If God Is...?

[Foxfyre]

That's insane. (No offense to anyone who believes that stuff).

Yeah my thoughts as well.

Now the exact same chruch does not view going to movies and dancing as sins.
Sins are sins and do not change like that.

And the infighting and such that goes on in churches.... cliques, etc....
Just examples of how very few humans can be true Christians.

People are People, Each with different measures of the same Spirit. Human Nature is what it is, in many senses, regardless of Faith, even in spite of it. There is outward and inward, too. Just as easy to focus on the blessings, even that of extended days, spent in the company of loved ones, as to spend time throwing stones. Comes a time we each need to open up our eyes, even if it's just for piece of mind.

Yes people are people. Each and every one of us different and imperfect and capable of sin and a sinner. Christians are no different and I just shake my head at those who think that if Christians are not perfect, then they are not true Christians. Or they point to imperfections of Christians as 'proof' that Christianity is bogus. That is akin to saying a person is not a scientist or mathematician or physicist if he or she makes a technical error or answers a question wrong on a test or disagrees with the conclusions of his/her peers.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If God is, doesn't it make sense that She's WAY bigger than all of the Ancient Stories put together, let alone any one of them?

Sure. So what?

 

[Avatar4321]

Yes people are people. Each and every one of us different and imperfect and capable of sin and a sinner. Christians are no different and I just shake my head at those who think that if Christians are not perfect, then they are not true Christians. Or they point to imperfections of Christians as 'proof' that Christianity is bogus. That is akin to saying a person is not a scientist or mathematician or physicist if he or she makes a technical error or answers a question wrong on a test or disagrees with the conclusions of his/her peers.

In a way, I would argue that our flaws as Christians are evidence for Christianity, not against it. If we had no flaws, we would have no need for an Atonement.

It's because of our foolish mistakes that we need mercy from God. It's because we cant do everything perfectly that we need the Grace of God to make up the difference.

That doesn't mean we should go ahead and sin without regard to the truth, it just means that we arent perfect when we strive to be. We are still commanded to love Christ and that means keeping His commandments.

 

[Dajjal]

We have only to look at the pictures from the hubble telescope, that can look back to the begining of the universe, and study a smattering of quantum physics, to realize that a God that could put all that into motion must be, an absolutely vast mental being. He must have concieved of a theory of everything down to the smallest particle, then put the whole thing into motion by some gigantic act of willpower.

ONE BIG GOD.

Therefore the ancient texts of ALL the so called holy books are just the attempts of early societys to try and get a handle on God. But there never was any chance they would contain the truth about God.
No book ever can or will define God.

 

[uscitizen]

Yes people are people. Each and every one of us different and imperfect and capable of sin and a sinner. Christians are no different and I just shake my head at those who think that if Christians are not perfect, then they are not true Christians. Or they point to imperfections of Christians as 'proof' that Christianity is bogus. That is akin to saying a person is not a scientist or mathematician or physicist if he or she makes a technical error or answers a question wrong on a test or disagrees with the conclusions of his/her peers.

In a way, I would argue that our flaws as Christians are evidence for Christianity, not against it. If we had no flaws, we would have no need for an Atonement.

It's because of our foolish mistakes that we need mercy from God. It's because we cant do everything perfectly that we need the Grace of God to make up the difference.

That doesn't mean we should go ahead and sin without regard to the truth, it just means that we arent perfect when we strive to be. We are still commanded to love Christ and that means keeping His commandments.

Are you trying to say that mankinds flaws proves god exists?

 

[CausingPAIN]

If god is....


Now that is the real question.

all the other questions about god are irrelevant till that one is answered.

I think God answered that when He said "I AM"

and it is the ultimate question. One of Supreme importance. Because if He is there, and I can testify that He is, then the course of our lives can dstrastically change compared what they could be if He isnt.

Umm some human wrote that down.
From the same group of humans that claim to be the chosen of god, etc.

Your proof of god's existence seems to all revolve around one manuscript that humans wrote down.

Not all by humans.. did not some lighting on stone slabs be done?

 

[Foxfyre]

Yes people are people. Each and every one of us different and imperfect and capable of sin and a sinner. Christians are no different and I just shake my head at those who think that if Christians are not perfect, then they are not true Christians. Or they point to imperfections of Christians as 'proof' that Christianity is bogus. That is akin to saying a person is not a scientist or mathematician or physicist if he or she makes a technical error or answers a question wrong on a test or disagrees with the conclusions of his/her peers.

In a way, I would argue that our flaws as Christians are evidence for Christianity, not against it. If we had no flaws, we would have no need for an Atonement.

