Zone1 Why is it so tough to believe in God?

[LuckyDuck01!]

Is it because:

• Lack of belief we are lovable
• Lack of belief we are cared for
• Lack of belief God is an active agent in our lives
• Lack of belief we have a reason for being

What blocks people from believing in God? Why is it so hard to believe?

There are 4,200 recognized religions in the world. Each one says that "theirs" is the one true religion. Some of those religions that still exist are older than the Abrahamic ones, which are the worst.
To me, claiming that there is an "invisible" deity that had the power to create "everything," the universe all of the galaxies, suns and planets, air, water, other things on the periodic table, animals, vegetables and of course, homo sapiens, but couldn't get it quite right and can't present itself to all humans to prove its existence is silly. Telling people that because we are the most intelligent species on Earth, means we must look like the god, is the height of egotism.
Many of the religions, especially the Abrahamic religions were created to scare people via superstition in order to control their bad behavior, by convincing them that the invisible being will punish them even "after" their death if they behave badly.

 

[BreezeWood]

The Pro Israel Christian is the single most destructive demographic in America because it has no truth. It infected the GOP in the late 1990s and since then America has gone off a cliff. And it has not learned one thing, because it doesn't want to, it doesn't care, all because it hates the same thing the far left does, TRUTH.

that's a stretch in the liest to include the left with jews and christians ...

the jews and romans (christians) - are who brought the climatic end to the 1st century events, the refutation of judaism false commandments, hereditary idolatry, religion of apartheid et al that they again are uniting against what those times and jesus represented - liberation theology, self determination.

the workings of a truly monotheistic religion as interpreted by jesus, all being are equal.

 

[DukeU]

There are 4,200 recognized religions in the world. Each one says that "theirs" is the one true religion. Some of those religions that still exist are older than the Abrahamic ones, which are the worst.
To me, claiming that there is an "invisible" deity that had the power to create "everything," the universe all of the galaxies, suns and planets, air, water, other things on the periodic table, animals, vegetables and of course, homo sapiens, but couldn't get it quite right and can't present itself to all humans to prove its existence is silly. Telling people that because we are the most intelligent species on Earth, means we must look like the god, is the height of egotism.
Many of the religions, especially the Abrahamic religions were created to scare people via superstition in order to control their bad behavior, by convincing them that the invisible being will punish them even "after" their death if they behave badly.

So, break it down for us.

When and how did life originate?

 

[BreezeWood]

The man who found it, BURIED IT AGAIN."

the first century events fizzled by the weight of the opposition jesus should have known their fate from the beginning than being forsaken, who's kidding who - the money changers religion, their politicians have been winning since time immemorial ... not all was lost nor buried and found by others as well and lives for another day hopefully soon.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's your belief, own it.

Again, no, nobody believes that. But you think they do, because you know less than nothing about any of it.

I understand why you don't believe it. But even that is odd, to me. Is your God too weak to have created humans via evolution? Or too stupid? Or is it both?

Surely, you believe it is none of the above. So, what gives?

 

[DukeU]

Again, no, nobody believes that. But you think they do, because you know less than nothing about any of it.

I understand why you don't believe it. But even that is odd, to me. Is your God too weak to have created humans via evolution? Or too stupid? Or is it both?

Surely, you believe it is none of the above. So, what gives?

I understand your need to deflect from what you believe.

I wouldn't admit it either.

 

[forkup]

I asked you questions which you ignored. Can you measure the speed that an angel can fly? Can you determine where God is? Can you determine how long it took God to create Adam and Eve? Please answer.

I have made clear that the 'faith' I speak of is the Christian faith. I have made clear that I don't believe in everything else that pretends to be of faith. The faith I speak of is faith in God, Christ, and the Bible, which I have said many times. In Christianity, faith is the key.

Oh gee...a theory is stronger than a scientific fact. If that is so, why do you need facts? That makes no sense. If facts support your 'theory' why is it still a 'theory' and not a fact, because you said 'facts don't change? Answer: because it is bullshit. No problem, I got my boots on.

