Difference is, what we, the atheists, believe is what we can touch, what we can test, dictated by logic and reason. What you believe is apparently based on a fleeting sensation that could just as easily be described scientifically, but you choose to assume that it means something you have read or have been brought up to believe. Had you not been told about God, you would not be looking for God, and you would not find God. The reason belief in God existed in the past is because people couldn't explain certain phenomena, and from what you're suggesting, that's the exact reason you believe in God too. What you choose to see as God, scientists will study and analyse and reduce to simple chemistry, and hey, that's just not as pleasant therefore God must be the real answer.

For you it's a matter of belief, but for us it's a matter of science, and no matter how you word it, those are not the same thing at all. Belief is nothing more than an unquestioned assumption, which is fine and all, but if you believe that then why do you also choose to accept all the goof things science brings you? The medicine, the technology, astronomy... Why choose to believe God wanted people to endure surgery without anaesthetic for centuries before finally revealing to someone through a divine vision, a safer way to operate, but only after a certain number of people had died in agony?

That can be easily explained by chemical reactions on our brain.
But I'm not wasting my time researching and posting here, since you won't believe it anyway.

The original premise of the thread is a perfectly valid philosophical debating point. "Is the Abrahamic God as portrayed in the Bible/Koran/Torah a decent chap by modern standards of morality?"

the first few pages were debate, based on the bible... I took certain bits of it to prove that God is a homicidal maniac, and have yet to see much proof to counter this.

lol thats a new one

True, and just by sheer number fuels the argument to completely unneeded terms..

untrue... A debate is a topic withtwo or more sides, with exponents of each viewpoint trading ideas and discussing their views, whilst also pointout the defects in the other sides views....
Numbers have noting to do with it.... Your inability to actually debate does.

and once again thats where you are wrong... Asking if god exists or not isn't a debate thats just an argument, there i agree...

however this topic was asking based on the bible, do you think that God deserves our worship? Or is he a homocidal killer?
that is something that can quite easily be argued, backing up your stance using quotes from the bible is also quite easy..

Now the fact that i really really don't believe in any God and especialy not the biblical one does not negate the fact that i can argue that based on the bible he is a mass killer who is intent on Genocide on well... a biblical scale.

See that point right there is why it is just insane for me to actually consider the possibility that God is a decent guy. If you want to get into heaven you have to give up a part of your lifestyle that makes you happy. Not only is that insane to say "God loves me, but he hates gays, so he will eternally damn me if I don't become a licensed hetero," but more and more research is starting to find that homosexuality is probably a genetic/chromosomal trait and not a choice (it has been witnessed in animals). So God loves you, hates homosexuals and will eternally damn you to Hell, and then has you born gay. Where is the nice guy in all of that because I see a hypocritical bigot.

But if you follow that line of thinking you consider the bible as a completely true historical document, which is more of a fundamentalist approach to Christianity and not at all part of mainstream Christianity.



Seriously...? :')