It's because of our foolish mistakes that we need mercy from God. It's because we cant do everything perfectly that we need the Grace of God to make up the difference.

That doesn't mean we should go ahead and sin without regard to the truth, it just means that we arent perfect when we strive to be. We are still commanded to love Christ and that means keeping His commandments.

Are you trying to say that mankinds flaws proves god exists?

No he is reporting the Christian belief that because humankind are imperfect beings, God became incarnate and showed us how to be better, but more importantly, showed us eternal life despite our imperfections. He gave us hope and the vision that the existing life that we know is not all that there is. He showed us that we are not limited by our currently situation or our current understanding of anything.

 

[uscitizen]

In a way, I would argue that our flaws as Christians are evidence for Christianity, not against it. If we had no flaws, we would have no need for an Atonement.

It's because of our foolish mistakes that we need mercy from God. It's because we cant do everything perfectly that we need the Grace of God to make up the difference.

That doesn't mean we should go ahead and sin without regard to the truth, it just means that we arent perfect when we strive to be. We are still commanded to love Christ and that means keeping His commandments.

Are you trying to say that mankinds flaws proves god exists?

No he is reporting the Christian belief that because humankind are imperfect beings, God became incarnate and showed us how to be better, but more importantly, showed us eternal life despite our imperfections. He gave us hope and the vision that the existing life that we know is not all that there is. He showed us that we are not limited by our currently situation or our current understanding of anything.

All just a belief.

 

[Foxfyre]

Are you trying to say that mankinds flaws proves god exists?

No he is reporting the Christian belief that because humankind are imperfect beings, God became incarnate and showed us how to be better, but more importantly, showed us eternal life despite our imperfections. He gave us hope and the vision that the existing life that we know is not all that there is. He showed us that we are not limited by our currently situation or our current understanding of anything.

All just a belief.

A belief that has been held/is held by billions. You know if billions of people said they knew such a thing as a flying pig exists, most intelligent people would at least consider whether such a thing was possible. But the dedicated Atheist won't accept that billions of people have experienced the living God or at least received happiness or assurance through Christianity. It doesn't make it hard to conclude that not believing takes a whole lot more faith than believing.

 

[there4eyeM]

"...did not some lighting on stone slabs be done?"

Links?

Just kidding. It would be nice if we could see these, though.
Like the Book of Mormon.

 

[newpolitics]

My preferred 'story' concerning religion is actually an account of a real person from Alexandria in the 5th century. Hypatia, a woman, has often been credited with being the first mathmatician who hypothesised and sought to prove that the earth is a sphere, as opposed to being flat. But her teaching and theories offended the rising dominance of Christainity under Constantine. She was murdered and her school was trashed after refusing to capitulate to the bishop of Alexandria's will. These were the events that precipitated the burning of the Library of Alexandria, the single largest source of knowledge in the known world at the time.

Hypatia could not have been the first person to postulate the roundness of the earth, as Eratosthenes (276-195 BC), an greek, successfully and accurately measured the circumference of the earth before 200 BC. He also accurately measured the degree of tilt on Earth's axis, and the distance of the earth to the sun (don't ask me how- look it up). This is important because Christians will claim that the bible says the earth was round before anybody could have known it. First of all, it doesn't. It says it is a circle, and flat. "Who stretched a measuring line across it?" JOB 38:44. You don't measure across a sphere, you measure around it.

 

[newpolitics]

No he is reporting the Christian belief that because humankind are imperfect beings, God became incarnate and showed us how to be better, but more importantly, showed us eternal life despite our imperfections. He gave us hope and the vision that the existing life that we know is not all that there is. He showed us that we are not limited by our currently situation or our current understanding of anything.

All just a belief.

A belief that has been held/is held by billions. You know if billions of people said they knew such a thing as a flying pig exists, most intelligent people would at least consider whether such a thing was possible. But the dedicated Atheist won't accept that billions of people have experienced the living God or at least received happiness or assurance through Christianity. It doesn't make it hard to conclude that not believing takes a whole lot more faith than believing.

This is an argument from authority, and does not mean that a god(s) exists, no matter how many believe it. The number of people who have "faith" in some god, just means that people want to believe in something. It does not mean that what they believe in is real. "All of the world's religions can not be right, but they can all be wrong." - Matt Dillahunty

 

[Foxfyre]

All just a belief.

A belief that has been held/is held by billions. You know if billions of people said they knew such a thing as a flying pig exists, most intelligent people would at least consider whether such a thing was possible. But the dedicated Atheist won't accept that billions of people have experienced the living God or at least received happiness or assurance through Christianity. It doesn't make it hard to conclude that not believing takes a whole lot more faith than believing.

