100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: can anybody prove to me a GOD?? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Honestly, the belief in a higher power, whether your preferred reference is "God" or "Goddess" or "the Universe" or something else, is a faith issue. One's faith may be based on what's been read or heard, or on a deeply personal experience. The existance of a higher power can't really be "proven" in a scientific sense, like the existance of molecules and atoms. Being a faith thing, if someone doesn't believe in such an "entity", the only way to prove it to him or her is with a highly spiritual, sometimes mystical, experience. I think that's why religion is such a touchy subject in modern society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no their is more then just the scriptures. Again for me for instance, all the medical laws said i would and should be dead right now but for some mysteriouse reason i'm not. No man made reason can state why i'm still here today, and this happens alot not just my incendent. Cowboy...if the fact that you are alive proves that there is a God..then according to your logic wouldn't the fact that people are dead proves that God didn't exist IMO life and death are both proof of the existence of a higher power. (To me, the Goddess. To someone else, God.) While most people aren't trying to rush head-long toward death, I believe that there is more to life than what we experince from the time we are born to the time when this physical life ends. Death is just a doorway, so to speak, to the next incarnation or level, bringing us closer to our higher power, in the long run. The fact that there is death doesn't disprove the existence of God. Death is merely a fact and stage of life. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMO life and death are both proof of the existence of a higher power. (To me, the Goddess. To someone else, God.) While most people aren't trying to rush head-long toward death, I believe that there is more to life than what we experince from the time we are born to the time when this physical life ends. Death is just a doorway, so to speak, to the next incarnation or level, bringing us closer to our higher power, in the long run. The fact that there is death doesn't disprove the existence of God. Death is merely a fact and stage of life. Rowanne ...and some people believe that little elves are God...the thread doesn't ask for what you believe about God it asks for you to prove that God/Goddess exist without scripture |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who's to say the "Bible" is the correct text? There are other religious writings that predate the Bible. the bible is the correct text because Yahweh ....oops I meant because God says so @funches Ummmm. The text of the [Christian] "Bible" is structured and mimicked from religious texts that predate it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who's to say the "Bible" is the correct text? There are other religious writings that predate the Bible. the bible is the correct text because Yahweh ....oops I meant because God says so @funches Ummmm. The text of the [Christian] "Bible" is structured and mimicked from religious texts that predate it. The text in the Christians Bible started anew with Jesus and the only thing that "all Christians" accept from The Old Testament is "that a Messiah is coming" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The proof of there not being a god is as simple as a spleen. The spleen is left over from our evolutionary process. It serves no purpose, but it used to. With adaptation and evolution, any purpose it used to serve is now unnecessary. To state there is the existance of god is contradictory, and the spleen is such simple proof of it. Ponder this, if we were made by god, then the spleen was added for no purpose. It would be a situation in which the creator sabotaged his grandest creation "in his eyes". Does this mean that god is deluded enough to intentionally sabotage his own work? Would this mean that if man was created in the physical image of god, then god himself is inherently flawed? If the creation is flawed and is created in the image of the creator, then the creator must be flawed also. But a perfect god cant be flawed. So, this brings the conclusion that if there is a god, then god inherently is not perfect. In mentality, god is easily jealous and is wrathful, both of which are mortal sins. So then, by conclusion, god is much more humanistic than we think. But for a god to be all powerful, but yet show some of the worst human traits, how can such a god truly exist? Therefore, such a god couldnt and doesnt exist. Its great how something so small and insignificant like a spleen can help us answer one of lifes greatest mysteries. how do you figure spleen isn't needed? a large dark-red oval organ on the left side of the body between the stomach and the diaphragm; produces cells involved in immune responses My fault, wrong part indicated. You are right, the spleen is used, I withdraw my statement in regards to the spleen. But in correction, one could easily discuss the tonsils. The tonsils are virtually useless and can cause infection in the body. There was the scientific belief that the tonsils were needed throughout life to catch bacteria and other airborne infectious diseases. Medical science has shown that the tonsils have no purpose and are useless. The current thing is that they MIGHT have a use up until the age of 3, but even that is under heavy scientific scrutiny. Its the same concept of how circumcision prevents disease. Medical science has proven that circumcision does not do anything in regards to preventing infection of the genitalia. In the same sense, the tonsils do nothing for prevention of bacterial infection. tonsils are not nesacarily unused, they help fight against upper respitory invections. Yes we can live without them, but we can also live with only one arm, we can live with only one leg, we can live without alot of body parts, does not make them any less of importance. Tonsils are only shown to help fight off infections up till the age of 3. After that, they are useless. This is medically proven. After the age of 3, tonsils are simply a risk factor. A risk factor for easily getting infected. We might not need an arm also, but having an arm after a certain age never greatly raised the possibility of arm-related infections, but having tonsils after the age of 3 raises the possibility of respiratory-related infections. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
centered
on
Thu 01/21/10 06:05 PM
|
|
