Evidence for God?

[Boss]

Nice strawman argument

A spiritual being who can mess with the physical world, but the spirit gives him protection from the physical world. You creator tells us that we will become spirit or alternatively, we are also spirit.

Thus, there is no protection and you must explain the origin of God.

Not a strawman argument. A logical argument you have no rebuttal for.

I don't need to explain the existence of something that has alway existed. You continue to demand a physical explanation for that which is not physical. It's really no different than me demanding you spiritually prove gravity is only a physical force.

As for your line about "protection from the physical" ...that made me laugh. Why would God need protection from what He created? That doesn't even make rational sense.

For the record, I can sympathize with your viewpoint. If I did not believe in Spiritual Nature, I couldn't accept the concept of a non-physical existence of anything. So, I fully understand, in your mind, the ONLY "existence" is physical. If something has no physical existence, it cannot exist. However, I can shatter your beliefs in one word... Love. Things beyond the physical can and do exist, whether you choose to believe they do or not. The existence of non-physical things requires faith and isn't proved with physical science. There is no way for me to quantify how much love you have for your mother... or how much more you love your mother than your Britney Spears CD collection.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

I wouldn't even call light, energy, magnetism or gravity "physical." We really can't explain these things. They border closer to spirit than matter.

He's desperate to find reasons NOT to believe in the Creator.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Nice strawman argument

A spiritual being who can mess with the physical world, but the spirit gives him protection from the physical world. You creator tells us that we will become spirit or alternatively, we are also spirit.

Thus, there is no protection and you must explain the origin of God.

Not a strawman argument. A logical argument you have no rebuttal for.

I don't need to explain the existence of something that has alway existed. You continue to demand a physical explanation for that which is not physical. It's really no different than me demanding you spiritually prove gravity is only a physical force.

Then I do not need to explain the origin of the universe & life. I can use the very same ridiculous defense.

As for your line about "protection from the physical" ...that made me laugh. Why would God need protection from what He created? That doesn't even make rational sense.

No dummy. You used that as a defense of your argument. It fails.

For the record, I can sympathize with your viewpoint. If I did not believe in Spiritual Nature, I couldn't accept the concept of a non-physical existence of anything. So, I fully understand, in your mind, the ONLY "existence" is physical. If something has no physical existence, it cannot exist. However, I can shatter your beliefs in one word... Love. Things beyond the physical can and do exist, whether you choose to believe they do or not. The existence of non-physical things requires faith and isn't proved with physical science. There is no way for me to quantify how much love you have for your mother... or how much more you love your mother than your Britney Spears CD collection.

You cannot explain where God came from either. None of you can. You have no case against science. You just admitted it.

I can show where your God came from previous God hypotheses. Christianity arose via religious evolution due to natural selection.

 

[Boss]

Then I do not need to explain the origin of the universe & life. I can use the very same ridiculous defense.

It's not about needing to... you can't. You have a tool called physical science. It's extremely useful in explaining things about the physical universe in which you live. It cannot explain things that aren't physical in nature... it's not the proper tool.

No dummy. You used that as a defense of your argument. It fails.

Really? You must be imagining words I never typed if you read something from me which stated God needs to be defended from physics. I simply articulated that God is not a physical being and, therefore, isn't subject to physical evaluation of physical science. Now, if I could magically turn God into a physical being, you could use science to evaluate physical existence, but I can't.

You cannot explain where God came from either. None of you can.

Came from? What do you mean? You continue to talk in physical terms about a non-physical entity. God doesn't "come from" anywhere. Where does the love for your mother come from? (and don't say inside your heart because all we find there is blood and arteries.)

You have no case against science.

LOL... I have never professed to have a case against science. How bizarre! Where in the hell are you getting these ideas from?

I can show where your God came from previous God hypotheses. Christianity arose via religious evolution due to natural selection.

No, you really CAN'T do this. You can attack Christian belief, which is really your entire shtick. That doesn't explain where God came from. Long, long before there were ever any organized religions, there was human spirituality. In fact, it actually dates back to the oldest human civilization we've ever discovered. The archeological evidence shows they routinely practiced ritual ceremonial burial using red ocher. This proves a spiritual belief of some kind. There is no physical explanation for ritual ceremonial burials using red ocher.

Often, we hear the atheist argument that man invented God to deal with fear of the unknown or cope with their own mortality. This absolutely contradicts every theory Darwin ever espoused about natural selection... AND... we find no evidence of this in any other form of life on the planet, now or in the past. It is clearly an argument with zero scientific support. Man has fear of the unknown and needs to cope with his mortality BECAUSE he is spiritually connected!

 

[K9Buck]

Atheists believe, and will always believe, that everything came from nothing.

 

[tecoyah]

Atheists believe, and will always believe, that everything came from nothing.

Untrue...as an Atheist allow me to express what actually defines the majority of us.

"I don't know"

This very simple statement might seem strange to the theist who claim the DO know, but nevertheless puts a nutshell around the basic premise. Few are ignorant enough to make the claim you do for us, but most Atheist/Agnostic people understand that we humans have limited knowledge pertaining to what created our universe, we simply do not accept the "Sky Fairy" hypothesis based on not only the lack of supporting data but, the simple fact that there cannot be one considering the large amount of competing versions claiming all the others are fake.

 

[K9Buck]

Atheists believe, and will always believe, that everything came from nothing.

Untrue...as an Atheist allow me to express what actually defines the majority of us.

