what proof is there that god exists? (1 Viewer)

[ComingUpForAir]

I think that people believe that there is a God because it's quite obvious there is something metaphysical out there, and in us.

No..horrible logic, just because our brains cannot comprehend most concepts (i.e those things that we did not evolve around), does not make those things 'metaphysical', or 'divine', or whatever..we just say 'we don't know', and in fact we know why we don't know.

Think about how unlikely it would be for us to turn out like this, if not for a particular design by a particular someone, and just by pure random evolutionary chance.

Totally wrong, go learn what evolution actually posits (the exitence of humans has nothing to do with 'random chance'), and while your at it go learn the probability axioms, then apologise for asserting such lowly thinking on the matter

 

[BradCube]

I don't really know if you are a troll or not, but here's a reply anyway...

incorret, the reason we 'dis-affirm' claims about the existence of fairys, 'god', etc is because they are unfalsifiable, there is no piece of evidence I could present to you that would result in you rejecting your 'faith' (A definition very similar to self-indoctrination). Much of the confusion about the existence of God boils down to the fact it is a 'nothing' statment, 'God' can mean anything, whereas 'santa claus' has a fairly concrete definiton.

Two points:

1. I do think that certain conceptions of God are falsifiable (via showing such a conception to be logically incoherent or otherwise).
2. I don't see any reason to accept that something which is unfalsifiable should be positively dis-affirmed - rather I would maintain that we should simply lack affirmation of it's existence (agnosticism)

What do you mean by 'God' Bradcube? Does it listen to your prayers? occasionaly suspend the laws of natures? i.e; is it a thiestic God...now if it is, your wrong in asserting we have reason to believe in 'it', but if your notion of God is some vaporish 'force for love' or someshit, then of course you can claim you have some 'reason' to beleive in it..

I mean the standard theistic christian God.

Atheist just means you are not a theist. done.

The term atheist hasn't always been typically used in this way. That is, it has not usually meant an a-theist or non-theist - this seems to be a new trend (which I suspect is because many hard-line atheists don't want the burden of proof required of their position). It just seems to add confusion to what people's real positions are.

Hahahah..i really pity your mind if you havent realised that the argument for God derives its entire strengh on the fact it can never be falsified, or contradicted, or whatever.
Why? because, again, no variation of God is a clearly defined entity.

Conceptions of God are plenty clear enough to be falsified, I don't really understand your point here.

And what would be the point of trying to pick out say passages of the bible that contradict, the cult members will just say thats because it is just an 'interpretation' or something..and God 'moves in mysterious ways'...

There could be numerous points (just thinking off the top of my head):

1. You could have established good reasons for not adopting their worldview
2. You may be exposed to a reasoned defense of their worldview and interpretation to which you were not previously familiar with.
3. You may allow "cult" members to beginning seeking out truth more vigorously through questioning their beliefs
4. If "cult" members have an unwarranted worldview, you may convince them of such.

WOW UR LOGIC IS SHIT, FUCK YOUR AN IDIOT

Bleh, personal attack, not much more to mention here.

okay and their are plenty of arguments from natural fairyology, ie:

Magical Wand Arguments
Pixie dust Arguments
Arguments from Invisibility
Arguments from Reason
Arguments from Seedy Men In Cars With Lollies (Ontological Arguments)
Arguments from Consitpated Men on the Toliet (ie Reformed Epistemology)
Arguments for the Resurrection of Peter Pan

Of course, I am not familiar with all of these (it would be a lifetimes work) but I am familar with the intricacies of a few (especially the second last). Nevertheless, arguments are out there if you're keen enough to work through them.

If you think you have serious arguments for the existence of fairies feel free to post the logical premises behind each argument.

ie, Kalam Cosmological Argument:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist
3. Therefore the universe has a cause

Gods primary purpose is for us to have a relationship with him?
what utterly bizarre downright non-sense.
You think Gods PRIMARY purpose is to have a relatioship with YOU, that it cares about YOU
Have your seriously not taken a step back and thought about the logical consequencess of such a statement, I mean, why did not God just zap everyone into a nice room to begin with? he can have a great relationship with them? why put all those animals throught millenium of poverty and violence? what kind of sick fantasy is this?
It's so hilariously obvious that you are engaged in WISHTHINKING, thats right, your pathetic little mind has latched itself onto some shitty little logical fallacy in some weird attempt to give your life 'meaning'.
what an utter fail.

There are a few things one could pose when looking at why God would create a world as he has rather than zapping "everyone into a nice room". Perhaps God prefers freewill and moral responsibility over a forced relationship with him?

 

[theism]

there is no proof.
there is alot of evidence however.

i think it would be easier for you to tell me why you don't believe in God,
and i will explain that way.

 

[ad infinitum]

I don't really know if you are a troll or not, but here's a reply anyway...


Two points:

1. I do think that certain conceptions of God are falsifiable (via showing such a conception to be logically incoherent or otherwise).
2. I don't see any reason to accept that something which is unfalsifiable should be positively dis-affirmed - rather I would maintain that we should simply lack affirmation of it's existence (agnosticism)

It's not up to small heads like you to decide questions of epistemology. They have been decided for you, and yes, you are wrong.

