You think your beliefs make you a special and unique snowflake, unlike all those teachers and teamsters and atheists who do it just to what… enhance their brand?
we managed to get lekatt to admit that
a) gods are created based on whim
b) all gods answers are purely subjective
I think thats a pretty good step forward for him.
Do we ever? 
It was John who said God was Love, that was just one human’s description of the word. That doesn’t make it true, one can Say God is truth But that too is just a human stating it. No one can say in truth that they ‘KNOW’ anything about God. Just as there are many words for things in different languages. No one can prove or disprove wither A God or God exists, it is only belief each person believes in.
Belief is not fact, but if proven then it is no longer faith. So far over the centuries there have been many different ideas of what the word God means. But no truth about a God has yet been proven.
My conclusion was directed at Timo, who justified god’s actions by the association with love.
Really? Well, praise the Lord!
Trust me-it didn’t take.
I knew no one was paying attention to what I said.
no - we paid attention - you just failed (apparently) to recognize the implication.
I am going to post a video so you will know why everyone believes as they do.
I was able to break out of the limitations of my environment and teaching, see if you can also.
That is a ten minute lecture by Deepak Chopra titled “Quantum Health_1”. At what point in that video can I find anything that pertains to the OP?
Just forget it. Call me when you understand.
Well, there’s nothing like a great debate, and that’s what we have here, nothing like a great debate.
Never ceases to amaze me how many ‘true believers’ rely so heavily on other peoples words to explain why they believe - and/or that it was these ‘other words’ that convinced them.
Seems if there ‘were a god’ and it was all ‘personal’ (as lekatt postulates above) - then other peoples words would never be needed to explain a given position - if its a singular/global/universal god that promotes itself to the individual - its ether
- schizophrenic with a side of multiple personality disorder
made up from whole cloth
because if it were truly a ‘God’, you’d think it would want its message to be consice, consistent and unchanging - AND available to all equally - and would never need to be ‘revealed’ thru someone else.
It’s part and parcel of the over-romanticized notion of god and the constant toadying that fills all prayer books - “Oh God, You are so Big, So incredibly Huge. Gosh we are all so impressed down here, I can tell You.” (- Monty Python) It’s what put me off religion first and most, way before I was old enough to articulate a logical argument against the existence of a deity.
In contrast there is nothing romantic about atheism. There’s no god and therefore no need to wax poetic about something that doesn’t exist.
Religion is stagnant; there really isn’t anything new to say about it, because it’s intellectually dead. It’s wrong now for the same reasons its always been wrong, and it’s never going to come up with new (or any) evidence in its favor so there’s never any new arguments for it.
But religion can adapt to new circumstances, by changing to meet them, and then claiming that it has been eternally unchanging and always reflected those circumstances! Why, it even foresaw them in inerrant prophecy!
Slightly more seriously…religion does change, in the same way societies change. It can learn to back off and concern itself solely with spiritual matters. It can reform. The British experience – churches that are little more than social clubs – offers us a hopeful model.
I’ve posted to this thread a couple of times and have been following it with some interest. I don’t agree with lekatt on all points (I have no interest in religion or the Bible as scripture) but we share a common idea about what we are.
For your edification and and enjoyment, I suggest you watch this. I’m sure lekatt will like it (CMIIW). I do.
Aloha
Yes, it was beautiful and I loved it. We are One.
Only by external forces. It is intellectually dead, and can only be reformed by pressure from the rest of society.