Dear God

Deep,  I fully believe you have your reasons for non-belief just as I have very valid reasons that I do Believe in God.  I hope that you are not looking for God in a physical sense, some white haired person who sets on/in clouds casting lightning bolts and other stereotypes.  I would also hope that whatever your reasons are that you remain open and flexible and remaining open to finding those answers that most all of us have.

I've known many people, just like you say you are, who never believed in God until they actually met God in a very profound and powerful way.  I also pray that if that day comes for you that it will do so while you are in this realm of existence. 

Your Signature line says a lot but also can be applied to many lines of thought and beliefs as well as non-belief.  Ignorance can also be viewed from various perspectives.  Just remember patience is defined by which side of the stall door you find yourself the same can be said of perceptions of who has ignorance.  

gb, I do remain open minded.  Just show me any evidence for god, direct evidence, and I'll reconsider.  Honestly.

I have splendid reasons for my unbelief, and they're better than your reasons for belief.  Your emotional responses to cultural or stressful stimuli do not impress me.

I will not meet God, any more than I will meet the Easter Bunny.  Nor any less, one's about the same as the other.

There is no ignorance implied by my signature line.  Ignorance is unawareness of facts.  Show me some facts that support the god hypothesis.  I'm right here, waiting.  I've heard the claims, the bleatings of the best apologists, the heartfelt emo testimonials.  I remain unimpressed on the basis of reason.

Your work is cut out for you.  Go on, give me your best shot.  I promise I'll receive it with an open mind.  After all, I was born and raised religious, and my open mind compelled me to my current opinion.  I'm capable of changing that open mind.  Let's hear it.

Srsly.

DF

DF,

Then why waste so much time on Him?

And what if it comes to be that your answers were wrong?

Then we simply die.

And all that worrying over doing the right thing, belonging to the right church, Heaven/Hell........over nothing.

If we are wrong.  If we are right, eternity awaits.

There is no 'right' church to belong to, Christ has only one church. His. It has no denomination.

As for worrying, no, don't have that problem.

According to some "Christians", there is a wrong/right church. I've had those religious nuts come at me with their best shots that I was in the wrong church, (when I was in church). Some "Christians" will swear their church is the "True Church" the Bible speaks of. You have just said there is only one church, the one of no denomination. I have news for you, there are church's of different denominations on every street corner or roadway. Are those people that attend those church's wrong to consider their church, "His" church? Who's right......you or them?

If you're really a "Christian", then you should be worrying. The Bible is full of instructions & contradictions. If you're not getting it right, then there's only one place God can send you & according to the Bible, it's hot.

Belief is like butt holes, everyone has one. And all those beliefs can't be right.

But, Chick,

WHAT if they are right?  If GB, other Christians, and I are wrong -- we still have lived a pretty good life by living the Christian faith.  We have lost nothing -- but, have gained peace of mind and happiness from following our God in which we believe.  So, if by some quirk -- the atheists are right -- we have lost nothing.  We all just die -- and cease to exist.  Still, I can say that I have had a very good life following Jesus Christ.

HOWEVER, if WE are right -- we WILL have eternal life in the presence of our holy God. 

And, the non-believers (atheists, agnostics, false religions, cultists, world religions, vanilla-flavored non-believers) -- all have condemned themselves to an eternity that no sane person would desire or want for himself/herself -- or his/her loved ones.

To me, that is a win-win bet!  I bet my eternity and the eternity of all my loved ones on the fact that I know God exists -- and that I will spend eternity with Him and with all my loved ones -- for everyone in my immediate family, and most of my extended family -- are Christian believers.  We are going to have a fantastic Family Reunion in heaven -- and our Host will be Jesus Christ.

Without Him -- what do YOU and your loved ones have to look forward to in eternity?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

GB, I've said it before and I still believe it, if atheists weren't open minded they'd be, or still be, believers.

Jen, since you are open minded, have you seen or heard any SCIENTIFIC proof that there is NO God?

Your answer has to be no because Science has no such proof.

Further: do you know of any absolute proof SCIENCE has produced that eliminates the possibility of God as the creator?

