Why?

[TheFinalWord]

I believe in mermaids and leprechauns and there are many stories about them. Now I want others to prove they dont exist.

 

BlackGetusga or quickjoe,

 

What exactly would constitute evidence for God's existence for you? Is there any benchmark in your mind that if it was available to you would make you say "Ah, now that does it!". What would appease you?

 

No baited question, just generally curious

 

BTW, I am going to watch the perseid meteor shower and marvel at God's handiwork It's all the proof I need. Peace

 

1 The heavens declare the glory of God;

the skies proclaim the work of his hands.

2 Day after day they pour forth speech;

night after night they reveal knowledge.

3 They have no speech, they use no words;

no sound is heard from them.

4 Yet their voice goes out into all the earth,

their words to the ends of the world.

In the heavens God has pitched a tent for the sun.

5 It is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber,

like a champion rejoicing to run his course.

6 It rises at one end of the heavens

and makes its circuit to the other;

nothing is deprived of its warmth.

Edited August 12, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[M30USA]

It doesnt make it the truth either, yet in your eyes you have taken it as just that.

 

No.

 

It just means I find these things worthy of investigation, and not to be thrown out at the outset before a fair look--as you apparently do.

 

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

-Herbert Spencer

[M30USA]

It would be very easy for God to show himself.

 

He did. 2000 years ago. And people still walked away from him not believing.

 

Funny, it is, that one of the few people to immediately recognize who Jesus is was a demon possessed man. The second Jesus walked up to him this man--without ever having met him--called him Son of the Most High and pleaded with him to leave him alone and not drive his demons away.

Edited August 12, 2012 by M30USA

[M30USA]

Your god is clearly quite determined to remain hidden from any form of human investigation, so do you really think there is any point discussing hypothetical evidence that will never present itself?

 

And you are making an assumption that something has to be seen in order to be knowable.

 

You are elevating your status to a supreme being...since you are pretty much telling God (if there is one) which precise criteria he must satisfy in order to--in your view--prove his existence. And that's just your criteria. There are 7 billion people in the world. What if their criteria for God are different? Wow. That's a lot. We better just follow yours then.

[M30USA]

And I take it you saw this?

 

And I take it you saw George Washington? Oops, he never existed.

[M30USA]

Maybe he didnt, but nobody worships him. Also there is still much more evidence of his existence then God.

 

Jesus Christ, merely as a person (deity aside), is the single most documented and well-established identity in ancient history. This would even be true if you threw out the entire Bible and just used secular documentation. You clearly don't know what you're saying.

[M30USA]

I swear...the modern generation and its pseudo-science is becoming quite a mental handicap.

 

It's like a person walking around talking with people who says, "I don't know if you're really here talking with me. I need empirical evidence. Wait, in order for me to listen to you, I need to know you're really there and it's not just subjective interpretation on my part."

 

Whereas the ancients were faulty for being overly superstitious, we during the current time have swung the complete opposite way to superscientism and have become so proof-obsessed that we neglect basic common sense--especially with things that cannot be measured scientifically.

[TheFinalWord]

Your god is clearly quite determined to remain hidden from any form of human investigation, so do you really think there is any point discussing hypothetical evidence that will never present itself?

 

Hi,

 

I think it's important to discuss or we wouldn't talk about this topic so much

 

I'm just asking what would be sufficient evidence for you? Is that not a fair question? Like I said, not a baited question. Just curious b/c it's interesting how one thing counts as evidence to some and to others it's meaningless.

 

Why do you think that is? For me, when I see the sky at night it convinces me. But I am a simple man

 

I do think that it will be hard to ever demonstrate or make a case for God if the bar for evidence can always be raised. Do you agree?

 

Do philosophical arguments count for you? Some think they don't. Just asking.

[TheFinalWord]

Writings are not evidence.

 

Okay so are you saying historical evidence doesn't count for you? If that's the case, maybe we're getting somewhere.

 

So historical evidence doesn't count? What about philosophical?

[writergal]

Hey Writergal,

 

I've always liked you on these forums. I apologize if I've annoyed you. I really am. I did not twist anything you said on purpose. I thought you were talking about me since you quoted me. I am sorry for any miscommunication.