I mean the standard theistic christian God.

Of which centuary? of which schism? of which interpretation?
Answer these specific questions-
1. Do you talk to this god of yours?
2. In what manner do you communicate with these voices (i.e voices in your head? Rain drop Morse code?, etc)
3. What do these voices/messages tell you? What insights do they offer you?

The term atheist hasn't always been typically used in this way. That is, it has not usually meant an a-theist or non-theist - this seems to be a new trend (which I suspect is because many hard-line atheists don't want the burden of proof required of their position). It just seems to add confusion to what people's real positions are.

Yes, the term has been corrupted by theists....its proper definition still remains absence of theism.

Conceptions of God are plenty clear enough to be falsified, I don't really understand your point here.

Uh, I thought Genesis was a pretty clear (open to be falsified) truth claim. It got tested, and found to be wrong, evolution trumped this babyish theory, therefore this Christian god is falsified. BUT WAIT. Oh no! Genesis was a 'metaphor'..! It isn't falsifiable only in the minds of the indoctrinated because their thought processes do not adhere to the norms of logic in matters of religion.

Furthermore, the Christian god is meant to answer prays. What prayers of yours has he answered? All tests have shown that 'prayer' has absolutely null effect. God=Falsified?

There could be numerous points (just thinking off the top of my head):

1. You could have established good reasons for not adopting their worldview
2. You may be exposed to a reasoned defense of their worldview and interpretation to which you were not previously familiar with.
3. You may allow "cult" members to beginning seeking out truth more vigorously through questioning their beliefs
4. If "cult" members have an unwarranted worldview, you may convince them of such.

Err, evolution is an 'established good reason for not adopting' god, or at least the christian (or theist) God.

Bleh, personal attack, not much more to mention here.

He's right.

If you think you have serious arguments for the existence of fairies feel free to post the logical premises behind each argument.

ie, Kalam Cosmological Argument:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist
3. Therefore the universe has a cause

Fairy Cosmological Argument:

2. Whatever invisible magic that exist has a cause
2. Therefore invisible magic began to exist
3. Therefore invisible magic has a cause

There are a few things one could pose when looking at why God would create a world as he has rather than zapping "everyone into a nice room". Perhaps God prefers freewill and moral responsibility over a forced relationship with him?

People can have free will and moral responsibility in a nice room with God....not even going to grant a response to your thoughts here, they are truly retarded.

 

[BradCube]

It's not up to small heads like you to decide questions of epistemology. They have been decided for you, and yes, you are wrong.

Which parts have been decided for me and furthermore, why is my position wrong? Please offer some reasoning for your stance.

Of which centuary? of which schism? of which interpretation?
Answer these specific questions-
1. Do you talk to this god of yours?
2. In what manner do you communicate with these voices (i.e voices in your head? Rain drop Morse code?, etc)
3. What do these voices/messages tell you? What insights do they offer you?

We needn't get as specific as this in order to have ways to falsify conceptions of God. There will be broad characteristics that apply to a variety of "interpretations" - ie the trinity, that God is loving, omnipotence etc. Onto your questions:

1. Yes

2. Generally inner dialogue or out-loud (when praying with others) in the cases where I am communicating to God. From God to me is not a "voice" that I hear, it's an inner conviction. Also don't forget that Christians regard the Bible as a way for God teach and communicate principles with them.

3. Generally I am convicted of sin in my own life (that was previously unknown or unrecognized), helped in ways I should relate to individuals and also given guidance in where to precede in my life and what changes I need to make.

Yes, the term has been corrupted by theists....its proper definition still remains absence of theism.

Corrupted by theists? Well, whichever way it came to have the meaning it does today, I still see no reason to separate it from agnosticism.

Uh, I thought Genesis was a pretty clear (open to be falsified) truth claim. It got tested, and found to be wrong, evolution trumped this babyish theory, therefore this Christian god is falsified. BUT WAIT. Oh no! Genesis was a 'metaphor'..! It isn't falsifiable only in the minds of the indoctrinated because their thought processes do not adhere to the norms of logic in matters of religion.

For what it's worth, non-literal interpretations of the Genesis account of creation occurred well before any theories surrounding evolution popped up to "test" it. St Augustine for example, believed that the universe was created with everything in place as we observe it today.

Furthermore, the Christian god is meant to answer prays. What prayers of yours has he answered? All tests have shown that 'prayer' has absolutely null effect. God=Falsified?

I'm at a loss to think of how this even matters. No one is offering a proof of God's existence on the basis of answer to prayer. Furthermore, trying to falsify God on the basis of answer to prayer (or lack thereof) also seems nothing more than unsubstantiated speculation on your part. How would you go about showing that an event was or was not an answer to prayer?

Err, evolution is an 'established good reason for not adopting' god, or at least the christian (or theist) God.

Perhaps if one was only considering a design argument from biology then you might be right (assuming that all of what evolution proposes is true). However, this sort of thinking ignores design arguments that consider the design of the universe as a whole (ie the "fine-tuning of the universe") as well as cosmological arguments, moral arguments, arguments from consciousness, arguments from reason etc.

