Why Do Theists Believe In God?

[Ancient Soul]

Could you elaborate on this further?

Most Christians believe that ALL they have to do is believe in the "Jesus died for their sins" myth, that's it, they are automatically "saved" so they don't have to do a thing to better themselves. Worse, some think that once they are "saved" they can keep on "sinning" all they want.

It's one of the biggest attractions to Christianity.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Why do theists believe in God? ​

Why not? But there are many images of God that many theists hold to be true. It's faith. Just like the argument there can be no such thing is faith that all created evidences to the contrary, no thing at all made it all possible.
Every God of every religion is made in the image and likeness of its believer.
Because unfathomable eternal power needs a face we can believe in. And believe loves us back.
If there is a God isn't it incumbent on that higher power to believe in us?

My theory on this obsession with making up God constructs in physical images is because the conditioning's of religions and society bind people's minds to the physical world only, so are clueless as to his true SPIRITUAL nature.

 

[Shantanu]

Most Christians believe that ALL they have to do is believe in the "Jesus died for their sins" myth, that's it, they are automatically "saved" so they don't have to do a thing to better themselves. Worse, some think that once they are "saved" they can keep on "sinning" all they want.

It's one of the biggest attractions to Christianity.

They want obviously to live normal lives doing what comes naturally to them: what do they mean by being 'saved'?

 

[nPeace]

(Kind of an after thought follow-up to my thread "Why Is It That Atheists Don't Believe In God?")

In One Word Tell Us Why You Think Theists Believe In God.

After that one word feel free to elaborate.

My one word is "NEED."

.

My one word is "RELIABILITY".

To elaborate...
One of my favorite quotes:
For [God's] invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable.

To a Theist - at least in my case, believing in God is like having 20/20 vision, and looking at my hand raised to my face.

To an Atheist, I imagine it's like having 20/20 vision, and looking at their nose hole without a mirror.

 

[Earthling]

(Kind of an after thought follow-up to my thread "Why Is It That Atheists Don't Believe In God?")

In One Word Tell Us Why You Think Theists Believe In God.

After that one word feel free to elaborate.

My one word is "NEED."

.

Truth.

I don't need to believe in God. Why would I need to? There is only one word to explain why I believe in God and it has nothing to do with fear of anything, nor need, or upbringing, I was brought up an unbeliever, nor is it Ignorance? Ignorance of what? God? I know more about God than most unbelievers I've encountered. Effectiveness can be deceiving, like a placebo. Even love, which I have a great deal of for Jehovah, wouldn't begin to describe it. A person could love God if he were a figment of their imagination or a concept they wanted to believe in. I couldn't love God unless he were true.

 

[nPeace]

That's what abrahamic religions say. He loves all people who accept him. The idea is if you dont accept him, you dont want to be his child. So, there is no reason to love you unto salvation because you willingly reject his offer. Kinda like a parent giving a child a Christmas present and when the child is free to say no, the parent reprimands him because he feels he has the right as a parent to do so since his child didnt accept the gift.

Some say this is love, to accept the gift out of obligation to god.

Hello Artist. I just felt I couldn't let this one go.
Let's say you have two children. You gave both gifts. One deliberately smashes theirs. The other doesn't. You love both children yes, but what are your feelings about them?

You try different ways to reach the heart of the destructive child, but they reject you and your gifts. What are your feelings?
What do you do?

 

[nPeace]

Some fail to fathom that love of God and love from God are human inferences and assumptions that bear no relation to God.

Are you assuming this? May I ask, how did you arrive at your inference?

 

[Shantanu]

Are you assuming this? May I ask, how did you arrive at your inference?

To my knowledge God is Nirguna and Paramatman so without emotions.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is the difference between Protestants and Catholics. We don't hold to position that the Pope is infallible.

We wouldn't say say we have become God. We are in the image and likeness of God but are not God.

Even the Catholics don't hold that the Pope is infallible... except in very narrow circumstances that almost never happen. Only two Papal teachings in the last two centuries have been generally accepted as meeting the criteria for infallibility:

Papal infallibility - Wikipedia

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Most Christians believe that ALL they have to do is believe in the "Jesus died for their sins" myth, that's it, they are automatically "saved" so they don't have to do a thing to better themselves. Worse, some think that once they are "saved" they can keep on "sinning" all they want.

