Evidence For God (I'd love to hear feedback)

[Levi]

There's an old saying that goes something like this:

You can't be honest with someone else unless your honest with yourself first!

The basic human condition is one of deceit, man has a deceitful heart and it is desperately wicked.

No one needs to teach a child to lie! All anyone has to do is simply observe what a child does, he or she will start to lie at a very early age. Now is this due to surroundings or is it passed on as an inherent tendency? I think its a bit of both , Obviously the worse liars will raise the worse liars- goes without saying really.

How does this fit with the op?

I have a fun little thinking game that sometimes helps:

Hold you breath and try to stop yourself from breathing permanently.

now

close your eyes and think of absolutely nothing for 3 minutes

The reason you could do neither of these is you are alive. You didn't ask to be but you are, your body is alive and your mind is alive, unique and individual.

Here comes the scary part!

You are going to die, sooner or later you are going to be put in a pine box and lowered into the ground. You don't ask to die but you will.

There is nothing you can do about either of the inescapable facts!

Be honest! You never asked for any of this, did you?

Time to be brutally honest and I'm going to ask a simple question that requires a simple answer and if you 'don't know' that is the best answer to give.

WHY HAS THIS HAPPENED TO YOU?

 

[childeye]

Okay, stop bringing up the "1+1=2" thing.[/QUOTE]Yes it is hard to deny 1+1=2. As I am using it to prove there is a God one must first admit this, that there exists a Truth we must submit to as men. "IF' there is a God as in a creator, it goes that (whatever is) Truth, must also be a product of His creating energy.

Albert Einstein used math to try to prove a God does not exist. knowing you cannot prove a negative, his hypothesis as an atheist was that, if God existed, the creation would have a beginning and so through mathematics he set out to prove the univers was infinite without a beginning. Using mathematics he came up with the now famous E=MC2 theory proving the universe in fact had a beginning and that energy was able to be converted into matter. Hence there is an absolute in all physical existence by which all things are relative and he became an affirmed believer in God through this evidence. You must be smarter than Einstein to claim fervently he is wrong. What evidence do you base your statement on?

All facts are intertwined and so it is that one can prove God through mathematics and by any means associated with Truth that is self-evident if in fact there is a God.

Here are your own words:
This is a topic asking for EVIDENCE for god, not concepts that are your opinion. "Truth" for you isn't the "truth" for Islam, for example. . . or Hinduism, Pagan beliefs, etc. To say "what it true for a person becomes their god", that statement is fallacious and I would completely disagree with that. You are coming from a religion that states it having "absolute truth", but that doesn't make it "evidence for god".

Please note you say the concepts I am using are my opinions and you elaborate by using various religions to describe what you mean. Yet mathematics are not religion. You have created a false dichotemy here equating facts with mankind's various images of the invisible God. For you said "Truth" for you isn't the "truth" for Islam, asserting that "My Truth" isn't any more valid than their's. You have confounded various images of God with Truth. I have already stated that Truth is apart from men's opinions or images and used 1+1=2 as an example. You have yet to acknowledge what is Truth and that I have proven it exists by your saying these things. My point being there exists an absolute by which we all reason although we all may not always agree what that absolute is or how to apply it as we lose sight of it. 1+1=2 is not hard to see however so I use it. You will not acknowledge this either and call it my opinion or concept. So you are in hypocrisy, for it is your opinion first that this is my concept as if a man can conceive God, putting the creation ahead of the creator, and also that it is my opinion that there exists an absolute that is Truth and therefore 1+1= 2 is simply my opinion. So as if to say you have no such absolute that rules you absolutely. Hypocrisy.

You first said to me that you gleamed I was equating Truth with God because I gave it a Capitol T. Therefore I can safely assume from your words that you have an aversion to the term God being equated with Truth when in fact "IF" there is a God, He must undeniably be equated with Truth (What is) as He is properly identified as the creator of what is. As for rejecting what is true. You reject that there is an absolute by which we all reason also as an opinion of mine. See above.

But I have. God is that absolute by which we all reason. We all must have an image of God even if you say there isn't one. It is an all inclusive term. You reject the term god as an absolute when that is the definition of Him both biblicaly and secularly. As in omnipotent, ominpresent, all knowing, and all powerful. Please try to understand that it is absolutely true that the all knowing would find it difficult to prove to the ignorant, that He is all knowing. Just as a blind man finds it difficult to be sure someone who sees, actually sees what he says he sees. This is Truth I am speaking and is found in the bible. All is built upon faith. Yet when one learns from somebody it is true what they taught, it is proof that they knew all along. Repeat this cycle enough and one begins to erase doubt. This is what is expressed in the bible, that to have the knowledge of God is to know Him through the Image He sent, not through mens various images conjured in their imaginations. Particularly the hypocritical view of ahteists whose image of god is that there is no God. It is the same as saying the truth is there is no Truth, when it is absolutely provable there is in fact a Truth.

