This is the body of an email I sent to an old high-school friend. This transaction occurred a few months ago when Edwards was still in the running for president.
I hope you enjoy my retort and please feel free to give me pointers for discussions like this in the future.
But I am concerned that I straight out said that "Christians are weak." If I did, that sounds pretty sh**ty, and I do not want to be these things: caustic, sanctimonious, and self-righteous. These are unattractive traits people on all sides of this discussion are guilty of having, and these traits are immediately off-putting and do nothing but detract from the pure essence of discussion. And I am frequently called out for having all three of those qualitites. So I am working on that, and let me start this off with an apology.
Without defending that statement, let me turn it around and put it into this frame: As it is not easy to "do all the things that God asks me to do" (to obviously quote you), it is also not easy to live without a pre-ordained moral code and essentially be left to one's own devices to constantly search for the meaning of life - and I mean that literally. See, not having an afterlife or "great reward" to look forward to puts a lot more pressure, I personally feel, on finding out how I can make my own mortal and hopelessly organic existence not be a bleak and finite one. This is a difficult way to live - I would think at least as equally difficult as trying to live up to the impossible standard of Christ.
One thing that troubles me in regard to my devoutly Christian friends is touched on when you say "I give in to the things that go against what's been asked of me." What do you mean? What exactly are you giving in to? Now, I'm sure you might mean things like envy, jealousy, possibly personal thoughts leaning towards lust and maybe even feelings of greed. These are what you may call "sin" and I would call "unfortunate human survival instincts that are made more complicated by our unnatural and modern circumstances." I would think the equivalents of these "sins" would be found in the wild, along the lines of a jealous lion killing the cubs of a rival male. (But our souls are what seperate man from beast, so I suppose this argument is moot...?) I've forgotten exactly what it is Christ asked of us, that is, outside of loving one another and giving to the poor, but the rest of "what is asked of us" by way of reigning in and stamping out every other carnal desire inherently programmed into our biological makeup is not only absurd but invalidates what it means to be human, in fact, alive...and repressing our ability to express things like envy and lust only exacerbate the problem by denying them.
You write that Jesus teaches us not to worry and that we are looked after by God; that we should forsake all worldy possessions and "serve Him." This does create quite the paradox, does it not? Are we to, in this polluted state of the world, revert back to nature and trust that the Lord will guide us through life provided we devote our lives to Him, or do we keep our jobs, our homes, and the trappings of comfort that come with having a home (and by this I mean the bare essentials: blankets, pots, pans, and by all means, television sets)? God helps those who help themselves, correct? If God gives us an opportunity to better our lives we should see that as a blessing, no? A better paying job? That is a gift from God, right? Then what about the pay raise that comes with it? Is that a part of the blessing we are to keep, or do we give the rest to the church and the poor, lest we live in excess and therefore sin? I am confused.
I know the first portion of your reply to me was defending against my assertion that God is "needy"...I still am caught wondering what an omniopotent and omniscient being was doing if one did create our world and set the rules in the garden to begin with. "God's trying to teach me life lessons"...why not give us this knowledge in the beginning and avoid all of the trouble that comes with the learning process? Here is an argument I have heard since before my days at (name of private high school here): We are God's children and He loves us in the same way we humans love our children. Sometimes we allow our children to fail, although it hurts us to see them do it, and sometimes we punish them, although it hurts us to do it, but we do it so that our children will learn and become better people because of it. My question was often, "Why did God, if He is all-powerful, need children? Was he lonely?" The response was, "Well, why do people have children? They wanted someone to love." Noooo, people have children because they want their DNA to remain after they themselves have died. This is purely scientific and biological. This, however, does not detract from the fact we experience a real love for our offspring and mates, but this too can be reduced to a series of hormones being released and endorphins setting forth inside our brains. This does not mean that when I look at the people I love that what I feel is anything but the passion and devotion that I feel for them. I am just more, say, earthly in my understanding of its origins, and I reject any notion of a more mystical "soul-love" or anything transpiring in the spiritual realm.
Translating this into a reason for God to create humans, to me this says that God was either lonely or bored, wanted someone to boss around (another reason why humans have kids), or needed an extension of itself in order to be more fulfilled in its legacy. None of these options allow for a truly omniscient or omnipotent God. Hence, God had a "need," according to the way I think.
Of course, this is all coming (no doubt frustratingly so) from a person who does not believe in anything remotely similar to the God of the Bible, and is herself frustrated with the limited vision of what a God of the infinite Universe could actually be, which is something beyond any scope or concept a mortal mind could conjure. This is the main reason why the rule-making, smiteful God of the Bible is impossible to me - it is too fashioned after the "sinful" image of humanity than the great being who would have made the cosmos.
The heart of your email, which I appreciate more than I could ever qualify, is that Christians are to follow Christ, and that His "rules" are that we love God with every fiber that constructs us, and that we are to love our brethren with the same interest with which we "love" ourselves. The second of these instructions I have never had any qualm understanding as fundamental to human survival, because instinctively it is in our best interest to treat the people around us well so that they can help aid in our own survival. It sounds so stark bringing it down to such a basic premise of survival, but as organic beings, that is our M.O. It has not been easier for me to try to live according to this premise without the belief in God, although I try to live with this as a mantra, anyway.
I just cannot express to you enough how important it is that I seek understanding and ultimately acceptance for whatever "purpose" I think I may have for being born. There is no "purpose," really, except that my parents mated and I was born. What happened after that was merely a series of coincidences. I cannot fathom any "higher purpose." But this does not mean I take my existence for granted. See, I am not one of those people who laments the possibility that I may not have been conceived. You've heard someone say it before: "Ooh, think about it, if your mom and your dad hadn't gone to the same college, you wouldn't be here today!" OH NO! I hate to break it to everyone, but it wouldn't have mattered to you since you WOULD NOT BE HERE TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. Life is a series of random events that shape and mold us, and as sentient beings it is a part of our need to bring purpose to our lives, since we recognize we are mortal. For me, it is politics, family, and discussions such as these. For some people, it is Sudoku.
So here's some cud to chew, and I swear I have not tried to be sanctimonious or self-righteous. I too am not trying to "convince" you of anything; I believe that to be impossible and frankly, condescending. I love doing this and I take every opportunity to hone my skills at explaining my position.
I hope I represented myself as an atheist well without being condescending or obnoxious. I feel a bad attitude is the worst thing that can widen the divide between us as humans.