Argument for God's existence.

gospels said:

Yes, you don't have to become a Christian. You will receive wisdom and understanding to discern the truth only after/if you choose to trust, listen, and follow the instructions of the God who claims to be the possessor of wisdom. If you go in the given direction where he leads you, then one day you will see Him and after you see Him you cant deny His existence.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid I edited the post after writing it. I wonder what you think of these points?

1. What do I say to a representative of another religion who tells me that all I have to do is follow their religion and I will see that it is true? What if there are multiple religions which say this?
2. What if I do try this, and I do not discover that it is true? What if I waste years of my life looking for God and never find Him? What if there is no God to be found?
3. Why, if God is real, is there no simple way of demonstrating this? There are lots of difficult things about understanding a person's message, but it's generally pretty easy to tell if they exist or not.
4. What about people who spent many years being faithful Christians, but eventually realised that they had been wrong, and that God does not, in fact, exist?

Silmarien said:

Except that I would argue that the evidence that any of this really constitutes reality is lacking. We know that said 16'2" thick brick wall is almost entirely made up of empty space, and the jury is out on what protons, neutrons, and electrons really are. There's a radical naturalist theory out there popular amongst some physicists called ontic structural realism, whereby reality isn't made up of material entities at all, but instead of a sort of infinite regress of relations. Most theists hate it, but I find it intriguing in that it effectively eliminates the concept of matter altogether.

Similarly, I'm not sure to what extent our common sense ideas about movement are compatible with the theory of relativity, so species needing to travel two real feet forward is another concept that I think is potentially suspect. That's the problem with modern physics--a lot of what we thought was obviously real and not appearance even 150 years ago probably is not.

I am not strictly speaking an idealist, but I think the old Platonic idea of the physical being in some sense an echo of the abstract is actually becoming an increasingly valid possibility, perhaps even the strongest one out there. You can actually be a scientific realist and an idealist.



Well, I don't think this counterargument is particularly good, since it requires that our conscious intellect is the extent of our potential knowledge, and that could easily fail to be the case. If you're some sort of forgetful god dreaming your own private reality, then I think it would make sense that you know far more than you consciously realize.

That said, I don't think this is a particularly compelling version of idealism. I have rules against absurd "what if" scenarios, so I wouldn't argue for brains in vats, but I would be happy to argue against the idea that concrete material entities genuinely exist. They really might not.



Oh, the eliminative materialists love going after that one.

Click to expand...

Meh. You're arguing with a dictionary (theist and atheist mean these things) you seem strangely hung up on me writing astronomy instead of astrology by mistake, and you say the physical world doesn't exist.
I think that's all that needs to be said, really. It's not like you've said anything that needs refuting.

InterestedAtheist said:

So I don't have to become a Christian to see the truth of the Bible. Just trust that it is true and follow its directions, and then I will see that it is true?
In that case, what about the following:

Click to expand...

1. What do I say to a representative of another religion who tells me that all I have to do is follow their religion and I will see that it is true? What if there are multiple religions which say this?

Let me know which religion or the divine of which religion claims that it was he who brought forth wisdom, has set up and possessed wisdom. No one claims but if they are then see which divine of the religion said it first and how he proved it.

2. What if I do try this, and I do not discover that it is true? What if I waste years of my life looking for God and never find Him? What if there is no God to be found?

If you had tried, it is never wasted, neither in life nor in death. Still if i were you, i will try until my death and not care about my life wasted. Wasted life is a life without God and an everlasting pain after death. Its all waste if i lost my soul after death. I will still choose to trust and follow his wisdom rather than mine, hoping i will find him in my moment of death when He comes to receive my soul.

3. Why, if God is real, is there no simple way of demonstrating this? There are lots of difficult things about understanding a person's message, but it's generally pretty easy to tell if they exist or not.

It does not seem to be simple because Human souls are blind and deaf and cannot see or hear properly because the darkness of sin blocks the eyes and ears of our soul. That is what makes the message difficult to understand. It becomes simple and easy to those who choose to trust the one who claims to have wisdom, because those people will receive the wisdom and understanding. As they walk in this path, their sins will be removed, helping them to see and hear clearly. When the darkness of sins are removed from our soul, then our eyes and ears become clean, and then only we can see the reality.

4. What about people who spent many years being faithful Christians, but eventually realised that they had been wrong, and that God does not, in fact, exist?

