Raising a Skeptic

Periodically I start up conversations with religious people, mainly Christians, on some of the religious articles on Huffingtonpost. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/religion).

Some of them can be rather interesting, most are mundane but I’ve decided to start posting some of these mini debates and discussions here for people to read and comment on. But check back because I will keep this going as an on-going series.

Personally I think it important to engage in these types of discussions. Mainly for yourself, to better understand your own objections to certain beliefs.

Below is a recent conversation I had with what I believe is just a person who believes in general spirituality, but does believe in a god. Not really sure what this person believes but you will see what I mean.

Theist:

Suffering and separation are synonymous. Suffering is not our natural state, but it can awaken the desire in us to return to our natural state by the mere fact that we all seek to escape our suffering. If there is a wound on the body there is a separation from the natural state of well being which focuses our attention on healing that wound. Emotional and spiritual suffering is no different. It is a wound of separation from our natural state of being one with God, the Sacred, Eternal Spirit, etc…..The more separate we are from that natural union the more we long to return with it, so in a way suffering is a reminder of something missing and an indication of the need to awaken and return to what is natural in us which is God.

Collin:

Then why create the separation at all?

And what then of the suffering of animals?

Theist:

Did you write the response or did God write it?? Its a very logical answer to your question about why create the separation at all?? Your implication being that God did it.
Humans created it and we have the ability to end it as well. That is a hard concept for many because that implies we may actually be responsible for things we do.
I always tell people to explore the questions in depth for themselves if they truly want to know the answers. The question you are asking isn’t really something that a Huffpost reply is going to satisfy:)

Collin:

I ask these questions more to start discussion. I have explored the questions in depth as you say. Spent well over a year of my life combing through my then religion looking for these basic answers. What I found as Bart Ehrman calls “God’s Problem” is that the Bible fails to adequately answer the question of why we suffer.

I heard this separation from God argument many times and in some different forms I don’t really find it the least bit compelling.

But if I’m am understanding what you are saying here is that God created separation so that I may exist? Ok but why? Is there then separation in heaven? And if simply being in God’s presence is enough to prevent negative choice and suffering because of it then why is there fallen angels?

Not saying this is the ultimate slam dunk against the existence of God, but it is for sure one of the most compelling arguments.

Theist:

No I didn’t say God created separation at all. Humans willfully created the separation from god. We humans did it.
I do appreciate you wanting to start a discussion and I commend you for thinking about this problem.
One very big flaw in your search is that you said you read the Bible for a year. The one thing most people completely fail to understand about spiritual answers is that this isn’t merely an analytical quest.
When Buddha asked the same question about the nature of suffering, he didn’t pick up a book and start reading. He engaged in meditation, prayer, contemplation, etc…..and truly lived the quest of his search.

Im just using Buddha as an example here. He said Enlightenment is the end to all suffering. If you want enlightenment yourself live the 4 noble truths and walk the 8 fold noble path.
This is not a classroom mental activity. This is what people completely fail to understand in the modern world. Buddha, Jesus, all the great prophets, messengers, laid down very specific paths to have this very same question answered for yourself.

NOT ONE said read a book for a year, NOT ONE. In life if you want answers truly, you must be willing to TRULY do what it takes.
You read a book for a year and you are convinced that is close to a slam dunk against God. You have a lot more to explore!! Your choice!!

Collin:

What makes these type of discussions so difficult is it appears we aren’t both in agreement on what the definition of god is.

My initial arguments are assuming that the god in question is the Christian triune God, or perhaps any Abrahamic god.

No mediation or prayer or study is necessary to understand that the existence of suffering in our world is a philosophical problem for the concept of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, all powerful god. All that is needed is common sense and the ability to look at it objectively.

The Abrahamic religions are textual religions. And understanding of their respected texts is necessary to fully understand each’s tenets.