Fairy Cosmological Argument:

2. Whatever invisible magic that exist has a cause
2. Therefore invisible magic began to exist
3. Therefore invisible magic has a cause

Your premises are unwarranted (not to mention the second one isn't even a premise but an out of place conclusion) and your final conclusion doesn't follow necessarily from the premises laid out before it. This means the argument is not valid, and even if it was, it's not sound. It might be worth reading up on deductive logic before reformulating arguments. A good starting point might be here?

People can have free will and moral responsibility in a nice room with God....not even going to grant a response to your thoughts here, they are truly retarded.

The point though is that if people can have true free will and moral responsibility within the proposed "nice room" the room may not be quite so "nice" after all. That is to say, that such a room may not be all that dissimilar from the earth in which we find ourselves.

 

[ad infinitum]

1. Yes

2. Generally inner dialogue or out-loud (when praying with others) in the cases where I am communicating to God. From God to me is not a "voice" that I hear, it's an inner conviction. Also don't forget that Christians regard the Bible as a way for God teach and communicate principles with them.

3. Generally I am convicted of sin in my own life (that was previously unknown or unrecognized), helped in ways I should relate to individuals and also given guidance in where to precede in my life and what changes I need to make.

You exhibit the symptoms of someone with a serious mental illness (schizophrenia). I would recommend you consult a mental health expert. Seriously, if you are experiencing voices that are not your own, telling you that you have 'sinned', you are in need of some serious help.

Corrupted by theists? Well, whichever way it came to have the meaning it does today, I still see no reason to separate it from agnosticism.

I see no reason for the word 'agnosticism'. Its a silly term, coined for a silly position, by a silly man.

For what it's worth, non-literal interpretations of the Genesis account of creation occurred well before any theories surrounding evolution popped up to "test" it. St Augustine for example, believed that the universe was created with everything in place as we observe it today.

?So you agree with my point? Evolution falsifies genesis, hence the bible is falsified, hence Christianity is falsified?...

I'm at a loss to think of how this even matters. No one is offering a proof of God's existence on the basis of answer to prayer. Furthermore, trying to falsify God on the basis of answer to prayer (or lack thereof) also seems nothing more than unsubstantiated speculation on your part. How would you go about showing that an event was or was not an answer to prayer?

It says in the bible that this God of yours answers prayers. They are clearly not. Many double blind, placebo controlled,etc studies have been done, all point to the same conclusion.

Perhaps if one was only considering a design argument from biology then you might be right (assuming that all of what evolution proposes is true). However, this sort of thinking ignores design arguments that consider the design of the universe as a whole (ie the "fine-tuning of the universe") as well as cosmological arguments, moral arguments, arguments from consciousness, arguments from reason etc.

Christianity is a design argument. 'God created man in his image'....
Stop retreating to deism, you are a Christian.

Your premises are unwarranted (not to mention the second one isn't even a premise but an out of place conclusion) and your final conclusion doesn't follow necessarily from the premises laid out before it. This means the argument is not valid, and even if it was, it's not sound. It might be worth reading up on deductive logic before reformulating arguments. A good starting point might be here?

LOL....I was parodying your logic.

The point though is that if people can have true free will and moral responsibility within the proposed "nice room" the room may not be quite so "nice" after all. That is to say, that such a room may not be all that dissimilar from the earth in which we find ourselves.

Why does god allow innocent babies to be tortured and die?

 

[CecilyMare]

No..horrible logic, just because our brains cannot comprehend most concepts (i.e those things that we did not evolve around), does not make those things 'metaphysical', or 'divine', or whatever..we just say 'we don't know', and in fact we know why we don't know.

It wasn't made up of logic in the first place. It was an opinion.

Also you're quite clearly one of those people who require loads of evidence to have any belief in the possibility of anything. You may as well not have faith in anything at all.

Totally wrong, go learn what evolution actually posits (the exitence of humans has nothing to do with 'random chance'), and while your at it go learn the probability axioms, then apologise for asserting such lowly thinking on the matter

It has a lot to do with random chance. In fact, take the big bang theory. That started with something completely uncalled for.

 

[theism]

come on new discussion!!

lets go.

 

[BradCube]

You exhibit the symptoms of someone with a serious mental illness (schizophrenia). I would recommend you consult a mental health expert. Seriously, if you are experiencing voices that are not your own, telling you that you have 'sinned', you are in need of some serious help.

Again, it is not an audible "voice" but close to an inner conviction. Thanks for the advice, but I'll let those I interact with daily in real life guide me as to when I should be paying a visit to the shrink

?So you agree with my point? Evolution falsifies genesis, hence the bible is falsified, hence Christianity is falsified?...

I think you may have missed the entire point I was making. I was saying that no, evolution does not falsify Genesis because Christians needn't be held to a literal interpretation of the 6 day creation event and this was the case before evolution "disproved" it. The point of mentioning Augustine was so that you could see that even early church forefathers didn't hold a literal interpretation of Genesis.

It says in the bible that this God of yours answers prayers. They are clearly not. Many double blind, placebo controlled,etc studies have been done, all point to the same conclusion.

