Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

[_ Old Earth _] where did god come from

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$1,048.00
Goal
$1,038.00
5

50

Guest
huh if the world couldnt be made without him then

what did he come from he had to come from something he didnt just spawn in from no where

i hope some one will reply to this i am haveing a hard time with this
 
Ps 93:2

2 : Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting.

KJV

He didn't spawn from anywhere he has always been. If you have a problem with that, you may have a problem believing in him.
 
Here's another good one. He created everything from abdolutely nothing = zilch.

It's by simple faith that those who believe do. Human understanding cannot rationalise these things.

That kind of faith can only come from God, and that rationalises him. And confirms that he is.
 
samuel said:
Here's another good one. He created everything from abdolutely nothing = zilch.

It's by simple faith that those who believe do. Human understanding cannot rationalise these things.

That kind of faith can only come from God, and that rationalises him. And confirms that he is.

The simple premise that something cant be created from nothing means that there must be something that transcends nothing. We cannot create space and time from the confines of space and time. Thus, space and time were created outside of space and time.

The days of "Stargate SG-1", "Contact" and the almighty "Discovery Channel" are incapable of answering these questions, but they feel the need to come up with their own science fiction answers because it proves to them (in a blind way) that there cannot be an all powerfull creator. They do not understand that logic cant support their conclusions.

So to say that "Human understanding cannot rationalise these things" is not absolutly true. We know that you cannot create something from nothing, therefore we conclude that God is both something and created outside of the construct that we dwell in.

50, there is no "Who came first, the chicken or the egg?" question to be asked. It cannot be asked in the context of the begining of our construct's existance.

Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

Job 38:6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

Psa 18:15 Then the channels of waters were seen, and the foundations of the world were discovered at thy rebuke, O LORD, at the blast of the breath of thy nostrils.

Pro 8:29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:

Isa 40:21 Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?

Isa 51:13 And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor?

Job 22:12 Is not God in the height of heaven? and behold the height of the stars, how high they are!

Job 25:5 Behold even to the moon, and it shineth not; yea, the stars are not pure in his sight.

Psa 8:3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;

Psa 147:4 He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.

Isa 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

Amo 5:8 Seek him that maketh the seven stars and Orion, and turneth the shadow of death into the morning, and maketh the day dark with night: that calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth: The LORD is his name:
 
I hope you understand that an eternal deity like our God is not inconsistent with the way He chose to create us and our world.
 
If the world is perfect enough to need an even more perfect creator, then by the same logic God must need a creator even more perfect than him.

If a perfect intelligent being can exist with no reason, then I see no problem with a universe of atoms existing with no reason.

One of the misunderstood things about the Big Bang is that it gives a beginning to the universe, but it also gives a beginning to time. So the universe both has a beginning and also has existed for all of time.

I think adding a creator complicates the picture and just makes it more complicated because you have to explain why something more complex exists.

Quath
 
The Barbarian said:
I hope you understand that an eternal deity like our God is not inconsistent with the way He chose to create us and our world.

Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

I think that this question God proposes to Job answers that statement and still does today. We can know what we know but we cannot accuratly imply how we came to be!

A) Because we were not there.
B) Because we would not understand.

I hope that my earlier statement: "So to say that "Human understanding cannot rationalise these things" is not absolutly true." does not cloud the fact that there are things we cannot understand. We cannot accuratly or logically define eternity, neverending, forever, and terms as such because we have no way of confirming or denying scientifically something we cannot witness. However, we have every right to speculate on these things. We do so based on what scripture tells us, and some even compare this to what science tells us. Scripture tells us little about the creation event, but it does tell us a ton about who and what God is. The first implication that we must try to wrap our minds around is that God claims to be "The Alpha and The Omega".
 
samuel said:
Ps 93:2

2 : Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting.

KJV

He didn't spawn from anywhere he has always been. If you have a problem with that, you may have a problem believing in him.


that right there is something established of meaning made from something

and always when did that start it had to start some time

this what other guys ask me when i try to get them saved

and if i was to just say well If you have a problem with that, you may have a problem believing in him then that wouldnt be the best thing to do now would it
 
Quath said:
If the world is perfect enough to need an even more perfect creator, then by the same logic God must need a creator even more perfect than him.

Not by any means true. This statement is human understanding at its best, and my above post speaks to that. We cannot understand this because we have no frame of reference to compare it to. God is the designer, God is the begining and the end.

