Today, as I sat in my treestand during what would end up to be another fruitless effort in my quest for deer flesh, my thoughts turned to what they quite often do; the ontological. I'm sure yours do too when you are sitting in a tree. I pondered Descartes and St. Anselm. I thought about how philosophers tend to smear the philosopher's before them proof of the existence of God, all the while providing fodder for the philosopher that will follow them. Of course, I thought of the logical premise that one can not prove a negative. So, one could never prove that God didn't exist even if he actually didn't.

Then, it occured to me that perhaps, since you can't prove that God doesn't exist, then perhaps that means he does. Could I prove that God exists simply by virtue of the fact that you can't prove that he doesn't?

I quickly realized that a) that's probably not possible and b) my tiny cerebrum can't handle the enormity of what I was trying to parse.

I moved on.

Perhaps proving a negative wasn't the way to go. Perhaps a logical falsity was another avenue. For instance:

If 2+2 is not equal to 4 then 2+2 is equal to any number other than 4.

But, since 2+2 IS EQUAL to 4 then 2+2 IS NOT equal to any number other than 4.

So, if we convert that to theologicese:

I do not believe in God therefore God does not exist.

But, since I DO, in fact, believe in God then God exists.

Hmmm...

Interesting. This kept me entertained for hours in the tree today. And yes, I know what you are going to scream...

TAUTOLOGY!

But, it's my tautology, damn it, and I like it. It's way better than St. Anselm's puny effort. It may not be as good as Descartes, but at least it's concise...

The way I see it, you don't need to have raw evidence to have strong belief.

God exists in the minds of the people who believe in him. He does not exist in the minds of those who don't.

There is no proof either way. In boils down to whether one believes what they have been taught about religion. Most people are introduced to a religion by their parents and adopt that one. Others take a more active interest in their spiritual life and research all theologies before determining which one they will follow.

Originally posted by old-reb


Then, it occured to me that perhaps, since you can't prove that God doesn't exist, then perhaps that means he does. Could I prove that God exists simply by virtue of the fact that you can't prove that he doesn't?



God has shown me that He is real. I used to wonder if He really is or not because I never actually had seen any proof. I had heard about Him throughout my childhood, but never had seen any concrete evidence.

Even after I became a christian, I still wondered if He was really real. I knew deep in my heart that He is real, but wanted to see proof of His existance.

God had healed me from severe back pains and a twisted pelvic bone instantly. I have seen others healed and delivered form various things too. I nor any other person can prove the existance of God, but God can if yuo really want to know that He is real, He can reveal Himself to you.

Originally posted by the J Man
God had healed me from severe back pains and a twisted pelvic bone instantly.

I would be interested in hearing more details about this if you are inclined to reveal them.

Originally posted by the J Man
if yuo really want to know that He is real, He can reveal Himself to you.

Amen.

We might also add, that these people that are saying, "I want proof, I want proof." LIke some of the Athetists....well, one of these days, you might just get that proof, and it wont be the way you'd hope.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
I would be interested in hearing more details about this if you are inclined to reveal them.

Okay, here's the story.

I started going to church back in 1997. Shortly after, I was layed off and found a job at a place where it was very hard on the back. Even though I was a christian, I still had no concrete evidence about God's existance and didn't know how to trust God in my situations.

After working there for 7 months, my back was in real pain. I had even went for back therapy. The therapy was not changing the back. Injuries to the lower back are known not to show up in an x-ray which is why I didn't know what was worng at that time. But I had severe pains.

I ended up quitting that job cause I couln't take it there anymore. I had tooken a part time job as a baker in a donut shop. But that job also fell through and I was out of work altogether.

I was extemely discouraged and even angry at God for allowing my life to be such a mess. My wife(then she was my girlfriend) often went over to Detroit to Monday night serivce for deliverance class taught by a prohet of God who is annointed by God in the ministry of deliverance. Another woman that went with my wife had called me up and said that the Lord had something for me tonight. I didn't really believe that and at first I didn't want to go(after all, I was angry at God). But she called me right back after I hung up the phone and told me "the Lord has something for you tonight." I said "alright, I'll go" even though I didn't really feel like it.

During these services, many people that go are ministered to prophetically and delivered. The teachings there are excellent. That night, I went up because I needed healing for my back. The prohet of God said "sit down in this chair." He then said "Put both your legs out." The Lord showed him what was wrong with my back. The left leg was a couple of inches longer than the other. It was a twisted pelvic bone.

I was healed instanlty and the pain instantly went away. Therapy on my back could not do that. A few other people were healed that night too including a guy that had back problems from doing construction work. I was prophesied over about my job situation that I wll have a job and also that I needed to clean up the house(meaning I needed to get myself right with God). Why I needed to get myself right with God, well I had a bad attitude and I used a lot of profanity and the Lord's name in vain. I was a very negative person and needed to change the way I conducted myself.

After that night, I knew for 100% fact that God was real and could never question Him on that again.

Thanks for your response JMan, I'm glad you're feeling better. :)

I believe that which we call God is within each of us. To make contact is to allow such to be done. Some must use mans-religions to accomplish this. Some can do it on their own. Many stay so tied up in their world of distraction that they miss the boat of the many opportunities that are there for them in a natural state, awaiting discovery. Man is but a shell without this inner contact, a shell of selfishness and restlessness that will never know true peace and self content.

J-Man,

Praise the lord youre feeling better, God's great isnt he?