Again, I ask how you can possibly test whether a prayer has or has not been answered. My guess is that you are assuming a negative answer is not an answer?

Christianity is a design argument. 'God created man in his image'....
Stop retreating to deism, you are a Christian.

Stop retreating to Deism? I don't understand you at all. Deism maintains that there is a supreme being that created the universe - a belief Christianity also holds - it's just that Christianity gets more specific in the characteristic and nature of this being and holds that it interacts with humanity. As such, many arguments from natural theology that apply to deism will be pertinent to the Christian conception of God.

LOL....I was parodying your logic.

I realize that, but the point was that it was a terrible parody. The Kalam Cosmological Argument I posted is logically valid (that is, its conclusion follows necessarily from its premises) and I'm also of the opinion that it is sound.

Why does god allow innocent babies to be tortured and die?

This all comes back to the suffering argument. Again, I think the freewill defense as given before provides an acceptable philosophical answer (even if on an emotional level it is still difficult to deal with).

 

[theism]

so why can't you believe in God?

 

[ad infinitum]

Again, it is not an audible "voice" but close to an inner conviction. Thanks for the advice, but I'll let those I interact with daily in real life guide me as to when I should be paying a visit to the shrink

Elaborate on what you mean by 'inner conviction'. Do you control it? From what you have said it is some external voice/force, this is not normal; and defined as schizophrenia (when you perceive some of your own thoughts as foreign). I'm not joking, you should seek some serious medical help if these 'convictions' keep occurring.

I think you may have missed the entire point I was making. I was saying that no, evolution does not falsify Genesis because Christians needn't be held to a literal interpretation of the 6 day creation event and this was the case before evolution "disproved" it. The point of mentioning Augustine was so that you could see that even early church forefathers didn't hold a literal interpretation of Genesis.

So Evolution does falsify the bible (hence Christianity) if you take Genesis on face value?
Yes, I agree; if you chose some obscure 'metaphor' interpretation of the bible you can shield it from any disapproval (as you could do with a cook book, etc).

Again, I ask how you can possibly test whether a prayer has or has not been answered. My guess is that you are assuming a negative answer is not an answer?

...Well, one study I read about was set up with people praying for sick patients in a hospital. It showed that prayers had no effect, well actually, they had a minor negative effect. Here is a link, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html. All other studies I know of come to the same conclusion (that prayers are in no way 'answered'; as the bible states).

Stop retreating to Deism? I don't understand you at all. Deism maintains that there is a supreme being that created the universe - a belief Christianity also holds - it's just that Christianity gets more specific in the characteristic and nature of this being and holds that it interacts with humanity. As such, many arguments from natural theology that apply to deism will be pertinent to the Christian conception of God.

You are a Christian. You believe that 'God created man in his image' (this is a core tenant of Christianity). This 'design' or 'creation' is completely contrary to what the theory of evolution posits. You are either a Christian or you take Evolution as truth, they are mutually exclusive.

I realize that, but the point was that it was a terrible parody. The Kalam Cosmological Argument I posted is logically valid (that is, its conclusion follows necessarily from its premises) and I'm also of the opinion that it is sound.

The logic used in my parody is a perfect mirror of the logic used in 'Kalam's Argument'. Furthermore I do not even have to refer to a reductio ad absurdum. Kalam's little word game fails overtly. It doesn't even support the idea of a deist god (let alone a theist god), it simply concludes that the 'universe had a cause'....uh yea, I'm not denying that, Scientists are just currently uncertain about what precursed the big bang (there are many theorys however due to the empircal nature of science and the difficulties of this particular problem, none as yet can be supported by any substanial evidence). Science is unsure....this in no way supports the idea of a god. You are simly equating mysteries.

This all comes back to the suffering argument. Again, I think the freewill defense as given before provides an acceptable philosophical answer (even if on an emotional level it is still difficult to deal with).

So if there is free will, God has no power to intervene.He is therefore not all powerful.
Why did he create suffering? A baby cannot exercise it's 'free will' to live? Surely God would have known the intentions and future actions of the tortuer ; he could have stopped the torture of the baby before it happens- doesn't he know the future?....
This whole line of thought descends into a big black hole, because it is all absurd.

 

[Cyrus the Great]

lol red box = shit cunt

 

[theism]

So if there is free will, God has no power to intervene.He is therefore not all powerful.
Why did he create suffering? A baby cannot exercise it's 'free will' to live? Surely God would have known the intentions and future actions of the tortuer ; he could have stopped the torture of the baby before it happens- doesn't he know the future?....
This whole line of thought descends into a big black hole, because it is all absurd.

wrong.

God chose to limit his power, by giving us a free will.

God did not create suffering
Suffering is a direct result of sin.
God did not create sin.

but one thing you would argue.. is 'IF there is a God and God is good, why is there suffering? why is there so much pain'?

ultimately..
i do not know.

But CS Lewis put it so brilliantly that he said.

'Pain is Gods megaphone to rouse a deaf world'

an article

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica] For thousands of years philosophers and theologians have struggled with the classical problem of why an all-loving and all-powerful God would allow evil to exist. In all that time they have never come up with a complete answer.

