Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


THE NOTION OF GOD AS ALL-POWERFUL CAN BE WISHFUL THINKING

Books like The Case for Faith * have hypocrites like Peter Kreeft who said of Rabbi Harold Kushner’s book, When Bad Things Happen to Good People, that Kushner’s God who doesn’t have the power to eradicate all suffering but is doing his best is not worth believing in (page 52, The Case for Faith). Kreeft means he doesn’t want to believe in this God. This is a terrible insult to a God who might be trying his best. Surely a God who suffers for us to try and help us is better than Kreeft’s God who is perfectly happy in Heaven and who doesn’t need to struggle? Which God is the best role model?
 
It is interesting that Kreeft is admitting that he will not believe in a God unless God is worth believing in. He only believes for himself and not God at all. He is declaring what he thinks worth believing is more important than God.
 
On page 63, Kreeft says that because we wrecked the world with our sin, God has the right to just forsake us and leave us in the mess. It was our choice and so he couldn’t be accused of being unfair. But then Kreeft says that he doesn’t see how we could love God if he did that so God became man in Jesus Christ to sort it all out and bring us to repentance. God helped because God is loving. So if God didn't help he would be degrading himself by being hard and unloving. So it follows then that Kreeft is wrong to say God had the right to forsake us!
 
Kreeft on page 74 quotes the Protestant theologian John Stott, as saying that he wouldn’t be able to believe in God if God hadn’t participated in human suffering and done something about it by becoming man to die a horrendous death on the cross. Again we see the theme, “I don’t care what God is. I will believe what I want about God. It’s me, me, me. Even if I suffer for this God, I am suffering for my pride and its not really God I am suffering for.” Since unfair suffering is the big objection to belief in God, it follows then that faith should start with the cross not with reasoning that there is a God and then deciding he died on the cross. Also it wouldn’t be very human to believe in God without being horrified about human suffering and wondering what God did about it. If God is about love then we have to start with the cross and reason from that point that there is a God. The apostle Paul said he knew nothing but the cross of Christ and focused on nothing else. The bottom line is that we end up worrying more about suffering, ourselves, than God. Again this is all about pleasing yourself and not really about God.
 
Not surprisingly Kreeft says that nobody is really morally good and quotes Isaiah from the Bible to argue that all our good works are filthy rags before God because they are stained with self-interest (page 61). So Kreeft then should admit that his beliefs in God are more to do with self-interest than concern for truth or even God! Kreeft is Peter Kreeft’s real God and God is his smokescreen.

Kreeft is just a preacher and representative of standard Christianity.  What he says then reflects on the religion as a whole.