I was wondering, what denomination of the church are you a member of?

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
J-Man,

Praise the lord youre feeling better, God's great isnt he?

I was wondering, what denomination of the church are you a member of?

The church I go to is non-denominational. It is filled with the Holy Spirit. How bout you? What church are you a member of?

Jman - thanks for sharing your healing experience.

Ultimately many religions and faiths exhibit similar experiences, without questioning your experience (which I have no reason to disbelieve) - I think certainly there is a higher power. Where I have problems is the religious belief that goes with it - the stuff that says this type of thing is exclusive.

Faith in anything is powerful.

Originally posted by the J Man
The church I go to is non-denominational. It is filled with the Holy Spirit. How bout you? What church are you a member of?

I am currently a member of a Southern Baptist Church...but I believe that as long as you accept Christ as youre savior....a doctrine just makes a name above the door.

Non-denominational is probably the best way to go.

I think people believe in God because they have to have something to believe in. If they don't...somehow I think mass chaos would erupt....well not really, but if it weren't God it would just be some other object or "person" they would worship.

woooooo valerie...lol

Originally posted by Shadow Garnet
I think people believe in God because they have to have something to believe in. If they don't...somehow I think mass chaos would erupt....well not really, but if it weren't God it would just be some other object or "person" they would worship.
I don't worship a damned thing...

Originally posted by BorgHunter
I don't worship a damned thing... I never said you did *shrugs* it's your choice what flavor of ice cream you want. [what's your flavah, tell me what's your flavah?....stupid commercial..]:mad:

Originally posted by Shadow Garnet
I never said you did *shrugs* it's your choice what flavor of ice cream you want. [what's your flavah, tell me what's your flavah?....stupid commercial..]:mad:
Okay, from your post, it sounded like you were saying everybody has to worship something or else their head asplodes or something...thanks for the clarification...;)

Originally posted by BorgHunter
Okay, from your post, it sounded like you were saying everybody has to worship something or else their head asplodes or something...thanks for the clarification...;) I do what I can *tips hat*...:p

Today's Ice Cream Flavors:

Buddha Surprise

Allah Orange

Jesus Christ Chocolate with Macademia

Okay, from your post, it sounded like you were saying everybody has to worship something or else their head asplodes or something...thanks for the clarification...
I have head explody! BOOM! BOOM!
Hehehe, and this may actually relate, since it takes place in heaven. And in hell:
"What about this coat, do I get to keep this coat?"
"What? No, you can't keep it. Quick, now, before you are gone, would you like me to convieniently divulge the secrets of your tragic and mysterious origins?"
"What? So I don't get to keep this coat? But it fits me perfectly, and this lining!!"
...
ZZT!

Originally posted by Blibblob
Okay, from your post, it sounded like you were saying everybody has to worship something or else their head asplodes or something...thanks for the clarification...
I got head esplody! BOOM! BOOM!
Hehehe, and this may actually relate, since it takes place in heaven. And in hell:
"You may ask me anything, anything you want. I really get a kick out of answering the meaning of life, come on, ask me that!"
"Can I keep the trenchcoat?"
"No, bye!" NNY!!!

And I read through the comic again and fixed my quotes.

Originally posted by Blibblob
And I read through the comic again and fixed my quotes. Heh that part is funny...but some of it makes a lot of sense!

Originally posted by Echo2
God exists in the minds of the people who believe in him. He does not exist in the minds of those who don't.

There is no proof either way. In boils down to whether one believes what they have been taught about religion. Most people are introduced to a religion by their parents and adopt that one. Others take a more active interest in their spiritual life and research all theologies before determining which one they will follow.

Echo I actually like how you put that. It really boils down to that. Unfortunately, though, one side must be right and one side must be wrong. And God (pun intended) have mercy on the wrong side's soul...

Originally posted by the J Man

God had healed me from severe back pains and a twisted pelvic bone instantly. I have seen others healed and delivered form various things too. I nor any other person can prove the existance of God, but God can if yuo really want to know that He is real, He can reveal Himself to you.

Can you not accept that your body came through for you? Why not thank your body for fighting off the back pains?

Christian: Thanks for healing me God
God: Uh, well actually it wasn't-
Christian's body: No, its ok, im used to it.
lol jk

Originally posted by CX returns
Can you not accept that your body came through for you? Why not thank your body for fighting off the back pains?

Christian: Thanks for healing me God
God: Uh, well actually it wasn't-
Christian's body: No, its ok, im used to it.
lol jk Does his belief that God healed his pains threaten you on a personal level or something?

Why ask him a question about his faith in one breath, and then make some sohpmoric lame ass attempt at humor against his religion in the next?

Originally posted by HaVoK
Does his belief that God healed his pains threaten you on a personal level or something?

Why ask him a question about his faith in one breath, and then make some sohpmoric lame ass attempt at humor against his religion in the next?

Did it ever enter your thought process that the post was a joke? I merely stated that it could have been his body that came through for him, but I would not intentionally attack his belief on how he got healed. Again for the people with an empty space btw their ears, IT WAS A JOKE! And it doesn't threaten me on a personal level.

Originally posted by CX returns
Did it ever enter your thought process that the post was a joke? I merely stated that it could have been his body that came through for him, but I would not intentionally attack his belief on how he got healed. Again for the people with an empty space btw their ears, IT WAS A JOKE! And it doesn't threaten me on a personal level. My apologies, I am used to people attacking my beliefs in this forum. BTW, if you use a smilie, people wouldnt have to be psychic, they would know if you were joking or not.