So you do comprehend after all. I hold you to your words in bold. For of course 1+1 will always equal two so there must be a God that exists since one cannot prove a negative. and you have just by your own mouth admitted there must be a God. And you say mathematics can't prove God exists, hypocrisy.

All things, let me say it again, ALL things are relative to ONE, I say again, ONE absolute. Please remember there are not many Truths as in 1+1 can equal many things. Nor does pink turn to blue because we call it blue. Therefore the onus is upon the unbeliever to prove that 1+1= something other than 2 to prove there is no single absolute, no God. For God peempts man's existence. For you seek to glimpse what is eternal in a finite view and this has been provided through the Christ. God is Love.

It is out of respect for you I do not patronize you with false respect. I'm just following the golden rule so as to not be hypocritical.

 

[jasoncran]

logic and order from chaos. i always get a kick when athiests imply that.

 

[tws]

Sorry I don't have time to read every post so far (got through about 12 though).

A few quick ideas:

Kalaam Cosmological Argument: Everything that has a beginning has a cause. The universe had a beginning and therefore had a cause. This cause is God. God did not have a beginning, therefore he has no cause.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalām_cosmological_argument

There is a God (book)
Amazon.com: There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind (9780061335303): Antony Flew, Roy Abraham Varghese: Books
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Flew#Restatement_of_position

The Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist (book, also a movie)
Amazon.com: The Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist (9780385522717): Matt Baglio: Books

Related: Sometimes when I have doubts about God's existence, I remember a couple of experiences I had with what I will call demons. These unexpected, very real, first-person experiences with non-material entities have forever convinced me there are supernatural forces at work. Now it does not prove God, but it proves the existence of non-physical entities. Yes, I am being vague - would take a long time to explain what happened.

 

[Elijah674]

One thing I have learned from my long LONG search on this topic, evidence won't be found. It could be that a person must be able to "tap into the metaphysical" in order to find something that could qualify as "evidence", but that seems unlikely. "Faith" is plenty for some people. For people like me, it was never enough, and it always had me feeling empty.

As for "seeing someone perform a miracle", such as "walking on water", there would be a logical need to figure out how it was done and if there was deception involved. It would take much more than that.

Just my 2 cents.

Hi, I am not going to redo this about my lifes past again. But if anyone had been similar to Saul (Paul) & the ex/Son's of Thunder that Christ refered James & John as, and then they read of the new life that actually takes place in Heb. 6:1-5, they would find documented proof of a real miracle.

For the person who surrender their will to the Master, this takes place. OK: The actual person knows 'THAT THEY ARE MADE A PARTAKER OF THE HOLY GHOST'

They have a NEW DESIRE. A NEW HEART & MIND. These ones KNOW that the old life has vanished away. Drinking, smoking, the evil talk & all of the other garbage is [GONE]! Taken away.

And if one saw the two sides of these persons life, they to know that a miracle took place. There is no one that was following satan around bigtime, that could change theirself [all at once], this past garbage was all gone! for well over 40 years.

And what other answer could be given for Peter even? From Matt. 26:69-75 he is seen as still being carnal to verse 75's CONVERSION!? Born Again? Surely! Note Christ's Words of Luke 22:31-34, but in verse 32 Christ starts.. 'AND WHEN THOU ART CONVERTED, strengthen the brethern'

And when Peter went out and wept bitterly in Godly sorrow, it was then that he was changed into the New Man. And from there on, one found a different Peter!

Let me just add this! We find few prophesied who have truely been Born Again who claim such. (Matt. 7's broadway ones) But the real evidence for this is so very simple, it is Christ Himself that Penned the 10 Commandments & then in the New Covenant wrote them in the Born Again Heart & Mind.
(1 Cor. 10:1-4 + Heb. 10:15-16)

And it is He that tell's the UNIVERSE with His WORD who it is that is Truely Born Again! Along with Acts 5:32 comes His PERSONAL WORD of.. IF YOU LOVE ME KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS'!;)

And how many do???

--Elijah

 

[Free]

And you say mathematics can't prove God exists, hypocrisy.