Quath said:
If a perfect intelligent being can exist with no reason, thyen I see no problem with a universe of atoms existing with no reason.

Who says that a perfect intelligent being cannot exist?

Quath said:
One of the misunderstood things about the Big Bang is that it gives a beginning to the universe, but it also gives a beginning to time. So the universe both has a beginning and also has existed for all of time.

I think adding a creator complicates the picture and just makes it more complicated because you have to explain who something more complex exists.

Quath

I do not disagree with the Big Bang theory. We claim to know that our universe expands, thus we have to claim in that mentality that it started at a point. This mentality does not negate or refute the word of God in any sense.
 
50 said:
samuel said:
Ps 93:2

2 : Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting.

KJV

He didn't spawn from anywhere he has always been. If you have a problem with that, you may have a problem believing in him.


that right there is something established of meaning made from something

and always when did that start it had to start some time

this what other guys ask me when i try to get them saved

and if i was to just say well If you have a problem with that, you may have a problem believing in him then that wouldnt be the best thing to do now would it

Look at the statement directly after "established of old" and you see "from everlasting".

If people desire to be saved because they believe that God created the universe, they missed the point of Jesus Christ entirely. Jesus did not point to creation as the reason we need to be saved. So you are correct in saying,
50 said:
and if i was to just say well If you have a problem with that, you may have a problem believing in him then that wouldnt be the best thing to do now would it
 
rmills said:
If the world is perfect enough to need an even more perfect creator, then by the same logic God must need a creator even more perfect than him.

Not by any means true. This statement is human understanding at its best, and my above post speaks to that. We cannot understand this because we have no frame of reference to compare it to. God is the designer, God is the begining and the end.
True. I was just addressing some of the human lines of reasonings why people think there is a creator. The Intelligent Design approach is that we have been made so perfectly, that we must have been created by an even more perfect creator.

[quoteWho says that a perfect intelligent being cannot exist?[/quote]
I am not saying it is impossible. I am saying that if it is acceptable that an intelligent being can exist with no, then it should not be a problem for a universe of matter/energy to exist with no reason. Basically, if you can make the leap that something can exist with no cause, then you have also made the leap necessary to accept the Big Bang.

I do not disagree with the Big Bang theory. We claim to know that our universe expands, thus we have to claim in that mentality that it started at a point. This mentality does not negate or refute the word of God in any sense.
I agree. The Big Bang could be the way that God decided to create.

Quath
 
First of all if you have to convince someone that there is a God. They have not the faith to believe in the first place. You can’t accept a literal God, nor a literal Christ.

Paul said he came not in excellency of speech or words, so that no ones faith may rest in the wisdom of men. But that it was the preaching of the Cross that brought salvation. Foolishness to those who do not believe, and the power of the salvation of God to those who do.

Human reasoning cannot save anyone, only that kind of faith that man has not got within himself does. And that has to be given to him from God. This is exactly why we have so many people walking around today calling themselves Christian, that are no more saved than a cat. You cannot reason anyone into true faith, only into deception.

If this sounds harsh it was meant to be.
 
First of all if you have to convince someone that there is a God. They have not the faith to believe in the first place. You can’t accept a literal God, nor a literal Christ.

This is a contradiction. In order to "convince" you must make arguments based in reason. If they already have the faith, then no "convincing" is necessary.

No, reason is a great part of the argument for God. Ask Thomas. He needed proof.

Actually, in a sense you all need proof. Your proof is that Jesus rose from the dead (even Paul says this is fundamental). You believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead. That is certainly "reasonable" proof. If I believed it happened, that would provide reason enough for me to be Christian.

If reason is not necessary, then Jesus would never had had to rise from the dead....the Apostles would have believed him to be the son of God by faith alone, without reason.

The difference is I have no reason to believe he rose from the dead. You use your faith in men (Paul, Peter, etc) to provide reasonable evidence of your God (Jesus rose from the dead). I find their testimony uncompelling.
 
There are two types of reason one is physical evidence, the other literal. One is un-deniable, the other is foolishness. To convict someone in a court of law, a lawyer has to produce reasonable physical evidence. It cannot be done from verbal arguments, not to say it has not happened, but it always leaves some room for question, and many such convictions are without doubt false.

So you cannot convince a person to have faith, he either has it, or does not. To bring him to a literal understanding is just that. Based on literal reasoning, but does not produce a saving type of faith. Only God gives that, and with some he chooses to do so, with others he does not. We have no hand in that.