They need to understand that God is holy and humans are imperfect. If they only continued in faith and in patience and reverence until their death, they would eventually see that He does exist. No matter what, if they choose to drop in the midway in this life, they will acknowledge that He does exist after their death when their soul is released into the spiritual realms. But that wont do them any good at that time. No matter what people choose, all will see who God is and acknowledge and bow before Him, either in life or in death.

InterestedAtheist said:

I'm afraid I edited the post after writing it. I wonder what you think of these points?

1. What do I say to a representative of another religion who tells me that all I have to do is follow their religion and I will see that it is true? What if there are multiple religions which say this?
2. What if I do try this, and I do not discover that it is true? What if I waste years of my life looking for God and never find Him? What if there is no God to be found?
3. Why, if God is real, is there no simple way of demonstrating this? There are lots of difficult things about understanding a person's message, but it's generally pretty easy to tell if they exist or not.
4. What about people who spent many years being faithful Christians, but eventually realised that they had been wrong, and that God does not, in fact, exist?

Click to expand...

1. What do I say to a representative of another religion who tells me that all I have to do is follow their religion and I will see that it is true? What if there are multiple religions which say this?

Let me know which religion or the divine of which religion claims that it was he who brought forth wisdom, has set up and possessed wisdom. No one claims but if they are, then see which divine of the religion said it first and how he proved it.

2. What if I do try this, and I do not discover that it is true? What if I waste years of my life looking for God and never find Him? What if there is no God to be found?

If you had tried, it is never wasted, neither in life nor in death. Still if i were you, i will try until my death and not care about my life wasted. Wasted life is a life without God and an everlasting pain after death. Its all waste if i lost my soul after death. I will still choose to trust and follow his wisdom rather than mine, hoping i will find him in my moment of death when He comes to receive my soul.

3. Why, if God is real, is there no simple way of demonstrating this? There are lots of difficult things about understanding a person's message, but it's generally pretty easy to tell if they exist or not.

It does not seem to be simple because Human souls are blind and deaf and cannot see or hear properly because the darkness of sin blocks the eyes and ears of our soul. That is what makes the message difficult to understand. It becomes simple and easy to those who choose to trust the one who claims to have wisdom, because those people will receive the wisdom and understanding. As they walk in this path, their sins will be removed, helping them to see and hear clearly. When the darkness of sins are removed from our soul, then our eyes and ears become clean, and then only we can see the reality.

4. What about people who spent many years being faithful Christians, but eventually realised that they had been wrong, and that God does not, in fact, exist?[/QUOTE]

They need to understand that God is holy and humans are imperfect. If they only continued in faith and in patience and reverence until their death, they would eventually see that He does exist. No matter what, if they choose to drop in the midway in this life, they will acknowledge that He does exist after their death when their soul is released into the spiritual realms. But that wont do them any good at that time. No matter what people choose, all will see who God is and acknowledge and bow before Him, either in life or in death.

@InterestedAtheist

InterestedAtheist said:

Meh. You're arguing with a dictionary (theist and atheist mean these things) you seem strangely hung up on me writing astronomy instead of astrology by mistake, and you say the physical world doesn't exist.
I think that's all that needs to be said, really. It's not like you've said anything that needs refuting.

Click to expand...

I'm hung up over the utter arrogance of telling someone that they're wrong about what their own position is. Seriously, that's a level of presumption I don't usually see around here, so congratulations.

I don't really see why you want to address the question of whether God exists when you refuse to discuss the question of what the claim "God exists" even means, and dismissively tell people that they're wrong when they approach it in a way you're not familiar with. That is kind of backwards and crazy, so at the very least I agree that a conversation here is not worth having.

Silmarien said:

I'm hung up over the utter arrogance of telling someone that they're wrong about what their own position is. Seriously, that's a level of presumption I don't usually see around here, so congratulations.

I don't really see why you want to address the question of whether God exists when you refuse to discuss the question of what the claim "God exists" even means, and dismissively tell people that they're wrong when they approach it in a way you're not familiar with. That is kind of backwards and crazy, so at the very least I agree that a conversation here is not worth having.

Click to expand...

