Show of Hands

*for all parents

Parents should sometimes let their kids die when they have the ability to save them?

Axl: Assuming that the death is not the end of the child, it's quite easy to conceive that that may sometimes be the case.

Lol

How exactly is that proof? What if the Christians are just not following Her will?

P.S. I'm Christian, and have no hatred whatsoever of non-believers. Sorry if I ruined your stereotype!

Human behavior doesn't prove or disprove god, however, since there are so many religions but there can be only one truth, it's statistically unlikely the particular one you adhere to is true.

I'm sure that it's not completely true, since a lot of religion is interpreted by humans and we are fallible. But there is no reason to believe that the tenets are chosen randomly. In fact, most major religions share dogma.

Ifb.......you didn't ruin my stereotype at all. So please don't flatter yourself. I stand by my post and beliefs, if there were a "God" those who follow him would not be all I mentioned before. After all, didn't "God"create man in his image?

You set the bar so low it's hardly flattery to think myself above it. Surely you don't think that applies to most believers?

It is indeed a sign of self aggrandizement to suggest that your "threshold" is above another user......hilarious!

What exactly do you think I'm claiming? Other than I'm a) Christian and b) not full of hate, not judging non-believers harshly, and not full of hypocrisy. And this is self aggrandizement?

@Ifb, you were the one to demean my position (which was respectful) by saying I had "set a low standard" now you are offended by my reply? Do a self check

Your opinion of the average Christian is indeed a low standard for me to rise above as a Christian. That's what I meant.

Well, assuming that God exists, God would be all powerful, all knowing, the creator of the world and the sustainer of life. That's where I would start for why you would worship God, assuming He exists.

Why would he need, let alone demand worship? If god exists, I imagine It to be the deist kind, more or less an abstract entity that, being all knowing and all powerful, couldn't care less whether It is worshipped, and doesn't judge.

So basically an irrelevant entity? What would be the point of ascribing to a God who is irrelevant?

We worship God for our benefit, not Hers. God loves us so She wants us to worship Her so that we can be fulfilled.

Only as explanation for the existence of the universe by saying there is a timeless entity that created it.

A timeless entity that is all knowing, all powerful, created the whole universe from the farthest planet to the smallest atom....and now sits on its hands doing nothing?

Worship does not mean bowing down. It means to honor and love. Look it up.

Worship is a communal, personal relationship with the Living God.

^^^^^
This.

steelcity....for all you know our entire universe could be the size of a spec of dust in the "god realm", or god could simply be a programmer who designed our universe on a computer and we are in a simulation...

I think it's idle speculation for us limited beings to muse about God's motive and whether he does or doesn't do something. We couldn't comprehend any more than a body cell could grasp how the human brain works.

There's no need to speculate when He has put it all in writing for us.

I hope you aren't talking about the Bible because that was written my men a thousand years after the fact.

"After the fact"? Which fact exactly?

Sorry, I should have said after the "fiction".

So you have nothing relevant or intelligent to add to the discussion? Ok. Keep up with the zingers though. They really help your case!

Will do!!

But dear veritas, you have no evidence for this.

Why do you apply evidence to all of your stances except when it comes to the issue of God?

If it doesn't intervene then how do we know it's morality or the extent of it's power? (I'm a Deist too)

Because we cannot perceive the metaphysical and agnosticism is lame.

@Talk. I'm not sure I quite understand the question.

"We cannot perceive the metaphysical"...

Still no evidence. I thought you were a man of logic?

I've explained this a lot.

Let's assume God exists. Even if He does, we CANNOT know of evidence that He exists. Clearly evidence is a terrible tool for verifying existence if we fundamentally cannot perceive it.

Logic and evidence are also two different things. Cosmological arguments are logic but they don't rely on evidence.

Using empirical evidence as the requisite proof of the metaphysical makes no sense. There is no overlap between those two. They are completely independent.

@v
I just cannot reconcile the compassionate part. Why does a compassionate God refuse to intervene in our lives?

There is no reproducible empirical evidence of God's existence, or a lot of things for that matter. Surely there are strong reasons to believe things apart from reproducible empirical evidence? Otherwise most (probably all) knowledge is doomed.

@OTI. I agree. Strictly existence is not sufficient. But with other Buddhist concepts I think they are compatible.

Plenty if evidence for God. Now the characteristics of God are up for debate and probably depend on divine revelation and *gasp* religion!

*of

Well I guess not necessarily since you didn't include all powerful. Or one hat intervenes.

*that

I recommend C.S. Lewis' "The Problem if Pain". Just because I don't give my children everything that they want does not mean that I don't love them, or that I'm incapable of giving it to them.

Also, human versions of compassion, etc. likely are different from the Divine, but only in the sense that God's version is better and more complete.

Exactly ifb, we are His children's. But He sees the big picture. Just like parents, when they say no and a kid is screaming on the floor as though the

...world ended. He is our heaven Father and knows best. And best is sometimes no and sometimes tough love. And I know first hand that being the parent who says no can be very painful for the parent.