There is no acceptable proof of God for atheists

Zombrex

This thread has gone on a bit of a tangent :pac:

Soul Winner

Morbert wrote: »

This is a very broad definition of faith, and it is certainly not the definition used by atheists when they say they have no faith.

I do not normally post definitions online, as I do not take dictionaries as authoritative, but it will at least help illustrate that the broad definition of faith you are using is not used by atheists.

The first set of results from typing "define:faith" into google.

•religion: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny; "he lost his faith but not his morality"
•complete confidence in a person or plan etc; "he cherished the faith of a good woman"; "the doctor-patient relationship is based on trust"
•religion: an institution to express belief in a divine power; "he was raised in the Baptist religion"; "a member of his own faith contradicted him"
•loyalty or allegiance to a cause or a person; "keep the faith"; "they broke faith with their investors"


From Encarta

"Faith, an attitude of the entire self, including both will and intellect, directed toward a person, an idea, or—as in the case of religious faith—a divine being. Modern theologians agree in emphasizing this total existential character of faith, thus distinguishing it from the popular conception of faith that identifies it with belief as opposed to knowledge. Faith indeed includes belief but goes far beyond it, and in the history of theology the distinction has more often been drawn between faith and works than between faith and knowledge."



Well I have to say that this doesn't apply to agnostic atheists like Richard Dawkins or Dan Dennett.

They are but English definitions of what faith is but we must go behind the English in order to understand where our English word came from. There are various words in the Old Testament which convey in action what faith is. Three of which are Chasah, Batach, and Aman. The Hebrew language is a pictorial language, and as such Hasa conveys the picture of little chicks “running” to the shelter of a mother birds wings. Batack conveys the picture of a person “leaning” on a staff for support, and Amam is an act of faith which from the subject’s perspective has no doubts whatsoever in the object in which his or her Aman is being placed, just like what Abraham had when he obeyed the Word of God by offering Isaac his promised heir to God. He was absolutely convinced that because God had promised that a multitude as numerous as the sand of the sea would come from Issac that God would honour His Word by raising Isaac up from the dead. "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." Romans 4:3. This is where we get our word Amen from. It means that for which you are 'Amaning' will surely be unto you as a fact.

In the New Testament all three words are rolled up into one word in the Greek – Pistis. All these words are verbs, and verbs, as everyone knows, are action words, as apposed to nouns which can either be the subject or object of a sentence. Verbs describe the action of the subject or the object in the sentence. The word “belief” and “Faith” for that matter in the English convey a mental accent without involving the self in active entrusting upon that which is believed in to be true.

So belief is but one third of the New Testament and Old Testament definition of faith. Even if you believe that there is a God that is not enough to save you. You must act on His Word of promise as Abraham did, only then can you be reckoned righteous in His sight, all other acts of man no matter how holy and good they might be from a human perspective fall short of this kind of action. That’s why without faith it is impossible to please God - Hebrews 11:6. This is where the Church has gotten off the track over the centuries. They left off teaching faith and reduced it down to simple belief due to the transition of ‘Pistis’ from the Greek via the Latin into the English. It’s rich meaning got lost in translation and became a noun. Churches the world over need to rediscover this truth and teach it to their congregants as it is the only way that a man or woman can be saved.

Anyway that’s just me getting all ‘sermony’ on you there, but getting back to atheism, atheism is an active stand against theism, it is the active belief that there is no God, it is not merely the lack of belief in a God. See the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of atheism here:

Turtwig

Soul Winner wrote: »

Anyway that’s just me getting all ‘sermony’ on you there, but getting back to atheism, atheism is an active stand against theism, it is the active belief that there is no God, it is not merely the lack of belief in a God. See the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of atheism here:

The word 'a-tom' these days is a misnomer; words change why can you not accept that atheists in the modern sense 'defacto atheism' is the realisation that, on the whole, God probably does not exist and is an elegantly beautiful figment of the emotional human mind.
If you are going to persist with that ideology of faith then you we are going into infinite territory.
Is the lack of belief in a fairy faith?
Is the lack of belief in a shurty faith?
Is the lack of belief in a woohah faith?
Is the lack of belief in a Giant Faith?
Is the lack of belief in a ghost faith?
Is the lack of belief in astrology faith?
Is the lack of belief in unicorns faith?
Is the lack of belief in a Flat Earth Faith?
Is the lack of belief in a Hollow Earth Faith?
Is the lack of belief in a Intelligent Design Faith?
Is the lack of belief in a perfectly Spherical earth Faith?
etc etc ad infinitum
Seriously need a better definition me thinks?


