Fire From Heaven and Broken Promises

Imagine two people making promises to you. The promises are basically the same: "Do this for me, and I will..." One promises to give you one million dollars. The other promises to give you a new house.

You do the deed, and go to the first person for the promised reward. Their response is something like this: "sorry, I don't have that money to give you right now," or "you have to wait until you die (wink, wink) to get that reward," or "sorry, that was a metaphor...the million dollars actually represents treasures of joy, happiness and fulfillment for doing what I want you to do," or "yeh, that promise was for someone else, not you. You just misinterpreted my words on that one."

You go to the second person for the promised reward. They give you keys to a new house; not a mansion, just a basic 3-bed, 2-bath ranch. But, at least, they kept the promise. No tricks, no excuses, no blaming you for misunderstanding.

I have seen so many Christians try to excuse their God from failing to make the promises He makes in the Bible. They even go so far as to say that the Bible really is not their sacred book, their Source for their belief. Of course, if you ask them to explain where their thinking and doctrine about God come from, their response is to accuse you of being unintelligent, belligerent, or simplistic.

But, the simple and plain truth is, that in the Bible, which is the Source of Christian doctrine and belief - whether certain Christians like it or not - are a truckload of promises that have not been kept, are not kept, and will never be kept (if God remains consistent with himself up to this point).

Which, fundamentally, makes God either (1) a liar, or (2) the Bible is really an evil, deceptive and destructive Source for doctrine, or (3) there is no God at all, and the Bible is - again - a powerfully destructive book because it appeals to people's hopes, dreams, aspirations, and faith...and it does not deliver because their is no Divine Being to back it up.

Now, what of this other person who made the promise and kept it? Who might that other person be? The Devil? Secularism? Science? Atheism? Hmmm...

Apart from the Devil (who probably does not exist, since there is no God), the others present a very attractive alternative to the Christian God. Why? Because at least they deliver. No, they do not deliver a mansion. Nor do they deliver the neat, perfect doctrinaire answer that ninety-nine percent of Christians like to believe their God offers (and can be summed up so easily in the "Statement of Doctrine" found in most, if not all, churches). But (and excuse my metaphor) it is the key to a new house. It is something.

In 1 Kings 18, there is a great story of the prophet Elijah confronting Ahab, the King of Israel who has turned to Baal worship. Elijah challenges Baal to prove himself in competition with God. Elijah dares for two bulls to be place on altars...the Baal prophets will pray to their God, Elijah will pray to his God (who he and the Bible claim is the one, true God). The Baal prophets pray and pray and pray. Nothing happens. Elijah mocks them. Nothing happens.

Then Elijah prays, and of course God answers by fire from heaven, consuming Elijah's bull, the altar, and the bull and altar used by the Baal prophets.

Elijah makes this great challenge to set up the whole deal: "let the god who answers by fire, let him be God!"

Remember Promise Keepers, that huge evangelical men's ministry stadium show that was hugely popular several years ago?

Promise Keeper? God? Not hardly! The so-called God of the Bible has been silent for a long, long, long time. Many hundreds of thousands of millions of faithful have prayed and prayed and prayed...and fasted...and prayed. No fire from heaven. No whisper in the wind. No million dollars. No key to a new house.

Nothing. If the god who answers by fire is truly God...then I think the atheists have made their point.

39 comments:

Anonymous said...

When it comes to prayer, Christians "count the hits and discount the misses." When God supposedly answers prayer they tell everyone. When God doesn't answer prayer they explain it away. They never allow themselves to actually be honest about prayer. It is a rigged enterprise from the outset, allowing nothing to count against their blind faith that God always does what is good and that he always answers a righteous prayer asked in faith that is according to his will.

GordonBlood said...

Well certainly the case you described might have been your experience John but it most certainly wasnt mine. Jesus made it very clear that prayer should be, ultimately, a private thing so I dont tell anyone what I believe God has truly answered and what he hasnt. Have all my prayers been answered? No, of course not. But as I have said on this blog time after time, the entire bible is full of God not answering prayers to Jesus, to Paul, to the early Christians etc. The bible also has periods where God does indeed answer those prayers. But if we take those two things together our conclusion should be that we have no reason to suspect that God will answer multitudes of prayers. I am beginning to think unanswered prayer played a serious part in Brothercrows loss of faith as he seems to address this far more then any other topic or issue.