Who's to say the "Bible" is the correct text? There are other religious writings that predate the Bible. the bible is the correct text because Yahweh ....oops I meant because God says so @funches Ummmm. The text of the [Christian] "Bible" is structured and mimicked from religious texts that predate it. The text in the Christians Bible started anew with Jesus and the only thing that "all Christians" accept from The Old Testament is "that a Messiah is coming" @funches And don't all Christians "believe" in the New Testament (since Jesus is the Messiah)? Most Jews don't acknowledge the New Testament. (Though, Messianic Jews do believe Jesus is the Messiah). Anyway, the New Testament is the "diary" of Jesus, so I'm a bit confused at your only mention of the Old Testament. Classify the "Christian's Bible" ... are you talking about the Old or New Testament? (I ask because you mention, "the Christians Bible started anew with Jesus"). So which one are you speaking of? But I hold to my original thought ... all Christian scripture is inherited from a common text, which existed before it - you never commented on that. Another great question to answer is, "why are there so many variations of "Christianity"? (i.e. - Roman Catholic, Catholic, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Lutheran, and so on). Apparently, "Christians" can't can't agree on a proper interpretation of the original "Bible text". |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Thu 01/21/10 06:15 PM
|
|
Who's to say the "Bible" is the correct text? There are other religious writings that predate the Bible. the bible is the correct text because Yahweh ....oops I meant because God says so @funches Ummmm. The text of the [Christian] "Bible" is structured and mimicked from religious texts that predate it. The text in the Christians Bible started anew with Jesus and the only thing that "all Christians" accept from The Old Testament is "that a Messiah is coming" @funches And don't all Christians "believe" in the New Testament (since Jesus is the Messiah)? Most Jews don't acknowledge the New Testament. (Though, Messianic Jews do believe Jesus is the Messiah). Anyway, the New Testament is the "diary" of Jesus, so I'm a bit confused at your only mention of the Old Testament. Classify the "Christian's Bible" ... are you talking about the Old or New Testament? (I ask because you mention, "the Christians Bible started anew with Jesus"). So which one are you speaking of? But I hold to my original thought ... all Christian scripture is inherited from a common text, which existed before it - you never commented on that. Another great question to answer is, "why are there so many variations of "Christianity"? (i.e. - Roman Catholic, Catholic, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Lutheran, and so on). Apparently, "Christians" can't can't agree on a proper interpretation of the original "Bible text". Texts used for the bible are many different texts and most are not in existence anymore. Each chapter is supposed to be a different text. There are texts that were kept out by the King and the rest were altered to fit the King's ideals at the time. That was how the King James version became a bible |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another great question to answer is, "why are there so many variations of "Christianity"? (i.e. - Roman Catholic, Catholic, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Lutheran, and so on). Apparently, "Christians" can't can't agree on a proper interpretation of the original "Bible text". Texts used for the bible are many different texts and most are not in existence anymore. Each chapter is supposed to be a different text. There are texts that were kept out by the King and the rest were altered to fit the King's ideals at the time. That was how the King James version became a bible I'm not talking about "interpretations of the Bible" as written, but interpretations of the text among sub-denominations among the Christian faith. For example, without doing a Google search, now many understand the difference between Anglican and Catholic beliefs? I venture to say, not many. Why are there so many sects and sub-sects of the Christian faith? That's my point, not why are there so many interpretations of the Bible text itself (which in of itself has many questions). |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CowboyGH
on
Thu 01/21/10 08:31 PM
|
|
Another great question to answer is, "why are there so many variations of "Christianity"? (i.e. - Roman Catholic, Catholic, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Lutheran, and so on). Apparently, "Christians" can't can't agree on a proper interpretation of the original "Bible text". Texts used for the bible are many different texts and most are not in existence anymore. Each chapter is supposed to be a different text. There are texts that were kept out by the King and the rest were altered to fit the King's ideals at the time. That was how the King James version became a bible I'm not talking about "interpretations of the Bible" as written, but interpretations of the text among sub-denominations among the Christian faith. For example, without doing a Google search, now many understand the difference between Anglican and Catholic beliefs? I venture to say, not many. Why are there so many sects and sub-sects of the Christian faith? That's my point, not why are there so many interpretations of the Bible text itself (which in of itself has many questions). i personally believe this to be the devils work. Keeping us all divided like this gives the devil more power to munipolate us as he does. Their are so many denominations of christianity because of different interpretations and ways of seeing it. Take 7th day adventist for instance. They are their own denomination for one simple reasoning, they celebrate sabath on Saturday compared to Sunday. Same goes with pentacostal, the two are very close. They celebrate sabath on Saturday because according to the USA calender Saturday would be the last day of the week. It goes Sunday - Saturday. But anyways lol, different things such as this is why we have so many denominations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, if we would all go atheist and reunite as we were created it would end the damage of religion on the human mind...lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and of course with the devil keeping us devided like he does gives room for people to turn and be atheist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism has nothing to with the devil, it is outside his realm. The devil can only influence those who believe in him.