Also I asked this earlier but got no answer, so hopefully, this time someone can help:

How is superstition any different from faith?

Soul Winner

Malty_T wrote: »

Also I asked this earlier but got no answer, so hopefully, this time someone can help:

How is superstition any different from faith?

I'll bite. Superstition is just like faith. It is an action based upon a belief in something observed to be true in life experience. Like touching wood etc to avoid bad luck. It appears to work nearly all the bloody time. What is your point? Oh don’t tell me, I know what your point is now. Christianity is the same as superstition? How original. So is atheism if that’s the case. If you don't want what you actually believe in to be put in the same bracket as a faith based belief systems then I suggest you stop calling yourself an atheists and think up another word, because that is what atheism is. The belief that there is no God.

PDN

Malty_T wrote: »

How is superstition any different from faith?

If you want a long answer you could do worse than read this article from the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123811509991753625.html

One key point in that article is Randomness and Order. Superstition is essentially a belief in the supernatural which consists of random beliefs rather than a coherent and consistent worldview.

It is no accident that Universities, the scientific method, and a host of other things that we take for granted today developed primarily where a montheistic religious worldview dominated culture rather a fearful animism that simply sought to appease possibly contradictory deities.

Faith is based on evidence (leaving aside whether you personally find that evidence to be compelling or not). It teaches me that I am a morally responsible individual and that there are predictable consequences to my actions. It encourages me to use reason and logic so as to order my life in a way that will benefit myself and my fellow human beings. Faith presupposes a personal relationship of some sort with the Divine.

Superstition is based on vague hopes and fears irrespective of whether any evidence exists or not. It makes little or no moral demands on me, but simply asks that I observe certain rites to placate some angry deity or even fate itself. There is no personal relationship involved with superstition, for it generally aims to get the gods to leave me alone as much as possible.

Let me add that much of that which has been labelled as 'Christianity' over the years has been much closer to superstition than to faith.

TheInquisitor

chozometroid wrote: »

What is comes down to is this: Atheists just don't like God, or the idea of the Christian God, so it doesn't matter to them if He is real or not. He is not worthy of worship to them. Atheists are their own gods, and as such, are on their own in the grand scheme of things.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

Your dead right, i don't believe in god and even if there is a god i don't understand why i need to worship him. Its like the egyptians worshipping their sun gods?? Whats the difference between you and them nothing??

Frankly a supreme being could come up and prove in whatever way that they created me, but sure i don't care. I don't need to worship him for that. I'll give him a box of roses and some flowers on his birthday like my mom if he wants!

I must disagree with you on the point where you said i think im god!! I don't think i'm my own god. I just think im some other measly human being in a group of almost 7 billion. I'm trying to live a good life, be nice to people( I gave my easter egg to a homeless person on the street) and raise a decent family. I'm not condesending and i don't judge people. Didn't your "god" say , "judge not lest you be judged"

Turtwig

Soul Winner wrote: »

So is atheism if that’s the case. If you don't want what you actually believe in to be put in the same bracket as a faith based belief systems then I suggest you stop calling yourself an atheists and think up another word.

Actually, did I ever say I was atheist? I reject the belief in your deity alright, but if I was 'forced' to classify myself as something it would be : agnostic,atheist,ignostic, which is really just a chain of words..my own personal belief is that I don' want any sense of identity with beliefs :

Posted when was I was an uber noob on boards (now I'm just utter noob:p)

I like it a bit too, unfortunately at the moment I don't want to accept any category of beliefs because I believe that gives us a natural subconscience to adhere to them just so we may be accepted by likeminded individuals. Trying to remain openminded is nigh on impossible - if not impossible.