Don Martin said...

gordonblood, of course unanswered prayer played a huge role in my deconversion. That and unkept promises. As a pastor, seeing these two realities - unanswered prayer, unkept promises - repeated literally thousands of times in others lives. Add to that immense suffering - not the American evangelical kind - the kind I personally witnessed in Uganda, West Africa, Czech Republic, Haiti. People dying of starvation, rampant disease, children living under buildings and in sewers, surviving by prostitution and pornography. Prosperity preachers preying on the people's hopes and fears. Add to that profound inconsistencies in the bible that no amount of theological or so-called intellectual philosophical posturing or reasonable scientific inquiry could answer.

Gordonblood, you may represent a very small, very unique brand of Christianity that accepts those inconsistencies...but me and 98% of the Christians I knew could not.

"Call to Me, and I will answer you." He did not. Therefore, He either lied, those who bore witness to him lied, or he does not exist. Honestly, the easier path is to believe he does not exist. God as a liar is too terrifying to consider as an actual reality; others lying about him...OK, I can accept that...and actually probably bounce between extreme atheism and agnosticism on those two poles.

To cavalierly dismiss unanswered prayer as no big deal, however, is irresponsible and (to me, at least) profoundly dishonest and inconsistent with Christian tradition. "We have no reason to suspect that God will answer multitudes of prayers." I doubt you could find a dozen Christians who would accept that statement as definitive.

Anonymous said...

Yes, it is much better to be an unbeliever. Your success rate is about the same, and you don't have all the guilt.

So even if there is some sort of God around, he/she still hasn't made himself worthy of worship and trust.

GordonBlood said...

Well Brothercrow lets see:
The number of Christians on earth is approximately 2,000,000,000. I assume nearly all of them pray. Like you I agree that God does not always answer prayers, and may only answer them in a way that may seem sporadic. However, I suggest it is impossible to draw the logical link between his not answering prayer and his existence. I will agree that it reduces the likelihood of his existence if that is the only data we were going on, but of course it isnt. Of course many persons would say that have had prayers answered, so that completely invalidates the point. By multitudes of prayers I essentially referred to constantly interfering in the natural world in an entirely obvious way. This is ultimately a question of theodicy really and im not going to discuss on a blog what entire books can only touch on.

Michael Ejercito said...

Why should God answer our prayers? What does He owe us?

He has every right to abandon us. After all, we are less to Him than intestinal bacteria would be to us.

Michael Ejercito said...


So even if there is some sort of God around, he/she still hasn't made himself worthy of worship and trust.

His worthiness of our worship and trust comes from His power to grant us eternal pleasure in Heaven or condemn us eternal torment in Hell.

The Bible is clear on the fate of the unbeliever.

Nick said...

Michael, it always reduces to threats and Might Makes Right, doesn't it? Hell is the ultimate weapon of the evangelical mind control system (see Edmund Cohen, The Mind of the Bible Believer). Such a being as you describe would deserve neither worship or trust, so your statement refutes itself.

As for prayer, you are so right Brother Crow. As a former Christian I witnessed its futility repeatedly, and still do among friends who continue to engage in the practice. I think Flew stated it best in his classic Theology and Falsification: "Now it often seems to people who are not religious as if there was no conceivable event or series of events the occurrence of which would be admitted by sophisticated religious people to be a sufficient reason for conceding "There wasn't a God after all" or "God does not really love us then." Someone tells us that God loves us as a father loves his children. We are reassured. But then we see a child dying of inoperable cancer of the throat. His earthly father is driven frantic in his efforts to help, but his Heavenly Father reveals no obvious sign of concern."

We must start looking for real solutions to our problems and stop entertaining hopeful but unproductive fantasies.

Gribble The Munchkin said...

The ineffectiveness of prayer can be seen at a glance around us. With all those churches praying so hard every sunday for peace or the end to various famines or suchlike, and yet the famines persist and the wars continue. The only time they end is when actual people put an end to them. Now the Christians may say this s god working through people, but then they are talking about god removing the free will of these people and that immediately lands them in the problem of evil vs free will arguement.

If prayer really worked, is this the kind of world we'd be in? No of course not, we'd be surrounded by awesome biblical style miracles, there'd be food a plenty, dictators would be regularly smited with columns of golden fire, etc.

Lets face it, you can only get a result out of prayer if the result was possible without prayer.

zilch said...

After reading a number of Michael Ejército's comments, I'm still not sure whether he's a singularly humorless fundamentalist, or a superb deadpan atheist spoof of one. And of course asking him is no use: one way or the other, he'll stay in character. In either case, he's certainly doing the work of the Devil by portraying fundamentalism in an exceedingly unattractive light.

