[/font]
Some who reject God live lives of diversion and merriment. Their fleshly pursuits seem to yield a carefree and gratified existence. The Bible says there is a certain measure of delight to be had in sin. The problem is that this is temporary; life in this world is short. Sooner or later, the hedonist, like the prodigal son in the parable, finds that worldly pleasure is unsustainable.
I am sure that atheists and non-christians in America really don't live life much differently than you.
However, not everyone who rejects God is an empty pleasure-seeker. There are many unsaved people who live disciplined, sober liveshappy and fulfilled lives, even. The Bible presents certain moral principles which will benefit anyone in this world: fidelity, honesty, self-control, etc. But, again, without God man has only this world. Getting smoothly through this life is no guarantee that we are ready for the afterlife.
And if there is no afterlife, what then? I believe I have only this life, so I need to make the best of it. The bible has moral principles, but it is only one of many. You are making the choice to follow it. You don't follow the bible because it's true, you follow it because you think its true, and therefore using your own subjective reasoning and claiming it is an objective morality.
That really is the message of the Bible how to secure eternity. (topic for another thread)
I don't believe there is one, and if there is, I'd probably rather be destroyed.
So as we look around the world and see how different cultures live, how does Being moral usually has a greater societal benefit than being immoral fit.
Sometimes better than others.
Without God, everyone would have their own view of right and wrong. Humans end up following the rules of relativism; hedonism; utilitarianism; situationism; or determinism.
But does that make it right?
People have been asking this long before either of us were born, and since the dawn of humanity what is considered moral when and where has shifted so often that to claim there is a time tested single "true" morality is laughable.
There is only one God. I dont have to prove there is a God. He speaks to you just as He does to me. We both have to make a choice.
I don't believe there is any God, let alone one. The burden is on you to prove it or else your claims of objective morality have no leg to stand on. I hear no voices, and I cannot choose to believe something if I am not convinced.
If you put the entire Bible in context it becomes abundantly clear that God is immutable. You can not take a piece of scripture from here and one from there and draw an accurate picture of God.
I have read the bible, and there are many interpretations of God as there is different denominations, and I have yet to find one where God resembles anything I would find admirable.
To prove the existence of God, lets begin with the law of cause and effect which states that every material effect must have an adequate cause that existed before the effect. We have an observable universe, and we know that nothing comes from nothing. Following that I believe that He is the God from the beginning to the end of the Bible.
Where did God come from? "He is outside our time, space, and our understanding" is the standard answer, and I think it's a cop out. There's no shame in saying "I don't know". We don't understand everything about the universe, but it doesn't mean we just make things up and leave it at that. It's odd that the more we understand things, the less things spirits and gods get to take credit for.