How many GODS do you have?

[Unbeliever]

It seems to me that "faith" is merely wishful thinking. How can faith be anything other than that? It certainly is no "evidence of things not seen."

Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, 'Yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up must come down, down, down. Amen!' If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.

[Baruch]

Well, the God depicted by the Bible was certainly not a very nice God:

What the Bible's God is really like

Yes, G-d is like Cthulhu ... G-d will destroy us all, and like it.  G-d isn't your friend or your daddy or your pet.  G-d is more like Kali than like Jesus.

So it might be a mistake to introduce religion to children.

[Baruch]

What about as He is depicted in the Qur'an?

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

More fair, more refined.  The Qur'an is more refined than the Tanakh.  But not as humane as the New Testament.  Yes, I read and listen to the Qur'an.  But I am very busy.

If anything, the Qur'an is a great work of art (as written) and an aural revelation (as declaimed).  It helps to be a native Saudi Arab of course.  I consider all great works of art, written or otherwise, to be revelatory.

[Unbeliever]

Yes, G-d is like Cthulhu ... G-d will destroy us all, and like it.  G-d isn't your friend or your daddy or your pet.  G-d is more like Kali than like Jesus.

So it might be a mistake to introduce religion to children.

Lucky for us such a monster doesn't exist, huh?

[Baruch]

Nice post hoc rationalization you got there.

But then, where does that leave me, with my critical thinking and my skepticism, then?

If the above is true, and your god knows that some people, like me will be unable to believe he exists without good evidence, then as far as I can tell, he wants us to believe he exists for bad reasons.

That sure seems like he values gullibility more than critical thinking. Not interested.

A seminary student could honestly tell you, that all theology is applied circular reasoning.  If they were honest.  This isn't as bad as it sounds.  But not something I have any interest in.

[Baruch]

It seems to me that "faith" is merely wishful thinking. How can faith be anything other than that? It certainly is no "evidence of things not seen."

And a Van Gogh is just paint.

[Baruch]

Lucky for us such a monster doesn't exist, huh?

What is the God-Emperor?  Donald Trump.  He will eat me last, and you first ... oh one of little faith.

So you are saying Donald Trump (or other living exemplars of "angst") doesn't exist?  There is more than one.  For some people it is Hillary or Barak or Boris or Vladimir.  There is a Great Satan for every taste.

[Cavebear]

It seems to me that "faith" is merely wishful thinking. How can faith be anything other than that? It certainly is no "evidence of things not seen."

Isn't "faith", by definition, a belief unsupported by fact?  And deliberately intended to stay that way?  It not something I understand well, but theists have (unendingly) explained that the non-evidential "trust" is sort of the whole point.  I think they are nuts, but that's how they explain "faith" to me.

[Baruch]

Isn't "faith", by definition, a belief unsupported by fact?  And deliberately intended to stay that way?  It not something I understand well, but theists have (unendingly) explained that the non-evidential "trust" is sort of the whole point.  I think they are nuts, but that's how they explain "faith" to me.

Apostle Paul said so, but why do you, of all people, agree with Apostle Paul?

[Cavebear]

Apostle Paul said so, but why do you, of all people, agree with Apostle Paul?

The definition of "faith" isn't really an atheist/theist dispute.  I fully understand what faith means.  I just don't agree it should be the primary determination of how to the understand the universe.

[Absolute_Agent]

Nice post hoc rationalization you got there.

But then, where does that leave me, with my critical thinking and my skepticism, then?

If the above is true, and your god knows that some people, like me will be unable to believe he exists without good evidence, then as far as I can tell, he wants us to believe he exists for bad reasons.

That sure seems like he values gullibility more than critical thinking. Not interested.

God foresaw that many would reject His reality, what makes you so special? On your "I can't accept anything without proof" I call bluff!

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[Cavebear]

God foresaw that many would reject His reality, what makes you so special? On your "I can't accept anything without proof" I call bluff!

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Not to interject (who, me?) but I'm wondering when any deity proved to you, personally, that it foresaw my or anyone else's rejection of its reality specifically.  Did you mean humankind in the whole, or just some portion of it?  And who might they be?  Is it all humans of some ethnicity or just all people of the general group?  Or is it all people who don't believe your specif religious doctrine right down to crossing the Ts and dotting the Is.  You have to be careful about that.  If you get too detailed, you find yourself alone in perfection of faith.  Religious wars have been fought over small matters.

[Absolute_Agent]

Not to interject (who, me?) but I'm wondering when any deity proved to you, personally, that it foresaw my or anyone else's rejection of its reality specifically.  Did you mean humankind in the whole, or just some portion of it?  And who might they be?  Is it all humans of some ethnicity or just all people of the general group?  Or is it all people who don't believe your specif religious doctrine right down to crossing the Ts and dotting the Is.  You have to be careful about that.  If you get too detailed, you find yourself alone in perfection of faith.  Religious wars have been fought over small matters.

At the moment the context is that we are discussing God as omniscient (hypothetical of course for Mr. Moon).  And His question pertains to the logicality of the concept of God--not proof of existence.  I personally don't view attempting to prove God's existence as a valid exercise to engage in.  I'm focused on exploring it's logicality.

In my faith, I accept God as all knowing based on scriptural information.  If He is all knowing it logically follows he foresaw each and every person who would reject Him.  But I don't know who they are, except when, as in Mr. Moon's case, they state as much. Have I received personal evidence God is all-knowing? Yes, much.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[Simon Moon]

God foresaw that many would reject His reality, what makes you so special? On your "I can't accept anything without proof" I call bluff!

OK, for argument's sake, I'll accept that there is a god, and he foresaw that many of his creation would reject his existence.

Then why did he even create those of us that find us in that position? I am not sure if you believe in eternal punishment, or annihilation theory, but either way, your god is still creating billions of people, knowing ahead of time that they are destined for punishment (or not being rewarded), all because he fails to provide us with evidence.

If there is a god, and he wants to punish me for not being gullible enough to believe he exists, I guess there's nothing I can do about it. But how does that not make him a moral thug?

[Baruch]

The definition of "faith" isn't really an atheist/theist dispute.  I fully understand what faith means.  I just don't agree it should be the primary determination of how to the understand the universe.

You know a dictionary definition.  Without having the theology of Paul, you can't understand what he was saying.  And Paul may be wrong.