Michael Ejercito said...


If prayer really worked, is this the kind of world we'd be in? No of course not, we'd be surrounded by awesome biblical style miracles, there'd be food a plenty, dictators would be regularly smited with columns of golden fire, etc.

Prayer is based on the presumption that the Lord of Lords and King of Kings owes us any favors.

Michael Ejercito said...

After reading a number of Michael Ejército's comments, I'm still not sure whether he's a singularly humorless fundamentalist, or a superb deadpan atheist spoof of one.
My statements are based upon Scripture and real-world observation.

The Scriptures record that God only did favors for a few thousand people throughout the entire Bible, out of a population of tens of millions.

zilch said...

Michael Ejército says:

My statements are based upon Scripture and real-world observation.

That would still be true for either the fundamentalist or the spoof! Superb!

kachow007 said...

God knows what is good or bad for you better than you know for yourself(he created you therefore He knows EVERY little detail about you), He can see the future and knows what will happen if He allows the prayer to be answered or not.....sometimes our prayers are answered by "unanswered" prayers...you may not like that God hasn't answered your prayer at a certain point, but later on you realize that it was best that your prayer wasn't answered and you will in some circumstances thank God for not allowing your prayer to go through how you wanted it to. God has never broken a promise and He never will. It is contradictory to His character.

Don Martin said...

kachow...nope, that one won't work. How can prayers for justice, for guidance, for healing of another...be wrong or selfish? Those prayers are in complete agreement with God's expressed will and action in the Bible itself. Plus, it does not take into account the fact that often the "God knows best" philosophy only leads to worse and worse things happening. I dare you to tell me in a way that is not insulting how it can be in my best interests to pray for a cure for cancer...no, I don't have it...and how it can be reconciled that the best answer to prayer is an unanswered prayer.

Harry H. McCall said...

This post of brother crow is an honest look at reality.

gordonblood stated: "The bible also has periods where God does indeed answer those prayers."
An excellent example of Circular Reasoning! That's like using a Ford commercial to prove a Ford car is the best of all since Ford said so.

michael ejercito: "Why should God answer our prayers? What does He owe us?
He has every right to abandon us. After all, we are less to Him than intestinal bacteria would be to us.

It sure sounds like we have a 5 point Calvinist here.

So michael, why should the unsaved burn in Hell, Ah yes! Now God owes us something. But I'm sure "God does not send anyone to Hell, they sent themselves." How about a rephrase michael: "The Hitler did not send the Jews to the death camps, they sent themselves!" Amen?

I asked a Fundamentalist Christian from Bob Jones University this:

If I and my goons showed up at your church one Sunday and told your pastor and congregation that unless I received $500 per month for “protection” starting next Sunday, I would have my goons would burn you church to the ground.

Question: Would you and congregation go into 24 hour a day prayer sessions and “claim the Biblical promises of Luke 9:54 “…Lord, do you want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” or better yet: John 14:13-14 “And whatever you ask in My name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.”

Would you claim in faith the above scriptures and cast your trust totally upon the Lord. OR Would you call the police?

After requesting some time to think about it, he returned the next day and said: “We would pray, but we would also call the police.” Amen brother Michael! You got us ole Atheist again. God almighty backs up His promises with the prayer of his righteous: James 5:16b “…The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.”

As a religion professor once said, “There’s always a reason given as to why prayer did or did not work.”

On a side note: A rural church burnt to the ground last week when a lighting strike hit the steeple (or what I call a “Prayer Antenna”). Now brother michael: Was that because they sinned before the Lord…was it an “Act of nature” or was it “God acting up”?

Better yet! If churches truly have faith in God, then why do all steeple crosses I see have a lighting rod sticking out of its top? Again, why not the congregation simply prove its total trust in the Lord by canceling all their property insurance or simply just leaving the church doors unlocked during the week? At least, brother michael, they should do as Gideon did in Judges 6 36-40 and put their fleece out to prove the Lord. Amen?

Michael Ejercito said...

But I'm sure "God does not send anyone to Hell, they sent themselves." How about a rephrase michael: "The Hitler did not send the Jews to the death camps, they sent themselves!" Amen?
So you equate God with Hitler?
Lord, do you want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?
Maybe you should have read Luke 9:54. Jesus refused to call fire from Heaven.