There is my belief, your belief that is all. I'll respect it as long as you don't impose it on others.

That is my philosophy:)

PDN wrote: »

If you want a long answer you could do worse than read this article from the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123811509991753625.html
....
Let me add that much of that which has been labelled as 'Christianity' over the years has been much closer to superstition than to faith.

Yeah, that was what I thought but it's not surprising really, superstition can creep in anywhere at anytime so easily - I still associate the magpie with bad luck... I just can't help it, I dismiss it, but it still prevails:o

Now, I'm going to get some coffee, got some serious reading to do:cool:

Thanks:)

maskofsanity

Soul Winner wrote: »

I'll bite. Superstition is just like faith. It is an action based upon a belief in something observed to be true in life experience. Like touching wood etc to avoid bad luck. It appears to work nearly all the bloody time. What is your point? Oh don’t tell me, I know what your point is now. Christianity is the same as superstition? How original. So is atheism if that’s the case. If you don't want what you actually believe in to be put in the same bracket as a faith based belief systems then I suggest you stop calling yourself an atheists and think up another word, because that is what atheism is. The belief that there is no God.

WRONG! Again... we assume there is no god. Because lets be realistic here. He's not exactly being forthcoming with the aul miracles in the last.. Oh lets say 1500 years. He hasn't helped any amputees grow new limbs, no one is coming back from the dead and good people suffer just as much as bad people.

Its not a belief its just plain observation. I don't believe.

The title of the thread is "there is no acceptable proof of god for atheists"
Well there is, and its nothing short of the universe tearing apart, god himself angels and all coming down from the sky telling me i'm wrong.
Otherwise I living a life free of fairy tale beliefs.
Ok if atheist doesn't work for you hows about anti-theist. I think that sends a clearer message.

Morbert

studiorat wrote: »

And back we come again because we can demonstrate that those different properties are true and apply to all real numbers. Can we apply that to all gods?

ad infinitum.

But we can't demonstrate that those properties are true. No matter how hard we try, we must always appeal to some assumption or other. The real number system is an assumption, a construct that cannot be derived from logical rules without accepting some statements as true without proof.

I was arguing that such assumptions are distinct from faith. I would not describe counting as faith based, even though we cannot show that 1+1=2 is necessarily true.

Soul Winner:While I have no problem with framing atheism as a belief, it is the idea that it is a faith that I disagree with. If atheism is a faith, then so is the belief that one apple plus one apple equals two apples.

For the record:I'm am effectively an atheist, but if you want to get really technical I'm closer to a metaphysical nihilist.

Turtwig

maskofsanity wrote: »

Its not a belief its just plain observation. I don't believe.

Not a fan of The X-Files then;)

maskofsanity

lol

Soul Winner

maskofsanity wrote: »

Well there is, and its nothing short of the universe tearing apart, god himself angels and all coming down from the sky telling me i'm wrong.

Believe me you don't want to be found in the wrong at that time. That is what Christianity is supposed to be pre-empting, well for some at least. Like telling someone that he's going to drive off a cliff unless he stops and turns back. He could keep driving and not heed the warning but once he gets to the cliff's edge it will pretty hard to stop the fall then. That thought instills fear in me, why it doesn't for others is a mind boggling mystery to me. If I’m wrong then I’m just a deluded fool, however if you’re wrong your really screwed.

Zombrex

Soul Winner wrote: »

If I’m wrong then I’m just a deluded fool, however if you’re wrong your really screwed.

That only works if it is a choice between atheism and Christianity.

Which obviously if we are prepared to entertain the ideas of supernatural deities that like to screw us if we don't worship them, it isn't

So if I'm wrong and you are wrong we are both screwed.