Originally posted by CX returns
Did it ever enter your thought process that the post was a joke? I merely stated that it could have been his body that came through for him, but I would not intentionally attack his belief on how he got healed. Again for the people with an empty space btw their ears, IT WAS A JOKE! And it doesn't threaten me on a personal level.

Okay, it's a joke. No problem. CX, there is no way that I would have been able to be healed of these lower back pains instantly and my body just all of a sudden coming through for me as you suggested. I was instantly healed and I know it was the work of the Lord. There are other too that have had miracles done in their lives.

Originally posted by the J Man
CX, there is no way that I would have been able to be healed of these lower back pains instantly and my body just all of a sudden coming through for me as you suggested. I was instantly healed and I know it was the work of the Lord.

How can you be sure it wasn't Zeus?

Or Mithra?

Or some other supernatural entity...?

Originally posted by the J Man
Okay, it's a joke. No problem. CX, there is no way that I would have been able to be healed of these lower back pains instantly and my body just all of a sudden coming through for me as you suggested. I was instantly healed and I know it was the work of the Lord. There are other too that have had miracles done in their lives.

I will respect your view. But if you think about it, some credit is due to your body for helping ya through... I'm not saying it was only your body, but just think about.

Originally posted by Freethinker
How can you be sure it wasn't Zeus?

Or Mithra?

Or some other supernatural entity...?

I was healed in the name of Jesus in a bible believing church operating in the prophetic ministry. The Word of God is taught in that church and many people are healed and delivered. When people get healed and delivered and strong holds are broken in people's lives, it is done in the name of Jesus. God has shown Himself real to me and many others.

I'm sure you've all heard it, but it's good to use...

Most people have never seen, held, or touched a billion dollars, but we all know it exists. How do we know? Because others have said they have held it and touched it (or bought shit with it.)

How do we know God exists? Because others have said they have heard him, seen him, or felt him.

It's all about faith...
:p :p :p :p

I don't think any amount of faith is needed to believe a billion dollars exist. It's largely an objective knowledge. (for example, you can argue that a billion dollars does not exist and come up with some simple contradiction)

To believe a god exist now you need faith.

What a silly question! Of course God excists, just most of you guys don't want to acknowledge it. :How can anyone be bigger than us?" Ha.

Originally posted by Beneck
What a silly question! Of course God excists, just most of you guys don't want to acknowledge it. :How can anyone be bigger than us?" Ha.
It's only silly if you have a closed mind.

I believe there is more to man than flesh.
I believe there is more than man.

Originally posted by Freethinker
How can you be sure it wasn't Zeus?

Or Mithra?

Or some other supernatural entity...?

Originally posted by the J Man
I was healed in the name of Jesus in a bible believing church operating in the prophetic ministry. The Word of God is taught in that church and many people are healed and delivered.

No doubt, Biblegod is --in your estimation-- capable of being anywhere.

I can think of no reason why other supernatural entities aren't capable of the same.

How can you be sure Mithra (or any of a thousand other gods invented by the mind of Man) wasn't inside the *bible believing church operating in the prophetic ministry* and wasn't in fact the entity responsible for the healing?

Originally posted by the J Man
I was healed in the name of Jesus in a bible believing church operating in the prophetic ministry. The Word of God is taught in that church and many people are healed and delivered. When people get healed and delivered and strong holds are broken in people's lives, it is done in the name of Jesus. God has shown Himself real to me and many others.

See this proves my point. You believed you could become healed, were it Jesus, the Aliens, or mad scientists that crept into your bedroom while you slept. I believe the mind and sheer force of will can and will allow anyone to overcome disabilities. I know you are going to say this is far fetched, and many have said that before as well. Look at evolution... Opps sorry... that's another debate, but my point is... we didn't have space flight 50 years ago, if someone in the 1920's told you that he was going to take a ship out of the atmosphere and land on the Moon you would have said... "Oh Hell NO! Are you off your Meds?" Yet... here we are even now studying Gamma Ray bursts that produce as much energy in a second as the sun does in a billion years. But yet... you are willing to believe in a supernatural being you have labeled God. Has your God evolved? Or Become more then he was? NO.... to quote the bible "God is, ever was and always shall be" Well... hmmmph.. it seems that Humans as a race have performed more epic feats then God has. So it is logical for me to assume that one day we will be like Gods, or extreamly evolved, so to a lesser developed species we might even become their God.

When we create A star or the Earth i'll be convinced. Or better yet, why dont we invent a plant from nothing. Then we will be God. As a race we've managed to destroy a lot more than we created. Check your logic.

Originally posted by Jwjames111
When we create A star or the Earth i'll be convinced. Or better yet, why dont we invent a plant from nothing. Then we will be God. As a race we've managed to destroy a lot more than we created. Check your logic.


ok let's create life artificial insemation, Children born in a petire dish. Ok how about Cloning a sheep... WoW! that's pretty amazing. And Terraforming.... heh don't get me started on that.

Originally posted by Jwjames111
When we create A star or the Earth i'll be convinced. Or better yet, why dont we invent a plant from nothing. Then we will be God. As a race we've managed to destroy a lot more than we created. Check your logic.