Neither will I be able to answer that question completely. But as Christians we must think about this issue and, I think, we can approach an answer.

First, some have tried to solve the problem of evil by simply saying God doesn't exist. Evil and good are simply two aspects of reality that war against one another. But if there is no God, there is no Creator to create the ultimate values of good and evil. And if there is no good and evil,the problem of suffering is gone too. If God does not exist, our moral indignation over what we think is wrong is simply personal prejudice, subjective feeling.Bertrand Russell said, "There is no God, therefore there is no good and evil." But deep within us something cries out against the murder of innocent people, the abuse of children, the rape of women. We know these are wrong because our consciences rise up against them.

The conscience is actually a gift from the Creator who is just and who defines good and evil. The fact that a conscience exists indicates therefore, that there is a conscience giver. For without a conscience-giver, without God,we couldn't tell what is good and what isn't. In fact, just before Bertrand Russell died, he said, 'To love is good. To hate is evil." Isn't it amazing that we as human beings have an innate ability and desire to distinguish between good and evil, right and wrong?

Don't make the mistake of using moral indignation as an argument against God's existence. For if there is no God, there is no authority to define what is absolutely right and what is absolutely wrong. Suddenly the individual or society becomes the authority. Good quickly becomes that which is expedient, easiest to do, or economically beneficial. One society says racism or a reign of terror is best for the nation. Another society concludes that equality and freedom are just values. If there is no God to define justice and morality, each society is correct for itself.Everything is relative.

In Marcel Proust's Remembrance of Things Past, a lady named Oriane must decide how to spend an evening. She can either sit by the bed of a dying man or go to dine in town. She has no foundation for morality. There is no choice between good and evil. The choice is simply between what she wants to do and what she doesn't want to do. She chooses to go to dine in town because it takes less effort. There is a type of logic to her decision.She has limited resources in a short life. Why waste them on a dying man? Why not seize the evening for herself?

Jesus Christ steps into this cruel cycle of relativity and points to the values of love and compassion created by God to be enjoyed by men and women.Christ delivers us from the superficiality of a life of expediency and ushers us into a life committed to justice and truth. Deep within each one of us are the fragments of a conscience that long to embrace the values God created for us to enjoy.

Second, Genesis 1 clearly communicates that when God created, all his creation was very good. God did not create evil, suffering or death. He created us to enjoy himself, each other, and to celebrate his gift of life. Genesis 3 is the tragic record of how man and woman chose to reject God. The Bible, history books and the morning newspaper record how an unmeasurable amount of evil has followed in the wake of human rebellion against God. The vast majority of this carnage is a direct result of human choice.

A student at the University of North Carolina protested, "Where is God in Ethiopia? Does he not hear the screams of babies as they starve to death?Why has God done this?"

I responded, "How can you blame God for starving babies in Ethiopia when the best-selling books in the United States are on dieting, on how to take the extra fat off? It is not God's fault that people are starving today. The earth produces enough food right now to give every person 3,000 calories a day. The problem is that some of us hoard for ourselves so that others of us go to bed starving at night. It is a cop-out to blame God for human irresponsibility. If a person gets drunk, drives his car across the median, and sends your friend to an early grave, will you blame God? Do you blame God for Hitler's seven million murders? That would be escapism.The vast majority of human evil and suffering is a direct result of human irresponsibility."

God created us to love him and each other. I deeply love my wife, Sharon.Suppose all I had to do to hear her say, "I love you, Cliffe,"was to push a button in her back and out it would come. That wouldn't be love. That wouldn't be a relationship. It would be a programmed response from a computer. A relationship demands love. Love requires a choice. It cannot be forced. God created us in his image. That means when God commands,we can obey or disobey.

God gave me a hand. I can use this hand to pick up a gun and shoot you or I can use this hand to feed hungry people. God gave me a mind. I can use my mind to build a bomb or to find a cure for cancer. If I blast people into oblivion and then blame God, I am an escape artist. God did not force me to travel down either path. I chose to abuse the gift of a mind that God gave me. Evil is one of the consequences of the freedom God has given us. I preach Christ because I want people to use their freedom to choose good.

Third, in light of the fact that human beings rebelled against God and created enormous suffering, why doesn't God punish us now? C. S. Lewis said, 'The question is not 'Why do the innocent suffer?' but rather Why don't we all suffer more?' " At the time of Noah, God judged people by sending a flood because every inclination of their thoughts was only evil all the time (Gen 6:5). God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of the people's wickedness. God used the Jewish nation to judge the Canaanite nations for sacrificing their babies and indulging in temple prostitution. Then God used the Assyrian and Babylonian nations to judge the Jewish nation for its idolatry.When some people told Jesus about those whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices and about the eighteen who died when the tower of Siloam fell on them, Jesus replied, "Do you think these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish" (Lk 13:1-5).

Jesus promised to return and to justly judge the peoples of the earth. Christ will destroy sin, evil and injustice when he comes in power and great glory.Why doesn't God end all evil now? Why doesn't Christ end human history now?The Bible reveals, "The Lord . . . is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (2 Pet 3:9).I do not know when or why God chooses to judge and punish people today.But I do know that he is patiently waiting for us to humble ourselves before him and to receive his forgiveness and eternal life. Now is the time to choose. When he returns, judgment will begin.