I am probably less screwed than you though because I'm banking on a god that prefers me to worship no god than worship the wrong god. You on the other hand, if you are wrong, have been worshiping the wrong god or a false god, and most human religions (including your own) consider that a big no no. Isn't it the worst crime in the Abrahamic religions?

So I'm afraid if you are wrong you are significantly more screwed than I am. :pac:

If it is going to just come down to odds the odds of you picking the right religion are far less likely than the odds of you picking the wrong one. It seems more sensible not to pick any at all, given the punishment in most religions for worshiping false gods.

maskofsanity

Soul Winner wrote: »

Believe me you don't want to be found in the wrong at that time. That is what Christianity is supposed to be pre-empting, well for some at least. Like telling someone that he's going to drive off a cliff unless he stops and turns back. He could keep driving and not heed the warning but once he gets to the cliff's edge it will pretty hard to stop the fall then. That thought instills fear in me, why it doesn't for others is a mind boggling mystery to me. If I’m wrong then I’m just a deluded fool, however if you’re wrong your really screwed.

Hmmm.... What if Islam is right? Dude allah would be maaaddd...

Turtwig

maskofsanity wrote: »

Hmmm.... What if Islam is right? Dude allah would be maaaddd...

*Common Misconception*

Actually that wouldn't really make a difference, Islam and Christianity (most forms) complement each other..

Soul Winner

Morbert wrote: »

Soul Winner:While I have no problem with framing atheism as a belief, it is the idea that it is a faith that I disagree with.

If atheism can be defined as the belief that there is no God then that is as much a religious statement as any other religion's basic tenet of belief. It is fast becoming very like how some faiths have developed. Take Buddhism for instance. It wasn't until 600 years after Buddha’s death that his disciples decided to stamp the attribute of divinity onto him, but he never claimed divinity himself while he was alive. Although it is unlike most faiths in that it has no particularly deity as its object of worship atheism does invoke a sense of worship - like the worship in some religions of certain saints - of those who have advocated it down through the years like Kant, Hume, Nietzsche et al. The only real difference between atheism and most religions is that most religions reject all other religions and atheism just goes one further and rejects all of them except itself. If it can be framed as a belief then it could easily become just another religion - the religion of no religion.

Morbert

Soul Winner wrote: »

If atheism can be defined as the belief that there is no God then that is as much a religious statement as any other religion's basic tenet of belief. It is fast becoming very like how some faiths have developed. Take Buddhism for instance. It wasn't until 600 years after Buddha’s death that his disciples decided to stamp the attribute of divinity onto him, but he never claimed divinity himself while he was alive. Although it is unlike most faiths in that it has no particularly deity as its object of worship atheism does invoke a sense of worship - like the worship in some religions of certain saints - of those who have advocated it down through the years like Kant, Hume, Nietzsche et al. The only real difference between atheism and most religions is that most religions reject all other religions and atheism just goes one further and rejects all of them except itself. If it can be framed as a belief then it could easily become just another religion - the religion of no religion.

Atheism is not a religion for the same reason theism is not a religion. It is a philosophical statement about whether or not there is a god, with no reference to a set of practises, or rituals, or doctrine, or moral code. Couple this with the fact that most atheists are agnostic, and the case is even less compelling.

Secondly, it can't be said that atheists worship Hume et al anymore than it can be said that theists worship Alister McGrath, or Michael Behe.

chozometroid

Wicknight wrote: »

Throughout this thread you have shown quite a high level of what is known as confirmation bias. You ignore conclusions that don't suit you and accept ones that do.

People tried to point this out to you with the example of the support you claim for your version of god can be used to support any and all god. You dismissed this off hand simply because as you said you are not interested in other gods.

That was very telling. You are only interested in demonstrating your god exists because you have already concluded that he does and are now working backwards.

I see a lot has happened in the brief time I've been away.