This is an argument from authority, and does not mean that a god(s) exists, no matter how many believe it. The number of people who have "faith" in some god, just means that people want to believe in something. It does not mean that what they believe in is real. "All of the world's religions can not be right, but they can all be wrong." - Matt Dillahunty

Not an argument from authority at all. Or even numbers. Just common sense. Certanly numbers or the prevailing wisdom is not authority. Most of the world once thought the Earth to be flat and that it was the center of the universe. We now know that despite how much peer review there was, that was wrong. But also, that was not based on experience, but rather peer teaching.

But when an extraordinary number of persons report a personal experience, and no conspiracy is possible, it is only logical to conclude that they are experiencing something whether they understand it correctly or not. If you have never been in love, do you conclude that no such thing isn't possible even after many, many others report the experience of being in love? Do you say it is only a belief?

 

[uscitizen]

No he is reporting the Christian belief that because humankind are imperfect beings, God became incarnate and showed us how to be better, but more importantly, showed us eternal life despite our imperfections. He gave us hope and the vision that the existing life that we know is not all that there is. He showed us that we are not limited by our currently situation or our current understanding of anything.

All just a belief.

A belief that has been held/is held by billions. You know if billions of people said they knew such a thing as a flying pig exists, most intelligent people would at least consider whether such a thing was possible. But the dedicated Atheist won't accept that billions of people have experienced the living God or at least received happiness or assurance through Christianity. It doesn't make it hard to conclude that not believing takes a whole lot more faith than believing.

the ratio is what matters not the numbers which grow as the population grows.
At one time most people believed in witches.
They would fall off the edge of the world, that veliciraptors only ate gay cavemen, etc.

 

[newpolitics]

A belief that has been held/is held by billions. You know if billions of people said they knew such a thing as a flying pig exists, most intelligent people would at least consider whether such a thing was possible. But the dedicated Atheist won't accept that billions of people have experienced the living God or at least received happiness or assurance through Christianity. It doesn't make it hard to conclude that not believing takes a whole lot more faith than believing.

This is an argument from authority, and does not mean that a god(s) exists, no matter how many believe it. The number of people who have "faith" in some god, just means that people want to believe in something. It does not mean that what they believe in is real. "All of the world's religions can not be right, but they can all be wrong." - Matt Dillahunty

Not an argument from authority at all. Or even numbers. Just common sense. Certanly numbers or the prevailing wisdom is not authority. Most of the world once thought the Earth to be flat and that it was the center of the universe. We now know that despite how much peer review there was, that was wrong. But also, that was not based on experience, but rather peer teaching.

But when an extraordinary number of persons report a personal experience, and no conspiracy is possible, it is only logical to conclude that they are experiencing something whether they understand it correctly or not. If you have never been in love, do you conclude that no such thing is possible even after many, many others report the experience of being in love? Do you say it is only a belief?

I made a mistake. I meant to say that you are using an argument from popularity, which you absolutely are. You are saying that X amount of people believe this, so it must be true. That is fallacious.

 

[newpolitics]

A belief that has been held/is held by billions. You know if billions of people said they knew such a thing as a flying pig exists, most intelligent people would at least consider whether such a thing was possible. But the dedicated Atheist won't accept that billions of people have experienced the living God or at least received happiness or assurance through Christianity. It doesn't make it hard to conclude that not believing takes a whole lot more faith than believing.

This is an argument from authority, and does not mean that a god(s) exists, no matter how many believe it. The number of people who have "faith" in some god, just means that people want to believe in something. It does not mean that what they believe in is real. "All of the world's religions can not be right, but they can all be wrong." - Matt Dillahunty

Not an argument from authority at all. Or even numbers. Just common sense. Certanly numbers or the prevailing wisdom is not authority. Most of the world once thought the Earth to be flat and that it was the center of the universe. We now know that despite how much peer review there was, that was wrong. But also, that was not based on experience, but rather peer teaching.

But when an extraordinary number of persons report a personal experience, and no conspiracy is possible, it is only logical to conclude that they are experiencing something whether they understand it correctly or not. If you have never been in love, do you conclude that no such thing isn't possible even after many, many others report the experience of being in love? Do you say it is only a belief?

