Questions for God

[Dimi95]

Isn't it interesting that it is skeptics who reason, and the religious rely on faith?

Do you need a reason to have faith in your partner?

I'm not convinced. You recite typical Christian dogma, and that doesn't come from learning facts, but from being exposed to that kind of dogma without adequate skepticism and questioning.

So adequate skepticism and "questioning" is the standard? Nothing Else?

Do you think Hindus and Muslims are following a true path, or indoctrinated into a common religious framework in their countries?

Very few people know that Catholicism created Islam.
Care to know something more?

Who told ou a God exists, and can be found in our religious framework? There are no facts. Theyre is no reasoned conclusion thyat leds tyo what you and other Christians believe.

You don't need facts and conclusions to prove that God exists , you only need faith and love.

Galatians 5
"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love."

So the fragmentation of Christianity is planned? The crimes committed by Christian institutions is planned? The Holocaust was planned?

The reason given is because man is in the Image of God.

Man, like God, is a being who can make choices. Unlike the rest of the physical creation, man is not a creature of instinct, reacting according to patterns, but one who must analyze and choose to do the right as stipulated by law.

If Hitler was a Christian he would notice this in the Bible

Matthew 5
"You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment."

James 1
"Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says."

Matthew 7
"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven"

How can you say "planned" , when you are given a choice ? To belive,or to belive not.

Most people don't know what is "to belive".
Classical Protestantism mistakes ,
misinterpreted words..

Unless you admit thaty religious texts are products of ancient peoples, and their beliefs have carried on as traditions of belief, you can't assume these texts represent truth as a premise.

I agree on what is noted , since i come from Orthodoxy.

I would care to discuss the beliefs of the ancient people , but we have to go through evidence in History.

I assume that you already know them and you are not comfortable in that area.

 

[InChrist]

I never took Christianity seriously, see how easy it is?

Who told you this? I was told similar things as a child. I hyad natural skepticism and asked questions.

Terrible self-serving thinking. What I wonder is why children develop cancer or defects if a God exists. i had asthma very bad as a kid and I asked God "why me?" Eventually it made more sense that the Christian God wasn't true and humans aren't special, just other animals in nature.

I’m sorry you suffered with bad asthma as a child. My brother did, too. I have two close friends who also did and still deal with asthma as adults, but they don’t blame God or disregard God because of it. I’ve already said I understand that bad things happen, like childhood cancer, because this is a fallen world reaping the consequences and impact of sin everywhere and upon everyone in various ways. No one is immune. According to the scriptures, all of creation is groaning (metaphorically) and waiting for redemption and deliverance from the present conditions. You are looking at the temporal state/world as if that is all there is. The scriptures indicate that God has a greater perspective and eternal plan to call people out of this damaged world into a new heaven and earth where there will be no sin and never be pain, suffering, or children with cancer.

 

[dybmh]

No, if the proposition is false, God may have a means of knowing [he] doesn't know [he] doesn't know X, but that doesn't satisfy the requirement that there be NOTHING [he] doesn't know [he] doesn't know.

If the contrapositive is false then the assertion is true. That's simple logic blu. When the contrapositive is false it doesn't leave any middle option. There are no counter examples. If there were then the contrapositive wouldn't be false. That's how logic works

Because there is absolutely nothing outside of God's knowledge then God knows there is nothing outside of its knowledge. It's that simple.

Since the contrapositive is false, the way to undermine the proof via contradiction is to bring a valid counter example. That shows the contrapositive was never actually false on the first place. ( But that's never going to happen. I have this buttoned up tight. )

Can you bring an example, any example, of something God doesn't know? If not, then God knows all, and God knows that there is absolutely nothing missing.

 

[Bthoth]

If the contrapositive is false then the assertion is true. That's simple logic blu. When the contrapositive is false it doesn't leave any middle option. There are no counter examples. If there were then the contrapositive wouldn't be false. That's how logic works

The nasty, end up extinct..... Clear enough?

Because there is absolutely nothing outside of God's knowledge then God knows there is nothing outside of its knowledge. It's that simple.

I agree... what is good is judged by the actions, not the religion.

Since the contrapositive is false, the way to undermine the proof via contradiction is to bring a valid counter example.

