Getting 'evidence' would break the system.

liveya

(Note: This is not about debating his existence, it's about the hypothetical situation where somehow (even though its impossible in the way they demand it) evidence is found and the consequences there after..)

And seeking evidence outside God (evidence itself) is pointless, and impossible.

I don't know what sort of evidence atheists are looking for, has anyone ever asked them? Has anyone ever asked an athiest what would be an example of evidence that would suffice? Has anyone ever thought about the consequences of finding evidence without the will to actually know him and love him?

It seems to me that finding 'evidence' without having seeked him willingly would break the system, a meltdown, life would be impossible. Could you imagine if you absolutely knew God existed, but you refused him? It would be like someone standing their watching you all day everyday, intruding on your life, it would be awful. Even for beleivers it would be intrusive and uncomfortable, so it is logical that we cannot know 100%, unless we totally willingly open ourselves to him, as the saints did, and do.

The system is perfect the way it is, God is present for those who seek him, but not intruding on our lives, he's at the 'perfect distance', so to speak. Knowing hell exists for example would create chaos and despair, people would flock to churches at least every Sunday, or even everyday, not out of freely choosing to love him, but out of fear, thus the failure of any real love.

On a final note, I know there are some athiests who convert and take that leap of faith, but there are some who just refuse to bow, and even think seriously about faith, and how could they do that, knowing he exists, so denial is the only option for those who refuse him. The will to be ones own God would be exposed if they didn't deny him. Nobody could refuse to bow and love God and simultaneously admit his existence, they would be exposed as arrogant God wannabe's.

Asking for evidence without deeply wanting to know God and submit to him (who is worthy of worhsip) is pointless. It would only serve to trap the person in a world of fear and forceful fake love, making life dreadful, ironically, a living hell.

What do you think?

dvae

for many atheists, i don't think theres much you could do to promote the existence of God.
after all Jesus himself came to the earth to atone for the sins of man, and to preach the word of God. after preforming many miracles there were still many who failed to believe.

liveya

dvae wrote: »

for many atheists, i don't think theres much you could do to promote the existence of God.
after all Jesus himself came to the earth to atone for the sins of man, and to preach the word of God. after preforming many miracles there were still many who failed to believe.

Trust me, I have no interest in conversion with those who in their heart of hearts, refuse to bow. It's easy enough to see who is seeking God, and who refuses out of wanting to be their own God.

My point, was to show that getting the evidence they ask for would be a disaster. Especially for those who refuse him. They ask for it, but really they don't want it. It wouldn't work.

The inability to prove or disprove him, only serves to reveal his splendor and perfection in all things. He respects our freedom and loves each one of us so much, even those who refuse him, he's made it impossible for anyone to impose him on others. A good God!

Sarky

Well if anyone could perform a miracle on live tv with plenty of qualified experts to ensure it wasn't faked, that'd be a start. Or God could show up in person like he did in the old days and sort out once and for all which of the however-many-there-are-now Christian denominations has it right. The stars rearranging themselves into a message in the night sky. He could just drop the requisite knowledge into everyone's brain at the same time, too. Anything verifiable. Anything at all beyond a feeling someone has. Anything that is consistently different from sheer random chance.

It's hardly asking much of an entity that allegedly managed to create a universe, is it?

liveya

Sarky wrote: »

Well if anyone could perform a miracle on live tv with plenty of qualified experts to ensure it wasn't faked, that'd be a start. Or God could show up in person like he did in the old days and sort out once and for all which of the however-many-there-are-now Christian denominations has it right. The stars rearranging themselves into a message in the night sky. He could just drop the requisite knowledge into everyone's brain at the same time, too. Anything verifiable. Anything at all beyond a feeling someone has. Anything that is consistently different from sheer random chance.

It's hardly asking much of an entity that allegedly managed to create a universe, is it?

None of the things you asked for would be proof, since to experience them as a person, you'd have to agree they are still scientific and not proof of God at all, just that something happened that you cannot explain it. It's still science, still not meta.

Secondly, I explained that Gods respect for our freedom, allows for doubt. Seek and you'll find, implying if you don't seek you won't find. A loving God wouldn't impose on anyone, so it makes sense that having given us enough light, it's up to us to accept and respond to this proposition, it has to be made in faith to prove one cares enough to take that leap.

A Perfect system, designed for freely chosen love.

Sarky

How would a verifiable miracle or the stars realigning themselves to spell out a message from god not be evidence to suggest god exists? Right now we have god curing cancer at a rate that's actually below the normal spontaneous remission rate, or both sides of a team praying to god for victory but in the end, one of them still loses. And that book that's true because of the bits in the book that say it's true. There is nothing compelling.

