“By “pathetic,” I mean that they aren’t even plausible, or clever, or troubling, or difficult to see through. They are formulaic, convenient, shallow, and logically incoherent.
I knew a man who survived Auschwitz (unlike most of his family), and lost any faith in God. While I believe in God, I didn’t have any glib answer for him, and I still don’t.”
Why would you be searching for a glib answer?
Any argument short of surviving a holocaust isn’t plausible?
Are you saying that because HE survived, he should be jumping for joy and thanking God?
Anyone who would criticize a Holocaust survivor for losing his faith is a glib, shallow person.
I knew a man who survived Auschwitz (unlike most of his family), and lost any faith in God. While I believe in God, I didn’t have any glib answer for him, and I still don’t.”
Why would you be searching for a glib answer?
Any argument short of surviving a holocaust isn’t plausible?
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
I think Arthur McGowan is referring to what happens to a person when they have a taste of Hell on Earth; when they see the worst evils being done by human beings to other human beings, and what this does to one’s faith.
It’s the “how could God allow people to do this” argument. A very convincing one for atheists, strangely enough, but one that even affects those strong in their belief of God.
The Nazis knew this. A particularly horrifying example was from no less than Dr. Josef Mengele ( http://www.mengele.dk/witnesses.htm ):
“One morning in July 1944 I spotted my mother among a long line of women moving toward the gas chamber. Mengele called me in and gave me an errand to the crematorium. He knew I would see my mother go to her death. A couple of days later he asked me if I still believed in God.”
It’s very difficult to discuss airy theological concepts with people who have experienced such things. Not that the concepts are incorrect, mind you, just difficult.
I think that’s what Arthur McGowan is hinting at.