Why do you believe God exists and why?

[childeye 2]

You said it was the energy that created the universe.

No, I said God is the 'source' of the energy that created all things, The Power that brought forth that which exists.

So now it is a who.

Yes a Who as in a Person, a Person as in being a self aware intellect.

Ok, both need to be demonstrated to be true.

The Christ is the revelation of the Person of God in the spiritual introspect of perceiving a pure Love/empathy. Which is also tied to time and space since he was prophesied to come out of a chosen people for this very purpose.

For example many events in Old Testament scripture are also allegories or types for spiritual events that would be experienced by Christians. Since some things are spiritual as well as physical, if you want a trail of particles you can follow, I would say to look at God as Light as pointing to God's energy that holds together all that is created, as well as a spiritual denotation for empathy/Love.

 

[muichimotsu]

Something does not come from pure nothing.

There would need to be multiple universes to have one suitable for life.

No one talks about pure nothing except those that tend to believe in something fundamentally unfalsifiable in the first place, "God"

The thing is we cannot verify the other universes at the moment, so it's technically in the hypothetical stage, though there could be a theoretical model in terms of predictions about what variations we would see in those other universes relative to ours

Intelligence, matter, time, space and energy has created “intelligence” (depending on how you define intelligence) while a path to intelligence without the help of intelligence would be extremely more difficult.

You can't presume intelligence in the Big Bang structure, you have to demonstrate that is a thing versus the other necessary aspects of time, space, matter and energy.

"Difficult" does not mean "impossible" and the former can be clouded by subjective or ignorant ideas about said limitations

My personal believe in God comes from the indwell Holy Spirit which is a personal guarantee for all true Christians.

Seems like circular logic when you appeal to the thing that is only described in the book that ALREADY has concluded God exists and that the Holy Spirit is thus a thing. Is there anything remotely independent of that to verify such an idea or test it?

I also look at this messed up world and see how it perfectly fits man’s objective while on earth and God is doing everything to help those willing to accept His help.

Except that still assumes "God" is the thing in question and not people just having basic social empathy towards others and trying to help others because they have that compassion and understanding of others as like themselves. Not everyone has the same objective your holy book claims they do, so maybe don't make assumptions about the whole of society from a 2000 year old book

Everything is fitting the objective

It only works that way if you preclude any alternative explanation or dismiss them out of turn by confirmation bias with no regard to basic rational and empirical investigation we'd expect for everything else, but conveniently doesn't appear to apply to your religious perspective about eschatology, etc

 

[Lukaris]

Did you catch that the laws of conservation of matter and energy apply only to isolated systems? We are not absolutely certain that the universe is an isolated system and the sheer scale is such that its end point is calculated in the billions of years from now



First off, science only speaks about life and death in the sense that we can observe and measure aspects for it, it says nothing about the soul, speculative at best in the idea of a persistent consciousness beyond biological death

And that feels far more like you're making special pleading for God to violate the rules you appear to acknowledge for everything else, which isn't being consistent in the slightest or applying the ideas you acknowledge in a neutral and objective fashion



Unfortunately not even those who believe in God will even agree on the necessity of paying taxes (which is especially ironic if they're Christian, given several instances where that is basically encouraged for believers, by both Jesus and Paul).

For me science applies to life and death and Jesus Christ to everlasting life. I am thankful by His incarnation, Gospel preaching, His cross, resurrection, and ascension for “violating” death to give us everlasting life if we choose to accept it. Existence is existence and it is up to the individual to realize whether it is needed to be dealt with or denied.

 

[muichimotsu]

For me science applies to life and death and Jesus Christ to everlasting life. I am thankful by His incarnation, Gospel preaching, His cross, resurrection, and ascension for “violating” death to give us everlasting life if we choose to accept it. Existence is existence and it is up to the individual to realize whether it is needed to be dealt with or denied.

How can you demonstrate everlasting life is a thing at all rather than wishful thinking on the part of fallible people?