It's one of the biggest attractions to Christianity.

I see the attraction of Christianity, such as it is, to be more about Earthly things: a sense of community, social events, knowledge that there's charitable support if things go wrong, opportunities for business networking, etc.

I mean, just the idea of meeting up with people once a week who are genuinely happy to see you... there's huge appeal in that for many people.

I think that for a lot of people, the reasons they stay in their faith have more to do with familiarity and comfort than they have to do with intellectual positions on theological points; they stay in their church because leaving would be like moving away from the town they grew up in.

 

[nPeace]

To my knowledge God is Nirguna and Paramatman so without emotions.

I understand that you have a belief. I just wanted to draw your attention to that fact, so that when you made the statement, "Some fail to fathom that (X) are human inferences and assumptions that bear no relation to God", you realize that the same reasoning applies in your case.

For example, someone could say, "Some fail to fathom that Nirguna and Paramatman (X) are human inferences and assumptions that bear no relation to God".
You could argue, "Well no." However, you'll get the same retort from those that believe "that love of God and love from God" are in fact not human inferences and assumptions, but rather, realities.

The question is, how do we go about proving our case? We can present our arguments for our case, and they can sound convincing, but can any of us actually prove it?
I don't think we can.

So it really remains a case of, 'The time will come when we will all get to see who failed to fathom what'.
This I believe. Do you agree with me?

 

[Shantanu]

I understand that you have a belief. I just wanted to draw your attention to that fact, so that when you made the statement, "Some fail to fathom that (X) are human inferences and assumptions that bear no relation to God", you realize that the same reasoning applies in your case.

For example, someone could say, "Some fail to fathom that Nirguna and Paramatman (X) are human inferences and assumptions that bear no relation to God".
You could argue, "Well no." However, you'll get the same retort from those that believe "that love of God and love from God" are in fact not human inferences and assumptions, but rather, realities.

The question is, how do we go about proving our case? We can present our arguments for our case, and they can sound convincing, but can any of us actually prove it?
I don't think we can.

So it really remains a case of, 'The time will come when we will all get to see who failed to fathom what'.
This I believe. Do you agree with me?

I spent the last 40 years studying God through a process of truth discovery and truth accommodation (satya-advaita). It was an experimental scientific theory of mine employed for truth seeking and that included the investigation of God. It is failsafe method of knowing the truth about the likes and dislikes of God because the process takes one slowly and steadily along a truth path whereby the neti-neti Hindu phenomenon of discovering what the essence of man (namely the Atman) is really like and this leads to becoming the Atman oneself through truth accommodation (I use the word Atman in the conventional sense, not my discovered sense so as to avoid controversy with other Hindus). When one then becomes Atman, one is perfect God oneself. So you know what God is like because I know myself through swadhaya (self examination). That is why I say I am God living a human life. There may be others who have experienced this in totality, or there may be none. @atanu may like to comment.

 

[Kenny]

No. The proof? Is the ever-rising number of "christian" brands. It's currently over 45,000 so far.

That? Is all the proof anyone needs, that there are no gods behind any christian brand.

Any subgroup of 'christian' that had the close, personal advice of an actual GOD?

Would quickly rise to the top, eclipsing all the other obviously false ones, within a generation.

Just like an epidemic disease...



That would be false. The fact that each brand calls itself something different and distinct from the rest? And refuses to 'play nice' with them, most of the time?

Proves they are separate, distinct religions. That happen to have a few silly premises in common, but more differences than anything else.



False analogy, does not fly. See above.



That would be another false statement by you: All they while you are "together"? Each are thinking, "those sinners are so gonna HELL" and worse.

I've been at those cross-denominational dinners: The only thing keeping them from mass murder? Are Secular Laws against murder...


I asked for evidence-- and you show me your claim instead...

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. The proof is right here. I am a pastor fellowshipping with pastor and your position doesn't match what the pastors positions have.

It ends up being that you are holding onto a flat-earth position... that being, no matter what evidence is there, you have decided not to believe it soooo...

Merry Christmas.

 

[Kenny]

And since you've experienced this, what exactly IS your "god's image" like?

Without sin having been made the righteousness of God, perfect in spirit as He (Jesus) presents us faultless before the Father with joy.

