Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That's right.
God was begotten not created, is eternal, and the ever-lasting creator of the universe and humankind.
So, obviously, although this question may seem fairly irrelevant (trust me it's relevant) and naïve, I want to stress the fact that it's a legitimate question - and shouldn't be given a quick dismissal:
I want to know how God CAN exist.
The explanation's already been given "begotten, not created" - but this means that God exists JUST BECAUSE HE DOES.
If you can't accept the universe "just existing" and have to have some form of first cause - then surely God is open to the same criticism?
Please help me on this issue.
Thanks,
phsyxx
And the key word there is if.
Being unable to explain the origins of the universe does not give one logical reason to assume a creator by divine decree who created it all and is not subject to all criticism applied to everything else because he is beyond it.
I agree. This thread, however, is more about the nature of god, not whether one exists or not.
I don't believe in gods, but I'm discussing the concept from a point of view of it existing.
Right. Same here, but I'm also arguing that the properties attributd to God are seemingly impossible - and also do not fit logically when looked at.
Plus, I wanted to explore the idea of the use of God as an explanation, and how this fails in principle, for the existence of the Universe.
Then, taking what people have given me, I am trying to demonstrate in a kind of Basil Mitchell kind of way, that what the religious believer purports and claims of God - are not actually anything more than nothingy guesses.
Probably. But go on.NavyGuy7 said:Ah, but who said I (or anyone else) was jumping to conclusions? I have reason to believe God created the universe. And it's my reason. So you'd only dismiss it as a matter of opinion, lol.
So what if our logic is based in a finite mind of a human being? This type of response often given by Theists is baffling. It becomes a meaningless discussion if responses given are dismissed or ignored because the person who gave the response is not infallible.NavyGuy7 said:And I don't think you're doing too good a job, then. You can't really apply science to God and expect him to fit into your hypothesis. And nothing is impossible with God. It is only impossible for us. And where is your logic based? Is it based in the finite mind of a human being? In the world? Of course some of the attributes of God would be "seemingly" impossible to us.
Actually.... you can't compare the Universe and God in the same way. God is, was, and always will be. The universe was created by God. Thus, they cannot both be compared under the same thing. The universe is a creation, not an eternal being/thing.
And nothing is impossible with God.
Probably. But go on.
So what if our logic is based in a finite mind of a human being? This type of response often given by Theists is baffling. It becomes a meaningless discussion if responses given are dismissed or ignored because the person who gave the response is not infallible.
Does it? Can you prove it?If nothing's impossible with God - why does evil exist?
Does it? Can you prove it?
That was the inconsistency with your argument that I was pointing out- you demand certain kinds of proof for God, yet tried to disprove a proposed quality of God with a concept similarly unprovable. Pick a means of validation and stick with it, at least.If you're going to take that attitude with one aspect of life - then I'll do the same with your God, thanks.
Get back to me when you have sound theological proof of God's existence.
That was the inconsistency with your argument that I was pointing out- you demand certain kinds of proof for God, yet tried to disprove a proposed quality of God with a concept similarly unprovable. Pick a means of validation and stick with it, at least.
How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.Unprovable?
Ok - so why does AIDS exist?
Why are there starving children in Africa, one dying every 3 seconds?
Why does Cancer exist?
Why does suffering occur?
What is the need for Volcanic eruptions?
What is the need for Hurricanes?
For Earthquakes?
Tsunamis?
Forest Fires?
Severe Thunderstorms?
Monsoons?
Flooding?
Are you simply going to explain all this away with you "Nothing is impossible for God" claim?
We simply 'tag' all of this under one four-letter word to make it simpler to say, rather than listing all of the needless suffering that takes place in the world - and that is, "evil".
Whether man-made or natural, or completely out of human controls - "evil" (these things which cause suffering) DOES exist. And its effects are undeniable.
So, "nothing is impossible for God."
Why doesn't he stop it?
How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.
Can you assert an objective definition of evil? If so, what is this definition and what makes it morally evil?How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.
Can you assert an objective definition of evil? If so, what is this definition and what makes it morally evil?
Are you denying your own world view (I assume your view encompasses moral standpoints) or are you asserting there is no evidence for moral evil according to your world view (and indeed other world views)?
No, of course not. Evil is a paradigm that people use to look at the world around them, not a substance whose existence or nature can be established through objective proofs.Can you assert an objective definition of evil?
How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.
How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.
In all honesty. Assuming god exists worshipping him despite all that isn't that absurd as he'd be the creator of everything. Good AND bad. Calling him benevolent despite all that makes no sense though. Say that his sense of morality is much too complex to understand for us or whatever you want. But don't tell me he's benevolent.Wait wait wait.... hold on, hold on....
You're telling me that these things HAD to be created by something?
And, if I'm not mistaken, Satan cannot be responsible, otherwise this would create a theological problem as Satan would be a secondary creative being ( ...and if that were the case, God would not be omnipotent) -
so God MUST have created the world with these things in.
Right?
And therefore - you still ... after all this.... worship Him?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?