I'm ignoring conclusions that don't suit me? Like all other gods existing as well as mine?
I have reasons for believing in the Christian God. I don't have reasons for believing in the other gods. Am I forced to give thorough explanations for denying the existence of all the other gods, when I believe there is only one? You haven't been convinced that any god exists, but I'm sure you haven't thoroughly studied every possible god to see if you are mistaken.
I, on the other hand, have found the truth, as I see it. Why would I continue to give all the other gods a chance, which I know enough about to disagree with? I don't disagree with the idea of the Christian God. There is no god comparable. There is no holy book comparable to the Bible.

The reason atheists don't accept your god exists is because they are not prepared to simply pick a god and start believing he exists. They want a reason beyond I get into heaven in order to do so.
If atheists accepted your evidence for God to be consistent they would have to accept it as evidence for all gods, which is obviously nonsense. And to be consistent so would you but you don't appear to be interested in that.

I haven't given my evidence for God, so you just wasted text. And as far as the evidence for any god goes, unless every god you're considering is omnipotent, omnipresent, loving, forgiving, created all life, has personal relationships with man, died for the sins of mankind, promises an eternity with Him if we believe in Him, doesn't say we'll evolve into gods, doesn't say we reincarnate, then they simply will not share the same evidence as the Christian God.

Also, I didn't simply pick a god and starting believing he exists. It's not that simple, I'm afraid.

They concoct any and all excuse for why the atheists don't believe that their version of god exists rather than the obvious conclusion that perhaps he doesn't, or at the very least perhaps there is not nearly enough evidence to demonstration to someone that he does.

I don't make excuses for you. That's your job.

I think believers need to look at why they do this. The fact that they do do this should at the very least make them think that something is a miss with their beliefs and why they can't convince a non-believer that what they think is true is actually true.

That's not my job, but as long as the non-believer isn't like some of the atheists here who despise the very idea of the Christian God, it's possible for me to open the door and have the Holy Spirit to do the necessary work. You've proven that you can't be convinced by any possible means. One day, maybe you will have a life-changing event.

Zombrex

Soul Winner wrote: »

If atheism can be defined as the belief that there is no God then that is as much a religious statement as any other religion's basic tenet of belief.

And if it is defined as the rejection of the religious claim that there is a God?

How can it be a religious statement if it is a rejection of a religious statement?

A common used phrase is atheism is a religion in the same way not collecting stamps is a hobby.

You say God exists and my religion has talked to him and we know things about him and we wrote them down in this book and it is all true.

I say "I don't believe that is true, I think your religion made that all up"

How is that a "religious" statement?

Soul Winner wrote: »

The only real difference between atheism and most religions is that most religions reject all other religions and atheism just goes one further and rejects all of them except itself.

We also don't hold to a set of common supernatural beliefs
We don't worship or believe in any supernatural deities or beings
We don't have common rituals or practices

Etc etc.

Again, how exactly are we a religion?

By your definition of a religion my football team is a religion (and not in a joke Football is the new religion kinda way)

maskofsanity

Soul Winner wrote: »

If atheism can be defined as the belief that there is no God then that is as much a religious statement as any other religion's basic tenet of belief.

It's not a religious statement its a anti religious statement.
No God.
No religion.

Zombrex

chozometroid wrote: »

I'm ignoring conclusions that don't suit me? Like all other gods existing as well as mine?
I have reasons for believing in the Christian God. I don't have reasons for believing in the other gods.

The reasons you listed as demonstrating to the rest of us that your god exists are reasons that can be used to justify the belief in any and all creator gods. You ignored that point when it was presented to you, simply saying that you don't believe in other gods, which is wonderful but utterly irrelevant since you were attempting to demonstrate why we should be believing in your particular god.

If you have other reasons you aren't sharing with us that only support the Abrahamic deity by all means present them.

Otherwise stop claiming the problem isn't the evidence its me. Cause where I'm sitting its the evidence.

chozometroid wrote: »

Am I forced to give thorough explanations for denying the existence of all the other gods, when I believe there is only one?

You are if you are trying to convince the rest of us. There is little point in claiming the evidence for you god is convincing and then not presenting it.

chozometroid wrote: »

There is no holy book comparable to the Bible.

Under what criteria?