 

[Kenny]

Oh, so you are one of those who believe that your beliefs in Jesus is all that you need and ALL of your "sins", past, present, and future, are swept away, and WORKS are not needed.

That's quite a loophole you made up there. Do you think your "god" is going to go along with that?

Not really.

It is a matter of the horse before the cart or the cart before the horse. The horse (salvation) is free and belief in Jesus is all you need (Ephesians 2:8-9; John 3:16). The cart are the works that you produce because you are saved vs. trying to produce enough works in a cart to pull the horse (salvation) to reality.

 

[Kenny]

Even the Catholics don't hold that the Pope is infallible... except in very narrow circumstances that almost never happen. Only two Papal teachings in the last two centuries have been generally accepted as meeting the criteria for infallibility:

Papal infallibility - Wikipedia

Depends on who you speak to. But, your are correct, not all Catholics hold to that position.

 

[Kenny]

Could you elaborate on this further?

Sure!

As a synthesis, there are two forms to become perfect. That which man can do by working his way up the ladder (such as reincarnation) or that which the Creator, the Almighty, can do by His power and capacity.

That which the Creator God Almighty can do is found in John 3:16 as Jesus said, "He who is born of the Spirit, is spirit". where the Creator God Almighty causes His Spirit to re-birth man's spirit once and for all. Perfection because it is made by the perfect one.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. The proof is right here. I am a pastor fellowshipping with pastor and your position doesn't match what the pastors positions have..

Proof you are wrong: Do your fellow pastors belong to the same brand of 'christian' as you?

If not, why not? The fact that there even are different brands of 'christian' prove that there cannot be any gods behind any.

You continue to ignore the Elephant in the Room: Modern Christianity continues to fracture into ever-increasing numbers of competing versions, none of whom can get along enough to put aside their differences, and re-join under one banner.

That? Is proof-positive you are wrong. .

It ends up being that you are holding onto a flat-earth position... that being, no matter what evidence is there, you have decided not to believe it soooo...

Merry Christmas.

That would be another StrawMan (lie) by you: show me evidence that there are decreasing numbers of BRANDS of CHRISTIAN.

AND YOU MIGHT HAVE A CASE.

 

[Shantanu]

Sure!

As a synthesis, there are two forms to become perfect. That which man can do by working his way up the ladder (such as reincarnation) or that which the Creator, the Almighty, can do by His power and capacity.

That which the Creator God Almighty can do is found in John 3:16 as Jesus said, "He who is born of the Spirit, is spirit". where the Creator God Almighty causes His Spirit to re-birth man's spirit once and for all. Perfection because it is made by the perfect one.

The only way to become perfect is to seek the truth about everything that moves and accommodate oneself within the truth discovered.

 

[nPeace]

I spent the last 40 years studying God through a process of truth discovery and truth accommodation (satya-advaita). It was an experimental scientific theory of mine employed for truth seeking and that included the investigation of God. It is failsafe method of knowing the truth about the likes and dislikes of God because the process takes one slowly and steadily along a truth path whereby the neti-neti Hindu phenomenon of discovering what the essence of man (namely the Atman) is really like and this leads to becoming the Atman oneself through truth accommodation (I use the word Atman in the conventional sense, not my discovered sense so as to avoid controversy with other Hindus). When one then becomes Atman, one is perfect God oneself. So you know what God is like because I know myself through swadhaya (self examination). That is why I say I am God living a human life. There may be others who have experienced this in totality, or there may be none. @atanu may like to comment.

Yes, it is good to search for truth. I believe in this also.
Like billions of people, you chose to follow a path in search of truth. Like billions of others - some spending double the amount of time you spent, in your search, you believe you have found the truth, or God.
What you believe you have found is still a belief, isn't it?
It may seem convincing, and in fact, you may be fully convinced, but you haven't proven that you are right, have you?

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that having a strong belief and conviction is wrong. Many people have, and I believe being on a serious quest for truth, demonstrates sincerity - which is good... although not necessarily right.

So I am making the point that although we can all present an argument for why we believe we are on the correct path, or found the truth, we cannot prove it.
It will however, be proven eventually.

If you disagree, then are you saying you can prove that you are God?
Let's see then.