To address the rest of your post:

Personal experience, is not and never will be empirical evidence about an objective phenomenon, no matter how many people experience it, simply because there are other possible explanations. I could make the argument that this phenomenon is the result of humans' need to believe in something to quell the fear of death and fear of unknown, which are two fears that make us feel out of control, thus producing anxiety and suffering. If a belief in god will quell this anxiety, it doesn't matter whether it is true or not, it only matters that it produces the desired effect of putting us at ease. This is the problem with the human mind. We will believe things just to feel better about ourselves or the universe, whether or not it corresponds with actual reality. So really, this is a psychological issue. In all likelihood, this is exactly why humans are primed to be religious. We have never had a natural explanation of anything until only very recently in our evolutionary history. Therefore, storytelling and religious ideas have been central to our understanding of the universe and our place in it, and thus, our understanding of ourselves. Psychologically, the ability to place our selves in the universe with a cohesive model that makes logical sense, is very important for our emotional well-being. Science can now provide that model on natural explanations. God is no longer needed. Those that hang onto god, are merely expressing an outdated version of our human software. It's time to catch up, and update.

The point is, is that there are other possible explanations for why so many people believe in god, other than god, and they make just as much, if not more sense, than "god exists."

 

[uscitizen]

And all of us do not have exactly the same software package and do not have that "god sized hole" in our subroutines.

 

[newpolitics]

And all of us do not have exactly the same software package and do not have that "god sized hole" in our subroutines.

Yes. I could even say that the software that informs beliefs about god in some people, is "produced" during childhood indoctrination, causing them to feel this "god sized hole" that then, only god can fill. This software then, is contingent upon other people telling them certain information is true. This is not evidence of a supernatural deity, but again, only of how susceptible the mind is to forming beliefs because an authoritative figure (priest, mother, father, etc...) is telling them something is true. When we are little, we want to please our mother and father, and will adopt their beliefs, including spiritual beliefs, to do so. This is not a pathway to truth, but again, evidence of human susceptibility to bad information in order to remain socially acceptable within a family context.

 

[Foxfyre]

This is an argument from authority, and does not mean that a god(s) exists, no matter how many believe it. The number of people who have "faith" in some god, just means that people want to believe in something. It does not mean that what they believe in is real. "All of the world's religions can not be right, but they can all be wrong." - Matt Dillahunty

Not an argument from authority at all. Or even numbers. Just common sense. Certanly numbers or the prevailing wisdom is not authority. Most of the world once thought the Earth to be flat and that it was the center of the universe. We now know that despite how much peer review there was, that was wrong. But also, that was not based on experience, but rather peer teaching.

But when an extraordinary number of persons report a personal experience, and no conspiracy is possible, it is only logical to conclude that they are experiencing something whether they understand it correctly or not. If you have never been in love, do you conclude that no such thing isn't possible even after many, many others report the experience of being in love? Do you say it is only a belief?

To address the rest of your post:

Personal experience, is not and never will be empirical evidence about an objective phenomenon, no matter how many people experience it, simply because there are other possible explanations. I could make the argument that this phenomenon is the result of humans' need to believe in something to quell the fear of death and fear of unknown, which are two fears that make us feel out of control, thus producing anxiety and suffering. If a belief in god will quell this anxiety, it doesn't matter whether it is true or not, it only matters that it produces the desired effect of putting us at ease. This is the problem with the human mind. We will believe things just to feel better about ourselves or the universe, whether or not it corresponds with actual reality. So really, this is a psychological issue. In all likelihood, this is exactly why humans are primed to be religious. We have never had a natural explanation of anything until only very recently in our evolutionary history. Therefore, storytelling and religious ideas have been central to our understanding of the universe and our place in it, and thus, our understanding of ourselves. Psychologically, the ability to place our selves in the universe with a cohesive model that makes logical sense, is very important for our emotional well-being. Science can now provide that model on natural explanations. God is no longer needed. Those that hang onto god, are merely expressing an outdated version of our human software. It's time to catch up, and update.

The point is, is that there are other possible explanations for why so many people believe in god, other than god, and they make just as much, if not more sense, than "god exists."

I won't argue the point with you. If you don't believe you don't believe. I am only making a case for why it is far more rational to keep an open mind than it is to dismiss or try to explain away the reported personal experience of billions of people.

 

[uscitizen]

And all of us do not have exactly the same software package and do not have that "god sized hole" in our subroutines.

Yes. I could even say that the software that informs beliefs about god in some people, is "produced" during childhood indoctrination, causing them to feel this "god sized hole" that then, only god can fill. This software then, is contingent upon other people telling them certain information is true. This is not evidence of a supernatural deity, but again, only of how susceptible the mind is to forming beliefs because an authoritative figure (priest, mother, father, etc...) is telling them something is true. When we are little, we want to please our mother and father, and will adopt their beliefs, including spiritual beliefs, to do so. This is not a pathway to truth, but again, evidence of human susceptibility to bad information in order to remain socially acceptable within a family context.

but with a few of us even that level of indoctrination does not work.