There is more then enough evidence to prove God exists.

[starlite]

After considering the comments on God being a murderer I find it necessary to present another view. God's expression of his disapproval is always justified, being based on the principle of his right to exclusive devotion and his consistency in upholding truth; it is governed by his love for righteousness and for those practicing righteousness. Divine judgment does not stem from a momentary whim, that is later regretted. Jehovah sees all the issues involved in a situation and has complete, entire knowledge of the matter. He reads the heart; he notes the degree of ignorance, negligence, or willful sin; and he always acts with impartiality.This is a condensed view of divine justice.

 

[Serenity7855]

Glad we agree.



You will also be surprised to hear then that God made the earth in six periods of time. It was not a 24 hour day.

Yes, God has limits. He always has been portrayed as a God with constraints. One such constraint is that he cannot sin. As soon as he sins he would become like Adam and Eve, a fallen God.



That is probably because you belonged to a main stream religion that does not preach the whole truth.



Yes, the entire story of the fall of mankind.



I have no reason to believe that there is anymore then one God but I do not see the relevance of the question.

Wow. My poor friend, you appear to have gone off on yet another unrelated tangent.

You said that my belief did not relate to Christian theology. I was demonstrating that it does.

 

[Bunyip]

You said that my belief did not relate to Christian theology. I was demonstrating that it does.

I was referring to your previous comment, what you responded with was an entirely different subject.
But no worries mate. It was your belief that god would cease to exist if he murdered anyone that I said had no relation to Christian theology - you do have great difficulty in recalling the point in hand from post to post so I will leave it there.

 

[Blackdog22]

If nothing else I am consistent in my beliefs. If you look at my arguments with outhouse you will see that he tried to trap me on what I believe the flood was. For the most part I said that I did not know, it either happened or it was allergenic. I then said that if it happened then it would be a supernatural event as there is no archaeological evidence that there had been a flood at tat time. So, I did not say it was nature taking care of business because I know that nature was not involved. So I did not say that God cannot stop water, you did, what I said was that when people become that wicked then the consequences are predetermined and good is helpless in stopping those consequences. You are not reading for comprehension.

Outhouse has done no such thing. You yourself said that God was helpless to stop the consequences as I have outlined in red. The consequences of which was water. If water is the consequence and God can't stop it, then God can't stop water. You just limited God so that he would fit into your narrow view of the world.

It is physically impossible for God to kill anyone, unless the killing was a righteous act. That is something that is impossible for him to do. It would make the perfect plan of salvation imperfect and a God would cease to exist. Neither of those are an option as we know God exists and that the plan of salvation is a perfect plan. God can do anything that can be done, one of those things that cannot be done, is for him to sin, therefore, he cannot kill.

So God can't kill, unless when he kills he does so righteously. So he can't kill, but when he does its righteous. In other words, God can kill when he wants, but you won't consider it killing because ?????. This is completely ridiculous.

Part of my reasoning for being here is because I enjoy having my faith challenged. It causes me to examine my own faith and look for answers to questions I have not asked myself. This is the process I am undergoing here, which is why I called it anecdotal. You label that inquisitiveness as being mentally challenged. I am feeling my way through a situation that has no historical or physical evidence and looking for answers that fit in with the known characteristics and existence of God. If you feel that that is mental instability then please do not converse with me.

This is why I am here as well. That is perfectly fine. I only asked because I really don't want to start bashing the opinions of someone who may not be thinking so clearly. Since you are saying you are fine I will believe you.

Well that is not the definition of omniscient. Wiki clearly states that omniscient is the knowledge of everything that can be known. That suggests that there are things that cannot be known. For example, we know for a certainty that the universe expanded at the point of the big bang into a universe at a speed that is faster then the speed of light. What we do not know is how that happened.

I am not debating the definition of omniscience. I am saying you are making things up. If you know all things that can be known there is no unknown. All things are known leaving no room for the unknown. You are also ignoring Gods other attributes. That being omnipotence and omnipresence.

His is a God, that is true, and anything that can be known, he knows, and anything that can be done he can do. I do not know why you cannot conceptualise this.

