Perhaps, when we die, God meets those who love him and allows those who don’t to vanish into the nothingness from which we all came. This really isn’t a bad prospect for the atheist because it is exactly what he was expecting anyway.

When you think about it, it actually is a bad prospect. We vanish into nonexistence because we had the wrong ideas in the world? I don't like that prospect at all. If there is a God as you describe, I would want him to reveal himself to me eventually.

Perhaps they simply go to another place where God isn’t.

Hey, I like that idea! The only problem is that sometimes things get boring in one place, and so I would kind of want to float back and forth between the two places, you know? Maybe I'll decide to be with one or the other for eternity - but I find that unlikely.

I just wonder what it would end up being like. Just look at what we have done with earth!

Yes, this begs the question of what this other-world would contain, and what we would be able to do with/against each other in such a world. Well, this universe was already planted with the capability for nuclear mass destruction, and the materials on Earth give us the stuff for all sorts of weapons and torture devices and manipulation tools, etc., so I really am not sure of how much worse it could be.

Maybe if we don’t achieve the appropriate perspective here, “heaven” will actually end up being hell!

There would also have to be a reason that your perspective can't change in hell/heaven. If it could change, then what's the point of this universe?

I understand and agree.

Respectfully,

Matt R

Anyway, I don't want to divert your attention any more. This is a fun discussion going on here. Keep it up!

(I use "deity" instead of "god" because I feel that it's more encompassing; it also has the added benefit of being gender neutral in the few cases where that could be an issue.)

But again, let me grant your point, and then ask: what, then, do you suppose will happen in Heaven? Will God continue to hide from us, even once we get there? Or will he reveal himself? And if he does, won't that cause people to begin to fear him, exactly as you described, and therefore cause them to cease loving him in the way he desires?

Good point! Your idea is very similar to the very idea that started me down my present path of thinking. It is a very good question, arguably the best I have ever heard.

I think that after this life, humans will have an empirical experience with God. At that point, it will be too late to make a “free-will” decision to love God. At that point, we will be influenced by possible fear of God or greed to use subservience to God to gain benefits from him. Basically, it will be too late to make a real decision. This is why I think that humans must choose here in this life whether they want to love God. It is possible to not believe in God here, after this life, I think it will be impossible.

… if, as you say, the evidence for an afterlife is not readily detectable to our senses, then could you really blame me or anyone else for not believing in such a place?

I do not blame you at all. I think it is possible to rationalize both the existence and non-existence of God. People do it every day. I think the choice is based the individuals free will. The question isn't "Is God possible or impossible" or "Is atheism possible or impossible". The question is "Do you want God or not?" I am a natural skeptic and I come here because I identify with your desire to approach life in a rational, logical, and responsible way. I have already become more rational and responsible as a result of communicating with you. I certainly do not “blame” you at all.

given that starting point, could you understand why some people would conclude that God either doesn't exist or doesn't care about our welfare, and in either case, is not worthy of our love and devotion? Wouldn't that be a reasonable conclusion given the facts available to us?

Yes, I think that it is perfectly possible to rationalize a non-God worldview. I think it is a reasonable conclusion. It is your choice. I do not find fault with you for coming to that conclusion.

And in the theodicy you've sketched, if the sole purpose of the world is as a testing ground for breeding worship, what would happen to people like us?

This, in my opinion, is a harder question for a theist than the problem of evil. It contains so many potential logical conflicts that it is a daunting question to answer. Here is my attempt…

I can think of three possible scenarios after this life is over.

Perhaps, when we die, God meets those who love him and allows those who don’t to vanish into the nothingness from which we all came. This really isn’t a bad prospect for the atheist because it is exactly what he was expecting anyway.

The other scenario would arise if we humans have an immortal and indestructible component to us. If even God cannot destroy this part of us, then those humans who do not choose God must go somewhere. Perhaps they simply go to another place where God isn’t. I don’t think that this other place necessarily has to be torture. Maybe it is a fine place to go and God just isn’t there. That would still accomplish God’s purpose in my theodicy. Maybe God loves people so much that he doesn’t even want to punish the ones who don’t believe in him, so he lets them have their own afterlife. I just wonder what it would end up being like. Just look at what we have done with earth!

I do have a third scenario which is entirely different. I am going to write an essay on it for my website, but I will give you the summary. Perhaps heaven and hell are the same place and the only difference is the perception of the people there. Maybe the whole purpose of this life is to achieve the appropriate perspective to allow the next life to be heavenly. Maybe if we don’t achieve the appropriate perspective here, “heaven” will actually end up being hell!

Respectfully,

Matt R

I find that if one wants answers to the great, eternal questions of life and the universe, religion seems to fill that void and is all too ready to do so. Atheism, on the other hand, certainly cannot answer those questions. However, I'd prefer remaining innocent rather than be given nonsensical solutions. I prefer reality over illusion, reason over doctrine, and understanding over dogma.

I think that you and I are similar in respect for a desire for answers and the belief that our answers should be rational. For many years I accepted popular Christian ideas about many things even though they were illogical. I knew they were illogical but there were no other answers I knew of out there and I was afraid to search on my own or develop my own ideas. I was afraid that by questioning, I would somehow be rebelling against God. I now realize that if there is a God, then he has given us our ability to reason and our understanding of God should be based on this tool that God has given us.