Last but not least: have you ever followed, with understanding, the mathematical models on which the BIG BANG is based? Not by a single scientist but by the few who can explain the theory, non of which are identical and do not totally agree and are argumentative in detail.

All this is not necessary for you to believe in NO God but if the above is not the case then your claim to be open minded is simply a claim.

========================================

Ah. Pascal's Wager again.

http://atheism.about.com/od/at...ll/a/AtheismRisk.htm

Question:
Why are you taking such a risk on being an atheist? If you're wrong, you'll go to hell. You've got nothing to lose by converting and everything to gain.

Answer:
This question, which is really just a simplified version of Pascal's Wager, is one of the most popular questions which religious theists — particularly Christians — pose to atheists. It must sound very appealing, reasonable, and rational to them, otherwise atheists wouldn't have to hear it so often. Unfortunately, Christians who use this reveal that they haven't done their homework because there are a number of very obvious and easy objections to this which they seem completely unaware of.

The first problem lies in the implicit yet unstated assumption that we already know which god we should believe in. That assumption, however, is not necessary to the argument, and thus the argument itself does not explain which religion a person should follow. This can be described as the “avoiding the wrong hell” dilemma. If you happen to follow the right religion, you may indeed “go to heaven and avoid hell.” However, if you choose the wrong religion, you’ll still go to hell.

Thus even if we accept the premise that we have nothing to lose and everything to gain by converting, what should we convert to? The thing missed by so many who use this argument is that you cannot “bet” on the general concept of “theism.” You have to pick specific doctrines. Theism is just a broad concept which includes all possible god-beliefs and, as such, barely exists absent specific theologies. If you are going to really believe in a god, you have to believe in something — which means picking something. If I pick, then I risk picking the wrong god and avoiding the wrong hell.

A second problem is that it isn’t actually true that the person who bets loses nothing. If a person bets on the wrong god, then the True God™ just might punish them for their foolish behavior. What’s more, the True God™ might not mind that people don’t bother believing in it when they have rational reasons — thus, not picking at all might be the safest bet. You just cannot know.

Some choices do indeed come with large risks. Many have died because they trusted in prayer rather than medicine. Others have perished due to the handling of poisonous snakes and the drinking of lethal liquids because Jesus said they would be able to do so without harm. The choice of pseudoscientific and mystical beliefs can carry very negative consequences.

A third problem is the unstated premise that the two choices presented are equally likely. It is only when two choices are equal in probability that it makes sense to go with the allegedly “safe bet.” However, if the choice of a god is revealed to be a great deal less likely than the choice of no god, then god ceases to be the “safe bet.” Or, if both are equally likely, then neither is truly a “safe bet.”

One final problem is the conclusion of the argument, where a person decides to believe in a god because it is the choice that offers the most benefits and least dangers. This requires that the god in question not mind that you believe in it merely in order to gain entrance to heaven and/or to avoid punishment in hell. Such a god wouldn't be a just or fair god, since a person’s eternal fate is not being decided upon based on their actions, but merely on their decision to make a pragmatic and selfish choice. Does this sound like a god that's worth worshipping?

Bill and none of the other "you better accept god" hucksters will explain HOW a person can choose to believe or stop believing. There are some things that are out of a person's control, things that just are the way they are with no way to change it. I tried to deny it for years, and finally accepted the fact I didn't believe anymore. There is no way I could put myself back into that mindset, no way I would make myself miserable by "living a lie" by pretending to believe.

Road,

That has a lot of false assumptions.

True, people have done stupid things in the name of religion, but people do stupid things anyway, religion or not.

A person doesn't DECIDE to believe in God. Your heart is opened by Him to see and feel Him. It's not a choice of  'the most benefits and the least dangers'.

If just deciding was all it took, then just DECIDE to believe when you are taking your last breath, problem solved. You got to live a life of debauchery and still go to Heaven. Perfect.

So the last paragraph is true, but not the way it was intended. That god would not be worth worshiping, but that's not how it works.

Proof of God:

1. Us and the universe are real only as far as we are concerned.

I’m not convinced the large rock in my garden is aware of the universe, any of it’s parts or that we as life forms move amongst and reckon about it.