 

I do think it takes more effort to have a dialogue online b/c we are loosing mediums of communication such as emotion, direct feedback, body language etc. Combine that with sensitive topics like politics and religion and there are bound to be misunderstandings.

 

Please forgive me b/c I am not honestly trying to twist your words or anyone else's words. If I am not accurately representing something please let me know. Sometimes I will change a question around to try to help people see the Christian perspective. But this is just my attempt, I am far from perfect and I never meant to purposely straw man anyone. For the record I think that is all you can do in forums, is try to show another perspective and hope people will perhaps appreciate it. I don't think you can "win" any argument on-line per say.

 

Well when it comes to evidence, I think you can look at philosophical arguments such as cosmological argument, teleological argument, etc. Is that what you mean? But I agree, there will never be 100% proof. I agree with Pascal when he said the evidence is sufficiently vague for those that don't want to believe and sufficiently sufficient for those that do want to believe. I believe God allows that on purpose to prevent coerciveness. I agree with that statement, though I mean no personal insult about your views

 

PS: When it comes to the bible, often skeptics here are presenting biblical cases and scenarios that are not accurate or in context. So when the bible is brought up and I believe the exegesis is in error, I may point that out. I think that is needed so we can have a good dialogue and not debate strawmen. I personally see that is where the bible comes up most in these threads. Just my observation.

 

My apologies TheFinalWord. I've always respected your posts and enjoyed our discussions. Today was an off day for me in general and I was too quick to judge, so my apologies.

[TheFinalWord]

It would be very easy for God to show himself.

 

Good point, I agree. But if He did make his evidence overwhelming like write on the moon "I exist". Would you have a choice to not believe in him?

 

The way I've always looked at it is that God could make it 100% clear. But then I would have no choice but to believe. That is where interesting questions about free will might be contemplated.

[writergal]

Did you read my post, at all?

 

I did read your post. You explained how you were an Atheist who went through a lot to get to where you're at right now in your spiritual journey, losing some folks in the process etc.

 

Did I misinterpret something from your post? If I did, my apologies.

[TheFinalWord]

My apologies TheFinalWord. I've always respected your posts and enjoyed our discussions. Today was an off day for me in general and I was too quick to judge, so my apologies.

 

No problem writergal Me too.

 

It's easy to get heated with these dialogues. If I am out of line please feel free to say so b/c I can definitely make mistakes! Have a good night!

[writergal]

No problem writergal Me too.

 

It's easy to get heated with these dialogues. If I am out of line please feel free to say so b/c I can definitely make mistakes! Have a good night!

 

That's true about heated discussions. I do like you and Dreaming of Tigers a lot, so I hope neither of you will hold this against me for too long. You're never out of line. I was the one who was out of line in Yellowshark's thread. Sorry guys! And thanks for the bunny. Here's one for you and Dreaming of Tigers too. I hope you both have a good night.

[dreamingoftigers]

I did read your post. You explained how you were an Atheist who went through a lot to get to where you're at right now in your spiritual journey, losing some folks in the process etc.

 

Did I misinterpret something from your post? If I did, my apologies.

 

I wrote my other sources for believing. Plus sone if the layman-type books that phrase it nicely (may have been in 2 different posts)

 

Science of God

Case for Faith

Case for Christ

 

The defining moment came to me at different moments.

I'm LDS and there are some church writings about the nature of the universe etc. That are quite old that have recently been proven. That smacked me in the head quite a bit.

 

There is a passage in the bible that basically says:

 

Blessed are those that have not seen and yet believed. (this strikes me as an internal observation, almost suggesting that they have a strong feeling or belief in God without a testimony from outside)

 

But I digress, I was not one of those "highly blessed" people in that regard. I resisted the notions of a God that would seem more authoritarian than anything.

 

What I have come to realize as I get older is that people often see their parents (or sometimes more specifically their father) as what God would be like.

 

In my case, I thought God was the type of being just looking to pounce on every little wrong and give no credit for any little right. That he created me, didn't truly care about me, but would smack me down for disobedience at the first instant. That wasn't God, that was my Dad.

