GOD & PROOF

Ignoring the attempt to goad a non-progressive war of meaningless insults of the above comment, I would like to thank Jatom for having the common decency and respect of carrying on a good debate without the immaturity of some of those who surround him in these Forums.

 

Alot of religions are pretty toxic and their followers are in-toxic-ated.

When someone kicks the addiction sometimes atheisim is the hangover.

There's the rub; if there is an Omni-Max Diety he should be able to violate anything he wants.

that's why televangelists are great; if someone's trying to sell me a faulty product I'd rather be approached by an idiot salesman in a clown suit than a skilled con artist who sounds like he knows what he's talking about.

 

"Omni-max" is inconsistent itself with laws of logic.

 

*edit* Oops. Posted this in the wrong thread (they're all starting to look alike to me.

 

Select an object, any object, and spend a moment (or two, or as long as you like) just being aware of it's existence.

Objectively speaking, one cannot say anything about the object other than this - it is a specific arrangement of atoms and forces. No more, no less. As such, it is indistinguishable from any other object. As such, it is identical to all objects.

Now, traditionally speaking, in order to be objective, one's information must adhere to the object's verifiable existence. But one can only know the object by way of its information. One cannot objectively know about anything without knowing information about the object. One's knowledge of the object is really knowledge of information about the object.

Additionally, for any object, there is an enormous amount of information, probably more information than the mind can manage. Mass, density, charge, composition, velocity, location, rotation, resonant frequency, amplitude, luminosity, age, color, shape, texture, temperature, and so on. Each one of these represents one specific category or spectrum of information.

It is reasonable to entertain the idea that there may be, effectively, an endless number of categories of information, an infinite number of interwoven spectrums, some of which are certainly as incomprehensible to the finite human mind as history is incomprehensible to a goldfish.

Now, this next part is where it gets a little complicated.

Each unit of information about any object (a specific arrangement of atoms and forces) is, by definition, non-objective. The piece of information is just that, It IS information. No more, no less. The information itself has no material reality whatsoever. In fact, no information has any material reality whatsoever.

In addition, the source of information, the "object" of information, may actually exist without actually being a physical object. Consider such non-material "things" as democracy, education, time, justice, wonder, compassion, inspiration, and so on. It is certainly arguable that they exist, but you can't really rap your knuckles on justice, or eat a fresh plate of time, or sweet-talk inspiration out of its prom dress.

That doesn't mean they don't, or can't, exist.

There are many things that have no physical being, but they certainly do exist. For many of these, you yourself have expected others to respect them, or you have made considerable afforts to convince others to become familar with them, to adhere to them, to value them infinitely more than their counterparts. These things include meaning (or truth), decency, fairness (or justice), intelligence (or consciousness), compassion, creativity, and on and on and on.

Now, anyone who has spent time pondering such things as love, truth, compassion, consciousness, creativity, and so on, may have recognized that there is something familiar about these things that seems to unify them. There is a primal, powerful, unified "center of gravity" within each one of these that is the origin of all information one can know about these things.

Take truth, love, consciousness and creativity. Anyone who has really experienced these may easily recognize that there is an undefinable existence at their center that is, ultimately, interchangable between them. At their most primal levels love, truth, consciousness, creativity, compassion, etc. are a single unity, they are the same thing. This is the all-transcendent spiritual reality to which people refer when they speak of God.

Believe it or not, there it is.

Peace and Love

 

They weren't meaningless insults. When someone says the truth (if I told someone they are an asshole for hitting someone who does not deserve or need to be hit) it is not an insult, it is the truth. Get past your anger.

When I said:

This refers to your statements along the lines of "God does not exist" or "Christian, show me proof of God" when only God can give you proof.

When I said:

I think it would be nice to see you attempt to create a logically coherant argument to support your claim. I tried to find one (searched for the word omnimax, omni-max, and omni max in the forums search, but couldn't get it to work- didn't even turn up my post with the word "omni-max"). I need a clear definition of omni-max to understand what you are saying.

I assume you mean something along the lines of:
Omni-max: All knowing, All powerful, All present, and all benevolent

Which is a great description for God.

God is omniscient, everything that exists is known by God.
God is omnipotent, God has power over everything.
God is omnipresent, there is nothing that God is not aware of and does not have power over.
God is omnibenevolent, God is good towards all beings, even murderers, rapists and ignorant atheists who do not understand the necessity of causing these things to happen.

 

"And Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord, amongst the trees of the garden. - Genesis 3:8 (vs. omnipresence / omniscience)

"And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden." - Genesis 4:16 (vs. omnipresence / omniscience)

"And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, from going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it." - Job 1:7 (vs. omniscience)

"They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not." - Hosea 8:4 (vs. omniscience)

"And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." - Matthew 28:18 (pro omnipotence regarding Jesus)

"And he [Jesus] could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them." - Mark 6:5 (vs. omnipotence regarding Jesus)

"And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." - Judges 1:19 (vs. omnipotence)

(Side Note: So all I need is a chariot of iron, huh? Can Home Depot really be mighter than God?)