I agree. All this talk of cloning, artificial insemination, terraforming, etc. is not creating at all. It is merely manipulating life and material that is already there. To be sure, God has given us the ability to do marvelous things, but we can't create anything out of nothing.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by philosophytara
[B]See this proves my point. You believed you could become healed, were it Jesus, the Aliens, or mad scientists that crept into your bedroom while you slept. I believe the mind and sheer force of will can and will allow anyone to overcome disabilities.
-----------------------------------------

Would not the end result justify the means? If faith in a religion or God created the healing is this not a good thing? Since this mind and sheer force of will is activated thru faith-should we not encourage that faith? Reqardless of how the faith is initiated?
I say that may-be we should encourage that which gives a good end result.

Philosophytara, it really doent seem like youve researched this topic much. Do some research and come back, k?

God is the Universe itself.

The Universe surely exists.

Does the Universe have a will?

Sure it does: you are made of dirt. Not in the Biblical sense, but literally. Once upon a time on a planet really really close to us there was nothing but dirt and water. Now there are brilliant people like us wondering how the mud became men.

If the Universe didn't have a will then you wouldn't have a will. If you believe you exist them God necessarily exists.

The Universe is a creation by God. He created the stars and knows each by its name.

Originally posted by UnCoolDuck
I agree. All this talk of cloning, artificial insemination, terraforming, etc. is not creating at all. It is merely manipulating life and material that is already there. To be sure, God has given us the ability to do marvelous things, but we can't create anything out of nothing.

Isn't that what your God had done? Manipulated life and material that is already there? He created Woman out of Adams Rib... and dirt.

Who created Adam's rib, and dirt. C'mon THINK MAN!!!!!

Originally posted by Jwjames111
Who created Adam's rib, and dirt. C'mon THINK MAN!!!!!

Aliens..... well you know I have had just about enough of your ignorant attitude... I have done my research, how about you show me some scientific research on your God and proof that he actually created the earth and stars etc. Anyway Free your mind James, and stop trying to act smarter then you are by trying to belittle another individual. So why don't you just STFU?:bike:

U sure your thirty? That was about the most childish answer ive heard in a long time. MY ignorant attitude? You know one thing i can admit about Borg and Vile is that they have their sources together. They have REal answers that make you think, not a bunch of BS about aliens, blah blah. You know its funny you couldnt catch the joking tone i used when i said that. Get over your self-righteousness and make sense and maybe i wouldnt even respond to your idiotic posts. And dont EVER presume to tell me im acting smarter than I am. You dont know me or anything about me. You dont know the debates ive had here or anywhere else about this exact topic. So you take your STFU and shove down your throat!

Originally posted by philosophytara
Isn't that what your God had done? Manipulated life and material that is already there?

No. He created the universe out of nothing.

No. He created the universe out of nothing.


Do you know this? Was there ever "nothing"? I was under the impression that matter isn't created or destroyed, so does nothing even exist? I don't ever recall seeing "nothing". Only reason I'm asking is do you know for sure, for SURE there was nothing?

Or is that more like a belief there was once nothing...................................?

The universe is made of "nothing". Elementary subatomic particles are actually space itself warped into patterns.

The universe was once void, then It noticed that It existed (even though there was nothing to notice). Once the Universe said to Itself "I am", It was.

Ed, are you suggesting the universe made itself?

Originally posted by stark
Ed, are you suggesting the universe made itself?

The Void was/is always here. The world of objects was created at the instant that the Viod relized itself (which, I'm tellin ya, is VERY difficult to do if there is nothing to notice).

Once It realized It was here, the statement "I am" manifested the physical Universe (which is made of energy which is made of space). We are all an expression of the realization "I am". we are the ultimate expression because then we spend our whole lives singing, dancing, and painting that phrase everywhere.

Originally posted by stark
Ed, are you suggesting the universe made itself?

A more straightforward answer:

The same way your thoughts make mental/astral objects, God's thoughts make physical objects. God didn't stand apart from Creation and direct it, God became Creation as soon as It realized It existed.

Oh oh, pantheism and Christianity clash. Fundamental differences. It's hopeless. No one will accept that other's view. :rolleyes:

This is reality, there is truly no -ism or -anity. -ism and -anity are trying to describe the same reality.

Originally posted by creetwins
Do you know this? Was there ever "nothing"? I was under the impression that matter isn't created or destroyed, so does nothing even exist? I don't ever recall seeing "nothing". Only reason I'm asking is do you know for sure, for SURE there was nothing?

Or is that more like a belief there was once nothing...................................?

I bet there are a lot of things which exist, or which once existed, that you "don't ever recall seeing".

I do suppose you are right, though. There never was "nothing". There has always been God, so there has always been something.

Originally posted by Jwjames111
U sure your thirty? That was about the most childish answer ive heard in a long time. MY ignorant attitude? You know one thing i can admit about Borg and Vile is that they have their sources together. They have REal answers that make you think, not a bunch of BS about aliens, blah blah. You know its funny you couldnt catch the joking tone i used when i said that. Get over your self-righteousness and make sense and maybe i wouldnt even respond to your idiotic posts. And dont EVER presume to tell me im acting smarter than I am. You dont know me or anything about me. You dont know the debates ive had here or anywhere else about this exact topic. So you take your STFU and shove down your throat!


::tapps her foot to hear the evidence and research that you supposidly have done:: and BTW I was thinking the same thing about you... unfortunately you seem to have some pent up aggressions... didn't you notice my scarscim when I told you to STFU..... Well....