You don't deal with existential concerns by just making up an easy solution, it only shows desperation instead of honesty even to a harsh truth that escapism just encourages with delusion

 

[Lukaris]

How can you demonstrate everlasting life is a thing at all rather than wishful thinking on the part of fallible people?

You don't deal with existential concerns by just making up an easy solution, it only shows desperation instead of honesty even to a harsh truth that escapism just encourages with delusion

People who embrace what you reject do it for purpose as to matter of life and death. If reality is so fluid it should be of little concern to you and just another option.

 

[muichimotsu]

People who embrace what you reject do it for purpose as to matter of life and death. If reality is so fluid it should be of little concern to you and just another option.

Their sentiments don't necessarily make it a better perspective, because passion can be in excess and ruin a sense of seeking objectivity or rationality.

Never said that, you're reading something into my beliefs based on a simple label that I honestly should just explain in my signature does not represent my beliefs in some sense of "orthodoxy" (which isn't even that unified among Buddhists worldwide if you look closer).

Reality can be fluid in a sense without making things pure relativism, which I don't subscribe to, so, again, your assumptions are only betraying how simplistic your perspective on anyone outside your little club must believe

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Why do you believe God exists and why?

God is continually at work in my life, I see him interacting with me. He has performed numerous signs that show me he is real. See Everybody Matters Ministry | Online Church

I have cut and pasted a few examples off that website:

I work as a computer programmer and have a long term client, whom I see more as a friend. While working on His website he brought up the fact that his daughter was very ill, she had developed Ulcerative Colitis, and had extreme pain and bleeding. He mentioned that doctors had told him it had no cure, and she would be on harsh medications to treat its symptoms for life. The father was saddened for his daughter, for he loved her. I having seen God heal in the past asked if he would mind if we could pray for her. He said he would appreciate it. So I set about to pray, to God for his daughter. That Sunday I also put a prayer request in the churches @SCFcentral prayer box. A month or so passed, and I received a work related call from the father. He ended the call by telling me, he did not know everything about God and healing, but his daughter was now well. So well that they were able to take the medications they were using right down. He thanked us for the prayer, and was confident that his daughter would stay well.

Some time after the second Gulf War an Australian man Douglas Wood was captured by terrorists in Iraq, who made demands for a ransom or he would be executed. I set about fasting and praying for his release, I said to God "You know where he is....tell me". Three words entered my mind ABC, Bazaar and "a meal". I thought "I am going crazy what has all that got to do with him. Bazaar I though "this is Bizarre". I thought maybe "a meal" is a town so I searched a map of Iraq for a town of that name, but found nothing that really matched. Some time latter Douglas Wood was freed by US troops who came across his captors. It was not until latter that I actually discovered what the three words meant. I was on a forum and came across a post by a user called ABC in the post she appealed to the terrorists to release Douglas Wood because she had seen him go to a Bazaar (another name for shop) and bought food (sausages I think it was) for disadvantaged people and had provided them with "a meal". So the three words God had given me when I prayed were about that post. So God did not tell me where he was he told me what type of person Douglas Wood was a good man. I believe God saw Douglas Wood's kind action too and blessed with an escape from his captors.

On the 10 of October 2012 the LORD prevented us from making a bad financial decision. Me and my wife had found a house that we thought could be a good investment for our future. But our pastor prayed about it and felt that it was not going to be a good investment. So I prayed that if it was not a good investment God would get the bible to open randomly to James 4:13-15, otherwise the bible would open to the verse in Mal 3:10 about God blessing our finances. I opened my bible on the computer and moved my hand quickly and randomly, first selecting a book of the bible, then a verse, all without looking where I was choosing, and it opened to James 4:13-15 so I knew that God did not want us to go ahead.

 

[Lukaris]

Their sentiments don't necessarily make it a better perspective, because passion can be in excess and ruin a sense of seeking objectivity or rationality.