I can, I am wondering why you can't. In this very post you have put limits on what God can or can't do. Limits that make no logical sense. Like saying God can't stop water because of consequences. You just made God no longer omnipotent.

 

[Serenity7855]

Outhouse has done no such thing. You yourself said that God was helpless to stop the consequences as I have outlined in red. The consequences of which was water. If water is the consequence and God can't stop it, then God can't stop water. You just limited God so that he would fit into your narrow view of the world.

I have not quoted outhouse here. I said that I had told him...

I have not limited God. There are just some things he cannot do. Sinning is one.

As for God using water to drown everyone that to is not possible as there is no evidence of a global flood. I did say that.

So God can't kill, unless when he kills he does so righteously. So he can't kill, but when he does its righteous. In other words, God can kill when he wants, but you won't consider it killing because ?????. This is completely ridiculous.

I said MAYBE to euthenase the world was a righteous act. I cannot call it killing because it is a sin and God cannot sin.

I am not debating the definition of omniscience. I am saying you are making things up. If you know all things that can be known there is no unknown. All things are known leaving no room for the unknown. You are also ignoring Gods other attributes. That being omnipotence and omnipresence.

You would say I am making things up and I would say I am using intelligent reasoning. No I am not ignoring Gods other attributes. I have written the same things about them. If an unknown is impossible, why is it that the cause of rapid expansion is an unknown.

I can, I am wondering why you can't. In this very post you have put limits on what God can or can't do. Limits that make no logical sense. Like saying God can't stop water because of consequences. You just made God no longer omnipotent.

I am not prepared to make a magician out of God. I do not believe that God can produce a white rabbit from an empty hat. To create something out of nothing. Is that restricting him. Do you believe that God is capable of the impossible, if you do then why did he allow his only begotten son to die an ignominious death on the cross. Christ asked, if it be possible, please take this cup from me. It was impossible so he sent and angel to comfort Jesus instead. It takes little research in the Scriptures where you can see that there are things that God cannot do.

No, I said that God didn't use water because it would have left evidence. It didn't. God cannot sin. That is not a limit that gives him freedom. If he could sin, who would he be held accountable to?

 

[Serenity7855]

I was referring to your previous comment, what you responded with was an entirely different subject.
But no worries mate. It was your belief that god would cease to exist if he murdered anyone that I said had no relation to Christian theology - you do have great difficulty in recalling the point in hand from post to post so I will leave it there.

Well that is a strange post. Religion is a belief system. All religious folk believe in the existence of something that you and your clan cannot see. So my belief in God ceasing to exist if he sins is no different to my belief that he dwells in heaven. How on earth are you able to make a distinction. It is not like you can use the bible as a source of reference because you do not believe in that either. You do have difficulty understanding the previous posts.

 

[Serenity7855]

After considering the comments on God being a murderer I find it necessary to present another view. God's expression of his disapproval is always justified, being based on the principle of his right to exclusive devotion and his consistency in upholding truth; it is governed by his love for righteousness and for those practicing righteousness. Divine judgment does not stem from a momentary whim, that is later regretted. Jehovah sees all the issues involved in a situation and has complete, entire knowledge of the matter. He reads the heart; he notes the degree of ignorance, negligence, or willful sin; and he always acts with impartiality.This is a condensed view of divine justice.

I cannot answer this as I am in agreement with it.

 

[outhouse]

If you look at my arguments with outhouse you will see that he tried to trap me on what I believe the flood was.


.

No trap.


So you view your own faith as being trapped? And cannot supply a honest reply?


We want to know where you coming from, what kind of beliefs you hold. If your afraid of what others think of your faith, are you embarrassed?


OR just know your stepping deeper into known mythology you cannot support, so you hold your belief and remain silent in your unsupported position?


Maybe your learning from your mistakles made in your OP?

 

[Blackdog22]

I have not quoted outhouse here. I said that I had told him...

I have not limited God. There are just some things he cannot do. Sinning is one.

Okay, so you believe in a limited God. No problem.

As for God using water to drown everyone that to is not possible as there is no evidence of a global flood. I did say that.

