"If God exists, why doesn't He prove it?"

[Dr Grump]

Because He dos not need to.

Oh, the "Cop Out" defense...
Whatever...

defense of what?

you seriously consider that this idiocy of "God has to prove ME He exists" warrants anything more than just mocking it openly?

Well, if you want to go down that road, I could start the old "What sort of nincompoop would believe in something that isn't tangible and has no proof that it ever existed"....

 

[Dr Grump]

because He does not need to

Because....?

Because you're not interested in proving it, only disproving it otherwise you wouldn't care. .

Of course I'm interested. I'd love tangible proof of a god....it would be fantastic.

 

[Ringel05]

Because....?

Because you're not interested in proving it, only disproving it otherwise you wouldn't care. .

Of course I'm interested. I'd love tangible proof of a god....it would be fantastic.

To put it bluntly - something that doesn't exist cannot reveal itself. Simple.

Kinda belies your claim, dontcha think?

 

[Dr Grump]

Because you're not interested in proving it, only disproving it otherwise you wouldn't care. .

Of course I'm interested. I'd love tangible proof of a god....it would be fantastic.

To put it bluntly - something that doesn't exist cannot reveal itself. Simple.

Kinda belies your claim, dontcha think?

No.

 

[Drake_Roberts]

How much proof do you need? (Rhetorical question)

You have first hand accounts. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John walked with or walked with people who lived with Jesus. Hundreds saw Jesus after he rose from the dead. That was not a popular thing to admit to in the Roman Empire back then. It could get you a free ticket to the Coliseum for an appointment with a hungry lion.

Why would these guys write this stuff down during the Roman Empire? There's no up side. It's a one way ticket to torture, prison, crucifixion or all of the above. Do a little research and find out what happened to everyone who walked with Jesus. These aren't fiction writers. Do you think they'd put their life on the line for a novel?

Let's step away from the Gospels and examine another era of history. Completely put Christianity out of your mind for a moment.

Let's say it's the year 3954 and people are debating if there was ever an Adolf Hitler, World War II or the Holocaust. On one side, you have people pointing out eye witness accounts as described by history books. They quote historians of the period commenting on the lessons to be learned from the period. On the other side, you have people saying this is just a myth. The books are just the works of men. Fantasy. Believers have nothing to go on but faith. Therefore, there are no lessons to be learned.

What is the agenda of the people who deny history? Less than minor I'd say.

What is the agenda of the people who deny the Gospels?

Your call. Make it a good one. We're rooting for you. There's a lot riding on it.

OK. Do people deny the existence of Sumerians and other ancient cultures like that? Nope. And that was 4000 years ago+. There is archaeological evidence to prove the existence of them. And unless all WWII related items vanish or have records of them lost, WWII will probably not be considered myth. People who deny the Gospels probably don't want people to waste their lives pursuing a falsehood. Call it misguided philanthropy, as the atheists will probably be disappointed, but still....
Sorry, kinda interrupting yer argument or debate or whatever but, hey, what the heck, why not?

 

[williepete]

OK. Do people deny the existence of Sumerians and other ancient cultures like that? Nope. And that was 4000 years ago+. There is archaeological evidence to prove the existence of them. And unless all WWII related items vanish or have records of them lost, WWII will probably not be considered myth. People who deny the Gospels probably don't want people to waste their lives pursuing a falsehood. Call it misguided philanthropy, as the atheists will probably be disappointed, but still....
Sorry, kinda interrupting yer argument or debate or whatever but, hey, what the heck, why not?

No apologies needed. You bring up an excellent point. If people are comfortable accepting 4,000 year old history, what is the agenda driving denial of 2,014 year old history? The people documenting Sumerian history weren't risking their lives. The people documenting and passing on by word of mouth the Gospels under Roman rule were signing their own death warrants.

 

[Mr. H.]

exactly.

it is funny to observe our militant atheists being so insecure and short sighted

I sometimes wonder if I'm an atheist.

That would be a long journey from being born and raised Roman Catholic LOL.

Today, the only things that I believe in my heart are:

Whatever "force" or "event" that caused the existence of the physical universe had no other purpose.

That same "force" exists today in every elemental particle of physical matter present in the universe today.

All life as we know and understand it resulted from and also evolved from that moment when the physical universe came to be.

Divinity is a relatively modern human notion and nothing else.

And finally...

Giggity.

you know that we come full circle usually? you are at 220 degrees

You intrigue me. Please continue.