Never said that, you're reading something into my beliefs based on a simple label that I honestly should just explain in my signature does not represent my beliefs in some sense of "orthodoxy" (which isn't even that unified among Buddhists worldwide if you look closer).

Reality can be fluid in a sense without making things pure relativism, which I don't subscribe to, so, again, your assumptions are only betraying how simplistic your perspective on anyone outside your little club must believe

I ultimately said that existence is existence and that an individual needs to decide whether or not the person needs to deal with it or not. In your bias you reject the Christian option because you probably consider it is something not good. My “little club” oh brother.

 

[muichimotsu]

I ultimately said that existence is existence and that an individual needs to decide whether or not the person needs to deal with it or not. In your bias you reject the Christian option because you probably consider it is something not good. My “little club” oh brother.

"Existence is existence" is a redundancy.

"Dealing" with existence is not done in just one way, that's the problematic assumption here, that your way is the best way with no real evidence beyond "popularity"

I don't consider it good, anything good that comes from it doesn't require Christianity as a framing device to understand that good of compassion and charity and such, those are human virtues that come in no small part from our empathy and understanding of diversity as a strength, including the ecumenical idea of interfaith dialogue.

 

[Lukaris]

"Existence is existence" is a redundancy.

"Dealing" with existence is not done in just one way, that's the problematic assumption here, that your way is the best way with no real evidence beyond "popularity"

I don't consider it good, anything good that comes from it doesn't require Christianity as a framing device to understand that good of compassion and charity and such, those are human virtues that come in no small part from our empathy and understanding of diversity as a strength, including the ecumenical idea of interfaith dialogue.

I have repeatedly mentioned to you in various ways of whether Christianity is a viable option among other possibilities. Either you try to reject it altogether or if I defend its integrity in the framework of your alleged interest of “interfaith dialogue” you deride it. Your framework of discussion is a catch 22 and an oxymoron.

 

[muichimotsu]

I have repeatedly mentioned to you in various ways of whether Christianity is a viable option among other possibilities. Either you try to reject it altogether or if I defend its integrity in the framework of your alleged interest of “interfaith dialogue” you deride it. Your framework of discussion is a catch 22 and an oxymoron.

You can't honestly claim you care about interfaith dialogue if Christianity is still the foundational aspect and not on equal footing

Do you want to honestly investigate or are you going to deny that there is a confirmation bias in your perspective that the supernatural is somehow valid in spite of being unfalsifiable and indistinguishable from random variables?

 

[Lukaris]

You can't honestly claim you care about interfaith dialogue if Christianity is still the foundational aspect and not on equal footing

Do you want to honestly investigate or are you going to deny that there is a confirmation bias in your perspective that the supernatural is somehow valid in spite of being unfalsifiable and indistinguishable from random variables?

Is Christianity an option, not an absolute, within your pantheon? I am asking on a basis that could be applied to comparative religion here along the line of say Huston Smith:

The World's Religions - Wikipedia

 

[muichimotsu]

Is Christianity an option, not an absolute, within your pantheon? I am asking on a basis that could be applied to comparative religion here along the line of say Huston Smith:

The World's Religions - Wikipedia

I don't have a pantheon, unless you're using it in some esoteric manner.

An option in the most nominal sense, but I'd be considered vastly unorthodox and heretical in my ideas anyway: universal reconciliation, Unitarian or Modalist, probably not really holding to any notions of some future destruction through eschatology, the whole of my theology in a Christian viewpoint I could hypothetically hold would be closer to Thomas Jefferson, practically speaking

 

[Lukaris]

I don't have a pantheon, unless you're using it in some esoteric manner.

An option in the most nominal sense, but I'd be considered vastly unorthodox and heretical in my ideas anyway: universal reconciliation, Unitarian or Modalist, probably not really holding to any notions of some future destruction through eschatology, the whole of my theology in a Christian viewpoint I could hypothetically hold would be closer to Thomas Jefferson, practically speaking

Peace.