Just as god can only hurt those who believe in him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism has nothing to with the devil, it is outside his realm. The devil can only influence those who believe in him. Just as god can only hurt those who believe in him. that makes about as much sence as saying the rain only gets people wet that believe in the rain. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism has nothing to with the devil, it is outside his realm. The devil can only influence those who believe in him. Just as god can only hurt those who believe in him. that makes about as much sence as saying the rain only gets people wet that believe in the rain. Only to those blinded by their own beliefs...lol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Honestly, the belief in a higher power, whether your preferred reference is "God" or "Goddess" or "the Universe" or something else, is a faith issue. One's faith may be based on what's been read or heard, or on a deeply personal experience. The existance of a higher power can't really be "proven" in a scientific sense, like the existance of molecules and atoms. Being a faith thing, if someone doesn't believe in such an "entity", the only way to prove it to him or her is with a highly spiritual, sometimes mystical, experience. I think that's why religion is such a touchy subject in modern society. Yes, faith with works is a wonderful thing, but not something anyone can give to someone else,,something that is found on the inside. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@funches And don't all Christians "believe" in the New Testament (since Jesus is the Messiah)? Most Jews don't acknowledge the New Testament. (Though, Messianic Jews do believe Jesus is the Messiah). Anyway, the New Testament is the "diary" of Jesus, so I'm a bit confused at your only mention of the Old Testament. @centered.....all Christians do not believe in The New Testament because if they all did they would all follow "ALL" the teachings of Jesus which most of them don't....the only thing "ALL CHRISTIANS" supposedly believe in is Jesus Classify the "Christian's Bible" ... are you talking about the Old or New Testament? (I ask because you mention, "the Christians Bible started anew with Jesus"). So which one are you speaking of? "ALL Christians" do not even consider The Old Testament to be part of the bible ....for Christians the bible starts with Jesus.... that way they can ignore God laws and don't have to stone unruly Children to death but still get the pleasure to tell others that are not Christians that by ignoring God laws that he is sending them to Hell But I hold to my original thought ... all Christian scripture is inherited from a common text, which existed before it - you never commented on that. what I commented on was that the only original text that applies to Christians or that all Christians will acknowledge is "That a Messiah is Coming" that simple phrase render anything including all text that predate that phrase as moot, as if it didn't exist ...er..no pun intended Another great question to answer is, "why are there so many variations of "Christianity"? (i.e. - Roman Catholic, Catholic, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Lutheran, and so on). Apparently, "Christians" can't can't agree on a proper interpretation of the original "Bible text". that's easy to explain....because Jesus spoke in parables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So I suppose that the fact that your body is not only a work of art, but that everything in it is created to function at just the precise intervals to keep you alive day to day came from a "big bang"? I suppose that the fact that if earth was any closer to the sun we'd burn up and any further away we would freeze is due to just mere coincidence. I suppose that the brain capable of conceiving and creating every invention inspired up to today came from some marcupial sludge that eventually evolved into man? You may not see the wind. But you see evidence of its existance. You feel it and you know it is there. When you have witnessed the birth of a child -you have seen evidence of God. Keep in mind, most of the Earth is technically considered inhabitable for humans. We have adapted. This is not God, this is a basic law of darwinism. Evolution is a very long drawn out process, spanning hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of years. Proof of evolution would be sub-species. Many religious people fail to effectively prove how sub-species that form due to a change in environs as part of "God's great plan". It is easily explained by adaptation to a climate/environmental change. Once again, the human brain is a marvel of evolution. The earth is older than 6 thousand years, thanks to carbon dating for that proof. There are human fossils that are over 1.4 million years old, not 6 thousand years old. Besides, we only use approximately 5-8 percent of our brains capacity. Thus, if the human brain was constructed by a God, it is faulty. So God is a