Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Gooch's dad · 02-12-2003, 10:30 AM

I have seen the term 'robots' used a lot in the FWD threads. Twitch in particular seems to resort to this bizarre argument in trying to explain why we have free will to choose, or not choose, to love God.

I have seen this argument many times from Christians, as a response to "Why does God hide from his creation?". A Christian will often answer something along the lines of:

"Because he doesn't want people to be robots. We have to choose whether to believe in him and love him. If he were not hidden, then we would have no choice."

This is patently false. My mother didn't find it necessary to hide from me in order to avoid me being a robot, did she? Nor did she find it better to create a situation where I would love her simply based on some belief that she existed, in spite of never observing her presence.

No, she was there to raise me, and I loved her because she treated me like any good mother treats her child. Was I robbed of free will by this? No, of course not. There are plenty of examples of monstrous children who grow up to hate their parents, in spite of the good treatment they got from their parents.

Likewise, if God existed and was obviously real and present--i.e., he spoke to everybody and made it clear what his intentions were for humanity--then people could still choose to not love this God. It would in no way make humans into robots.

Cheers,

-Kelly

Phanes · 02-12-2003, 12:32 PM

With evidence, there is no need for faith, and without faith, God is nothing.

In other words, God apparently has to make it as irrational as possible to believe in him.

Pretty clearly an arbitrary decision on the theist's part. There's a million different degrees between no evidence and infallible truth. Maybe it would be too easy if God could be mathematically proven. But it's still obvious that the vast majority of theist's don't think there's no evidence for God either, even if it's just that fuzzy feeling they get when they pray. Why God should settle on this given amount vs. that given amount between the two is beyond me. Maybe he should have made (more?) logical contradictions involved in believing in Him; now that would be a real test of faith.

Of course, I don't know what purpose "testing" is supposed to have at all, since God knows the second we're born, or even a billion years before.

:banghead:

christ-on-a-stick · 02-12-2003, 01:46 PM

Kelly,

I agree with you 100%. In fact, I would go further to say that as long as God refuses to "show himself" so that there is no doubt for anyone that he exists, that we are incapable of making a choice that we should be held "accountable" for.

After all, what is a choice if it is not an informed choice? How can we be held accountable for decisions based on incomplete facts that were *intentionally* withheld from us, even those of us who searched earnestly, yet in vain?

If an all-powerful God existed, he would be perfectly capable of making himself clearly and undeniably evident to every sentient person on earth. This would in no way negate our ability to choose to follow him, and if I understand Xian doctrine correctly, it's not just belief in God that is required for salvation but devotion to ("accepting" Jesus and all that).

After all, even the Debbil and Demons believe , right? Doesn't make them "saved". If they *knew* for a fact that God existed and had the free will to rebelled against him anyway, why should humans not be afforded the same opportunity?

Gooch's dad · 02-12-2003, 01:56 PM

coas,

As crazy as it may sound, it is an ancient part of Christian doctrine that belief *without* evidence is better than belief *with* evidence.

It dates back to Augustine, who used the same argument you're using about devils and demons. He said they believed in God, but did so because it was obvious to them. So his twisted version of logic told him that faith somehow must be really really good, since we humans don't have actual evidence to go by.

Isn't that one of the strangest ideas you've heard?

-Kelly

christ-on-a-stick · 02-12-2003, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Isn't that one of the strangest ideas you've heard?

Without question.

It's like Bizzaro-World.... gullibility is a virtue, skepticism a vice...

Ah well, I guess I should know better than to expect it to make any sense.

Shadowy Man · 02-12-2003, 02:09 PM

Well, I think of it as a defensive strategy.

If you want people to follow your religion, but you want it to be immune to philosophical attack, you just state that your god can't be proven, and in fact, has to remain hidden. That way, when no one can find him, it's proof that he is there.

Kind of like those Iraqi weapons of mass destruction: "The fact that we can't find them is proof that they are hidden."

To me, it is yet another indicator that the gods are obviously man-made creations.

JEST2ASK · 02-12-2003, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shadowy Man
Well, I think of it as a defensive strategy.

If you want people to follow your religion, but you want it to be immune to philosophical attack, you just state that your god can't be proven, and in fact, has to remain hidden. That way, when no one can find him, it's proof that he is there.

Kind of like those Iraqi weapons of mass destruction: "The fact that we can't find them is proof that they are hidden."

To me, it is yet another indicator that the gods are obviously man-made creations.

I wonder if perhaps the hiddeness of God is not the result of science and skeptical inquiry. In the O.T. we see God showing himself indiscriminately (according to the bible e.g. a pillar of fire and cloud of smoke and numerous other such manisfestation, seen by believers and non-belivers alike) for the stated purpose that they may know God. It seems to me that most Theist want it both ways. Hey look around you listen to the testimonies is that not proof enough for you / God-Jesus- can only be seen through faith. Well choose one or the other:banghead: either the bible is true or it isn't ... Ok enough ... sorry ...

