CG: deliver proof of god existence please?
-
harold aptroot wrote:
This "personal experience" thing makes it slightly odd, does that mean that god does not exist outside the minds of man?
No, because He causes external events to happen too, such as my friend who was healed of cancer.
harold aptroot wrote:
Also, how are you sure that's god?
Fair question. I'm not sure how I can say definitively that the being who does these things in my life is who He claims to be, except that I guess I also define Him by both those things and the Bible, and so long as both of those tests pass, whoever else He is, He is who I think He is.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
No, because He causes external events to happen too, such as my friend who was healed of cancer.
Well who knows. It wasn't exactly a proper experiment.. at best it provides evidence, rather than proof.
Christian Graus wrote:
I'm not sure how I can say definitively that the being who does these things in my life is who He claims to be, except that I guess I also define Him by both those things and the Bible, and so long as both of those tests pass, whoever else He is, He is who I think He is.
So he is god by definition, ok, but how is that related to the creation of life? Is that the same god?
-
Christian Graus wrote:
No, because He causes external events to happen too, such as my friend who was healed of cancer.
Well who knows. It wasn't exactly a proper experiment.. at best it provides evidence, rather than proof.
Christian Graus wrote:
I'm not sure how I can say definitively that the being who does these things in my life is who He claims to be, except that I guess I also define Him by both those things and the Bible, and so long as both of those tests pass, whoever else He is, He is who I think He is.
So he is god by definition, ok, but how is that related to the creation of life? Is that the same god?
harold aptroot wrote:
Well who knows. It wasn't exactly a proper experiment.. at best it provides evidence, rather than proof.
Sure, I'd accept that. Certainly the cancer story is personal to me, she is my friend, but it's twice removed from you, which is why it's ancillary to the core proof that is offered to you personally.
harold aptroot wrote:
So he is god by definition, ok, but how is that related to the creation of life? Is that the same god?
The Bible says so, and I included the Bible in my initial definition. Certainly it would be odd for one God to have the power to create life, and another God to have the power to communicte with me, without that first God interfering or being evident. In this case, I think Occam's Razor applies :-) And, I am off for the day, so that will be why I don't reply again right now.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
modified on Saturday, May 22, 2010 9:56 AM
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Well who knows. It wasn't exactly a proper experiment.. at best it provides evidence, rather than proof.
Sure, I'd accept that. Certainly the cancer story is personal to me, she is my friend, but it's twice removed from you, which is why it's ancillary to the core proof that is offered to you personally.
harold aptroot wrote:
So he is god by definition, ok, but how is that related to the creation of life? Is that the same god?
The Bible says so, and I included the Bible in my initial definition. Certainly it would be odd for one God to have the power to create life, and another God to have the power to communicte with me, without that first God interfering or being evident. In this case, I think Occam's Razor applies :-) And, I am off for the day, so that will be why I don't reply again right now.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
modified on Saturday, May 22, 2010 9:56 AM
Christian Graus wrote:
I think Occam's Razor applies
Maybe it does. I was actually steering towards this being an other case of "something that merely lacks a proper explanation - for now" One god may be simpler than several, but.. Whatever explanation there may be for "Speaking in Tongues", I wouldn't care much if people called it god by definition. But then that same god would probably not be responsible for anything else. Or maybe it would. We'll see.
Christian Graus wrote:
The Bible says so
CSS could write a book, that could grow into a religion as well.. And how about this. For a couple of hundred of thousands of years there had only been humans who, if they believed in any higher being at all, didn't believe in the god you believe in. Why was "the real god" suddenly found about 2k years ago? Is this again a case of god being illogical merely because I think he is? Or is it actually (partly) the same god? edit: /thread. I lost interest.
modified on Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:08 PM
-
The fact that Hitler did what he did proves there isnt a god. Or the Serbs, or Stalin, or the English in Ireland. Or pol pot. Fact is believing in god weakens man. It deludes him intio believing he is looked after. He isnt. The sooner people realise it is up to them to create a better life on earth the sooner we will get on and do it.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
The fact that Hitler did what he did proves there isnt a god. Or the Serbs, or Stalin, or the English in Ireland. Or pol pot. Fact is believing in god weakens man. It deludes him intio believing he is looked after. He isnt. The sooner people realise it is up to them to create a better life on earth the sooner we will get on and do it.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
The fact that Hitler did what he did proves there isnt a god. Or the Serbs, or Stalin, or the English in Ireland. Or pol pot.
Oh, I don't know... maybe he just has a vicious sense of humor. :-D
fat_boy wrote:
Fact is believing in god weakens man. It deludes him intio believing he is looked after. He isnt. The sooner people realise it is up to them to create a better life on earth the sooner we will get on and do it.
