Author Topic: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?  (Read 9934 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #116 on: January 10, 2014, 04:37:31 PM »
I slightly disagree Boots


It’s funny to me that you are telling me what I believe based on your flawed logic. 
Here’s the problem with your thinking:  You are equating God, who is an eternal being(1) to all other things which whether complex or not, are made by Him and therefore have a beginning(2).  If God is material like us, then I could understand your point.  But God is not made, He is the maker.  God is the beginning of all and the end of all(1).  While finite beings cannot completely understand this, we can conceive it and believe it(1).  I do by using two things that I perceieve exist…..my brain and my heart(1).  My brain says that physical matter cannot exist eternally.  My heart, which is that part that is made in the image of God, my soul(1),  says that there is something bigger than myself and Jesus revealed who that is(1).  There is another main issue, and that is the issue of sin.  I know that myself and all other humans are sinners(1).  I can see the results of sin and the damage it does to people(1).  So being made in the image of God(1), I realize that I need God but cannot get to him because I’ve sinned against Him(1).  I therefore need to be reconciled back to Him(1).  I’m not proving these things in the scientific way that you want me to because that is a box.  There is more to it than the box atheists try to confine this argument to.(2)


(1)Circular reasoning/Begging the Question
(2)Special pleading
(3)Appeal to ignorance

When I started this I didn't expect almost everything he said to be Circular reason, after the third (1) I marked, it got kind of funny.

Sorry, but I cannot see where you marked (3).

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #117 on: January 10, 2014, 06:28:48 PM »
... (something doesn't come from absolutely nothing)... 
No?


Finally had a chance to watch the entire video.  Krauss is a smart guy who obviously has a bone to pick with religion.  His primary goal seemed not for education, but for proselytization of his faith in nothing and to spread his conclusions, not his science.  His religion is the religion of self.  He is his own idol. 
Dark matter, the stuff between the stuff.   Is still stuff.  Krauss even gave it a name "energy".
The idea that we can identify something like dark matter and energy and call it "nothing" is absurd at the most obvious level.  To actually have Nothing is just that.  Nothing.  To even be able to name something er....I mean nothing, goes against the principle of "nothing".  Because "nothing" if there is such a thing, isn't actually there.  If there is such a thing as "nothing", then behind all of it there was "something" (like God) prior to it, that could speak something into existance, as the bible says. 

Job 38:
“Have you understood the expanse of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.
19 “Where is the way to the dwelling of light?
And darkness, where is its place,
20 That you may take it to its territory

And that you may discern the paths to its home?

Offline Eddie Schultz

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 209
  • Darwins +5/-0
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #118 on: January 10, 2014, 07:06:42 PM »
Many people believe that God answers prayer.  You can say that it's coincidence but you would be in the clear minority of people who agree with you (outside of this website). I know, being in the minority doesn't make it less true if others are deluded, but I've heard many stories from people whom I know that experienced answers to prayer.  Physical healing included.
Well here is your chance to show the world proof of the correct god to pray too.
I assume there must be medical records for this and doctors that would testify that it could only have been the result of prayer that cured the person?
Just think how much the world could benefit from finally knowing the real "working" religion to follow.
Imagine how many deaths you could help avoid by stopping  people fighting in the name of wrong religions.
You have a duty here, the world needs to know.
Or did you just hear the stories and believe them?

Patrick Henry, I was reading through this thread and noticed you didn't answer Jonny UK from his reply to you above back on December 18th. I would love to hear your reply. My christian brother claims the same things, but can never provide any real evidence to support his and others claims of healing, etc... through prayer.

Thanks

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #119 on: January 10, 2014, 07:33:06 PM »

Job 38:
“Have you understood the expanse of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.
19 “Where is the way to the dwelling of light?
And darkness, where is its place,
20 That you may take it to its territory

And that you may discern the paths to its home?

Do you honestly think this is talking about Dark Matter?

Do you know the dimensions of the earth?
Were you there when the foundations were laid?
Do you know in what the foundations were set into?
Do you know where Mr. Sun rests his head at the end of the day?
Do you know where the darkness goes when the sun is awake?
Do you know from where the winds come from?
Do you know where Mr. Lightning is when he isn't visible?
Do you know from whence Mr. Thunder comes and goes?
Do you go into the store houses of snow and hail and cast it down upon the Earth?
Do you open and close the flood gates?
Can you order the Sun to reach out his hands, to grab the edges of the Earth and shake all the evil people off of it?
blah, blah, blah ad nauseum.
Do you? Can you? DO YOU? CAN YOU? ???

Bolded: About dark matter? I think not.

In a previous post[1], I answered all those questions, something any 4th grader can answer[2], but when Job was written by people that thought the Earth was flat, they didn't know the anwer to any of those questions. It's part of a monologue from YHWH to Job telling him, "I know and can do all these things. No, I'm not telling. Just shut up, and put up!"

Another verse taken out of context trying to make it fit modern knowledge.
 1. a long time ago.
 2. or has the knowledge to know where to look/ask
« Last Edit: January 10, 2014, 07:36:59 PM by Ivellios »

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1691
  • Darwins +112/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #120 on: January 10, 2014, 07:34:56 PM »
... (something doesn't come from absolutely nothing)... 
No?


Finally had a chance to watch the entire video.  Krauss is a smart guy who obviously has a bone to pick with religion.  His primary goal seemed not for education, but for proselytization of his faith in nothing and to spread his conclusions, not his science.  His religion is the religion of self.  He is his own idol. 
Dark matter, the stuff between the stuff.   Is still stuff.  Krauss even gave it a name "energy".
The idea that we can identify something like dark matter and energy and call it "nothing" is absurd at the most obvious level.  To actually have Nothing is just that.  Nothing.  To even be able to name something er....I mean nothing, goes against the principle of "nothing".  Because "nothing" if there is such a thing, isn't actually there.  If there is such a thing as "nothing", then behind all of it there was "something" (like God) prior to it, that could speak something into existance, as the bible says. 

Job 38:
“Have you understood the expanse of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.
19 “Where is the way to the dwelling of light?
And darkness, where is its place,
20 That you may take it to its territory

And that you may discern the paths to its home?

You have not understood the video. Dark matter is not energy. It is not this which is nothing. Also the properties of nothing are what they are discovered to be, not what YOU dictate them to be.

Second the bible does not say that the Elohim created something from nothing. It says that the primal substance was water, which existed prior to any creation. Obviously the bible is the speculation of primitive people who made up these multiple gods to create everything.

« Last Edit: January 10, 2014, 08:30:45 PM by Foxy Freedom »
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
  • Darwins +49/-21
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #121 on: January 10, 2014, 08:03:54 PM »
... (something doesn't come from absolutely nothing)... 
No?


Finally had a chance to watch the entire video.  Krauss is a smart guy who obviously has a bone to pick with religion.  His primary goal seemed not for education, but for proselytization of his faith in nothing and to spread his conclusions, not his science.  His religion is the religion of self.  He is his own idol. 
Dark matter, the stuff between the stuff.   Is still stuff.  Krauss even gave it a name "energy".
The idea that we can identify something like dark matter and energy and call it "nothing" is absurd at the most obvious level.  To actually have Nothing is just that.  Nothing.  To even be able to name something er....I mean nothing, goes against the principle of "nothing".  Because "nothing" if there is such a thing, isn't actually there.  If there is such a thing as "nothing", then behind all of it there was "something" (like God) prior to it, that could speak something into existance, as the bible says. 