Sure, evil is as evil does.

That shows the contrapositive was never actually false on the first place. ( But that's never going to happen. I have this buttoned up tight. )

Sure...... with a bias of self being superior or authority

Can you bring an example, any example, of something God doesn't know?

The question is what does god know, not what people think.

If not, then God knows all, and God knows that there is absolutely nothing missing.

I agree as justice will prevail over beliefs.

 

[blü 2]

If the contrapositive is false then the assertion is true.

Only if it's a true contrapositive ─ which as I pointed out, it's not, since it allows things to remain in the category of things God doesn't know [he] doesn't know.

Because there is absolutely nothing outside of God's knowledge then God knows there is nothing outside of its knowledge. It's that simple.

Mere assertion, the very opposite of demonstration, which is what I'm asking for.

Can you bring an example, any example, of something God doesn't know? If not, then God knows all, and God knows that there is absolutely nothing missing.

It's not my job to give examples, even if I knew any.

It's for the supporters of the claimed-to-be omniscient God to validate that part of their claim.

 

[F1fan]

Do you need a reason to have faith in your partner?

That is a different definition of faith. Religious faith is unjustified belief.

So adequate skepticism and "questioning" is the standard? Nothing Else?

If you want correct conclusions to questions standards are crucial.

Very few people know that Catholicism created Islam.

Very few, like yourself and your mom.

Care to know something more?

Is it more of our incorrect statements?

You don't need facts and conclusions to prove that God exists , you only need faith and love.

Faith and love don't prove God exists. Nor do facts.

Galatians 5
"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love."


The reason given is because man is in the Image of God.

Man, like God, is a being who can make choices. Unlike the rest of the physical creation, man is not a creature of instinct, reacting according to patterns, but one who must analyze and choose to do the right as stipulated by law.

If Hitler was a Christian he would notice this in the Bible

Matthew 5
"You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment."

James 1
"Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says."

Matthew 7
"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven"

The Bible isn't relaible nor factual, so irrelevant.

How can you say "planned" , when you are given a choice ? To belive,or to belive not.

When you say we are "given" a choice it suggests there is only one option. And guess what, you can't demonstrate it's true.

Most people don't know what is "to belive".

Theists can't answer why they believe in ideas that not only lack evidence, but are also inconsistent with reality.

Classical Protestantism mistakes ,
misinterpreted words..

A lot of that in religion.

I agree on what is noted , since i come from Orthodoxy.

What makes orthodoxy valid? Your personal opinion? Notice hour belief doesn't stop any other form of Christianity. It is anthing goes.

I would care to discuss the beliefs of the ancient people , but we have to go through evidence in History.

Does it matter when there is no factual reason to believe that any gods exist? At best you will track the evolution and divisions of Christianity, and how it's sects disagree.

I assume that you already know them and you are not comfortable in that area.

Them? Ancient people? Do you claim to know ancient people? How old are you?

 

[dybmh]

It allows things to remain in the category of things God doesn't know [he] doesn't know.

It does not all any thing to remain in that category. There are no things in the category of things God doesn't know. That's the point of the scripture verses you seem to have ignored.

It's really simple. All you needed to do, is bring a valid counter example, any valid counter example.

Since you cannot name one thing that is in the category of things that God doesn't know, then my proof stands. There is nothing outsidee of God's knowledge. God would know this. I explained it multiple times, in multiple ways. I brought scripture to support it.

Mere assertion, the very opposite of demonstration, which is what I'm asking for.

No, you did not ask for demonstration. I stopped watching the thread because you cannot pick a question and stick to the topic.

This is typical. Atheists ask questions, then once the questtion gets answered, they shift the goal posts... "but, but, there's no evidence..."

You never asked for demonstration.

It's not my job to give examples, even if I knew any.

Then we're done. You now know how. It's because nothing is excluded from God's knowledge. And God knows this. Since you cannot bring a counter example, that proves I'm correct.

You have been given the verses in the bible which define God in a manner which there can not be anything beyond it's knowledge. It possesses all knowledge and would absoutely know if any knowledge were lacking. If you cannot bring any counter examples, then you have the answer to your question. How does God know that there is not anything lacking from its knowledge? Because there is absolutley nothing lacking from its knowledge per the bible.

