venio, video, vinco. (I come, I see, I conquer)

[Gawdzilla Sama]

That's a big if.

A big if-if.

[the_antithesis]

It is not our obligation to believe your assertion because it is entirely possible that whether there is a god or not, you're just a know nothing dummy-dumb. You can't use presupposition to prove your position. You do not get to do that with the actual bone of contention.

If all you have are weak arguments, you will never video.

[Hydra009]

Hey guys, I have psychic powers.

Proof?  Well, there are two possibilities: I have psychic powers or I don't have psychic powers.

If we start with the assumption that I have psychic powers, then it makes sense that I move pencils with my mind and talk to space aliens.  Those same space aliens also say that psychic powers are a real thing because they themselves have psychic powers.  How do I know this?  Because they told me telepathically.

Checkmate, atheists.

[Mr.Obvious]

As I said previously, every person has the capacity to communicate with God. That means that if you tell me that God said such and such to you, you could be correct or in error, but your assertion is not my obligation to believe it because I can take it to God myself. If you speak erroneously, you are the main recipient and victim of your error. The constraints of the processes of communicating with God can only be self-imposed and enforced because you are the the one closest to the action. If you are duplicitous with yourself, it is self-delusion. Naturally, if others believe your falsehood they will be wounding themselves by not vetting your idea properly. Contrary wise, if you speak truth and others believe it, then it's a win-win.

All i'm still hearing here is , " i want to be able to say i am right, solely because i hope and feel like  i should be right".
Which, honestly, seems sad in and by itself.
I stopped believing around 17-18-19 years old, but i haven't reasoned like that since i was probably like 13.

But as pityfull and childish qs your notion may be... were it held like a private belief... then maybe? I mean: you can't 'choose' what convinces you. You can go out there and do research to expand your knowledge. But a belief is not a choice, so up to that point; believing you are right because you 'have to be' right might still be a fallacy  but it at least can make sense to you.

But to come out to the world. To say you welcome all challenges to your god and to know that the only thing you can offer in response is : "Nu-huh! My God tells me you are wrong and I am right and therefor that is that! Nah! And you should believe me because i thought about it real hard. And you are dumb for not believing me. If you talk to god he will tell you the exact same thing, but you are just too dumb and too wrong and too sinful."


... yeah, sure dude. Gottem. Checkmate.

Except, i will say: my dad can beat up your dad.
So there, i win the argument.

[Ecbarrowes]

I've noticed you haven't answered my question yet, Ecbarrowes. I can't say I'm surprised. Theists always cower away from the simple questions.

God is the perfected being that Jesus instructs us to attain to.

[aitm]

God is the perfected being that Jesus instructs us to attain to.

Dead?

[the_antithesis]

God is the perfected being that Jesus instructs us to attain to.

Perfection is undesirable because perfection is useless.

Every time you say your god is perfect, you are saying your god is useless.

I want you to remember this so you will understand. It's because your talking points are poorly thought out and are not only unconvincing, but unappealing. This is why you fail.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Don't try to make him think, he's just here for the Heaven Points.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

God is the perfected being that Jesus instructs us to attain to.

This is a non-answer, and I will once again require that you define your terms. What is a perfect being? Why does Jesus' opinion of it matter? Assuming you mean the character in the Bible, who  has four distinct and conflicting characterizations across the four gospels, do you have any evidence that he even existed? And if so, which of the four versions?

[Ecbarrowes]

I'm aware that prayer is supposed to be done in quiet places. At the time, I was alone in my car, in a church parking lot on a Wednesday evening. The problem wasn't that I couldn't decipher what was God vs Satan, but that I got literally nothing.

I didn't tell God that I was leaving ministry if he didn't answer. I told him was done with him. I was getting tired of the one-way relationship, where I give everything and he can't even be bothered to answer my calls.

I'm not sure you understand. If you are agreeing that God's only (or primary) measure for who gets to escape Hell and go to Heaven is belief in the right religion, then accountability is the last thing in God's priorities. By being a Christian, you essentially get to escape all accountability. Meanwhile, by believing in the wrong religion or none at all, it doesn't matter how good or bad you were in life, you burn all the same. Either way, your actions count for nothing.