Better yet! If churches truly have faith in God, then why do all steeple crosses I see have a lighting rod sticking out of its top? Again, why not the congregation simply prove its total trust in the Lord by canceling all their property insurance or simply just leaving the church doors unlocked during the week? At least, brother michael, they should do as Gideon did in Judges 6 36-40 and put their fleece out to prove the Lord. Amen?

God never said anything about stopping lightning strikes.

Michael Ejercito said...



kachow...nope, that one won't work. How can prayers for justice, for guidance, for healing of another...be wrong or selfish? Those prayers are in complete agreement with God's expressed will and action in the Bible itself. Plus, it does not take into account the fact that often the "God knows best" philosophy only leads to worse and worse things happening. I dare you to tell me in a way that is not insulting how it can be in my best interests to pray for a cure for cancer...no, I don't have it...and how it can be reconciled that the best answer to prayer is an unanswered prayer.

So your criticism of God is that He does not give us what we want, whenever we want it.

There is a word for people who whine that they can not have what they want, whenever they want it; it escapes me at the moment...

Harry H. McCall said...

michael ejercito "Maybe you should have read Luke 9:54. Jesus refused to call fire from Heaven.

But he could have just as I quoted the disciples having asked...just as Elijah did on Mt. Carmel (since the actions of Jesus are modeled on Moses in Matthew and Elijah in Luke).
You stated:
God never said anything about stopping lightning strikes.

But God has given Benny Hinn the power to heal the sick. He has given Mike Murdock the keys of wisdom. He has given Richard Roberts the word of healing. Pat Robinson can pray away a hurricane. Don’t believe me? Well, just turn on you TV michael and behold the wonders of the Lord in action or do you Calvinist not accept the gift of healing and tongues today?

kachow007 said...

Do you want to know what I think? I think that people who ask God for something and it doesn't go the way they want become angry and refuse to let God tell them why their prayer wasn't answered the way they wanted it to and then you also refuse to believe that God has His own way of doing things. You become angry because it's not what you wanted the way that you wanted it to be. I have no idea why God has not answered yours and millions of other peoples' prayers for a cure for cancer. I don't have all the answers and neither do you. I just have to believe that God has his own way of working out things that ultimately will be good for all. I can't question God's authority because I can't even come close to fully understanding why He works the way He does.........I just have to submit to Him and have faith that He will do what is best for everybody.

Harry H. McCall said...

kachow007 You are simply a Christian and believe in your Judao-Christian God because this was the social structure you were born into. If this were India, I’d probably be talking to kachow007 the Hindu.

You might just want to be sure your church checks the ground connection on the steeple. An “Act of God” just might be heading your way in the form of lighting.

Nick said...

On the subject of lightning rods, when Ben Franklin first proposed them the clergy of the day were against the idea, possibly on the grounds that one shouldn't tempt god (Andrew Dickson White, A History of the Warfare of Science With Theology in Christendom). Just as the clergy opposed reducing the pain of childbirth on women on the grounds that god had prescribed painful birth in the scriptures: To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
Genesis 3:15-17

How many Christians today oppose lighting rods or the use of modern medicine in hospital births? It's not the God of the bible that has made them better, its the enlightenment values of the modern western world.

Harry H. McCall said...

Well said Sea Vedder!
If it were not for modern medicine, I would have died over 30 years ago.

The Christian religious mind usually operates on two levels: 1. the non-critical mind of faith used in the worship of God and 2. the mind of a stock broker who carefully analyzes every point with a critical mind before making a decision in the secular world.

When it comes to faith, the human brain seems to get “Dumbed down”.

kachow007 said...

No actually that is where you would be wrong. I was not raised in a predominatelty Christian household.....my faith was my own decision not anybody else's. I made the choice, no one can force you to believe something....at least not for long. I think that there will be no lightning bolts coming my way, but thank you for your concern.

Harry H. McCall said...

Kachowoo7 stated: I made the choice, no one can force you to believe something....at least not for long.

If your statement is a truism, than just what happened all the Christians in the eastern part of the old Roman Empire as Islam swept west? Most all those former Christian countries are still Moslem today.

Nick said...

Michael Ejercito said...
"So you equate God with Hitler?"
Yes, at least your god, Michael.
Think about this, all those unsaved souls who suffered and died in the Nazi concentration camps (presumably including all Jews as they did not believe in Jesus) upon death found themselves sentenced to God's eternal concentration camp in the lake of fire, suffering far worse things than anything inflicted by the Nazis. Their suffering on earth was limited to this lifetime, but your god will torture them forever and ever without end! And please no nonsense about people choosing to go to hell, "Anne Frank, you have no one to blame but yourself for being cast into everlasting fire."

