Zone1 Why is it so tough to believe in God?

[Zincwarrior]

(Isaiah 44:6-8) "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.

"And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them shew unto them.

"Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God, I know not any."

As Jesus said, (Rev. 22:13), "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."

How am I doing so far?

Quantrill

It is easy to believe in God. It defies logic to believe in a loving god.

 

[ding]

why would books of fiction, desert bibles be any different or better than dreams of accomplishments for the better to come.

jesus perished and will not be seen on earth again than were it possible for everyone else.

Religious texts are what they are despite your broad brushed dismissal. They will be here long after you are gone and are historically more relevant and enlightening than any of your insensible gibberish.

 

[ding]

It is easy to believe in God. It defies logic to believe in a loving god.

I'm sure it seems that way to you. But I don't see anyone doing evil for the sake of evil. I see a lot of people rationalizing wrong as right. So the concept of fairness is so ingrained in each of us that we legitimatize good and delegitimagize evil. As such there is a built in compensating feature to existence. We get to experience reality and learn and grow from it. This is pretty simple, if God is not loving because he let's us make our own mistakes, then parent who do the same aren't loving either.

 

[Zincwarrior]

I'm sure it seems that way to you. But I don't see anyone doing evil for the sake of evil. I see a lot of people rationalizing wrong as right. So the concept of fairness is so ingrained in each of us that we legitimatize good and delegitimagize evil. As such there is a built in compensating feature to existence. We get to experience reality and learn and grow from it. This is pretty simple, if God is not loving because he let's us make our own mistakes, then parent who do the same aren't loving either.

Tell me about the loving god who drops a roof on kids in a school in the next storm.

We are less than nothing to God.

 

[DukeU]

Tell me about the loving god who drops a roof on kids in a school in the next storm.

We are less than nothing to God.

Do you have kids?

 

[Zincwarrior]

Do you have kids?

Yes. God hasn't killed them yet.

 

[DukeU]

Yes. God hasn't killed them yet.

Have any of your kids ever had anything bad happen to them?

Bike accidents, hurt from falls, stitches, broken bones, etc>?

 

[Quantrill]

It is easy to believe in God. It defies logic to believe in a loving god.

So, you believe in God?

Why does it defy logic to believe in a loving God?

Quantrill

 

[ding]

Tell me about the loving god who drops a roof on kids in a school in the next storm.

We are less than nothing to God.

Believing God is responsible for dropping a roof on kids in a storm is a very polytheistic way of seeing things. God is responsible for creating existence. He's not controlling it. Storms are a part of existence.

So I don't see it the way you do. I'm less contemptful about it. It's a part of existing. I accept it just like I accept all the other times something good happened (which is the vast majority of time) instead of something bad. But here's the thing you need to consider, if you truly believe there is no God, then who are you going to blame for a roof dropping on kids in the next storm? And will it illicit the same level of contempt?

 

[ding]

Yes. God hasn't killed them yet.

Isn't all life born to die?

 

[ding]

We are less than nothing to God.

We are God's creatures. We are beings that know and create and are the pinnacle of God's creation. We are God's creation becoming self aware.

Anyone who has ever created anything of worth does not see their creation as less than nothing.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So your claim of being "the wrong God" are a straw dog.

No, it's part of the wager. You just didn't think of it.

What if YOU are wrong? What if you have the wrong god?

Whoops.

 

[ding]

No, it's part of the wager. You just didn't think of it.

What if YOU are wrong? What if you have the wrong god?

Whoops.

Clearly you don't understand Pascal's wager.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Clearly you don't understand Pascal's wager.

Clearly Pascal didn't understand his own wager.

Zoroaster, for example, doesn't mind nonbelievers like me. But, those who put other gods before him, like you?

They don't fare so well.

Better hope you placed the right bet.

 

[ding]

Clearly Pascal didn't understand his own wager.

Zoroaster, for example, doesn't mind nonbelievers like me. But, those who put other gods before him, like you?

They don't fare so well.

Better hope you placed the right bet.

Sure he did. He understood that the benefit in believing in a higher power far outweighed not believing in a higher power such that even if there were no higher power the benefit of that belief made believing in it worth it.

Darwinian principles back this up. If belief in a higher power offered no functional advantage, it would have died out long ago.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sure he did. He understood that the benefit in believing in a higher power far outweighed not believing in a higher power such that even if there were no higher power the benefit of that belief made believing in it worth it.

Darwinian principles back this up. If belief in a higher power offered no functional advantage, it would have died out long ago.

He sure didn't, because his own wager did not rule out choosing the wrong god.

He understood that for himself. Not believing in a higher power, however, has generally been great, for me.

I have no need of this nonsense whatsoever. One could easily argue the benefit of nobody being religious ever again.

 

[ding]

He sure didn't, because his own wager did not rule out choosing the wrong god.

He understood that for himself. Not believing in a higher power, however, has generally been great, for me.

I have no need of this nonsense whatsoever. One could easily argue the benefit of nobody being religious ever again.

His wager had nothing to do with a specific God.

 

[ding]

Not believing in a higher power, however, has generally been great, for me.

That must be why you come here seeking conflict to show your disrespect for people with different beliefs. Because your life is so wonderful. People who have wonderful lives don't need to go out of their way to be disrespectful. Apparently anyone who believes different than you are not worthy of respect.

 

[JohnDB]

No, it's part of the wager. You just didn't think of it.

What if YOU are wrong? What if you have the wrong god?

Whoops.

It is and has ALWAYS been impossible for the Bible to exist if it were not for God.

There is no other piece or collection of pieces of literature that can make that claim.

And you have yet to prove that "Atheist life" is superior to a life filled with Faith, Hope, Love, and Altruism.

Like I posited before....
Atheists are always losers in the game of life. Doesn't matter how you slice it....they are always losers.

 

[BreezeWood]

Atheists are always losers in the game of life. Doesn't matter how you slice it....they are always losers.

and desert dwellers ...

are always winners especially when given their choice of elected officials.