Fourth, at the University of Maine a young man painfully asked, "My younger sister fell on the concrete next to a pool. She broke some bones.When she was just about healed, she fell again and broke some more bones.Her bones were nearly mended when she stumbled and broke another bone. What's the story? Is God playing a sadistic game with my little sister?"

Babies are born with multiple birth defects. Genetic disorders plague many of us. An earthquake levels a city, and thousands lose their lives in the rubble. The Bible teaches that there is not always a one-to-one correspondence between sin and suffering. When we human beings told God to shove off, he partially honored our request. Nature began to revolt. The earth was cursed.Genetic breakdown and disease began. Pain and death became part of the human experience. The good creation was marred. We live in an unjust world. We are born into a world made chaotic and unfair by a humanity in revolt against its Creator.

Fifth, the book of Job reveals there is a personal being named Satan who works to bring pain, disaster and death into the lives of people. If a person suffers and is angry with God, frequently that is misplaced anger. God is the giver of life. Satan is the destroyer, the one who tears down life. Often pain is not the direct result of sin but rather the handiwork of Satan. Paul, for example, wrote to the Corinthians, "There was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me" (2 Cor 12:7).

Sixth, in Jesus, God stepped into this world marred by human rebellion and the destruction of Satan. When Jesus was confronted by pain and disease,he brought healing through the use of a miracle. He did not use his supernatural power to feather his nest but rather to heal the sick and raise the dead.

Jesus commanded his followers not only to trust him in all circumstances but also to love those who bring them pain. Jesus said, "If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.... Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Mt 5:39, 44). This type of trust in God and love for all people produces Christlike character. Paul writes, "Suffering produces perseverance; Perseverance, character"(Rom 5:3-4).

C. S. Lewis writes, "God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains: it is his megaphone to rouse a deaf world." The amazing truth taught in Scripture is that God can take suffering and pain, and produce something good and beautiful. Many people have told me how God used pain and tragedy to wake them out of spiritual lethargy and bring them to a point of decision for Christ. Aleksandr Solzhenitsvn writes, "Bless you, prison, for having been in my life." The prison wasn't good. But God could bring good out of it.

The question each one of us must answer is, "Will I allow suffering to drive me to Christ for salvation and the power to be Christlike in character, or will I allow suffering to drive me into bitterness and despair?"

Seventh, the great news of the Bible is that God cares so deeply for hurting people that he has provided the solution for suffering and death. Jesus commands us to be agents of compassion and justice in a decaying world.To fight pain and suffering is not simply an option for a follower of Christ.It is an expression of his love for God. John writes, "This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers. If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth" (1 Jn 3:16-18). Followers of Christ use science, medicine, law, business, education and any other tool to alleviate suffering, prolong life, promote justice, and enhance the quality of life.

The great news of the Bible is that God is a suffering God. He suffered in Jesus Christ. God is not a philosophical notion floating in space. God is a personal being who became man in Jesus of Nazareth. He died on a cross to provide the ultimate solution for suffering and death. His solution is forgiveness and eternal life. Christ rose from the dead. Over a period of forty days he appeared to over five hundred people. He ascended to his Father in heaven. He promised to come again to destroy all evil, suffering and death. He will transform this chaotic, unjust world into an orderly, just world. "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away" (Rev 21:4). If there is no all-knowing, all powerful God who stands at the end of human history, justice shall never ultimately win.The wrongs will never be made right. Evil, suffering and death triumph.

But Christ taught that history was ultimately God's story.

The question is, "Have I accepted God's solution to the problem of suffering? Have I accepted Christ?" I cannot hide behind the question,'Why does God allow suffering?" But I can embrace God's solution for suffering by putting my trust in Jesus Christ for eternal life and allowing Christ to thrust me into a hurting world to administer his love, forgiveness and healing. [/FONT]

 

[theism]

But god DID create man in his own image. And yet, god's own creation sinned and disobeyed him. Why then, did god create imperfect humans? God made adam and eve who gave into their desires and ate from the tree of knowledge. If they were certainly made in "god's image", wouldn't they have obeyed god? Or is my interpretation too literal?

Good question.

Perhaps this will shed more light on the 'image of God' part.

HOW ARE HUMANS MADE IN GOD’S IMAGE?
There’s something special about people and we all know it. The death of a person is simply a different category than the death of an ivy vine, an insect, or even an idea. So what makes humans different than anything else? Maybe the Bible provides a clue when it says that humans were made in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26-27).
But what exactly does this mean? How are humans made in God’s image? Perhaps we should take a closer look at this mysterious biblical phrase.
For starters, it's likely that the Hebrew and Greek terms used for “image” and “likeness” in the Bible are interchangeable. There is no indication that these are two distinct characteristics. In fact, the writer of Genesis is probably just emphasizing one idea by using two different words. But what is this idea? A helpful concept comes from the Greek word for image, eikon, where we
get our word icon. Consider how an icon on a computer screen works. It’s a small picture that represents and points to another file or program when functioning properly. In the same way, human beings or Eikons, are people who somehow represent and reflect God himself when functioning as designed.


