What if you KNEW there was a God.

[FunctionalAtheist]

I have not bothered to investigate Sikhism because I am still investigating another religion worthy of investigation. That is the religion of Joseph Smith.

What standard did you use to determine that the religion of joseph smith was 'worthy of investigation?' And how did you rank it compared to Sikhism to determine that it was at least as worthy to continue your "investigation?"

 

[Altfish]

God gives us principles and expects us to use them to guide ourselves in the decisions we make. He does not want to have to spell everything out.

In other words, keep it vague so that it can be interpreted any way the religious like?

 

[Curious George]

Enlighten me.

Your use of genetic fallacy.

Saying that arguments for the existence of God cannot be rooted in logic or reasoning is a fallacious argument, and is itself not rooted in coherent logic or reasoning.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

God gives us principles and expects us to use them to guide ourselves in the decisions we make. He does not want to have to spell everything out.

Amazing considering all the things that so many good christians spell out how others are sinning every day. Amazing how good christians can point their fingers and condemn others, but use some generalist BC to think it doesn't apply to them. You'd better hope your judgment of others on earth doesn't apply you you in heaven. You couldn't pass your own judgements, do you think you will pass HIS?

 

[JoStories]

You are talking to the wrong person. I do not deny the existence of things which cannot be seen by the natural senses.

Thanda said: ↑
Can you (or anyone else you know) verify the existence of the Higgins Boson using your (or their) five senses?


You were the one who asked the second questions which is really the first post that I responded to. The Higgs theory is particle physics and I was merely answering you. You asked for "anyone else you know". I responded. And now you don't want someone to respond>?

 

[JustWondering]

The prophets created the religion (according to you). How then can you say their claims coincide because they belong to the same religion? If the Judeo-Christian religion was created by the speeches and writings of prophets over hundreds (if not thousands) of years. How can the fact that they produced a consistent story not lead us to question if it was all a lie. Do you have a similar case that you can put forward where people continually put forward consistent ideas that often endanger their lives over hundreds or thousands of years and in the end they were all just making it up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

 

[JoStories]

When will we know the existence of the Higgins Boson for certain? Will it be when we can see, hear, feel, touch or smell it?

The answer is: by inference. The Bible teaches that humans have a soul. If the Bible is true then humans have a soul. If it is not then we don't know if humans have a soul. How can we verify if the Bible is true? The best method would be to verify the existence of the central character and subject of the Bible: God. How do you verify the existence of God? One must pray for him to give a confirmation of his reality. He could give that confirmation through a voice, an appearance, a feeling, a vision etc.

The difference here is the particle physics are measured scientifically and can be replicated. The Bible and its stories cannot be replicated. TO this time, no man has been able to water on water and we have no verifiable evidence that Christ either Trying to compare the BIble to the Higgin Boson is like trying to compare apples to cabbage. It just does not work together at all.

 

[JustWondering]

What process did you follow during you honest evaluation?

I have already described my process. I looked for actual evidence to support ANY religion and found none. So why should I embrace one religion out of many when none of them have any evidence to support them?

 

[JustWondering]

Your use of genetic fallacy.

Saying that arguments for the existence of God cannot be rooted in logic or reasoning is a fallacious argument, and is itself not rooted in coherent logic or reasoning.

Sound logic and reasoning can be supported by evidence. What evidence do you have to support your position?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Can you (or anyone else you know) verify the existence of the [Higgs] Boson using your (or their) five senses?

FACEPALM! Yes! In theory! Do you know what theory means? Can you (or anyone else you know, or any one that theoretically exists or has every existed) verify the existence of god? NO!!!!!

[EDIT] Absolutely amazing that people will compare the validity of their overriding theme with the minute details of verified theory (assuming they know what that word means). The words that come to mind have already giving me many warnings on these forums.

 

[JoStories]

I believe one must get to the source. That is, God. That is how I am going about my investigation. I'm interested in finding God. All other things, as far as I'm concerned, will flow naturally from that knowledge. If God tells me there are many people like him and some them are like elephants etc - then I will move away from Christianity and move towards Hinduism. If God says he is the only God and he has no son, then I will gravitate towards Islam. My current religion is therefore just a stepping stone in my search for God. I am sure that an honest seeker of God will come to know the true God regardless of which religion was their starting point.