And who'd be imposing? He'd settle the question once and for all, we'd still have the choice whether we want to bother with all that bowing and scraping business or not. If he's providing no evidence whatsoever of his existence, well, it's his own damn fault so much of the world doesn't believe in him.

liveya

Sarky wrote: »

How would a verifiable miracle or the stars realigning themselves to spell out a message from god not be evidence to suggest god exists? Right now we have god curing cancer at a rate that's actually below the normal spontaneous remission rate, or both sides of a team praying to god for victory but in the end, one of them still loses. And that book that's true because of the bits in the book that say it's true. There is nothing compelling.

And who'd be imposing? He'd settle the question once and for all, we'd still have the choice whether we want to bother with all that bowing and scraping business or not. If he's providing no evidence whatsoever of his existence, well, it's his own damn fault so much of the world doesn't believe in him.

You don't seem to understand my point. One could not live their life in peace, if they refused to bow and knew he existed; In knowing he exists they'd know there is an absolute truth, and would be exposed to not admitting the truth and would be seen to be clearly ignoring it, who would be irrational then?

I'm marvelling at the perfect way the universe is made, ignoring the fall for the moment, since that's our fault. The only people who enjoy eternal life are those who admitted the truth, those who took that leap of faith, because they wanted to know, love and enjoy God, not those who refused and wanted to be their own Gods.

True love for God cannot be borne out of you having no choice to refuse him, simply because you knew he exists, the imposition against your will would be a tragedy.

Note the importance of the phrase freely choose to love..

totus tuus

This photo was allegedly taken by a young girl at Medjugorje in the late 1990s.

Sarky

Oh, I missed the bit where you were redefining evidence to mean "Whatever points to the existence of god". Sorry about that. Carry on with... Whatever this thread is actually about then.

Regarding the picture, give me half an hour with Photoshop and I'll show you one just as convincing that has "SATAN" written near the top. It's not terribly compelling evidence. Anyway, this was never a thread about actual evidence I guess, so I think we're done here.

liveya

totus tuus wrote: »

This photo was allegedly taken by a young girl at Medjugorje in the late 1990s.

But that's not proof, that's an allignment of the clouds in a way that has the same shape as the word Christ, still room for doubt. It will always be a matter of faith, thank God - to prevent heaven from being filled with people who refused God.

liveya

Sarky wrote: »

Oh, I missed the bit where you were redefining evidence to mean "Whatever points to the existence of god". Sorry about that. Carry on with... Whatever this thread is actually about then.

Regarding the picture, give me half an hour with Photoshop and I'll show you one just as convincing that has "SATAN" written near the top. It's not terribly compelling evidence. Anyway, this was never a thread about actual evidence I guess, so I think we're done here.

In all honesty Sarky, isn't it fair that only those who want to know God get to enjoy him for eternity? As opposed to those who didn't want to know him, but had to because they had no choice otherwise? A loving God would not impose himself, it's very simple. It's perfect..

Seek and you'll find..But you have to want to find him, to seek him..

Zillah

None of what you are saying really makes sense.

For example, knowing about Hell isn't what turns Hell into horrendous blackmail...creating Hell in the first place is what makes it horrendous blackmail. If God really wanted to respect my freewill he'd give me an option that didn't involve either worshipping him or suffering forever. Punishing someone for something they genuinely did not believe to be the truth is either insane or evil. Couldn't God just allow me to fly around the universe exploring stuff in an immortal spiritual body instead of joining you guys in heaven, or being condemned to Hell? Why would he make Hell at all?

Knowing about an unfair system is not what makes the system unfair - a system being unfair is what makes it unfair. God has no need to force me to choose between him and eternal torture.

EDIT:

Clearly the "Christ" image is an inferior copy. Thor has better hand writing and a higher image resolution.

liveya

Zillah wrote: »

None of what you are saying really makes sense.

For example, knowing about Hell isn't what turns Hell into horrendous blackmail...creating Hell in the first place is what makes it horrendous blackmail. If God really wanted to respect my freewill he'd give me an option that didn't involve either worshipping him or suffering forever. Punishing someone for something they genuinely did not believe to be the truth is either insane or evil. Couldn't God just allow me to fly around the universe exploring stuff in an immortal spiritual body instead of joining you guys in heaven, or being condemned to Hell? Why would he make Hell at all?

Knowing about an unfair system is not what makes the system unfair - a system being unfair is what makes it unfair. God has no need to force me to choose between him and eternal torture.