The Bible also says that Adam and Eve were created in the image of God and that all subsequent human descendants – that means you and me – carry the image of God as well. So, every human being you’ve ever met or will meet is made in the image of God. There is no indication that any persons are made in the image of God the slightest bit more or less than other persons. In fact, people who may be tempted to think they are less valuable according to
the world’s standards – the chronically ill, poor, immigrants, orphans, outcasts, or socially marginalized – are often highlighted in the Bible as especially significant to God. What’s more, sin itself doesn’t destroy the image of God in us. Sin seems to corrupt, corrode or distort the image, but does not eradicate it completely. Surely, we are all cracked Eikons beyond the abilities of self-repair. Nevertheless, there remains a glimmer of God’s image in all of us.

So if we have the image of God, what is the image of God? Or as one Christian scholar asks, what does it mean to be an Eikon? Because Genesis does not provide an exhaustive explanation, theologians have offered three slightly different answers. First, the image of God could be something substantive that humans possess that separates us from God’s other creatures.
Perhaps it is the human ability to reason, the freedom of will, a sense of morality, or an immaterial soul/spirit. As far as we know, no other living things have these qualities in the same way as we do. Thus, according to this view, the image of God is one or several substantive qualities that God has uniquely given to humans. Another view is that the image of God is not something resident in human nature, but the actual experience of a relationship. Put a different way, when a person is in relationship with God and other people, he or she bears the image of God. So, when God originally made
humans uniquely in his image, he made beings with an unmatched ability to relate to each other and to himself. And though sin brings brokenness into our relationships, it does not remove the relating ability altogether. Even people at odds with one another have a relationship, albeit a fractured one.

Last, some theologians suggest that the image of God is functional. In other words, when we do as God has instructed and live out the function for which we were made, we bear his image. Pointing to Genesis 1:26-28, these scholars suggest that our purpose – being fruitful and ruling over the earth – bears the image. Another picture might be helpful here. Ancient rulers scattered statues of themselves across the land over which they ruled. These images reminded
the subjects of their sovereign ruler and functioned to maintain his dominion over the land. In the same way, perhaps humans are images of God scattered across the land he created. And when we live out our stewardship responsibility, we most truly bear God’s image. So, which is it? A quality we have been given, an ability to be in relationship, or a purpose we serve? Maybe there is no right answer. It could be that the Bible is intentionally vague because all three are important. Perhaps we don’t so much need a theological system to analyze as a model to follow. This leads to an extremely significant conclusion.

In Jesus Christ, we see the only perfect and complete example of one who fully bore God's image. On one hand, this is because Jesus was God. This is why the apostle Paul said that Jesus “is the image [eikon] of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15 TNIV). But on the other hand, Jesus was fully human. In fact, he is more human that any one else who has ever lived. Jesus was
tempted in every way humans are, yet he never sinned (Hebrews 4:15). He also lived in perfect relationship with God the Father (John 17:21). Moreover, Jesus obeyed God fully and fulfilled his earthly purpose completely (John 17:4). Put simply, in light of the person he was and the life he lived, Jesus provides the perfect example of God’s image to us. This is why the Bible also
exhorts us – as cracked Eikons who dimly bear the image of God – to be “conformed to the
image of his Son”

 

[ComingUpForAir]

God chose to limit his power

In this statment you claim to know the mind of 'God', if you don't realise whats wrong with such a proposition, I seriously question how you manage to wipe your own ass.

God did not create suffering

But if one asserts he created the universe, then he enabled suffering and pain

Suffering is a direct result of sin.

What a nauseating statment, what exactly were the sins of the thousands of babies who died horrible deaths soon after they where born?
If you ever said this anywhere other than a internet forum you would get that greasy little head of yours caved the f**k in

i do not know.

Correct

But CS Lewis put it so brilliantly that he said.
'Pain is Gods megaphone to rouse a deaf world'

more disturbed sadomasicistic babble, you really would be physically hurt if you read this rubbish out at some infants funeral, you remind me of the overweight and unkept cult leaders who said the 9/11 attacks where punishments for our 'sins'.
disgusting sheep, my dog is smarter than you

 

[xMaFF]

Before I start my argument, I'd like to state that, I'm Christian.
I acknowledge that my arguments may therefore be "biased," in regards to the topic:
"What proof is there that God exists?"

However, the argument has taken a different direction,
In that the arguments presented are currently addressing:
- Whether God / religion holds position in one's morals in judgment, or "inner conviction"
- "Freedom" and "Power" given by God to its creations
- Exercising God's "Justice / Punishment" and God's method(s) addressing "Sin"
- "Man is perfect, as man was created in God's own image"

(Does anyone else think of Death Note or FFX when "Sin / Judgment" comes to mind?) XD


Religion and deities do possess some significance in affecting one's morals in judgment as religion, altogether, is a way of life. All religions have unique teachings and morals. These morals and teachings are interpreted by its peoples and practiced through everyday life. Therefore, not everybody's definition of "Justice" is the same, as all religions have unique traditions and respective morals.