I gave you the information, but you refuse to read it? I gave you the verses, but, you refuse to read them? Then you will never get an answer to your questions about the God of the bible.

I'm putting you on ignore now. I have better things to do.

 

[Dimi95]

That is a different definition of faith. Religious faith is unjustified belief.

Both of them are spiritual.
How are they different?

If you want correct conclusions to questions standards are crucial.

Who dictates the standards?

Very few, like yourself and your mom.

I will see her on Christimas and ask her , maybe she knows also.

Apart from my mom , yes not many are familiar with that conclusion.

Is it more of our incorrect statements?

Since you dont care to know , its irrelevant

Faith and love don't prove God exists. Nor do facts.

Who dictates the standards to prove the existence of God ?
And how is that reliable ?

The Bible isn't relaible nor factual, so irrelevant.

I can assume that you are not comfortable to talk about evidence in History

When you say we are "given" a choice it suggests there is only one option. And guess what, you can't demonstrate it's true.

Why do you assume what i can and can't? Do you know me ? Or do you judge the book by its cover?

Theists can't answer why they believe in ideas that not only lack evidence, but are also inconsistent with reality.

Does evidence in History counts in your standards?

A lot of that in religion.

Sure , as long as you accept that is individual interpretation.

What makes orthodoxy valid? Your personal opinion? Notice hour belief doesn't stop any other form of Christianity. It is anthing goes.

What do you know about Orthodoxy?

Does it matter when there is no factual reason to believe that any gods exist? At best you will track the evolution and divisions of Christianity, and how it's sects disagree.

So you won't even give a chance to that kind of evidence?

Them? Ancient people? Do you claim to know ancient people? How old are you?

I meant evidence in History.

I am sorry if you misunderstood me , English is not my first language.

One question more , have you ever studied the ressurection?

 

[blü 2]

There are no things in the category of things God doesn't know.

No, the question is straightforward and you haven't given a coherent answer to it: HOW does God know there's nothing [he] doesn't know [he] doesn't know?

And you haven't answered it.

That's the point of the scripture verses you seem to have ignored.

I'm only interested in scripture if it explains HOW God knows there's nothing [he] doesn't know [he] doesn't know. But scripture contains merely assertion,

It's really simple. All you needed to do, is bring a valid counter example, any valid counter example.

I don't need to do anything except point out what you haven't done,

 

[1213]

My problem is why the God had to do it the first time. Is this supposed to be the best a God can do? And it fixed nothing. This is why I can't take these stories literally, or useful.

The goal was to kill the evil people at that time. I think it was successful, they don't live anymore. And I think God wanted to do it, because He don't want evil to continue forever.

... The more conservative the Christian, the less like Jesus they tend to be.

Why call them conservatives, if they have been progressive and rejected Jesus?

If you don't understand Hinduism why dismiss it? You assume supernatural forces, so why not cows having some influence?

I don't say cows have no influence. They have influence. It is just not enough for me to keep them as my God. I have higher standard for what I am willing to keep as my God.

 

[1213]

(You'll be aware that was no such Roman practice as letting a prisoner free at Passover, ...)

Why should I believe that?

...Only in Matthew and Luke do we get the 'virgin birth' shtick, not credible in itself since

Ok, I understand that you think God can't cause Mary to become pregnant.

and (so that Jesus can be a messiah descended from David) supported by two incompatible and obviously fake genealogies which anyway are expressly for Joseph, who even more expressly is NOT Jesus' father here.

I think the genealogies are not really the same thing. Matthews speaks of book of generations, which is not necessary the same as a genealogy of a person and not the same thing as what Luke is talking about.

 

[blü 2]

Why should I believe that?

Because, bible tales aside, you've never seen evidence that there ever was such a practice?

But don't take my word for it. Do some genuine historical research on the matter and satisfy yourself one way or another.

Ok, I understand that you think God can't cause Mary to become pregnant.