We've asked him countless times for the heaps of overwelming evidence that he supposidly has, and he has never obliged.

Originally posted by Jwjames111
And dont EVER presume to tell me im acting smarter than I am. So you take your STFU and shove down your throat!
I believe that sentences do not start with And, Also I believe you meant to say "Shove IT down your throat!"

::clapping her hands:: You are well on your way to being a future wife beater and abusive controlling man. At least I don't order you around by telling you what you can and cannot presume.

If you want to quit calling names and have an intelligent conversation on the topic, try searching some of his posts. He's posted a lot of this evidence before.

You should also search Stark's posts.

Originally posted by philosophytara
I believe that sentences do not start with And, Also I believe you meant to say "Shove IT down your throat!"

::clapping her hands:: You are well on your way to being a future wife beater and abusive controlling man. At least I don't order you around by telling you what you can and cannot presume.

But sadly, you result to sillyness such as grammar...tsk, tsk.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by philosophytara
::tapps her foot to hear the evidence and research that you supposidly have done:: and BTW I was thinking the same thing about you... unfortunately you seem to have some pent up aggressions... didn't you notice my scarscim when I told you to STFU..... Well.... Shall we play a game? If you want to go the old spelling/grammar nazi route, at least be correct in your own spelling or grammar, Einstein.

tapps = taps

supposidly = supposedly or supposably would work as well

scarscim = I have to take a wild ass guess on this one. I presume you meant "sarcasm"

After the word unfortunately, in your sentence above, you should have had a comma. Put a question mark after STFU. You started a sentence with the word "and" in the above paragraph.

This game is fun. Dont you agree?

This game is NOT fun, I was angry with James' last post and unfortunately I resulted in childish behaviour. You can be sure that wont happen again, at least on my part. I will not give you the satisfaction.

Have a wonderfull day playing with yourselves because I am no longer here for your amusement.

I agree with Uncoolduck we should be having intelligent conversations. Not resorting to childish tacticts.

Blib i cant believe you said that. Im really shocked that after all the info i have posted here and the countless hours i've spent researching my posts you could make such a statement. I really hurt about that. To Uncool, Jere, and Havok...Thanx. To philosophytara, Im sorry i got upset and called you names. But in reality you had no right to say what you said to me. Im sorry but the people I usually debate with dont presume to belittle people on a personal, which I feel you did. I hope you will accept my apologies and move past this. However, the childish answers did start with you and while i responded wrongly there is a way to talk to people which i hope you and I will work on. Once again, Im Sorry and from now on, lets give intelligent comment and intelligent debate.

wow...almost a week later and no replies...oh well, guess i killed them with niceness...

Do you know sometimes, i actually envy you religious folks, because at least with religion you have a certain amount of clarity and whilst we have been calling them nutjobs etc, those peoples religion has given their life purpose.

When I think "whats the point, im gonna kick it for another 50/60 years, die and rot" it doesnt exactly inspire me to go do amazing things, but when you guys think "Im going to work hard, enjoy my life and i know because of this, that It wont end there, I will go on and (either be reborn or..) go to heaven"

Ive just read Dop's story of his religious journey (http://users.oco.net/skunkcreekcrew/htdocs/tibet.html#1) which has made me almost jealous really, since his life was filled with so much purpose, diversity, discovery etc.

I wouldnt say im converting or anything, just that Im beginning to understand the desire for that.

Oh, that's deep, Loki. May be you will get it afterall. I am very happy for you.
Paul uses jealousy agains Jews. He preaches to Gentiles, so Jews would get jealous and believe in Christ too. I hope this will work for you too. I don't care what path you choose to come to Christ, as long as you do.

Yeh like i said somewhere else, that post is older than the newer ones and ive come to despise christianity now :) Christ/Jesus was called the Son of God, but lets face facts here they called loads of people the son of God.

Yeah, unfortunately that's true.
Hey, I invite everybody to look at:
www.existence-of-god.com

Originally posted by STOpandthink
Yeah, unfortunately that's true.
Hey, I invite everybody to look at:
www.existence-of-god.com
I skimmed through the site. Seems to make a helluva lot of assumptions, including telling me that my argument is absurd. The fact is, it's absolutely positively impossible to prove the existence of a higher being, first of all, without his/her/its/their consent. If God(s) doesn't want us to realize his/her/its/their existence, we won't until we die. Secondly, we don't know until we actually see the god(s). Therefore, we don't know about the existence of a god(s) until A) he/she/it/them gives us consent to see him/her/it/them, or B) we die. No amount of haughty philosophical arguments will change that. For the time being, belief in a higher power or absolute disbelief in a higher power is a matter of faith. Uncertainty is a matter of logic.

Originally posted by STOpandthink
Yeah, unfortunately that's true.
Hey, I invite everybody to look at:
www.existence-of-god.com

Interesting, and well written, but I do have a few problems with some of the conclusions drawn by the author, and some of his reasoning. This is the final section of the article/page you linked to.

The historical evidence surrounding Jesus’ crucifixion and the birth of the church, then, is perplexing. None of the naturalistic explanations of that evidence, it is argued, does justice to it; we are pushed towards a supernatural explanation, to the conclusion that Jesus really was raised from the dead and so really is Lord. At this point, it can be tempting to say that any naturalistic explanation, no matter how far-fetched, is better than this supernatural explanation. Sure, the odds of someone surviving crucifixion are tiny, but isn’t that explanation more likely to be true than the Christian alternative? Sure, it is almost impossible that the disciples simultaneously hallucinated a risen Jesus, but isn’t it more likely than that they saw the real thing?

