Who & what are the demons ?

Moral neutrality in the form of indifference?

No. I am suggesting that rather than choosing good or evil the choice could be good or indifference.Then evil need not actually exist, God could reward the "good" and ultimately just let the indifferent fade into non-existance.Then none of that nasty hell/satan/evil/hate stuff would be at all necessary?Just a thought........Edited by Straggler, : Fix quotesEdited by Straggler, : No reason given.

I just did this.But I still don't believe.What am I doing wrong?

OK. So how do I meet the lord such that he can convince me?

This sounds suspiciously like your usual circular argument of - "Those who believe will see the reasons to believe".If we change this to "Those who believe will create reasons to believe" then I think we are closer to the truth of the situation.

Thank you very much.In return I wish you all the best with regard to those pesky demons.

That seems awfully pick'n'mix. Isn't believing in good/God as a "force outside of us that we are powerless to correct" just a mirror image of that which you are rejecting demons for?

I would put people who reject the possibility of God in the same class as those who have rejected the possibility of the demons. Or the Immaterial Pink Unicorn etc. etc.Personally I haven't rejected the possibility of any of these thingsBut I see little more reason to believe in the IPU than demons or God.Phat - Do you reject the possibility of demons?

Presumably many of those who believe in the existence of demons have had experiences, or heard of events, which they attribute to the existence of demons.Do you consider their belief in the existence of demons to be misplaced?

In this thread I am less interested in your belief in God and it's basis than your position on demons and those who do believe in their existence.Do you consider those who believe that demons are responsible for certain experiences or events to hold false beliefs?What do you think forms the basis of these beliefs if it is not based on the actual existence of demons?

If demons do exist and have a demonstrable effect on reality then denying that they exist because we don't like the idea of such things would just be an act of denial. It would be like denying that viruses exist because I don't like them. I don't see how denying reality is conducive to a rational approach to life. Fortunately we don't have to deny reality in order to reject the notion of demons as particularly likely. If the events and experiences that are attributed to demons would occur whether demons exist or not then on what basis are demons being postulated as the cause of anything at all?

So, whatever you believe may have caused this event, do you consider belief in demons as the cause of such an experience to be a reasonable conclusion?Do you consider those who believe that demons are responsible for similar experiences or events to hold false beliefs?What do you think forms the basis of these beliefs if it is not based on the actual existence of demons?

I'm not asking about proof and falsification here.I am asking if you consider those who believe in the existence of demons to be wrong?

Dude that is bonkers. And, if you think about it, not a logically consistent approach.There are some who believe that president Obama is the anti-Christ. There are some people who believe he is not the anti-Christ. If president Obama is not the anti-Christ those who believe that he is the anti-Christ are wrong. If president Obama does turn out to be the anti-Christ those who believe he is not the anti-Christ - Are wrong.Either way there are currently people who hold a belief regarding president Obama’s status as the anti-Christ which is wrong.Likewise demons either exist or they don’t. So there are necessarily people out there who hold beliefs about the existence of demons which are wrong (some believe they exist and some believe they don't) Yet you say you don’t believe this event was caused by demons. Which means you must consider those who believe that a demon did cause this event are wrong in this belief. Regardless of who is right or wrong somebody’s belief regarding this matter has to be wrong. You can’t believe opposite things and both be correct. That makes no sense whatsoever.I am not sure why you are so resistant to the idea that a belief can be wrong?

I wouldn't have put it quite as belligerently but I agree in spirit.But, to be fair, anyone who is a regular here can probably not be accused of refusing to engage with people who will challenge their beliefs.i think what Phat said about belief is silly. But Phat remains 'one of the good guys' here all the same.......