Hell was created (I'm not sure by God, some have said its by Satan himself) not for human beings, but the Devil and his angels. But some peeople refuse God and choose sin, commiting the unforgivable sin - rejecting the holy spirit all one's life, and therefore deserve to be punished. Hells eternal nature is not purposeful, it's a consequence of the sin that must be punished or else God wouldn't be just. An all loving God must punish sin, or else he is unjust. The punishment continues forever because the sin continues forever, locked from the inside.

So you are asking for God to let a person who refuses him, freely: therefore love, goodness, righteousness and justice to live happily ever after for eternity, floating around enjoying Gods work? although to reject him would make you the worst creature ever created, by your choice? Do you really think a person, who has freely rejected such a good God deserves to go unpunished? Terrible..

No, if you refused the gospel, truth, love then you don't deserve to live happily ever after, nobody of who made such selfish choices does. Complaining about Gods perfect justice, and then wanting him to be unjust for you is just silly.

One cannot be forced to love God, that's my point. Even upon absolutely knowing his existence, you'd only draw to him out of fear not out of love. If one does really want to know and love God, they would take that leap of faith because for them it's worth taking. They wouldn't hide behind bad theology and elaborate arguments as an excuse for not responding to him.

shanered

Just look at how different all the different Christian groups portray God. each one differently saying this and saying that, do you not see a trend? Do you not see your history and see where many of the aspects of God came from.
There may be a spiritual element to the world that we live in, but to be certain that your sect knows exactly what going on and all the rest are wrong is a little ignorant of history and a little vain in my eyes.
Personally I believe in something spiritually, I do believe in energy and force beyond what modern science can explain, but i think its the same thing with all religions and past religions involving countless gods and godesses, what makes your god different, because he is one?
Thats just like worshiping everything and if you did that hopefully you feel great about everything and I can understand why people would strive for that.
But the whole evidence thing, very subjective in my eyes.
Science is all things measurable.
How could you provide evidence for everything and anything, I believe what many people believe God to be is like a second voice or a made up element of their concience kinda like third person in your mind if that makes any sense, its like creating a parent for your concience that you can never upset and will always love you.
Its very comforting I do believe, but to even ask for evidence is crazy as God is whatever you want and everything.
Not very scientific, where each person has there own idea and of course it would be impossible to analysis everybodies notion of what god is, and even disprove that or even prove that for that matter.
the fact that it works so well is that its as subjective as you like.
Rant over...

Gumbi

What do you mean by "the universe is perfect?

Edit: Btw, aren't miracles, by definition, impossible?

liveya

Gumbi wrote: »

What do you mean by "the universe is perfect?

Edit: Btw, aren't miracles, by definition, impossible?

What I mean by perfect, is perfect for allowing people to freely come to know him. Perfect in that I cannot prove what has been revealed to me, which gives me good reason to have faith, to you. Therefore imposing him on you.

The original thread questioned the athiest's demand for evidence. Life would be unlivable having evidence, it would be like trying to avoid the sun in a noonday, cloudless desert. Unavoidable, and imposed against our will.

Thankfully he's given us some breathing space and a chance to freely make that choice. Through Christ he's given us enough light to seek him. So real love can flourish.

Gumbi

liveya wrote: »

Gumbi wrote: »

What do you mean by "the universe is perfect?

Edit: Btw, aren't miracles, by definition, impossible?

What I mean by perfect, is perfect for allowing people to freely come to know him. Perfect in that I cannot prove what has been revealed to me, which gives me good reason to have faith, to you. Therefore imposing him on you.

The original thread questioned the athiest's demand for evidence. Life would be unlivable having evidence, it would be like trying to avoid the sun in a noonday, cloudless desert. Unavoidable, and imposed against our will.

Thankfully he's given us some breathing space and a chance to freely make that choice.

That's quite a strange definition of perfect.

Gumbi

So you're essentially saying that evidence of God is self-defeating? So why should anyone believe in God in the first place then?

Zillah

Can I just clarify something: You believe that a person who genuinely doesn't believe that a God exists, but managed to live a life with kindness and generosity anyway, deserves to suffer torture forever?

People can't force themselves to believe in something they don't. Nor can they love it. Your God is either cruel or insane.

Or, there is no such entity, which would explain why all of this makes no sense.

pauldla

With apologies to Douglas Adams.

God: I refuse to prove that I exist, for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing!

Me: Who said that?

God: I did! Oh, er....

Exit God pursued by a bear

It would be like someone standing their watching you all day everyday, intruding on your life, it would be awful. Even for beleivers it would be intrusive and uncomfortable

So, you don't believe in an all-seeing, all-knowing, all pervasive god?

