Ok you all got the meaning of my question wrong probably because of my wording I'm sure I'm sorry for that. I guess I was trying to get at this idea that I see on this forum, and do tell me if I'm wrong that anyone feels like this, but it seems most of you don't want there to be a God, and no matter the argument or evidence your goal is set to prove it wrong.
I think you're misunderstanding the meaning of responses to you: I'm not disbelieving in the existence of god to be stubborn - I disbelieve in god because I am unconvinced that such an entity exists.
Why would God, who chose to give life, want to go beyond( the already present evidence of his existence, I'll go further with that in a moment) and try to make one believe who wants and try's to prove he isn't there?
a) God is all-loving, and therefore would not relegate me to eternal torture (or lack of his all-love or whatever you believe the consequence of missing out on salvation means) simply for being either too stubborn or too stupid to recognize his existence. You know, sort of like how most people would find a parent to be 'bad' if that parent decided to kick out there 7-year old for not wanting to do math and not being good at social studies.
b) God is all-knowing, and therefore is capable knowing why
I do not believe in his existence.
c) God is all-powerful, and therefore is capable of actually convincing me of his existence.
You never answered my earlier question regarding god wanting me to know of his existence, so I'm still going with 'yes, god wants people to know he exists' answer.
Therefore the answer to your question is still 'yes', based on the characteristics that god apparently has. Is there anything incorrect, illogical, or unreasonable with the all-loving/all-knowing/all-powerful argument that myself and others have made to you?
I would like you all to give me your examples that the bible is so contradictory and so false, if I can just get the name of the verses if possible that would help out.
And further if you all can show me your evidence and substantial proof for Jesus not living and his message not true?
Tell you what - I'll start putting together substantial proof for Jesus not living sometime after you give substantial proof that Osiris did not or does not live. Before attempting that, however, you may wish to look into what the phrase 'proving a negative' means.
How only the belief in Jesus and through him is the way to God, that main message has never changed since? Can you show the resurrection did not happen?
You may wish to look into the history of the protestant reformation. You may wish to look at the tenants of many of the other monotheistic religions out there. Talk to a Jehovah's Witness, a Southern Baptist, a Mormon, an Episcopalian, and a Roman Catholic, ask them what 'salvation' means. Ask a Jew or a Muslim about the relationship Jesus has to god. Ask a Hindu, a Jain, and a Wiccan what 'god' means.
If you do that and still find the message of the whole 'belief in Jesus and through him is the way to God' to be a consistent, never changed message, then we can continue the conversation.
I'll show you that Jesus' resurrection didn't happen after you show me that Rama was not the 7th incarnation of Vishnu. Refer to 'proving a negative' again.
This is also a sincere question of mine honestly, because I understand how absurd I seem to some of you but I am, with every single ounce, in the entirety of my being, certain that what I believe is true. But I haven't and I won't tell any of you that you need to do the same as me or believe the same as me.
So let me ask you this: do you know what being wrong feels like? If you only pick one of the questions in this post to respond to, I do ask that you answer this one.
The question though..... How do you personally define morals in your own life?
That is a fairly deep question and I'm uncertain as to how it pertains to the current discussion. However, at the core of how I personally define morals in my own life, it is in the context and with respect to the feelings, needs, and well-being of other living things capable of having feelings, needs, and well-being. What I don't do for defining morals is look to a really old book or accept an action as morally righteous because some entity that may or may not have interest in letting me know that he even EXISTS
trying to tell me what to do.