Oh, the scientific method doesn't deal with what is true. It deals with what is 'likely to be true'. Which makes its facts questionable as well as its theories. And, we are not talking about medicine, and technology. We are talking about God, Christ, and the Bible. Which you and others come along claiming it is false because your science can't prove it. If you want to just address medicine and technology, then get the hell out of the religious section.

What I am saying is what I said, science cannot know or test anything in the supernatural world, as you pretend you can. You don't know that faith is an inferior method. You just don't believe faith is another method of knowing. Your science cannot know about God. Yet you and others like to pretend you do by applying your scientific method to prove God.

Yes, you are consistently full of shit. Trying to pass off your science as the superior mode of knowledge and trying to pass off your scientific method of knowing as reliable to speak against God, Christ, and the Bible.

Again, are you open to faith being the only way to know God, Christ, and the Bible? Because thus far, science and its methods cannot prove it.

Quantrill

I ignored your question since I figured the answer would be self-evident and easily derived from other things I said. Since you insist I will answer. I can't answer those questions because I presumes that stuff exists that can't be measured against reality. That's not a gotcha but rather I nonsense question.

Something you would easily understand in other contexts. I can ask you what the speed is at which reindeer fly. Or the weight of Thor's hammer and you would reply with, "I can't measure imaginary things", and you would be right.

As for the scientific method. I've explained it clearly, in plain English, using examples to illustrate. I guess you can go online and find somebody to draw you pictures but the answer will essentially be the same.

It's not my fault you don't know enough about the scientific method to know the difference between hypothesis, and theory. It just illustrates that you are trying to critique something you don't understand. Or for that matter seem to have an interest in understanding.

It isn't on me to claim God doesn't exists, ( Although I can disprove certain God claims easily) it's on you to prove it does because you claim he does. And my position is that until you do I have no reason to believe he does. That's the answer to the entire OP.

You are just one more person who illustrates that God can't be defended in a epistemically sound way.

 

[forkup]

Those are still beliefs. Speaking of evidence prove there is no God with evidence.

Genesis is an allegory quite advanced considering when it was written. It describes evolution, man's inherent need for meaning, free will must exist with morals.
Go ahead prove there is no God

And yet evolution was rejected on religious grounds by people who go by the same book that you now claim describes evolution. Meaning that the claim itself is contradicted.

Let's assume you are talking about the Christian god. Something I think is a safe assumption in context.

There's the mathematical improbability of it. Unless you can show a fundamental difference between the method by which you determine your God is real as opposed to other religions it simply is a statistical improbability, that's one.

Since I will assume you go by the Bible. I can say that the geological record proves that a global flood is completely unsupported. It would have left clear tracks.

The Genesis story itself is completely unsupported by evolution and geology.

As you said you can overcome this objection by claims that it's allegorical, or simply old, or interpret it in a way that fits your narrative. Interpretations that have been and are actively contradicted by people who read the same book as you do but regardless it's a post hoc rationalization.

There are numerous miracles described, problem is that for some reason miracles always evade any testable standard. So we have to accept something that although theoretically testable has never been tested. Again unlikely to be accurate since there are NO examples of it that a have ever been tested.

There's prophecies that fail on occasion.

There's empirical test that have been performed on the effectiveness off prayers. Look up the Templeton studies.

All of this leads me to say that the empirical claims made about the Christian God are falsified on many a occasion, therefore the empirical model of that God is rejected.

 

[forkup]

Ah, and that's where you ignore the evidence of untold millions of people throughout man's history testifying to His existence.

If the testimony of untold millions is reliable "evidence", you would believe in Thor, Shiva, Buddha, Zeus, etc., etc. You reject them all.

So why do you think your God is the exception.

 

[Quantrill]

I ignored your question since I figured the answer would be self-evident and easily derived from other things I said. Since you insist I will answer. I can't answer those questions because I presumes that stuff exists that can't be measured against reality. That's not a gotcha but rather I nonsense question.

Something you would easily understand in other contexts. I can ask you what the speed is at which reindeer fly. Or the weight of Thor's hammer and you would reply with, "I can't measure imaginary things", and you would be right.