As for the Apostles faith they did believe him to be the Son of God, before his resurrection.
 
If the Apostle's firmly believed him to be the Son of God before he died, why did he need to die? Thomas obviously wasn't completely convinced, and I think many would argue with the contention that the Apostles were all on board.

Paul says that Christianity is founded on the FACT that Jesus rose from the dead. It is that miracle that defines the religion and the God.

Thus, the debatable issue with Christianity can be summed up: "Did Jesus rise from the dead?" All other issues are moot past that.

To answer that question, even your "literal" reason depends upon the physical fact that Jesus actually rose from the dead. The only evidences of that are 2nd hand testimonies, which to me do not even meet your "literal reasonableness" standard.

Another issue with your "literal" approach is that it acutally validates all other religions. Under that criteria, they are just as true as yours. Again, you must return to the risen Jesus as proof. Physical proof.[/i]
 
I stopped believing in Santa Clause by the time I was four. Because he is literal there is no divine revelation of his existence. But I can’t remember when I did not believe that God was, and that Christ was his son. This came long before I ever understood any of the Bible. And did not come by reasoning.

Christ had to die, and shed his blood to pay the penalty for sin, because the Apostles believed, that was not sufficient to do so.
Jesus rose from the grave not to provide proof, but to justify the faith of those who do believe.
Paul said if Christ is not risen, then we are the most foolish of all men. If he did not do so, we all might as well eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die.

The resurrection was the final conformation by God that Jesus death was sufficient, and had indeed paid the complete price for sin.

This is the one of the main functions in Salvation, you must first believe from your heart that Jesus rose from the dead. Without this it makes no difference what else you believe.
 
Wow! Samuel and ThinkerMan, you are having a great debate here. This argument happened between a Pastor and I. We eventually came to a conclusion that can be summed up in one saying...

If you are wrong about Jesus, it doesn’t really matter what you are right about. :wink:

I guess that this saying applies in two ways in that it can be spoken from both the believer and the non-believer perspectives and equally apply.
 
The proof that Jesus or God cannot be rationalised from common reasoning, is that those who try, can never come to any positive understanding.
Like the Bible says ever seeking, and unable to come to the knowledge of the truth. If I had all of the worlds knowledge, and could not come to simple faith in Christ, I would still be lost. The problem is no one can come to that kind of faith, unless the Father calls them first.
 
Amen to that. You must accept God on faith or not at all. As Jesus said, you have to come to Him like a little child.
 
The proof that Jesus or God cannot be rationalised from common reasoning, is that those who try, can never come to any positive understanding.

Well, at least we both agree on that....now on to your main point.

The problem is no one can come to that kind of faith, unless the Father calls them first.

Herein lies the problem. According to your theory, it takes an affirmative action of God to make God's presense and reality known. So as an agnostic, these are the options available.

1. God did not call me.

I guess I'm damned. I must not be chosen. Alas, poor me. Sounds very Calvinistic (and unfair for a benevolent God)

2. God called, I didn't answer.

I was Christian for the majority of my life. I never felt "called", though I asked. In repeated attempts to have God prove himself to me...never happened. I did my part for many, many years. Nada.

This also infers that God is not powerful enought to convince me.

3. God called, but Satan led me astray so I couln't hear.

I can't see where Satan comes into this. We have both conceded that evidence is lacking as a way to prove God and Jesus, so he could not have mislead me there (as many fundies claim with science). And if he did, doesn't matter....I need the call from God alone, right?

How could Satan have gotten in the way when in my younger years I asked, with an open heart, for that very call? God would have to be subordinate to the powers of Satan if his call didn't make it to my waiting ears and mind.

4. God has called me, I know it, but hate God (my personal favorite)

I have no reason to hate God. Life, the universe, earth are all beautiful things. I enjoy life and the world around it.

Bad stuff happens, but in a world of chance that HAS to occur. Unlike others, I do not blaim any supernatural entity for car accidents, AIDS, war and cancer....I simple accept them as a product and property of life on earth. These same things happen to animals, bacteria and plants.

It would be great if there was an afterlife.....eternity in bliss and love. Sounds great....I truly wish it were true.

But since I don't, I simply concentrate on enjoying this, my one life, to the fullest I can, with no expectation of reward or punishment after I'm done with it.[/quote]
 
Back
Top