 

[Ringel05]

Of course I'm interested. I'd love tangible proof of a god....it would be fantastic.

To put it bluntly - something that doesn't exist cannot reveal itself. Simple.

Kinda belies your claim, dontcha think?

No.

Considering your statement, which reveals a complete disbelief in any deity, I don't see how your faith in no deity can translate to a desire for faith in a deity. Honestly you have faith with limited circumstantial proof in no deity but require proof positive that a deity exists before you believe.
Pretty interesting.

 

[Dr Grump]

Considering your statement, which reveals a complete disbelief in any deity, I don't see how your faith in no deity can translate to a desire for faith in a deity. Honestly you have faith with limited circumstantial proof in no deity but require proof positive that a deity exists before you believe.
Pretty interesting.

I do have a complete disbelief. However, if somebody came up to me and said "I have tangible proof of a god", why wouldn't I be interested. Wouldn't anybody be interested? It would certainly pique my interest, and I would still be sceptical as hell until they showed me.

 

[Steven_R]

I'm a skeptic and seeker of knowledge of everything, with an insatiable curiosity about the world around me going back to childhood,. I didn't chose my personality traits regardless of whether they are the product of nature or nurture or some combination thereof. I need proof of everything. I fail to understand why any god(s) would create me to be that way, deny me the proof I need, and then punish me for eternity for acting on the way I was built.

 

[Iceweasel]

I'm a skeptic and seeker of knowledge of everything, with an insatiable curiosity about the world around me going back to childhood,. I didn't chose my personality traits regardless of whether they are the product of nature or nurture or some combination thereof. I need proof of everything. I fail to understand why any god(s) would create me to be that way, deny me the proof I need, and then punish me for eternity for acting on the way I was built.

Mankind assigns human traits to God or makes the demand. If God exists, and I believe he/she/it does, why assume he needs our acceptance or approval? Religion is not God, it's a belief about God, a theological issue. Humans are the smartest mammals on Earth but that doesn't neccessarily mean the creator of the universe feels obligated to prove anything to anyone.

That aside, proof is in the mind of the beholder. What proof would you accept? A personal appearance and miracle? Why couldn't you say a higher alien species did it? There is no proof that the universe or life is
capable of happening on its' own. So I don't understand those that demand proof of a creator. To me, that would be even more miraculous. It's just a matter of you picking a belief you are comfortable with or saying you don't know.

 

[Ringel05]

Considering your statement, which reveals a complete disbelief in any deity, I don't see how your faith in no deity can translate to a desire for faith in a deity. Honestly you have faith with limited circumstantial proof in no deity but require proof positive that a deity exists before you believe.
Pretty interesting.

I do have a complete disbelief. However, if somebody came up to me and said "I have tangible proof of a god", why wouldn't I be interested. Wouldn't anybody be interested? It would certainly pique my interest, and I would still be sceptical as hell until they showed me.

I guess I should have rephrased my initial response so this bears repeating:

Yet lacking any real proof you firmly believe there is no God...... not even slightly skeptical of your belief yet you want proof of the opposite. Again, that's interesting.

 

[Vox]

Oh, the "Cop Out" defense...
Whatever...

defense of what?

you seriously consider that this idiocy of "God has to prove ME He exists" warrants anything more than just mocking it openly?

Well, if you want to go down that road, I could start the old "What sort of nincompoop would believe in something that isn't tangible and has no proof that it ever existed"....

which will warrant the response - what sort of brain dead imbecile comes to the religious forum and demands proof of God's existence if he is not a nincompoop himself

 

[Ringel05]

I'm a skeptic and seeker of knowledge of everything, with an insatiable curiosity about the world around me going back to childhood,. I didn't chose my personality traits regardless of whether they are the product of nature or nurture or some combination thereof. I need proof of everything. I fail to understand why any god(s) would create me to be that way, deny me the proof I need, and then punish me for eternity for acting on the way I was built.

Mankind assigns human traits to God or makes the demand. If God exists, and I believe he/she/it does, why assume he needs our acceptance or approval? Religion is not God, it's a belief about God, a theological issue. Humans are the smartest mammals on Earth but that doesn't neccessarily mean the creator of the universe feels obligated to prove anything to anyone.

That aside, proof is in the mind of the beholder. What proof would you accept? A personal appearance and miracle? Why couldn't you say a higher alien species did it? There is no proof that the universe or life is
capable of happening on its' own. So I don't understand those that demand proof of a creator. To me, that would be even more miraculous. It's just a matter of you picking a belief you are comfortable with or saying you don't know.