But I didn't tell you what your position was. I'm quite happy to accept that you are a theist. I just said that you were incorrect in the meaning of the word theism.
You said:
"If I give you a definition of theism, you do not get to tell me that I am making things up and insist on your own definition. You can ask for clarification on what precisely I mean, but if a theist is using language in a way you are unfamiliar with, it is up to you to adjust to it."
And the answer is: of course I can tell you that you are making things up, if you are making things up. And of course it's not up to me to "adjust to you using language" if you're doing it wrong.
You know, just because you are a theist, that does not mean you own the word. It has quite a specific meaning, and it's nothing to do with "reality is in some sense ultimately subjective in nature (i.e., that it is personal)". All it means is that you believe in a god of some kind. I'm not "making up my own definition," it's just that I know what the word means.

Sorry, Silmarien, but when someone says something incorrect it's sometimes best just to tell them. It saves time.

gospels said:

Let me know which religion or the divine of which religion claims that it was he who brought forth wisdom, has set up and possessed wisdom. No one claims but if they are, then see which divine of the religion said it first and how he proved it.

Click to expand...

I doubt that many religions make exactly the same claims as Christianity, but most of them say that they are the one true religion. So how do I tell if they are false and Christianity is true?

gospels said:

If you had tried, it is never wasted, neither in life nor in death. Still if i were you, i will try until my death and not care about my life wasted. Wasted life is a life without God and an everlasting pain after death. Its all waste if i lost my soul after death. I will still choose to trust and follow his wisdom rather than mine, hoping i will find him in my moment of death when He comes to receive my soul.

Click to expand...

Okay. Good for you. Now, from my point of view, how am I to know that God exists? Because if He doesn't then it certainly is a waste of my life to seek something that doesn't exist.

gospels said:

It does not seem to be simple because Human souls are blind and deaf and cannot see or hear properly because the darkness of sin blocks the eyes and ears of our soul. That is what makes the message difficult to understand. It becomes simple and easy to those who choose to trust the one who claims to have wisdom, because those people will receive the wisdom and understanding. As they walk in this path, their sins will be removed, helping them to see and hear clearly. When the darkness of sins are removed from our soul, then our eyes and ears become clean, and then only we can see the reality.

Click to expand...

Hmmm. And yet many people say that they have tried this, and it didn't work. Why is it that you can't give evidence to someone who doesn't yet believe in God so that he can believe?

gospels said:

They need to understand that God is holy and humans are imperfect. If they only continued in faith and in patience and reverence until their death, they would eventually see that He does exist. No matter what, if they choose to drop in the midway in this life, they will acknowledge that He does exist after their death when their soul is released into the spiritual realms. But that wont do them any good at that time. No matter what people choose, all will see who God is and acknowledge and bow before Him, either in life or in death.

Click to expand...

But these people are saying they did try, with great sincerity, to follow the Bible and to seek God; it's just that they couldn't. Apparently all you can do is offer the simple assertion that they were wrong and should have tried harder.
So what am I to do if more than one religion says the same thing as you? I can't take them all on faith, they're mutually exclusive.

InterestedAtheist said:

I doubt that many religions make exactly the same claims as Christianity, but most of them say that they are the one true religion. So how do I tell if they are false and Christianity is true?

Click to expand...

No divine in other religions claim the exact same claim that He brought forth wisdom, has set up and possessed wisdom. If even say, look for the one who said it first and how he proved it. If someone said the same thing, then they have to explain/provide evidences of their wisdom.

InterestedAtheist said:

how am I to know that God exists?

Click to expand...

As i said you can see that He exists if you genuinely care to just listen to the God of wisdom. This question will be asked to every human being in their own mind during their lifetime because it is God who questions this in our minds to find out who cares to listen to Him. This question will go on because it is God who questions humans about what they think and have decided about Him. All humans will have this question. So the question in of it self is a proof that God is asking this to every human.

InterestedAtheist said:

Why is it that you can't give evidence to someone who doesn't yet believe in God so that he can believe?

Click to expand...

Evidences are endless yet they become evident in each person's view only if they genuinely care to see and hear the God. He is speaking to all the people, all the time, in their minds, but it is the matter of who cares to listen and follow His voice.

InterestedAtheist said:

So what am I to do if more than one religion says the same thing as you? I can't take them all on faith, they're mutually exclusive.

Click to expand...

With all the religions trying to counterfeit the truth, it is very difficult. What is needed is wisdom that discerns the truth. It is safe to trust a guide who not only claims to have set-up and possess the wisdom but also have proved it. Your question should be who is the one that claims this and have proved it. No divine in other religions claim the exact same claim and explained why and how.