Job 38:
“Have you understood the expanse of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.
19 “Where is the way to the dwelling of light?
And darkness, where is its place,
20 That you may take it to its territory

And that you may discern the paths to its home?

You're right. Lawrence even said that "nothing" isn't "nothing"(as we once thought it to be) anymore. So, keep in mind that Lawrence agrees with you about that. A Universe From Nothing is a catchy title that also allows "nothing" to still be "something". Also remember, there could be a mind-boggling infinite fluctuation between "something" and "nothing" that we may never wrap our heads around. Lawrence just wants to share with you how our universe came from "nothing". He is not going to pretend that he knows where the "nothing" came from.






The idea that we can identify something like dark matter and energy and call it "nothing" is absurd at the most obvious level.

Yeah, and then you quote from the Book of Job. Talk about absurd.
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Online SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
  • Darwins +108/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #122 on: January 10, 2014, 09:14:34 PM »
His primary goal seemed not for education, but for proselytization of his faith in nothing ....

I think you came to this conclusion because you don't understand the science.  If you understood the science you will understand that his primary goal was for education about the conclusions that science can make currently.  You don't like the conclusion but whether something is true or not doesn't care if we like it or not.

....and to spread his conclusions, not his science.  His religion is the religion of self.  He is his own idol.

More false assertions based on you not liking the current conclusions made by science.


Dark matter, the stuff between the stuff.   Is still stuff.  Krauss even gave it a name "energy".
The idea that we can identify something like dark matter and energy and call it "nothing" is absurd at the most obvious level.  To actually have Nothing is just that.  Nothing.  To even be able to name something er....I mean nothing, goes against the principle of "nothing".  Because "nothing" if there is such a thing, isn't actually there. 

That's the thing, the stuff between the stuff is nothing.  If you want to define the stuff between the stuff as stuff then the "nothing" no longer exists.  We don't know that "absolutely nothing" ever existed.

Confusing, I know.

The problem is, what we thought was "nothing" actually turned out to be "something".  So then what is actually "nothing"?  We don't know anymore in this universe.

So in a sense you are probably right when you say "Something doesn't come from absolutely nothing".  Unfortunately, your statement doesn't apply to reality as we currently understand it.

"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3956
  • Darwins +265/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #123 on: January 10, 2014, 11:49:42 PM »
I slightly disagree Boots


It’s funny to me that you are telling me what I believe based on your flawed logic. 
Here’s the problem with your thinking:  You are equating God, who is an eternal being(1) to all other things which whether complex or not, are made by Him and therefore have a beginning(2).  If God is material like us, then I could understand your point.  But God is not made, He is the maker.  God is the beginning of all and the end of all(1).  While finite beings cannot completely understand this, we can conceive it and believe it(1).  I do by using two things that I perceieve exist…..my brain and my heart(1).  My brain says that physical matter cannot exist eternally.  My heart, which is that part that is made in the image of God, my soul(1),  says that there is something bigger than myself and Jesus revealed who that is(1).  There is another main issue, and that is the issue of sin.  I know that myself and all other humans are sinners(1).  I can see the results of sin and the damage it does to people(1).  So being made in the image of God(1), I realize that I need God but cannot get to him because I’ve sinned against Him(1).  I therefore need to be reconciled back to Him(1).  I’m not proving these things in the scientific way that you want me to because that is a box.  There is more to it than the box atheists try to confine this argument to.(3)


(1)Circular reasoning/Begging the Question
(2)Special pleading
(3)Appeal to ignorance

When I started this I didn't expect almost everything he said to be Circular reason, after the third (1) I marked, it got kind of funny.

fixed
« Last Edit: January 10, 2014, 11:52:44 PM by Hatter23 »
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #124 on: January 11, 2014, 12:26:51 AM »
fixed

Thanks. Thought my eyes were failing me.

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
  • Darwins +86/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #125 on: January 11, 2014, 07:50:21 AM »
It’s funny to me that you are telling me what I believe based on your flawed logic.

Nowhere have I told you what you believe. What I have said are consequences and conclusions drawn from what you have told us you believe. I'm even asking you what you believe but you don't give any straight answers, so I have to work with what you've already supplied and draw up potential hypothetical beliefs. If you read back, you'll see plenty of "if you believe".

As for my "flawed logic", don't just tell me it is, show me it is. It's dead easy to simply assert stuff, as you've demonstrated nicely with the rest of your post.

Quote
Here’s the problem with your thinking:  You are equating God, who is an eternal being to all other things which whether complex or not, are made by Him and therefore have a beginning.

I'm not equating god to anything. I'm taking your beliefs and showing them to be contradictory. You see complexity as evidence for intelligent design, yet you also believe simple things are created by an intelligent designer. I mean, you've just said it yourself that whether something is complex or not, god made it, therefore complexity is irrelevant to whether you believe there is an intelligent designer. You are simply reversing your argument to try and show evidence of intelligent design, when in actuality, you are taking your biased a priori assumption and retro fitting things around it. It's very transparent and not at all original.

Quote
If God is material like us, then I could understand your point.  But God is not made, He is the maker.  God is the beginning of all and the end of all.

As I've explained, it isn't my point. It's a deconstruction of what you believe and highlighting that when your beliefs are broken down they're contradictory. Now you're telling us that we are material, but then you've told us that we have a soul, which isn't material. See what I mean by contradictory? You're all over the place. You need to make your mind up and stop compartmentalising.

Quote
While finite beings cannot completely understand this, we can conceive it and believe it.  I do by using two things that I perceive exist…..my brain and my heart.  My brain says that physical matter cannot exist eternally.  My heart, which is that part that is made in the image of God, my soul,  says that there is something bigger than myself and Jesus revealed who that is.

Look, see you're doing it again by saying that there is part of us that is like god. So we are like god, though god is not material like us, but we have something that is made like god, which isn't material and complex, but requires making by god.
Right, so we are like god. Sheesh, I'm finding this hard work. No wonder you ignore it and carry on regardless.

Quote
There is another main issue, and that is the issue of sin.  I know that myself and all other humans are sinners.

This thread exists for you to provide evidence that god really exists, not simply assert stuff. Don't just claim to know it, show it. I can just as easily state that I know that myself and all other humans aren't sinners. One of us is wrong, so how do we go about finding out who is most probably correct?

Quote
I can see the results of sin and the damage it does to people.  So being made in the image of God, I realize that I need God but cannot get to him because I’ve sinned against Him.  I therefore need to be reconciled back to Him.

I see words but they mean nothing to me in that order. I'm not interested in all this assertive white noise. We want your evidence.

Also, again we are like god, but not in a complex sense because that requires god to make it, though this bit that is in the image of god requires being made by god too. Of course, god doesn't require this shared likeness being made by another intelligent designer due to special pleading.

Quote
I’m not proving these things in the scientific way that you want me to because that is a box.  There is more to it than the box atheists try to confine this argument to.