The original thread questioned the athiest's demand for evidence. Life would be unlivable having evidence, it would be like trying to avoid the sun in a noonday, cloudless desert. Unavoidable, and imposed against our will.

I have evidence for many things, and I find life to be quite tolerable. The evidence presented to me for the existence of gravity, for example, has not turned my life into a cloudless desert. Maybe I'm not doing it right.

ceegee

totus tuus wrote: »

This photo was allegedly taken by a young girl at Medjugorje in the late 1990s.

Does God not speak Bosnian? You'd think he'd speak/write in the local language.

philologos

shanered wrote: »

Just look at how different all the different Christian groups portray God. each one differently saying this and saying that, do you not see a trend? Do you not see your history and see where many of the aspects of God came from.

This is why you shouldn't trust in groups. You should investigate it for yourself. Thankfully we also have the Bible which means we can look into what has been revealed and think about it for ourselves.

There are plenty of reasons as to why one justifiably could believe in Jesus. The case for creation, the case for Jesus' death and resurrection, the case for objective morality, the clear reality of sin and the fallen world we live in, the list goes on and on. The Gospel makes logical sense, from beginning to end.

The reality is most atheists don't want to believe in God. That's why you notice that the goalposts are raised any time you happen to respond to any of their objections. If they really wanted to know God, they would know to seek out and find Him by any means possible. They also know that there are many Christians who would be more than willing to help them to find out more about Jesus. I hope they take that opportunity and look into it rather than actively trying to find any reason not to believe.

mrac

But the god of the bible was constantly relieving himself to the world and was constantly performing miracles etc. to prove himself. Then, for no reason at all, he just sort of stopped...and never directly intervened again. Sounds a little suspicious if you ask me.

By the way you could rewrite the op to replace the christian god with say Thor and it would have the exact same merit, so why then do you dismiss Thor so easily and instead embrace the christian god?

liveya

mrac wrote: »

But the god of the bible was constantly relieving himself to the world and was constantly performing miracles etc. to prove himself. Then, for no reason at all, he just sort of stopped...and never directly intervened again. Sounds a little suspicious if you ask me.

By the way you could rewrite the op to replace the christian god with say Thor and it would have the exact same merit, so why then do you dismiss Thor so easily and instead embrace the christian god?

He was revealing himself yes, preparing for the messiah. There isn't much need for him to do much more after Jesus came and showed the way. Miracles still occur by the way, especially where the church is growing in Africa and Asia, many don't have the resources we do, like Doctors, so he provides for them. They also have great faith, and don't doubt everything as a way of avoiding him.

In regards to Thor, did Thor actually do anything? Did he send his Son to save them from their sins, did he ever reveal himself and triumph over Evil, in the way most unlikely, humility, sacrifice and suffering? Of course, I'm playing here, Thor was an answer to awareness of something out there, some characteristics of Thor would certainly be similar Yahweh. They got some of it right.

There is good reason to put faith in Christ, but some just don't want to, they have their motives. If they really wanted to know God, they'd seek him, even without evidence, as millions of other people have. It's not as if they're the first person being asked to have faith anyway,

Excuses excuses..

doctoremma

This thread reads like a whole heap of cognitive dissonance.

"I cannot provide proof of god's existence so I'm going to argue that proof would have a negative and destructive effect".

Proof for an atheist:
1. the earth stops turning or halts in its orbit for a day.
2. the secrets to curing cancer, harnessing fusion or solving poverty are discovered, written in unambiguous language on a rock somewhere.
3. an unexpected supernova occurs and ignites a message across the universe, saying "I am god, trust in me".
4. an amputee spontaneously grows a new leg, after praying for one.

Things like that.

totus tuus

ceegee wrote: »

Does God not speak Bosnian? You'd think he'd speak/write in the local language.

Maybe because the person who took the photo spoke english?

A woman from Harriman, New York, was posing for photos on Apparition Hill at Medjugorje in 1995, and when the film was developed one of the photographs showed the word "CHRIST" written in a dark sky (even though the photos were taken in broad daylight!).

Source:

http://www.spiritdaily.net/Sign_Wonders/skysignsa.htm

The locals in Medjugorje saw the word 'Mir' written in the sky, Bosnian for the word peace!

http://www.medjugorje.com/medjugorje/signs-and-miracles/548-mir.html

Then there was the Miracle of the sun at Fatima in 1917 witnessed by both atheists and believers alike.

mrac

liveya wrote: »

He was revealing himself yes, preparing for the messiah. There isn't much need for him to do much more after Jesus came and showed the way. Miracles still occur by the way, especially where the church is growing in Africa and Asia, many don't have the resources we do, like Doctors, so he provides for them. They also have great faith, and don't doubt everything as a way of avoiding him.