Couldn't agree more. :thumbsup:
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
-
The fact that Hitler did what he did proves there isnt a god. Or the Serbs, or Stalin, or the English in Ireland. Or pol pot. Fact is believing in god weakens man. It deludes him intio believing he is looked after. He isnt. The sooner people realise it is up to them to create a better life on earth the sooner we will get on and do it.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
No, I think it's wrong to treat such an issue using philosophical arguments.
-
The fact that Hitler did what he did proves there isnt a god. Or the Serbs, or Stalin, or the English in Ireland. Or pol pot. Fact is believing in god weakens man. It deludes him intio believing he is looked after. He isnt. The sooner people realise it is up to them to create a better life on earth the sooner we will get on and do it.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
The fact that Hitler did what he did proves there isnt a god. Or the Serbs, or Stalin, or the English in Ireland. Or pol pot.
Didn't god endow us with free will thereby absolving itself of any responsibility? Isn't that always the same old excuse that religious people bring out to explain away 'bad things'?
fat_boy wrote:
Fact is believing in god weakens man. It deludes him intio believing he is looked after. He isnt. The sooner people realise it is up to them to create a better life on earth the sooner we will get on and do it.
I agree - placing faith in the non-existent is rather weak - again, absolution from having to accept responsibility. Of course, believers will spout that god does exist though there is no evidence, whatsoever, to back such an assertion. Yes, I know that an argumnet can also be made for the reverse but I don't think you need to prove that god doesn't exist - the evidence (or lack of) is all around; rather there is need to prove that it does otherwise you'd be as well to believe in the Spag Monster as any other omnipotent being.
me, me, me "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program. And if we become extinct because we don't have a space program, it'll serve us right!" Larry Niven
-
*grin* that's not confronting at all. In the Bible, God acts in the lives of His people. The proof is not of the sort that one could make a TV documentary on, it's personal. Having said that, there have been people who have joined my church because they did what the Bible says to try to prove that God would not answer, and He did. What the Bible specifically offers the non believer is that if they repent ( which means they are willing to let God prove He is real and, if He is, that they are willing to do things His way ), and be baptised ( that is, be submersed in water, which indicates a willingness to bury the old way of life, when God proves Himself and proves the wherewithall to create a new and better way of life for the individual ), then when someone becomes a Christian, they will have a physical experience which will always include ( but is rarely limited to ) the ability to speak a language that God gives, which is commonly known as speaking in tongues. In my case, when this happened to me, I immediately felt different in many ways, I did literally become a new person. I had gone to many churches before hand, and had 'given my heart to Jesus', and I'd meant it, but I'd been unable to change the negative things in my life. So, if blind faith is all that we're talking about, why didn't my blind faith work before ? You know, there have been down times in my life, and times where I've been disconnected from my faith to a degree, but I can't imagine ever denying what happened to me. In fact, my atheist mother admits that something real enough happened to change me totally, she too would point to that moment as a time of change, and not my other religious experiences that came to nothing. So, yes, the proof God offers is not of a nature that is easy to observe as an outsider. It's not meant to be. God does offer proof to the individual, but He still wants us to have faith. I'm not saying it only works if people are already converted, but I would also say it would not 'work' if someone was not serious enough about it to be willing to consider that God might well exist, simply because I don't see how anyone could be seriously asking Him in those circumstances. That is, it's not a party trick or a joke. And, because it doesn't conform to what people would like God to do, they tend to simply reject it without looking into it at all. Which I would accept if it was done honestly, but 'I don't like the nature of the proof God offers so I will reject it and mock you' doesn't seem like a reasonable
Christian Graus wrote:
In the Bible
Starting from that premise made me wary, I'm afraid. If your belief in God is based in part on the legends of nomadic herdsmen from 3000 years ago, then I don't understand how you can also discount the truth of Buddhist, Islamic, Hindu, Jain, Norse, Greek, Roman, Native American, Aborigine, Aztec, Inca, Maya, Olmec, Celtic or any other religious myths.
-
I do not believe in a god per se, but I accept the existance of god as a concept used by some people to base their value judgments and morals on. But society could do this without the belief of a divine being. Society passes laws to protect its people, these laws come from man not god. Did the bible mention Drink Driving or Drug Possession? Did the bible say paedophilia was wrong? No. The bible did say that you should let your wife and daughter be raped by a crowd of men rather than let a male guest be sodomised, and it does say that you should not maltreat your slaves or beat them without good reason. I think we live in a world better lawed by man than by religious books.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Dalek Dave wrote:
I do not believe in a god per se, but I accept the existance of god as a concept used by some people to base their value judgments and morals on.
