Rationalising The Irrational - Hardcore Theists Apply Within

the hanks ass stuff is amusing and showcases how non believers may view the rules that some believers may insist on, but also minimizes the passion and reason for belief from our standpoint. The box that you put God in is different from my perspective.

You find it amusing because you don't think it is realistic to your experience. I find it amusing because it is exactly how your rationale sounds to others.

We can see the passion but not the reason.Somehow believers think that the more passionate their belief the more persuasive that must be. We see that the more passionate the belief the deeper the delusion and the more the deluded are then prepared to act irrationally on their beliefs.

Which would be true if He didnt exist.The Bible talks of delusion...(not that you are impressed) and it talks of those who believe the Lie as being deluded. It also says God will send the delusion.The reason is that people had no love for the truth.Your truth is based solely on physical verifiable evidence.The reason for accepting evidence must be contemplated.I believe that we accept what we want to accept. You dont have to accept any unproved thing if you dont want to.Let me ask you this....if there were evidence that Jesus was God, would you worship Him or would you find an excuse to oppose Him. (Hypothetical Question)

It's true even if "He" does exist. People blowing themselves up and killing others for their passionately held beliefs is wrong no matter whether "He" exists or not. Correct Oppose him? What a daft idea. Ignore him maybe.But if there was conclusive evidence all rational people would accept whatever it was. One thing I'm absolutely certain about, this worshipping stuff is utter bollox whether "He" exists or not - it's some weird masochistic/power thing that is entirely human in origin. No god would demand people grovel. What possible purpose could it serve? It's a primitive human artefact. Laughable.

That is just another human using the same lame excuse you are using. We are rejecting claims that have no evidence to back them, just as you do all of the time. Also, knowing requires evidence by its very definition. Belief is not knowledge. That is an argument that you would reject for any other claim.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

False dichotomy.I'd ask him the same questions I ask you: Why does He feel a need to be worshipped? If I did oppose Him, how would that affect Him?

Lemme get this straight. Assuming that Jesus was God...not a spaghetti monster. Not a creation of your brain. Not a character in a book.You seem to think that if such a thing as a Creator of all seen and unseen were in human form and in the room next to you you would simply stroll over to him and ask questions? Did it ever occur to you that you would not be on His level? Just sayin..
and keep in mind we are being hypothetical for the purpose of this argument.Lets get even more hypothetical. Say you turn this question back to me. First, describe to me the character and nature of a hypothetical God that YOU create.Then I'll tell you my response

Come on Phat. You learn by asking questions of those NOT on your level.Of course questions should be asked of Jesus or God, just as the Bible stories show us.

so what sort of questions would you ask Him? And can you imagine what sort of questions He might ask you?

He may say that worship is totally voluntary. He may feel offended if you ignored Him and turned on the football game IF He was trying to have a conversation with you, however. He may say that opposing Him would not affect Him but it might affect YOU.Upon further reflection of the worship question, He may say that worship causes you to focus. Worship is for our benefit...not His.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Why he didn't put more padding on shinbones? Why he didn't use two separate paths for taking in food and breathing? Why did he make okra so slimy? What was the reason to invent cockroaches? What makes you think I designed those things?

Why would He come to earth disguised as a human if that wasn't what He wanted? A being that created all that is seen and unseen would probably be fairly aloof from much of its creation. He wouldn't be impressed if it "worshipped" Him. He wouldn't feel the need to destroy it, or to create a fiction in His own mind about sending His Son to "save" it from Himself.

If humans can carry on a conversation during a football game, why can't God?When people say they can't hear themselves think, I tell them to think louder. I agree. So why do I need the distraction of a god to help me focus?

Only if It wanted to be. Perhaps It would want to be involved. Perhaps He would be proud. Perhaps He would feel that the creation was better off worshiping Him rather than gold, fast cars, or faster women. He may think that a free willed creation was capable of destroying itself. He may also feel that sending His Son as a messenger would be the only way to preserve the free will.. Perhaps this creation meant a lot to Him and He didn't want to simply destroy this pot and start a new one. He wanted the intellectual and moral development to potentially continue without directly interfering and making the vessel perfect.We have argued before about the hole in the front yard being an "attractive nuisance". Perhaps the hole had to be there to allow the creation the challenge and personal growth of avoiding it.