In regards to Thor, did Thor actually do anything? Did he send his Son to save them from their sins, did he ever reveal himself and triumph over Evil, in the way most unlikely, humility, sacrifice and suffering? Of course, I'm playing here, Thor was an answer to awareness of something out there, some characteristics of Thor would certainly be similar Yahweh. They got some of it right.

There is good reason to put faith in Christ, but some just don't want to, they have their motives. If they really wanted to know God, they'd seek him, even without evidence, as millions of other people have. It's not as if they're the first person being asked to have faith anyway,

Excuses excuses..

My point of Thor was that any of the thousands of man made gods could be substituted into the op and have equal credibility. The reason people on this board so firmly believe the christian god over any other is a matter of geography, the majority of people on this board were born into a christian family or christian society or both and it is for that reason they accept the christian god only.

Someone born in say India would be most likely born into a hindu family and therefore believe in the hindu gods. According to your religion these people will be sent to hell (putting false gods before the "true" god) not for being a bad person in any way but simply for being born into a society which "doesnt know any better" regarding the "correct" god.

Surly if god was a loving god he would make an indisputable appearance or such so that everyone would know the correct god and stop following these false gods therefore people would not be doomed to eternal hell simply for not knowing any better, wouldn't you agree?

doctoremma

totus tuus wrote: »

Maybe because the person who took the photo spoke english?

Source:

http://www.spiritdaily.net/Sign_Wonders/skysignsa.htm

The locals in Medjugorje saw the word 'Mir' written in the sky, Bosnian for the word peace!

http://www.medjugorje.com/medjugorje/signs-and-miracles/548-mir.html

You actually think that photo is real?

liveya

mrac wrote: »

My point of Thor was that any of the thousands of man made gods could be substituted into the op and have equal credibility. The reason people on this board so firmly believe the christian god over any other is a matter of geography, the majority of people on this board were born into a christian family or christian society or both and it is for that reason they accept the christian god only.

Someone born in say India would be most likely born into a hindu family and therefore believe in the hindu gods. According to your religion these people will be sent to hell (putting false gods before the "true" god) not for being a bad person in any way but simply for being born into a society which "doesnt know any better" regarding the "correct" god.

Surly if god was a loving god he would make an indisputable appearance or such so that everyone would know the correct god and stop following these false gods therefore people would not be doomed to eternal hell simply for not knowing any better, wouldn't you agree?

No, I don't agree. A majority of new testament historians conclude Jesus existed, and ressurected from the dead. The jews weren't even expecting him to die, no mind ressurect. Theologically it's perfect and has stood the test of time. There is no good reason to believe in Thor.

In your second part you've commited the genetic fallacy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

Being born into a Christian family does not mean Christinaity is false, it means one has been chosen to follow Christ in his vocation, to be his disciple.

In your third part, you ask if he was loving, why didn't he make an indesputable appearance: He did. Through Jesus Christ whose historic evidence is credited. Jesus gave us every reason to beleive he is the truth, the light and the way. He is the only person to have never bored anyone with his sermons, and whose theology and logic holds to this day. The lives of the saints and their miracles which are witnessed by the faithful continue.

Like I said before, only those who say but what religon? Don't understand how Christ stands out from other people like Muhammed, or Buddha, They claimed to speak the truth: "Here is my mind", Jesus claimed to be truth.

liveya

doctoremma wrote: »

This thread reads like a whole heap of cognitive dissonance.

"I cannot provide proof of god's existence so I'm going to argue that proof would have a negative and destructive effect".

Proof for an atheist:
1. the earth stops turning or halts in its orbit for a day.
2. the secrets to curing cancer, harnessing fusion or solving poverty are discovered, written in unambiguous language on a rock somewhere.
3. an unexpected supernova occurs and ignites a message across the universe, saying "I am god, trust in me".
4. an amputee spontaneously grows a new leg, after praying for one.

Things like that.

You can't be serious. Have you ever thought to yourself, that if any of these things happened, it might not be according to the divine plan, or that actually it's not proof at all, people could and would foff it off as a co-incedence, or a hallucination. Even if those things did happen, what then? You still don't know God, you just know he exists and therefore are trapped, what if you didn't want to know him, is that fair that he imposed himself on you?

Also, you're a human, limited and finite. Those things you suggested might not be working towards a greater good, they might disrupt everything with catastrophic effects. So your arrogance of how God could do things is exposed, when you cannot accept you could be wrong in what you suggested.

God doesn't have to prove himself to you, or do anything at your command. If you wanted to know him, you'd seek him, simple as. Many others have. But it seems your ulterior motives prevent you from taking that leap of faith.