As for the scientific method. I've explained it clearly, in plain English, using examples to illustrate. I guess you can go online and find somebody to draw you pictures but the answer will essentially be the same.

It's not my fault you don't know enough about the scientific method to know the difference between hypothesis, and theory. It just illustrates that you are trying to critique something you don't understand. Or for that matter seem to have an interest in understanding.

It isn't on me to claim God doesn't exists, ( Although I can disprove certain God claims easily) it's on you to prove it does because you claim he does. And my position is that until you do I have no reason to believe he does. That's the answer to the entire OP.

You are just one more person who illustrates that God can't be defended in a epistemically sound way.

No, you can't answer those questions because your scientific method of knowing has no ability to answer them.

I didn't ask you about Thor's hammer or the speed of reindeer flight. I asked you questions about God, and the supernatural.

You can't disprove or prove God one way or the other. You're right though, you have no business in the religious arena trying to. So why are you here?

You cannot apply your scientific method to prove or disprove God. We already know you don't believe. What is your purpose here? Just to say science can't prove God? You're just another non-believer who likes to ***** about God, but has nothing to say.

Quantrill

 

[Hafar1014]

And yet evolution was rejected on religious grounds by people who go by the same book that you now claim describes evolution. Meaning that the claim itself is contradicted.

Let's assume you are talking about the Christian god. Something I think is a safe assumption in context.

There's the mathematical improbability of it. Unless you can show a fundamental difference between the method by which you determine your God is real as opposed to other religions it simply is a statistical improbability, that's one.

Since I will assume you go by the Bible. I can say that the geological record proves that a global flood is completely unsupported. It would have left clear tracks.

The Genesis story itself is completely unsupported by evolution and geology.

As you said you can overcome this objection by claims that it's allegorical, or simply old, or interpret it in a way that fits your narrative. Interpretations that have been and are actively contradicted by people who read the same book as you do but regardless it's a post hoc rationalization.

There are numerous miracles described, problem is that for some reason miracles always evade any testable standard. So we have to accept something that although theoretically testable has never been tested. Again unlikely to be accurate since there are NO examples of it that a have ever been tested.

There's prophecies that fail on occasion.

There's empirical test that have been performed on the effectiveness off prayers. Look up the Templeton studies.

All of this leads me to say that the empirical claims made about the Christian God are falsified on many a occasion, therefore the empirical model of that God is rejected.

Only Jews who created Genesis and can read it in Hebrew know what it means. Christians distorted its meaning to create a new version. They used threats of Hell to force obedience.
Genesis is an allegory and yes it does describe evolution. Adam is made in Gods likeness. That means potentially divine. He must evolve to accomplish that. There are 2 different Adams. The first primitive. At the end a man with free will and moral knowledge. Thats evolution the improvement of the species from the lower to higher forms.

Allegorys are used to explain ideas in a narrative. Genesis describes the inherent need for meaning in life. Viktor Frankl proved that. Man evolves. Free will must also have morals. Try and disprove those human concepts.

Noahs story is an allegory. But there were floods after the ice age and the possibility of an earthquake So what. Its a metaphor.

You dont get it because you think metaphors are literal and if you cant prove them then they are wrong. They have meaning that escapes your simple concrete mind.

Like most atheists you need a reality thats easy to understand, simple, concrete, and very limited. You see religious people happy and flourishing and that forcers you to doubt your beliefs so you try And disparage them. You have need to fee superior which based on Adlerian psychology means you really feel inferior.
So you mske science your religion but 40% of all scientific research is false

https://www.science.org/content/article/about-40-economics-experiments-fail-replication-survey

You choose your beliefs because you have an e emotional need that you arent even aware of.

 

[Hafar1014]

No, you can't answer those questions because your scientific method of knowing has no ability to answer them.

I didn't ask you about Thor's hammer or the speed of reindeer flight. I asked you questions about God, and the supernatural.

You can't disprove or prove God one way or the other. You're right though, you have no business in the religious arena trying to. So why are you here?

You cannot apply your scientific method to prove or disprove God. We already know you don't believe. What is your purpose here? Just to say science can't prove God? You're just another non-believer who likes to ***** about God, but has nothing to say.