prick with a sick sense of humor, or he screwed up. I have seen no empiracal evidence of God, nor ever will. People used to believe God held us to the ground and that gravity was blasphemy. Through several theorums and tests conducted, we learn. Followers of God dont look to prove an existance of God, your only options are "believe it or else". It is so surprising that in an age of knowledge, we still cling to bronze age superstitions. And about the wind, people used to credit that with being God's presence, but that was disproven. sparky, I was really loving what you were writing, right up to that 5-8% of our brain nonsense. For the luv of pete, how do people still think this? How does this make sense to anyone? Has anyone ever heard of anyone ever getting any kind of brain injury whatsoever where the doctor comes back and says "eh, don't worry about it. You weren't using that part anyway"???? NO!!! You know why? BECAUSE YOU BLOODY WELL USE 100% OF YOUR BRAIN. talk about your tragically persistant and stupid urban myths... Okay, bad example for not being explained thoroughly on my end. With the human brain, 5-8 percent is used consciously, while the other 92-95 percent is used sub-consciously. There is still a lot of debate as to whether or not it is possible to use any of the larger percent consciously. If we can tap into more of the subconscious brain to use consciously, then we would be inherently flawed on creation. A better example of proof of God's non-existence would be the spleen. It doesn't really serve much of a purpose anatomically, but it used to. This is a piece of anatomy which, through evolutionary processes, does not have a purpose anymore. So, would God add something to the formula that is unnecessary and useless? Would this mean, as a creator, that a creation of God's, made in his image, was flawed upon creation? And if so, would this mean that the creator's ability and skill was flawed?  You shoulda quit while you were behind...
Like I think most people, I consciously use about 10% of my brain. And the spleen has a function in the body. Geeze, was that the best you could come up with? If you want to show that God doesn't exist by way of example of extraneous body parts, why not use some that make sense? Say, like body hair? Or wisdom teeth? Penises that are, on average, 6 inches long where 1.5 inches are all that's needed for impregnation? Fully developed mammary glands in females w/o them being pregnant or nursing? Or the tiny little undeveloped uterous(sp?) in every male? The woman's cliterous(sp?)? Sheesh, there are so many better examples you could've used... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think only God can prove it,,,He has proven it to me,,but it is an individual experience and an individual knowledge That's very nice. So if I never believe, it's God's fault for never proving it to me. I like that. That's good stuff. no, its not about blame or fault. Its about individual desire to seek and willingness to believe. We find what we look for, if we are looking for the 'evidence' that he doesnt exist,, Im sure we can convince ourselves we found it. We can come up with self made conclusions about what constitutes proof of our belief,, God is not to be tested, he is to be saught I've sought and I did not find. I am only willing to believe what is provable, logical, and reasonable. I would be more than happy to believe in your god, were there any convincing evidence. However, after having read your bible and concluding that if your god existed, he's little more than a petty childish tyrant, upon being convinced of his existance, I would so join Satan in his fight against him. So maybe it's a good thing I don't believe, huh. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think only God can prove it,,,He has proven it to me,,but it is an individual experience and an individual knowledge That's very nice. So if I never believe, it's God's fault for never proving it to me. I like that. That's good stuff. no, its not about blame or fault. Its about individual desire to seek and willingness to believe. We find what we look for, if we are looking for the 'evidence' that he doesnt exist,, Im sure we can convince ourselves we found it. We can come up with self made conclusions about what constitutes proof of our belief,, God is not to be tested, he is to be saught I've sought and I did not find. I am only willing to believe what is provable, logical, and reasonable. I would be more than happy to believe in your god, were there any convincing evidence. However, after having read your bible and concluding that if your god existed, he's little more than a petty childish tyrant, upon being convinced of his existance, I would so join Satan in his fight against him. So maybe it's a good thing I don't believe, huh.
AS I said before, each person will require different things as 'proof' and not everyone that calls Oh Lord will find him(as the bible also says), but multitudes have. It is good that you dont try to fight against him,, I agree. |
|
|
|
|