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." - Isaiah 45:7 (vs. omnibenevolence)

"And I will execute vengeance in anger and fury upon the heathen, such as they have not heard. - Micah 5:15 (vs. omnibenevolence)

"And I myself will fight against you with an outstretched hand and with a strong arm, even in anger, and in fury, and in great wrath. - Jeremiah 21:5 (vs. omnibenevolence)

"These six things doth the LORD hate ... A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren." - Proverbs 6:16 ... 19 (vs. omnibenevolence)

"I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy." - Jeremiah 13:14 (vs. omnibenevolence)

-----

Kharakov, you may want to read the Bible again, just to refresh your memory.

Edit: I really get a kick out of you saying "God is good towards all beings, even ... ignorant atheists ...", and then God saying in the Bible, "I will execute vengeance in anger and fury upon the heathen."

 

God allmighty!
That sure puts the fear of God into you.
Lord have Mercy!
What a Godforsaken wretch is anyone who suffers the wrath of God.
I'll be damned, that's one hell of a temper.
Can I suggest Anger Management? It helped me.
Sodom and Gommorah might have benefitted had that been something he had attended some classes beforehand.
The alpha and omega, who created all, which includes the Devil, is not to be messed with. Arouse his ire, and you chance him smiting you with his fury.

 

Kharakov, just so as to be "fair". I will ONCE MORE ask you CLAIMERS to DEFEND your religion instead of trying to shift the burden of proof on the doubters.

This is so fucking typical of so-called "Christians". They CANNOT prove there is such a being as "God", so their EXCUSE is to say, "Well, atheists can't prove there isn't!" --Which is, by the way, RIDICULOUSLY ILLOGICAL. A completely STUPID and BLATANT violation of the laws of logic.

However, since neither camp can provide concrete evidence (and atheists need not have to), I have simply ASKED time and time again for you "Christians" to provide ample argument. Just good argument!

This, too, seems too difficult to you "defenders" (what a joke!) of the faith. Your same tactics-- attempting to shift the burden, using illogical arguments and standing by them, playing word games, and generally running scared is...excuse me...FUCKING TYPICAL.

However, since YOU laid out your OWN definitions of the terms of an omni-max character, I will try to respond to you--which is MUCH MORE than ANY OF YOU have ever done for me. What's next, I wonder? Will I have to spoon feed you? Shit. Goddamn. This is getting pathetic.

But I am going to do it, because my diatribe is so long in another thread titled: MR. IMPOSSIBLE MAN. Look for it!

 

No, actually I do not expect you to jump into my vehicle. All I'm asking is that you inspect your own vehicle. For the most part, apologetics with unbelievers has gone how you stated above. Common ground is established, then the apologist works from there. The apologist will try to give cogent and convincing arguments to the unbeliever in hopes that he will change his mind. This is one method, however I think a better method (when dealing with an athiest anyway) is to have him examine his own postion. An atheist is usually all too ready to critique the Christian's position, and his arguments, but he never really challenges his own! Since neither he nor the apologist ever challenge his position, then the atheist world view is left intact and it is by this world view that he proceeds to judge the apologist agruments against him. At the heart of the matter, an atheists most basic argument goes something like this:

1. My atheistic position is true
2. The Christian is advancing arguments against my position being true
3. Therefore his arguments are false

Far be it for any atheist (or Christian for that matter) to actually admit that he proceeds in this question-begging fashion, but nevertheless this is what happens. Let me give you a worst case scenario example. Suppose I were to give a naturalist atheist a convincing argument for the historicity of the resurrection of Christ (which has been done btw). And suppose the athiest were completely convinced by the argument, and concluded that this man Christ must have ressurected from the dead. Being true to his naturalistic convictions (just as a Christian is true to his Christian convictions) he may say, "Well I can no longer doubt that this man has somehow risen from the dead. However, I will not go so far as to say that this was a miracle from God. Indeed, I think that science will be able to explain this event sometime in the furture, and that what you Christians are willing to call a mystery and a "miracle," will be explained as nothing more then a event grounded in natural causes, and explained by the natural sciences." And so in this case, why not chellenge the ateist's commitment to naturalism since this is his stumbling block? He will get nowhere until this belief is challenged.

But we do have a way of debating. But only if you are willing to chanellege your own convictions. You seem willing, and perhaps over zealous to have Christians challenge there convictions, but are you willing to challenge your own? When you're ready, I'll will be right here waiting.

