In your opinion what causes christians to believe in Jesus

[Thumpalumpacus]

Why is anyone still entertaining this numpty?

[Sheldon]

Has the forum never seen a scale before? Surely, everyone knows zero and none are still valid measures within any scale. You don't just magically fall off the scale if you don't have a positive mark. If a form asks for your marital status, single people just mark single, they don't go on obtuse rants about how they have no marital status or are outside the marital status framework.

False equivalence fallacy, I am done explaining why, or you will never learn, bro...

[Sheldon]

When are we getting our cash? Your claims about atheists ranged from outright bullshit, to straw man claims, the adjectives describing the deity depicted in the bible are factual, but as I sated unequivocally, these fictions have no bearing on my atheism. you seem to have missed the part where I stated unequivocally the only reason I need to remain disbelieving, is the dearth of objective evidence any deity exists or is possible, so it seems you have read my posts with the same care you have read the bible. 

You have failed to even try and address your own denials of objective reality, let alone over 45% of adults in the US, based on their superstitious beliefs. 

You really do imagine you can bluff your way through anything, bizarre. 

Pony up the cash, bro...

Don't you know everything counts as proof of his made up theory....... 

Once someone is emotionally invested in a belief, then they start to use confirmation bias, the heavier the emotional investment, the stronger the bias. Even allowing for the dearth of objective evidence for any deity, or that any deity is possible, one cannot fail to note that nothing John has said thus far, gets you any closer to Jesus than it does to the Aztec deity of gluttony. 

I don't have a relationship with deities, anymore than I have one with unicorns, it's just that the majority of humans have managed not to convince themselves that unicorns are real, and make up claims about them, and insist these unicorns want something, and that everyone is obliged to grant it, or else (insert dogma of choice here)...

[Sheldon]

It's ironic that a bunch of atheists are trying to say my theory is wrong by claiming they have no relationship with God. As if that isn't precisely what I'm predicting.

The correlation can't reasonably be in dispute. The key thing here is that I see that correlation as causal.

Still denying objective reality, now that's ironic...bro

[Sheldon]

It's ironic that a bunch of atheists are trying to say my theory is wrong by claiming they have no relationship with God. As if that isn't precisely what I'm predicting.

The correlation can't reasonably be in dispute. The key thing here is that I see that correlation as causal.

But what you actually said was...

I think, in practice, most people believe or disbelieve for one key factor—relationship. This is something like a heuristic people follow on both ends. You will rarely find someone who believes God is megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, and capriciously malevolent, as Dawkins alleges, and is also a believing Christian. And you will rarely find someone who thinks the God of the bible is merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth, as the Bible alleges, and is also a militant atheist. 

I think there is a genuine correlation there: For every Christian that says they prayed and were heard, there is an atheist saying they prayed and weren't. The Christian will say God exists because good has happened to them, the atheist will say God doesn't exist because evil happened to them. In other words, the kind of relationship you have with God spills over into a judgment regarding his existence.

Emphasis mine.

So yes, that's precisely what you predicted, to the word. Fun fact: If you have zero girlfriends, you aren't in a relationship.

And ironically, we know that kind of relationship is at least possible. John's spiel has fallen at that first most essential hurdle.

[Sheldon]

Fun fact: If you have zero girlfriends, you aren't in a relationship.

Then having no girlfriend would be your relationship status.

Correct, it would be non existent, as in no relationship, no girlfriend would exist. 

I thought it an imperfect analogy, as we know girlfriends can exist, unlike deities, but it's actually not a bad analogy at all.

[Sheldon]

It's ironic that a bunch of atheists are trying to say my theory is wrong by claiming they have no relationship with God. As if that isn't precisely what I'm predicting.

The correlation can't reasonably be in dispute. The key thing here is that I see that correlation as causal.

You don’t have a theory. You’ve simply made one of those ‘have you stopped beating your wife’ statements.

Boru

Ah, but he made up some stats mun, most atheists, most people, etc etc...I think he forget to link the citation to that research, enabling him to know what most people think. And of course the objective fact that every atheist who has responded, has expressed unequivocally that the straw man he assigned them is categorically not true, doesn't seem to have registered.

Religious apologists always fail to grasp that atheism has no dogma or doctrine, and thus they think they can bluff and make up stats about what atheists think.

[Sheldon]

The difference is that girlfriends are real things. To put them on a par with a non-existent thing is just silly. It’s like saying someone has a ‘relationship’ with the Invisible Pink Unicorn.

A pink unicorn is different in that it is rather impersonal, it doesn't quite have the social relational aspect. 

In the same way the deities people have imagined are to me. I have a relationship with people, not necessarily with what they imagine to be real.

With religion, I think the effect is so strong it even spills over from the pulpit to the pews. I think people are also more or less likely to believe based on their interaction and relationship with other followers. A person treated badly by christians is more likely to not believe God exists, and a person treated well is more likely to believe he does.

Ah another claim, ah no pretence of any objective evidence to support it, I am going to go ahead and apply Hitchens's razor here, slash...and disbelieve this entirely unevidenced claim. 

NB What you have described is a relationship with theists, not with their imaginary deity. If I was beaten up by a load of Star Wars geeks for dissing the franchise, it would not register as a reason to disbelieve any claim that Jedi are real, I already have sufficient reason for that, as I do with deities. Now I can't claim to know what others think, unless they tell me, as you keep doing unabashed and without a hint of irony, but I am an atheist, I no more have a relationship with deities than I do with a flat earth, and for the same reason. Though I occasionally have to listen to people pretend they exist.

[Sheldon]

If you think you have a better word for the relation one has with a concept, other than just relationship, go ahead and offer it.

Understanding... you're welcome...bro

[Sheldon]

You're missing the point that I don't have a god to develop an internal framework toward. No god. No relationship.

You still have attitudes towards God, or the concept of God. You've probably stated many of them on the forum. And if not, we can test it right now. Do you agree with at least one of the following statements: 1. The God of the Bible is capriciously malevolent. 2. The God of the Bible is merciful and gracious.

I agree the bible depicts it that way, but but I don't agree it is that way, as I AM AN ATHEIST!!!

Dear oh dear John.