@InterestedAtheist

gospels said:

It is safe to trust a guide who not only claims to have set-up and possess the wisdom but also have proved it.

Click to expand...

And how did He prove it?

InterestedAtheist said:

And how did He prove it?

Click to expand...

Through out the whole bible, God provided the proofs of His wisdom. I have quoted the below scripture where He says how He proved it. However, its all over the bible, in every page.

By wisdom God founded the earth and by understanding He established the heavens. By His knowledge the deeps broke open, and the clouds drop down the dew. Proverbs 3.

He said that He brought forth and owns wisdom. By His wisdom, He raised the dead from their tombs. He caused thunders by His wisdom.

I wish i could discuss all of it but i also wish that you look and find them yourself. If you read and look, you will find out that no one else could ever do what He did by His wisdom. Such is the greatness of His wisdom in whom i can rely and trust that He owns wisdom.

InterestedAtheist said:

But these people are saying they did try, with great sincerity, to follow the Bible and to seek God; it's just that they couldn't.

Click to expand...

I can only tell why they left the faith or couldn't find God, if/when i encounter those people and know their story, for then i can find out where they missed the track and went wrong which led them to think that God doesn't exist.

gospels said:

Through out the whole bible, God provided the proofs of His wisdom.He said that He brought forth and owns wisdom. By His wisdom, He raised the dead from their tombs. He caused thunders by His wisdom.

Click to expand...

Okay. But this is nothing but stories in the Bible. Do you see why a person who does not believe in God cannot find this convincing?

gospels said:

I can only tell why they left the faith or couldn't find God, if/when i encounter those people and know their story and then i can find out where they missed the track and went wrong, which lead them to think that God doesn't exist.

Click to expand...

You may find Dan Barker's book Godless to be of interest. He was a deeply sincere Christian for many years, before one day he started answering questions which led to a years-long journey of investigation which led him to conclude that there was no God.
I am quite certain that anything you could say, he would have said, when he was a Christian. He believed deeply and sincerely, and was quite sure of his faith. But he still lost it. Believing that you are right does not guarantee that you are.

InterestedAtheist said:

You may find Dan Barker's book Godless to be of interest. He was a deeply sincere Christian for many years, before one day he started answering questions which led to a years-long journey of investigation which led him to conclude that there was no God.
I am quite certain that anything you could say, he would have said, when he was a Christian. He believed deeply and sincerely, and was quite sure of his faith. But he still lost it. Believing that you are right does not guarantee that you are.

Click to expand...

So did he believe so deeply and sincerely and so sure of his faith that he did not even stand the test of faith. All who believe will be tested and found out. The only deep and sincere belief is the one that stands the test of faith and it is they that can only see the reality. Since he did not stand the test of faith, he obviously could not see any further. And who knows, he might one day regret and come back to faith.

InterestedAtheist said:

Do you see why a person who does not believe in God cannot find this convincing?

Click to expand...

I will tell you why. A person cannot see it convincing because he/she do not have the wisdom that gives understanding to discern the truth about these "stories" unless that person first chooses to listen and follow the God of wisdom. My message is that in order to know what is real, one must first look for the God of wisdom and simply follow Him. I did for 25 years and stood the test of faith only after which i received the sight to see for real.

We made our lives so feasible for us that we have abilities to fulfill all our own needs. That is why it is so easy to deny or ignore the existence of God. Perhaps, where/when human abilities fail to keep them, it will become very evident and simple to find God. However, God is wise beyond any human and is testing us all by allowing us with these abilities.

You are not a reality and non-existent for a fish inside the depths of an ocean. Despite of whether a fish can see you or not, you do exist. Depending on where the fish is, it takes time, perseverance, patience, effort, hope and a long journey to find you and know that do you exists for real. It is same with every human soul.

@InterestedAtheist

gospels said:

My message is that in order to know what is real, one must first look for the God of wisdom and simply follow Him.

Click to expand...

I know you mean well, but you write a lot without really saying anything. All that you say can be pretty much summed up in that one quote, which is excessively vague, to the point of being meaningless.

Personally, I've found much wisdom in the Bible. None of it leads me to conclude that God exists, although I won't rule out the possibility.

Yttrium said:

I know you mean well, but you write a lot without really saying anything. All that you say can be pretty much summed up in that one quote, which is excessively vague, to the point of being meaningless.

Personally, I've found much wisdom in the Bible. None of it leads me to conclude that God exists, although I won't rule out the possibility.

Click to expand...