"I don't know"

This very simple statement might seem strange to the theist who claim the DO know, but nevertheless puts a nutshell around the basic premise. Few are ignorant enough to make the claim you do for us, but most Atheist/Agnostic people understand that we humans have limited knowledge pertaining to what created our universe, we simply do not accept the "Sky Fairy" hypothesis based on not only the lack of supporting data but, the simple fact that there cannot be one considering the large amount of competing versions claiming all the others are fake.

Well, everything either came from nothing or a superior intellect created this realm along with all of its inhabitants. You mock such a theory as believing in a "sky fairy" while pretending that the theory that the universe created itself is somehow an acceptable "scientific" hypothesis. You guys pretty much adhere to the ABG theory, which stands for "Anything but God".

 

[K9Buck]

You cannot explain where God came from either. None of you can. You have no case against science. You just admitted it.

The fact that we're here should be evidence enough to convince you that there exists a super-intellect that is not bound by the laws of this universe. Unless, of course, you believe that the universe created itself and that life just magically appeared. It's one or the other. Which is really easier to believe? Then consider all of the other evidence of a creator (intelligent design) and all of the people who have claimed to met Jesus, etc., then the preponderance of the evidence is on a creator. Is that proof? Of course not. But, it is evidence, which is what the op sought.

 

[tecoyah]

Atheists believe, and will always believe, that everything came from nothing.

Untrue...as an Atheist allow me to express what actually defines the majority of us.

"I don't know"

This very simple statement might seem strange to the theist who claim the DO know, but nevertheless puts a nutshell around the basic premise. Few are ignorant enough to make the claim you do for us, but most Atheist/Agnostic people understand that we humans have limited knowledge pertaining to what created our universe, we simply do not accept the "Sky Fairy" hypothesis based on not only the lack of supporting data but, the simple fact that there cannot be one considering the large amount of competing versions claiming all the others are fake.

Well, everything either came from nothing or a superior intellect created this realm along with all of its inhabitants. You mock such a theory as believing in a "sky fairy" while pretending that the theory that the universe created itself is somehow an acceptable "scientific" hypothesis. You guys pretty much adhere to the ABG theory, which stands for "Anything but God".

Obviously I am dealing with an extremely limited intellect and rather unused imagination. The term "Sky Fairy" is not so much mocking as a description that well defines a magical entity that dwells in the heavens. "Everything" could have come from "Nothing" but there is no evidence to suggest this, any more than evidence suggesting a God did it.
Many hypothesis exist including quantum explanations but, none predict this all "Poofed" into existence for no reason and with no cause.

 

[tecoyah]

You cannot explain where God came from either. None of you can. You have no case against science. You just admitted it.

The fact that we're here should be evidence enough to convince you that there exists a super-intellect that is not bound by the laws of this universe. Unless, of course, you believe that the universe created itself and that life just magically appeared. ....snip.....

YOU are the only one suggesting this.

 

[K9Buck]

Obviously I am dealing with an extremely limited intellect

Stopped reading right there. Time to put you on "ignore". Good bye.

 

[tecoyah]

Obviously I am dealing with an extremely limited intellect

Stopped reading right there. Time to put you on "ignore". Good bye.

Have A Nice Day

 

[MarkDuffy]

What I want to know is why did God abandon you believers?

He said he, through Jesus, was coming back soon. Don't give me the year is a thousand garbage, cuz God was talking in our language to us.

It's been 2000 years and we are tired of waiting. The media has a lot of questions for the interview.

 

[Political Junky]

The Bible was written thousands of years before modern science.
It was meant to explain our origins to illiterate people. Unfortunately many still buy the ancient wisdom.

 

[MarkDuffy]

The Bible was written thousands of years before modern science.
It was meant to explain our origins to illiterate people. Unfortunately many still buy the ancient wisdom.

That is why God needs to come back. He needs to explain reality to the believers. They will be shocked and probably want to crucify him again, as believers crucified Jesus.

But the point remains. Where is God? He could settle this argument very easily.

 

[Old Rocks]

I believe in evolution, but I don't believe that life spontaneously materialized in a primordial soup and then "evolved" into every living thing that's ever existed. There is certainly a lack of archaeological evidence to support that claim.

Well, first of all, archaeology does not address abiogenesis, that is in the realm of chemistry. And the problem is not in finding a route for life to have started, but which, of many possible routes, did life take to get started. And, since life started very early in the history of our planet, it looks as if it is not an unusual event.

 

[Old Rocks]

These types of threads attract all sorts of atheists that not only do NOT believe that a creator made us or the universe, they don't WANT there to be such a being. Hence, they have zero objectivity on the topic. They're like attorneys shilling for a certain outcome as opposed to having an open mind and looking for the truth.

We scientists tend to not believe in magic.

What we do care about is why believers have so little faith they must deny science to keep their belief.

God loves science. If you have to claim God invented science, then that works for me also.

No, you do believe in magic. After all, you believe the universe created itself.

And you believe that God created itself.

 

[Old Rocks]

The universe had a beginning. To say otherwise is disingenuous.

Where there is a creation, there is a creator. Next you're going to tell us that Mount Rushmore made itself.

Now that is about as shitty of logic as there is.

 

[K9Buck]

What I want to know is why did God abandon you believers?

He said he, through Jesus, was coming back soon. Don't give me the year is a thousand garbage, cuz God was talking in our language to us.

It's been 2000 years and we are tired of waiting. The media has a lot of questions for the interview.

Here's another genius that thinks the universe created itself. I've got a bridge to sell this guy.

 

[K9Buck]

The universe had a beginning. To say otherwise is disingenuous.

Where there is a creation, there is a creator. Next you're going to tell us that Mount Rushmore made itself.

Now that is about as shitty of logic as there is.

What's your theory?

Crickets.