Try to keep up, Nan!
                      I was asking you (and Nate) to explain why you object to suffering. Trying to give you guys a chance to demonstrate that your worldview isn’t completely worthless.
                      So far…you’re not doing very well.

                      Like

                    12. “Trying to give you guys a chance to demonstrate that your worldview isn’t completely worthless. So far…you’re not doing very well.”

                      I think I’m doing pretty well. I don’t believe in a God who designs psychopaths to kill people, and then say that it’s OK for him to do so. I don’t need said imaginary being to give me meaning in life.

                      If that makes me worthless, I’m OK with that.

                      Like

                    13. “I don’t believe in a God who designs psychopaths to kill people, and then say that it’s OK for him to do so.”

                      Right. You believe in evolution that designs psychopaths to kill people and then say it’s NOT okay for them to do so.

                      Like

                    14. “Right. You believe in evolution that designs psychopaths to kill people and then say it’s NOT okay for them to do so.”

                      Nature is indifferent. I do not ascribe intent or “design” to the process of evolution and observations. You are the one requiring there be an intentional intelligent designer.

                      Like

                    15. “Finally! You admit that it’s okay for psychopaths to kill people. It took you long enough!”

                      I’ll answer this before you ask. No, I don’t believe it’s OK for psychopaths to kill people. I’ll say it again, in case you haven’t caught on yet, I don’t need a belief in an imaginary being to say that it’s bad.

                      However, understanding neuroscience I have empathy for the fact that psychopaths could be no other way. I also believe we need to do a better job of taking care of those with mental illnesses as such. It’s to no fault of their own that they were born that way (or, as you would say, intentionally and intelligently designed). I would hope in the future that science and humanity can help in this process.

                      Like

                    16. That doesn’t make any sense, Nate.

                      Evolution is responsible for psychopaths. Why are you not okay with them? Maybe psychopaths are the next evolutionary step for humanity. It’s pretty outrageous to describe psychopathic murderers as ‘mentally ill’ when you admit they were ‘born that way’. Are you smarter than evolution, Nate?

                      Like

                    17. “That doesn’t make any sense, Nate.

                      Evolution is responsible for psychopaths. Why are you not okay with them? Maybe psychopaths are the next evolutionary step for humanity. It’s pretty outrageous to describe psychopathic murderers as ‘mentally ill’ when you admit they were ‘born that way’. Are you smarter than evolution, Nate?”

                      My apologies. I was referring to our current medical and scientific understanding which define it as a personality disorder. You are correct, they were intentionally and intelligently design…er…born that way. Maybe it is the next step. Only time will tell. I cannot tell the future. I can only hope to be an advocate for taking care of others and advancing the human race into the future.

                      Please understand I don’t see evolution as an intelligent designer. I ascribe no intent to evolution. Therefore I do not “blame” evolution. I do not anthropomorphize evolution. I don’t see anyone behind the curtain.

                      Could I be killed by a psychopath tomorrow? Maybe. Maybe that’s how God designed it all, right?

                      Like

                    18. You have claimed the positive: that an intentional and intelligent designer exists. You even said that he designed the psychopaths knowing they would murder his other intelligently designed humans.

                      I do not ascribe intent or design to evolution. I have nothing to blame with evolution. I don’t believe in an imaginary being pulling the strings. This is your belief. This is why I’m asking the questions for you to answer.

                      Like

                    19. “I do not ascribe intent or design to evolution. I have nothing to blame with evolution.”
                      Right.
                      Right.
                      Right!
                      That’s what I have been saying all along!
                      There is nothing to blame for psychopaths!
                      Evolution is not ‘responsible’ for people killing each other. It is just what happens!
                      Stop saying this is ‘my belief’. It’s YOURS!

                      Like

                    20. Your belief is in an intentional and intelligent designer who sees murder as OK. He not only sees it OK, he designs it as such. And you want us to believe in this God as good?

                      I do not believe in such an imaginary being. That’s your belief.

                      Like

                    21. “I know it seems uncharitable, but watching your insipid religion go up in flames is exhilarating.”

                      A man after his own God. God intentionally and intelligently designed you just to have this conversation on the Internet. Well done, God. Well done.

                      We all love you and all of your imaginary friends.

                      Like

                    22. “Your worldview is in smoldering ruin as well, Nate. It’s a knot of contradiction.”