Now that you found it, then a wise man would choose to listen and follow it. I was speaking about giving it a genuine chance by listening and following it. If you haven't done that, then obviously you cannot conclude or come to a correct conclusion. I'm glad you did not rule out the possibility. I've listened, followed, and stood the test of faith, and then I've found it for real. I don't live in uncertainity anymore. I know my soul will rest in peace when its my time to die. I wish others also will have this assurance, joy, rest, and peace that my soul has.

InterestedAtheist said:

But I didn't tell you what your position was. I'm quite happy to accept that you are a theist. I just said that you were incorrect in the meaning of the word theism.
You said:
"If I give you a definition of theism, you do not get to tell me that I am making things up and insist on your own definition. You can ask for clarification on what precisely I mean, but if a theist is using language in a way you are unfamiliar with, it is up to you to adjust to it."
And the answer is: of course I can tell you that you are making things up, if you are making things up. And of course it's not up to me to "adjust to you using language" if you're doing it wrong.
You know, just because you are a theist, that does not mean you own the word. It has quite a specific meaning, and it's nothing to do with "reality is in some sense ultimately subjective in nature (i.e., that it is personal)". All it means is that you believe in a god of some kind. I'm not "making up my own definition," it's just that I know what the word means.

Sorry, Silmarien, but when someone says something incorrect it's sometimes best just to tell them. It saves time.

Click to expand...

"Thus all three paths [monotheism, polytheism, atheism] are convinced of the unity and uniqueness of the absolute; where they differ is only in their notion of the manner in which man has to deal with the absolute or, alternatively, of how the absolute behaves towards him. If--to treat the question very schematically--monotheism starts from the assumption that the absolute is consciousness, which knows man and can speak to him, for materialism the absolute, being matter, is devoid of all personal predicates and can in no way be brought into contact with the concepts of call and answer; the most one could say is that man himself must liberate what is divine from matter, so that he would then no longer have God behind him as something that had gone before him but only in front of him as something to be creatively effected by him, as his own better future. Finally, polytheism can be closely related to both monotheism and atheism, because the powers of which it speaks imply the oneness of a supporting power, which can be thought of in either way. Thus it would not be difficult to show how in antiquity polytheism went perfectly well with a metaphysical atheism but was also combined with philosophical monotheism."

Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI), Introduction to Christianity, pg 109

At least in the Anglo tradition, the term "theism" is usually identified with the "philosophical monotheism" that's being discussed here--that's why we have concepts like "classical theism" and "philosophical theism," both of which are very explicitly monotheistic. I would probably challenge the use of the word "monotheism" to describe concepts like the Neoplatonic One or Brahman within the major forms of Hinduism, since they're not really personal in quite the same way that the Abrahamic God is, but these still involve the claim that the absolute is consciousness, so most people, myself included, would wrap them under the label of "theism." This is the standard understanding of the word within philosophy of religion.

My claim that theism entails that reality is in some sense ultimately subjective in nature, i.e., that it is personal, is not something I made up. It's really just a paraphrase of saying that "the absolute is consciousness," since the mark of consciousness is subjectivity. If you were to read literature like the Neoplatonists, many of the early Church Fathers, the Upanishads, and so forth and so on, you would see that the absolute being ultimately subjective is really the common denominator.

Of course, you can continue to disagree with me, with Pope Benedict XVI, with the entire theistic tradition going back at least 2500 years. Or you can admit that perhaps you don't know as much about theism as people who actually study theology.

InterestedAtheist said:

Ed1wolf said: ↑
See my post to cvanwey where I deal with this assertion.

ia; I did see it. You didn't deal with it.

Click to expand...

Why not?

Ed1wolf said: ↑
That is not a miss in the bible, but rather a miss by the interpreter. But of course, they didn't have all the information from God's other book, Nature, that showed how old the universe is and how it shows the more likely correct interpretation of the bible.

ia; In other words, the Bible can never be incorrect, because whenever it disagrees with reality this must just be a mistake in our reading of it. This is, of course, a logical fallacy. Any religion could use your line of reasoning to prove that any religion is correct. It proves anything and, therefore, proves nothing.

Click to expand...

No, as I explained to cv that if we discover that the universe is eternal, is not expanding or is not winding down energetically that would falsify the biblical model of the universe. Because all three things are taught by the bible about the universe using both books of revelation. So just like any scientific theory it is falsifiable.