2. If life forms did not exist, rocks would not be having this conversation nor any other non-life form would be having one in our stead.

3. Since the big bang is without a doubt a unique invention of ours, WE are it’s creator.

4. Any position we take as life forms that the universe exists or possibly exists without us again is an invention of our own.

5. In the case that it does exist without our existence or invention it exists by what authority?

The answer is……………………

But you said Christ has only one church & that it has no denomination. What about those people in those church's of different denominations? Are they going to Hell since they are evidently in the wrong church?

How can you believe in God if you believe the Bible is not logical? Does the two not go hand in hand?

You say you try not to break any commandments. I’m sure you do, so what happens then? It doesn’t worry you that you broke one or several?

Following your best instincts, trying not to break any commandments, & trying to be good to others doesn’t make a Christian. I know many people that follow those same rules but they are by no means a Christian. I would love to hear what you believe a Christian to be.

BTW, I respect your humble opinion. 

No, most believe because they were taught as a child that he exist & to believe. Most of those never question it. Others do question, find it lacking & choose not to believe because there is no definite proof.

Others do decide to believe in God. Their heart is opened by Him once they decide to believe that He does exist. It's what they call faith.

First of all Rramn show me which group of legitimate scientists are trying to prove or disprove a god.  When scientists reveal results of studies that don't jibe with your fairy tale that is not trying to disprove a god, that's simply presenting those results. Secondly, show me any one of my posts where I mention a "big bang".  I look at different theories, discard some, the god myth being the first to go of course, and keep up with other theories that make sense to me. You can keep thinking a god "that had always been here" made a man out of dirt but I've moved past that.

No semi, there is no 'wrong' church if you follow the teachings of Jesus. The Bible IS illogical. Religion is ILLOGICAL.  That is why it's based on faith. If I break a commandment, I ask for forgiveness. I promise i will try not to do it again. I will fail. If we were perfect, as Jenn said, just create us in Heaven.

It seems you have a more defined idea of Christian than I. So go with what you believe. I said I am not a Christian by the standards set here.

You can't prove that there isn't an invisible pink elephant looking over your shoulder as you type on your keyboard.

But, if you say that he is there, the burden of proof is yours. Nobody can prove he isn't there. You can't prove that he is.

The same logic applies to God.

"Faith" is a delusion.

I was not taught as a child to believe. I was sent to church and followed the sheep, but i did not believe. And I was taught to question EVERYTHING, that's how you learn.

Their heart is opened first, then they believe. Not the other way around.Or at least, that is how it worked for me. The people that have the 'life changing experiences', did not believe until after the experience, not before. But as I said, that is my opinion.

People without faith always say it's a delusion. They have to.  It gives them comfort. I don't have to prove anything to you jimi.  Your opinion means nothing to mean.

I have faith in a lot of things, I take comfort in a lot of things. I don't need blind faith in a god to have comfort.

Semi, if a person opens their heart, asks Jesus to come in, and then promises to always TRY to do God's will, they will be given the gift of belief. And it doesn't matter what church you attend. If you read the Bible, ask for understanding, pray, and try to always do God's will, you will be a member of JESUS' church,  whether you attend a COC church, a Catholic church, a Baptist church, or no church at all.

A good analogy would be the difference between justice and the law. We all know what is FAIR, but because our laws are so convoluted and arbitrarily put into practice, very often a horrific crime gets a light punishment while someone who hasn't done much wrong by comparison, gets a very harsh sentence. If justice prevailed instead of "the law", the bad guy would get punished while the not-so-bad guy would get the slap on the wrist.

In religious matters, if FAITH prevailed over "the church", people would not be so confused. When B said that Jesus' church had no denomination, what she meant is that it is a person's faith that makes him a member of Jesus' church, and no doubt SOME members of each denomination ARE true Christians. The rest are Baptists or Catholics or Methodists or whatever, but if they define themselves by denomination rather than as Christians, that is a good tip off that they are going down the wrong path.

Amen, Sister

A good rant, nagel.  I agree.

And if the grape juice is fermented: it's alcoholic.

No where does the Bile say not to drink, it says not to be drunken.

