God's Intent

[POI]

1. Does God cause some to become inexorably drawn to Him, or not?
2. If so, why not all?
3. If not, then why do some believe and some not? Meaning, is it more-so based on logical reasoning that some believe or not believe, or, more-so based upon emotion?

[POI]

Indoctrination, lead or reinforced by fear,...

Probably that is why Bible teaches against fear and tells cowards go to hell.

But for the cowardly, unbelieving, sinners, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their part is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”
Rev. 21:8

There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear has punishment. He who fears is not made perfect in love.
1 John 4:18

Maybe that is why also Yoda says: "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you"

You missed my point. (i.e.)

1213 I don't know what emotion could be reason to be a Christian.

POI Indoctrination, reinforced by fear.

I'll give you a direct example. My sister-in-law has been taught/indoctrinated that God is watching everything she does. And if she does something that God does not really like, "God will zap her."

I'm willing to bet this is not uncommon.... Meaning, God is watching and judging your every move. Many fear God's punishment. If many are taught this tactic, early in childhood, it's later hard to shake. Especially when such silly concepts are reinforced as adults. Unlike the concept of Santa Claus, which once you realize this concept is not very logical, authority does not get together to reinforce it anyways.... Fear alone keeps many in the 'faith'.

If you found something to be wrong, would you then reject the canon? Or, would you maybe instead find a way to rationalize it, to remain Christian?

If I would find something wrong, I probably would reject the wrong thing. I don't think one wrong thing is good reason to reject all right and good things. I am a disciple of Jesus, because I think his teachings are good and I want to live according to them because of that.

Well, like I stated prior, I don't think you could find anything 'wrong.' You would instead just rationalize it into being 'right'.

**********************

Unaddressed topic from post #8:

You made the statement that no one has proven anything wrong in the Bible. Where you going to prove it, or just make the assertion completely unwarranted?

[POI]

To me it seems absurd that anyone could claim "God wants this, that and the other".

And yet, I'm sure you've heard some/many who claim to in church, other....

[JoeyKnothead]

1. Does God cause some to become inexorably drawn to Him, or not?

If god is barbecue, there's a compelling argument for this being the case.

2. If so, why not all?

Vegans.

3. If not, then why do some believe and some not? Meaning, is it more-so based on logical reasoning that some believe or not believe, or, more-so based upon emotion?

I think it can be both, or either.

Where I find the most reasoned and logical theists, they don't carry on in overly emotional ways. They can appreciate science and logic, they just end up in faith. This is generally a good bunch ya can trust in a foxhole, or with a high caliber weapon.

Then there's that bunch that thinks floods in Louisiana are caused by the gheys in California.

[boatsnguitars]

It is actually interesting that people think people choose Christianity because emotion, but when I look the arguments against Bible and Christianity, they seem to be very much emotional.

But the majority of religious beliefs are inculcated through indoctrination of vulnerable and susceptible minds. Emotion is not relevant, nor is choice involved. People engage in arguments relating to their religion long after their beliefs have become firmly rooted. It becomes obvious that the main intent is to prop up those beliefs in the face of conflicting evidence. When reason and logic fail, faith comes to the rescue. Cognitive dissonance is resolved and calm descends on the believer's mind once again.

Do you have some evidence for your claim?

I have to ask, how can you not be aware of the mountains of evidence of this area of study? How do you explain that most religious people on the planet aren't Christian, and they tend to be of the religion they grew up in? Don't you ever wonder about things?

[boatsnguitars]

To me it seems absurd that anyone could claim "God wants this, that and the other".

And yet, I'm sure you've heard some/many who claim to in church, other....

I would suggest that every Theist does it. They are each their own personal Prophet and tell themselves what God wants all the time. They haven't developed any logical tool to determine if any of it is true. A God could exist, and still all Theists could be completely wrong about what God wants - and they'd have no idea.

[JoeyKnothead]

I would suggest that every Theist does it. They are each their own personal Prophet and tell themselves what God wants all the time. They haven't developed any logical tool to determine if any of it is true. A God could exist, and still all Theists could be completely wrong about what God wants - and they'd have no idea.

The question of God's wants has been definitively answered...

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

We have gone of this idea before. I guess we are running out of new ideas. That is why I just drop in from time to time to see if anything new popped up that needs to be addressed, or if some repeat is worth addressing.

This has zero force because all a theist needs to point out is that God can have a good reason to do things as he does them. This is basically about divine hiddenness to which there are several replies that take the force out of the argument.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

We have gone of this idea before. I guess we are running out of new ideas. That is why I just drop in from time to time to see if anything new popped up that needs to be addressed, or if some repeat is worth addressing.

This has zero force because all a theist needs to point out is that God can have a good reason to do things as he does them. This is basically about divine hiddenness to which there are several replies that take the force out of the argument.

This is the ultimate in denial of all reason and evidence 'God knows best'.It is the ultimate reason why I am sure that all God - apologetics start and (ultimately) end with faith. There are various attempt to fiddle Bible,science and logic to fit the faith - your appeal to Ontology being one that crashed and burned early on - and all you appear to be do is pop in, make a faithbased assertion of...denial and pop out again, convinced you have struck a blow against atheism. You have only given more logical reason why anyone with their mind still open will see that atheism goes with evidence and the Theist goes with faith and denial of the evidence.

Even as we have seen with a couple of regular theists, denial of what the Bible actually and clearly says. apart from a reasoned assessment of what it implies.

[JoeyKnothead]

This has zero force because all a theist needs to point out is that God can have a good reason to do things as he does them. This is basically about divine hiddenness to which there are several replies that take the force out of the argument.

I find it quite interesting how some folks'll use the term "divine hiddenness" when they could say, "I can't show he exists."

Notice also the empty claim of "several replies that take the force out of the argument", yet not even one example is offered for analysis.

That kinda sloppy work is why some folks're so suspicious of theists claims.

[TRANSPONDER]

This has zero force because all a theist needs to point out is that God can have a good reason to do things as he does them. This is basically about divine hiddenness to which there are several replies that take the force out of the argument.

I find it quite interesting how some folks'll use the term "divine hiddenness" when they could say, "I can't show he exists."

Notice also the empty claim of "several replies that take the force out of the argument", yet not even one example is offered for analysis.

That kinda sloppy work is why some folks're so suspicious of theists claims.

it is,at the rink of repeating myself, symprtomatic of the basic illogic of theism which scuppers pretty much all their arguments before they speak them.

Here it is clearly excuses for not having any evidence or evading evidence there is likely not a god. It is why theists have this idea that if they just deny everything on any pretext up to and including 'I don't care what you or anyone else says..." They really see that loss as a win. Obvious, but apply that to any discussion and see how it explains all their thinking.

P.s Mind

I haven'f seen blank Bibleverse for some while. Used to be a Plague of facewiped, that did.

Like this. 'Evolutionary discussion':
Evolution is a false claim,
Geoilogy shows that the rocks are no more than eight thousand years old,
and there are no transitional fossils.
Also, Darwin could not explain
how evolution could account for complexity of the eye,
and he recanted on his deathbed.
Anyway
And blind chance cannot account for anything,
no more than a whirlwind in a junkyard
could create a jumbo jet.
The numerical odds against complex structures evolving by chance
are astronomical.
It is also impossible that kinds could change into other kinds;
horses cannot breed with donkeys,
nor snakes with eagles,
nor crocos with ducks
because there is a genetic barrier that prevents it;
So There.