I find it interesting that you said Jesus (can’t speak on Buddha not familiar enough) never said to read a book. However in order to know that you would have had to have read a book.

I guess I do fail to understand that this isn’t a classroom activity, admittedly. But only because I don’t see apparently self evident value of mediation and prayer. In fact I see no value in it at all in terms of learning about anything but one’s own psyche.

Theist:

Your argument boils down to this, and I don’t mean it in a derogatory way. There is a way that has been laid down, but I don’t want to follow it. I want anwers my way.
I have spend years living and studying the worlds traditions and I can tell you respectfully that it is your own judgments that are keeping you from the answers.
I can’t go around saying that I want to be a brain surgeon but don’t see the value of Med school. Again, I am not being rude but that is what your argument boils down to.
You need to explore this issue seriously if youseriously want answers. Your choice!!

Collin:

Again you seem to approach the world’s religions and traditions from a point of their validity being self-evident and not requiring critical analysis not based on the supposed merits of their dogma or teachings but of their basis in truth. I don’t choose to follow the “way” that as been laid out like you said because I find no evidence for that “way’s” validity. So it isn’t a matter of me just not wanting to follow that way, I have judged it and found it lacking.

Theist:

You assume that I applied no critical analysis?? I personally to practice the mystical path of a religion, though I have studied and lived other ones than my current one. ALL of them lead to the same destination. Each one takes the traveller through different routes but the final arrival point is the same.
Lets just take Buddhism(not my practice) which clearly says that if you want enlightenment live the 4 noble truths and follow the eight fold path. I don’t know how much simpler and clearer he could have made it.
Again, not to be rude, but you are really caught in a circular logic that goes nowhere.
Its not about the vailidity being self-evident. I actually explored them for myself but part of exploration is actually doing what they say. You simply cannot say they are invalid withouth actually having live them. You cant claim to be more critical than me when you haven’t live them when I have.
Read the story of the saint Ramakrishna Paramhamsa from India. He practiced Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity and acheived “enlightenment” through all 3.
Religious paths and spirituality are not mutually exclusive.

Collin:

Ok I shouldn’t have presumed anything about what analysis you undertook.

But I want to focus on one thing you said:

“ALL [religions] of them lead to the same destination. Each one takes the traveller through different routes but the final arrival point is the same. ”

So a couple questions from that.

1. Do you believe this is true of literally every religion? Including rather new religions such as Mormonism or Scientology. Would you categorize Joseph Smith or Ron Hubbard as prophets as well?

2. Since all the religions lead to the same destination and I spent a majority of my life walking the path of Christianity then there is no need for me to explore the other faiths, correct? Because although Christianity may have a different path the end “enlightenment” goal should remain consistent.

Assuming the answer to number 2 is yes then my analysis of the Christian teachings and dogma should be accurate enough for me to make a determination on what you hold to be true religious/spiritual enlightenment.

So operating the realm of Christianity, then my personal experience and study on the teaching of its prophet [Jesus] do not lead me to any place similar to the one you proclaim. Which should the leave open the discussion to what the path of Christianity leads to.

Because all I can go on is what we believe Jesus to have said. And I don’t find anything in the quotes attributed to him to base your conclusion on.

More to come hopefully…

OK, Collin’s talk “Hiding your Athiesm: Benefits and Consequences on your Children ” is now online at Skeptographers!

Download MP3 here, or better yet, subscribe at http://skeptographers.com

Well, guess there’s no living with Collin now. Mr. Bigtime recorded an audio version of his “Hiding Your Non-Belief” series and submitted it to a newly-formed skeptical podcast forum Skeptographers.

Would you believe they accepted it? Even after hearing that southern accent of his!

He just heard yesterday that it will be “airing” on or around the September 20th episode… which I think means it’ll be the 3rd episode. Maybe Collin will elaborate/embellish further.

Seriously though, I congratulate him. He worked pretty hard on those essays and deserves the attention. Kudos to you, sir!
-R