Stark

liveya wrote: »

In regards to Thor, did Thor actually do anything? Did he send his Son to save them from their sins, did he ever reveal himself and triumph over Evil, in the way most unlikely, humility, sacrifice and suffering? Of course, I'm playing here, Thor was an answer to awareness of something out there, some characteristics of Thor would certainly be similar Yahweh. They got some of it right.

Thor could make thunder and lightning with his mighty hammer. Why do you deny the spectacle of thunder and lightning so easily?

mrac

liveya wrote: »

No, I don't agree. A majority of new testament historians conclude Jesus existed, and ressurected from the dead. The jews weren't even expecting him to die, no mind ressurect. Theologically it's perfect and has stood the test of time. There is no good reason to believe in Thor.

In your second part you've commited the genetic fallacy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

Being born into a Christian family does not mean Christinaity is false, it means one has been chosen to follow Christ in his vocation, to be his disciple.

In your third part, you ask if he was loving, why didn't he make an indesputable appearance: He did. Through Jesus Christ whose historic evidence is credited. Jesus gave us every reason to beleive he is the truth, the light and the way. He is the only person to have never bored anyone with his sermons, and whose theology and logic holds to this day. The lives of the saints and their miracles which are witnessed by the faithful continue.

Like I said before, only those who say but what religon? Don't understand how Christ stands out from other people like Muhammed, or Buddha, They claimed to speak the truth: "Here is my mind", Jesus claimed to be truth.

Regarding your first point, many historians would claim that muhammad etc. existed so why do you dismiss these claim but hold onto the ones which reinforce your view point?

Regarding the genetic fallacy, the commandments clearly state that worshiping other gods gets you a ticket to hell, hindus worship other gods therefore the only logical conclusion you can take if you truly believe the commandments is that they are going to hell. So do you believe they go to hell? In which case is that fair and loving? OR Do you believe that they can still go to heaven? In which case are the commandments wrong? can they be ignored in some cases? how do you resolve the commandment issue?

Almost all religions have some form of "divinely inspired" text, if there is no proof than how are we supposed to distinguish which is true and which is false? You must agree that devout followers of all religions will swear that their text is true and that they have every reason to believe its true etc. in the same way you have exerted that your holy text is true.

doctoremma

liveya wrote: »

You can't be serious. Have you ever thought to yourself, that if any of these things happened, it might not be according to the divine plan.

Well, if it easn't according to a divine plan, it wouldn't happen, would it? And if it doesn't happen, I have no reason to believe in a divine plan (or a being that creates one).

liveya wrote: »

or that actually it's not proof at all, people could and would foff it off as a co-incedence, or a hallucination.

I agree. I'd be looking for naturalistic explanantions first. I'm just highlighting a few examples of where earthly naturalistic explanations would fail me and I'd need to think bigger (maybe aliens, maybe god, whatever).

liveya wrote: »

Even if those things did happen, what then? You still don't know God, you just know he exists and therefore are trapped, what if you didn't want to know him, is that fair that he imposed himself on you?

Things that exist do not impose themselves on anyone. Do I want to be "ruled"? Not especially. Am I "ruled" by various entities imposing themselves on my life? Yes. My mother, my boss, my government, my monarch. All have been imposed on my life; some I welcome, some I do not. All exist though.

liveya wrote: »

God doesn't have to prove himself to you, or do anything at your command. If you wanted to know him, you'd seek him, simple as. Many others have. But it seems your ulterior motives prevent you from taking that leap of faith.

Well then, god needs to understand that he made me as I am, a skeptic, a non-believer, and not consign me to hell for my normal and innate thoguht processes.

Blowfish

liveya wrote: »

Nobody could refuse to bow and love God and simultaneously admit his existence,

I don't respond well to threats. If the god you describe popped up tomorrow and said 'serve me or you'll go to hell', I'd tell him to F off. Any god that sends people to a place of torture for eternity for not serving is not worth 'loving', they'd essentially be the ultimate dictator.

liveya wrote: »

It's easy enough to see who is seeking God, and who refuses out of wanting to be their own God.

That is an incredibly bizarre leap of logic. Do you believe in vampires? If not, it clearly means it's because you want to be one...

Monty Burnz

liveya wrote: »

You don't seem to understand my point. One could not live their life in peace, if they refused to bow and knew he existed;

You think that this would bother a god who presides over appalling human misery and always has?

liveya

Getting back on topic, it seems to be perfect, that so called scientific evidence is not provided for those who don't will to know God. This allows for real love to flourish, out of a genuine desire to know him, not because they had no choice, since there was definite evidence. That wouldn't be right.