 

My husband for instance was abandoned in childhood has doubts about the existence of God but figures if there was a higher power that it would have nothing to do in his life. He figures, "maybe we were just some sort of experiment or phase, like a cake or something." I've lightly teased him about the Church of the Experimental Cake.

 

Often it's really hard to evaluate religion's validity because of how we FEEL about it. We can throw facts back and forth all day BUT at the end of the day, it's what sits right to you.

 

In my church, we are told the way to find God is to pray with a broken heart and contrite spirit (in other words, be sick of not knowing and open minded) to ask him to show you whether his word is true or not.

 

And to test the principles he laid out to see if they work for you or not.

If you aren't actually trying the basic principles and asking with prayer if he is there or not, then how can it actually, fully be ruled out by you personally?

 

If it isn't provable or not via science, than there must be another means, and that means would be personal.

 

Honestly, if God were out there and is intelligent enough to have created the whole universe and each of us (and we are insanely complex), don't you think he'd be smart enough to dodge scientists in the 21st century?

[TheFinalWord]

I really don't want to appear snide, but you really set yourself up when you say things like that.

 

haha, yeah I know. I don't mind b/c I don't think either of us is going to change the others mind. It was just for fun to lighten things up.

 

I am just genuinely curious of what evidence would convince you of the Christian God. There's no attempt to bait here Ideally, what would it be.

 

We need to use the right tool for the job, so tell me about the properties of your god.

 

That's a good question. I'll have to think about your last points. Gotta go right now

[quankanne]

What are you gonna do in heaven for endless millennia?

 

exist in love ... or as I tell people, just be in one big love-fest with God. Because how much more perfect could that get? We measure "happiness" with corporeal things ... stuff we buy, etc ... but they can't compare with peace of mind or pureness of being, IMO. So yeah, grooving with God is how I see heaven.

[M30USA]

Which begs the question why? What does god have to lose by being discovered?

 

1) The Bible says the righteous shall live by faith. Angels do not have to live by faith, because they see God. But for whatever reason, God wants his prize creation to live by faith. My guess is that it somehow will add even more to our glory if you can go through all this crap simply by faith.

 

2) Read the account of Moses who demanded to see God's face. God told Moses a stern no, but he said he would allow Moses to crawl into the crevice of a rock and turn his back around as the glory of the Lord passed by his backside. Moses then went back down Mount Sinai and it says his face was literally radiating when the Israelites saw him. He had to place a cloth over his face.

[TheFinalWord]

Which begs the question why? What does god have to lose by being discovered?

 

Good question. Blaise Pascal wrote a lot about this.

 

To completely butcher his argument, if the evidence was 100% we would have no choice but to accept God. It would be a sort of coercion. Pascal basically says the evidence is vague to those that don't want to believe in God b/c they deem themselves unworthy. (PS: That's him, not me

 

 

“ “God has willed to redeem men, and to open salvation to those who seek it. But men render themselves so unworthy of it, that it is right that God should refuse to some, because of their obduracy, what He grants to others from a compassion which is not due to them. If He had willed to overcome the obstinacy of the most hardened, He could have done so by revealing Himself so manifestly to them that they could not have doubted of the truth of His essence; as it will appear at the last day, with such thunders and such a convulsion of nature, that the dead will rise again, and the blindest will see Him.

 

It is not in this manner that He has willed to appear in His advent of mercy, because, as so many make themselves unworthy of His mercy, He has willed to leave them in the loss of the good which they do not want. It was not then right that He should appear in a manner manifestly divine, and completely capable of convincing all men; but it was also not right that He should come in so hidden a manner that He could not be known by those who should sincerely seek Him. He has willed to make Himself quite recognisable by those; and thus, willing to appear openly to those who seek Him with all their heart, and to be hidden from those who flee from Him with all their heart, He so regulates the knowledge of Himself that He has given signs of Himself, visible to those who seek Him, and not to those who seek Him not. There is enough light for those who only desire to see, and enough obscurity for those who have a contrary disposition.”