You know, maybe if you had started off with this instead of arguing as if you thought the flood actually happened for 20 pages, it would of really helped.... Outhouse asked you many times if you believed in a literal flood and you were extremely evasive. Thanks for finally answering. What do you believe then? The Bible is a lie or perhaps just a book of vague stories.

I said MAYBE to euthenase the world was a righteous act. I cannot call it killing because it is a sin and God cannot sin.

So you simply refuse to call murder as murder when God does it. You are playing word games to keep your idea of a limited God intact, you realize that right?

You would say I am making things up and I would say I am using intelligent reasoning. No I am not ignoring Gods other attributes. I have written the same things about them. If an unknown is impossible, why is it that the cause of rapid expansion is an unknown.

Saying that God is bound by laws or doesn't know why expansion takes place, is making things up. There is no way you could possibly know that.

I am not prepared to make a magician out of God. I do not believe that God can produce a white rabbit from an empty hat. To create something out of nothing. Is that restricting him. Do you believe that God is capable of the impossible, if you do then why did he allow his only begotten son to die an ignominious death on the cross. Christ asked, if it be possible, please take this cup from me. It was impossible so he sent and angel to comfort Jesus instead. It takes little research in the Scriptures where you can see that there are things that God cannot do.

While this is fine, and I wouldn't want you to make your God into something he is not, perhaps you can stop using words like Omnipotent when describing him. He is clearly a limited god.

No, I said that God didn't use water because it would have left evidence. It didn't. God cannot sin. That is not a limit that gives him freedom. If he could sin, who would he be held accountable to?

Many Christians argue that when God sins its just not sin because he is God. Basically, its fine for him to be a dirty cop and because he is Chief of Police no one can touch him on the subject.

 

[Ouroboros]

After considering the comments on God being a murderer I find it necessary to present another view. God's expression of his disapproval is always justified, being based on the principle of his right to exclusive devotion and his consistency in upholding truth; it is governed by his love for righteousness and for those practicing righteousness. Divine judgment does not stem from a momentary whim, that is later regretted.

"The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled." Gen 6:6

Jehovah sees all the issues involved in a situation and has complete, entire knowledge of the matter. He reads the heart; he notes the degree of ignorance, negligence, or willful sin; and he always acts with impartiality.This is a condensed view of divine justice.

Therefore he could kill babies before they become evil in the time of Noah, but he doesn't kill babies that will become evil today. Why? Why not do the same today? Why doesn't God go all "Minority Report" pre-cog on us all?

 

[Ouroboros]

Okay, so you believe in a limited God. No problem.

A good word for that is "impotent." This Yahweh/Jehovah God that we're presented with is an impotent God. He can do some things, but most things he can't do because he can't. In general, he doesn't anything because he can't.

But the strange thing is that in the ancient times, God supposedly did a lot of things, and many of those things were immoral, yet he's supposed to be good. If a human killed babies to prevent the baby from growing up and become evil, then we (as moral agents) would consider it a gray area. It's not quite acceptable to kill a baby for any reasons, especially if they haven't had the chance to actually be "evil". But God gets a pass on this? Why would the potential of evil be a reason for killing a person? Isn't free choice and free will put in place for the purpose of us choosing, in actions, to do good or evil and be judged on that choosing? Why should babies be killed based on their future possibility of choosing evil? It just doesn't make any sense.

 

[Serenity7855]

No trap.

We will see

So you view your own faith as being trapped? And cannot supply a honest reply?

Ah, thought so, a trap. No, my faith is not trapped. It is very logical and straight forward. All of my answer are honest. I know of no other way to answer.

We want to know where you coming from, what kind of beliefs you hold. If your afraid of what others think of your faith, are you embarrassed?

Who is "we"?

I do not mind telling anyone where I am coming from or what my belief is. I am not afraid of my belief, on the contrary, if I were then this really would be the worst place to be, but I am not. Neither am I embarrassed for the same reason.

OR just know your stepping deeper into known mythology you cannot support, so you hold your belief and remain silent in your unsupported position?

That is not true, my belief in the existence of good circumstantial evidence to substantiate the existence of God is as strong for me today as it has ever been, despite the weak contradictory arguments that you and others tried to use.

