You'll probably find this shocking, but I disagree. I think there is evidence. In fact, there is corroborative evidence for almost any major world religion/belief system (including yours). The key questions are this: 1. Is one correct? 2. Is there a way to synthesize them all into a cohesive whole? 3. Are none of them correct? 4. Are they all simulataneously true? We know what your strong leaning is toward of course, but to say that there's no evidence is throwing out the testimony of many of your dear friends and fellow traders. Now you don't want to do that do you?
Jokes don't work. They die out quickly...Imo only something with a spiritual backing, right or wrong, lasts through the centuries... Example: UFO's have persisted through many decades now because there are many legitimate sightings of them. (As you know I think the legitimate ones are spiritual in nature...) If there had been no legitimate sightings, it would have died out...
I think you need to give the rest of humanity a little more credit than you do. Why can't even the most "primitive" people deal with a spiritual reality? Why do primitive people have to always be primitive in their thought processes as you postulate for example? How do you really know that, for example, some shaman on the Navajo reservation is a myth-believing fool? He's not perfect, but maybe he knows something you don't? Isn't that possible?!?
I asked you once to explain this "power theory" and all you did was restated something about a race to be the criminal. What I want to know is what this means? Go into it a bit, flesh out this world you perceive the atheist as existing in. At least then we'll have something to discuss. For now, all you're saying is the functional equivalent of "Bertram [sic] Russell said people who eat pepperoni pizza want to buy Canon printers. There! Argue against it!" And when I tell you, no Jem, I, as a pepperoni eater don't want to buy a Canon printer, you aren't willing to accept my answer. Well, what exactly am I supposed to argue against? If you want me to agree with your conclusion you're going to need to provide supporting arguments for it; "'Cos Bertram[sic] Russell said so!" isn't good enough. Trying something in the form of "Firstly...blah blah blah blah! Secondly, blablablab blah blah blabla blah! And lastly, blah blabla blah blah blablabla! Therefore, ladies and gentleman, in conclusion, we can see that anybody who eats pepperoni pizzas must obviously want to buy Canon printers!"
As the story goes isn't it that God created sin, ensured people would sin, and knowing people must sin , he sends Christ to be killed for the sin God himself caused and created. So then God punishes Christ/himself/people, as atonement for all people, who God caused to be sinful in the first place. 2. If you commit murder here in this life on this earth you will probably be punished here on this earth. The punishment will most likely come from the state, other people or maybe even yourself. The only way God is involved in this is maybe the way he created us or if He influenced our laws, then through that avenue. That's a big involvement isn't it? But reckless at least, to create mankind as sinful then leave it to them to be sinful! 3. Now if you or anyone else does as you say and is fair and kind etc. then all should go well for them here which is as I see it is fine with God as He set it up that way. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" " Love thy neighbor as thyself". etc. But God isn't said to have set it up that way. He set it up that all people would be born with sin. It could equally be that God's intention is that you should be sinful. To be fair and kind does not need God. I don't see it as fine with God, when God made things so that mankind had to be sinful. it sounds like it would be more fine with him if people sinned. 4. If you decide not to accept Christ's death for your sins and want to be seperate from God for eternity then that is also your choice. It is totally up to you. There may be consequences for this decision but it is totally up to you to weigh the choices. This is much like the decision to murder. If you don't like the consequences then there are other avenues such as not murdering. When you say "accept Christ's death for your sins" I take it you mean believing Christ died for (payment of?) peoples' sin. If he did then apparently the debt is somehow paid. so it's ok by God to sin now. Apart from that, apparently Christ's death didn't work. God killed himself or his son for something he created himself, but then left in tact the very thing Christ is supposed to have died for. Deciding not to fall for this story is much like the decision to murder. Are you sure about that?? I think such extreme comparison signifies a tendency on your part to over dramatize for the sake of effect. Finding no reason to accept mythical stories, is hardly comparable to finding reason not to murder. For now you have made the right and noble decision to live here innocently to the best of your ability which is a very good decision. The rest is totally in your hands and is nobodies business except yours. It is kind of like having ones cake and eating it too. It may not be possible to totally reject God and yet share in all the benefits He promises. If you don't want to be near God then He will honor your desire and not force Himself on you. And that seems fair to me. I suppose a threat of eternal damnation, whether implied or expressed directly as in the Bible, is not actually forcing anyone. However religionists make it their business to use as much linguistic force (myth with murder , non complience with eternal torture) by stating what they know is right. But to choose to be near something or someone which is described as much a homicidal, despotic, tyrannical, megalomaniac, as a loving creator of everything.. is a complete non starter. Surely one would have to be actually forced to accept such unacceptable circumstances, were the myth to turn into reality.
Then if man sows the seeds of rationality and reasonableness, so shall he reap the logical result that 'we' can conclude there is no reason to pre-suppose God by assumption and moreover, the lack of something is likely to be unable to judge anything... whether fairly or otherwise.
Doubter: >That little thing is part of the consequences. Uhhh...EXACTLY. The "consequence" of living a respectful, helpful life is to be murdered by vengeful, mass murdering lord -- simply because I won't tow his line and call him a Loving Father. Word it however you want...it doesn't change what it is. JB
Shoe: >And, guys, if the Seventh Day Adventists are right >about hell, then many of the standard objections to >hell vaporize. I'm sorry Shoe, I've heard you say that before and I just have to call you out on it. The only significant difference between the SDA version of hell and the standard christian "Miltonian" version of hell is the length of time spent there. The SDAs teach that the time will be commesurate with your deeds(the worse your life, the more time you spend) rather than "forever". They STILL believe in the LITERAL lake of fire that will LITERALLY burn you to death. At a minimum it will be the practical equivilent of being burned at the stake So, you can say the "objections vaporize", but mine sure as hell don't. I don't believe that it is fair to be burned AT ALL for living a respectful, helpful life. Imagine that. JB
With a bit more time I just HAVE to revisit this post. Doubter: >It could well be that He foresees the end of the universe >in a ball of fire and the only safe place is under His >protection. Who knows. The bible repeatedly and clearly states (Rev. 19 for example) that the final destruction of the 'non-saved' is deliberate. Verse 15 for example: >And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with >it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them >with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of >the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. Uhhh...yeah. Your apologist position of "well, the end is not his doing -- he is *saving* me from this end that he simply *foresees* is just fine as a personal position, but it doesn't square with the teachings of the word of god. The word of god says the he gets really pissed with everyone who doesn't believe in HIM as the ONLY and he comes down and kicks ass in brutal ways. JB