Michael Ejercito said...

Think about this, all those unsaved souls who suffered and died in the Nazi concentration camps (presumably including all Jews as they did not believe in Jesus) upon death found themselves sentenced to God's eternal concentration camp in the lake of fire, suffering far worse things than anything inflicted by the Nazis. Their suffering on earth was limited to this lifetime, but your god will torture them forever and ever without end! And please no nonsense about people choosing to go to hell, "Anne Frank, you have no one to blame but yourself for being cast into everlasting fire."
God chooses to punish those who defy Him and His law.

Unlike prisons in the physical Universe, everyone in the lake of fire is guilty.

Nick said...

God chooses to punish those who defy Him and His law. I'm glad you understand it is God's choice. To make a choice is to choose between options, so God could choose not to torture people forever but decides to do it anyway. Just like Hitler, only worse. Unlike prisons in the physical Universe The Universe is by definition the totality of all that exists. I'm happy to know you admit your lake of fire is imaginary, just like your invisible magic demon god. everyone in the lake of fire is guilty. Yes Michael, of the horrendous "crime" of being born.

kachow007 said...

Yes, the countries may have a religion that is set for the nation, but that does not mean that every person is going to follow that religion. Have you ever heard of underground churches and services? That's what happens when the govt. tries to control religion and issues like that.

Michael Ejercito said...

Just like Hitler, only worse. Unlike prisons in the physical Universe The Universe is by definition the totality of all that exists.
Note that I wrote physical Universe, which implies a subset of the Universe.

Nick said...

And the first annual Spot the Spoof Award goes to...

phys·i·cal
2. of or pertaining to that which is material: the physical universe; the physical sciences.

I take it you mean the Universe we observe is a subset of some supernatural realm, the dwelling place of God, angels, demons and resurrected god/man zombies. If our observable universe is a part of something larger that something is also natural, not supernatural. Supernaturalism presupposes the primacy of consciousness and that is self-contradictory.

On the subject of the original post, the effects of prayer are entirely psychological and amount to a kind of therapy in some cases. The best definition of prayer is talking to oneself for the simple reason that there is no one on the receiving end.

Goodnight everyone. Hope you enjoyed the show.

MD Med in Mumbai said...

Before saying that aeroplanes do not exist, a villager in a remore island needs to know what is an aeroplane first. In the same way, gefore saying that God does not exist, you have to define God. Without that there is no point of this website or any debate in the first place.

Christian_lawyer said...

Interesting to see people in denial.Its natural for any human to go into denial when his/her expectations are not met, thats a human trait. Such denial does not lead to a conclusion that God does not exist, his existence is only being denied by those who do not have faith even as little as a mustard. The book of Job in the Old Testament should show how a true believer would believe, very few men would have been afflicted by God as he was and for what? to prove Satan wrong, nothing else! no "constructive purpose". But Job did not go into denial; in fact he reiterated his faith and he not only survived but also prospered.

We seek to define actions by what we see and obviously, we cannot see as far or as much as God can; so an attempt to deny God merely because we cannot see beyond our our prayers that are not answered (million dollars, large house, change of ruler...)is in keeping with the fact that we are human...thats where faith matters and Jesus taught us just that..."Luke 17:6 The Lord answered, "If you had faith as big as a mustard seed, you could say to this mulberry tree, 'Pull yourself up by the roots and plant yourself in the sea!' and it would obey you." Alas! we do not have that faith and so we rue the broken promises

zilch said...

joby- correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that "being in denial" means something like "knowing that some state of affairs obtains, but refusing to acknowledge it". In the case of God, denial would mean "knowing that God exists, but denying, or not admitting, or refusing to acknowledge, that He exists". But the atheists here are not in denial, by this definition. We are saying, for whatever reasons, that we do not believe that God exists.

Following your usage of "denial", I could claim that you are "in denial" about Santa and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Of course, you could claim, as many Christians do, that deep down, we do recognize that God exists. But this is meaningless projection motivated by wishful thinking.

zilch said...

Oh, and dr.s.p.mathew- the problem with defining something before you can declare that it doesn't exist sounds reasonable. But it's likely to lead to an endless regress, if you're not talking about aeroplanes or butterflies, but supernatural beings or objects.