Value judgements and morals... That's the interesting thing about being human. We measure what is against what we think out to be and therefore make a value judgement against reality. Sometimes what we think out to be is a simple preference. Other times it's more profound such as being appalled by man's actions against his fellow man. I'm not interested in arguing for or against the existance of God. I don't find that interesting or even relevant. What's more interesting to me is how we hold ourselves above the world around us when we make value judgements. Our sense of rightness/wrongness could come from many sources including evolution, society, religion, etc, or all of the above. It doesn't really matter. We still make value judgements regardless and treat them in some sense as being legitiment or containing truth. In this sense we are spiritual beings. We can't cut ourselves off from this. Whether we believe in God or not we have this in common.
-
If there was a proof you wouldn't believe in god. You would know.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
-
If there was a proof you wouldn't believe in god. You would know.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
-
I believe reasonable amounts of beer is good for you, but I have no proof for it.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
-
I still believe in Salma Hayek.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
I still believe in Salma Hayek.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
Plenty of proof there!
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
-
I believe reasonable amounts of beer is good for you, but I have no proof for it.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
I'm willing to take part in a double-blind-drunk test.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
I'm willing to take part in a double-blind-drunk test.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
I'll get in touch next time I'm in UK. I think a there needs to be a lot of testing to find out what to believe in.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
-
That's a very loaded statement, and I think it's unfair of you to target CG because he's a committed Christian. There are many things that are accepted without proof of existence, but we do not target those who avow to them. For instance, many reputable scientists accept the Higgs-Boson as a reality, but there is no proof it exists. Do you issue this challenge to them as well? Question: Why does his belief system offend you so much? In all the time I've known Christian, I've never known him to ram it down others throats, so why worry about it?
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
I do not believe in a god per se, but I accept the existance of god as a concept used by some people to base their value judgments and morals on. But society could do this without the belief of a divine being. Society passes laws to protect its people, these laws come from man not god. Did the bible mention Drink Driving or Drug Possession? Did the bible say paedophilia was wrong? No. The bible did say that you should let your wife and daughter be raped by a crowd of men rather than let a male guest be sodomised, and it does say that you should not maltreat your slaves or beat them without good reason. I think we live in a world better lawed by man than by religious books.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Before the modern bible many Greeks, and latter Romans, followed the Stoicism philosophy. It emphasized thinking and moral virtues, without need for belief in a higher being. Many of the teachings found in the bible appear to come straight out of that philosophy. Therefore, it is not only possible to lead a moral life, without religion, it is not uncommon today or in the past. I first learned about Stoicism, years ago, when a friend said I was a Stoic; after I explained to him that I did not know if God existed, but that it was not necessary to be a good person that knows the difference between right and wrong. Commandments: Murder, Stealing, Lying, etc. are all bad – Well no kidding, I never would have realized that on my own. ;) INTP "Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra "I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
-
That's a very loaded statement, and I think it's unfair of you to target CG because he's a committed Christian. There are many things that are accepted without proof of existence, but we do not target those who avow to them. For instance, many reputable scientists accept the Higgs-Boson as a reality, but there is no proof it exists. Do you issue this challenge to them as well? Question: Why does his belief system offend you so much? In all the time I've known Christian, I've never known him to ram it down others throats, so why worry about it?
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
The Higgs-boson is a different case, if it exists it could provide the mechanism for electroweak symmetry breaking, which is an observed phenomenon. The existence of god would not fix the laws of nature. The existence of the Higgs-boson is also not stated as a fact, but as "probable" and people are trying very hard to prove or disprove the theory - unlike religion, which just states that god exists and that's the end of it.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Question: Why does his belief system offend you so much? In all the time I've known Christian, I've never known him to ram it down others throats, so why worry about it?
Religion offends me, Christian is alright, merely misguided :)
-
The Higgs-boson is a different case, if it exists it could provide the mechanism for electroweak symmetry breaking, which is an observed phenomenon. The existence of god would not fix the laws of nature. The existence of the Higgs-boson is also not stated as a fact, but as "probable" and people are trying very hard to prove or disprove the theory - unlike religion, which just states that god exists and that's the end of it.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Question: Why does his belief system offend you so much? In all the time I've known Christian, I've never known him to ram it down others throats, so why worry about it?
Religion offends me, Christian is alright, merely misguided :)
harold aptroot wrote:
unlike religion, which just states that god exists and that's the end of it.
But that's not true. People have been trying for centuries to prove that their version of God is better than everybody elses; often with pointed results.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.