Ed1wolf said: ↑
Evidence it is invalid?

ia: The Cosmological Argument employs special pleading and, as such, fails.

Click to expand...

What special pleading?

Ed1wolf said: ↑
Yes, it would help to show that the Creator is benevolent.

ia: Nonsense. Even if - and this is highly debatable - Christianity could be shown to be responsible for "most of the best things in Western civilisation" all this would prove is that people believe God wants them to be good - not that God actually exists.
Supposing, for example, we came across a hitherto undiscovered tribe of people who lived lives to a very high moral standard. When questioned, they said it was because the god of their tribe, a spirit who lived in the forest wanted them to be good. Would this convince you that the spirit of the forest was real?

Click to expand...

Given that entire societies being generally good and moving in the direction of good are very rare, so if such societies exist that would show that there may be a force outside of the natural forces working in such societies. The few societies where this is occurring were all founded on Christian principles thereby providing some evidence that the Christian God exists, though not proving it.

Ed1wolf said: ↑
I am not claiming I can prove it is God, but it is the conclusion of abductive reasoning, ie to the most likely conclusion.

ia: In your own imagination only, I'm afraid. Convince yourself of anything you like, but your "arguments" aren't nearly as good as you think they are.

Click to expand...

In what way?

Ed1wolf said:

Yes, but I am not talking about logic alone, there is also no empirical evidence for a prior universe.

Click to expand...

Just like you would claim there is 'no evidence' for the many opposing asserted god claims you reject, whom claim 'evidence' demonstrates existence of their god(s)

My point being, is that 'time', prior to the beginning of it's measurable state, is immeasurable. And this is where you instead demonstrate invoking the god of the gaps argument.

Ed1wolf said:

I never said that the classical BB theory has been proven, just that the majority of scientists agree with it and its implications of a finite universe.

Click to expand...

The vast majority of biologists have and due accept evolution. And yet, you reject such a conclusion. Why are you bringing forth this point?.?.?.? Even if it actually were the case, that most scientists assert a finite universe?

Ed1wolf said:

I was studying to work as a biologist, but also I was curious about a theory that has had a tremendous effect on the world and history almost as much an effect as Christianity.
Unlike most scientific theories, it has had an effect on how people live day to day and how governments treat their citizens including major political theories such as communism and fascism, and how businesses treat their employees, whether people decide to become Christians, and many other things. But I have had a less intense though similar interest in BB theory. I used to not believe in BB theory but as I studied it I became more convinced it was true and then more recently discovered that the Bible actually taught the basics of it 3000 years before scientists discovered the evidence for it.

Click to expand...

The Bible's ambiguity allows for many to draw many differing conclusions. As stated prior, all believers don't even unanimously agree on the meaning of the word 'day'... Let alone the Bible speaking about the "BB".

Ed1wolf said:

Most cosmologists would not believe in it if they did not think it had a great deal of evidence as we both stated above.

Click to expand...

The universe being finite vs eternal is certainly not a settled topic. Accepting the "BB" really have no relevancy. Until you address the video, and also the links I have provided thus far, this disagreement remains going nowhere....

Ed1wolf said:

They would never make a scientific theory regarding causation, because that is considered outside the purview of their definition of "science".

Click to expand...

Then stop asserting it...

Ed1wolf said:

Once you come to know God personally then you can know with some degree of certainty that He created it at the BB. Of course, the belief that the creator is the Christian God is not a exactly a scientific claim.

Click to expand...

What about all the humans whom are sure to have come to know an opposing god(s)?

You don't think they could just as easily draw connections between their beliefs, and their believed upon god(s)? Again, even believers in Christ disagree about practically any and every passage of the Bible, and their believed Bible's 'true meaning(s)'.

Ed1wolf said:

Almost all the denominations that accept the infallible authority of the bible agree on essentials including the definition of God. And There are relatively few of those denominations.

Click to expand...

I disagree. I was a member of a nondenominational church for many years. Some were young earthers, some were old earthers. Some would assert the flood was local, some global. Some were more works based, and some were belief based; for salvation. Some believed in a literal hell, and some did not. And this was all within the one church I attended, reading from the same passages. This was before you might ask these same individuals of the 'definition' of their believed god.

Ed1wolf said:

The evidence of the characteristics of the universe fit the cause being the Christian God.

Click to expand...

Again, asserting your own personal presupposition isn't what makes something 'true'. Let the evidence do the talking. Your above assertion presents nothing more than fallacious reasoning.

