Zone1 Why is it so tough to believe in God?

[hobelim]

The deeper meaning of your imaginary conclusions

What imaginary conclusions? Thats kosher law has nothing whatever to do with what's for dinner and thats what Jesus meant when he said, "eat my flesh"?

Sure.

is that they all say something about you yourself, like interpreting a speech in the way you would say it. Try figuring out what drives you to come up with these narratives.

I figured that out years before I ever opened my mouth. It's the right thing to do. Don't worry about me. I'm cool.

Worry about yourself, your family, and your friends if you think that a person can eat their way into righteousness.

DERP

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

At least I won't be lonely since 70% of people in the world are not Christians. Also, I doubt that many who claim to be Christian really follow all of Jesus' teachings so Heaven might be sparely populated. Of course Christianity is all about forgiveness so maybe I'll get a pass. What do you think?

The Godlies' Glorious GOTCHA

It's more fun for Christofascists to believe they'll be looking down from Heaven and gloating as you suffer eternal torment down in Hell. "Hah, Hah, Hah! I told you so, but you wouldn't listen. Look at you now. Hah, hah, hah, hah!"

 

[forkup]

The weak point of Robert's contention is he overlooked that the God of Abraham is different from "all other possible gods". Dismissing the one God would be like dismissing all nuts as poisonous because one nut (the cashew when not undergoing heat before or after removing the shells) is poisonous. Roberts needed to delve more deeply into the dissimilarity that makes the God of Abraham differ from all others.

There’s no discernible difference I’ve ever found. Not one. And I’ve never heard a compelling case for one either. Every god, past, present, and inevitably future, is believed in with fervent faith by its followers and dismissed with equal certainty by outsiders. Each is claimed to be unique. Each is revealed through faith. Each is denied by reason.

I can predict, with decent accuracy and without knowing anything personal about you, which god you believe in, simply by knowing where you were born. I can also predict, with some accuracy, which parts of your holy book you interpret literally, which you treat as metaphor, and which you dismiss as cultural relics, based not on divine revelation, but on the century, you live in.

That’s not divine inspiration. That’s environmental conditioning. Your god didn’t shape your beliefs. Your environment shaped your god.

 

[hobelim]

There is good and bad Karma and the judging of good vs bad seems mystical to me.

What does good or bad have anything to do with it? Karma is about as mystical as "you reap what you sow".

I don't recall the 'soul' being mentioned in the three little pigs.

I was referring to talking pigs. Anthropomorphism. There was never a time in the past when pigs could talk. There was never a time when serpents could talk except for the human sort. There is nothing mystical about that FACT.

Soul is just what people thought of as consciousness. You don't believe in consciousness? Is that too mystical?

How do you know that?

How do I know that someone trying to tell me that I have to have blind faith in what I already know is impossible to be LITERALLY true is peddling pure bullshit? lol...

I'm smart. Awake, aware, and alive.

I think the difference between us is that I read what is in the Bible, while you read what is not in the Bible. What you're doing is writing your own Gospel.

When you read a fairy tale did no one ever alert you to the fact that the moral lessons were never written down and are not necessarily directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used? You didn't just know that?

Thats a shame.

That is your right of course but don't number me among your followers.

Don't worry. That never even crossed my mind. I'm a big boy! I can stand upright all on my own.

BTW, I am not trying to attract followers. I am showing where wrong and right and judgment lie. To free the dead in hells keeping so they can live their own lives without shame or guilt or any obligation to anyone including me.

I have given the fruit of my mind freely. It is pleasing to the eye and good to eat. Eat it and you will never hunger again.

I have done my duty and am content to let the chips fall wherever they may. My hands have been washed clean.

 

[ding]

There’s no discernible difference I’ve ever found. Not one.

You mean besides the fact that no other religion makes the claim of God seeking man?

 

[forkup]

You mean besides the fact that no other religion makes the claim of God seeking man?

