Mr. Ed
Be what you is not what you what you ain’t
- Location
- Central NY
Why do we believe in God
- Thread starter Mr. Ed
- Start date
JustDave
Well-known Member
Evolution is interesting, but I don't have to go nuts defending it. The only reason I can think of that might create that much fever over creationist ideas is that it supports 2000 years worth of out of date Biblical writings. But that really shouldn't matter to those needing a higher power in their lives. Even with advancements in science, there is and always will be plenty of room to believe in a god of one's choice without getting obsessed with irrelevant details once written down by ancients struggling for answers to why we exist.
MarkD
Keeper of the Hounds & Garden
- Location
- San Francisco Bay Area
I agree there is no need to make a big deal about evolution except to acknowledge what a brilliant insight it was In Darwin and Wallace's day. But there is no reason to see it as being in competition with Genessis. The Bible is composed of many kinds of writing but none at all concerned with natural history or the sciences. It is outstanding in presenting a mythos to capture deep truths about who we are as humans and what we are doing here but it isn't expository writing so using it as the basis for challenging science is peculiar.
Isn't it obvious by now that there is no basis for proving God does or doesn't exist. For those who truly believe what matters is what they think it is that exists and what God mean to them. Those who truly have faith in God don't think He needs our best legalistic thinking to defend Him.
Last edited:
Belief in a creator is the inevitable logical conclusion based on objective observation and assessment of compelling evidence.
In very stark contrast, the denial of a creator, is based on:
1. An urgent psychological NEED to feel free from having to recognize such an existence
2. A blind faith or an unqualified trust in what dishonest fanatically-motivated atheist scientists say.
BTW
I once conversed with atheists at the Randi Discussion Forum, and after six long months, and they finally admitted that the only reason why they had been rejecting all the logical arguments supporting the existence of a creator was because they were on a jihad against everything religious due to having been raised by fanatically religious parents who had ruined their childhood. In short, they were on an anti religion jihad based on personal resentment and nothing more. Otherwise, they would not have been opposing the compelling facts that they had been presented with.
Yet having a fish as an ancestor isn't funny.
In very stark contrast, the denial of a creator, is based on:
1. An urgent psychological NEED to feel free from having to recognize such an existence
2. A blind faith or an unqualified trust in what dishonest fanatically-motivated atheist scientists say.
BTW
I once conversed with atheists at the Randi Discussion Forum, and after six long months, and they finally admitted that the only reason why they had been rejecting all the logical arguments supporting the existence of a creator was because they were on a jihad against everything religious due to having been raised by fanatically religious parents who had ruined their childhood. In short, they were on an anti religion jihad based on personal resentment and nothing more. Otherwise, they would not have been opposing the compelling facts that they had been presented with.
Yet having a fish as an ancestor isn't funny.
Last edited:
Well, that is your opinion. However, please note that Christians are specifically commanded to defend God from defamation and to share the message that Jesus preached. So it isn't merely a need as you say, but an obedience to what we were told to do.
Acts 6: 29
“We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,” he said. “Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us responsible for this man’s blood.” 29 But Peter and the other apostles replied, “We must obey God rather than men.
Mark 16:15
And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.
Matthew 10:27
What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops.
Last edited:
Darwin thought that protoplasm was a simple blob. He had absolutely no idea that there was a code inside the cells.
Last edited:
I sometimes wonder, if we were to begin our lives without any information about God, without any religious concepts, without anyone or anything influencing us, would we eventually wonder about the reason for our existence and come to the conclusion there is a higher power? or not?
JustDave
Well-known Member
If you are talking about a total intellectual vacuum, I think some would wonder why or how we are here. Others may be more interested in other things. It would be the same way we wonder about the ancients. How did they come upon the concept of gods? And if they did, why? How did they come up with anything they didn't already believe?
Knight
Well-known Member
I think we begin our lives exactly like that. What we learn as our lives progress is why there is a discussion like this.
When questions begin to surface about how mankind began is where it gets sticky. I think to each their own in what they think about there being an omnipotent something that created humans in "our image".
Relying on the bible as factual historical account begins with.
The Two Creations in Genesis - Bible Odyssey.
Then contradictions like merciful & vengeance are available to read. A variety of justified deaths attributed to God.
Dwindling In Unbelief
Whether there is or isn't can go on every once in awhile with no proof either way. It comes down to.
