Theory number 3.

[Darkstar]

---

Why would he have to dictate us if he proved his existence?

In the case of God sending Messengers, the Messengers life and ideas will all be taken as guided and an authority.

As for not talking to us via voices, perhaps, we have no way of recognizing the voices are from God.

Of course, if God made us know he exists, he would not have to dictate to us.

---

God could make it that we would recognize his voice; he can do anything.

---

According the christianity, that 'honor and dignity' includes burning eternally in hell. I understand that one would need to strengthen their soul. My point was that if someone is born not even believing thay have a soul at all, then they will naturally make no effort to strengthen it.

Well Atheists believe in will power as well. They believe it's generated by the brain only as opposed to a spirit/soul, but never the less, they can struggle and try to overcome difficulties as well.

---

You know what they say; third time's the charm. Allow me to explain this as concisely as I possibly can. If someone is born with a soul so weak that they are unaware of its existence, they will not attempt to strengthen it. I, for instance, do not 'feel god'. Becuase I cannot feel any form of soul whatsoever, I assume that I do not have one and thus make no effort to strengthen something that doesn't exist when I could be strengthening other things. Where there's a will, there''s a way. But what happens when the soul is too weak for even a will? Eternal torture...(not by any deistic god, mind you)

---

Design was assumed, but there are many things, even without evolution, that do not suggest design. Design, just like 'goddidit', has no predictive power. We can call it design, but does that actually mean anything?


Confirmation bias, on the other hand, does exist and can be used to predict how people might act. Psychologists did not simply say they are 'irrational' and move on, but give an accurate assesment of the phenomenon.

Sure confirmation bias is a possible theory behind our belief in God. But if all emotionally driven beliefs are fallacies, the same can be said about us knowing praise, value, or morals exist.

---

Morals are an evolutionary advantage; they do not fall into this category. The concept of value makes sense, and had a use ever since people began to barter. As for praise, my best guess would be that it is an extension of the value system to people.

---

Is it? The evolutionary explanation of morality would be equally valid if there is no free will. Also, if nihilists make any effort to be moral, they must believe in morality on some level, even if they do not acknowledge it (perhaps not even to themselves).

I agree that everyone believes in morality to an extent, but people do take on the intellectual position that morality is a delusion as well.

It's like I said before, even a nihilist has pride, but that's not really possible without belief in objective praise/value.

But this doesn't change the fact, emotion is part of the "belief" experience of praise and morality.

---

People can take the position that it is a delusion, but that doesn't make them right. As for emotion in beliefs, it is best to leave them out. Having emotions is perfectly acceptable, and minor descisions can be left to emotion (i.e. 'on a whim'). However, theists (ones with religions more than deists) seem to employ emotion more prominintly in descision making than reason, and that is where there starts to become a problem.