Now there are lessons here beyond what I’ll write about, but his conversion is troubling. Not that it causes me to doubt. It’s troubling because Morgan represents who we are as human beings, dumb, most of us, most of the time. I see absolutely no connection with those two questions and the conclusion he came to. You see, skeptics do not have to say what would convince them to believe. God should already know. So why isn’t he doing anything to convince us otherwise? I’ve already written my answer to the second question right here, which also answers the first question, why I don’t believe.
Morgan’s testimony is that as human beings we respond to warmth and friendship, even online it appears. We gravitate to the beliefs of someone who is kind and gravitate away from the beliefs of people who are unkind.
Damn I wish it weren’t so, but it is. My claim is that if this is who we are as human beings then we need a reality check based in the sciences. We cannot simply fumble through our lives adopting the beliefs of the people we like, or beliefs that tell a compelling story of love. We need to demand evidence, cold hard evidence if possible, before we’ll believe.
I have been asked what would convince me Christianity is true. Let me answer this question. . . .
Now, I wouldn’t require all of this to believe. I cannot say how much of this I might need to believe. But I certainly need some of it. If it were offered, I’d believe. However, if I was convinced Christianity is true and Jesus arose from the grave, and if I must believe in such a barbaric God, I would believe, yes, but I could still not worship such a barbaric God. I would fear such a Supreme Being, since he has such great power, but I’d still view him as a thug, a despicable tyrant, a devil in disguise; unless Christianity was revised.
This shows us, indeed, why atheism is a pointless preoccupation for the Christian apologist: Even if the atheist were to believe in God, he would still not be saved. He would not even be almost saved; he would just be sulking and resentful. He would be fearful of the creator of the universe and the sustainer of life, which would be beneficial for him in the long run, but he would still hate having his will thwarted and his personal desires unfulfilled. Among the many dreams that would be crushed would be the possibility of knowing everything in the universe, since if there is an omniscient creator, and you are not Him, then you don’t get to know everything.
“How can we possibly love God if He just isn’t good enough for us?” This is the eternal question from the foolish. No doubt, a tummyache would strike in short order, and the theological edifice would crumble under the weight of one person’s suffering.