If we rule out the possibility of miracles from the beginning, then of course the answer to these questions will be Yes. If we assume from the outset that miracles cannot happen, that God does not exist, that Christianity is false, then of course any other explanation of the historical evidence will be preferable to that offered by Christianity. To make these assumptions, though, is simple prejudice. There is a genuine historical puzzle here, and each of us must look for an explanation that we find genuinely satisfying. For my part, none of the naturalistic explanations satisfies me. I find it much more plausible to set aside my prejudice against miracles, and think that God raised Jesus from the dead, than to believe any of the alternatives outlined here.

The author repeatedly refers to historical evidence, using phrases like "The historical evidence surrounding Jesus’ crucifixion" and "...any other explanation of the historical evidence will be preferable to that offered by Christianity", but he never actually mentions what that "evidence" is. As far as I know, there is no extra-biblical evidence that Jesus even existed, much less that he was crucified and subsequently ressurrected. If anyone has any to offer, I'm all eyes.

The rest of his argument, indeed the entirety of it, is predicated on the existence, and accuracy, of this "evidence". The writer then makes the leap that takes the discussion from the historical, to the supernatural. This is accomplished by straying from the path of logic, and ignoring the scientific method. He writes:

None of the naturalistic explanations of that evidence, it is argued, does justice to it; we are pushed towards a supernatural explanation...

That's where he lost me. There is absolutely no validity to that leap of illogic.

His reasoning is as follows:

A: There is evidence that Jesus was crucified, and subsequently rose from the dead. (forget for the moment that he doesn't provide the "evidence")

B. We can't find a natural explanation for this occurence.

C. Ergo, there must be a supernatural explanation.

That's just faulty logic.

Try this one.

A. We have historical evidence that leprechauns exist, and bury their pots 'o gold at the ends of rainbows. (forget for the moment that I don't provide any, allthough I could :))

B. Despite dogged investigation, and multiple excavations at the ends of rainbows, science has been unable to verify the existence of leprechauns.

C. Therefore, we must conclude that leprechauns are supernatural creatures.

We don't however conclude that leprechauns are supernatural creatures. We conclude that it's time to re-examine our "evidence", and thus, our underlying premise that leprechauns exist. This critical step is something the author of your article doesn't mention. He goes right from "we don't have an answer", to "it must be God". Not very logical, or credible.

The writer strays into the realm of outright falsehood when he makes this statement:

If we assume from the outset that miracles cannot happen, that God does not exist, that Christianity is false, then of course any other explanation of the historical evidence will be preferable to that offered by Christianity. To make these assumptions, though, is simple prejudice.

The author makes it clear here, and explicitly states in another part of the article, that he "prefers" the Christian explanation, even as he's accusing those who disagree of prejudice.

I am no more unwilling to believe the story of Christ's ressurrection, than I am unwilling to believe in leprechauns. I just need some real evidence before I'll believe in either. Where's the prejudice?

BorgHunter:For the time being, belief in a higher power or absolute disbelief in a higher power is a matter of faith. Uncertainty is a matter of logic.
You are absolutely right. I have faith. I believe.
But you are wrong in the sense that we can't "find" the higher being. Obviously we can't unless God lets us, but we can look at all the evidence and come up with a reasonable conclusion. Sadly, no one argument is conclusive, although some are very persuasive.
Vilepagan:
As far as I know, there is no extra-biblical evidence that Jesus even existed,
There were some actual evidence found that a man named Jesus existed around 30AD. His name was found in some diaries and other writing documents. I am not aware that any of them actually say that he was He.
That's just faulty logic.
I agree that the site and the author aren't perfect. As I said many times before, we can't prove anything. Any logic that we will try to create will be faulty somewhere.
I just wanted to share the site with you guys. I think some of the arguments for God's existence are pretty interesting.

I have no argument with believers saying "I have faith" or interpreting personal anecdote as in some way divine. (well I do, but that would be another thread, he he).

But when people argue philosophically, logically or emperically for god's existance it sounds silly.

You cannot attempt to rationalise faith in a thing on the basis that it cannot be proved to not exist. Yes - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But one would not use this 'logic' to try and argue rationallistically for the existance of, say, a tribe of heat-resistant flying unicorns in the centre of the sun on the basis that it has not been proven otherwise.

Is god less silly than my made up unicorns? No. Indeed god is much much sillier.

I tried to find out about this magic person desperately in need of my love despite his alleged perfection by taking 3 on line bible lessons. What do I learn? God walks without feet or gait in a garden. He has no lips but talks to himself sometimes as “I” other times as “We”. He is three as well as one. He is called Holy Spirit, an intangible compound name which is, like ‘god’, no more than an arbitrary series of letters.

God would seem to be incoherent wisp of nothingness. There is not the slightest trace of god left over to disprove.

Blob, nobody believes in those unicorns, but many people believe in God. In fact many many people accept some form of God. I think you are in minority here.
Also, logic is not completely useless when talking about God. I think we can use logic and empirical evidence.
I feel sorry for you, Blob. You made an attempt and apparently the lesson didn't explain God well enough or clear enough. If you have any specific questions, I will be glad to answer them.

