Zone1 Why is it so tough to believe in God?

[The Sage of Main Street]

Do they claim God actually resides in them?

A Difference That Doesn't Make Any Difference

Many feel that possession, often only for the purpose of justifying heinous acts against non-believers. Quit pretending they don't, just to make a false case for the uniqueness of your delusion.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

It's a faulty analogy. Being curious isn’t the same as having a reliable method for finding truth the issue isn’t who explores, but who can show that their map actually works.

I’m an extremely curious person, and that’s why I make a point of educating myself. If you care about knowing things, you have to distinguish what you know from what you believe otherwise curiosity becomes indistinguishable from imagination.

Where we differ is method: when the physical world doesn’t yet provide an answer, I don’t jump to one. You treat ‘spiritual’ answers as valid by default, but without a way to test or distinguish them from wishful thinking, competing traditions, or human psychology, there’s no way to know they’re true. That’s the entire problem.


Let me pose this question. It illustrates the problem.

What do you prefer when curious, and why.
-A likely wrong answer
-No answer at all.

That's the philosophical question here.

Theism Sets People Up for a Slavish Mindset About Real Powers

Intelligence is the enemy of their rulers, and their rulers are the ones who created their religion for them.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

We’re not discussing hope, we’re discussing belief, both in the literal and epistemic sense.

I don’t deny that humans have deep psychological drives, or that emotion influences cognition. That’s well-known. But the existence of a psychological need doesn’t make a belief warranted. It only explains why people want to believe something, not whether the belief is true or justified.

And none of the arguments presented so far address the actual question of epistemic warrant.
They explain why belief feels compelling, not why the belief is reliable.

That’s the distinction I’m making.

The Dark Ages Were Also Called "The Age of Faith"

The confused and weak-minded desperately need to be convinced of something. Belief does not come from within, but from impressive convinced people who want to manipulate and dominate them.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Summa cum laude is a Latin phrase meaning "with highest praise. You spelled it wrong and reversed the words

Imprimatur Ut Imperemus

Question the ulterior motive behind everything you read.

 

[Quantrill]

If that was true then God sucks as an author. You might be too religious to believe this but only people write stories to educate other people, even if what they write about is a life changing experience with my God.

Even so your response just goes to show how deadly the curse in a cup of wine that Jesus sent his disciples around the world to preach to the nations was and remains, like the first century equivalent of a thermonuclear option on steroids, a far more devastating abomination causing a worldwide desolation for thousands of years.

He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword.

Take, from my hand, this cup of fiery wine and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. When they have drunk it they will vomit and go mad; such is the sword that I am sending among them" Jeremiah 25:15


Thanks for proving the truth in what I said. Jesus came to bring a curse in a cup of wine to smite the nations.

Try to remember. You are just a corpse strapped to a gurney being dissected in an open arena to determine the cause of death for the benefit of dedicated medical students. The stench is great! Almost unbearable. So also try to remember that being repulsive isn't a superpower. Its just one of your many character flaws. So carry on! Bottoms up! No one will care if you threaten to set yourself on fire, again and again. You're already burning in hell.

Enjoy! Accursed one.

God is the Author of the Bible. And, you can find many instances as this where the same is true.

Concerning God's promise to Abraham of the birth of Isaac even at old age and past the time of child bearing: (Gen. 18:12) "Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, say, After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?"

(Gen. 18:13) "And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh...."

(Gen. 18:15) "Then Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not; for she was afraid. And he said, Nay; but thou didst laugh."

How did the writer of (Genesis) know Sarah laughed silently? He couldn't have. But God knew she laughed because He is God and heard her laugh. And God is the Author of the Bible.

So, save your unbelief and your stupid statements for another...oh phony one.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

God wrote down on paper what Jesus said? Did God use pencil, pen, or fountain pen? Also, do you understand that Jesus is not separate from God, Jesus is a plenary portion of God, so what Jesus knows, God knows because they are really one and the same, just different aspects of the same thing, Jesus is merely in a form that man can relate to here on Earth.


Sure wish you had an inkling of proof of that.

You have it written in the Bible.

Jesus is the God/Man. 100% God/100%Man.

Where do I indicate that Jesus is separated from God? Please pay attention.

(Gen. 1:3) "And God said...."

Quantrill

 

[DukeU]

Can't even make a post without lying, can you?

That's because you have a new god, now. We all know his name.

You really shouldn't be ashamed of what you believe.

Maybe one day you will have the confidence and guts to admit it........maybe.

 

[Meriweather]

Where we differ is method: when the physical world doesn’t yet provide an answer, I don’t jump to one. You treat ‘spiritual’ answers as valid by default, but without a way to test or distinguish them from wishful thinking, competing traditions, or human psychology, there’s no way to know they’re true. That’s the entire problem

You wouldn't mind pointing out what was wong about my premise wouldn't you, my shrugging girl, instead of simply asserting it? And while you are at it answer the question, not "conclusion" I posed at the end.

Actually I don't treat, or even think of spiritual answers as "valid by default". That premise is wrong. Nor am I "you, my shrugging girl". A few days ago I noted that the discussion we had been having was pretty much over because I saw too many "you" entering the responses and an indication the discussion was no longer between you and me, but rather a discussion with a Meriweather only present in your own mind--removing the essential me from the discussion.

"no way to know they’re true" - More accurately, due to the lack of physical evidence in spiritual experiences, spiritual explorers cannot offer the physical proof, only testimony. I, of course, know my testimony is true--not a doubt in the world. I am also fully aware that in this world, lack of physical proof, is a huge deal to some. For those who have no belief, and are absolutely convinced no God exists, it is easy to dismiss the testimony, claiming/thinking that someone must be lying, mistaken, or imagining the event. Ironically, there is no way to know that claims that someone is lying, mistaken, or imagining an event are true, either. Lack of physical evidence works both ways.

