You are generalizing that I "can't take a stand" from the single fact that I say "I don't know" when asked if God exists. You have yet to explain why saying "I don't know" is "weak." Can you prove God exists? No. Can Lardbeetle prove God doesn't exist? No. And yet you want me to "have a backbone" and choose one or the other?

Personally, I think it takes more backbone to admit I don't know than to jump into one of the two camps you've so helpfully pre-defined for me.

How you got from saying "I don't know if God exists" to being a liberal, I don't know. You happen to be correct, but the logical connection escapes me.

Such generalities you spew.

I was a National Merit Scholar. Definitely feeble-minded.

I volunteered for the Army as an officer in a combat branch (Armor). Clearly, no backbone.

In high school I led a revolt in my Scout troop when the Scoutmaster decided everyone (Jews, Muslims, atheists, Catholics) would have to participate in Christian church services on campouts. I'm sure that showed I was "weak."

This last Christmas I stopped a purse-snatching at the Mall of America. More "weakness".

I vote, I pay my taxes, I own a house, I'm raising two kids, I've been married and faithful for 9 years. I stand up for what I believe in my daily life. I'm honest to a fault.

But because I see no proof either way about God's existence, I'm a weak-minded cowardly liberal. Sure.

I'd say "bite me", but your avatar is a Doberman.

__________________
Scarred survivor of the April 2008 Mod War.

I made the connection that you are a Liberal, because you talk like a Liberal (i.e., you seem to have the Liberal inclination to analyze things ad nauseam). My experience has shown me that arguing with a Liberal is pointless, because they tend to believe arguing is an end in itself and not a means to an end. Relating that to a belief in God, you will never have “proof” that God exists, so why even enter into a debate about the matter? You either believe, or you don’t.

I admit I can be wordy, and I tend to believe that most things are various shades of grey, not black or white. And specifically regarding the existence of God, I discuss it because I enjoy the discussion, not because I expect it to lead anywhere.

That said, I'm always willing to follow a logical thread to a conclusion. If a discussion about God ever DOES end up leading somewhere, I'll follow it.

And that is what justified calling me "weak", "lacking a backbone" and "worthless?" Interesting value system you have there.

Because I find contemplating cosmic questions such as "Is there a God?" and "Where did we come from?" and "who created the Universe?" enjoyable.

In your world, maybe.

Every believer and nonbeliever needed, at some point, to be persuaded to their particular point of view, and their particular brand of religion. Unless they were born believing what they believe now, everyone at some point was a "seeker" who was trying to decide what to believe.

Me, I looked at the evidence and arguments on various sides and quickly realized there was no proof either way, so why waste time arguing about it?

That is not "refusing to take a stand": My stand is that there is no proof either way. Arguably that's the toughest-minded stance of all, because I'm choosing to live my beliefs (not worshipping a God I'm not convinced exists) while at the same time recognizing that my beliefs might be condemning me to eternal (*)(*)(*)(*)ation. It's called having the courage of one's convictions.

But I still enjoy the thorny questions.

__________________
Scarred survivor of the April 2008 Mod War.

No, I'm not. You're insulting him, not in the course of helping the debate, but just for the hell of it. It's disruptive to the forums. Stop it.

Yes, we analyze things. AKA, we think. Have you ever been unsure about something? Lacking proof, if I told you that one brand of sports car was faster than the other, would you automatically just jump to the conclusion that either
A) I am right
or
B) I am wrong
and that there is no possibility to say
C) I have no knowledge of sports cars, so I don't know.

And if you respond to this by saying that theology is different from car mechanics, well, it is, but my point is still valid, and one can be genuinely unsure about ANYTHING, EVEN if you feel uncomfortable about it and it does not fit into your black-and-white world of 1's and 0's.

Valid choices concerning theology:
A) God(s) exist(s)
B) God(s) does/do not exist
C) I have not seen (a) god, nor has anyone proven he/she/one exists, so I decide to look for truth in my own fashion until I find it, if I even do, or if I even wish to spend the valuable moments of my life searching for something like that.

THINK. THINK. I BEG YOU.

Thanks for the defense, lardbeetle, but I'm a moderator. So the authorities are sort of automatically aware here.

Besides, insults tend to say a lot more about the speaker than the target. I'm content to let other readers of this thread draw their own conclusions about who's being reasonable and who isn't.

__________________
Scarred survivor of the April 2008 Mod War.

Well, you're welcome, and I see your point.

Sorry for taking so long to respond, but I have been out of town. I’ll ignore the remarks from lardbeetle, who evidently doesn’t care for the First Amendment when it applies to people with whom (s)he disagrees. As far as Liberals being weak minded, I firmly stand behind that statement. Liberalism, by its very nature, seeks to please everyone and in doing so, makes mediocrity sacrosanct. Likewise, being unable to decide whether, or not, God exists is indicative of a mind that is unwilling to accept absolutes.

That being said, what proof would satisfy you that God exists? In all seriousness, what anecdotal evidence are you seeking?

But you're flat wrong. Liberals, for instance, often support gay marriage. That clearly is not "trying to please everyone." It's actively alienating a majority of the population.