It can't, at least not the way you're using it and I'm not so sure there is a way it can, so let's no go calling people hypocrites.

 

[Former Christian]

Jasoncran

"logic and order from chaos. i always get a kick when athiests imply that."

The Atheists I know don't believe that logic and order came out of chaos. They recognize that the universe is run according to laws. What they don't recognize is that the source of the laws has to be a God.

I'm more concerned with an Atheist blaming the ills of the world on religion. There are other forces at work in the world that are political and economic. Religionists aren't the only ones who have been against peace. And I'm bothered by Atheists not being tolerant toward those who believe a religion. The author of this thread does believe that we would be better off without religion, but so far at least he's tolerant of religion.

Cute young lady under your moniker. Is she a new addition to the family?

FC

 

[childeye]

*Editing because I don't want to attack. Not worth it.

You failed to answer my question. Show how 1+1 would NOT equal 2 without a god existing! Let me answer it for you. It would ALWAYS equal 2 and this has no bearing on whether a god exists nor not. I conclude that you are using the circular reasoning fallacy. "1+1=2 because there is a god and because there is a god, 1+1=2".

You might as well ask me to prove there is no Truth, which is impossible as there is a Truth. We all have an image of god even an atheist. The Christ is the Image of the true God sent by God himself. As we know there was sent a Christ we know there is a God and He is Love.

 

[childeye]

Please believe me that I understand what you are saying and please forgive my use of the term hypocrisy. It is not meant as an insult, but to point out what negates and disqualifies itself in reasoning and establishes what is true and not falsehood.

Please allow me to apply the same non hypocritical reasoning to what you have said above. Please don't get offended. You say: "We all have an image of god" doesn't make sense because not even the most pious of person COULD understand such a being [for arguments sake, a god DID exist].

Is this a true statement? No. why? Because everytime a man determines what is right or wrong he must create an image of god. Even though he does not know God or even believe in such an idea of God, he must form an absolute and presume what God would have him do, for he must make a moral decision and determine Truth from falsehood. There must be an absolute by which one reasons morally. And this absolute then becomes his god for it rules his decision making regarding what is true or false, right or wrong, good or bad. It defines success and failure, rich and poor, free and slave, and all binary terms are defined by this absolute. It rules absolute as long as a man believes in it.

So it is you have come to this conclusion: Human speech would be entirely incapable of coming close to any understanding, so "an image of god" is just buzz words without any real conceptual integrity. It's just . . . said because it sounds pious.

This conclusion is based upon your first statement that since a pious person could never understand such a being, there can be no image of such a being. Yet we do conjure images regardless, because we must. Your image of god, that there is no god has hence ruled your thought process to say that an image of god is just buzzwords regardless of the fact you have established your own image of god. your own absolute. And this has ruled your thought process. What we believe to be true governs our reasoning.

And so, your reasoning is hypocritical therefore since you do not acknowledge you recognize any absolute although you yourself have manufactured one to morally reason upon. The god of no gods.

Hence the bible says that man has made his worthless idols and false gods and he has also become worthless. Consequently, you will not discuss these self evident truths with me because your god invalidates them by your aversion to the term God. Next comes the spirits of darkness for they live in a man through lies that men believe as true. You will know anger at those who wage wars because of religion and count yourself better than they because you would believe the lie that peace would ensue if only they would follow the god of no gods. The bible predicts this. We are made in God's image and so we become that which we believe as absolute. For this reason the Christ was crucified and he said forgive them, they know not what they do.

 

[Deavonreye]

You mistake "hypocricy". In order for a person to be a hypocrite, that person has to understand that what they are saying isn't the truth, but continue to say it anyway because of what others think. That isn't what I'm doing, . . . and you are still being offensive when you make that call on me.

It may come as a surprise to you that I am not an atheist. I have no idea whether or not any gods exist. I have an aversion, perhaps, but it is to the "image of god" that man has decided on. This isn't exclusive to any one religion, . . . as many do it. For the sake of argument, let's say that "truth [principles that are always true]" is evidence for a god [of which I still completely disagree with that premise]. There isn't any way at all to determine with of the thousands of gods is the correct one.

This is all said, I have still yet to see any credible evidence of a god. I'm all for it, but it has to be credible/evident. "Absolute truth" would still be so if NO gods exist. The person making the claim [that it wouldn't] must be able to show that 1+1 would not equal 2 if a god didn't exist, . . . but more than that, must also make a clear cut case that THEIR god is the true one.