Originally posted by STOpandthink
Blob, nobody believes in those unicorns, but many people believe in God. In fact many many people accept some form of God. I think you are in minority here.
I agree. But popular does not make true. The vast majority used to believe the sun goes round the earth but that did not make it so.

Also, logic is not completely useless when talking about God. I think we can use logic and empirical evidence.
Oh poor little believers! Why is it you understand god so less well than us atheists!? Don't you know that if god exists, and he may well for all I know, then he is above our pathetic human logic, above our reason? God is not confined to rules and limits for goodness sake. He created logic and can change the rules or take just take logic away. He is GOD! He is above our petty understanding.

However, the consequences of this would be grave indeed. Logic relates to the most basic of things such as identity and existence and, conversely, contradiction. If there is a god then he can do anything he wants - he can make 2 plus 2 equals 5 should it please him; he can make us have both free-will and not free-will; he can make a thing be and also not be (including himself!). What an absurd and chaotic universe we live in if god exists.

This is why believers are welcome to say "I have faith" but not to attempt to rationalise faith using the laws of logic.

I agree. But popular does not make true. The vast majority used to believe the sun goes round the earth but that did not make it so.
I absolutely agree. Never follow something because a majority does. Please, by all means, be an individual. (I am not being sarcastic.)
God is not confined to rules and limits for goodness sake. He created logic and can change the rules or take just take logic away. He is GOD! He is above our petty understanding.
I am very glad you understand that, not many people do. Yet, I think God made it possible for us to talk about Him on some level. After all, we were made in His image, so there is something in us that we can use to find out about Him.
he can make 2 plus 2 equals 5 should it please him; he can make us have both free-will and not free-will; he can make a thing be and also not be (including himself!). What an absurd and chaotic universe we live in if god exists.
Indeed He can. I use this argument only against the "stone" question. (Can God create a stone so heavy...?) I do not believe God breaks any logical rules for our sakes. Scientific, yes, but logical...no. I don't think God really wants us to become confused and messed up.
Faith is hard to explain using logic, because, honestly, it doesn't have a reason one can clearly put into words. Why do I believe? Because I know that I am right. See, that makes no sense, yet there is something in me, which compells me and draws me closer to God. (no I am not a psychopath).

Nice post SPOt.

"Can god create a stone so heavy he cannot lift it?"

Self-confessed hardline atheist though I am I would never use this line of argumentation. Anyone who does is demonstrating they do not appreciate who god is, whether they chose to believe in him or not.

You called me SPOt again. :)
I am glad that you realize the foolishness of the "stone" argument. You are one step ahead of many.

Originally posted by Blob
Yes - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Not entirely true...

There is a principle of logic called The Negative Evidence Principle.

It's stated succinctly as follows:
"A person is justified in believeing that p is false if (1) all the available evidence used to support the view that p is true is shown to be inadequate and (2) p is the sort of claim such that if p were true, there should be available evidence that would be adequate to support the view that p is true and (3) the area where evidence would appear if there were any, has been comprehensively examined" (Scriven, 1966)

Note that I posted this to address Blob's statement, not the question of whether or not God exists.

Originally posted by STOpandthink
You called me SPOt again. :)
I can explain! Recently I spent some time debating with an adventist called spot in a chatroom. The sequence S-P-O-T is kind of programmed into my fingers at the moment. :@@:

Interesting post VP. I must confess my logic is not what it should be for the good little orthodox atheist that I strive to be.

I think point 2 in the argument shows that "absence of evidence" for the bimp* is indeed "evidence of absence".

Thank you - I'll remember that.


Of course there is also plenty of evidence that thoroughly counters the possibility of a caring bimp. Let's face it: the slightest whiff of contradiction in the bible (http://www.infidelguy.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=5490) ; the faintest hint of suffering in the lowliest of microscopic life-forms; the smallest trace of doubt of the bimp's existance in a single human mind - all are devastating and absolute refutations of the possibility of an all-powerful, all-loving creator.

* big invisible magic person

Nice reference Blob, I havent managed to get through all of it however this made me chuckle

(1) "And God made the beast of the earth" (Gen. 1:25) and "So God created man in his own image" (Gen. 1:27) versus "God formed man of the dust of the ground" (Gen. 2:7) and "God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam"(Gen. 2:19). According to the 1st account man was created after the beasts. According to the 2nd he was created before them. In the latter instance, he had to have been created before the other beasts; otherwise, how could they have been brought to him.

Yeah, it's a great resource Loki.

Armed with Rook Hawkins's work, as well as the skeptic's annotated (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/) (which I'm sure you know already), I can, at times, successful refute theists despite knowing virtually nothing about the bible myself!


I believe an evil laugh is in order.

Mwahahahaha. :D

Originally posted by Vilepagan

There is a principle of logic called The Negative Evidence Principle.

It's stated succinctly as follows:

There is a principle of logic called The Negative Evidence Principle.

It's stated succinctly as follows:

quote: "A person is justified in believeing that p is false if (1) all the available evidence used to support the view that p is true is shown to be inadequate and (2) p is the sort of claim such that if p were true, there should be available evidence that would be adequate to support the view that p is true and (3) the area where evidence would appear if there were any, has been comprehensively examined" (Scriven, 1966)

Insert the word *God* for variable 'p' in the above equation, and it quickly becomes evident that this principle perfectly fits the religionist's irrational claims of some invisible omnipotent being who "created" the universe.