Now for the giggle of day: Girl? How old are you imagining me to be anyway?

 

[Meriweather]

Go Away. Find a Choir. Preach to Them.

The choir is busy practicing singing hymns, hence the decision to enter discussions on a religion forum. Here's a thought: Those who find me irritating have the option of putting me on ignore. I always look forward to your responses to me. They always make me laugh, which Reader's Digest gave me to understand, is Good Medicine. So, thank you, it is greatly appreciated.

 

[hadit]

Go Away. Find a Choir. Preach to Them.

Irrelevant examples only convince those who are already convinced and are grabbing at straws to make themselves look realistic to those who aren't brainwashed.

The thread title is "Why is it so tough to believe in God?". If you don't like someone sharing the Gospel or talking about their experiences with God, go somewhere else. This is the IDEAL place for someone to "preach".

 

[forkup]

The choir is busy practicing singing hymns, hence the decision to enter discussions on a religion forum. Here's a thought: Those who find me irritating have the option of putting me on ignore. I always look forward to your responses to me. They always make me laugh, which Reader's Digest gave me to understand, is Good Medicine. So, thank you, it is greatly appreciated.

People of belief/faith are the explorers, the pioneer, stepping beyond the physical into the spiritual. They return with the testimony that the spiritual is worthy of exploring.

This is you claiming that testimony of the spiritual is by definition valid. It's spoken as a fact not a possibility. In fact that's the whole premise of your analogy. Spirituality is simply a different way to truth, is it not.

The shrugging girll thing was tongue in cheek and you still haven't answered the question. And I doubt you will.

And no I don't find you irritating. You are just one of many who uses bad faith arguments on here. If it really bothers me I would have quit a long time ago.

If it gets bad like it has here. I simply expose all the tactics as they are happening.

 

[Meriweather]

This is you claiming that testimony of the spiritual is by definition valid. It's spoken as a fact not a possibility.

My statement was presenting testimony based on my own experiences (therefore fact), and others have similar testimonies. Testimony is valid, and my testimony is based on fact--events that did take place. It is not my 'claim' that they possibly took place, but that they did take place.

Claims that they don't take place for everyone is also testimony and equally as valid as is the testimony of those who have had these experiences.

From the first I have also insisted there is no physical evidence for those who want scientific proof which is physical evidence based on being able to repeat the event.

1. I have true testimony
2. I have no physical evidence

What else is it you want?

 

[Meriweather]

I simply expose all the tactics as they are happening.

As I do when I point out moving goal posts.

 

[hadit]

My statement was presenting testimony based on my own experiences (therefore fact), and others have similar testimonies. Testimony is valid, and my testimony is based on fact--events that did take place. It is not my 'claim' that they possibly took place, but that they did take place.

Claims that they don't take place for everyone is also testimony and equally as valid as is the testimony of those who have had these experiences.

From the first I have also insisted there is no physical evidence for those who want scientific proof which is physical evidence based on being able to repeat the event.

1. I have true testimony
2. I have no physical evidence

What else is it you want?

To replicate God in the lab is to remove His intelligence and autonomy from the picture, rendering Him nothing more than a caricature. IOW, He would not be God. He would not even be someone who could control what he does.

Can any of us be replicated in a lab? No. Science can only reveal God's footprints and His actions, as many scientists are now admitting the universe was designed. It cannot replicate Him.

 

[forkup]

As I do when I point out moving goal posts.

Yet the only thing you've done is CLAIMED I moved the goalposts. I can claim I'm the Easter bunny. Doesn't make it true.

 

[forkup]

My statement was presenting testimony based on my own experiences (therefore fact), and others have similar testimonies. Testimony is valid, and my testimony is based on fact--events that did take place. It is not my 'claim' that they possibly took place, but that they did take place.

Claims that they don't take place for everyone is also testimony and equally as valid as is the testimony of those who have had these experiences.

From the first I have also insisted there is no physical evidence for those who want scientific proof which is physical evidence based on being able to repeat the event.

1. I have true testimony
2. I have no physical evidence

What else is it you want?

I used a GENERAL "believers." You didn't mention YOU. Like you like to say, moving the goalposts. And unlike you I tie it to things you actually said.

As for what you experienced. How do you distinguish what you experienced from a delusion? Or motivated thinking? How do you get to god. Because I promise you people who have had similar experiences exists that worship other God's than you.

As for valid. Valid doesn't mean true by default, but something untrue is by definition invalid. Which brings me again to my question.

If you are curious what do you prefer and why.

-An answer that's unlikely to be true.

-No answer.

And what I want is an answer to the question I've urged you to answer for the third time.

 

[Meriweather]

I used a GENERAL "believers." You didn't mention YOU. Like you like to say, moving the goalposts. And unlike you I tie it to things you actually said.

As for what you experienced. How do you distinguish what you experienced from a delusion? Or motivated thinking? How do you get to god. Because I promise you people who have had similar experiences exists that worship other God's than you.

As for valid. Valid doesn't mean true by default, but something untrue is by definition invalid. Which brings me again to my question.

If you are curious what do you prefer and why.

-An answer that's unlikely to be true.

-No answer.

And what I want is an answer to the question I've urged you to answer for the third time.

 

[Meriweather]

As for what you experienced. How do you distinguish what you experienced from a delusion? Or motivated thinking? How do you get to god. Because I promise you people who have had similar experiences exists that worship other God's than you.

You don't have to promise what is already known. Your other questions are pointless. Believe that I am delusional, brainwashed, etc. I don't care what you believe about me. This discussion was centered on why some in general believe and why some do not.

 

[godincarnate.me]

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?

not thinking.

 

[hobelim]

(John 17:1-26)

Quantrill

genesis 3:14