Oh dear. As well as your erroneous sweeping generalisation of atheists, you couldn't be more wrong about what I want. I don't expect you to be able to prove it in the scientific way because you can't. What I expect is for you to be able to provide an alternative method to falsify all of these assertions you make. I've been asking this of theists since I can remember and not once got an answer. Change the world, PH, and be the first to do so....
« Last Edit: January 11, 2014, 07:53:23 AM by Ataraxia »
If you keep on living your life as though your purpose is to be saved and go to heaven, you are missing the heaven that you are living in right now.

Online wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2799
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #126 on: January 11, 2014, 09:45:00 AM »
Five Pages and no Answer

Gosh, you are doing well, Patrick, avoiding the question for this long. I'm getting tired of seeing page passing page with no straight answers. So let's try again, Patrick.

Please answer -

1. What are your reasons for believing there is an actual existing god in or outwith the universe? (This is just the reason your believe this - nothing more.)

2. What might turn up that would make you change your mind about the existence of a god?

Right, Patrick, quite simple - just two answers needed and our discussion here might end....
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4709
  • Darwins +107/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #127 on: January 11, 2014, 01:35:40 PM »
Kcrady deserves an address to his post as well
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #128 on: January 12, 2014, 03:32:37 AM »
... (something doesn't come from absolutely nothing)... 
No?


Finally had a chance to watch the entire video.  Krauss is a smart guy who obviously has a bone to pick with religion.  His primary goal seemed not for education, but for proselytization of his faith in nothing and to spread his conclusions, not his science.  His religion is the religion of self.  He is his own idol. 
Dark matter, the stuff between the stuff.   Is still stuff.  Krauss even gave it a name "energy".
The idea that we can identify something like dark matter and energy and call it "nothing" is absurd at the most obvious level.  To actually have Nothing is just that.  Nothing.  To even be able to name something er....I mean nothing, goes against the principle of "nothing".  Because "nothing" if there is such a thing, isn't actually there.  If there is such a thing as "nothing", then behind all of it there was "something" (like God) prior to it, that could speak something into existance, as the bible says. 

Job 38:
“Have you understood the expanse of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.
19 “Where is the way to the dwelling of light?
And darkness, where is its place,
20 That you may take it to its territory

And that you may discern the paths to its home?

You have not understood the video. Dark matter is not energy. It is not this which is nothing. Also the properties of nothing are what they are discovered to be, not what YOU dictate them to be.

Second the bible does not say that the Elohim created something from nothing. It says that the primal substance was water, which existed prior to any creation. Obviously the bible is the speculation of primitive people who made up these multiple gods to create everything.
I agree that science is saying dark matter and dark energy are different.  But look at what Krauss says in the following interview:
 http://www.onbeing.org/program/our-origins-and-the-weight-of-space-with-lawrence-krauss/transcript/5241

Dr. Krauss:
"The beauty of the night sky and everything we see is just a bit of cosmic pollution in a universe full of dark matter and dark energy. Ninety-nine percent of the universe, 30 percent of the universe roughly is this dark matter, which is made, we're reasonably convinced, of some new type of elementary particle that doesn't exist here on earth. Seventy percent is dark energy, which is the energy of nothing."

"......... empty space weighs something. It's amazing. Who would have thought that? Empty space weighs something. And most of the energy in the universe resides in empty space.

Dr. Krauss: And it's even empty. There's not stuff in there. There's nothing. You can look for it and there's nothing there, but it weighs something. And what it really means, Krista, is that it changed what we mean by nothing. But there's nothing wrong with that.



Not wanting to belabor this but, obviously whether it's dark matter or dark energy, he is talking about "something".  So there is no evidence of something coming from nothing, all on it's own.  Seems to me Krauss was implying that was true. Which is misleading.  That is my point.


Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #129 on: January 12, 2014, 05:46:13 AM »
Five Pages and no Answer

Gosh, you are doing well, Patrick, avoiding the question for this long. I'm getting tired of seeing page passing page with no straight answers. So let's try again, Patrick.

Please answer -

1. What are your reasons for believing there is an actual existing god in or outwith the universe? (This is just the reason your believe this - nothing more.)

2. What might turn up that would make you change your mind about the existence of a god?

Right, Patrick, quite simple - just two answers needed and our discussion here might end....
If you go back to page one of the thread you'll see my first attempt.  It was not avoidance.  I'll write something new for you that should go along with it: 
I sense that there is more to life than.... that we live a certain life span then we die without any consciousness.  Based on that I've looked to answers in religion, philosophy, and even atheism.   

I see a lot of answers to common questions of the heart and the basic human condition are found in the bible.  I believe that a clue to this consciousness that I referred to is that we were made in the image of God.  Therefore we are looking for God, even though we don't know it in many cases. 

Evidence that we look for God is that we all look for meaningfulness in life.  While we may strive for stuff like money, big houses, great careers, we are never truly satisfied with stuff.  All this serves as a God replacement and indicates I think, that all people worship something.  Whether it's money, power, sex, self, physical beauty, on and on.  We put so many things in life on a pedestal and make them ultimate things in our lives, that we are rarely found to be happy or content.  The consequence is that we tend to grow old not in peace, but in frustration.  Not saying that there aren't exceptions to this.  But I think that it is evidence that people need a hope that is beyond themselves and even this life.  Again, most people seem to be wired this way.  People all over the world and every generation. 

Another thing to point out is hope.  Hope is a powerful thing.  Hope can lift up a person's spirit and literally save their life.  We've all seen or read stories of people who died needlessly without hope, and people who survived against the odds because they didn't let their hope die.  It's an interesting phenomenon.  Hope, faith, conscience, consciousness, love, beauty, laughter, art, music, all of which have substance but at the same time have ethereal qualities to them, make us more than just physical creatures like animals, in my opinion.  Not putting down animals, just saying I don't observe these same qualities. Therefore, I call these things mounting evidences of a possibility that I'm more than just a creature who is a product of random chance. 

I don't get the sense that there is no purpose to this life.  To the contrary, I get a strong sense of purpose and meaning from these mentioned human traits.  So I do link purpose and meaning with something higher than me.  I do not link purpose, meaning, these other existential traits and ideas with random chance evolution from nothing or no being.   But instead it makes greater sense to me to look for a creator in order to find the answer to why humans do what they do and have the traits that they have.  At this point I'm not saying that this leads to Christianity.  But most likely to a being or something beyond me that is a creator of all this.   

This is not confined to Western civilization, most people in the world and throughout history have felt this way and have been searching for God or had at least a general feeling of something bigger than themselves.  This is not proof that there is life beyond, but when there is mounting evidence toward something, then it becomes something significant. 
So, based on all of this, I looked for solutions and when presented with the gospel of Jesus Christ, found meaning and answers that really spoke to me.  It was something that I could not kick.  I tried to move away from it but have always been drawn back to the message of Christ and the bible.  So without fighting any more, I realized that I am a Christian. 

Now that I'm a Christian, I've tried to make sure that what I believe is true or not true.  What I've discovered so far is that the bible is a trustworthy set of books full of prophecies that have come true, archeology that has been uncovered to authenticate, eye witness testimony, and effectual change in human lives that brings about cultural and individual change for the better.  I recognize that there are other religions and beliefs that can bring about good changes as well.  So I've looked into the truth claims of many different things and found Christianity to be a much more reliable and fitting representative of what I see the truth being. 

I believe that the story of Christ trumps all other beliefs and the authenticity of the bible does as well.  I do recognize that there are biblical difficulties, but over the years science, archeological discoveries, maybe better interpretive skills, help to reveal the truth in the bible.  So those difficulties that we have today may very well be taken care of in the future. 