You were tired of praying all your life as if to a stone wall, concluding that the God you were praying to was no more an intelligent, benevolent being than a rock with writing on it. It seems to me that you cast God in the image of parents who expected your obedience without discussion. God is not that way. He expects and requires your constant attention and is there to answer your every concern as the best kind of doting father, giving attention to the minutest of details and concerns. If you have a question, he wants you to have an answer to it, if you will allow it. You need to open your mind to the possibility of a God that can and wants to have a two way relationship.

My definition of "religion" is more enlightened than some. Mine defines it as the sum of what you do and are. If you call yourself a Christian and hate your neighbor, then you are clearly not following Christ. In the parable of the two sons, Jesus condemned lip service, praising those who actually do right after having said "no," a bit like your benevolent athiests.  They are more Christian than posers. Your parents seem to be suffering from the lie that God ceased two way communication after the new testament was written.

[Unbeliever]

You, sir, are full of shit.

[Blackleaf]

You were tired of praying all your life as if to a stone wall, concluding that the God you were praying to was no more an intelligent, benevolent being than a rock with writing on it. It seems to me that you cast God in the image of parents who expected your obedience without discussion. God is not that way. He expects and requires your constant attention and is there to answer your every concern as the best kind of doting father, giving attention to the minutest of details and concerns. If you have a question, he wants you to have an answer to it, if you will allow it. You need to open your mind to the possibility of a God that can and wants to have a two way relationship.

No. I expected two-way communication. I just didn't get it. I prayed alone before bed, basically doing what's known as "mindfulness meditation," but with the expectation that God would send me his thoughts as I quieted my own. I also prayed in the car before class in college, and throughout the day, but without the bowing my head and all that. Basically, I could be walking and praying, and no one could tell from just looking at me. I imagined it as if Jesus was standing right beside me. I was also reading the Bible in my own time; something most Christians never do. Even when my parents forced me to change churches, while I hated it, I figured God had something to teach me.

But after years and years of doing this, the delusion was starting to break. I would think God was telling me one thing, then it would turn out to be false. I'd pray for others' well-being, just to find out things got worse. There was literally nothing to suggest that God was communicating with me at all, much less listening. I don't have to convince myself that you are real, because that is self-evident. Why should God be held to different standards?

My definition of "religion" is more enlightened than some. Mine defines it as the sum of what you do and are. If you call yourself a Christian and hate your neighbor, then you are clearly not following Christ. In the parable of the two sons, Jesus condemned lip service, praising those who actually do right after having said "no," a bit like your benevolent athiests.  They are more Christian than posers. Your parents seem to be suffering from the lie that God ceased two way communication after the new testament was written.

While Biblically inaccurate, this is a more palatable take. I prefer this to the more Biblically accurate, but more ridiculous belief that faith in the correct version of Christianity is required to be saved.

I also find it funny that people use "neighbor" as a synonym for "stranger," when Jesus made it clear that he only cared about the Jews. The story of the good Samaritan? Samaritans were Jews. He was telling Jews to look out for each other. When gentiles asked Jesus for help, he would ignore them. Like with the woman who had the "issue of blood." She was following Jesus around long enough for the disciples to get sick of her pleas and ask Jesus to shoo her off. Jesus compares her to a dog, telling her that he wouldn't waste his miracles on her, and he only changed his mind when she said that even dogs get the crumbs that fall off the table.

"He was just testing her."

For what? A lack of self-respect? Well, I guess she passed. Congratulations, lady, you need therapy!

Christianity was a Jewish sect until Paul decided to open it up to gentiles. It should be called Paulism, because he's the one who founded the religion people follow today. Jesus said anyone would be cursed if they removed a single letter from the law of the prophets, then Paul came along as was like, "Shellfish is cool. Pork? Eat it if you want. Circumcision? Optional. Don't worry about it."

[the_antithesis]

... God is not that way. He expects and requires your constant attention and is there to answer your every concern as the best kind of doting father, giving attention to the minutest of details and concerns. If you have a question, he wants you to have an answer to it, if you will allow it. You need to open your mind to the possibility of a God that can and wants to have a two way relationship.

So your god is not perfect. You just call it perfect despite the lacks it must fulfill. A perfect being requires nothing by definition. A perfect being would have no wants.

[Unbeliever]

Is God both perfectly good and perfectly evil? Is God both perfectly beautiful and perfectly ugly? Is God both perfectly powerful and perfectly weak?
That word "perfect" doesn't really mean much of anything at all.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Humans are frequently full of perfect bullshit.