___________________________________

"So long as the priest, that professional denier, calumniator and poisoner of life, is accepted as a higher variety of man, there can be no answer to the question, 'What is truth'? Truth has already been stood on its head when the obvious attorney of mere emptiness is mistaken for its representative."

Originally posted by Freethinker
Insert the word *God* for variable 'p' in the above equation, and it quickly becomes evident that this principle perfectly fits the religionist's irrational claims of some invisible omnipotent being who "created" the universe.

Well observed.

See this proves my point. You believed you could become healed, were it Jesus, the Aliens, or mad scientists that crept into your bedroom while you slept. I believe the mind and sheer force of will can and will allow anyone to overcome disabilities. I know you are going to say this is far fetched, and many have said that before as well. Look at evolution... Opps sorry... that's another debate, but my point is... we didn't have space flight 50 years ago, if someone in the 1920's told you that he was going to take a ship out of the atmosphere and land on the Moon you would have said... "Oh Hell NO! Are you off your Meds?" Yet... here we are even now studying Gamma Ray bursts that produce as much energy in a second as the sun does in a billion years. But yet... you are willing to believe in a supernatural being you have labeled God. Has your God evolved? Or Become more then he was? NO.... to quote the bible "God is, ever was and always shall be" Well... hmmmph.. it seems that Humans as a race have performed more epic feats then God has. So it is logical for me to assume that one day we will be like Gods, or extreamly evolved, so to a lesser developed species we might even become their God.

__________________
I was against Clinton's impeachment. What a man does with his penis is not for the American people to say. "John Ritter"

I am just curious now. I was reading your post and you made it sound like man, has done greater things then GOD? If I am correct to assume this is indeed what you meant then could you please give me an example of something greater then crating the Heavens and Earth. I am sure that you will not find anything but go ahead and do some research for me .. thanks

oops i cant figure out how to get that quote thing down, but you know the top part is so not mine mine would be the ??????? at the bottom

Originally posted by majormax
oops i cant figure out how to get that quote thing down, but you know the top part is so not mine mine would be the ??????? at the bottom
Sentences (and, by association, periods) are your friends...I can't figure out what on Earth you're trying to say...something about quotes and what belongs to you or something to that effect...

majormax
Has your God evolved? Or Become more then he was?...So it is logical for me to assume that one day we will be like Gods,...
My hands are just shaking in unbelief. Did you just say that???? Wow, you need some help.
Let me break it down for you:
God knows everything. God is, essentially, everything. God can do anything.
Do you think we will even get close to that state??? Do you think God has any need to evolve, since He is already Perfect and Complete. We evolve because we are weak little creatures, flawed and incomplete. God, on the other hand, is...well...God.

Blob:
Let's face it: the slightest whiff of contradiction in the bible ; the faintest hint of suffering in the lowliest of microscopic life-forms; the smallest trace of doubt of the bimp's existance in a single human mind - all are devastating and absolute refutations of the possibility of an all-powerful, all-loving creator.
All of your "contradictions" can be easily addressed. If you want to bring any specific one out for me to answer, I will be glad too.
Also, the one Loki brought up is a simple misconception: Bible is a book and the order of words in it does not dictate the order of event. If you read it carefully and thoroughly, you will find that it often makes jumps back and forward in time. Just think about it. The Bible says that "God formed the man" at least twice. Does that mean that God created man twice? No. It's a book, read it like one. Sure it follows a general chronological order, but not p.o.i.n.t. b.y. p.o.i.n.t. That would be dull.

Your a muppet, but then that was clear from the offset.

The contradiction relates to the order in which he made the animals in comparison to Man, Not in how many times it mentions he created man.

(1) "And God made the beast of the earth" (Gen. 1:25) and "So God created man in his own image" (Gen. 1:27) versus "God formed man of the dust of the ground" (Gen. 2:7) and "God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam"(Gen. 2:19). According to the 1st account man was created after the beasts. According to the 2nd he was created before them. In the latter instance, he had to have been created before the other beasts; otherwise, how could they have been brought to him.
Well, Loki, let me make it more clear to you. (Now I know how you felt Paul)
God created beasts.
God create man.
Now we have:
"God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam"
Let's take it part by part:
"God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air"
True? Yes. We have already established that God created the beasts before. This just restates it again.
"and brought them unto Adam"
True? Yes. Adam was already made. Now the Bible goes on to clarify that the beasts were made for Adam. They were also brought to him, so he could name them.
The terms here are: repetition and restatement. That is what Bible does, it repeats what it said before and it restates it, so people will hopefully understand it.

1) "And God made the beast of the earth" (Gen. 1:25) and "So God created man in his own image" (Gen. 1:27) versus "God formed man of the dust of the ground" (Gen. 2:7) and "God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam"(Gen. 2:19). According to the 1st account man was created after the beasts. According to the 2nd he was created before them. In the latter instance, he had to have been created before the other beasts; otherwise, how could they have been brought to him

http://www.infidelguy.com

I am sorry, what is that? Did you miss my post or something?

It contradicts and dissproves your statement previous to mine

No it doesn't. Actually my post explains it. I don't see why you can't understand it.

Ok then, Everyone else who has read this, does my quoted point about the contradiction between the fact that the animals coming first dissprove StopandThinks statement?

Its clear they did, but once again your lying to yourself to keep this false Faith