                      Says the man who claims his specific God has intentionally intelligently designed cancer to cause suffering and pain in children. But he loves you, John!

                      Like

                    23. “Says the man who claims his specific God has intentionally intelligently designed cancer to cause suffering and pain in children.”

                      I never said anything like that.
                      You are being dishonest. That shouldn’t bother you though because the universe is indifferent to stuff like that.

                      Like

                    24. “I never said anything like that.
                      You are being dishonest. That shouldn’t bother you though because the universe is indifferent to stuff like that.”

                      Ok, so let me ask another question then: Did your God intentionally and intelligently design cancer that can, and does, cause pain and suffering in children?

                      Like

                    25. I won’t answer that question unless you are willing to concede that ‘my God’ actually exists. So far, you haven’t invested anything philosophically in this conversation. I’m not interested in defending my theology when you refuse to explain your own.

                      Like

                    26. I don’t know your specific God. All the believers I meet have a different theology and view of God. If there was a single God, then there would be no need for all sects and denominations in the world today. It would be very clear to everyone. So no, I can’t concede to the very specific God that’s in your head. And, you haven’t provided any evidence or offered to introduce me to him so I can talk to him. I love to chat over coffee. Let’s meet. Bring him with you and we can talk this over a cup of dark roast.

                      I’ve been transparent the entire time. I have nothing to hide. I’m not defending evolution as a God or intelligent designer. It simply is, and we are here to observe it. I genuinely care about the well being of people and I do not believe in God. I don’t believe murder is objectively good for humans and that we need to take care of one another, illnesses and all. I’m fully aware that I was born, and I will die, and I will cease to exist. I don’t need to live in the hopes of an afterlife (which, again, has more theological implications).

                      I have no theology because I have no belief in God.

                      You are claiming a belief in a God. You have a theology. Yet you won’t answer questions that are very relevant to that theology.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    27. You’re dodging.
                      How disappointing.

                      All you need to is admit some “God” exists in order to move the conversation forward. Belief in some transcendent, intelligent, sentient, willful, mind is necessary to discuss theology.

                      You are claiming no belief in a God. This too is theology.

                      Like

                    28. You are redefining terms again, so I’ll need your help here. Theology is defined as “the study of the nature of God and religious belief.” I do not believe in God. I have no religious belief.

                      Why would I need to admit what I clearly don’t believe in? You are claiming the positive – that a transcendent, intelligent, sentient, willful mind is necessary. I have not made that claim. My questions are about your intelligent God that you claim exists and evidence is all around us. This is the positive claim you’ve made.

                      Let me know what I’m dodging and I’ll try and respond accordingly. I genuinely can’t know your specific God. You haven’t shared anything beyond you believe in him. Do you believe he created everything? Did he do it in 6 literal days? 7? Do you believe the earth is 6,000 years old or millions of years old? Do you agree with the Westboro Baptist church that claims God and that he hates fags? Do you side with Ken Ham (it sounds as though you might, based on similar arguments)? What about Rob Bell, who claims a theology of love and does not believe in Hell? Do you believe in Hell? Do you believe in Heaven? What stories in your holy book are real and what are metaphor/allegory? There are so many questions you haven’t yet answered. What would make you think that I would admit to your “God”?

                      Like

                    29. You don’t have to “admit to my ‘God’. You have to admit to the existence of some intelligence that transcends the natural universe. That’s it.
                      Otherwise, you have no reason to bitch about psychopaths killing people. It’s just evolution doing what evolution does.

                      Like

                    30. It is evolution doing what evolution does. I don’t blame it. It’s not an intelligent designer. I do not believe in any intelligence that transcends the natural universe. We could go down that path, in which case I could ask the age old question of who designed the designer? If a designer is required, then where does it end? Is your God the ‘root’ of all intelligent design? Did he just pop into existence out of nowhere? That would be absurd right, we all know you can’t get a washing machine from nothing!

                      I only bitch about those who are OK saying they believe in an imaginary being who “loves” them and intelligently and intentionally designed everything, and in the process they condone murder. I bitch about the bad ideas in imaginary things, not about psychopaths.

                      It is evolution doing what evolution does. I do not ascribe intent or design to evolution

                      Like

                    31. I see the trend. I have answered, and repeated, each of your questions.

                      Do you believe that God is loving?

