What does an atheist...

[tackattack]

Yet you have no problem calling him loving in previous posts?

I'm pretty sure I've actually tried not to call him loving only Love. I've defined repeatedly that I feel God's Love is different than the terms we define as the emotion or act of love here on earth.

Then what is God's love?

There was a typo in that and I've coreected it. It makes the statement a little clearer, but let me expound. I see love as caring and compassion, devotion, honesty, self-less and patient. Theese are some attributes the bible contributes to what God's Love is, but I see them as human traits that over the course of evolution could have developed out of communal living of primitive species. God's Love is eternal, the very concept of eternal is contrary to the reality of human existance. God's love is forgiveness. The concept that a man can kill my family and I'm supposed to just let it go is in direct opposition to my human nature. God's love is not boastfull or envious. When animal species have found a mate they publicise that to other males and are protective thus I don't see where this could have developed either. God's Love never fails. The concept of something not breking down (entropy discussion earlier) is foreign to the finite life on this planet. That's going to have to be a good start I'm going home to bed.

I don't understand your wording. Could you please define "the idea of a personal god"

A personal God is typically defined as god who answers prayers, which you believe he does, which means he cannot be indifferent and therefore choses directly to help some people through prayer but obviously doesn't care about starving babies.

I don't believe I ever stated that God answers my prayers. A lot of Christians feel God answers prayers. I don't pray to God asking for anything so there's no cause for an answer from my view.

My point was man does this to his fellow man. He may use God as an excuse for going to war, feeding the hungry, etc. but good or bad; we do it to ourseleves.

That is directly contradictory of what you said earlier, which i quote:

"Just because he doesn't stop your suffering, your diseases, etc. doesn't mean he doesn't supply that to others"

So you either believe that God helps some people and not others, or you believe he's indifferent. You seem to constantly flipflop on this point, so can you answer me directly, is god indifferent or does he help some people and not innocent babies?

---

I believe God heps everyone, it's whether the individual can accept that help is what's in question. I can never truly know what God's love is because it is unknowable, maybe it is indifferent. difference supposes choice and eludes to accepting he's sentient which I can neither prove nor is it relevant.

It takes far more humility to admit that we are lucky than it does to suppose we're divine.

I like the last line but let me try and get my head around this. How do you factor free-will and cause and affect into (for lack of a better term" this theory of coincedence?


From our current understanding of Quantum Indeterminacy, even if you knew the state of everything in the universe you would still be unable to make predictions without probability and since Determinism cannot be random, i can conclude that there is only really free will. Due to the inherent randomness in the universe, even from a single cause that happened the same way each time you cannot expect that two instances will result in identical chains, in fact you would expect the differences over time to snowball into notably different systems.

The Christian view of free will i see as being problematic. As Christopher Hitchens puts it: "God gave you free will, you have no choice in the matter"

You're going to have to go deeper into this and relate it to cause and effect for me I need time to ingest and rest.