Straightforward, hard-to-answer-questions about the Bible/Christianity

My most difficult obstacle preventing belief in the Christian God: How can you place the most important aspect of your life (everything that identifies "you"... your soul) on the line for something that can't be verified?Maybe it's just me, but that's my big dilemma that I really don't understand how others get past. That question sums it up, but I will attempt to add further detail here:When I make light decisions, I really don't fact-check much at all. I don't really care if I see this movie or play that video game in my free time. It's fun and all, but it doesn't really matter. For such light decisions, I don't do much research or verification before applying myself in their direction. If I'm wrong, it doesn't really matter and I can just correct it the next day.When I make big decisions, I do lots of fact checking and verification. When things matter, I need to make sure all the i's are dotted and the t's are crossed. I find anything less to be... irresponsible. For example, when I purchased my house I researched the different companies and subdivisions in my price range. I read all the fine-print myself and double-checked all the lawyer proceedings. Even the house-selling-guy said something like "no one ever reads the fine print..." But, to me, this was a huge decision. I've never spent so much money before. It will take me 15-20 years of my life to pay it off, it's a big decision to me. I'm not about to simply trust someone else when I'm putting my life, and the life of my family, on the line. For big decisions like this, I need verification that my family and myself are not going to be screwed over or have our time and investment wasted. I'm required to be responsible and mature about such big decisions.
I'm sure you would agree that it would be irresponsible for me to make such a large decision without verification of any of the facts presented to me that surround such an issue.This is my problem with believing in the Christian God (or any God). Everything that is me (my soul) is rather important to me. It's a big decision for me to invest my soul and passion into something as important and life-changing and possibly life-consuming as religion. Therefore, in order to be responsible and mature about it, I require an adequate level of verification.But how can you get verification for something that is, fundamentally, unverifiable? I cannot see God, I cannot talk to God, I cannot read God's fine-print where they define all terms and leave no room for alternate interpretations. There's the Bible, there's history, there's current religions, and there's what lots of people today talk about. But, looking at it objectively, none of these current religions or Bible's or religious people agree on much. Therefore, obviously, there's no point of verification. If there was a real, actual point of objective verification, then everybody, everywhere would agree completely. Just like how everybody, everywhere agrees completely that objects in free-fall on planet Earth will accelerate at 9.8m/s^2 until their terminal velocity is reached. It's objectively verifiable. With all the different interpretations of religion, the Bible and even God himself, it's self-evident that there is no point of verification. If there were such a point of verification, there wouldn't be "different religions". The fact that different religions exist shows that there is no objective point of verification.

---

I find the two following items to be facts:1. What I decide to do with my life and soul is important and therefore I should make responsible, mature decisions about such things.2. The Christian God, the Bible, other God's and all religions are inherently unverifiable. Therefore, it is impossible to make objective, informed decisions about which one is "better" or "true" or "good".These two facts lead me to an impasse where I am unable to make a responsible, mature decision to believe in the Christian God (or any God).Do you understand my dilemma? I do not understand how anyone can possibly make a responsible, mature decision based upon something that cannot be verified. None of us do it for any other big decision in our lives. Why do so many of us do it where religion is concerned?Basically, I cannot be responsible and mature and also believe in the Christian God, and such a decision seems rather important to me, so I cannot get around the dilemma.Edited by Stile, : Added bolding around basic question, as requested by slevesque for ease of review.

I agree.For anyone else who actually thinks that 'perfection' is not subjective:Perfection has to be about a certain feature. Perfection about that feature can (most of the time) be objective, but the choice of what feature needs to be 'perfect' is simply a subjective choice.For example:I can have a perfect square. But what does this mean?Likely, I'm talking about a square with exactly 90 degree angles and exactly the same lengths of edges. But if this sqaure is 10", and I need a sqaure patch to cover my square hole that is 15", then my perfect sqaure doesn't fit at all, it's too small, it's useless.How can a "perfect square" be useless for a job where I require a square?Obviously, it's because "perfection" has to subjectively be about a certain feature.The perfect square to cover my 15" square hole doesn't even require exactly 90 degree corners or exactly equal lengths of edges. All it needs to be is a roughly-square shape of 16" or so. That is the "perfect square" for this job.Therefore, pefection can reasonably only be measured objectively after a subjective feature or purpose for that perfection is defined. This renders "perfection" to be a subjective idea.With humans, it gets even worse. How can you define a "perfect" feature or purpose for all humans?Are symmetrical facial features "perfection" in human aesthetics? It is for most of the population, but certainly not for all. So it's not 'perfect', then.Is "being saved" or "knowing Jesus Christ as personal saviour" or something similar the "perfect" purpose for humans? It's a high priority for many people, but not even a majority of earth's population. The majority of earth's population wants to "be saved" by some other deity, or has no interest in such things at all. So it's not 'perfect' either, then.Is an all-knowing, omnipotent being "perfection"? I certainly don't think so. Wouldn't perfection include a certain amount of fun? How can you have fun if you already know what's going to happen all the time? You can never be surprised, you can never anticipate, you can never learn. That doesn't sound very fun. Therefore, omnipotence is not 'perfect' because there would be at least one thing I would miss.Omnipotence may be perfection regarding the ability to do things. But it is not some general, undefined "perfection." Such a thing doesn't exist, because perfection is subjective.

Yes, I agree with the basic premise of Hyro's point as well. At fault for what? Granted if God is the supreme creator, and if all this is according to some plan of his, and if there is some sort of "good" thing behind this unknown plan, and if there is some sort of way we're supposed to understand what to do without knowing the plan or the "good", or God at all... then God may very well have a point in saying that we are "at fault." For something.But, well... obviously, that's a lot of if's. And really big if's. Like, totally out there kind of big if's. An active 3 year old's imagination has nothing on those sorts of if's. Yes, certainly agreed.
Sad, really, that so much fear and anger and bloodshed comes as a result of nonsense. But, well, such things are born of nonsense, regardless of the "form" or "type" of that nonsense. Even without all this God stuff, I'm sure some other nonsense would fill the gap and the world wouldn't be all that different from what it is now.So, how do we fight nonsense? - On a global scale?Obviously through understanding, education and a will for "what's right."
But, as big as all those above "if's" are, this is equally as big of a "easy to say, hard to do" kind of thing.So, what do we do?I haven't worked out any feasible ideas yet, advice is welcomed in earnest. I basically just post here, it makes me feel better Doing our best to try our best, I suppose

If "reasonable" is not "a logical, evidence-based explanation"... that what, specifically, does "reasonable" mean to you? "Acceptable to me" is not the same as "reasonable."I will not argue that "faith" is a (the only, even?) acceptable reason for some people to accept the Bible and God as truth. However, that certainly does not make it reasonable. Not in a mature, responsible sense of the word, anyway.

So, you cannot grade standards of morality. Got it.
You are building your credibility on the idea of objectiveness. Excellent. *Poof*That was the sound of your credibility exploding, being popped by a hypocritical needle.

Are they possibly going to be asked (and attempted to answer...) in the future? Or is it just not that kind of place?Fair enough, either way... Although there are a LOT of well-formulated questions on the first page of this thread. Hopefully some well-meaning Christian will come along and attempt to give them a decent answer.[/guilttrip] I especially like this question:
Message 7
This message isn't specifically meant for slevesque (although he's certainly welcome to attempt these questions). Just saying this thread really did start off in a good direction, and it would be a shame if all these nice hard-to-answer-questions about the Bible/Christianity were just left to rot without ever being given even an attempt at an answer...Okay... now [/guilttrip]