Your best argument that god exists

[Awkward Fingers]

my best arguement that God exists is that if He does not, then man is the greatest living thing in the known universe. and if man is the greatest living thing in the universe then the universe is in serious condition indeed. look at all the problems man has caused. there just has to be something greater than man whether you call it God or some other name

Greatest at what?
Swimming? Eyesight? Skateboarding? Mass migration?
Guess what, we're no where near the greatest, depending on the category.

 

[Skwim]

my best arguement that God exists is that if He does not, then man is the greatest living thing in the known universe.

Why? What would make man the greatest living thing in the known universe if god doesn't exist? Why couldn't he be second? or sixty-third?

and if man is the greatest living thing in the universe then the universe is in serious condition indeed.

Kind of a pretentious remark don't ya think?

look at all the problems man has caused. there just has to be something greater than man whether you call it God or some other name

Please look up "Begging the question" under fallacious arguments.

 

[Aly Millard]

How about atheists give reasons why they don't believe in God. There is a good chance theists don't believe such a God exists either.

I believe the need for God in one's life is not necessary.

 

[McBell]

my best arguement that God exists is that if He does not, then man is the greatest living thing in the known universe. and if man is the greatest living thing in the universe then the universe is in serious condition indeed. look at all the problems man has caused. there just has to be something greater than man whether you call it God or some other name

False dichotomy.
Why do you think it is a toss up between god and man?
Ever wonder how many species on this planet would not give man a second glance if man was not interfering with them in some way?

 

[McBell]

How about atheists give reasons why they don't believe in God. There is a good chance theists don't believe such a God exists either.

There has not been presented to me convincing evidence that your god (or any other god) exists.

 

[outhouse]

Now you are saying there was no empty tomb outside apologetics. That is not historicity, it's a presupposition.

You have a complete lack of academic knowledge here and know nothing of what is or is not historical.

The empty tomb is factually not historical.

Im not making a historical claim that would give you an opportunity to weigh in with your opinion. I am stating we don't know what happened to his body after crucifixion.

We don't know that the Christian church grew as a result of the Apostles preaching? Seriously?

His real people, his inner circle, factually never wrote a single word about the man. Hellenist wrote about Jesus.

NOT Galilean Aramaic Jews.

Jesus did not spring out of text.

Agreed.

But much of his story did come from the communities that wrote about him based on what they heard in oral traditions after decades of mythology and theology shapes the stories.

The authors of the Gospels, whomever you choose, wrote about Jesus. So did Paul.

So?

They wrote far removed from his life, and gave him the same divinity as to compete against the Emperors divinity.

Gentiles could worship the Emperor the son of god, a corrupt politician.

OR they could worship a selfless man as son of god.

 

[outhouse]

Unmasking the Jesus Seminar:
A Critique of Its Methods and Conclusions

Not credible.

He is known apologist blogger.

While well educated, the men he condemns who would put him to shame in person.

 

[outhouse]

The Mythology of an Anti-Christian Bigot - Crisis Magazine

also not credible.


Your attack on academia is not strong, it amounts to fanaticism.

 

[Shad]

clear your clipboard.

Much of these bizarre claims derive from late-nineteenth-century liberal or modernist theology. Both of these schools presumed, indeed, that Scripture, the Church as believing community, and the doctrine derived from the former to give shape to the latter were essentiallymythological. And they accepted that mythos, as the total poem that represents and explains reality, was a work of mythopoeisis, of a myth-maker; the most obvious candidate for a myth maker is the human imagination. This would seem to show that religion is a myth of man’s “invention.”

This liberal or modernist claim is, however, the perverse outworking of an earlier one held by orthodox Christians—one which is held by most orthodox Christians in our own day. The early expression, articulated by S.T. Coleridge, John Keble, and John Henry Newman, held that indeed culture is the poem of a poetic community. The Church is a poetic community, whose practices, prayers, doctrines, and works constitute together a great poem. This poem is a work of human imagination, because the Church is composed of human beings. This says nothing about its truth or falsehood.

The question we must answer is, rather, what is this imagination whose out-working, whose expression, is manifested in the great poem of the Church? The Church answers: it is the active recipient of the absolute and the unconditioned. The Church receives the revelation of God. The human imagination receives this revelation in faith. In response to this reception, it begins its work of discernment, of staring into the hieroglyph of what God has shown, in history and above all in his Son, the Logos, so as to discover what are the expressible truths its contains.

The Logos, the singular eternal Word, finds expression in the many temporally spoken words, the logoi, of the Church and its members. And so, the primary source, or cause, of the activity of the imagination of the Church is inspiration: this revelation in faith to the people of God, from God. But this primary source is not the sole source. Human reason of its own nature and power can rise up to the absolute, unconditioned truth. If it could not, we could not know by reason the truths of mathematics, the definitions of such things as rabbits, frogs, goodness, justice, freedom, and beauty, or of the existence of God. But we in fact do know all these things, and do so by way of reason’s own activity. Philosophy, poetry, and the physical sciences are some of its more prominent expressions. These are not human “inventions,” they are the result of reason’s discernment of realities outside and above itself. To claim otherwise would be to claim that every truth is an invention of the individual’s subjectivity.

The Mythology of an Anti-Christian Bigot - Crisis Magazine

.

Non-sequitur since I am talking about history while you conflate theology with history. Also you source is not that of history but religious thus hold it's own bias as fact. Try again.