I think that ulitimately it will be the guidance and direction of the Holy Spirit, but for the most part you are right. It can come from argumentation, but it also must come from a willing heart. Arguments are nothing if the recipient isn't willing. As a side note, I am very willing to dialague with you, just not in the same fashion you want me to. Why do you only want me present evidence to you in a certian way? Why do you seem to be unwilling to challenge your own convictions? Perhaps these are questions you should first come to grips with before inviting a Christian to come talk with you. As a Christian, my job is to glorify God. As an apologist my job is to convince the unbelieve to become a Christian like me. My job is not to present ready-made arguments on order to the unbeliever so that he can present ready-made answers, so that I can present ready-made rebuttals, and so on ad insanity. I'm not here to dialogue with you page after page of pointless arguments, I'm here to convince you of the truth of Christianity. For some that will be by presenting arguements, for others that will be by challenging their beliefs, but for most I believe that it will be by seeing the example of Christian living set by the Christian. Afterall, arguments for Christianity are nothing, if Christians don't brother living like Chiristians. So in answer to your question, I think that even the most rational (un)believers are utimately convinced by some of the most subjective evidences. If you don't believe me, look around you. Even in this very forum. Rarely do I find rational objections to Christianity. They're mostly about how stupid and hypocritcal Christians are. It's also very rare that when a Christian gets into a lengthy disscussion with an atheist, that the atheist doesn't resort to mentioning something about hypocritical Christians, "holier than thou" Christians, the Crusades, etc. But none of these have anything to do with the truth or falsity of Christianity as a world view. It's simply stating that the atheist observes that some "Christians" have done some bad things, that he doesn't like.

Good and well. If you want me to comment then present your argument here.

Well I'm certainly happy to hear that How much did you actually learn from them? What were their views on say, depravity? Election? The state of salvation? The Holy Spirit's job in salvation? Regeneration? The nature of inspiration? Revelation? Illumination? Atonement? Grace? Eschatology? The conditions of forgiveness. Were they Calvnist? Arminian? Molinist? Were they dispensationalist? Preterist?

 

I don't personally believe in any sort of god, but I'm willing to believe that if there was one, that our comparitavely feeble logic would not nearly be enough to 'describe' what 'he' is. It'd be like asking a snail to speak french.

 

at my point in life, i dont really beleive much in god. i am sorry, but i just find the idea of some giant guy sitting somewhere watchin us going 'that dude just stole an apple, i shall smite him!' alittle...insane

 

That's what I was saying. If there is an all powerful being, defying logic should be snap for Him.

Hell, people in here do it all the time.

 

If it makes you feel any better, I don't believe in that sort of god either.

 

The names Sodom and Gomorrah have been associated with God's judgment of sin. The word sodomy is still found in the English language as a legal term for unnatural sexual acts. To many, these names are only stories or myths from out of the past. Sodom and Gomorrah, however, were a part of a larger agricultural conferderation of cities which were know as the cities of the plain. Genesis 13:12,13 The five Cities of the Plain included Sodom, Gomorrah, Zoar, Admah and Zeboim. Genesis 19:22 It appears that the cities of the plain have been found. Archaeological evidence points to five ruined cities which support evidence of the Biblical cities of the plain.
The search for the cities of the plain begins with some scholars saying they were non-existent. (1918-W.F. Albright; 1948- Martin Noth and finally Noldeke).
A very recent discovery made at the ancient site of Ebla has revealed the historical existance of the Cities of the Plain. University of Rome excavators, Giovanni Pettinato and Paolo Matthiae have translated tablets taken from the ruins and report that on one of the tablets a trade list is recorded which includes the Cities of the Plain. This is the first record of these cities mentioned outside of the Bible. The interesting fact is that the names of the Cities of the plain are spelled the sme as they are in Scripture.
As these newly discovered ruins authenticate and illuminate the Holy Scriptures, they may also be a warning to our own society as it goes about its business, all the while rejecting and disobeying God.

http://www.abu.nb.ca/ecm/topics/arch5.htm

 

campbell, I'm not sure of what your intentions were here. I'm Christian and believe in the infalliblity to the Bible, so you don't have to try and prove to me that some event really happened. I'd believe it regardless.

Second, I do believe in the God of judgement, I just don't believe in a God who sits and waits for someone to mess up just so He can zap them with a lightening bolt. I believe that goes against the God revealed in scripture. The God who (according to Romans 2:4) is kind, tolerant, and patience with our sinful rebellion against Him in an effort to lead us toward repentance.

 

Neither do I I really don't picture God as a gaint in human form lol!

 

The God of the Bible is revealed in the prophecies of the Bible. These prophecies are ignored by most but Jesus fulfilled three hundred of them found in the Old Testament. The Old Testament was finished 400 years before Jesus appears here on earth. The Bible tells us that before Christ appears again God would allow the Jews to return to Israel recapture Jerusalem, and their nation would be surrounded by enemies. God tells us He is returning the Jews to Israel so He can reveal to the World who He is. When the enemies of Israel try to force the Jews out of their land, and this day is coming. God will step forward to protect the Jews, while at the same time revealing to the Jews and the world who He is. God also tells us, Jerusalems East Gate will remain sealed until the Prince to come opens it. Jerusalems East Gate remains sealed today. The Bible also tells us that most of the World will not be happy when
Christ returns, because most of the world will oppose Him.

 

Epistemologically thinking, I like the Basic Account Theory. P if and only if P.

Therefore the proof of God is:

God exists if and only if God exists.

(because we can rationalize the existance of God, He must exist)


I love playing devil's advocate

 

has anyone read the book 'the bible code'? it doesnt really have anything to do with this current topic of conversation, but man its creepy! i mean, i dont beleive in god and stuff, but there something behind the bible that has something to do with something