What is it about the Bible that should make me go "That is true" where as I wouldn't say the same for all other holy books?

chozometroid wrote: »

And as far as the evidence for any god goes, unless every god you're considering is omnipotent, omnipresent, loving, forgiving, created all life, has personal relationships with man, died for the sins of mankind, promises an eternity with Him if we believe in Him, doesn't say we'll evolve into gods, doesn't say we reincarnate, then they simply will not share the same evidence as the Christian God.

I'm sorry but none of that made any sense.

Are you seriously claiming that the Christian God has to be the true god because god would only fit the criteria of the Christian God?

I couldn't have picked a better example of confirmation bias.

It is a Star Wars fan saying the best movie of all time has to be about two robots who fall to a desert planet and meet a farm boy who rescues a princess from a big space ship and then have a battle where they destroy the space ship and then him being pleasantly surprised when he determines, unbiased of course, that Star Wars is the best movie ever based on those "neutral" criteria of a good movie. What are the odds!

Why does a god have to do any of those things other than doing those things fits nicely into your religion and means your religion is true.

chozometroid wrote: »

Also, I didn't simply pick a god and starting believing he exists.

Just look at the list you just gave me of what a god has to be in order for it to exist. Does it sound familiar?

chozometroid wrote: »

You've proven that you can't be convinced by any possible means.

A repeatable experiment would be a good start ... anyone got one of those ... anyone ... nope? ... didn't think so

I've proven that I wouldn't simply believe you just because you say you think it is all true. I've got 500 million Hindus sitting over there who claim their religion is all true as well, you have not presented any reason why you are correct and they aren't.

chozometroid wrote: »

One day, maybe you will have a life-changing event.

Possibly, but then unlike the you guys I would still look for the scientific experiment. I tend not to start believing what I hope to be true, if I did I would waste an awful lot of money on the Lotto.

liamw

Soul Winner wrote: »

The only real difference between atheism and most religions is that most religions reject all other religions and atheism just goes one further and rejects all of them except itself. If it can be framed as a belief then it could easily become just another religion - the religion of no religion.

I cannot believe you just said that.

Atheism is the absence of belief, not the belief in absence.

The only reason we have a word to describe people who lack belief in a religion, is becuase religion itself is so popular.

I assume you don't believe in fairies. Let me apply the same logic to you. You are an afairiest. You technically cannot disprove that fairies exist, but you rightly go through life assuming they don't. Now, suppose we have a few different groups of people, each of who believe in fairies but the details are slightly different. To make the analagy correct, let's say that people with particular fairiestic beliefs belong to their fairiligion.

"The only real difference between afairiesm and most fairiligions is that most fairiligions reject all other fairiligions and afairiesm just goes one further and rejects all of them except itself. If it can be framed as a belief then it could easily become just another fairiligion - the fairiligion of no fairiligions."

Zombrex

liamw wrote: »

I cannot believe you just said that.

Atheism is the absence of belief, not the belief in absence.

The only reason we have a word to describe people who lack belief in a religion, is becuase religion itself is so popular.

I assume you don't believe in fairies. Let me apply the same logic to you. You are an afairiest. You technically cannot disprove that fairies exist, but you rightly go through life assuming they don't. Now, suppose we have a few different groups of people, each of who believe in fairies but the details are slightly different. To make the analagy correct, let's say that people with particular fairiestic beliefs belong to their fairiligion.

"The only real difference between afairiesm and most fairiligions is that most fairiligions reject all other fairiligions and afairiesm just goes one further and rejects all of them except itself. If it can be framed as a belief then it could easily become just another fairiligion - the fairiligion of no fairiligions."

All fairiligion believe in fairies, even the ones that believe they don't exist. Believing something doesn't exist is still believing in it. Isn't it :P

maskofsanity

Wicknight wrote: »

All fairiligion believe in fairies, even the ones that believe they don't exist. Believing something doesn't exist is still believing in it. Isn't it :P

Exactly my boy! By jove I think You've got it! Bloody logic...

chozometroid

Originally Posted by chozometroid
And as far as the evidence for any god goes, unless every god you're considering is omnipotent, omnipresent, loving, forgiving, created all life, has personal relationships with man, died for the sins of mankind, promises an eternity with Him if we believe in Him, doesn't say we'll evolve into gods, doesn't say we reincarnate, then they simply will not share the same evidence as the Christian God.