The extreme left (Communism, for example) does tend to discount individual initiative and advocate the same rewards for everyone, regardless of talent or effort. But that hardly represents liberalism, just as right-wing dictators hardly represent conservativism.

And as I demonstrated above, that's nonsense. There are some things, like God, for which there is no clear, objective evidence. Stating such a truth is not being "unwilling to accept absolutes." It's being unwilling to accept unproven assertions.

"The world was sneezed out of the left nostril of an invisible 500-foot-high unicorn." IMO, there is just as much evidence for that as for your God. Are you "unwilling to accept absolutes" if you disbelieve me in the absence of proof?

I recognize that you feel you have all the evidence you need. I respect that. SOMETHING got the universe rolling, and if you want to call that something God, I won't argue. In fact if that's your definition of God, I'll even agree that God exists. But that raises all sorts of other questions, such as "what does God mean, then" and "how do you know it's the Christian God" and "why should we worship it?"

God may well exist; acknowledging that fact is why I'm an agnostic, not an atheist. But his/her/its existence has not been revealed to me in a way I consider logically and evidentially satisfactory.

I'll repeat the question I asked above: Are you saying I should make a positive assertion about something that I don't, in fact, have positive knowledge about?

Any objective proof (public miracles performed, for example) or my own personal anecdotal proof (God decides to reveal himself to me in such a way that I'm convinced it's not just a hallucination).

__________________
Scarred survivor of the April 2008 Mod War.

“Making a positive assertion about something for which you have no positive knowledge” is a wonderful definition for “faith” and it is the only way you will ever receive proof that God exists.


From my understanding of the Bible, God seems to get ticked off by people asking Him to perform miracles. This makes sense to me, because God does not need to prove Himself to anyone. If you think it through, for people to expect miracles from God just so they can have proof He exists is pretty presumptuous and arrogant. Actually, it is clear in the Bible that people must make the first move when it comes to establishing a relationship with God.

Don’t let pride about your intelligence stand in the way of getting to know God. You obviously are extremely intelligent and I get the feeling that you think by accepting on faith that there is a God, your intelligence will somehow be diminished. If other people think you are less intelligent because you have faith, oh well - that’s part of humbling yourself before God.

As far as which faith is correct, I believe that Judaism is correct; unfortunately, many Jews failed to recognize their Messiah. As far as Islam is concerned, at it’s very core is the belief that non-Muslims must either be converted or destroyed and that the god of Islam fooled people into believing that Jesus had been crucified. These should be major red flags.

Christianity is the only faith that provides people with the opportunity to have a personal relationship with God. I know that phrase gets tossed around a lot by Christians, but it just means that after you become a Christian, you start “seeing” God at work in your life on a personal level. I don’t mean to be condescending, but the experience of getting closer to God is difficult to describe without a common frame of reference. It would be like a woman trying to convey to me the feeling she got after buying a new purse - the experience gets lost in translation.

Even though a simple prayer is all that is required to establish a relationship with God, for most people the difficult part is being able to humble him/herself. It takes a lot of humility for a person to get on his/her knees and say a heart-felt prayer to an invisible God and then tell other people about that love for this invisible God.

If you do ever decide to accept on faith that God exists and then humble yourself enough to admit that you are a sinner, just like everyone else in the world, and accept that Jesus died for your sins, I am confident you will receive all of the proof you seek beyond any shadow of a doubt. You are so close to receiving the personal anecdotal evidence you seek, but proving the existence of God is a Catch 22, because in order for you to receive proof that God exists you first must believe that God exists.

It's called faith because there is no proof. I'm fine with that. I'll even accept that it may be a personal limitation that I require proof. But I do.

I'm not asking him to do anything. I'm simply stating that until he does, I will have difficulty believing that he exists.

Sure. But then I wouldn't expect him to expect me to worship him.

Then why was he so free with the miracles and communication 4,000 years ago? What changed?

That's never been my concern, especially in a country where 70% or more of people are regular churchgoers.

My agnosticism is a purely personal decision.

But I'm sure the adherents of every religion believe their religion to be the correct one. From where I sit, your religion has no greater claim to validity than any other. Although if you define God simply as "whatever got the ball of existence rolling", then I'm probably more inclined toward monotheism than polytheism.

To me that just makes modern Islam resemble medieval Christianity.

I've suggested before that Islam -- the youngest of the major monotheistic faiths -- is going through the same adolescent growing pains that once convulsed Christianity and, before that, Judaism.

I understand, and I respect that. You obviously believe very strongly, and that's your right. I don't think less of you because of it. I don't think you "weak-minded" or anything simply because you believe. I freely recognize, for instance, that God may have spoken to you but not to me. In such a case, you would be strongly convinced of his existence, while I would not be.

I just dispute the notion that my stance reveals me to be "weak minded".

You're correct to describe that as a Catch 22. Or as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Maybe someday such an approach will appeal to me; 12thMan seems to think I'll see the light in the next few years. For now, though, I cannot in good conscience believe in (and more importantly, worship) something I cannot verify.

__________________
Scarred survivor of the April 2008 Mod War.