Why I am a good proof that there is a God

[Sheldon]

God is omnibenevolent. It was not God who caused the suffering but it was Satan who as Jesus said desires to kill steal and destroy.

Didn't he curse Adam and Eve and all the descendants of the human race over some fruit being eaten? Didn't he flood the entire planet destroying everyone and everything outside of the contents of a small boat?

Didn't the biblical deity torture King David's new-born baby boy for 7 days until it died? Just because it was angered that the parents had conceived the baby in an adulterous affair? That doesn't sound very benevolent to me, let alone omnibenevolent? Didn't that deity torment Job over a bet, even killing Job's family?

The deity depicted in the bible seems sadistically cruel and barbaric to be honest.

 

[Jainarayan]

I believe you are putting the cart before the horse. I can't put any faith in something I don't believe in.

So at age 13 I believed God would answer me. So by faith I waited for an answer. The proof that my belief and faith were not in vain was when God answered me.

Faith is believing in something you have no proof of. I’ve said I have no proof extraterrestrials exists but I believe they do. Conversely there’s no proof they don’t exist.

I have no proof Vishnu exists but even in the absence of that proof I believe He does, and that He is God. Though in a way Einstein and other theoretical physicists have proven His existence, given what I believe God is.

But I don’t need proof of His existence or to prove it to myself or anyone else to believe in Him. That’s my faith. Likewise no one can prove He doesn’t exist.

 

[Muffled]

It's appalling, the idea of vicarious redemption is repugnant enough, but the idea of a blood sacrifice for atonement is utterly repellent.

Also the Job myth depicts at best a deity that was entirely ambivalent about Job's suffering, and that of family. The myth depicts a deity more concerned with winning a bet.

I believe it is repellant because it represents what sin does to a person; It bleeds him until he dies.

I believe you can call it repugnant if you want but there is no other way. If there were Jesus would gladly have taken it as He prayed in the garden of Gethsemane.

There is no evidence that Job is a myth and no, God is not ambivalent about Job's suffering.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe it is repellant because it represents what sin does to a person; It bleeds him until he dies.

It doesn't need an allegorical substitute that is unevidenced, I find the idea repugnant all on it's own.

I believe you can call it repugnant if you want but there is no other way.

No other way, than torturing someone to death, as a blood sacrifice, to appease its own anger, and for a deity that purportedly has limitless knowledge and power? Sorry but I find that claim preposterous even as a hypothetical.

If there were Jesus would gladly have taken it as He prayed in the garden of Gethsemane.

If this is true, then the deity depicted cannot be omnipotent, as it is a rational contradiction to claim a deity for whom nothing is impossible, is bound to a single choice or course of action. I think Occam's razor suggest a more plausible explanation for the crucifixion, given how commonplace a punishment it was at the time.

There is no evidence that Job is a myth and no,

"a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events"??? That sounds like a myth to me? Unless anyone can demonstrate some objective evidence any of it is real?

God is not ambivalent about Job's suffering.

Then why deliberately cause it for a bet? The alternative seems far far worse.

 

[Jainarayan]

I believe you can call it repugnant if you want but there is no other way. If there were Jesus would gladly have taken it as He prayed in the garden of Gethsemane.

The “other way” was for God to not test Adam and Eve in the first place when, being omniscient, he knew full well they would fail, then punish them and all humanity. This is something that makes absolutely no sense to me. What is to be gained and accomplished by giving a test they’d fail?

As a parent would you leave a case of Budweiser out, tell your kids not to drink it, knowing they will, especially having been goaded into it by an older kid, known to be a liar, then punish them and their innocent siblings severely for it? That’s cruel and sadistic, and abuse of authority.

 

[Muffled]

I may have asked this way back in the thread, but echoing another thread, why is it important to prove God’s existence? Isn’t one’s own belief and faith enough?

Last night on an episode of The UnXplained Dr. Robert Cargill, an archaeologist specializing in Middle Eastern and Biblical history and a theist even said that people trying to find the Ark of the Covenant is an attempt to validate their beliefs and prove the existence of God. Why? Proving God to me, for example, so I can follow him? I know Joe Biden exists, I believe in his existence, but I have no use for him. So, proving God’s existence to me will have no effect.

I believe it is important to prove God exists because there are those who say He doesn't

I believe it is a good idea to find the ark because some people say a flood never occurred.

I believe Biden is useful because his ineptitude will usher in a Republican landslide.

I believe you do not have a god who can do what God can do for you.

 

[Muffled]

Which doesn't change the principle. The results of science are public and are checkable by other teams.


Even if we assume for a moment that there is a god, then the endless different religions, sects, cults, and denominations, would tend to suggest otherwise.


I'm sure it is, but you are trying to make claims about objective things outside of it based on nothing but what you subjectively experience inside it.


So what happened to all the people who've prayed, and/or have been prayed for, who died anyway? Every time any attempt to measure the effects of prayer has been made, it turns out to be no better than not praying.

I believe just as other teams can verify quarks, other people have had experiences with God. I doubt you have direct experience with quarks and most likely not with God but that doesn't mean the testimonies in each case are not true.

I believe if you said that horses with different sizes and colorings prove that there is no horse, you would be using the same logic.

I believe that is not for me to know. I could speculate that it was sin or simply not in God's plan or perhaps the person praying did not actually know God. My wife died of cancer but I did not pray for her to get well; I prayed for God to do what was best for her. The latter prayer is a lot less selfish.

I believe you must be reading the wrong studies. I have read that the opposite is true.