Quantrill

Atheists often have the need to feel superior by disparaging religious beliefs. The success of religion in creating moral cultural values and happy people forces them to face their own belief's validity. Why are religious people so happy and successful if they believe in a God. So they attack that which shames them. They need a realty thats limited easy to understand and concrete. So they make science their religion. 40% of all science is invalid. Religion has better record for accuracy

 

[hadit]

I look at this

God spoke directly to Moses.
So Moses had proof of Gods existence

Beyond that, God wrote his commandments on stone tablets for Moses to bring back.

Now, THAT is solid proof that God exists. If I looked at those tablets, I could say….nobody but God could have written on those tablets.

But Moses smashed those tablets, so I have no solid proof.

God missed his chance

View attachment 1185569

Here's the rub. You would look at the stones and say, "Oh, no, that's faked". When you are determined to not believe, no amount of evidence is sufficient. This illustrates what I'm talking about.

You're in a room with a lot of people. There's a door in one wall that is not locked, just closed. A few of the people open the door, walk through it and come back, telling you all about a buffet set up in the next room. It's beautiful, fully stocked and everything is delicious. They don't bring anything back with them and you insist they're just making it up, but you won't open the door and see for yourself, instead demanding that someone shows you evidence of the buffet. All you can see is that they are content and happy while you are hungry and desperate.

All you have to do is open the door, but you won't.

 

[rightwinger]

Here's the rub. You would look at the stones and say, "Oh, no, that's faked". When you are determined to not believe, no amount of evidence is sufficient. This illustrates what I'm talking about.

You're in a room with a lot of people. There's a door in one wall that is not locked, just closed. A few of the people open the door, walk through it and come back, telling you all about a buffet set up in the next room. It's beautiful, fully stocked and everything is delicious. They don't bring anything back with them and you insist they're just making it up, but you won't open the door and see for yourself, instead demanding that someone shows you evidence of the buffet. All you can see is that they are content and happy while you are hungry and desperate.

All you have to do is open the door, but you won't.

I have opened that door and not seen any food

The religious tell me that they have faith that there is food there

 

[hadit]

If the testimony of untold millions is reliable "evidence", you would believe in Thor, Shiva, Buddha, Zeus, etc., etc. You reject them all.

So why do you think your God is the exception.

Because I actually have a relationship with Him. Without that relationship, it's all just another story.

 

[Hafar1014]

Here's the rub. You would look at the stones and say, "Oh, no, that's faked". When you are determined to not believe, no amount of evidence is sufficient. This illustrates what I'm talking about.

You're in a room with a lot of people. There's a door in one wall that is not locked, just closed. A few of the people open the door, walk through it and come back, telling you all about a buffet set up in the next room. It's beautiful, fully stocked and everything is delicious. They don't bring anything back with them and you insist they're just making it up, but you won't open the door and see for yourself, instead demanding that someone shows you evidence of the buffet. All you can see is that they are content and happy while you are hungry and desperate.

All you have to do is open the door, but you won't.

Its an allegory the message is what it means not a literal reading of it. Open your mind

 

[hadit]

I have opened that door and not seen any food

The religious tell me that they have faith that there is food there

I do not believe that you really opened the door. If you were just looking for evidence that God exists without admitting your need for Him, I don't think He's going to show up just to do tricks. What were you asking for?

 

[Hafar1014]

I do not believe that you really opened the door. If you were just looking for evidence that God exists without admitting your need for Him, I don't think He's going to show up just to do tricks. What were you asking for?

His need is to prove God does not exist which is the goal of a fool. Why even bother.

 

[Hafar1014]

Is it because:

• Lack of belief we are lovable
• Lack of belief we are cared for
• Lack of belief God is an active agent in our lives
• Lack of belief we have a reason for being

What blocks people from believing in God? Why is it so hard to believe?

You just might be depressed. This isnt about god its about your emotional state.

 

[Hafar1014]

Hearsay is not acceptable evidence to me. Faith is certainly not evidence.

Beliefs dont require evidence. Atheists believe there is no God and have zero evidence.