 

[viole]

my best arguement that God exists is that if He does not, then man is the greatest living thing in the known universe. and if man is the greatest living thing in the universe then the universe is in serious condition indeed. look at all the problems man has caused. there just has to be something greater than man whether you call it God or some other name

Well, even if true, I do not see how that proves anything.

It would only slightly achieve that if the Universe could only exist within a teleological framework, that requires things to go "the right way", whatever that might be.

But that would beg the question, wouldn't it?

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

God does not exist. God is Existence.

Therefore, existence does not exist. Just kidding, I know what you mean....

By the way God would include Satan and the Ebola virus, since they exist. At least, the latter.

One way to think about it is an apple. I can say it's green, it's big, it's sweet. All of these things add something to the description of the apple. But saying that the apple exists doesn't tell me anything descriptive about it. Existence is not a property of the apple.

Of course it doesn't. It does not make a lot of sense to say that sjdhcbjshdvb exists before you give a clear cut definition of what sjdhcbjshdvb is. Nevertheless, I am confident that apples exists, while blue fairies do not, independently how detailed the descriptions of apples and blue fairies are. Therefore, perfect definition does not entail existence.

God exists us and all things. There is not anything that can be compared to God. Therefore God is No-Thing.

I read somewhere that we are in His image. Someone must have tried to make a comparison

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

"...Part one, remember, was the historical reality of Christ’s bodily rising from the dead. Part two is how the Resurrection is a continuing reality in the Holy Eucharist. .

So, the reality of the Resurrection can be reduced to the reality of a wafer turning literally in the body of a two thousands years old God, if a necessarily male homo sapiens dressed funny whispers some Latin words on it?

Well, I am sure that most theists do not believe this absurd atheistic definition or property of God. They are called Muslims, Hindus,...., and Protestants.

Ciao

- viole

 

[1robin]

Simple as that.

Identify your god and convince us that it exists. ​

The best argument that a biblical God exists is that anything at all exists.

The universe as a whole or any part (no matter how small or large) does not contain the explanation of it's existence within it's self. It's explanation must exist external to it's self. By the law of sufficient causation, the cause of the universe must be personal, moral, more powerful than the power the universe contains, able to interact anywhere within this universe as well as external to it. etc.......

You basically get exactly what people over 3000 years ago (who were ignorant of sufficient causation) described as God.

 

[1robin]

So, the reality of the Resurrection can be reduced to the reality of a wafer turning literally in the body of a two thousands years old God, if a necessarily male homo sapiens dressed funny whispers some Latin words on it?

Well, I am sure that most theists do not believe this absurd atheistic definition or property of God. They are called Muslims, Hindus,...., and Protestants.

Ciao

- viole

The protestant doctrine of the Eucharist is that the eating of the wafer and drinking the juice is symbolic participation in the last supper and by extension a sign that we have participated in the literal benefits the sacrifice of Christ's body and blood provide. The same way baptism is an outward symbol of an internal fact.

 

[viole]

The best argument that a biblical God exists is that anything at all exists.

The universe as a whole or any part (no matter how small or large) does not contain the explanation of it's existence within it's self. It's explanation must exist external to it's self. By the law of sufficient causation, the cause of the universe must be personal, moral, more powerful than the power the universe contains, able to interact anywhere within this universe as well as external to it. etc.......

You basically get exactly what people over 3000 years ago (who were ignorant of sufficient causation) described as God.

How do you go from "the law of sufficient causation" to "it must be personal, moral"?

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

The protestant doctrine of the Eucharist is that the eating of the wafer and drinking the juice is symbolic participation in the last supper and by extension a sign that we have participated in the literal benefits the sacrifice of Christ's body and blood provide. The same way baptism is an outward symbol of an internal fact.

Sacrifice? Why do you insist in calling it such?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Koldo]

The best argument that a biblical God exists is that anything at all exists.

Even if I were to accept that a creator god exists that still wouldn't be sufficient to establish the existence of the biblical god specifically.

 

[1robin]

How do you go from "the law of sufficient causation" to "it must be personal, moral"?

Ciao

- viole

Personal is a slam dunk. Only personal beings can chose to act.
Moral is a bit tricky but since we almost universally perceive an objective moral realm it is not much of a stretch.

Even in a self proclaimed non-moral realist can be found the presumption of moral fact if observed for a while. Even Psychopaths believe in objective wrong and right. We just disagree with what they are.

 

[1robin]

Sacrifice? Why do you insist in calling it such?

Ciao

- viole

Do you consider being beaten, hung on a cross with nails, and a spear stabbed through the heart a nice afternoon. However the real sacrifice was the perfectly loving relationship between the father and the son was severed for 3 days. Many people misunderstand that Jesus saves us from physical death, he saved us from being eternally separated from the father by doing so himself. Though in his (and only his) case there was no sin (the thing that separates us from God) to prevent Christ from re-establishing their former relationship. Can you imagine the pain of being separated from perfect love which you had enjoyed for eternity? I was separated from a less than perfect love I had only known 3 years and it almost killed me.

 

[1robin]

Even if I were to accept that a creator god exists that still wouldn't be sufficient to establish the existence of the biblical god specifically.

If you look into sufficient causation in a philosophy text you will find that the nature of the effect can tell us much about the cause. In the case of the universe the aspects that whatever created must have had are a perfect match for the biblical God. BTW this argument never gives you the biblical God specifically, it merely makes necessary a God who's description is identical.

Now I do not suppose that single argument is going to make any run to the confessional but it is juts a good argument among thousands. I could not present even just the good arguments for the biblical God if I never stopped typing for the term of my natural life.