Rhea, thanks for your input, and helping to get childeye to understand what is going on here. Yes, it would appear that childeye is insisting upon his "truth" being a given. Under those conditions, then childeye will always win [in his mind]. But the premise is flawed.

BTW, I forgot to address the point that "Einstein believed in god". Reference?

 

[childeye]

=Deavonreye;568664]You mistake "hypocricy". In order for a person to be a hypocrite, that person has to understand that what they are saying isn't the truth, but continue to say it anyway because of what others think.

No, you are describing lies not hypocrisy, although being a hypocrit one does not see the lies they are under. Hypocrisy is when with your own words you say things contrary to what you yourself say. The behavior pattern from hypocritical reasoning is manifested in acts of doing unto others what you yourself would not want done to you. It is called sin.

That isn't what I'm doing, . . . and you are still being offensive when you make that call on me.

It may be offensive to you, but what would you have me do? Lie to you so as to not hurt you feelings? But I would not have you lie to me for the sake of my feelings. By all means slap me in the face if it will keep me from falling into a fire. Chucked my pride, in Christ I died.

It may come as a surprise to you that I am not an atheist. I have no idea whether or not any gods exist. I have an aversion, perhaps, but it is to the "image of god" that man has decided on. This isn't exclusive to any one religion, . . . as many do it. For the sake of argument, let's say that "truth [principles that are always true]" is evidence for a god [of which I still completely disagree with that premise]. There isn't any way at all to determine with of the thousands of gods is the correct one.

Deavonray. These words you say turn my heart to you with all sincerity. Honesty is faintly poking out when you say, I have no idea whether or not any gods exist. I have an aversion, perhaps, but it is to the "image of god" that man has decided on... And here I feel I am talking to Deavonray not the mask He\She hides behind for protection.

This is all said, I have still yet to see any credible evidence of a god. I'm all for it, but it has to be credible/evident. "Absolute truth" would still be so if NO gods exist.

Ahhhhh Deavonray, Look at the term "God". Have I not pointed out absolutely that this term is all inclusive. According to the term itself absolute Truth could not possibly exist without God. You are asking me to prove to you there is a light that is a moral Spirit in man's soul. I am doing that. I have told you it is Love, He is Love. All things began in Love but have become perverted through broken heartedness. That is why yousay, I have an aversion to the "image of god" that man has decided on. Here it is clear you are bias and held captive to a blasphemous image of god, because of broken-heartedness. Please, please, please see Jesus. Because he knows our pain and he is the evidence you seek. Do not look at the institutions that carry his name in blaspheme according to a man made opinion of him. For he is a real person and no one defines Jesus but the True God Whose Image he is.

The person making the claim [that it wouldn't] must be able to show that 1+1 would not equal 2 if a god didn't exist,

This is insanity. Can you not see this?

. . . but more than that, must also make a clear cut case that THEIR god is the true one.

I wince at the phrase THEIR god. But I will comply with convincing you he who comes in the name of Jesus the Christ comes from the True God. All I ask is that you be honest, put aside pride, be honest. That means if I point out hypocrisy in your reasoning, you admit it.

Rhea, thanks for your input, and helping to get childeye to understand what is going on here.

Let us begin here. Has Rhea made me understand anything? Please see the post in response to His\Hers.

Yes, it would appear that childeye is insisting upon his "truth" being a given.

Is this statement true? What Truth have I insisted upon that is mine? I have insisted upon agreeing there is a Truth which is not mine. You are being dishonest here and to see God you must be pure of heart.

Under those conditions, then childeye will always win [in his mind]. But the premise is flawed.

The premise for saying my premise is flawed is in fact flawed, as everything both you and Rhea say I said, I never said. No one can help you because you deceive yourselves after this manner of dishonesty. Please see the record. It is your truth you wish to push upon everyone else saying it is my truth, when in fact I have said the Truth is not manufactured by anybody. Remember, I did not make up 1+1=2, that is my point for bringing it up.

BTW, I forgot to address the point that "Einstein believed in god". Reference?

Search Time magazines' interview with Albert Einstein.
P.S. It is a fact you cannot prove a negative.

 

[WIP]

JustWondering,

Your original topic of this post is the question of "evidence" for God and not proof as some have tried to deny and change it. When I look around me I see EVERYTHING as evidence of God. Actually I see it as proof but let's just stay on topic. How our environment is so perfectly suited for those of us that inhabit this planet; how its size and location is so perfectly placed to make that possible; how the atmosphere is so perfectly the right combination of gases and processes we all (plants and animals) need; the beautiful perfection of our bodies and all the trillions of individual intricate components and processes that must come together in complete unity for it to function as a whole. In my mind it's just too convincing to be anything but God-created.