Some Christians put greater emphasis on other things, like miracles.  I'm not discounting those supernatural things either.  In order to believe in God, a Christian needs to accept that.  I'm aware that this website calls on people to answer that big question, "why not amputees"?  We can always ask questions like that though.  Why didn't God reveal more to us?  I really don't know.  But I don't think that it disproves God either.  By the way, this is kind of a jab, but there were eye witnesses that Jesus healed an amputee.  Remember Peter cut off a Roman soldier's ear and Jesus healed it.  I know, I know, it's in the bible and those people aren't alive and we have no video tape to prove it. Eye witness testimony is acceptable in court systems today.  It makes sense that it be considered when looking into the claims of the bible. 

There is a lot more to say, but all the details are just things that we debate over and over. 

Anyway, those were a lot of words that you won't accept. 

But in a nutshell, I believe because I agree with the bible, that belief is really a supernatural thing that God does to an otherwise cold human heart.  It takes humility and and a recognition that there is something wrong to begin with.  That I'm a sinner in need of salvation from Jesus Christ,......... the One claimed to be the Messiah and who impacted the world so much.

What would change my mind?  If Jesus were not a real person who lived.  Or if it could be proven that He wasn't who the bible said He was.   For example, if it were proven that He really didn't die on a cross under a Roman crucifixion.  That His body was really stolen to fool people into believing in the resurrection.  Or disproving the authenticity of the biblical narrative of Christ and His deity. 

(NB: Edited for clarity. There is nothing in atheism or Christianity that prohibits the use of double line spacing after paragraphs: walls of text are hard to read.
GB Mod)
« Last Edit: January 12, 2014, 11:47:20 AM by Graybeard »

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #130 on: January 12, 2014, 06:24:37 AM »
Many people believe that God answers prayer.  You can say that it's coincidence but you would be in the clear minority of people who agree with you (outside of this website). I know, being in the minority doesn't make it less true if others are deluded, but I've heard many stories from people whom I know that experienced answers to prayer.  Physical healing included.
Well here is your chance to show the world proof of the correct god to pray too.
I assume there must be medical records for this and doctors that would testify that it could only have been the result of prayer that cured the person?
Just think how much the world could benefit from finally knowing the real "working" religion to follow.
Imagine how many deaths you could help avoid by stopping  people fighting in the name of wrong religions.
You have a duty here, the world needs to know.
Or did you just hear the stories and believe them?

Patrick Henry, I was reading through this thread and noticed you didn't answer Jonny UK from his reply to you above back on December 18th. I would love to hear your reply. My christian brother claims the same things, but can never provide any real evidence to support his and others claims of healing, etc... through prayer.

Thanks
Eddie,
Right or wrong, I read Jonny's question as not being sincere but sarcastic.  So I didn't bother.
Really, Christianity is based on a heart change that God does to a person.  If a person doesn't see themselves in need of being forgiven of their sins or even having sin in their life, then that person won't believe.  Now, all people see life through a set of lenses.  Your brother probably sees that God is in charge of life and death.  Therefore when someone experiences a life and death situation and comes out of it, he most likely attributes it to God and thanks Him for it.  An atheist sees life through the set of lenses that says there is no god.  Therefore he will never be convinced.  God is not my genie in a bottle, that I can conjure up to produce evidence for you to believe.  Even Jesus said that if a dead man came back to life it wouldn't change a person's heart necessarily.  See the story of Lazarus and the rich man.    It is an act of God that changes a person's heart and causes them to believe. 
Here's an example.  When my daughter was born, she had lung problems and was huffing so badly that our hospital doctors had her sent to Seattle by helicopter for immediate high level care at the University of Washington Hospital.  My wife and I prayed for my daughter of course.  I then drove as fast as I could to be at the UW hospital to be with her.  Leaving my wife who had undergone a C-section at the birth hospital.  Now I know that this could be explained away.  After about 2 hours of driving, when I came in to see my baby daughter, the UW doctor told me that He was surprised at how well my daughter was doing based on the symptoms he was told to expect.  She arrived in better condition than when she left.  Well she recovered quickly and after it was all behind us, we thanked God for answered prayer and that she was ok.  Could that have happened whether we prayed or not?  Whether we were Christian or not?  YES.
The bottom line is that we thanked God, not because He proved something to us.  But because we already believed. 
 

Offline lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
  • Darwins +49/-21
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #131 on: January 12, 2014, 07:51:29 AM »
What would change my mind?  If Jesus were not a real person who lived.  Or if it could be proven that He wasn't who the bible said He was.   For example, if it were proven that He really didn't die on a cross under a Roman crucifixion.  That His body was really stolen to fool people into believing in the resurrection.  Or disproving the authenticity of the biblical narrative of Christ and His deity.

Please read Reply #110 by kcrady on page 4.

Please.



While reading, keep in mind that his post(currently) has been given eleven +1's by our readers(whose average IQ is probably considerably higher than the world-average). We are not plus-one-ing him because he tells us all of the eloquent lies we love to be told.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2014, 07:59:45 AM by lotanddaughters »
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Online wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2799
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #132 on: January 12, 2014, 08:38:26 AM »
Right or wrong, I read Jonny's question as not being sincere but sarcastic.  So I didn't bother.
Really, Christianity is based on a heart change that God does to a person.  If a person doesn't see themselves in need of being forgiven of their sins or even having sin in their life, then that person won't believe.  Now, all people see life through a set of lenses.  Your brother probably sees that God is in charge of life and death.  Therefore when someone experiences a life and death situation and comes out of it, he most likely attributes it to God and thanks Him for it.  An atheist sees life through the set of lenses that says there is no god.  Therefore he will never be convinced.  God is not my genie in a bottle, that I can conjure up to produce evidence for you to believe.  Even Jesus said that if a dead man came back to life it wouldn't change a person's heart necessarily.  See the story of Lazarus and the rich man.    It is an act of God that changes a person's heart and causes them to believe.

That's a nice bit of preaching but let me ask you something. Given the joining a church involves handing money over to the church for what ever its leaders think fit , could we compare this to a Golf Resort? Let's say you want somewhere special to play golf and I tell you about a wonderful place - a golf resort - with plenty of course of all difficulties, all the facilities you could want. Now I don't show you any pictures of this place but I ask you to pay up your initial fee for joining. Do you join? You have never met me before and now nothing about me or the gold resort. All you have is my word that it is there and that be joining you will automatically become a better golf player. How about a $500 joining fee?

Quote
Here's an example.  When my daughter was born, she had lung problems and was huffing so badly that our hospital doctors had her sent to Seattle by helicopter for immediate high level care at the University of Washington Hospital.  My wife and I prayed for my daughter of course.  I then drove as fast as I could to be at the UW hospital to be with her.  Leaving my wife who had undergone a C-section at the birth hospital.  Now I know that this could be explained away.  After about 2 hours of driving, when I came in to see my baby daughter, the UW doctor told me that He was surprised at how well my daughter was doing based on the symptoms he was told to expect.  She arrived in better condition than when she left.  Well she recovered quickly and after it was all behind us, we thanked God for answered prayer and that she was ok.  Could that have happened whether we prayed or not?  Whether we were Christian or not?  YES.
The bottom line is that we thanked God, not because He proved something to us.  But because we already believed.