The claim that Christianity is unique because God seeks man is neither exclusive nor testable. Judaism, from which Christianity emerged, includes divine pursuit, God calls prophets, seeks covenant, and initiates relationship. Islam teaches that Allah sends messengers and guidance to humanity out of mercy. Hinduism has avatars like Krishna who descend to restore dharma. Even certain strands of Buddhism speak of bodhisattvas who delay enlightenment to help others.

So no, Christianity doesn’t hold a monopoly on divine initiative.

 

[ding]

And I’ve never heard a compelling case for one either. Every god, past, present, and inevitably future, is believed in with fervent faith by its followers and dismissed with equal certainty by outsiders. Each is claimed to be unique. Each is revealed through faith. Each is denied by reason.

Maybe try looking inside you instead. There's a reason every argument you make is a moral argument.

 

[ding]

The claim that Christianity is unique because God seeks man is neither exclusive nor testable. Judaism, from which Christianity emerged, includes divine pursuit, God calls prophets, seeks covenant, and initiates relationship. Islam teaches that Allah sends messengers and guidance to humanity out of mercy. Hinduism has avatars like Krishna who descend to restore dharma. Even certain strands of Buddhism speak of bodhisattvas who delay enlightenment to help others.

So no, Christianity doesn’t hold a monopoly on divine initiative.

God seeking man is a claim all Abrahamic religions make. No other religion makes that claim. Christianity takes it to the extreme.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I am trying to help you understand it is not religion, government, business, parenthood, etc. that is the problem or the source. It is the world that is fallen and fleeting. Catholic teaching, and perhaps the basis of all religion/denominations, is to love the world, not for the sake of the world or even the people in in it, but for for the sake of God and His work of achieving the Kingdom of heaven here in this world.

It seems to me you go through your day(s) totally ignoring the bits, pieces, places, actions of the God's Kingdom that are present/being built here in this world so that you may concentrate on everything that is wrong and throwing stones at the people and groups (of this world) who try (despite their own weaknesses and failings) want to be a part of raising/reconstructing all that is fallen from the Kingdom back into the Kingdom of God.

Same Fraud, Different Uniforms

That's exactly the same as the Marxists' excuses for their false-premises ideology's constant and inevitable failures. Both sets of preacher-creatures need tyranny just to survive.

 

[ding]

Same Fraud, Different Uniforms

That's exactly the same as the Marxists' excuses for their false-premises ideology's constant and inevitable failures. Both sets of preacher-creatures need tyranny just to survive.

Don't blame Christianity for Marx co-opting Christian principles. Blame Marx.

 

[ding]

Christianity doesn’t hold a monopoly on divine initiative.

The resurrection says otherwise.

 

[forkup]

Pointing out that belief correlates strongly with geography and historical context isn’t a moral argument, it’s an empirical observation. It’s not about what should be believed, but about what is believed, and where. That’s not a judgment. It’s a pattern. And it’s testable.

If every culture produces its own gods, and every era reshapes them, then the burden isn’t on me to look inward, it’s on you to explain why your god just happens to match your coordinates and temporal location.

 

[forkup]

God seeking man is a claim all Abrahamic religions make. No other religion makes that claim. Christianity takes it to the extreme.

Neither Hinduism or Budhism is Abrahamic.

 

[forkup]

The resurrection says otherwise.

Judaism has resurrection different from the Christian one. So what is "the" resurrection? So does Egypt, Greece, Canaanite, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, etc. etc.

Sure, sounds unique to me.

When you say "the resurrection" what you are saying is that you believe one of the many claims and reject all others.

 

[forkup]

The Godlies' Glorious GOTCHA

It's more fun for Christofascists to believe they'll be looking down from Heaven and gloating as you suffer eternal torment down in Hell. "Hah, Hah, Hah! I told you so, but you wouldn't listen. Look at you now. Hah, hah, hah, hah!"

That’s Pascal’s Wager in costume: “Believe, just in case.” But here’s my typical counter.

What if God doesn’t reward belief without reason? What if this life is a test, not of obedience, but of discernment? What if the real filter isn’t faith, but common sense?

