MY favorite arguments for the existence of the Christian God:

[Dave RP]

How many miracles has J.K. Rowling worked? How many times has J.K. Rowling attributed her "creative inspiration" to Divine Voices & Visions ? And for how many thousands of years running have others been adding to that body of writings, in an (allegedly) supra-naturally complex, mathematically structured, and sophisticatedly self-referential way?

And, of course, how many times has anything in those pages actually been born out in (archaeologically attestable) physical reality, for all human eyes to plainly see?

Abrahamic Scripture is not just some single fire-side story. It is a (supposed) historical record of "God in heaven's" (alleged) miraculous wonder-working upon this planet over the past ~8000 years.

What about the (claimed) "Plagues" vs. Ramesses' Egypt that do coincide archaeologically, not only with the end of Ramesses the Great's reign, the onset of identifiably Israelite occupation of Canaan, as well as some sort of retaliatory raid against "ISRL" by Ramesses' successor Merneptah attested on an Egyptian stele... but also the "Bronze Age Collapse" which wiped out civilizations around the region and plunged the eastern Mediterranean into centuries of Dark Ages?

Something major happened. Troy fell. The Greeks collapsed. The Hittites failed. The Egyptian empire crumbled. Other than perhaps the Philistines (who themselves appear to have fled to Canaan from somewhere else), the only humans around to actually benefit was a group of refugees hiding out in the Arabian wilderness, claiming to receive Divine Guidance via Divine Voices & Visions from "God in heaven".

I guess if you actively desire to reject such claims, you could claim it "just happened" to be a one-in-a-zillion string of fortuitous random coincidences which "just happened" to turn a bunch of Egyptian slaves into the regional power of Israel...

I guess what I'm trying to say, though, is that I find no reason per se to reject the claims. If there actually factually was (and is) a "God in heaven" capable of communicating meaningful, intelligible audio-visual messages (Divine Voices & Visions) to humans on Earth, then such an "uplink" to Divine Guidance would be able to steer a group of humans through plagues, locust swarms, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis and/or whatever else happened to power & prominence in the (supposedly) "Promised" land.

I see no reason to dismiss such a scenario out of human hand. Are humans somehow doing anything to somehow "stop" or "prevent" or "shield against" such Divine Voices & Visions being communicated successfully to humans on Earth?

Why are you so incredulous? What might you know about "heaven" that the rest of us don't? Humans don't really know exactly how Quasars, Blazars, or Gamma ray Bursts work, but we think we detect them regularly all the same. It's a puzzle, hopefully humans will figure it out some day. Meanwhile, other humans think they perceive a "Divine Presence" from "God in heaven", communicating to their minds audio-visual Voices & Visions. Why is that impossible? And if it is possible, what is anybody around here doing about it, much less to (say) somehow stop it. I don't understand your dubiousness. Nothing I notice in any way "violates the fundamental fabric of space-time" or anything. "God in heaven" can affect our "pale blue dot"... insofar as we now know our "pale blue dot of a planet" isn't really much of a big Cosmic deal, then such a claim is not really much of one either.

I have just attended the British Museum exhibition "Living with gods - peoples, places and worlds beyond."

The exhibition looked at religious beliefs around the world, it looked at how people worshipped their gods, the stories, objects, images, prayers and rituals of the innumerable religions around the world.

There were several threads running through the exhibition including the certainty that each religion had got it right, they had the mystical connection with god(s) necessary for peace, eternal life, connection with ancestors etc.

In addition the use of ritual to reinforce faith was virtually universal, chanting, prayer beads, prayer wheels, sacred texts are in almost universal use.

Every religion has absolute certainty, it's the arrogance and dogma of religion which I find incredible - "MY sacred books are correct, yours are not, you are doomed I am saved" - if you look at the world as a whole it seems glaringly obvious to me that if there is a god, and if that god "cares" about humanity and offers soem form of afterlife, it is the same god for everyone. No ones sacred texts, rituals or beliefs are better then anyone elses.