Well, you know, there are always stories about people who claim to have been healed but the stories never come with enough information to confirm this and, of course, they are always about things that either medical treatment can cure of things that sometimes go into remission. Now, obviously, I am delighted that you daughter was fine but I am concerned about your final comment.

Your daughter was treated by midwife / doctors at birth, air ambulance crews and finally by the specialist unit at the hospital - no doubt getting exceptionally good care. yet you decide to thank a mysterious being for her recovery and not the those talented. hard-working staff who made her recovery possible. After all, if you really believed in the power of prayer you wouldn't have bothered with the hospital at all and let your god do the work wouldn't you? Let's be fair, your god failed to let your wife have a normal delivery - the simplest of things to do - and made her go through a C section.

So on one had you credit your god with the improvement of your daughter but don't mention that failure of him in dealing with your wife's failure to deliver normally. Maybe I'm unfair. Maybe you and your wife didn't pray for an easy delivery but I bet you did. So why doesn't your god get the blame as  well as the credit?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline xyzzy

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
  • Darwins +48/-0
  • "Nothing happens"
    • xyzzy
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #133 on: January 12, 2014, 11:34:21 AM »
The bottom line is that we thanked God, not because He proved something to us.  But because we already believed.

Patrick, so here you are admitting that you didn't get a sign, you didn't have anything unusual, you just decided that it was what you wanted to believe. It's confirmation bias through and through.

Wheels mentioned this, I'm going to too.

I was going to say you got lucky, but much of it wasn't luck at all. And that makes your thanking this mythical being all the more galling and utterly disrespectful too. You won't talk to people who don't treat you in a certain way, you said that. But, what the heck, disrespect the people who saved your child's life, so you can continue to find ways to maintain your belief in some mix-n-match tribal god - Hell yes!

Look at like this:

Only the top tier of students even get into medical school. You won't find a Dummies Guide to Being Your Own Medical Doctor on Amazon.[1] Many perish and don't see it through.

The top tier of the top tier of students get into the best medical schools. Just like any university.[2]

The best doctors-to-be get residencies and fellowships at the best hospitals.

And then, 8-10-13+ years later out pops a doctor, a surgeon, a really good one, but one that is still learning. And so on.

The best doctors consistently achieve the best results. You can look them up and find out who they are.

Do you think the most skilled medical professionals start their daily routine with a "dear god, keep me in the top rankings because my position there certainly isn't due to hard work" prayer? Perhaps a panel of believers says the "keep the top docs in the top rankings" prayer, but I seriously doubt that they do. No, I doubt that you do too?

None of this is luck. None of this happens because people pray. It happens through hard word and dedication.

In your case, you didn't sit there, pray, and get a vision: call a helicopter, tell it to go to UW which is not where they'd normally go,[3] make sure the EMT does his bit, alerts the staff, so that they can be ready and waiting.

And, had you done so, what would you have prayed? "Dear god, please do make sure that several years ago, all the people who are looking after my child had the foresight to enter a career in medicine". Again, of course you didn't. Your prayer was probably something along the lines of asking for your child to be saved, but in the medical sense.

In other words, your prayer was nothing more than wanting what was going to happen, to happen. In that case your medical team arranged for the best and most appropriate care - as they rightly should have.

Your prayer was for your own benefit: it made you feel better; there's simply no proof that prayer affects medical outcome in any significant manner.

But it doesn't end there, that's actually where it begins. Medicine is a team endeavor. There are many specialities (you know this, of course) and tons and tons of ancillary staff.

All of whom work together so that you can piss all over their hard work with a "thanks god"?

Sorry, man, but thanking the invisible man in the sky for any of this is so disrespectful, so self-serving, so out of touch with the real world,[4] I'm close to calling you names.

 1. This one is self-referential, though -- http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Idiots-Guide-Homeopathy-Sollars/dp/0028640039
 2. http://youtu.be/OXRi28W-ENY?t=38s
 3. It wasn't, that's my point
 4. Even if it's an unintentional slight
« Last Edit: January 12, 2014, 11:50:01 AM by xyzzy »
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool -- Richard Feynman
You are in a maze of twisty little religions, all alike -- xyzzy

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
  • Darwins +86/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #134 on: January 12, 2014, 02:43:54 PM »
To actually have Nothing is just that.  Nothing.  To even be able to name something er....I mean nothing, goes against the principle of "nothing".  Because "nothing" if there is such a thing, isn't actually there.  If there is such a thing as "nothing", then behind all of it there was "something" (like God) prior to it, that could speak something into existance, as the bible says. 

Job 38:
“Have you understood the expanse of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.
19 “Where is the way to the dwelling of light?
And darkness, where is its place,
20 That you may take it to its territory

And that you may discern the paths to its home?

So you have a problem with Krauss' definition of nothing, but you have no problem in using that definition to explain gods involvement? And your best, most logical explanation of something coming from "nothing" is from being spoken into existence? Surely this is just hyperbole, unless god now has a larynx, tongue, mouth and air to breathe etc, but of course he doesn't because they're all material properties. So god didn't speak anything into existence, it was done via some unknown means - an unknown mean indistinguishable from any other means we can currently conceive of.

You're basically talking gobbledygook and making stuff up on the spot, because we simply don't have the language to articulate the counter intuitiveness of such a concept. It's the same with Krauss' use of the word "nothing", but unlike you with "speak", he's at least tried to give us an alternative definition to its common usage.

PS - I always find it amusing when random scripture is quoted as a eureka moment when the language used in it matches a label we have attached to a new discovery. You should have a random scriptural bullshit game of snap with a Muslim. I'd be happy to provide the popcorn.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2014, 02:45:49 PM by Ataraxia »
If you keep on living your life as though your purpose is to be saved and go to heaven, you are missing the heaven that you are living in right now.

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
  • Darwins +86/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #135 on: January 12, 2014, 04:18:00 PM »
Christianity is based on a heart change that God does to a person.  If a person doesn't see themselves in need of being forgiven of their sins or even having sin in their life, then that person won't believe.

To believe you have sin in your life you first have to believe the Christian god exists, therefore this is just circular reasoning.

Quote
An atheist sees life through the set of lenses that says there is no god.  Therefore he will never be convinced.

No they don't. That would be another of your sweeping generalisations of atheists. Lives/world views are based on what you factor in, not what you factor out.

Quote
God is not my genie in a bottle, that I can conjure up to produce evidence for you to believe.

Then you and your god are useless to this thread and any other requests for evidence. Please stop pretending you have some.
If you keep on living your life as though your purpose is to be saved and go to heaven, you are missing the heaven that you are living in right now.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3956
  • Darwins +265/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #136 on: January 12, 2014, 05:19:35 PM »
God is not my genie in a bottle, that I can conjure up to produce evidence for you to believe. 

If that's the case, why is it part of your doctrine to hold that we should be punished for not believing in something that there is no evidence for?

Secondly, I am not asking for a genie and wishes, I am asking for something that distinguishes the god you believe in from some completely imaginary being.

And no, reasons that are logical fallacies don't count.

