Why do you believe in God?

[pladecalvo]

This is a broad question, so I am not sure if this is what you are asking or if you are trying to lead into a free will/determinism discussion. So I'll just answer as I am perceiving your question. If I am wrong, just clarify and I'll more than likely be happy to give it another shot.

I believe that we are held accountable (consequences) for the moral decisions we make in this life and the next. I also believe that Christ's blood covers and forgives many of the wrongs committed by us, wrongs that this world will never forgive and never let us live down. God, in His grace and mercy, erases many of our wrong moral decisions as He knows our hearts ... just as a parent knows their child's heart.

Thanks but what I was getting at is this. Do you think we have a moral responsibility to others? In other words, if we see people suffering...should we do what we can to help them....even if there suffering is the fault of others or should we just let them suffer? What I'm leading up to is is that Christianity claims that we suffer because of Adam and Eve. So the Christian god is, in effect, allowing us to suffer for what Adam and Eve did. Yet we, as mere mortals, would feel a sense of moral responsibility to end the suffering of others even though they may be suffering for what someone else has done. Why doesn't Christianity expect the same of it's deity?

Hope that made sense....it's getting rather late here and I'm beginning to droop.

 

[pladecalvo]

I know THAT. I was wondering what motivates you to debate this in particular. Why not Less Filling/Tastes Great? Or South versus North? Ford vesus Chevy?

[/seeking]

I think I've mentioned before that I'm fascinated by why theists believe the things they do without having a single shred of objective evidence for it. I'm fascinated why they (IMO) abandon all the reason and logic that they use in their everyday lives in favour of faith. They don't drive through a stop light having faith that their deity will protect them. They wouldn't leave a small child alone somewhere and have faith that no harm would befall them and they wouldn't leave their wallet on a park bench and have faith that it would still be there the following day....but when it comes to their god they employ faith without question.

 

[Minor Axis]

What I'm leading up to is is that Christianity claims that we suffer because of Adam and Eve. So the Christian god is, in effect, allowing us to suffer for what Adam and Eve did. Yet we, as mere mortals, would feel a sense of moral responsibility to end the suffering of others even though they may be suffering for what someone else has done. Why doesn't Christianity expect the same of it's deity?

Only a stubborn and vengeful God would punish all of Adam and Eve's descendants because she failed to obey God and believed that sneaky snake. No teaching, no second chance, no quiet time, no opportunity to learn from one's mistakes. Don't try to make excuses for God who displays no forgiveness in this example. When she blew it, the good times on Earth were over for the human race, finito, just forgetaboutit.

Seriously, this story is not very compatible with general Christian teachings about the love and forgiveness of God, unless he knew all along Eve was going to blow it and it really was planned from the beginning! (Course then they'd need to fix that story.)

 

[groundpounder]

....but when it comes to their god they employ faith without question.

maybe this is why you're having a hard time and feel the need to do some of the things you do and post the way you post. The vast majority of people employ faith WITH question. And AFTER question.

My questions have lead me to where I am. Does that make it any more understandable?

And to the other point, I continue to wonder why you ask questions whose answers you have no interest in.

If you ask the question, "Why do you believe in God?" and someone gives you an answer and then you say, "Well that's silly (or some variation of)" then your reasoning for the question was shrouded in a cloak of seeking of knowledge, when it was actually bait.

I find that unpleasant.

 

[pladecalvo]

Seriously, this story is not very compatible with general Christian teachings about the love and forgiveness of God, unless he knew all along Eve was going to blow it and it really was planned from the beginning!

Which he would have done of course....due to his omniscience.

 

[groundpounder]

I think I've mentioned before that I'm fascinated by why theists believe the things they do without having a single shred of objective evidence for it. I'm fascinated..

I'm honestly seeking the source of the fascination. That's what intrigues me.

People generally interest me. I like to know what makes them tick - either in real life or e-life. I love this stuff. More drama the better, I say. Drama reveals...

 

[groundpounder]

and I know you didn't ask the question, but you are intelligently debating the subject. I like that, so I directed the question to you. Plus, you've started some other interesting threads of late, so it seemed relevant to level the question to you.

 

[pladecalvo]

maybe this is why you're having a hard time and feel the need to do some of the things you do and post the way you post. The vast majority of people employ faith WITH question. And AFTER question.

....and more often than not they don't like the answer that the question gives them... so they employ faith as a means to continue believing in spite of the contrary evidence.

My questions have lead me to where I am. Does that make it any more understandable?

That really depends on what questions you asked.

And to the other point, I continue to wonder why you ask questions whose answers you have no interest in.

It is not wise to claim what someone who you don't know has or hasn't an interest in.

If you ask the question, "Why do you believe in God?" and someone gives you an answer and then you say, "Well that's silly (or some variation of)" then your reasoning for the question was shrouded in a cloak of seeking of knowledge, when it was actually bait.

I don't think I have said "that's silly" to any response...or any variation of. I have given my reasons why I disagree and tried to point out why...nothing more.

I find that unpleasant.

Can't please everyone my friend.

I'm honestly seeking the source of the fascination. That's what intrigues me.

There is no "source". No mystery. Just a genuine fascination for why people believe in some supernatural, unevidenced, entities...but scoff at other supernatural, unevidenced entities.

People generally interest me.

...but you can't understand why theists interest me.

 

[GraceAbounds]

Thanks but what I was getting at is this. Do you think we have a moral responsibility to others?

Yes, though not a blanket statement.