 

Rather than butcher his case anymore, I'll give a link

 

The Harvard classics - Charles William Eliot - Google Books

 

Good classic prose

 

Blaise Pascal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edited August 12, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[whichwayisup]

Why do you want to live for trillions of years in imaginary neverland heaven? Personally I think it would actually be more like Hell. I mean really.. What are you gonna do in heaven for endless millennia? Ever thought about that part? How will you keep busy, will you get a hobby? Whats it gonna be like for you "believers" after say, a couple million years up there?

 

See, you are assuming that life forever on heaven is like being a human on earth. Nobody knows. What if it's a ball of happy energy, a soul, our essence wrapped into a new form of life, whatever that could be .. And who says it's a couple of million years?

 

Our brains could be different..Maybe we won't have a brain. Maybe it's a completely different kind of 'person/alien' that nobody can ever dream up of.

 

All I know is, when I go and if there is a heaven (I certainly hope there is!) I'll welcome it with open arms.

[TheFinalWord]

As long as you realise that this "vagueness" (which I read as no evidence whatsoever) is entirely consistent with claims that are incorrect. If we have no choice but to "believe as childrend do" (ie, unconditionally) then critical thinking goes out the window and it then becomes a matter of which religious claim you hear first.

 

In short, evidence is a good thing, and equating it to coercion is a pretty big stretch. You may as well argue that we are coerced (as though it were a bad thing) into breathing and shedding cells.

 

Well, Pascal (Pascal actually had religious conversion so he didn't adhere to the first one he heard about) was talking about how we interpret the evidence. He didn't say we had no choice or no evidence at all. But we can interpret it with "heart-based" biases that either affirm or deny God. I think we see many even in science that either "see" or "don't see" God, i.e. Collins and Dawkins are two examples. Why is that? Both are experts in their respective fields; one sees God the other doesn't. Pascal argues that God could make it undeniable (i.e. 100%, absolute proof so even Dawkins could not deny it), but that would be coercive of God and deny free will.

 

It's not the end all be all to your question though

 

PS: BTW there are lots of biblical narratives about this topic but I'm trying to avoid that

Edited August 12, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[quankanne]

To completely butcher his argument, if the evidence was 100% we would have no choice but to accept God.

 

I've also heard it posed as, "What if we had every scrap of evidence needed that pointed to God's existence? Would we believe, or would we be skeptical, and why?"

 

my thought is that people would probably be skeptical, because they don't want to be caught up into such an intimate relationship that asks them to give their all for something they can't see or touch or smell or hear ... which is why faith is a gift that only few possess.

[TheFinalWord]

This is all well and good as an academic exercise, but as soon as our eternal souls are hinged on a single belief that we might or might not be able to convince ourselves of (and this is highly dependent on where in the world and when in history we happen to be born) then it all degenerates into total incoherence.

 

It's not that we might be able to convince ourselves of it or not, it's if choose to accept it or not. It's a matter of free will, according to the argument, not trickery "maybe we will get it, but maybe we won't"

 

But again, with evidence, I think it's how high you set the bar. Some people I have talked too in the past make the bar so far away they can never be satisfied. I think they have to ask themselves if they are being reasonable in how much evidence God (or the concept of a god) has to provide. Hard to answer. I don't know, in general, what area and/or quantity of evidence would be most satisfactory for you. Empirical, philosophical, historical? All three?

 

But I agree if eternal souls are at stake it's important.

 

It becomes impossible to satisfactorily reconcile god's fairness with the blatant unfairness of the situation. For a person who holds to this kind of thinking, their choices are equally unappealing, as they can either:

• Deny reality, and refuse to recognise that a person living in a fundamentalist Islamic state like Iran is much, much less likely to accept Jesus as their personal saviour than somebody living in, say, Texas where it's practically beaten into you from birth.
  
• Invent all these loopholes for people who had never heard of Jesus or people who die before they can arrive at that conclusion. And this isn't a simple thing. The age of accountability isn't exactly something you can pinpoint, but you kind of need to in order to manipulate reality into this eternal punishment|eternal reward dichotomy with no middle ground. Speaking of which...
  