I think we begin our lives exactly like that. What we learn as our lives progress is why there is a discussion like this. When questions begin to surface about how mankind began is where it gets sticky.
JustDave
Well-known Member
Darwin was apparently a very good observer, because there was little data at that time to confirm his ideas. Given what little was known, he could have been wrong, and been just a sidebar in biology. Given his religious background, it's no wonder he held off for so long before making his ideas available. He knew he was going to be taken to the woodshed.
As the years went on, more and more data started rolling in to confirm his theory, even now, over a hundred years later it's still coming, and I've heard that compared to most theories, the evidence supporting evolution today turns out to phenomenal compared to the best of them. Today, it's hard to imagine even a handful still trying to discredit him. His theory does indeed turn out to be a brilliant insight.
In order not to, we would have to put our reasoning abilities on hold since everything points to a creator. Including mathematics as expressed in nature. Here is one example.
Last edited:
Last edited:
rbtvgo
Member
- Location
- Absecon, new jersey
I re read your comments 3 times. I understand and yet I don't. My experiences are similar but different. I have known of the existence of God since I was a child but never knew or communicated with him till much later. My assumption at this point is that He knew me.
Much later in life I encountered the born again movement. Can't say that that I all of a sudden believed but I did read the Bible.
As I read it was almost like God speaking to me. I read, re read, thought and prayed to him. Then he spoke to me in words that I would never have used if I was simply talking to myself. This confused me because his responses were nothing like I would have uttered to myself.
I realized, at that point, that the God who knew me as a child, was really there.
Since then I try to lead my life in a different way. I don't succeed but when things get tuff I go to him. I go to him for mundain things. I go to him for traveling mercery"s when I have to travel far. I go to him for decisions about our family and how to proceed.
There is so much more but I don't think that this is the proper venue. I would like to continue to talk to you but not sure how.
I liked your response.
bob
Much later in life I encountered the born again movement. Can't say that that I all of a sudden believed but I did read the Bible.
As I read it was almost like God speaking to me. I read, re read, thought and prayed to him. Then he spoke to me in words that I would never have used if I was simply talking to myself. This confused me because his responses were nothing like I would have uttered to myself.
I realized, at that point, that the God who knew me as a child, was really there.
Since then I try to lead my life in a different way. I don't succeed but when things get tuff I go to him. I go to him for mundain things. I go to him for traveling mercery"s when I have to travel far. I go to him for decisions about our family and how to proceed.
There is so much more but I don't think that this is the proper venue. I would like to continue to talk to you but not sure how.
I liked your response.
bob
MarkD
Keeper of the Hounds & Garden
- Location
- San Francisco Bay Area
Good question. Some of us find our way there slowly on less traveled pathways but the existence of wisdom traditions disqualify our experience from answering you question. Still it has arisen in some form or other almost everywhere and for as long as we've been recognizably human.
rbtvgo
Member
- Location
- Absecon, new jersey
Our wisdom and understanding is based on what knowledge the creator has given us to work with. Think about that for a minute. Otherwise based on your understanding and experience you may fall short in coming to a conclusion about the things you question. I do all the time. Yet I firmly believe that God is in charge. I may not understand but I need only to believe and accept. This can be really tuff. Read about David in the Bible. Yet God said he was a man over mine own heart. ?????? Considering what David did, why would God make that statement?
Warrigal
SF VIP
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
I hear you bob.
I don't. There is no god. JMHO.I hear you bob.
JustDave
Well-known Member
I don't know if there is a god, or why there has to be one. There are still many questions about how and why this or that is as it is, but over the years we have found actual answers for many of these questions, and each time we found one, it didn't involve a god. So not having every answer now, doesn't seem like a valid reason for needing a supernatural explanation for what we don't know.
Anyone can claim inability to perceive glaring evidence. It's easy. Takes no effort. Just a declaration of inability to see. The excerpt below describes this common evasive tactic which is considered flawed or fallacious reasoning.
The invincible ignorance fallacy, also known as argument by pigheadedness]is a deductive fallacy of circularity where the person in question simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given. It is not so much a fallacious tactic in argument as it is a refusal to argue in the proper sense of the word. The method used in this fallacy is either to make assertions with no consideration of objections or to simply dismiss objections by calling them excuses, conjecture, anecdotal, etc. or saying that they are proof of nothing, all without actually demonstrating how the objections fit these terms. It is similar to the ad lapidem fallacy, in which the person rejects all the evidence and logic presented, without providing any evidence or logic that could lead to a different conclusion.