Shadownought · 02-12-2003, 08:16 PM

Maybe God's afraid that if somebody found him, they'd turn him in to the government for weird medical experiments.

Phanes · 02-12-2003, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shadownought
Maybe God's afraid that if somebody found him, they'd turn him in to the government for weird medical experiments.

Or maybe he's worried he'll be held accountable for a huge list of crimes against humanity.

02-12-2003, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gooch's dad
coas,

As crazy as it may sound, it is an ancient part of Christian doctrine that belief *without* evidence is better than belief *with* evidence.

It dates back to Augustine, who used the same argument you're using about devils and demons. He said they believed in God, but did so because it was obvious to them. So his twisted version of logic told him that faith somehow must be really really good, since we humans don't have actual evidence to go by.

Isn't that one of the strangest ideas you've heard?

-Kelly

Not at all. Augustine was right because to have some evidence is very dangerous. It makes one lukewarm and that is why some Christians can't seem quench their smoldering fire while we are disgusted by the smoke of their burning sulfer.

02-12-2003, 10:30 AM	#1
Gooch's dad Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Madison WI USA Posts: 3,508	God hides so that we're not robots? Silly. I have seen the term 'robots' used a lot in the FWD threads. Twitch in particular seems to resort to this bizarre argument in trying to explain why we have free will to choose, or not choose, to love God. I have seen this argument many times from Christians, as a response to "Why does God hide from his creation?". A Christian will often answer something along the lines of: "Because he doesn't want people to be robots. We have to choose whether to believe in him and love him. If he were not hidden, then we would have no choice." This is patently false. My mother didn't find it necessary to hide from me in order to avoid me being a robot, did she? Nor did she find it better to create a situation where I would love her simply based on some belief that she existed, in spite of never observing her presence. No, she was there to raise me, and I loved her because she treated me like any good mother treats her child. Was I robbed of free will by this? No, of course not. There are plenty of examples of monstrous children who grow up to hate their parents, in spite of the good treatment they got from their parents. Likewise, if God existed and was obviously real and present--i.e., he spoke to everybody and made it clear what his intentions were for humanity--then people could still choose to not love this God. It would in no way make humans into robots. Cheers, -Kelly

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-12-2003, 12:32 PM	#2
Phanes Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Tallahassee Posts: 127	With evidence, there is no need for faith, and without faith, God is nothing. In other words, God apparently has to make it as irrational as possible to believe in him. Pretty clearly an arbitrary decision on the theist's part. There's a million different degrees between no evidence and infallible truth. Maybe it would be too easy if God could be mathematically proven. But it's still obvious that the vast majority of theist's don't think there's no evidence for God either, even if it's just that fuzzy feeling they get when they pray. Why God should settle on this given amount vs. that given amount between the two is beyond me. Maybe he should have made (more?) logical contradictions involved in believing in Him; now that would be a real test of faith. Of course, I don't know what purpose "testing" is supposed to have at all, since God knows the second we're born, or even a billion years before. :banghead:

02-12-2003, 01:46 PM	#3
christ-on-a-stick Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Durango, Colorado Posts: 7,116	Kelly, I agree with you 100%. In fact, I would go further to say that as long as God refuses to "show himself" so that there is no doubt for anyone that he exists, that we are incapable of making a choice that we should be held "accountable" for. After all, what is a choice if it is not an informed choice? How can we be held accountable for decisions based on incomplete facts that were intentionally withheld from us, even those of us who searched earnestly, yet in vain? If an all-powerful God existed, he would be perfectly capable of making himself clearly and undeniably evident to every sentient person on earth. This would in no way negate our ability to choose to follow him, and if I understand Xian doctrine correctly, it's not just belief in God that is required for salvation but devotion to ("accepting" Jesus and all that). After all, even the Debbil and Demons believe , right? Doesn't make them "saved". If they knew for a fact that God existed and had the free will to rebelled against him anyway, why should humans not be afforded the same opportunity?

02-12-2003, 01:56 PM	#4
Gooch's dad Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Madison WI USA Posts: 3,508	coas, As crazy as it may sound, it is an ancient part of Christian doctrine that belief without evidence is better than belief with evidence. It dates back to Augustine, who used the same argument you're using about devils and demons. He said they believed in God, but did so because it was obvious to them. So his twisted version of logic told him that faith somehow must be really really good, since we humans don't have actual evidence to go by. Isn't that one of the strangest ideas you've heard? -Kelly

02-12-2003, 02:09 PM	#6
Shadowy Man Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Shadowy Planet Posts: 7,585	Well, I think of it as a defensive strategy. If you want people to follow your religion, but you want it to be immune to philosophical attack, you just state that your god can't be proven, and in fact, has to remain hidden. That way, when no one can find him, it's proof that he is there. Kind of like those Iraqi weapons of mass destruction: "The fact that we can't find them is proof that they are hidden." To me, it is yet another indicator that the gods are obviously man-made creations.

02-12-2003, 08:16 PM	#8
Shadownought Regular Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: United States Posts: 209	Maybe God's afraid that if somebody found him, they'd turn him in to the government for weird medical experiments.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.