[/QUOTE]Maybe your learning from your mistakles made in your OP?[/QUOTE]

It is always a good thing to learn. I like to do something at least once every day.

 

[outhouse]

good circumstantial evidence
.

:biglaugh:

 

[Serenity7855]

Okay, so you believe in a limited God. No problem.

You know, maybe if you had started off with this instead of arguing as if you thought the flood actually happened for 20 pages, it would of really helped.... Outhouse asked you many times if you believed in a literal flood and you were extremely evasive. Thanks for finally answering. What do you believe then? The Bible is a lie or perhaps just a book of vague stories.

I really do not understand how you came to that conclusion. I used to think that the flood was a real event until science proved that there was no evidence of a flood. I then changed my opinion to it either being a supernatural event or just a allegorical tale. I have not thought that the flood was an actual events for many years now so how you thought that I was describing a natural event fails me.

To say that the bible is a lie is merely a puerile antagonistic statement. It bares no validity and is intended to agitate me. It does not. The Bible uses parables and allegories right the way through. There is no reason why the flood story is intended to teach a gospel principle that you label a lie.

So you simply refuse to call murder as murder when God does it. You are playing word games to keep your idea of a limited God intact, you realize that right?

No, I definitely see murder as murder. I am under no illusion about that. I simply threw out an idea, that is, can righteous euthanasia be considered a blessing and not a sin? I made know claim. I was fishing for ideas.

Saying that God is bound by laws or doesn't know why expansion takes place, is making things up. There is no way you could possibly know that.

I did not say that God doesn't know why rapid expansion exists, I said that we don't know. I am sure God knows, however, this, yet again, demonstrates that you are not reading for comprehension. No insult intended just an observation that you seem to see what you want me to be saying instead of what I am actually saying.

While this is fine, and I wouldn't want you to make your God into something he is not, perhaps you can stop using words like Omnipotent when describing him. He is clearly a limited god.

Why, when omnipotent and omniscience has limitations?

Many Christians argue that when God sins its just not sin because he is God. Basically, its fine for him to be a dirty cop and because he is Chief of Police no one can touch him on the subject.

Which all sounds perfectly underhanded but the God I worship is not underhanded. He is perfect.

 

[outhouse]

All of my answer are honest. I know of no other way to answer


.

Less the dodging and straight foward evasion, and your statement really is not substantiated.

You avoid the reality that only men wrote these books, and they were different cultures collections of mythology compiled into a religious book, by a people that did not even know their own origin, and allegorically dictate a world history.

You also avoid the fact that men create deities, and there is no factual evidence, youir deity was not created by man.

 

[McBell]

If you read this for comprehension you would know exactly what I am saying. It is possible for some of us to murder, it is not possible for God to murder. He cannot sin.

Ah, so you basically rendered the word 'omnipotent' useless because based upon your "explanation" here, EVERYONE is 'omnipotent'.

 

[Serenity7855]

Ah, so you basically rendered the word 'omnipotent' useless because based upon your "explanation" here, EVERYONE is 'omnipotent'.

So tell me, can you do everything that can be done. I can' t so that makes everyone minus one, at least.

 

[Serenity7855]

Less the dodging and straight foward evasion, and your statement really is not substantiated.

You avoid the reality that only men wrote these books, and they were different cultures collections of mythology compiled into a religious book, by a people that did not even know their own origin, and allegorically dictate a world history.

You also avoid the fact that men create deities, and there is no factual evidence, youir deity was not created by man.

You have watched a few YouTube documentaries and now you think you are an expert by repeating the same old fallacies.

 

[outhouse]

You have watched a few YouTube documentaries and now you think you are an expert by repeating the same old fallacies.

Wrong again.

Try real education, and facts of the world you live on

 

[Awkward Fingers]

So tell me, can you do everything that can be done. I can' t so that makes everyone minus one, at least.

Then god isn't omnipotent either.
Murder CAN be done but you say god can't murder.
So is your statement "god can do anything god can do?"

Great. I can do anything I can do, too.

So, can god do anything that can be done?
Can murder happen?