                      Like

                    32. No, I do not believe that any God exists from any of the thousands of religions or minds of believers. I do not believe this because I have no need to invoke a supernatural being. I do not believe because there is no evidence in the observable universe. I do not need to invoke a god of the gaps for things I do not yet know.

                      You are claiming the affirmative, that an intelligent designer (that, of course, did not need to be intelligently designed himself) created everything in the observable universe. Do you believe this God is loving?

                      Like

                    33. Gary, my apologies for overtaking the comment thread here.

                      John, I recommend we move the conversation out of this comment thread. Feel free to email me (nate@theklaibers.com) with any follow up discussions. I can privately give you my phone number if you’d like to call and have a conversation. Also, if you ever find yourself through Ohio I would love to buy you a coffee or lunch (I’ll even pay for God’s, too, if you bring him!).

                      Like

                    34. You did answer, and your answer now opens up many more questions about your specific God and theology, but that can be another day.

                      “You got the guts to answer mine?” Wow. Sure.

                      I can look into history and see how we have evolved as a society. I happen to be in the here and now. There are humans in the past who had no problem with killing people based on their beliefs in imaginary beings. We have a collection of the torture devices they used. Humans used to enslave other humans. White men claimed superiority over all other races. Women were to be submissive to men and were not given the same rights as men.

                      Nowhere in here did a God step in to tell people to stop doing this or to guide them in a new direction (if he did, then he’s still responsible for this historical direction since he’s the intelligent designer of all). He didn’t step in and say “You know, I intentionally designed that human to create that torture device to bring pain to other humans, but now, I think I’ll do away with it…” Collectively, humans started to see there were better ways. Individuals and groups stood up to these people and provided better ways that didn’t result in pain and suffering. They worked for basic rights. They worked for peace. They sought out solutions that would aid us in survival and our lifespan. They stopped believing in imaginary beings. They learned. They realized it wasn’t a demon, that it was epilepsy. They realized it wasn’t a rain God. They realized it wasn’t a sun God.

                      Our brains have evolved. We have evolved as a species. We have evolved within communities and tribes. Our morals have evolved. We have survived (for now). Hopefully we can continue to make the future a better place for our descendants. No doubt our descendants will look back at us an laugh at how we did things.

                      I don’t need a mythical being to give me meaning in life. I don’t need a mythical being to tell me that suffering is bad (especially when said mythical being is responsible for so much of it in the first place). I don’t need the presence of a mythical being for me to care about suffering. Just because nature is indifferent doesn’t mean I am indifferent. I don’t need the promise of a mythical afterlife (that’s the goal, right? Otherwise why even care about God?) to live a good life right here and now.

                      This is always an interesting response to me. As if you need the security of a mythical being to understand suffering (which, based on your specific God it’s OK). Without this mythical being in your head you would go out and rape, kill, and steal (you know, all the stuff your God does in his holy book).

                      Like

                    35. Belief in God is not necessary to be a caring individual. I would never suggest otherwise.

                      You claim your sense of caring has evolved. You also claim that future, more-evolved generations will look back at you and laugh at your lack of intelligence. So it is reasonable to conclude that your answers are futile.

                      Like

                    36. “Belief in God is not necessary to be a caring individual. I would never suggest otherwise.”

                      God is not necessary to be a caring individual, so how does one become a caring individual? Would their caring arise from natural properties?

                      It’s either supernatural or not, right? Is there a middle ground?

                      Like

                    37. “I said: BELIEF in God is not necessary to be a caring individual. BELIEF in God is not necessary…”

                      Do you believe humans have free will?

                      Like

                    38. “Yes.
                      Humans have free will.

                      (See how easy it is getting me to answer questions?)”

                      Great. I do not believe (or BELIEVE) in God. I care about the well-being of other humans. I have no need for an imaginary being to care for humans. How could I do so?

                      Like

                    39. You do so because, again, you do not need to believe in God in order to have a sense of morality.

                      But if you’re going to suggest that your moral instincts are simply manifestations of evolution, then you cannot claim ‘caring’ is correct and ‘murder’ is incorrect. Both are merely products of evolution.

                      Like

                    40. “You do so because, again, you do not need to believe in God in order to have a sense of morality.”