Invincible ignorance fallacy - Wikipedia
Rather comical. LOL!
The invincible ignorance fallacy, also known as argument by pigheadedness]is a deductive fallacy of circularity where the person in question simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given. It is not so much a fallacious tactic in argument as it is a refusal to argue in the proper sense of the word. The method used in this fallacy is either to make assertions with no consideration of objections or to simply dismiss objections by calling them excuses, conjecture, anecdotal, etc. or saying that they are proof of nothing, all without actually demonstrating how the objections fit these terms. It is similar to the ad lapidem fallacy, in which the person rejects all the evidence and logic presented, without providing any evidence or logic that could lead to a different conclusion.
Invincible ignorance fallacy - Wikipedia
Rather comical. LOL!
Last edited:
Mr. Ed
Be what you is not what you what you ain’t
- Location
- Central NY
I accept and support the notion of god, however, it is Christianity I have trouble believing. How does salvation feel in our daily lives? Is salvation the ability to live without fear or hesitation from one moment to the next? To rely solely by instinct because you know yourself so well there is no need to second guess, standing fast on every decision because you understand the consequences.
life without worry or guilt, past behavior and events have been reconciled, no remorse or shame. I am the person I want to be, I am content, without need or desire to be something or someone else.
I am saved from the desire to look elsewhere, I have all I need and want in the person I am.
Can Jesus offer more to me than who I am? I think not. I disagree with Christianity because it focuses on things we supposedly cannot have without Jesus, which I think is wrong and misgiving.
it is awkward during communion because I do not partake. I cannot support what I do not believe.
life without worry or guilt, past behavior and events have been reconciled, no remorse or shame. I am the person I want to be, I am content, without need or desire to be something or someone else.
I am saved from the desire to look elsewhere, I have all I need and want in the person I am.
Can Jesus offer more to me than who I am? I think not. I disagree with Christianity because it focuses on things we supposedly cannot have without Jesus, which I think is wrong and misgiving.
it is awkward during communion because I do not partake. I cannot support what I do not believe.
bobcat
Well-known Member
- Location
- Northern Calif
I can see a logical argument for the existence of some creative force or energy, but I don't think it could be adduced as proof.
However, I would never use the Bible as a basis for that argument. It has way too many flaws and problems.
However, I would never use the Bible as a basis for that argument. It has way too many flaws and problems.
Actually, atheists panicked when the idea of the Big Bang was presented as fact because they feared it was confirming the statement in Genesis.
The purpose of the Bible is to introduce us to the concept of a fall of mankind and its redemption. it is not meant to provide evidence of a creator. Instead, it tells us, that such evidence, such as the DNA code, for example, is compellingly present within nature itself, to such a degree, that those who deny it are without any valid excuse.
JustDave
Well-known Member
If I actually had my wish that something came before, why would it have to be a metaphorical thinking watchmaker? From what we now know about our universe, many amazing (at least amazing to our limited minds) have happened through laws of physics and hundred or so basic units of matter, not a watchmaker. But not according to the Bible, where fully formed life and material things just poofed into being, which we now now absolutely didn't happen. Yes something poofed into being, but Adam and Eve descended from an ancestor to apes and humans and it took billions of years for that to happen, not 7 days.
Humans lack the humility to understand that the thing we praise so highly as human intelligence, is not necessarily a thing of the highest order. The Earth got a long quite well before it led to intelligence.
The Bible doesn't say that things simply poofed into existence. It tells us that a power called holy spirit was used to create them.
| Psalm 104:30 ► |
| New International Version When you send your Spirit, they are created,... Furthermore, codes don't code themselves. Until it can be proven that information magically arises in water. and then magically codes itself as if it were directed by a planning mind, then all other arguments are mute. Unfortunately for the proponents of this idea, there is absolutely no evidence for abiogenesis. You see, it has never been directly observed to happen in nature. Neither can it be forced it to happen in a laboratory. under controlled conditions. So the assumption that it somehow happened, and must be happening all over the universe wherever water exists, is totally based on blind faith. |