• Invent "limbo" or "purgatory" in an attempt to deal with the undeniable injustice of punishing people for choices they weren't even aware of, or who had diminished capacity to make.
  
• Try not to think about it, and just reassure yourself with confirmation bias.
  
• I leave this one blank, to be filled in by you if you think I've missed anything significant.
  

Well the blank bullet I would say is the genetic fallacy is a risk, i.e. that because I can show how a belief originates that shows the belief to be false.

 

I would say that we can talk about each of those cases individually. And with these issues, many of them have hermeneutic biblical reconciliations (not purgatory, but you knew I'd say that ). I can show you them if you want.

 

But to be honest, I don't quite see how you're connecting your first paragraph with this second one. Maybe it's just late. Can you clarify?

 

Before getting into God's justice again, I think we should go a step back.

 

You mention fair and unfair. What is "fair"? How do you know what fair and unfair is? Yes, this will get into objective moral values and we both know where that will go

 

 

Before I speak about this, I'd like to hear what you, as an educated person, think of this assertion. And how is it effectively different from arguing that it's better to spend your entire life with your eyes closed, because to open them would effectively be coercion and strip you of your free will to believe that the universe is a uniform shade of pink?

 

I'm trying to follow you here. When you say "as an educated person" I worry I'm getting baited or I've let you down

 

Please go ahead and just tell me what you think I said and I will clarify if it's wrong b/c I'm not quite following what you're asking. Like I said I'm a simple man, maybe just give an example. If I said something you don't agree with, go ahead and just say it please. I won't mind I never said anyone should live with their eyes closed (I don't think?)

[YellowShark]

Proof that god and heaven exist? I don't have to prove it because the burden of proof is upon the folks who claim god and heaven exist. And all they really have is a book from a couple thousand years ago with a bunch of stories in it.

 

Proof that god doesn't exist? Fairly easy. When an earthquake or hurricane such as Katrina hits it affects the "righteous" equally as bad as the "unbelievers." Now why would an all-mighty infinite god fail to protect the "righteous?" Why would god let something as simple to him as a storm kill true believers? I mean if one can pray and god answers those prayers -(there's a whole thread on that here)- where is god when it comes to natural disasters? And don't tell me its a test. There are better, less destructive ways to test faith than wiping out believers in tsunamis and hurricanes.

 

Alas I was just wondering what one does for eternity. Since that is the claim. That if you "believe" then after you die you go live for eternity in heaven. So what are you gonna do for eternity? Its a long time. But now I am told eternity is not really eternity in heaven cuz "time and space" follow different rules there. OK. So where is the evidence for that? And this is where we default back to the book from a couple thousand years ago with a bunch of stories in it.

 

Well that's not enough evidence for me. I require more than one source for the proof of something as fantastic as an eternal all-mighty being who controls everything in the universe. Ya, I know, in good old days you'd just burn me at the stake for asking such blasphemous questions.

 

ETA:

 

Evidence of an all-powerful eternal being who controls everything should be easy to produce. After all wouldn't that make god the most important thing in the universe? So why is he hiding? He should stand up and be counted IMHO.

Edited August 12, 2012 by YellowShark

[dreamingoftigers]

I wouldn't burn you at the stake. (I'm squeamish)

 

So, since hurricanes and other natural disasters happen where God doesn't slap the waves back from the believers, he clearly doesn't exist or care?

 

Why would he care about life/death so damn much if that relationship continues on throughout an eternity regardless?

 

How is that a test?

 

The test isn't whether or not all of these great world-wide things make me extra-comfy because God's in a good mood today. Jeez, he didn't even let his only begotten off of the hook.

 

IOW, sh*t happens, and he's there for us anyways. Life or death.

 

Just sometimes he shows us personally beyond the shadow of a doubt. And sometimes he asks us to cling to that faith and remember what we have with him and the promises he made to us.

 

So in your own words and ideas, you could invent a better, more convenient universe and because this one doesn't line up to your expectations, there is no God.

 

Well YS, what needs changing, tell us how God would need to change in order to be a God that you would find acceptable?

 

Just how much suffering is allowable? How much choice? How much self-management? WWYSD?