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #137 on: January 12, 2014, 05:49:11 PM »
Right or wrong, I read Jonny's question as not being sincere but sarcastic.  So I didn't bother.
Really, Christianity is based on a heart change that God does to a person.  If a person doesn't see themselves in need of being forgiven of their sins or even having sin in their life, then that person won't believe.  Now, all people see life through a set of lenses.  Your brother probably sees that God is in charge of life and death.  Therefore when someone experiences a life and death situation and comes out of it, he most likely attributes it to God and thanks Him for it.  An atheist sees life through the set of lenses that says there is no god.  Therefore he will never be convinced.  God is not my genie in a bottle, that I can conjure up to produce evidence for you to believe.  Even Jesus said that if a dead man came back to life it wouldn't change a person's heart necessarily.  See the story of Lazarus and the rich man.    It is an act of God that changes a person's heart and causes them to believe.

That's a nice bit of preaching but let me ask you something. Given the joining a church involves handing money over to the church for what ever its leaders think fit , could we compare this to a Golf Resort? Let's say you want somewhere special to play golf and I tell you about a wonderful place - a golf resort - with plenty of course of all difficulties, all the facilities you could want. Now I don't show you any pictures of this place but I ask you to pay up your initial fee for joining. Do you join? You have never met me before and now nothing about me or the gold resort. All you have is my word that it is there and that be joining you will automatically become a better golf player. How about a $500 joining fee?

Quote
Here's an example.  When my daughter was born, she had lung problems and was huffing so badly that our hospital doctors had her sent to Seattle by helicopter for immediate high level care at the University of Washington Hospital.  My wife and I prayed for my daughter of course.  I then drove as fast as I could to be at the UW hospital to be with her.  Leaving my wife who had undergone a C-section at the birth hospital.  Now I know that this could be explained away.  After about 2 hours of driving, when I came in to see my baby daughter, the UW doctor told me that He was surprised at how well my daughter was doing based on the symptoms he was told to expect.  She arrived in better condition than when she left.  Well she recovered quickly and after it was all behind us, we thanked God for answered prayer and that she was ok.  Could that have happened whether we prayed or not?  Whether we were Christian or not?  YES.
The bottom line is that we thanked God, not because He proved something to us.  But because we already believed.

Well, you know, there are always stories about people who claim to have been healed but the stories never come with enough information to confirm this and, of course, they are always about things that either medical treatment can cure of things that sometimes go into remission. Now, obviously, I am delighted that you daughter was fine but I am concerned about your final comment.

Your daughter was treated by midwife / doctors at birth, air ambulance crews and finally by the specialist unit at the hospital - no doubt getting exceptionally good care. yet you decide to thank a mysterious being for her recovery and not the those talented. hard-working staff who made her recovery possible. After all, if you really believed in the power of prayer you wouldn't have bothered with the hospital at all and let your god do the work wouldn't you? Let's be fair, your god failed to let your wife have a normal delivery - the simplest of things to do - and made her go through a C section.

So on one had you credit your god with the improvement of your daughter but don't mention that failure of him in dealing with your wife's failure to deliver normally. Maybe I'm unfair. Maybe you and your wife didn't pray for an easy delivery but I bet you did. So why doesn't your god get the blame as  well as the credit?
Your golf analogy doesn't fit.  People in my church and people I know in other churches are actively involved with decisions and making things happen.  The church is us, for us, and for all who will come.  It's not about the leadership, in fact we have a say in what leadership does, and teaches.  There is communication and things to do, all the time for those who wish to be involved.  The difficulty is actually trying to get people more involved rather than just coming on Sunday.  So it's not an exclusive golf club, that offers something that we are not a part of or cannot see.  The gospel is about getting out and doing things, getting on the golf course and golfing, using your analogy, not just talking about it on Sundays.  If you're saying that the golf club is heaven and I pay money to get there even though I never have seen it, then I would say that paying money to God in order to get to heaven isn't the key to getting there at all.   
I know there is errant teaching that emphasize money as if God will bless someone with more money if they just give money to the church.  That's just not right and I think certain televangelists and the like, are money hungry deceivers using the gospel to their own personal gain.  But for a church to accept money from people in order to pay bills, salaries, while doing things like feeding and clothing the less fortunate, providing counseling, is a good practice of the gospel message of love to all, regardless of whether they believe or not.   
Now, regarding my daughter's condition and wife's pregnancy.  Your assertion is that if I really believed, I would just trust God to do it all and not rely on doctors.  I don't believe that's how God works.  The atheist ideal is for Christians to go around proving that God exists by just praying or performing miracles.  But you want to see that happen because to you, if it were all true, that's what you'd expect.  The problem is, that is NOT what the bible teaches.  God put us all here for a reason.  That means we are to learn and grow as people, using science, medicine, getting up in the morning and engaging in work, using our hands and feet to accomplish things.  You seem to want miracles more than I do.  And I'm the one who believes that they can happen.  I think that they rarely happen, and don't expect to see one in my lifetime.  But it doesn't matter because the power of the gospel message has invoked enough faith in me that I believe regardless of seeing a miracle.  Of course I'd like to see something supernatural or a healing, but they rarely causes people to believe anyway.  There will most likely always be an explanation from someone who chooses not to believe.  For all the reasons that I've given you before, I believe in Christ as Lord.  But again, I believe that God has us here on earth to live out the gospel, which means enduring hardship and struggling like everyone else.  Not skating by never doing things on my own because God should provide everything miraculously. 

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #138 on: January 12, 2014, 05:50:22 PM »
God is not my genie in a bottle, that I can conjure up to produce evidence for you to believe. 

If that's the case, why is it part of your doctrine to hold that we should be punished for not believing in something that there is no evidence for?

Secondly, I am not asking for a genie and wishes, I am asking for something that distinguishes the god you believe in from some completely imaginary being.

And no, reasons that are logical fallacies don't count.

I'll like to expound on this, if you don't mind: When the reason to believe is because of miracles that Jesus himself said, "Anyone that believes will be able to perform even greater miracles than I." The disciples asked Jesus how to tell to tell the difference between a true believe and a false one so they wouldn't be betrayed and killed by a false believer. Jesus said that the miricles prove God's power. Mohammad stated that he could not preform miracles, proved he, not Jesus was a true prophet.

It's should be ironic that the best you can give, is no different than all the other false religions, whom are certainly not believers in Jesus. 
« Last Edit: January 12, 2014, 05:54:34 PM by Ivellios »

Offline jynnan tonnix

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1790
  • Darwins +93/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #139 on: January 12, 2014, 06:14:02 PM »
Speaking of praying and recoveries, a couple of years ago my mom had an unspecified cancer (a swollen lymph node was removed and indicated that she had cancer elsewhere, but they never could actually find evidence of it).

My parents, especially my dad, are devout Catholics. They are also both Polish, and Dad has always been almost militantly so. He had a fairly good friend, due to his high-level involvement in Polish Scouting...a priest who later became a bishop, and had known Pope John Paul II since his seminary days. JPII, having recently gained sainthood around that time, seemed to Dad the perfect person to pray to. "Family connections" and all that.

As I said, Mom's cancer was never actually identified. As far as they could tell, it had originated as some type of skin cancer, but they were never able to find it. Dad is convinced that JPII intervened, as a favor of one old-time Polish Scout to another.