Don't be a glutton, don't be slothful, don't be prideful.

Don't do anything to excess. Moderation is the key.

And the Old Testament is really just the Jews Bible.

Shalom.

A good rant, nagel.  I agree.
And if the grape juice is fermented: it's alcoholic.

No where does the Bile say not to drink, it says not to be drunken.
Don't be a glutton, don't be slothful, don't be prideful.

Don't do anything to excess. Moderation is the key.

And the Old Testament is really just the Jews Bible.

Shalom.

LeChayim!

But you had to believe in something before your heart was opened. Saying the people that have a life changing experience did not believe until after the experience is like saying Moses didn't believe in God until the river divided. 

Moses already had God talking to him when he parted the Red Sea.

No I didn't believe before. It was like Jennifer said, I was going through the motions to pretend to be a good church goer, but didn't believe.

But that is me.

What do you think makes a person a Christian, Semi?

I've followed this topic from afar ( on vacation that is ) but do feel the need to respond regarding some of the post.  First of all, Deep and other non-believers, it's not my place to judge anyone of you or any other Christian.  Second it's also not my place to persuade/convince someone that God exist.  I don't believe it's any human's place to convince another human of that fact.  God does a much better job doing that than any mere human can possibly hope to do.  

Yes I said God does that ... many may state. without doubt, that God doesn't exist and I have no problem with that being a true statement.  To the unbeliever God doesn't exist for there is no evidence of God in the life of the unbeliever for them to look toward as tangible proof or existence.  To nagle, Moses, Paul, other Christian believers God has more than adequately demonstrated Himself unto them such that no doubt remains.  I cannot physically prove that I have dreams or that I Love or have various emotions but I can testify to having them as they are a part of being human.  Someone may see direct or indirect changes in the way I act or behave that might lead to an assumption that something happened, say Love etc but no physical proof is available.   Likewise God is Spirit and dwells in a Spiritual realm and does not relate to humans in the physical realm in physical ways.  The human though knows well when they are being communicated with, by God, for it's no longer a debatable thing but a miraculous one.  

I, nor any other Christian, can provide you with physical proof of God or a change in our life but there are indirect and direct changes that should be evident that something has happened.  Changes like a total change in attitude, the way a person acts, lives etc, but even that isn't sufficient physical proof.  God does reveal Himself to whom He Will and to those who honestly seek Him ... he can be found.

It is God who will do the convincing and provide the proof, not man/woman/humankind.   As for Pascal's Wager and those who know what that is, what should be taken away from that is the severity of the decision that is to be made.

Jenn,

You are correct. None of the ‘legitimate scientists’ ever mention the subject and I know most of them. ‘Results of studies’ are just that and prove nothing for sure. I agree.

You assert that my belief in God is a fairy tale. Your posts are evidence that you are not one of the significant scientists of whom you referred which disqualifies your opinion as to what is a fairy tale.

Jenn this may surprise you but all the ‘significant scientists’ do not exclude the possibility of a creator in their language totally and the absence of absolute proof of scientific theories leaves the door wide open. I think you will have to at least agree to that.

You said you considered different theories and abandoned some for others. Personally I don’t consider you qualified to abandon any scientific theory. If you were you certainly would not be making such claims. Myself included.

I think after you have a PhD in mathematics and physics you would be much less apt to make some of your claims.

I just don’t see the scientific world getting anywhere near an answer to the riddle of what are we all about.

Respectfully,

True. The decision over which gods to choose, before even deciding on whether or not to believe in such a thing.

Because he might actually be willing to enter into a conversation.  He might even give me his best efforts.  I want to see them.

I have no time for those who are certain of the nonexistent.  They are fools and incapable of using their brains.  gb is willing to engage me in the intellectual field of honor, and I look forward to it.  His talent is rare, since intellect and religion coincide with such infrequency.

DF

Nevertheless, it is not an opinion. It is rational truth. It is not an excuse to say that you don't hve to prove anything when such proof is impossible. If it isn't delusional to deny the truth, then you don't understand the term.

Pascal['s wager is not Germain to this "discussion".