However, it is not necessary for an individual to hold belief in a "religion" to have a sense of "Justice" or "Inner conviction" as external environments and phenomena provide thought in expressing their opinions and control in their behavior.

As stated before, by theism, God did not create suffering, as:

God chose to limit his power, by giving us a free will.

God did not create suffering
Suffering is a direct result of sin.
God did not create sin.
​

I agree with this ^__^
In relation to "Perfectionism and God's Image in Man," I would like to explain that all of you are correct (I think?) This is my opinion,

God created man in his own image
Our "imperfections" are what make us perfect
But saying that nobody is perfect is an insult to God
Because God is perfect.
Those who are in a constant state of grace
Are perfect
Because they are close to God.
​

I hope that addressed everything...
And at the original question -- Is there any proof that God DOES NOT exist?

God exists because there is faith.
There is faith because people believe.
People believe because we have free will. (n___n)

 

[ComingUpForAir]

Before I start my argument, I'd like to state that, I'm Christian.
I acknowledge that my arguments may therefore be "biased," in regards to the topic:
"What proof is there that God exists?"

However, the argument has taken a different direction,
In that the arguments presented are currently addressing:
- Whether God / religion holds position in one's morals in judgment, or "inner conviction"
- "Freedom" and "Power" given by God to its creations
- Exercising God's "Justice / Punishment" and God's method(s) addressing "Sin"
- "Man is perfect, as man was created in God's own image"

(Does anyone else think of Death Note or FFX when "Sin / Judgment" comes to mind?) XD


Religion and deities do possess some significance in affecting one's morals in judgment as religion, altogether, is a way of life. All religions have unique teachings and morals. These morals and teachings are interpreted by its peoples and practiced through everyday life. Therefore, not everybody's definition of "Justice" is the same, as all religions have unique traditions and respective morals.

However, it is not necessary for an individual to hold belief in a "religion" to have a sense of "Justice" or "Inner conviction" as external environments and phenomena provide thought in expressing their opinions and control in their behavior.

As stated before, by theism, God did not create suffering, as:

God chose to limit his power, by giving us a free will.​

God did not create suffering
Suffering is a direct result of sin.
God did not create sin.​

I agree with this ^__^
In relation to "Perfectionism and God's Image in Man," I would like to explain that all of you are correct (I think?) This is my opinion,

God created man in his own image
Our "imperfections" are what make us perfect
But saying that nobody is perfect is an insult to God
Because God is perfect.
Those who are in a constant state of grace
Are perfect
Because they are close to God.​

I hope that addressed everything...
And at the original question -- Is there any proof that God DOES NOT exist?

God exists because there is faith.
There is faith because people believe.
People believe because we have free will. (n___n)

your wall-of-white-noise manages to convey, and re-enforce, the precise definition of religion;
unknowable information in terms of the not-worth-knowing ....(special emphasis on the 'not-worth-knowing' component)

(such a slab of text does not dignify a response, I feel unclean for even responding with this much)

 

[theism]

In this statment you claim to know the mind of 'God', if you don't realise whats wrong with such a proposition, I seriously question how you manage to wipe your own ass.

honestly friend you can personally attack me all you want.
it doesn't get you anywhere.

I do not know the mind of God,
however if you read the bible, which is the inspired word of God, you can ascertain the statement with evidence.

But if one asserts he created the universe, then he enabled suffering and pain

wrong again.
he allows suffering to occur, yes.

What a nauseating statment, what exactly were the sins of the thousands of babies who died horrible deaths soon after they where born?

I can guarantee you, all of the evil in the world today is as a result of mans sin.
ie. greed, pride, lust, etc.

If you ever said this anywhere other than a internet forum you would get that greasy little head of yours caved the f**k in

hah
good luck with that..


now a question for you.

what do you live for,
and what is the evidence that whatever you are living for, is trustworthy?
what is the evidence that whatever you are living for is reliable?

 

[theism]

[/font]
If he gave us FREE WILL to sin, then what right does he have to punish us if we choose to act on out free will?

I'm sorry.
that's not a valid argument.

it's like your parents allowing you to go to a party.
if you go to the party get drunk/high, and come home.
you can't say to your father 'you can't punish me.. you let me go to the party!'

I actually believe that there is NO god. What say you about that?

if there is no God, life is purposeless, morality is relative and death is the end.

what is the purpose of your life, and what evidence is there that proves it is trustworthy and reliable?

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

I'm sorry.
that's not a valid argument.

it's like your parents allowing you to go to a party.
if you go to the party get drunk/high, and come home.
you can't say to your father 'you can't punish me.. you let me go to the party!'

I stand corrected.

if there is no God, life is purposeless, morality is relative and death is the end.

what is the purpose of your life, and what evidence is there that proves it is trustworthy and reliable?

I'm afraid I'm going to have to beg to differ. Must we have a purpose to live? I live because I want to live; not because of some imaginary being telling what I can and can't do. And, if death is the end, so be it.

Why waste your time now if you know there's something better after death? Woulodn't it be more prudent to slaughter our young now so they are ensured a one-way ticket to heaven.