Tigers!

So it's an act of will or volition to change one's belief?

Amaleq13

No, given a genuine effort to allow the evidence to lead to a conclusion, it is an involuntary response to the evidence.

If you honestly approach the evidence with no preconception about what the outcome "should be", the evidence or the argument dictate your conclusion rather than an act of will.

Steven Avery

Sven, could you consider the possibility that there was a tremendous amount of atheistic propaganda within the society and school system of the now-defunct East Germany ? AChristian was not saying that it is impossible for someone to be trained to deny the obvious, or for someone to want to deny the obvious as a cover for personal accountability before the God of Creation. To actually look at the beautiful creation and life and color and beauty and believe it simply pieced together from an explosion and some sort of primordial soup ... now that is a real atheistic-faith position.

Sven

Quite possible. I thought about that, too, at the start and asked her - but all she said is that religion simply wasn't something which was talked about, neither positive nor negative. Sorry, "propaganda" simply does not cut.

Do you understand the difference between denying something and not being able to understand how one can believe something? Apparently not.
And it's obvious that all that you can do against something challenging your worldview as strong as this simple fact which I brought up is - deny its existence. Sad.

Hey, and here the usual Christian insulting tactics of people they don't know in the slightest start again! Do you ever think about the implications of what you write?

No, that's a huge pile of strawmen - why I'm not surprised?

Steven Avery

If you are given enough materialistic philosophy, it can act as a shielding from the reality of God. Propaganda isn't always "this is bad". And since a primary teaching of Marxism is precisely the negative aspect of all "religion" as an opiate, I simply do not accept that there wasn't a lot of subtle and not-so subtle brainwashing possible based on one testimony. Others testify differently.

Most assuredly. Materialism and atheism "as a cover for personal accountability before the God of Creation" is something that is common and often easy to see. I feel that often the atheist understands the basics. And I believe it is often a believer's duty to share that fact with those who embrace atheism and various materialistic and humanistic and naturalistic philosphies. At least for consideration, exorting them to dig to the roots of their atheistic faith. It may cause some antagonism, or it bear forth peacable fruits of righteousness, however there is a responsibility to speak the truth in love.

There are many enmeshed in atheistic views who simply want to be free. And have not really had a clear message given. Who really desire, and are close to, a repentance experience.

That is why I was not addressing you or your fiance or anybody you know.. you are right, I do not know any of your personally. However, I do know the unsatisfaction and irrationality of trying to put a cosmic-deterministic-accident veneer over the beautiful creation.

Shalom,
Steven

Sven

Oh, I see. Simply not mentioning your god is enough for not believing in him. OK. Oh, wait... isn't the exact opposite of what you two claimed?

Well, these are others. And as I said: You are in denial. "I simply do not accept" are just other words for this.

[snip more simplistic insults and strawmen] - why do I even bother to respond to crap like this? ]

mightyjoemoon

So who seared Jehovah's conscience? You label the evils that Diogenes mentioned as "sins" yet Jehovah commanded them to be performed. Did he not spend enough time with Jesus? Does Jehovah need to listen to "Cat's in the Cradle" for a bit?

aChristian

I'm not sure which evils you are talking about. Most of the evils that people here attribute to God are usually men (godly or otherwise) sinning without God's approval. (There is a lot of that in the book of Judges where every man does what is right in his own eyes.)
You also can read portions in the law of Moses where God only allows a certain amount of sin before a civil punishment is invoked. That is just how societies function with their laws. We do the same thing. We can't say "Thou shall not lie or thou shalt go to prison" - the prisons wouldn't hold us all. So we say, "Thou shalt not lie under oath in a courtroom or we will put you in prison". We do not think that it is good to ever lie, but our laws can only enforce so much righteousness. The same is true for the law of Moses. In some cases it limited the amount of unrighteousness allowed, without giving approval to any unrighteousness.
Sometimes people misunderstand some of God's commands because they fail to recognize the context the commands were given in.
In addition, sometimes I read people here attribute evil to God because they don't like his righteous judgements. It's kind of like the prison inmates all griping about the rotten judge who threw them in there.

Diogenes the Cynic

God's never said a word to me. I can't disobey someone who's never given me an order.

Not that I would necessarily follow orders from God anyway. If God told me to do something I felt was even mildly unethical I would refuse. I have to be loyal to my own conscience above all else.

Tigers!

Sounds all rather Pavlovian