[quote="InJesusItrust, post:10, topic:285424"]
Actually turning to God is the most rational decision. For if there is no God morality is a sham and truth is whatever a dictator decides is truth. There is nothing transcendental to anchor these things to so they are just temporal.
If there is no God, the most rational response to suffering is suicide. If there is no afterlife nothing matters. On the other hand if there is an afterlife we can argue there is an objective meaning to life. To argue that there is only subjective meaning means there is no meaning, for then contradictory meanings are true and so holding that position is illogical. Nobody can truly live their life as if there is no meaning, truth or morality. Everyone falls victim to living their life as if one or more of these things exist.
And did you believe all this before you became religious? Because it sounds like the usual theistic trope to me; it completely fails to grasp the reality and colours everything with a religious pre-supposition.
I find it really hard to believe you were ever an atheist. And I stand by my previous comment that your conversion and current belief are not the result of any critical thought process.
Furthermore atheists speak as if it is courageous to never reach out to God even if it is a necessity for a person. They call it weakness.
Can you cite me an example? I know of no atheists that call it a weakness. We call it wrong. It might seem to be a psychological necessity for a person to do it, but that doesn't make religion true. No evidence exists that any religions are true.
Yet on the flip-side one could argue that they are too proud to take help when help is needed. That is not strength but weakness, being a slave to your own vanity.
Not at all - if there were evidence that calling upon this help actually resulted in help being provided, then there would be very few atheists left. But there is no evidence that this works. In fact, there's plenty of evidence to the contrary.
If one reaches out and touches God they will inherit all things. But if one does not touch Him they lose nothing, but gain the truth, that God does not exist. But that can only happen if they seek Him with true intentions, because if the absolute God exists He knows all things.
I have no problem with you believing this per se. I just think you're wrong to do so.
It is simply rational to listen to theists when they tell you to seek out God and pray with your heart that He reveal Himself.
Is it rational to listen to Muslims telling you to seek out Allah? What about Hindus exhorting you to seek Shiva, or Ganesha?
The only obstacles are not being able to reason out why it is rational or not being able to risk being a fool.
No, sorry, I can't figure out why it's rational to believe in something for which no evidence exists, and which is completely unnecessary. To me that seems patently *ir*rational.
Nor do I think it's foolish to disbelieve in that for which no evidence exists. I might be proved wrong, but I would be wrong for the right reasons, so I could not be counted a fool. That said, I have no problem being exposed as a fool if I do something foolish. I do not count atheism as foolishness.
“There are only three types of people; those who have found God and serve him; those who have not found God and seek him, and those who live not seeking, or finding him. The first are rational and happy; the second unhappy and rational, and the third foolish and unhappy.” - Pascal
Pascal, is entitled, as are you, to an opinion. However, the evidence is clear to see - atheists are no more unhappy than theists, and "foolishness" is in the eye of the beholder.