And as I said, in the first gospel, Mark, Jesus is simply another male member of the Jewish faith in Galilee, until God adopts him. And neither Paul (unsurprisingly, considering he doesn't give a dang about the earthly biography of Jesus but for a handful of key points) nor the author of John

There's a credible hypothesis that the error in Matthew arises because the word for 'young woman' in Isaiah 7:14 was translated into the Septuagint as 'virgin' instead of 'young woman', and that the author of Matthew, totally disregarding what Isaiah 7:14-15 actually say (that the conception occurred and the son was born within those chapters) decided that Jesus had to be born of a virgin because scripture said so. Of course, the unknown author of Matthew may have got that version of the story from his particular Christian group. A version is repeated by the author of Luke.

I think the genealogies are not really the same thing. Matthews speaks of book of generations, which is not necessary the same as a genealogy of a person and not the same thing as what Luke is talking about.

The only reason that I can see for including genealogies at all is to make Jesus a descendant of David and thus be messiahable. Same for Paul, same for the authors of Luke and of John. But of course in the original, the gospel of Mark, Jesus says, 'Don't be silly, of course you don't have to be descended from David.' (Mark 12:35-37).

And the genealogies in Matthew and Luke are not only not credible, but ridiculous since they claim Joseph, specifically NOT Jesus' father, was descended from David. So for those two Jesuses, I guess you'd have to hope God was descended from David, though I can see difficulties with that view.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You don't need facts and conclusions to prove that God exists , you only need faith and love.

It's through faith that one can also "prove" that gods don't exist. It's exactly the same argument (none) but with an opposite conclusion. That's the beauty of faith. It allows one to believe anything, it's opposite, or both at once.

Wiser and more eloquent people than me, from a variety of faith traditions, have described their spiritual experiences and pointed the way to enlightenment. Examples are not hard to find, but no one else can walk the path for you.
“It is in your power, my friend,
to gaze constantly at the Beloved’s face.
Make a way to the core of yourself
and banish all other impressions.” - Jalalludin Rumi

Your example did neither of the things you just referred to. It's just more empty, unevidenced words.

"He who is pure consciousness, from which all form emerges, manifest and transcendent" should just about cover it imo.

And more. This is what faith generates: anything it wants.

I’m sorry you suffered with bad asthma as a child. My brother did, too. I have two close friends who also did and still deal with asthma as adults, but they don’t blame God or disregard God because of it.

Why not? When you add up all of the ways that this god fails to intervene constructively in one's life, it doesn't matter if it exists or not.

I understand that bad things happen, like childhood cancer, because this is a fallen world reaping the consequences and impact of sin everywhere and upon everyone in various ways. No one is immune.

And no more of these things happen to those with no gods, so why even think about them?

I don't say cows have no influence. They have influence. It is just not enough for me to keep them as my God. I have higher standard for what I am willing to keep as my God.

Do you? How does the god you believe in have more impact on your life than cows? How does thatgod have more impact on your life that it does on this atheist's life?

 

[Muffled]

Right. So the perfect god made an error in his design.

Perhaps you could provide verse numbers for this revelation

Is it an error or is it the way things are supposed to be? Perhaps in the darkness the light shines brighter.

 

[Muffled]

If God exists he is what he is, not what we perceive him to be.
He will not change according to each individual he will remain what he is.
What he is cannot be known, so it's a waste of time trying to understand.

I believe we can't know the whole but we know in part. We don't have omniscience but we know some things, we don't have omnipresence but we do recognize out limited presence, we don't have omnipotence but we can get some things done.

 

[ChristineM]

Is it an error or is it the way things are supposed to be? Perhaps in the darkness the light shines brighter.

If i believed in an omni everything god I'd say it was an error. Others are free to believe whatever they want.

Actually no, the lights measures the same intensity. It just looks brighter because there is no other light to subtract from it's brilliance

 

[F1fan]

Both of them are spiritual.
How are they different?

Religious faith is unjustified belief, meaning belief that has no factual or reasonable basis. To have faith in a partner or process is synonymous with trust.

Who dictates the standards?

The ancient Greeks created logic, and these have become the formal standard for reasoning in law, debate, science, and basic critical thinking. Logic and critical thinking is not useful, nor used by theists.

I will see her on Christimas and ask her , maybe she knows also.