For a nonbeliever to be convinced there is a God by physical evidence is impossible. Before you can “see the proof†you must first surrender yourself and open your heart and mind to the possibility. Believers are just that, "believers". We believe there is a God plain and simple. “No proof required,†as I've said before. We believe by faith enabled by the Holy Spirit. “I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Spirit has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith.†Luther’s Small Catechism: 3rd article explanation. We cannot prove it to nonbelievers on our own. It is impossible for us to provide the evidence nonbelievers need to understand it as we do. God himself could stand before them and they would not be convinced. He's done it before and was crucified. Of course nonbelievers don’t even believe who Jesus was and so that statement is also impossible for them to fully comprehend.

As much as we are unable to prove God exists to a nonbeliever they too are as much unable to prove to us that He does not exist. Nonbelievers have been trying to show evidence and prove God doesn’t exist for millennia and we still believe. It is what it is. I believe in God. I believe God created everything, including those that refuse to believe. I believe that everything I can see, touch, hear, smell, taste, and sense around me is evidence and proof of God’s existence just as surely as I believe that I get wet when it rains. You want evidence? Take a look around; look in the mirror, pick up the miracle of a newborn baby and feel the soft skin, count its fingers and toes, let it grasp your finger, listen to its heartbeat, hear it cry for its mother, take a deep breath and smell the roses, close your eyes and listen to the voice of God. There’s your evidence! Now it’s up to you to take that first step and reach out to Him. You won’t regret it.

 

[jasoncran]

Jasoncran

"logic and order from chaos. i always get a kick when athiests imply that."

The Atheists I know don't believe that logic and order came out of chaos. They recognize that the universe is run according to laws. What they don't recognize is that the source of the laws has to be a God.

I'm more concerned with an Atheist blaming the ills of the world on religion. There are other forces at work in the world that are political and economic. Religionists aren't the only ones who have been against peace. And I'm bothered by Atheists not being tolerant toward those who believe a religion. The author of this thread does believe that we would be better off without religion, but so far at least he's tolerant of religion.

Cute young lady under your moniker. Is she a new addition to the family?

FC

that is jaci my newborn grandaughter. and i have athiest tell that.they either cant answer that or that the laws are what they are. thus self creating,hmm

so the universe ordered itself? they cant answer that.

 

[jasoncran]

fc we got one that believes as i said.math has order to it thus some being had to order that and create it. math and known laws of nature cant logically poof into being without having something create them.

sooner or later the naturalist must then ask where did these laws of nature come from? and why and who did it. origins of life beg these questions. otherwise why bother asking?

we dont need to know where the germ came from in order to learn how to kill it.

 

[JustWondering]

WIP,

Thank you for your last post. I may not agree with everything you said, but I sense you said it with sincere and kind intentions, and I do appreciate that. I used to believe as devoutly as you. I wonder sometimes if I have become hard hearted, or if I have merely opened my eyes to see things as they really are.

My problem is, even if I try really hard to believe again (which I have done over the past couple years), I just can't seem to make myself feel like I used to. I feel like I've read too much and allowed too much cognitive dissonance into my brain to ever allow me to have true faith again. The severe doubts will always be there, no matter how hard I might try to dispel them.

If God is real and Christianity is Truth, I need a real miracle in my life. If I'm wrong, I sincerely want to know it. But at this point I have almost given up hope of ever returning to faith. Many days I accept my new reality and feel pretty happy, but other times I get very depressed at what I've lost.

Anyway, when I started this post I didn't intend to spill my guts like this. I just wanted to say thanks for sincerely sharing your thoughts.

 

[jasoncran]

christianity isnt based on feelings. shoot if i did it that way. i wouldnt have made it through my wartime expercience.

i thought ,and in my arrogance i thought i had what it took, No god got me through that.

 

[Deavonreye]

No, you are describing lies not hypocrisy, although being a hypocrit one does not see the lies they are under. Hypocrisy is when with your own words you say things contrary to what you yourself say. The behavior pattern from hypocritical reasoning is manifested in acts of doing unto others what you yourself would not want done to you. It is called sin.

Wrong. Your definition is more akin to a lie. I was a hypocrite when I continued playing for a worship team, pretending that I was still a christian when I no longer could be. I eventually stopped playing. I'm no longer a hypocrite.