Here's an important question for your consideration. Why are you searching for God? You already set forth variable that you feel God has: IE God has to be within one of the mainstream religions. Have you looked from a Buddhist POV. Its very liberating and is where I found the spirit of God. Try reading some Thomas Merton..m

 

[Thanda]

What do you think of people who deny climate change?

What I think of them is not relevant. What is relevant is that your statement that the existence of many religions proves there is no real evidence is false.

 

[Thanda]

In other words, keep it vague so that it can be interpreted any way the religious like?

Yes. Keep it vague to that each person can use the guiding principle in their circumstances as they arrive. Were God to attempt to give commandments for every situation both present and future the Bible would be an endless book. None would get around to reading all of it so it would be useless.

Do you know of a business book that teaching every single thing you need to do in every single business in every single country with every type of people?

 

[JustWondering]

What I think of them is not relevant. What is relevant is that your statement that the existence of many religions proves there is no real evidence is false.

Then provide real evidence. I'm willing to consider whatever you have to offer, honestly. Don't be offended if I find your "evidence" lacking however.

 

[Thanda]

FACEPALM! Yes! In theory! Do you know what theory means? Can you (or anyone else you know, or any one that theoretically exists or has every existed) verify the existence of god? NO!!!!!

Yes. In theory we can.

 

[Thanda]

What standard did you use to determine that the religion of joseph smith was 'worthy of investigation?' And how did you rank it compared to Sikhism to determine that it was at least as worthy to continue your "investigation?"

I didn't rank it comparing it with Sikhism. I was introduced to the church at the age of eleven. The first thing that impressed me was their teaching of the church about the pre-existence. I liked the idea since from a very young age I always felt I had always existed. I was also impressed with the doctrine of continuing revelation. It has always made sense to me that an unchangeable God would like to talk to his children today just as much as he liked to in days past. It didn't make sense that at the time the world was most wicked a caring and unchangeable God would choose that time stop giving guidance to those of his children who are willing to learn.

EDIT: This is why I am starting by investigating this church. Had I grown up in an area where Sikhism was present. And had I been similarly impressed. I would have started my search there.

 

[JustWondering]

I didn't rank it comparing it with Sikhism. I was introduced to the church at the age of eleven. The first thing that impressed me was their teaching of the church about the pre-existence. I liked the idea since from a very young age I always felt I had always existed. I was also impressed with the doctrine of continuing revelation. It has always made sense to me that an unchangeable God would like to talk to his children today just as much as he liked to in days past. It didn't make sense that at the time the world was most wicked a caring and unchangeable God would choose that time stop giving guidance to those of his children who are willing to learn.

What impressed me when I was eleven would not impress me as an adult. Just saying.

 

[Thanda]

What impressed me when I was eleven would not impress me as an adult. Just saying.

I think what you wanted to say was "What impressed me when I was eleven would not [necessarily] impress me as an adult.". Just saying.

 

[Curious George]

Sound logic and reasoning can be supported by evidence. What evidence do you have to support your position?

Your position that you are using an ad hominem attack? Your words come to mind. But you can look up the fallacy if you would like, or if you don't understand.

You have said all arguments for God do not use logic and reasoning but use imagination.

You have made a conclusion with no premises. You are attacking the subject of all arguments, not the argument.

But let us assume that you simply said, no argument for God's existence is logically sound.

Then at worse you are making a "all swans are white" statement using inductive logic which is impossible to prove. (Sidenote: you really should see Kant on inductive reasoning). But, nonetheless, induction is logic of a sort and certainly reasonable. However, all one needs is one counter example to disprove a statement like this. For that, I will use anslem's ontological argument for God.

However, in a transparent appeal to authority, I would also throw out Plato's first cause argument.

There are your black swan my friend, but you really should revisit your wording and move towards actual argument instead of attack.

 

[Thanda]

Amazing considering all the things that so many good christians spell out how others are sinning every day. Amazing how good christians can point their fingers and condemn others, but use some generalist BC to think it doesn't apply to them. You'd better hope your judgment of others on earth doesn't apply you you in heaven. You couldn't pass your own judgements, do you think you will pass HIS?

Who are you asking this question to?