Maybe the gullible are being weeded out. Maybe the God worth following wouldn’t want followers who believe out of fear, coercion, or cultural inertia.

I would like this god better and I have equal evidence for him. Meaning... none at all.

 

[Meriweather]

There’s no discernible difference I’ve ever found. Not one. And I’ve never heard a compelling case for one either.

Then your study and research is lacking.

I can predict, with decent accuracy and without knowing anything personal about you, which god you believe in, simply by knowing where you were born. I can also predict, with some accuracy, which parts of your holy book you interpret literally, which you treat as metaphor, and which you dismiss as cultural relics, based not on divine revelation, but on the century, you live in.

Your "decent accuracy" isn't enough based on where I was born. That "decent accuracy" would also fail in some of your other predictions.

That’s not divine inspiration. That’s environmental conditioning. Your god didn’t shape your beliefs. Your environment shaped your god.

Was it environmental conditioning for you? Did that fail? If it failed for you, then how can you claim that environment is what shapes God for others?

 

[forkup]

Then your study and research is lacking.

The only thing lacking is for you actually to give a testable claim of uniqueness, simply the claim it is, is what you offered. Ding has tried, so feel free to give an explanation in what way the Abrahamic God is unique.

Your "decent accuracy" isn't enough based on where I was born. That "decent accuracy" would also fail in some of your other predictions.

Undoubtably I would fail in certain particulars. Maybe even fail miserably on you. On average no. And broadly speaking... unlikely.

Was it environmental conditioning for you? Did that fail? If it failed for you, then how can you claim that environment is what shapes God for others?

It failed when my bible school teacher answered a question I had truthfully and in all honesty. And because I realized his answer was dogmatically correct, it allowed me to examine if the reasoning behind the belief withstands scrutiny. It doesn't, and nobody has been able to convince me otherwise. As I dug deeper I noticed that the same reason I didn't belief in the dogma of his belief, would be the same reason I would reject any other.

The conclusion I reached is that all beliefs work in the same way. Rely on the same type of arguments to convince its believers and that all those arguments are logically unsound.

As to your question. I can claim that, because I did have environmental conditioning. Meaning I know for a fact that your environment does prime you to a particular belief. Just because it failed on me doesn't mean it failed on others. For instance, the likelihood I would have turned out Muslim was near zero since I wasn't exposed to it in my childhood.

And I do know my history. So, I can say with certainty that how I looked at, and was taught my belief when I was being raised would have branded me a heretic 500 years ago.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Absolutely false. I categorically stated that we all live on faith and gave multiple reasons why we do (none of which you addressed, let alone refuted). I can't help it if you make up from nothing such erroneous conclusions.

Which was irrelevant bullshit.

And you also tried to make the claim that formation of life wasn't possible in that time frame.

Which was ad hoc bullshit.

Then you childishly expected someone to disprove your ad hoc bullshit.

Nobody has to do that. If you don't think life formed in the short, 100s of millions of years window, then the burden lies on you and anyone who agrees to prove it.

Which will never happen, as the evidence shows what it shows and isn't going anywhere.

 

[forkup]

Do you take a testing kit to the pharmacy to make sure you're getting what you're supposed to get? If not, you live on faith. Do you first verify that every chair you are about to sit in will support you and not collapse? If not, you live on faith.

Let me address that.

The difference is simple: those things can be tested, and have been. I don’t personally test every pill or chair, but I rely on systems built on verifiable standards: pharmacology, engineering, regulation, peer review. My trust is conditional, grounded in reproducible results and accountability.

Faith, the way you’re using it, isn’t testable. It doesn’t rest on evidence, it replaces it. Religion asks for belief without verification. Science builds trust through verification.

So no, I don’t live on faith. I live on justified conditional confidence. And that’s a very different thing.

 

[BreezeWood]

Then maybe you should also consider what people of no faith have done throughout history as well

such as the meek shall inherit the world ... by some accounts -

they do have a history, their persecution and victimization by christianity, the desert religions.