As I'm trying to get Grump to see, non believers always demand a proof of God but demand no proof to support their belief system that there is no God.
Believers are under no onus to make non-believers believe, it's not in our hands, our onus is to be the best examples we can be.

 

[hobelim]

I'm a skeptic and seeker of knowledge of everything, with an insatiable curiosity about the world around me going back to childhood,. I didn't chose my personality traits regardless of whether they are the product of nature or nurture or some combination thereof. I need proof of everything. I fail to understand why any god(s) would create me to be that way, deny me the proof I need, and then punish me for eternity for acting on the way I was built.

If you are rational person who adheres to the scientific method of discovering truth then you should already know that unless you conduct your experiment in a controlled environment and sterilize all of the equipment that you are using to discover the truth of something, the chances are that the results might be skewed by unknown contaminants and are unreliable.

True?

In the same way if a person seeks proof of God, it stands to reason that they would have to first purify their mind, the most important instrument of all, before they could perceive the truth and have confidence in a sound interpretation of all of the evidence resulting from the inquiry.

So if there is a God in actuality, then he already exists, and if you have not seen any reason to believe, the answer might not be that the truth is that he really doesn't exist but that you just need to purify your mind from any contamination and from all previous conclusions based on the false results of amateur experiments.

 

[BlackSand]

I guess I should have rephrased my initial response so this bears repeating:

Yet lacking any real proof you firmly believe there is no God...... not even slightly skeptical of your belief yet you want proof of the opposite. Again, that's interesting.

We also have Pascal's Wager ... Where the philosopher put mathematics, expectations and reason into the formula considering the consequences of belief in God or Super Dominance.
Although I am certainly no a philosopher ... Pascal measured what could be gained with or without the acceptance of God ... And then the affects of either.

At that point Pascal was more than willing to accept that a "wager" in favor of God could very well be more productive than a "wager" against God.

.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I guess I should have rephrased my initial response so this bears repeating:

Yet lacking any real proof you firmly believe there is no God...... not even slightly skeptical of your belief yet you want proof of the opposite. Again, that's interesting.

We also have Pascal's Wager ... Where the philosopher put mathematics, expectations and reason into the formula considering the consequences of belief in God or Super Dominance.
Although I am certainly no a philosopher ... Pascal measured what could be gained with or without the acceptance of God ... And then the affects of either.

At that point Pascal was more than willing to accept that a "wager" in favor of God could very well be more productive than a "wager" against God.

.

"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder." - Homer Simpson's (Matt Groenig's) version of Pascal's Wager

 

[Vox]

I guess I should have rephrased my initial response so this bears repeating:

Yet lacking any real proof you firmly believe there is no God...... not even slightly skeptical of your belief yet you want proof of the opposite. Again, that's interesting.

We also have Pascal's Wager ... Where the philosopher put mathematics, expectations and reason into the formula considering the consequences of belief in God or Super Dominance.
Although I am certainly no a philosopher ... Pascal measured what could be gained with or without the acceptance of God ... And then the affects of either.

At that point Pascal was more than willing to accept that a "wager" in favor of God could very well be more productive than a "wager" against God.

.

"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder." - Homer Simpson's (Matt Groenig's) version of Pascal's Wager

There is no "wrong God".

pascal's wager aplies to ANY God

 

[BlackSand]

We also have Pascal's Wager ... Where the philosopher put mathematics, expectations and reason into the formula considering the consequences of belief in God or Super Dominance.
Although I am certainly no a philosopher ... Pascal measured what could be gained with or without the acceptance of God ... And then the affects of either.

At that point Pascal was more than willing to accept that a "wager" in favor of God could very well be more productive than a "wager" against God.

.

"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder." - Homer Simpson's (Matt Groenig's) version of Pascal's Wager

I am willing to wager Pascal put more thought into it than Homer Simpson did ... And supported the conclusions.
It is your wager in the long-term ... Not Matt Groenig's ... But whatever you are willing to wager is fine with me.

.

 

[daws101]

An all powerful God would chuckle at the thought he would have to prove his existence.

why is that pop?
lot's of people doubt a god exists..if god was a compassionate god he would be more than happy to prove his exsitance..if not, god would be arrogant asshole who thinks he /she /it is above the rules he /she it/ created...