Personally I still believe that religious belief is mostly about humanities need for answers, our enquiring mind, wanting to believe in something special outside our normal humdrum existence, seeing our loved ones again, having some respite from a brutal life, hence why there are so many different interpretations. If there was one all powerful god, there would be fewer religious belief systems because this all powerful god would have made us very aware of his presence.

It was an interesting exhibition.

Living with gods

 

[Motherofkittens]

This is exactly why I am in atheist, there is no good evidence for any deities. Much less a particular one/s.

This truly applies to Darwinism and evolution.
It ain't true just coz people believe in this nonsense.

Of course not. Just because people believe in something doesn't by itself mean anything. But it is true because of the millions of pieces of evidence for it.

 

[AV1611VET]

This is exactly why I am in atheist, there is no good evidence for any deities.

Merry Christmas!

 

[Kylie]

Merry Christmas!

Oh, and the existence of Christmas celebrations is evidence for the existence of Christ, is it?

Tell me, AV, do you think there's some force in the universe that prevents people from celebrating things that never actually happened?

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh, and the existence of Christmas celebrations is evidence for the existence of Christ, is it?

Yes. That's why it's called Christmas, and not XMAS, like the educated call it.

Tell me, AV, do you think there's some force in the universe that prevents people from celebrating things that never actually happened?

Yes.

Study this verse and what it means as regards what kind of power is being kept in check:

2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

There is enough theology in that verse to keep academia scratching their empty heads for years.

 

[bhsmte]

LOL

 

[AV1611VET]

There is enough theology in that verse to keep academia scratching their empty heads for years.

LOL

Yup.

Just scratch his head and watch him LOL.

 

[Silmarien]

In addition the use of ritual to reinforce faith was virtually universal, chanting, prayer beads, prayer wheels, sacred texts are in almost universal use.

Prayer beads are a meditative aid. Any spiritual path, theistic or otherwise, involves retraining the way your brain works, so tools for reinforcement are helpful. Ritual is important even from a secular perspective--it's how we develop habits and discipline.

Every religion has absolute certainty, it's the arrogance and dogma of religion which I find incredible - "MY sacred books are correct, yours are not, you are doomed I am saved"

That really depends upon interpretation. There are traditions like Hinduism that are quite happy to swallow up any other religion that gets too close. Christ is an avatar of the Jewish aspect of Brahman? No problem, welcome aboard Vedanta! Most versions of which don't even have a concept of damnation at all.

You can find strong universalist threads weaving their way through Christian theology as well.

If there was one all powerful god, there would be fewer religious belief systems because this all powerful god would have made us very aware of his presence.

A deist would say that God is simply not interested in interacting with us, so it's irrelevant how many religious traditions exist. Spiritual experience is not an argument in the first place.

A pantheist, panentheist, or non-dualist might say that the cultural context of spiritual experience does not invalidate it. If the world's enduring traditions have similar spiritual and moral teachings, that is enough. Perhaps some knowledge of God is innate underneath the various religious interpretations. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says that those who are devotees of other gods and worship them with faith actually worship only him, if improperly.

And a Christian would say that God did make us powerfully aware of his presence, 2000 years ago, and the world was never the same afterwards.

 

[Motherofkittens]

Appealing to common sense is a terrible Christian tactic.

The exact same common sense that tells us things dont poof into existence is what tells us there isnt a whole other realm of beings intersecting ours.

I for one dont think common sense has the last word on either of these subjects. After all, common sense is based on everyday human-scale experience. We can hardly expect it to account for all of reality.

Especially when we think about the cosmos, which is "beyond" this universe. There are already things now that defy common sense and when we come across something unknown we cannot say what is or isn't common sense, and be right, until we know more about it. Common sense is useful when you need to think fast and are basing it on knowledge of similar things. It is definitely not the end all and be all. There are better tools out there.

And as @durangodawood , said, common sense says there was no supernatural anything nor is there supernatural anything. If you think "poof!" is unlikely how much more unlikely is it that there was a being that makes no logical sense, has no evidence for itself and was able to then go "poof!".

