I quit the RC religion in the Spring of 1957 while I was in college.
Months later as I was enjoying my new intellectual and emotional freedom, I heard the “God is love” mantra. I had never heard it and for a moment it tempted me.
Then I realized that duty, not love, had been paramount in the home I’d known. In another moment, as if an intuition bubbled up from somewhere, I told myself “No, it’s too late for that.”
Decades of happy agnostic atheism followed, agnostic because I never gave religion another thought.
Faith? unevidenced faith differs from evidenced faith.
You are great at provokin thought! I really apprecitate that!
That is why I love Tom. He challenges me! He confronts me with reasonable questions!
I think you may be on to something here. I often hear that people are looking for new religions or churches. I have never heard a Christian state that they simply want to know the facts, as in "I want to know what is real and worship a real god."
I remember people discussing in great detail about gods and no proof of gods right on this site a few years ago. Some of them sounded impressive but it was too much detail for me. Finally one of them said he was going to hear William Lane Craig speak that night. I asked him why. His answer was that "there still could be a god."
It would be my understanding that listening to this man would only take you in circles. You would have to end up right back where you started from.
The only reason to listen to WLC in this day and age is to induce a bad case of dyspepsia. It would be one thing if Craig had it in him to be objective regarding the existence or non-existence of a god. He doesn't. His biases are so ingrained as to make it impossible for him to consider an alternative to his faith.
Meanwhile, I suspect most of us would be open to the possibility of a god based on one simple matter – EVIDENCE – the one thing Craig and his ilk have never had and likely never will have.