genegc2

> I don't believe in things that seem unlikely and have no proofs.

Neither do I.

So I guess my parting comment is that we all need to do a better job of discussing opposing belief systems with mutual respect. There are good arguments on both sides - and I would suggest that if that statement sounds ridiculous, you've not been sincerely listening to the other side, or you've only heard straw man arguments. It's not black and white - and being closed minded is not something unique to one side or the other.

Let's try to hear both sides out - and develop an understanding of each other's beliefs and non-beliefs rather than dropping into an "us" vs "them" stance. Truth does not need to be defended with anger or violence. There's no need to convince or convert - we just need to be true to our search. Truth is often hard to find, but it's not fragile.

I've resisted providing specific evidence for my beliefs because I can reasonably expect for it to not be well received in this forum. But if anyone is interested in a good example of a balanced and civil debate of Christianity vs. Atheism, based on evidence and reason, this is a pretty good one -- https://youtu.be/fEw8VzzXcjE

I am not posting that in an attempt to convert or convince - I'm certain it will do neither. I'm posting it in attempt to encourage civil discussion, and exchange of ideas and beliefs. Notice in the debate the mutual respect the speakers give to each other.

Close-mindedness and hatred exists in every belief system. Let's try to encourage one another on our respective paths. Let's encourage one another to relentlessly seek truth.

There are more consequences than just hell and jail - and a faith or belief system purely motivated on hell and/or jail is an immature one.

My argument boils down to Natural Law, and it sounds to me like yours does too. When you say "I don't have any reasons to value my enjoyment over theirs" - I would totally agree, but I still don't understand how you arrive at that without a belief in Natural Law.

An argument that doesn't rely on Natural Law goes something like this: We have evolved into highly social beings, so our internal physiology naturally rewards us for socially constructive behavior, so we choose to not be a dick because being a dick feels bad. It's a purely selfish motivation because that is what is purely rational.

My limited understanding of Natural Law comes from CS Lewis and Thomas Aquinas, but I did a quick search before writing this reply and I see that it has some backing in atheistic thought. Is that where your coming from?

> Why? I can write a game where you have choice, but no pain or suffering. Is God worse programmer?

If our choices were reduced to those which could not cause pain and suffering, life would resemble a game; our choices would lack any consequence. Thankfully, life is much more than a game.

> and don't be a dick

This advice is curious to me. How do you derive this from your beliefs? I can understand you saying "don't be a dick just to be a dick", because that would cause pointless suffering. But if I can advance my own wealth or happiness by being a dick in such a way that I can reasonably avoid retribution, why shouldn't I?

You bring up two issues here - the need for evidence, and the problem of pain and suffering. There are of course a lot of resources on both sides of the coin about those issues. I'll just summarize my very limited understanding - my personal approach. My faith is evidence based - but it can't be 100% proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. Since it can't be proven, I'm forced to continue to grow in my understanding, and humbly continue the journey. And I have to make a deliberate choice to believe - based on the evidence I see and experience in my life. Also, since it can't be proven, I can't convince you to accept it - you have to do your own searching - you have to make your choice. I believe that this is by design, and I find it to be beautiful.

The problem of pain and suffering is a lot harder to address in a brief comment. Nothing I can say in a few short lines will be very satisfying, unless you already believe or are wanting to believe. Here are a few thoughts...

Pain and suffering are not good in and of themselves, but good can come from them.

In order to escape all pain and suffering, we would have to surrender our freewill - and then what would be the point to life anyway?

My level of understanding will always be limited. I have to approach this journey with humility. I can know a lot, but I can't know everything. I will work to alleviate pain and suffering where I can, and trust that in end, all the pain and suffering in the world will have brought about a glorious end that will be worth it.

That's certainly equally valid. But my brief comment was meant to also be a humble suggestion of another place to look - another thing worth trying. It's a viewpoint that definitely seems to be in the minority in this forum, but it's an important one to consider. A couple more ideas worth considering: - Coming to a place of faith starts like everything; it begins with the desire to have faith. - Consider the possibility that reason and faith are not mutually exclusive, but actually complementary (just give that concept a chance before dismissing it - it has a very strong intellectual history)

In my experience, there is no joy without faith.