I'm starting to think these debates are a waste of time, because clearly there are those who absolutely have no interest in knowing God, they just find any excuse and a million reasons (which is why it continues endlessly), and to be frank, I wouldn't say Jesus himself is actually pleased with the time Christians waste here, talking about him, instead of using the time to talk to him.

Didn't he say to the apostles, to those who refuse the gospel, to shake the dust from their sandals, and the blessing will return to them? Seems asbout right.

Monty Burnz

liveya wrote: »

Being born into a Christian family does not mean Christinaity is false, it means one has been chosen to follow Christ in his vocation, to be his disciple.

Can you please quote who made this argument? Because I think you will find that this is a stawman that you just invented.

Monty Burnz

liveya wrote: »

Getting back on topic, it seems to be perfect, that so called scientific evidence is not provided for those who don't will to know God.

We don't even need scientific evidence - he could just tweak our personalities to make us less sceptical in general, and more inclined to believe things without proof. But for some reason he made some people in every society with a higher standard of proof before they believed in God/Allah/Thor/Ahura Mazda/the local Kami etc. etc.

Why make people with different levels of credulity but provide the same evidence of existence to all? It seems unfair.

mrac

liveya wrote: »

Getting back on topic, it seems to be perfect, that so called scientific evidence is not provided for those who don't will to know God. This allows for real love to flourish, out of a genuine desire to know him, not because they had no choice, since there was definite evidence. That wouldn't be right.

I'm starting to think these debates are a waste of time, because clearly there are those who absolutely have no interest in knowing God, they just find any excuse and a million reasons (which is why it continues endlessly), and to be frank, I wouldn't say Jesus himself is actually pleased with the time Christians waste here, talking about him, instead of using the time to talk to him.

Didn't he say to the apostles, to those who refuse the gospel, to shake the dust from their sandals, and the blessing will return to them? Seems asbout right.

So essentially you have no way of refuting the points raised by people in this thread so you revert to just assuming your position is right, ours is wrong and its our own fault for not thinking as you do. I said it before and it is perfectly true of your above post, you can replace the word "God" in your post with Thor, Odin, Zeus, lepricons, fairies, unicorns, vampires etc. and it would hold exactly the same weight to me as your post does.

totus tuus

doctoremma wrote: »

You actually think that photo is real?

I was merely posting a claim by another source - I don't need photos to back up my own beliefs.

I do believe in the Fatima Miracle as it was witnessed by thousands and well documented!

doctoremma

totus tuus wrote: »

I was merely posting a claim by another source - I don't need photos to back up my own beliefs.

Do you think the photo is real?

totus tuus wrote: »

I do believe in the Fatima Miracle as it was witnessed by thousands and well documented!

As someone who has dedicated a large proportion of her research career to retinal physiology, I can assure you that there are far more mundane methods to explain what people "saw".

getz

i am sure religion will come up with some excuse when they find life on other planets,after all they still insist god only made life on earth.

Sin City

liveya wrote: »

Getting back on topic, it seems to be perfect, that so called scientific evidence is not provided for those who don't will to know God. This allows for real love to flourish, out of a genuine desire to know him, not because they had no choice, since there was definite evidence. That wouldn't be right.

I'm starting to think these debates are a waste of time, because clearly there are those who absolutely have no interest in knowing God, they just find any excuse and a million reasons (which is why it continues endlessly), and to be frank, I wouldn't say Jesus himself is actually pleased with the time Christians waste here, talking about him, instead of using the time to talk to him.

Didn't he say to the apostles, to those who refuse the gospel, to shake the dust from their sandals, and the blessing will return to them? Seems asbout right.

You see that is the point though, there are millions of reasons to dispute Gods existence and very little to support him, The bible says that its the world of God is not proof of Gods existence either

pauldla

liveya wrote: »

Getting back on topic, it seems to be perfect, that so called scientific evidence is not provided for those who don't will to know God. This allows for real love to flourish, out of a genuine desire to know him, not because they had no choice, since there was definite evidence. That wouldn't be right.

I'm starting to think these debates are a waste of time, because clearly there are those who absolutely have no interest in knowing God, they just find any excuse and a million reasons (which is why it continues endlessly), and to be frank, I wouldn't say Jesus himself is actually pleased with the time Christians waste here, talking about him, instead of using the time to talk to him.

Didn't he say to the apostles, to those who refuse the gospel, to shake the dust from their sandals, and the blessing will return to them? Seems asbout right.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but I really can't understand your first paragraph.

so called scientific evidence is not provided for those who don't will to know God.