                      And yet, I care for other human beings. How could I come to that without a belief in God? Could my caring come from natural causes?

                      Yes, they are products of evolution. I do not deny that. I have given you several examples of this throughout our own history. There are those who have come before us who believed murder was correct. It was the correct response to those who did not believe in God. It was the correct response to those who said the earth is not the center of everything. It was the correct response of a petty God who flooded his intentionally and intelligently designed creation, time and time again.

                      By your beliefs in an intentionally intelligent designer, then nothing can be created without that designer. Nothing. I can conclude with this that all murders have been designed by God, correct?

                      Like

                    41. “I can conclude with this that all murders have been designed by God, correct?”
                      Again.
                      I’m not answering this unless you acknowledge that God exists.

                      Right now, you haven’t explained why you’re upset with evolution for creating murderers.

                      Like

                    42. Right, you are a persecuted Christian doing the good work of your specific God! You are fighting the good fight.

                      If Jesus would be pleased with you, then, again, I really don’t want to be friends with him.

                      Like

                    43. Not answering. Again. I see a trend!

                      I do not ascribe design or intent to evolution. What, or who, should I be upset with? I have no imaginary being in my head. I do not anthropomorphize evolution. I can play my part in evolution by educating others on reality (the one that doesn’t include a killing God creator) and taking care of other human beings. I can educate my children. Hopefully we can collectively take care of each other. I’m still waiting for that God to step in to do so, but alas, he’s still MIA. Until then, as a human, I will do what I can.

                      Like

                    44. Yes, I am stuck with psychopaths. I do not need to claim an intentional and intelligent designer designed them to intentionally cause harm to other human beings. I don’t condone murder, and won’t support a designer (again, I do not ascribe intent or design to evolution) who believes that it’s OK.

                      Like

                    45. “I do not need to claim an intentional and intelligent designer designed them to intentionally cause harm to other human beings.”
                      Amen!
                      Glad you’ve finally taken ownership.

                      Now all you need do is admit that you actually do ‘condone murder’ and you’ll have a perfectly consistent theology.

                      Like

                    46. Can you please provide your definition of theology?

                      Why would I admit that I condone murder? Please elaborate.

                      Like

                    47. I ascribe no intent or design to evolution. No designer. It’s indifferent.

                      I’m not sure what’s irrational. I haven’t claimed that evolution designed natural events. They simply are. The same weather we have observed on other planets in our solar system. We know the variables that lead to the natural events. We can monitor them as humans. If I claimed evolution designed it, then yes, I would agree that condoning natural events would be irrational. Since I believe it’s indifferent, then I wouldn’t expect anything else. What is irrational?

                      Like

  3. What a shame Branyan. As soon as I read your use of the vernacular … ”Dude” in your last comment it was obvious you had lost the plot and had your arse handed to you!
    Nate’s argument is a keeper.
    Stick to comedy, JB …. you suck at apologetics.

    Like

  4. Yes.
    I think Jesus would be pleased to see Christianity standing firm against the onslaught of heresy.

    And this little throwaway comment is absolute gold, as it perfectly demonstrates that you are nothing but an indoctrinated arse.

    If the biblical character, Jesus the Nazarene were real he would not give as much as two figs about your particular brand of faith and what you consider heresy. In the bible stories, he was a Jew. Born a Jew, lived a Jew and died a Jew.
    If he had to be subject to the absolute garbage you espouse in the name of ”Jesus” he would likely be completely baffled first off, and then laugh his head off at you.

    Which is pretty much what everyone here is doing on this thread.

    Like

  5. Jesus doesn’t work out because of religion and that’s because Jesus was a ‘saint’ or a ‘martyr’ and that’s because he was a Jew.

    Jesus seriously stops working at that point because he was arrested for being a Jew (he was a politician/political figure in his day) and that was during a time of political change which was occurring then and that culture was following on from a much earlier pre Judaeo-Christian polytheistic history of that sort of area (including Ancient Egypt), which saw the god called ‘Yahweh’ as the devil and which, if any of it were given scholastic merit today would impromptu (not unlike some hypocritical Christians) treat Jesus as a ‘man’ and therefore, as a ‘sinner’…

    For people who can’t stand Judaeo-Christianity, that is a great phenomenon of human ignorance, possibly the greatest our current culture can imagine.

    Like

Leave a comment