Deavonray. These words you say turn my heart to you with all sincerity. Honesty is faintly poking out when you say, I have no idea whether or not any gods exist. I have an aversion, perhaps, but it is to the "image of god" that man has decided on... And here I feel I am talking to Deavonray not the mask He\She hides behind for protection.

I'm not hiding behind anything at all. I am agnostic. I cannot make a call that "no gods exist" because that cannot be proven anymore than you can make a positive claim for god. But ...

Ahhhhh Deavonray, Look at the term "God". Have I not pointed out absolutely that this term is all inclusive. According to the term itself absolute Truth could not possibly exist without God. You are asking me to prove to you there is a light that is a moral Spirit in man's soul. I am doing that. I have told you it is Love, He is Love. All things began in Love but have become perverted through broken heartedness. That is why yousay, I have an aversion to the "image of god" that man has decided on. Here it is clear you are bias and held captive to a blasphemous image of god, because of broken-heartedness. Please, please, please see Jesus. Because he knows our pain and he is the evidence you seek. Do not look at the institutions that carry his name in blaspheme according to a man made opinion of him. For he is a real person and no one defines Jesus but the True God Whose Image he is.

I cannot continue my own thoughts on this section of this thread. They would be against TOS. Suffice it to say, I do not agree with your statements. What I CAN say is that I sought Jesus for ~30 years and always came back empty, even though I attempted with the utmost sincerety that I could. There was never anything there. Just what others TOLD me to believe. Eventually, that was not enough.

This is insanity. Can you not see this?

What I see is someone making "absolute truth" into a deity when "absolute truth" is just as valid in a "god absent" universe.

I wince at the phrase THEIR god. But I will comply with convincing you he who comes in the name of Jesus the Christ comes from the True God. All I ask is that you be honest, put aside pride, be honest. That means if I point out hypocrisy in your reasoning, you admit it.

I cannot admit to that which I know I didn't commit. However, I am open to your convincing argument. If it holds merit, my pride will have no affect on it. I am [by no means] one who is "in rebellion".

Is this statement true? What Truth have I insisted upon that is mine? I have insisted upon agreeing there is a Truth which is not mine. You are being dishonest here and to see God you must be pure of heart.

Once again, you pass judgement upon me. There is nothing dishonest in my posts. I cannot convince you of that, but I speak out of the highest sincerety. Anything else is useless banter.

The premise for saying my premise is flawed is in fact flawed, as everything both you and Rhea say I said, I never said. No one can help you because you deceive yourselves after this manner of dishonesty. Please see the record. It is your truth you wish to push upon everyone else saying it is my truth, when in fact I have said the Truth is not manufactured by anybody. Remember, I did not make up 1+1=2, that is my point for bringing it up.

Then by all means, produce your evidence for me to evaluate. Just don't be quick to attack when I don't accept it "hook, line, and sinker", like a Chick Tract.

I am after TRUTH. EVIDENCE. FACTS. Do you have some? Post them.

 

[ivdavid]

I am after TRUTH. EVIDENCE. FACTS.

What is truth? And this is not a new question - it's been asked since ages ago.

What would you consider as criteria to be satisfied, for that premise to be deemed true? Is it some experimentally provable thing that you're expecting - because that would never happen - you can never experiment physically on something that is Spiritual(non-physical). Is it then some feel-good factor that you expect to experience in order to confirm that as truth - this then becomes so subjective, it cannot be a basis to determine truth.

Is it then a non-contradictory system that you're expecting, to explain all our worldly (& non-worldly) phenomenon - but for this, you must evaluate the system's consistency under the system - not from outside the system, as you're doing now. When you analyze the logic of the premises of a system - you must do so w.r.t. the first premises that that system holds. You cannot take up first premises from outside that system, then apply that to the system - and finally claim that this system is flawed because it breaks down here.

And I suppose you do realize that science can never explain the WHYs of the universe - just the HOWs. In that sense, it is limited. Take an illustration of a Christian believer laying claim to having heard God speak with him by His Spirit - is this evidence of God's existence - to that believer, it is. But to the person who is disinclined to believe, he will have to either 'rationalize' it away or concede that there is a God, which he is averse to doing for so many other reasons (which he may not even be consciously aware of). What would such a person do - he'd say that the believer was only having hallucinations and that this need not be construed as evidence for God.