I'm sure this story would have certain types of American Protestant Christians up in spades about Satan and the lies of Catholicism and any number of things. Dad probably never prayed to God "in person" for Mom's recovery at all...yet she recovered. Was it JPII's doing? Sheer luck? God listening in and deciding to grant the favor despite commandments about having no other gods before him? The Catholics' reliance on saintly intervention definitely borders on that sometimes. It's one of the biggest beefs that many other denominations have with them. Yet I suppose Catholics' prayers to saints produce exactly the same proportion of results as Baptists' pleas to God, or atheists' really hoping that things go well. And getting the right medical attention improves the chances of a positive outcome in every one of those situations as well.

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #140 on: January 12, 2014, 06:15:41 PM »

So on one had you credit your god with the improvement of your daughter but don't mention that failure of him in dealing with your wife's failure to deliver normally. Maybe I'm unfair. Maybe you and your wife didn't pray for an easy delivery but I bet you did. So why doesn't your god get the blame as  well as the credit?
Christians will emphasize when God heals, so how about when things don't go well? 
In Job, after his sons and daughters were killed and much of his possessions were destroyed:

20 Then Job arose and tore his robe and shaved his head, and he fell to the ground and worshiped. 21 He said,

“Naked I came from my mother’s womb,
And naked I shall return there.
The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away.
Blessed be the name of the Lord.”
22 Through all this Job did not sin nor did he blame God.

God is in a win/win situation.  If things go well, the believer praises Him.  If things don't go well, we have the example of Job to help shape our attitude. 
One of the atheist arguments is that the bible is a bunch of concocted stories that are there to convince people that they need to believe in order for the leaders of the church to control the masses. 
The problem that I have believing that idea, is that the bible tells this type of story.  Obviously this is a problem for Christianity if your ideal god is that he should always protect and provide for us everything that we want to happen.  But that isn't what the bible teaches.  It teaches us to trust in God, despite our understanding, because God has a reason for shaping us in the way that He wants for His purposes.  Our job as believers is to respond to God like Job, in humility and in trust.  I say this because I think that this is evidence that the bible is recording things that actually happened and letting the "chips fall where they fall".   If I were to try and steer people to a false religion so that I could have the power, stories like this in Job wouldn't say that God allowed Job an "upright man", and his family to go through all this suffering and tremendous loss.  I would say something much more palatable like what the televangelists say today, that if you "just believe and have enough faith", then Jesus will heal your ailments and you will get that great job, and money will come back to you ten fold.  Much of today's "christian message" is junk. 

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2343
  • Darwins +437/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #141 on: January 12, 2014, 06:33:24 PM »
Much of today's "christian message" is junk.
What's the harm with god himself coming down and clearing things up?

There are people who believe that god exists, and earnestly wish to follow him.  What hope do they have if they sincerely believe the wrong message when the entity that wants them to know the message does nothing to correct them?  And what makes you think you have the message right?

I mean, there are people who go very far down the path of absolute trust in god's protection.  Like parents who pray for their child, sincerely believing that god will save them, and then the child dies.  Why didn't god himself correct their misunderstanding - especially before the child suffered and died?

I just don't understand it.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4709
  • Darwins +107/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #142 on: January 12, 2014, 06:59:23 PM »
Much of today's "christian message" is junk.
What's the harm with god himself coming down and clearing things up?

There are people who believe that god exists, and earnestly wish to follow him.  What hope do they have if they sincerely believe the wrong message when the entity that wants them to know the message does nothing to correct them?  And what makes you think you have the message right?

I mean, there are people who go very far down the path of absolute trust in god's protection.  Like parents who pray for their child, sincerely believing that god will save them, and then the child dies.  Why didn't god himself correct their misunderstanding - especially before the child suffered and died?

I just don't understand it.
I am surprised nobody has written a 3rd testament.....well that Smith guy did try,and today he has millions of Mormons believing that crap. Still can we have some jerk-off try and pass his writings off as "inspired by God"?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #143 on: January 12, 2014, 07:04:23 PM »
So in order to understand my points for belief in God, you would first have to accept something that I believe is true.  That mankind is made up of more than just the physical.  We have other dimensions to us.  Love, music, art, self sacrifice, laughter, sadness, and all of these expressions (and more) tell me that we are more than just tangible.  We have qualities like higher level thinking and a consciousness that causes us to ask why am I here?  Where did I come from?  Where am I going?

These are the basic questions that every philosophy and religion in the history of the world has wrestled with, and proposed answers to.  I don't see any reason to make the immediate leap from "Huh.  Fascinating questions" to "Therefore, the Bible must be true!"  It would be quite the stroke of luck if the predominant religion of the region and culture you just happened to be born in also just happened to be the one with all the correct answers to the questions of life!  Wouldn't it?  If you are uncomfortable with the "random chance" element of evolutionary theory, shouldn't you also be uncomfortable with the idea of assuming that American Protestantism is true just because you happened to be born into the milieu of American Protestantism? 

Obviously, taking the answers of the local predominant religion doesn't work as a method of discovering truth because...think of all those other poor bastards born in other places and times, with other predominant religions and philosophies!  If you had been born under the reign of Pharaoh Thutmose III, I guarantee you, "Christianity!" would not have been the answer to those questions you would have found.

So, the first thing that must be done when beginning a process of inquiry into these questions, is to seek out a method or methods that work for the purpose of answering questions, discovering facts, and identifying errors in one's own thinking.  "Defend the religion I was born into" demonstrably does not work, as shown by the existence of all those people born into religions and philosophies you think are wrong, wrong, wrong.  So far, the methods that have shown themselves to work best are: observation, logic, and science practiced under a rubric of reciprocal accountability.  "Reciprocal accountability" is the process by which ideas (world views, political polices, scientific theories, products for sale, claims that a given person is guilty of a crime, etc.) are subject to the critical scrutiny of others, who are free to shoot them down. 

This is the underlying principle of how the world's most successful science (peer review, replication of observation and experiments by skeptical scientists), courts (adversarial trial-by-jury with guaranteed access to professional legal representation), government (political leaders regularly subject to democratic elections, checks-and-balances, and debate of their policy proposals), and markets (free competition by multiple enterprises with a government referee to prevent the formation of cartels, monopolies, systematic cheating by the powerful, etc.) work.  Of course these things don't work perfectly.  Nothing human does.  But...the way we find out they don't work perfectly, and try to make them work better is: science, logic, and reciprocal accountability. 

Have you noticed that religions as a rule, never use these tools?  How they always try to put something or someone (or both) above questioning and criticism?
 
Observations like this leads me to believe that we are more than just evolved beasts.  That we are not random chance beings whose ancestors crawled out of a primordial soup and eventually become man.  I don't see the evolutionary reason or even the possibility of evolution "needing to" create those intangible qualities (as if evolution itself had a brain and a motive).

I could just as easily say, "Observations like this lead me to believe that we are more than just automatons made to tend a garden (Gen. 2:15).  That we were not made to just munch fruit and obey orders, or herd goats in the desert.  I don't see the design reason or even the possibility of a deity 'needing to' create those intangible qualities [e.g. ability to perform calculus or build spaceships] in order to have people to bow down to it and sing its praises."  And the truth is, I don't.  Any deity capable of creating a hundred billion galaxies with a thought has no conceivable use for human sycophants.

1. I see evidence of good and evil

This does not provide evidence for Christianity.  The "Argument From Evil" is actually one of the main evidences against the existence of an all-powerful, all-good creator deity with omnimax attributes (omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, omnibenevolence).  Leaping straight to Christianity here also represents a fallacy of Locating the Hypothesis.  More on this below. 