In other words, if we see people suffering...should we do what we can to help them....

Yes, again - not a blanket statement.

even if there suffering is the fault of others or should we just let them suffer?

Yes we should help them.

What I'm leading up to is is that Christianity claims that we suffer because of Adam and Eve. So the Christian god is, in effect, allowing us to suffer for what Adam and Eve did. Yet we, as mere mortals, would feel a sense of moral responsibility to end the suffering of others even though they may be suffering for what someone else has done. Why doesn't Christianity expect the same of it's deity?

I have a moral sense of responsibility to let my children suffer natural consequences of their actions so that they learn life lessons.

I know other parents that can't bare to see their children suffer at all and therefore rush in & remove the natural consequences of their child's behavior and their children never learn life lessons or grow in character and wisdom.

Hope that made sense....it's getting rather late here and I'm beginning to droop.

I understand, though I think there are actually two different subjects being discussed here. 1. What is the source of suffering. And once the source is understood, 2. Why would God allow it to continue?

And for me personally, there would be a 3rd issue of God's timing vs. our timing.

Good night pladecalvo. Talk to you tomorrow possibly.

 

[Cajun Fox]

That completely depends on what you think God's role is in our existence. God is not hands on in that manner. We make the Earth what it is, not God.

Dude...read my posts again kid. I don't think he exists at all...therefore he couldn't have a role in our existence. The second statement is true...we make the world like it is with our OWN decisions. Not by some imaginary being high in the skies.

 

[pladecalvo]

I have a moral sense of responsibility to let my children suffer natural consequences of their actions so that they learn life lessons.

Not quite the same thing is it Grace. Do you think that you would be morally responsible if you allowed your children to suffer the consequences of someone else's action ....which is what your god is doing.

I understand, though I think there are actually two different subjects being discussed here. 1. What is the source of suffering. And once the source is understood, 2. Why would God allow it to continue?

The question is:

Can your god be considered morally responsible when he allows us to suffer because of the actions of others (Adam and Eve)?

Another question of course would be:

Why does your god punish us for the 'sins' of Adam and Eve after categorically saying that the children will not suffer for the sins of the father?

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Not quite the same thing is it Grace. Do you think that you would be morally responsible if you allowed your children to suffer the consequences of someone else's action ....which is what your god is doing.



The question is:

Can your god be considered morally responsible when he allows us to suffer because of the actions of others (Adam and Eve)?

Another question of course would be:

Why does your god punish us for the 'sins' of Adam and Eve after categorically saying that the children will not suffer for the sins of the father?

All interesting statements...With a fatal flaw.

When we suffer consequences.....Is it because we did something knowing there were consequences attatched?

Let me make it easier:

I am going to steal this candy bar because I do not wish to pay for it.

Consequence: Shoplifting charge and perhaps a day or two in the pokey.

Guilty party: Myself? God?

I always find it insteresting that a Christian will claim that they are free from judgement and punishment from God, and an atheist or even an agnostic will swear up and down that we live and die by the firm hand of something/someone that doesn't exist.

To me it's ironic, that's all.....I am not even sure how you can debate something that doesn't exist in your opinion

 

[Peter Parka]

I dont believe there shouldn't be consequenses and punishment for wrongdoing, I just find it unjust if there is a god, punishing people for sins of others.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I dont believe there shouldn't be consequenses and punishment for wrongdoing, I just find it unjust if there is a god, punishing people for sins of others.

If there's no way of proving God's existence, how can you prove the exitence of the consequences he renders?

And if you do happen to lean towards the New Testament, wouldn't you believe that God sent his son to wash you clean of sin and forgive you?:unsure:

 

[Peter Parka]

See, the whole Jesus thing I personally find barbaric. If God is all powerful and can do anything, why would he need to send his son to die for us?

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

See, the whole Jesus thing I personally find barbaric. If God is all powerful and can do anything, why would he need to send his son to die for us?

That is actually a really good question

 

[luc154]

See, the whole Jesus thing I personally find barbaric. If God is all powerful and can do anything, why would he need to send his son to die for us?

Because only a holy person can pay the price for all the sins of a fallen and depraved world. The consequence of sin against a holy God cannot be comprehended by mere human ability. If you sin against a holy God only a supernatural act can undo this. Hence the sending of the Son so man can find salvation.

 

[FreeWorkVest]

Not quite the same thing is it Grace. Do you think that you would be morally responsible if you allowed your children to suffer the consequences of someone else's action ....which is what your god is doing.



The question is:

Can your god be considered morally responsible when he allows us to suffer because of the actions of others (Adam and Eve)?

Another question of course would be:

Why does your god punish us for the 'sins' of Adam and Eve after categorically saying that the children will not suffer for the sins of the father?

I am curious, exactly how many different ways would you like this explained to you. If we had a target number, it would help

I have answered these at least two different times. Are you illiterate? Or just ignoring answers to extend the "debate"?

 

[Peter Parka]

Because only a holy person can pay the price for all the sins of a fallen and depraved world. The consequence of sin against a holy God cannot be comprehended by mere human ability. If you sin against a holy God only a supernatural act can undo this. Hence the sending of the Son so man can find salvation.

See, this is where you contradict yourself. You claim your god is all powerful and can do anything so if that is the case, surely he can change the rules so that a holy person dosent need to die for others.

 

[groundpounder]

To me it's ironic, that's all.....I am not even sure how you can debate something that doesn't exist in your opinion

This is where I was headed when I said I didn't think pladecalvo was interested in the answer. Thanks...