Ed1wolf said:

Yes, it is, it is called an ad hoc creation.

Click to expand...

Negative...

Going back to your argument, millions have claimed to speak to opposing gods. Since you reject them, their asserted god is no more or less 'real' than the assertion of 'universe-creating pixies.'

Again, when something was first asserted, has no relevancy as to whether or not this attestation is actually 'true.' Evidence does....

Ed1wolf said:

No, there is evidence for Yahweh existing at least 13.8 bya as I have already explained. I am just making the point that experiential evidence is evidence. Imagine being a marriage counselor, if one husband said he only had one experience of love from his wife this year as compared to a husband who had 52 experiences of love from his wife in the past year, which marriage is more likely to be stronger than the other? The other gods and religions can be eliminated through other evidence such as logic, science, historical and philosophical evidence.

Click to expand...

Statistics suggest the possibility that the number of believers in Islam may some day surpass believers in Christianity. This must make Islam more 'true' and 'correct.'?.?.?.

Adherent estimates in 2012
Religion Adherents Percentage
Christianity 2.4 billion 33%
Islam 1.8 billion 24.1%

cvanwey said:

Ed1wolf said: ↑
The BB theory is just as much a theory as evolution and in fact is a theory based on much greater evidence than evolution. And the overwhelming majority of cosmologists believe that the universe is not eternal and time had a definite beginning.

cv: You are missing what I'm saying. Cosmologists don't know if the 'universe' is eternal or finite.?

What Happened Before the Big Bang?

Stephen Hawking Says He Knows What Happened Before the Big Bang

Click to expand...

Straw man, I didn't say that they KNOW, I said that so far most of the evidence says that it is finite. And that there is more empirical evidence that it is finite than there is that evolution is true.

Ed1wolf said: ↑
But there are rational speculations and irrational speculations, the conclusion that there is a Personal Cause for the BB is the rational conclusion. The others are irrational.

cv: The 'BB" is a place-holder term. It is recognized as the earliest current measurable moment of our universe. What happened before this could be infinite or finite.

The fact that you leap to a 'personal cause', before finding out what is/was going on prior to the 'Big Bang' appears fallacious in it's conclusion. 'God of the gaps' also comes to mind...

Click to expand...

There is no rational gap, it is based on the knowledge that all effects require a cause. And, after I did make that very small rational leap, my experience with Him confirmed it.

Ed1wolf said: ↑
The universe is a diversity within a unity, which is exactly the same characteristic of the Christian God, this is similar to the markers that art experts use to determine who created a certain piece of art. Artistic Creators leave "fingerprints" that reflect things about themselves. And its four main characteristics were taught in His word 3000 years before they were discovered by scientists, the only religious book that does so.

cv; The Bible is ambiguous at best, and wrong at it's worst.

Also, you threw in a variation of the 'watch maker' argument. I think we all know this 'argument' all too well.....

Click to expand...

The Bible has never been proven wrong. What watchmaker? I was referring to an artist. But the real watchmaker argument is actually very good since it is based on knowledge not a gap in knowledge.

Ed1wolf said: ↑
You are oblivious because so many people including Christians dont learn the evidence.

cv: Please list the specific sources of your 'evidence'?

Click to expand...

Science, history, and logic.

Ed1wolf said: ↑
Yes, but the origin of this characteristic is very unlikely to be the result of evolution as I demonstrated. So your point is actually evidence for a Creator.

Click to expand...

cv: Beg to differ.... Long ago, when we had to hunt for food or gather water, if you were walking along a path, and heard a russell in the bushes, you would think two conclusions... 1. the wind, or 2. something russelling the bushes. The ones whom assumed the former, were all eventually killed off. Thus, all that is left, are the ones whom assume the later.

It's the same reason if one hears a noise in the dark, most automatically first assume danger. It's instinct. We inherit these instincts, from the surviving relatives. We also apply this intentional agency for 'good'. Meaning, if something 'good' happens, we assume it was given by some watching agent. This is most likely why the vast majority of people invoke intentional agency for both 'God' and 'evil'.

If the above is true, then 'evolution 101' may be demonstrated.
.

Click to expand...

Huh? Millions of species have survived perfectly well for millions of years without assuming any of those things and according to Richard Dawkins criteria of spreading their genes are far more successful than humans. There is no reason natural selection would select for belief in God or some watching agent.