2. I have reason to believe in the authenticity of the bible

Not sure what you mean by "authenticity of the Bible" here.  If you're arguing something along the lines of, "The Bible said that Nineveh was real; the archaeologists thought it was a myth until they found it, therefore the Bible is God's infallible Word!," that is no more to the point than assuming that because Troy and Mycenae were found, therefore the Goddess Athena must exist.  Again, you're jumping straight to the Bible for no apparent reason.  Have you tested the Upanishads for authenticity?  Locating the Hypothesis again.


3. The bible also admits the problem of good and evil
4. The bible states that the ability for good and evil exists in people.  Which I see evidence of.

Outside of, maybe, a few hand-wringing French Existentialists and postmodernist academics, you'd have a hard time finding any philosophical or religious text that doesn't admit the problem of good and evil, and state that good and evil exist in people.  If you're guessing that I'll mention "Locating the Hypothesis" again here, you'd be right.

 
5. The bible states that mankind needs to be taught what good and evil are.  Otherwise, if left to their own devices, man will deviate into a place where he hurts and destroys himself and others around him. I see evidence of this throughout history and in today's world.

See my response to #4 above.

But ultimately a society without God's rules for living written in their hearts, will decay.  Therefore God in the bible shows us that we are lost without Him.

And yet, somehow, the Japanese, the Swedes and Finns and Danes manage just fine without ordering their societies along the lines of a Biblical Sharia.  In terms of measurable criteria of social health (crime rates, teen pregnancy rates, happiness levels, social equality, infant mortality, etc.) such secular societies routinely outperform religious societies like the U.S.  Within the U.S., the more secular "blue" states outperform the more religious "red" states.  As far as we can tell from actual observation, we are better off "without Him."  For that matter, the ancient Egyptians, Minoans, etc.--not to mention hunter-gatherer cultures that measured their continuation in tens of thousands of years--seem to have managed alright without the Bible.

Furthermore, what exactly are "God's rules for living" anyway?  No eating shrimp wrapped in bacon?  No use of blended-fiber cloth?  Picking up sticks on a Saturday should be a capital offense (Numbers 15:32-36)?  No, wait, we ignore all that stuff nowadays, don't we?  You know, the places where the Bible actually lays out a code of law and jurisprudence.  Instead, we come up with a set of "rules for living" we like better (don't be gay, don't be a woman, and cut taxes on the rich) and then say those are in the Bible as "God's rules for living."  How many Christians these days actually obey the things the Jesus of the Gospels said about money?   Well, if we're going to come up with our own rules anyway, we might as well use the methods I outlined above and stop using Yahweh as a ventriloquist dummy.

Locating the Hypothesis

I mentioned the concept of "Locating the Hypothesis" a few times.  When we are trying to answer a question, and are confronted with a large possibility space of potential answers, it is fallacious to select one particular hypothesis out for focused attention without having sufficient evidence to do so.  Over and over again, you leap straight to [your interpretation of] the Bible without first providing any evidence that it, and not some other ancient holy book or none, should be privileged as the one worthy of consideration.

Quote
To see the problem of privileging the hypothesis, suppose that the police in Largeville, a town with a million inhabitants, are investigating a murder in which there are few or no clues - the victim was stabbed to death in an alley, and there are no fingerprints and no witnesses.

Then, one of the detectives says, "Well... we have no idea who did it... no particular evidence singling out any of the million people in this city... but let's consider the possibility that this murder was committed by Mortimer Q. Snodgrass, who lives at 128 Ordinary Ln."

If the detective does not have evidence already in hand to justify singling out Mortimer for such special and individual attention, then this is, or ought to be, a violation of Mortimer's civil rights.

You have provided no reason to immediately select "the Bible" as the one hypothesis worthy of consideration, no evidence that you ever went through any process of inquiry where you considered the merits of the Vedas and the Pyramid Texts and the Pupul Vuh and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics[/url] and the writings of Confucius, etc. before finally hitting upon the Bible as the best and most rational understanding.  You've shown no evidence of having a method of inquiry that lead you to choosing "the Bible" other than "being born at a particular place and time." 

6. Other religions are self serving in that they try to control their followers.  If practiced correctly, Christianity allows people to choose.

Oh, sure.  But if you "choose" wrong, you BURN FOREVER AND EVER AND EVER IN EXQUISITE FIERY TORMENT!!!!  Nice soul ya got there.  It'd be a shame if something happened to it.  Capiche?



Of course people from the beginning of time have wrestled with these issues.  That's exactly what one would expect from people who were created in the image of God to do.  Even if they don't know God. 
Now, I don't make a "leap".  The reasons that I gave were just a beginning.  I don't leap from the existential concept to.... American Protestantism.  First is accepting the idea that we are more than just an accident.  And more than just a physical creature destined for the dust without a soul or something else, whatever that might be.  After at least considering that possibility, a person can enter into a journey of discovering what that something else could be.

That you don't see a reason for God to create people........well the bible says that God loves His creation.  Maybe that's a good enough reason.  As parents and people with family, we should be able to relate to that.   The Bible says that God knew you from the beginning of the earth.  That He created you for a reason.  If God is who He says He is, and does love His creation, then people who know Him will WANT to bow down and sing His praises.  He doesn't force anyone to do that.

Re: the issues of good and evil:  Good and evil are definitions of standards.  We would have to get into the problem of where our standards come from.  Are they floating or fixed? 
I see that good and evil exist and it causes me to look for a good/evil standard and reason why.  The bible answers those questions.  I know other "holy books" claim answers too.  Yes, I've read many of them but not all.  That doesn't mean that landing on just the right truth was a coincidence.  I don't see this as a choice as much as I see it as God's leading me and giving me reasons to believe at the same time. 

Burning forever may be a metaphorical explaination of hell.  Forever seperation from God is probably one thing that christians can agree upon regarding this subject.  That it burns like an unquenchable fire because the person will never have satifaction in their existance, always searching and never able to experience relationship, contentment, always blaming God for even being in hell, will certainly be a part of that eternal existance.  But hey, at least God is giving the person what they wanted right?  Seperation from Himself.  A lot atheists say that even if the God of the bible were true, they wouldn't want to be with Him.  A loving God, I suppose, gives them what they want in the end. 

I will get to the rest of your long response later.  Not ignoring it. 




Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #144 on: January 12, 2014, 07:12:27 PM »
Christianity is based on a heart change that God does to a person.  If a person doesn't see themselves in need of being forgiven of their sins or even having sin in their life, then that person won't believe.

To believe you have sin in your life you first have to believe the Christian god exists, therefore this is just circular reasoning.

Quote
An atheist sees life through the set of lenses that says there is no god.  Therefore he will never be convinced.

No they don't. That would be another of your sweeping generalisations of atheists. Lives/world views are based on what you factor in, not what you factor out.

Quote
God is not my genie in a bottle, that I can conjure up to produce evidence for you to believe.

Then you and your god are useless to this thread and any other requests for evidence. Please stop pretending you have some.
If you think that you don't bring personal biases into your beliefs then you are self deceived. 
If you think that I am useless to this thread, then take your nasty personality somewhere else and be done with it.  You've acted this way from the beginning.  You can move on.