Consider: I claim that there is a perfect ice cream sundae, so perfect that it surpasses sex in enjoyment and brings everlasting peace to those who eat it. You claim such a sundae does not exist. I ask you to define this perfect sundae that does not exist. What do you say? How many scoops does this perfect sundae have? Is is a banana split? Whatever you say about this sundae, I can say that you have not defined the perfect sundae. You cannot define the undefinable, grasp the ungraspable, or unscrew the inscrutable, so there is no resolution. A waste of time, imho.

MD Med in Mumbai said...

As Zilch said "You cannot define the undefinable, grasp the ungraspable, or unscrew the inscrutable," so I am glad that atleast he is starting to define his idea of God. I hope we can arrive at a consensus on what defines God.
My definition of God [limited by my human understanding] would be that God is the Creator of all creation, omnipresent, all knowing, present in all dimensions, time and space.
Over to you guys, hope we can thrash out this issue soon!

Jonathan Lindvall said...

It seems to me the arguments here against the existence of God are primarily 1) that you think He made promises that He would do what we want Him to do, but hasn't fulfilled those promises; and 2) that many of us Christians try to defend His existence with silly, circular arguments. These sound to me like disappointments, but not rational arguments against a reality (or potential reality).

If one person claims to see something another person can't see, it is possible the first person is deluded or lying. It is also possible the second person is simply either blind or closing his eyes.

It seems to me rather silly for the first person to try to persuade the second, unless there is some over-riding reason the second one needs to see it. If the second person is unpersuaded, it is reasonable to dismiss or ignore these efforts, but it seems even more foolish for the second person to bother arguing against the first person unless he feels there is some danger in falsely claiming to see the thing in question.

In this case, we Christians see (or claim to see) a reality the non-Christians can't see. Our motivation in trying to persuade others could be our own pride (wanting to prove we are right). Or it could be that we are compassionate on those who don't see what we see, and don't want them to experience the results of that blindness. Or it could be that we really, honestly love God, believe He wants relationship with all of us, and know He is deeply grieved when we reject Him.

If God exists, and if He wants relationship with us, He is the one who must somehow break through into our awareness. If we refuse to acknowledge Him when He does, that's foolish. If we honestly don't see Him, it is better to not pretend (as many do, and claim to be Christians), but to still be open to the possibility that others who claim to see Him might be both truthful and rational.

Jesus told one man, “unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." If you don’t see it, that doesn’t mean it’s not there. If you can’t see radio waves, it simply means you don’t have a tuner with that capacity. If you claim to have been a Christian and didn’t see it, you weren’t actually born again. That doesn’t mean what you didn’t see wasn’t there.

All I’m suggesting is that those who don’t see God (and His kingdom) continue to be honest in doubting His existence, but be open to the possibility He might yet reveal Himself to you. Who knows? He might even use something in this discussion to begin that process.

Christian_lawyer said...

Zilch, Wikepedia has a longish but very complete definition of "Denial" as "Denial is a defense mechanism in which a person is faced with a fact that is too painful to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence. The subject may deny the reality of the unpleasant fact altogether (simple denial), admit the fact but deny its seriousness (minimisation) or admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility (transference)." Seems to describe the athiest's views on God to me esp re: broken promises.

Facing upto God and realizing that he and not we are in control is often painful, but it is a fact and we can pretend otherwise. I for one would not be prepared to believe that the molecules that constitute what you and I are randomly and without purpose came together to make us. I find a deliberate and loving purpose of an Almisghty God in creating you and me.

zilch said...

Joby- I'll go along with the wiki definition of "denial" in the sense of a defense mechanism. And "being in denial" would be an accurate description of someone who still believes in God, but does not want to believe, for whatever reason. But "denial" is not applicable to the atheists here, because we are not "denying" a painful fact; we are saying that the painful fact does not exist to be "denied", in the sense of "denial" as a defense mechanism. And if I understood Bro Crow correctly, he did not say that he is angry with God or doesn't want to face up to God because of the broken promises, but takes these broken promises as evidence that God (at least as depicted in the Bible) does not exist.

Are you in "denial" about the Tooth Fairy? We must be careful about not mixing the two senses of denial: the simple sense of negating something ("I deny that leprechauns, or God, exist") and the clinical sense of not facing something ("I deny that I have a drinking problem" when one has a drinking problem).

cheers (hic!) from sunny and cold Vienna, zilch