Why the Christian/Judeo/Islamic God?

It occurs to me that belief in any gods is subjective. So why the Christian/Judeo/Islamic god (CJIG). Throughout all of recorded history and probably long before that, there have been literally thousands of gods defined by various cultures and whole civilizations. Withing these cultures and societies, various gods have become similar, but not one that is totally understood or recognized by everyone of a group, they have many sects. It also occurs to me that more often than not, people beliefs reflect their location on the planet and their beliefs reflect their parents beliefs.

Doesn't it seem at least a LITTLE BIT odd that if there was a god, it would be pretty simple to all agree on "the one true god"? God is so important to a vast majority that it should be obvious to all that the one true god would reveal itself to all people all over the world, and not by word of mouth since as we all know, humans lie and are capable of unintentionally spreading lies. It would seem to me that any god capable of creating the universe would certainly be capable of appearance and world wide communication. Please don't come back to me with "who do you think you are to questions gods motives/actions" crap. If he exists and is responsible for my presence, then I'm one of many of his subjects that has the same questions, thats who I am! If i can't question this god then he is a tyrant, not worthy of my adorations.

So why the CJIG? Why do you believe in this god? There is no real evidence of this or any other god. The bible is not evidence and I won't allow it to be used in this debate/discussion as evidence. The reason for this is to make a point, that point being, you have nothing you can point to (other than the language in the bible) that says your god exists. There is no external, empirical evidence for your god or any other.

Doesn't it strike you as odd that your god hasn't said a word to anyone in over a thousand years? Doesn't it strike you as odd that this god (or any other) doesn't talk to ALL people, not just the few "so called charismatic prophets"? Why would a god require faith (belief without logical proof or empirical evidence)?

I don't expect any real answers because I know there is no evidence for your god or any other outside of language. Your only understanding of any god is through scriptures. Without those scriptures, there is nothing. We can say we've had "feelings" or experienced some phenomena, but people of other god beliefs have had these as well, even in mass, with belief that it was their god, so how can that be empirical evidence? Why isn't evidence for god (any god) universal? Is it because its quite possible that there isn't any god, or at best, one who created it all and then left the building?

Debate/discuss...

 

For people who know what God is, there is a single opinion.

For those who don't, there are many.




x

 

So this god is an "opinion"? What's the criteria for this opinion? Who decides that "These" people know? Surely this god would want everyone to know? No? Why not and how do you know?

This sounds like the "No True Scottsman" falacy.

 

meh. why not?

 

Uhhh I think I spelled it out in the OP, do you have anything of relevence to offer?

 

not really, no. didn't really see the relevance of the OP, either. but i guess that's just me.

 

Thanks for not playing, please don't clutter my thread, thanks

 

you're right. i'll let you get back to being angry and totally ineffectual. carry on.

 

angry? BAHAHAHAHAAHA... I created a thread to TRY and have a discussion/debate, and you come in with absolutely nothing to say on the subject except to say Why not. If you really wanted to know "Why Not Christianity" wouldn't the polite thing to do be to start your own thread? I don't come into your threads with irrelevent comments, all I did was ask politely that you don't clutter my thread. What anger?

 

no really. carry on. enjoy. i'm off like a prom dress.

 

It's interesting Itsdarts, You start a discussion by basically saying the rules are that no matter what, I'm right and that you can use nothing to try and prove me wrong, but when mamaKCita points out the logical fallacy of your opening argument, you won't even discuss it with her.

PS sorry about cluttering up your thread.

 

Uhhh WHAT logical falacy did Mama point out? What "Rules" say that I'm right and you're wrong? All I said was...

The bible is NOT evidence of god any more than Moby Dick is evidence of a whale that eats people.

If you didn't know I was an atheist and I wrote a book that said "God told me that man has totally interpreted the bible wrong." is that evidence of god speaking to me? Would you believe me? Why not? I repeat, the bible is not evidence of a god and its circular reasoning to assume it is as shown here..... The bible says god exists because the bible says so. Duh!

Please, if you have something to contribute, please do, but if all you are interested in is protecting the honor of Mamacita, use another thread. MamaCitas only contribution to this thread was "Why Not?" which could be the topic of another thread since its a totaly different subject for debate and I asked her to kindly start another thread if she wanted that answer.

And AGAIN, the whole point of this thread was to show that without the language of the bible, there is NOTHING you can point to that says this god exists. Is the Veda evidence that Vishnu exists? If so, why don't christians worship Vishnu too? Oh thats right, because "the bible" says there is only one god, yet christians ignore the fact that the Veda says there are 8 or 9 manifestations the god Brahma, the bible only has one (or three?) manifestations of God, Jesus. Whats the difference and who do you believe and WHY? Rationally you shouldn't believe any of them until there is better evidence for a god.

 

You're right

 

Counsel in the heart of a man is as deep waters, but the man of discernment is one that will draw it up.

 

Profound, but I don't see the relevence, thanks for playing....


The silence in here from theist is telling.:cheers2:

 

The logical fallacy of your opening argument is that, while you ask for a discussion you really don't want one, as is shown by the “discussion” you had with mamaKCita and the one you’re having with me.

The quote points that out, you could have said a great many thing in reply to draw out discussion but instead you where dismissive, which ends discussion before it begins.

You ask; What rules?

If you’ll notice these are not stated as questions but statements of fact indicating that it is useless to discuss this topic with you as you will dismiss anything brought up because there is “no evidence” to support opposing views.

This for example, you suppose that someone would use the Bible to support their views by saying; see the Bible says God exists so it must be so, as you say circular reasoning but you fail to allow for the fact that there maybe other ways to use the Bible to prove God’s existence.

 

Unless you can name this logical falacy, its not one just because you said so. My OP asks for reasons WHY this god, not "Why NOT" this god, he opening statement was off topic.

I didn't want off topic discussions like this one. She COULD have said "because thats how I was raised" or " because I checked out other religions and this one made more sense" or any of a number of other statemements REALTED to this topic.

There is no way you can "prove god" from the bible. Its a book. So why Christianity? Faith alone? Thats illogical and irrational. So now, not only have you not answered the OP, you're managing to throw the thread off topic even more. If there is evidence in the bible to support the existence of the Christian god, it would make sense that there would only be one religion in the world.... there is not one religion in the world.

 

Like I said, you don't want a discussion you just want to be dismissive.

Enjoy your "discussion".

 

I'm laying out the facts, if you can refute them, do so. So far yo haven't refuted anything I've said, accused me of falacies that don't exist and accused me of being dismissive, when all along you have nothing to say about "Why Christianity". Are you or are you not Christian? If so, WHY???

 

you guys are a hoot

at first I wasn't going to answer because I didn't consider myself the type of candidate you were looking for itsdarts, but I'll post since no one else seems capable.

I'm not a typical "Christian"; some people would hesitate to define me as a christian at all. The reason I personally still define myself that way, is because I find the teachings of Jesus resonate soundly with me. However, I dont think Jesus has a monopoly on spiritual truth, nor do I limit myself to Jesus' teaching or christianity in general. As for why I find the teachings of Jesus the most appealing, I would have to say that he says so much with so little, and there is the fact that I was raised in a Christian household.