But what is a hallucination and why must that explain away God? Perhaps there are more reliable sources but I felt wikipedia would suffice for now -
"hallucinations are defined as perceptions in a conscious and awake state in the absence of external stimuli which have qualities of real perception..."
In short, hallucinations are defined as real(pertaining to physical world) responses to non-real(not pertaining to physical world) stimuli. How's this different from what the believer is saying - the believer is stating the same thing - that he is responding(in the physical world) to God's Spiritual(not pertaining to physical world) stimuli.

What has this scientific definition added to - nothing in my opinion. It's almost subtly assumed that anything that can be explained by science, does away with the need and truth of a religious explanation - and science(or rather its misuse) then goes about taking what religion says and rephrases it in technical jargon to make it its own - and then circularly uses it to 'prove' the 'irrationality' of religion and faith in God. How can you expect to be given evidence when this is the approach?

So, I'll get back to my question - what do you consider as objective criteria to be satisfied for something to be deemed true? Let's discuss this before we proceed to discussing truth itself.

 

[childeye]

=Deavonreye;568842] I was a hypocrite when I continued playing for a worship team, pretending that I was still a christian when I no longer could be. I eventually stopped playing. I'm no longer a hypocrite.

Yes your description does fit with hypocrisy. To be clear let us agree that
hypocrisy is acting as if one is something they are not, as in false piety. Let us
agree that a lie is saying something that is not true. Let us agree that saying
something that is untrue when you are unaware it is not true is being deceived
without any intention to be a liar nor believe a lie. Let us agree that when we
declare something true and then say it is not, that is a contradiction, and this
is what I mean by hypocritical thinking.

I'm not hiding behind anything at all. I am agnostic. I cannot make a call that "no gods exist" because that cannot be proven anymore than you can make a positive claim for god. But ...

I would say we must have some terminology we agree upon to avert misunderstanding and misconstruing what is being said. I am refering to the term god as an absolute. You have said you cannot prove that no gods exist, yet reject my assertion, that the term applies to that which establishes moral truth in one's reasoning, as in cause of it, or sum of it. You will simply say, such a term cannot be proven to exist for you are not going to consider that Truth is evidence of a creator, nor therefore will you accept the term god applied as an absolute as it is decribed in dictionary definitions and affirmed in all regarded sacred text applications. So how do you define god so that I may know what or who it is I am trying to prove exists?

I will say that God to me is the Spirit of Love. And that I believe God is
Love eternal.

What I CAN say is that I sought Jesus for ~30 years and always came back empty, even though I attempted with the utmost sincerety that I could. There was never anything there. Just what others TOLD me to believe. Eventually, that was not enough.

Well I do not know what others told you, I can only witness for myself. Jesus is found at the cross. Jesus is the display of Godly Love put to the test. Either you believe Love (God) is eternal or you give way to the conviction that it is not. And the Gospel is the good news that Love is eternal and those who believe that, are changed by it, and can see the Truth of God and are therefore led by that Truth founded upon trust and serving in such trust.

What I see is someone making "absolute truth" into a deity when "absolute truth" is just as valid in a "god absent" universe.

For me, in honesty I must admit that absolute Truth exists before I can even
begin to examine whether there is a God who created it. This becomes apparrant
to me as I learn and come into knowledge of that Truth that is absolute. I
define morals as those actions that are beneficial for the whole of society, so
as to make life as pleasent and prosperous as possible for everyone as a whole.
With this in mind, I must admit I would have to care for others as well as
myself to be walking in Truth.

Seeking what is Truth regarding moral direction in behavior is where we get
into the prospect of religion, what is the moral absolute, what is God, and what
is called the Spirit of Love. The ability to feel others needs and not just my
own so that I do not become a burden upon others. For some do not seem to have any profitable feelings as they hurt others, even sometimes finding pleasure in doing so, and this is deemed evil.

Hence, for me to care and establish right and wrong, I must believe some
direction is the right one. Love for others requires I do so. Hence God is Love
and I can feel love and I obey Love, and so I testify to it. Love is real, and
without it, evil ensues and society dies.

I cannot admit to that which I know I didn't commit. However, I am open to your convincing argument.

Well said, and I accept the statement in trust and faith, as sincere honesty.

Once again, you pass judgement upon me.

As we have made a peace between us above I do not wish to respond to this,
only to say, if I have misjudged you I am truly sorry.

Then by all means, produce your evidence for me to evaluate. Just don't be quick to attack when I don't accept it "hook, line, and sinker", like a Chick Tract.

I am after TRUTH. EVIDENCE. FACTS. Do you have some? Post them.