What does that mean? Are you suggesting that, because I do not believe in a god, I cannot be supplied with scientific evidence of his existence? Conversely, if I did believe in god, I would be provided with scientific evidence? If that is what you are trying to say (and I'm sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick), then this is complete nonsense.

This allows for real love to flourish, out of a genuine desire to know him, not because they had no choice, since there was definite evidence.

What does that mean? If I believe in God I will be provided with evidence he exists, and then I will love him? I'm trying really hard not to write the letters wtf in huge burning caps right now.

This is nonsense: it makes about as much sense as my nephew's talk about his imaginary friend. I'll admit that I may well be reading it wrong, so please, can you explain further?

totus tuus

doctoremma wrote: »

Do you think the photo is real?

Can't say without evidence.


As someone who has dedicated a large proportion of her research career to retinal physiology, I can assure you that there are far more mundane methods to explain what people "saw".

I suppose you can explain how those who were writhing in the mud with fear and in the lashings of rain had their clothes instantly dried and cleaned. :rolleyes:

http://www.fatimaforbeginners.org/index.php/fatima/the-miracle-of-the-sun

fatmammycat

totus tuus wrote: »

I suppose you can explain how those who were writhing in the mud with fear and in the lashings of rain had their clothes instantly dried and cleaned. :rolleyes:

http://www.fatimaforbeginners.org/index.php/fatima/the-miracle-of-the-sun

Who knows, perhaps a number of moving statues helped in the dry-cleaning process?
Seriously, large groups of people claim to see all sorts of things on a regular basis, take a quick gander at those people who gathered in Knock for the Coleman/Mary side show. Heck, think of the VAST mumber of people who claim they've been abducted by aliens. They believe what they say so it must be true, right?

Cossax

totus tuus wrote: »

I suppose you can explain how those who were writhing in the mud with fear and in the lashings of rain had their clothes instantly dried and cleaned. :rolleyes:

http://www.fatimaforbeginners.org/index.php/fatima/the-miracle-of-the-sun

Well there you have it everyone, God is an awesome dry-cleaner!

We know for a fact that the sun didn't dance around in the sky or exhibit any other miraculous behaviour on that day so make of the rest of it what you will.

pauldla

totus tuus wrote: »

I suppose you can explain how those who were writhing in the mud with fear and in the lashings of rain had their clothes instantly dried and cleaned. :rolleyes:

http://www.fatimaforbeginners.org/index.php/fatima/the-miracle-of-the-sun

If you visit the hometown of Mao Ze Dong in Hunan, China, you can go to the very large museum dedicated to his life.

One of the exhibits there tells of the extraordinary events that took place when his body was carried in state after his passing, and of more extraordinary events that happened when a large memorial statue to him was erected.

Two examples that I can remember from the top of my head: the sun and the moon appeared together in the sky (they have photos of same), and, even though it was mid-winter, flowers bloomed as the cortege passed.

Can you accept these as true, or would you require proof from an independent source?

When Kim Il Sung of North Korea died, similar events were reported. Can you accept them as true, or would you like corroborating evidence from a independent source?

doctoremma

totus tuus wrote: »

I suppose you can explain how those who were writhing in the mud with fear and in the lashings of rain had their clothes instantly dried and cleaned. :rolleyes:

http://www.fatimaforbeginners.org/index.php/fatima/the-miracle-of-the-sun

Given the masses of press and scientific photographers there, I asssume you can produce evidence of this claim?

STOP PRESS: People in the midday sun dry out. God is real.

shanered

People love to believe what reinforces their beliefs.
Its almost like that loving God is loving themselves, which they can think of in a third person type belief.
Of course their are going to many (of the many) stories that they hear about God that they choose to believe, but that is all, unless the experianced many of these events first hand, whereby similar people would claim to have been abducted by aliens could be similar to religious experiance attributted to God.
Its whatever these people want to believe......
It doesn't matter about the evidence....
But then again it always get me this whole believers are damned as it just starts this crap of being harassed by believers being tried to converted by these concerned christians.

shizz

totus tuus wrote: »

I suppose you can explain how those who were writhing in the mud with fear and in the lashings of rain had their clothes instantly dried and cleaned. :rolleyes:

http://www.fatimaforbeginners.org/index.php/fatima/the-miracle-of-the-sun

The events of that day are not a matter of hearsay, but of actual reported fact. As just one example, we can point to the observations of Avelino de Almeida, Editor in Chief of O Seculo, the great “liberal,” anticlerical and Masonic daily of Lisbon:

HA. It claims this and then the only evidence it has of course is quotes from people there. Not hearsay at all.