Believing that God is rational and can be understood in a rational manner puts me at odds with most religions because most religions end up appealing to the mysteriousness of God to answer the most difficult questions in life. I find this appeal to mysteriousness unacceptable. If God wants us to seek him, then it seems that he must be understandable.

My solution is to search for my entire life to discover the answers to the difficult questions. I equate my search for answers about God with the search for a cure for cancer or AIDS. I don't have any guarantee that God is out there, but my intuition tells me that he is. In the same way, researchers have no guarantee that a cure is out there, but they think there may be, so they search. I search for answers about God because I beleive that those answers are the important ones and will do much good for people who wonder about meaning.

I have already learned a few things that have filled me with vitality, joy, peace, and love for others. I truly have become a better person. I try to communicate this wonderful experience I have had to anyone who will listen. The challenge I face is that discussions about God bring up such strong emotions that sometimes people assume I am saying things that I am not. Sometimes people shut me out before I can explain that I just want to tell them about a wonderful experience that I have had.

In closing, I cannot tell you for sure that there is a God or what this God may be like, but I can tell you for a fact that I have discovered something that is greater than me. It makes me better and it makes my life better. I do not presume to be wiswer or smarter than you, I have already displayed my ignorance of scientific notation. I feel like a prospector who has struck it rich and I want to share the motherload.

If you are interested, I will tell you the few things I have learned and I think are true.

Respectfully,

Matt R

After reading my last comment, I can easily see why it hit you the wrong way. I meant that when someone has found something that has truly made them a better person, it is hard to argue with them about the source of the improvement. I didn't mean to suggest arrogance on your part.

I apologize about my last comment. Sorry about the misleading intention.

As to this discussion so far, I too agree. You seem to be a reasonable person, Matt R, and you're asking good questions. It seems to come across much better when one asks the questions, truly wondering what the answers are, rather than being under an illusion that one already knows the answers and asks questions in a defensive manner. You, Matt, are the former, and it is most appreciated.

I have been thinking of another point that I wanted to make, and thought I already wrote it. But, looking back, I can't find it. So, I will write that here, hoping I haven't missed it.

I find that if one wants answers to the great, eternal questions of life and the universe, religion seems to fill that void and is all too ready to do so. Atheism, on the other hand, certainly cannot answer those questions. However, I'd prefer remaining innocent rather than be given nonsensical solutions. I prefer reality over illusion, reason over doctrine, and understanding over dogma. And, thus, I remain an atheist, a secular humanist, a naturalist, and a rationalist. I am patient, and will wait until science, philosophy, and humanity can discover even more about the universe and provide us with a better understanding. And I am confident that we will progress, as I am that further discoveries will be based in naturalism.

I am very pleased to have this discussion with you and the others. It is very invigorating and interesting. Regarding your remarks:

Even if I fully grant the existence of Heaven, I don't think it helps the cause of theodicy all that much. Whether there is future happiness in store for us or not, the existence of pain and suffering now still needs to be explained. It wouldn't excuse the actions of a husband who beat his wife and children for him to apologize afterward and offer to take them away on a tropical vacation.

I agree. I don't see heaven as an apology or an attempt to make things right. I think it is more likely that what we see as "natural evil" could have some part in making "heaven" possible.

Also: You talked about fearing God, and said that the fact of his power would lead him to hide himself from us so as not to coerce our love. I don't necessarily agree with that. Power alone doesn't cause fear - I can think of many powerful people whom I would not be the least bit afraid of if I were to meet them. What causes fear is power wielded capriciously and without compassion or rationality.

See my response to Jacob R. I think this also answers you. If it does not, let me know and I will try to answer.

I have to close now due to time constraints. I will address the rest of your response later.

Respectfully,

Matt

On the other hand, some people felt that they became better people after leaving their religion, Blane Conklin for example:

Good point, but does this call the concept of God in general into question, or just Blane Conklin's former religion? I think that most if not all religions are a flawed attempt to reach God. I do not think reaching God is a matter of statutes and ceremony. I believe it is a matter of the heart and a desire to love.

Thank you for taking the time to reply to my comments. Your imput is appreciated.

Respectfully,

Matt R

Regarding the gravitational constant, I understand you much better now. Thank you. I am always amazed by what a paradign shift will do.

It's difficult to argue with someone when they say they are a better person. ;)

I am potentially mortified. I did not intend to infer that I am a better person than you or anyone else here or anywhere. My meaning was that I became a better person than I was before when I "gave my life to God". The post-God Matt is better than the pre-God Matt. I hope that clears up my meaning.

Respectfully,

Matt

But that very day, I also began thinking about moral and ethical questions. What would change? What would stay the same? In a phrase, how would I now live? And how would I relate to my wife and two small children? The answers might surprise you.

The initial answer is that nothing changed. I did not suddenly lose interest in the well-being of my children, nor want to cheat on my wife. I did not become a "heathen," with all the accompanying moral and ethical connotations.

The long-term answer is that I became a better human being. I found more compassion toward the billions of people I had never met. If the teeming masses of the world were no longer the concern of a supernatural being, then they just became mine.