I have made the point above that we all affect one another in our actions and
lives as we share the planet. This to me is a fact. Consequently it is also a
fact, for me to care about how I affect others requires Love, the virtue of
kindness, compassion, and affection for others. However, I've seen where love is
not and evil is present. In this I see there is some sort of corruption that is
in mankind and I must wonder at the viability of love. For there are wars and
neighbor attacks neighbor, each accusing the other of not having love for their
neighbors. Here I see hypocrisy. So there is an evil in man that works through
deception, for neighbor attacks neighbor all in the name of Love, in their image
of god. These men do not seem to be led by compassion, or an absolute Truth, yet they definitely have a passion and believe they are following what is true.
Hence I think God is like light, for no one can see light, but without Light one
can not see.

When I heard of the Christ I wondered at the story of this man who was said
to have been sent by the One True God in other words not the false ones, pertaining to absolutes. The story was complete with six thousand years of prophecy all devoted to his portence. And when I read his words they speak of all that is real and matters regarding Love and Truth. He possessed the ability to defeat all arguments that were based on falsehhood and reveal the hypocrisy of it. He was lowly, had no possessions, his concern was for the poor of society. He accused no one of wanton sin except those who accused others. He sought no power or glory for himself but only glorified the One true God whom he called Father. He glorified the Father as Love, and took no credit for piety and he would not hit back, but said we should love even our enemies and return good for evil. Then both the religious and secular leaders of this world, they took him, and stripped him naked, beat him, scourged him, and reviled him and hung him upon a cross, crucified for all to see. And before he died he prayed for forgiveness upon
those who with wanton malice had done this, saying forgive them Father for they
know not what they do.

I wasn't there, and I didn't see him rise from the dead as they say, but I know he came and believe he is the Christ. The True Image of the One true God come into the world so men may believe and be changed. The Holy Spirt Who testifies to him showed me.

So I see the world divided here, at the cross. There are powers of darkness based on false gods or no gods as long as it is not serving the One True God that is Light and Love from a pure heart. And such purity can only exist if we know it
is not ourselves lest in our ignorance we return evil for evil blaming the other for not loving.

The evidence is presented and placed before me. I have seen it. God is a moral imperative. I know the difference in my heart believing in the Christ. Darkness cannot live there. So I say to you, there is a choice to be made whether I believe or not because I must believe something, and regardless I will be serving a god whether it be a god of falsehood, or the God of Truth. The true God can only be the Creator, and the false god can only be the inventor of lies, for whatever is not Truth is falsehood, morally speaking. As Love is a Spirit so is Love's enemy. I may not believe it. I may think I make love happen just like those who return evil for evil, but I will be deceived. The cross is a division. Those who believe
in freewil are on one side, and those who believe there are spirits that rule in
men are on the other. I will either be crucified with Christ or be a crucifier
of Christ. That's the choice I must make, Love is eternal or it is not, either God is real or He is not. For the Truth entered into the world and each person judged themselves according to what they saw.

So it is that all who do not believe in Love as eternal, not admitting that Love precedes our existence and will be there after we are gone, are in hypocrisy because they claim a false piety based upon faith in only their temporal selves.

 

[WIP]

WIP,

Thank you for your last post. I may not agree with everything you said, but I sense you said it with sincere and kind intentions, and I do appreciate that. I used to believe as devoutly as you. I wonder sometimes if I have become hard hearted, or if I have merely opened my eyes to see things as they really are.

My problem is, even if I try really hard to believe again (which I have done over the past couple years), I just can't seem to make myself feel like I used to. I feel like I've read too much and allowed too much cognitive dissonance into my brain to ever allow me to have true faith again. The severe doubts will always be there, no matter how hard I might try to dispel them.

If God is real and Christianity is Truth, I need a real miracle in my life. If I'm wrong, I sincerely want to know it. But at this point I have almost given up hope of ever returning to faith. Many days I accept my new reality and feel pretty happy, but other times I get very depressed at what I've lost.

Anyway, when I started this post I didn't intend to spill my guts like this. I just wanted to say thanks for sincerely sharing your thoughts.

I think the part I've put in bold type kind of says something to me. It says that you are relying on your own strength and reason to believe and it's very possible that is where you are in this stage of your life. I've been there. I spent almost 20 years in denial until I finally gave in to God.

The best advice I can think to offer is that you try not closing the door completely. Jesus is knocking and it's up to you to respond. Maybe this isn't a good time in your life to do that. That's okay. The Holy Spirit will convict you in His time and when He does, I would love to be there to watch your reaction. It will be wonderful to see.