Gbrk,

You are casting pearls before swine. I hate to see you do that. Deep farce only wants to belittle you and make a sport of blaspheming God. These folk are not normal. They are dangerous humanists. They are enemies of God and mankind.

They are afraid of me because I have whipped them down. They have no recourse against me because I see only the evil in them. There is no good in them and they hate you gbrk and everything good you represent.

They will devour themselves soon enough. Don’t waste your mission on this handful of evil humanists when there are so many out there that would gladly hear about Jesus.

Bill this goes for you too.

Let me handle these devils. Deep farce, Unoi, jemi, nagle’and Adot.

As for whether a person is genuine or not in their statements is for other readers to determine.  I believe that anyone who has followed this board and these topics can surmise from a sampling of post, from each contributor, what the person is about.  As for me or concern about my time and efforts, I consider, they are never wasted on those here.  While I am fully aware that there are a minority of folks here for strictly nefarious reasons I also know there possibly is one reader that never contributes but follows our discussions.  It is for those people that I spend time in attempts to explain my reason for belief and to defend my faith.  It is for those Christians who may not be so bold to directly confront those who would, like a few of our members, seek to make sport of believers because they detest them or abhor them and what they believe in.  

It is always going to be an argument, of some non-believers and atheist, that believers and Christians are delusional or just intellectually insufficient in an  attempt to explain how a rational, thinking, person could believe in God, or a God.  There is little to ever change their mind and intent however there are others who follow the forum and those are worth spending time in debate and in discussion that may otherwise not seem beneficial.  

You also always will have people who demonstrate vile hatred, toward believers, of such a nature that makes you wonder of it's source and how a person could have such feelings toward another person just because they believe differently.  I fully believe that just as spiritual forces are at work in some that demonic forces are at work in others.  I fully believe that outside of our physical realm a Spiritual realm exist where a Spiritual battle is in play, around us.  So I am fully aware that quite possibly there are other reasons some few express vile hatred toward believers, here and other places in life.  

Those readers who come to the forum and may never contribute also see the postings of these people and can also realize this.  A greater injustice would be to leave these people unopposed and allow them to tear down Christianity or Religion and people's reasons to believe.  I also fully believe that quite possibly one day one thing a believer may say might be used, by God, to actually start a spark of curiosity within a non-believer and from that give an inroad for God to reach someone He intends to minister unto.  While I realize that many may not be legitimate and true to their words it is my belief that some are.  

Some I believe are here for curiosity and because people are always seeking.  Yes a few, maybe more than a few, come to make sport of believers and have hopes of tearing down the beliefs of others through badgering and intimidation never realizing that they may just be strengthening the faith of a weker believer. Most mature believers who are stronger in the faith will have no concern for themselves for they recognize the spiritual battles that exist in the world and including the forum.  In a purely secular sense some would call it a battle of the minds and some who may come ot the forum, out of curiosity and never contribute, need to see that being a Christian isn't about setting in a pew on Sundays or Wednesdays but that there is reason to defend the faith everyday and out of Churches.  That the world consist of people who fully disbelieve in God and feel comfortable in that and that there are reasons that a Christian needs to feed on the word of God rather than just rely upon belief in Christ.  The same forces that Christ fought, in the time He chose, are at work today and the same forces and difficulties that the disciples fought are alive and well today so I don't see it as casting pearls before swine but rather standing up for those unknown numbers that may be following the forum from afar who would otherwise wonder why no one stands up for them or for believers.

Some have said why don't more pastors come and spend time on the forums?  I say many would be ill equipped to do so for they don't teach this type conflict in seminaries and for those that ask those questions I would say that I"m sure there is at least one pastor/minister that has or does spend time here.  Many pastors that I know are not ready or desire an in your face type confrontation with non-believers.  Others would count it casting their pearls before swine and feel it would take time away from their congregations and study for their own preparation.  I can't answer for them or why more pastors aren't here but just to express my own opinions on that subject.  Thanks Rramnlimnn I do appreciate the sentiments but hopefully you see it's more for the unannounced and followers that don't contribute that I spend the time I do here for I'd be the same in person as I am here and it also helps prepare for those confrontations when they do occur.