Apart from my mom , yes not many are familiar with that conclusion.

Still no explanation to support your claim that Catholicism created Islam.

Since you dont care to know , its irrelevant

Still no effort to support our claims, so why should anyone take ou seriously?

Who dictates the standards to prove the existence of God ?
And how is that reliable ?

Of the many diverse God claims none I have seen has been able to prove any exist. The question is why believers keep thinking their Gods exist when there is no factual basis for their judgment. It's notable that believers tend to adopt the version of God the are exposed to socially.

I can assume that you are not comfortable to talk about evidence in History

You haven't even tried to talk about history, so how would you know?

Why do you assume what i can and can't? Do you know me ? Or do you judge the book by its cover?

Because of the thousands of believers I have encountered since 1996 none have ever been able to offer evdience that an God exists. Are you really the first? Not according to your posts so far. Just more handwaving.

Does evidence in History counts in your standards?

History doesn't include what theists believe. For example the stories in the Old Testament are not history. How humans behave while believing Bible stories IS history, and a lot of it is bad.

Sure , as long as you accept that is individual interpretation.

Individual interpretation is why Christianity is fragmented.

What do you know about Orthodoxy?

Whatever is availble in resources online. They bottom line is that it is no more reliable or legitimate than an other version of Christianity. I say that since the authority of any sect in Christianity is derived by the group itself, and is irrelevant to the other groups.

So you won't even give a chance to that kind of evidence?

Where is it? Look at your posts so far, no evidence at all despite many fantstic claims. So you're not even serious about arguing your claims.

I meant evidence in History.

I am sorry if you misunderstood me , English is not my first language.

That's OK. You're doing fine. I would suggest iyou learn about evidence for claims. That you believe something is true is irrelevant if you can't support it with evidence.

One question more , have you ever studied the ressurection?

Absolutely. There is no reason to accept the story as true. The whole Jesus myth is absurd, and likely derived from Egyptian lore.

 

[F1fan]

The goal was to kill the evil people at that time.

So what of the babies and children, along with animals? Just collateral damage because God couldn't figure out a moral way to only target the bad guys?

I think it was successful, they don't live anymore. And I think God wanted to do it, because He don't want evil to continue forever.

Yet evil prevailed, so a lot of death and no solution. Sounds like an incompetent God.

Why call them conservatives, if they have been progressive and rejected Jesus?

Because that is the label attached to more rigid believers, and it is astounding they think they follow Jesus when their actions reveal they don't.

I don't say cows have no influence. They have influence. It is just not enough for me to keep them as my God.

Have it your waÿ, that is how believers behave: they believe what they want regardless of evidence or reason.

I have higher standard for what I am willing to keep as my God.

Certainly it isn't concern about killing babies and children for a failed goal, so what is it? Take your time, and use as many words as necessary to convince skilled thinkers.

 

[InChrist]

Why not? When you add up all of the ways that this god fails to intervene constructively in one's life, it doesn't matter if it exists or not.

And no more of these things happen to those with no gods, so why even think about them?

So you assume God is failing or must not exist because He doesn’t accommodate your expectations or intervene into human life the way you think He should. Don’t you think there is the slightest possibility that as a finite being you may have a very limited perspective and understanding compared to an infinite Creator God, who may very well have valid, eternal reasons for doing things according to His wisdom, as opposed to your short-sighted ideas?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

So you assume God is failing or must not exist because He doesn’t accommodate your expectations or intervene into human life the way you think He should. Don’t you think there is the slightest possibility that as a finite being you may have a very limited perspective and understanding compared to an infinite Creator God, who may very well have valid, eternal reasons for doing things according to His wisdom, as opposed to your short-sighted ideas?

I don't expect anything from gods. Nor do I expect them to be wise on my behalf. They would have their own interests, but don't seem to care about our world.

Also, my ideas are not short-sighted from my perspective. They're what matter to me. Finite beings would have different interest from gods, wouldn't they? Whatever might occupy their minds would be of little interest to those unaffected by whatever that is. Why should anybody care about the reasons such a god has for doing whatever it does if it's not doing them for him or those he cares about?

I simply have no use for this god concept and no reason to think about gods beyond discussions like these.