Wicknight wrote: »

Are you seriously claiming that the Christian God has to be the true god because god would only fit the criteria of the Christian God?

Just look at the list you just gave me of what a god has to be in order for it to exist. Does it sound familiar?

I guess you missed the point. Read again.

Wicknight wrote: »

Possibly, but then unlike the you guys I would still look for the scientific experiment. I tend not to start believing what I hope to be true, if I did I would waste an awful lot of money on the Lotto.

I guess you won't have to worry about winning that lotto.

Soul Winner

Wicknight wrote: »

That only works if it is a choice between atheism and Christianity.

Which obviously if we are prepared to entertain the ideas of supernatural deities that like to screw us if we don't worship them, it isn't

So if I'm wrong and you are wrong we are both screwed.

If we are both wrong then what are the consequences? I supposed I'd have to face the wrath of a God who allowed the deception of billions by doing nothing to counteract the formation and growth of Christianity and whatever other religions that are also based on the deluded stories of deluded leaders. Jesus would be the enemy of this God making Him a type of Satanic figure. I think I'd prefer that atheism was true. But as it is I'm glad that I am right

Wicknight wrote: »

I am probably less screwed than you though because I'm banking on a god that prefers me to worship no god than worship the wrong god.

If there is little evidence for the God's of established religions then there is zilch evidence for this one. But heck, who knows?

Wicknight wrote: »

You on the other hand, if you are wrong, have been worshiping the wrong god or a false god, and most human religions (including your own) consider that a big no no. Isn't it the worst crime in the Abrahamic religions?

Only after coming to know the true God and turning back to worshipping false Gods is it a big no no, but the God of the Bible is quite lenient to those who by nature worshipped false Gods before learning about Him. It is only after hearing the truth about Him and then persisting in worshiping false Gods does He get all peed off.

Wicknight wrote: »

So I'm afraid if you are wrong you are significantly more screwed than I am.

Only if your hypothetical God is less just than the God of the Bible. At least He revealed Himself throughout history. Everyone knows about Him at this stage, and the time is coming for everyone to give an account of their lives which He gave them. What excuse does anyone have? I never heard of you? I would have believed had you given us more clues as to your existence? There is no excuse for rejecting His grace.

Wicknight wrote: »

If it is going to just come down to odds the odds of you picking the right religion are far less likely than the odds of you picking the wrong one. It seems more sensible not to pick any at all, given the punishment in most religions for worshiping false gods.

If Islam turned out to be right I would have no truck telling Allah that I truly believed that Jesus was the Son of God. What can he say? That I was wrong? That it was ok to revere Jesus as a great prophet like the Muslims do but not as the Son of God? I would say; but this great prophet claimed He was the Son of God the Messiah, the savior of the world who thought it not robbery to be equal with God, which is a heinous blasphemy in the Islam religion. Jesus was great prophet? I think not, yet this is what Islam teaches. Pretty confusing.

Or what if the Jewish religion is right? What can Jehovah say to me for believing in Christianity? What else did Jehovah do for us non Jews if Christianity is false? He can't say anything to Christians who worshiped Jesus as God because He never did anything to counteract the rise to Christianity.

And what if one of the pagan religions is right? What is the punishment for rejecting the pagan Gods and turning to Christianity? What will happen to Christians in the here after for being wrong on that score? Maybe a pagan God worshipper can fill us in.