 

[Motherofkittens]

OK; that sounds like a 'No True Scotsman Common sense' fallacy to me; I get the impression that, for most people I encounter, common sense means what seems immediately obvious without 'looking into their reasoning'. It may just be a difference in usage between groups though. YMMV.

That is the most popular definition. Hence why if you don't actually have knowledge about something or something similar to it, and you try to apply common sense you can end up dead wrong. Just like with the two examples of people expecting or not expecting a number to come up because of what the previous numbers were.

 

[Kylie]

Yes. That's why it's called Christmas, and not XMAS, like the educated call it.

Careful, AV, your ignorance is showing...

The "X" comes from the Greek letter Chi, which is the first letter of the Greek word Χριστός, which in English is "Christ". And it was first used in the 16th century... BY CHRISTIANS.

So stop playing the victim here. There's no war on Christmas, and once again you spout off propaganda without knowing what you are talking about.

Yes.

Study this verse and what it means as regards what kind of power is being kept in check:

2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

There is enough theology in that verse to keep academia scratching their empty heads for years.

So all the celebrations of other religions, they are celebrating things that actually happened are they?

Oh, that's right, you think all the other gods are real, but you call them demons or something.

Whatever makes you happy, AV. You go right on with whatever mental contortionism you need to hold on to your ideas.

 

[AV1611VET]

Careful, AV, your ignorance is showing...

Not hardly.

I'm familiar with your Chi argument.

I get the Greek shoved at me all the time by those who make the Bible say something It doesn't.

 

[Kylie]

Not hardly.

I'm familiar with your Chi argument.

I get the Greek shoved at me all the time by those who make the Bible say something It doesn't.

So you decide that something is wrong because you don't like it, despite the huge amount of evidence against you?

Reality can take a hike, huh?

 

[MarkHurste]

Not hardly.

I'm familiar with your Chi argument.

I get the Greek shoved at me all the time by those who make the Bible say something It doesn't.

Does the Bible discuss the use of "X" in "Xmas"? I might have missed that bit.

I was once looking at someone's notes where they were talking about crystals (it was a science class I think, not the new agey crystals). And they used the shorthand "Xls" or "Xtls" something like that. Do you think they did that so that they wouldn't have to write a word that even sounded like Christ?

As for the other poster's comment about "Christ" and Greek, well, I mean we all know that the name Jesus is 100% Hebrew, right?

 

[AV1611VET]

So you decide that something is wrong because you don't like it,

No.

I have a set of heuristics I call my Boolean Standards.

Would you like to see them?

 

[AV1611VET]

Does the Bible discuss the use of "X" in "Xmas"? I might have missed that bit.

The Bible doesn't discuss the use of X in anything.

"Xmas" is just a way of intelligently removing "Christ" from "Christmas."

Science's way of x-ing a paragrab, so to speak.

 

[bhsmte]

So you decide that something is wrong because you don't like it, despite the huge amount of evidence against you?

Reality can take a hike, huh?

That pretty much sums it up.

 

[Kylie]

The Bible doesn't discuss the use of X in anything.

"Xmas" is just a way of intelligently removing "Christ" from "Christmas."

Science's way of x-ing a paragrab, so to speak.

Hey, AV, what do you call someone who keeps making the same wrong claim after he's shown to be wrong?

 

[Kylie]

No.

I have a set of heuristics I call my Boolean Standards.

Would you like to see them?

I've seen them, many times. They're rubbish.

 

[MarkHurste]

The Bible doesn't discuss the use of X in anything.

"Xmas" is just a way of intelligently removing "Christ" from "Christmas."

Science's way of x-ing a paragrab, so to speak.

So long as we aren't interested in truth then OK!

Apparently the Oxford English Dictionary traces it back to the 1500's and it appears to be, as the other poster noted, more related to the Greek "chi", the first letter of Christ's name than your suggestion.

But if truth isn't in the game here then by all means let's go with your suggestion!