 

[Jainarayan]

I believe you do not have a god who can do what God can do for you.

You are correct… you believe. You cannot know or prove that my God is not God. In the same way I believe your God is a demi-god.

 

[ratiocinator]

I believe just as other teams can verify quarks, other people have had experiences with God.

So why do they disagree with each other about god(s)? The evidence for quarks is objective, you don't have to believe them to look at the evidence.

I believe if you said that horses with different sizes and colorings prove that there is no horse, you would be using the same logic.

Then you believe wrong. Clearly logic isn't your strong suit. There's only supposed to be one god (as far as your stated religion says, anyway).

I believe that is not for me to know. I could speculate that it was sin or simply not in God's plan or perhaps the person praying did not actually know God. My wife died of cancer but I did not pray for her to get well; I prayed for God to do what was best for her. The latter prayer is a lot less selfish.

The thing is that you offered an answered prayer as evidence. In fact, praying to god makes no difference (according to all the attempts to measure it). The way you justify that is with things like this. Basically, pray, see what happens, and whatever happens, that must be the right answer, hence all prayers are answered. This is why you don't have any evidence. If you did, your claim would be falsifiable.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe it is important to prove God exists because there are those who say He doesn't

I don't believe any deity exists, since no one can demonstrate any objective evidence for the claim. I don't believe it is important either way, as long as theists stop claiming they know what a deity wants, and this makes such claims moral absolutes, and theists stop denying scientific facts, which have real and pernicious implications.

I believe it is a good idea to find the ark because some people say a flood never occurred.

Unlike a lot of theistic claims, the Noah flood myth is falsifiable, and geological science has falsified it, if you want to deny this scientific fact then what you think you've found is entirely moot. As your belief is a closed minded absolute.

I believe Biden is useful because his ineptitude will usher in a Republican landslide.

At least Biden is not peddling relentless crass racist and sexist platitudes on social media anyway. I'll bet my house he won't incite a seditious insurrection if he loses the next election as well. I am also glad I live in the UK.

I believe you do not have a god who can do what God can do for you.

The first part is bang on, the second part is a begging the question fallacy.

 

[Hidingfromyou]

I believe first and foremost God is real because He abides in me.

My testimony to that affect should be enough but people need to know there are discernable affects that indicate god is present.

1. God speaks to me.
2. God gives me dreams and visons.
3. God heals my diseases.
4. God keeps me from sin.
5. God helps me to understand scripture
6. God speaks through me.

I reject your claims because I don't believe you.

 

[Muffled]

You are correct… you believe. You cannot know or prove that my God is not God. In the same way I believe your God is a demi-god.

I believe the evidence is in the words spoken by them but then your version of God hasn't spoken.

 

[Muffled]

I reject your claims because I don't believe you.

I believe in honesty and am glad that you are being honest. I come on this site for one reason only: to bear witness of the truth.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I believe in honesty and am glad that you are being honest. I come on this site for one reason only: to bear witness of the truth.

There is different understanding of what truth is, depending on what teaching one follow and how each person perceive the level of truth one understand at any given time, it is an development of understanding

 

[Hidingfromyou]

I believe in honesty and am glad that you are being honest. I come on this site for one reason only: to bear witness of the truth.

I realize you believe in what you're writing. For you, they're real. That's probably all that matters.

 

[Muffled]

There is different understanding of what truth is, depending on what teaching one follow and how each person perceive the level of truth one understand at any given time, it is an development of understanding

I believe there is only one truth: Jesus said "I am the way the truth and the life,"

 

[Spirit of Light]

I believe there is only one truth: Jesus said "I am the way the truth and the life,"

It's is good you holding on to your belief and faith

 

[Muffled]

I realize you believe in what you're writing. For you, they're real. That's probably all that matters.

I believe everything matters. The atheists say they want proof but then refuse to accept the testimony.

 

[Muffled]

So why do they disagree with each other about god(s)? The evidence for quarks is objective, you don't have to believe them to look at the evidence.


Then you believe wrong. Clearly logic isn't your strong suit. There's only supposed to be one god (as far as your stated religion says, anyway).


The thing is that you offered an answered prayer as evidence. In fact, praying to god makes no difference (according to all the attempts to measure it). The way you justify that is with things like this. Basically, pray, see what happens, and whatever happens, that must be the right answer, hence all prayers are answered. This is why you don't have any evidence. If you did, your claim would be falsifiable.

I believe it is because not everyone has received Jesus as Lord and Savior.

I believe the same goes for God.

I believe the contrary is true. I was best at Math which is a logical course and I worked as a Computer Programmer which is logic applied to a computer. I also took Logic as a course at the university.

I believe there is only one God but there are many gods.

I believe that is a false conjecture on your part.

I am not sure what you mean by that but I believe you can't turn a lie into the truth and you can't turn the truth into a lie.

 

[Jainarayan]

I believe the evidence is in the words spoken by them but then your version of God hasn't spoken.

What do you call the Bhagavad Gita, then? What do you call the words in the Shiva Purana, Vishnu Purana, and Srimad Bhagavatam if not spoken by Shiva, Vishnu and Krishna, respectively?

Why do you speak about Hinduism and our beliefs when you know less than nothing about them, yet keep calling our God a false God, denigrating our scriptures and getting everything wrong? Please enlighten me. That’s why so many people dislike so many Christians, and IMO rightly so... the hubris, and denigrating and intolerance of others’ beliefs. I don’t know which of them is the worst.