And what if atheism is true? No need to worry there. I won't even be around to regret wasting my time with Christianity if atheism is true.

maskofsanity

Soul Winner wrote: »

If Islam turned out to be right I would have no truck telling Allah that I truly believed that Jesus was the Son of God. What can he say? That I was wrong? That it was ok to revere Jesus as a great prophet like the Muslims do but not as the Son of God? I would say; but this great prophet claimed He was the Son of God the Messiah, the savior of the world who thought it not robbery to be equal with God, which is a heinous blasphemy in the Islam religion. Jesus was great prophet? I think not, yet this is what Islam teaches. Pretty confusing.

Yep I would think creator of the universe would be little more careful about what information people get about him or her

Soul Winner wrote: »

what if the Jewish religion is right? What can Jehovah say to me for believing in Christianity? What else did Jehovah do for us non Jews if Christianity is false? He can't say anything to Christians who worshiped Jesus as God because He never did anything to counteract the rise to Christianity.

Its almost like he doesn't exist...

Soul Winner wrote: »

what if one of the pagan religions is right? What is the punishment for rejecting the pagan Gods and turning to Christianity? What will happen to Christians in the here after for being wrong on that score? Maybe a pagan God worshipper can fill us in.

And what if atheism is true? No need to worry there. I won't even be around to regret wasting my time with Christianity if atheism is true.

Yeah Id rather not waste my time than worry about that.

Turtwig

Soul Winner wrote: »

If we are both wrong then what are the consequences? I supposed I'd have to face the wrath of a God who allowed the deception of billions by doing nothing to counteract the formation and growth of Christianity and whatever other religions that are also based on the deluded stories of deluded leaders. Jesus would be the enemy of this God making Him a type of Satanic figure. I think I'd prefer that atheism was true. But as it is I'm glad that I am right



If there is little evidence for the God's of established religions then there is zilch evidence for this one. But heck, who knows?



Only after coming to know the true God and turning back to worshipping false Gods is it a big no no, but the God of the Bible is quite lenient to those who by nature worshipped false Gods before learning about Him. It is only after hearing the truth about Him and then persisting in worshiping false Gods does He get all peed off.



Only if your hypothetical God is less just than the God of the Bible. At least He revealed Himself throughout history. Everyone knows about Him at this stage, and the time is coming for everyone to give an account of their lives which He gave them. What excuse does anyone have? I never heard of you? I would have believed had you given us more clues as to your existence? There is no excuse for rejecting His grace.



If Islam turned out to be right I would have no truck telling Allah that I truly believed that Jesus was the Son of God. What can he say? That I was wrong? That it was ok to revere Jesus as a great prophet like the Muslims do but not as the Son of God? I would say; but this great prophet claimed He was the Son of God the Messiah, the savior of the world who thought it not robbery to be equal with God, which is a heinous blasphemy in the Islam religion. Jesus was great prophet? I think not, yet this is what Islam teaches. Pretty confusing.

Or what if the Jewish religion is right? What can Jehovah say to me for believing in Christianity? What else did Jehovah do for us non Jews if Christianity is false? He can't say anything to Christians who worshiped Jesus as God because He never did anything to counteract the rise to Christianity.

And what if one of the pagan religions is right? What is the punishment for rejecting the pagan Gods and turning to Christianity? What will happen to Christians in the here after for being wrong on that score? Maybe a pagan God worshipper can fill us in.

And what if atheism is true? No need to worry there. I won't even be around to regret wasting my time with Christianity if atheism is true.

What if Christianity was a farce though, and God needs the collective mind power of people believing in Him to conquer the Greater Universe from the Good Eternal Beings that created us all? That sounds like a big risk to me!

Secondly, not everyone is aware of Christianity, indeed some people probably haven't even heard of it.

Soul Winner

maskofsanity wrote: »

Yep I would think creator of the universe would be little more careful about what information people get about him or her

Or maybe He's just like the householder in the parable that Jesus told His disciples, see below:

The Parable of the Weeds

"The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared. "The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?' " 'An enemy did this,' he replied. "The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?' " 'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.' Matthew 13:24-30

Moral of the story? Don't be a weed, rather be a crop that bares fruit, else you'll burn.

maskofsanity

Yeah I get what your trying to say but are you sure your not a weed?