Curt's Invitation - Prove God Exists!

[GenMarshall]

Again, a quite well-thought out paragraph.

But the vast majority of humans are likely put aside their beliefs when
face with crisis or deadly situations, and moderate religious people are
just as likely to commit suicide as anyone else...

A point of note:
Indeed, extreme religious people have all the trappings of insane humans.
So, can we project that moderate religious people have a mild version of
this mental state, which can be provoked into full blown frenzy?

In reading, Religion and Mental Health: Evidence for an association by Harold G. Koenig and David Larson. They state that the healing professions of psychiatry and religion have had a historical relationship between them. Even the first mental hospitals were established and ran by religious orders during the Middle Ages. Though advances of mental illnesses were suppressed during that time. Fast forward to the Renaissance, the mentally ill, whom were thought to be possessed by deamons, were persecuted by misguided religious leaders.

Fortunately religious reformers helped put a stop the persecution and psychiatric care developed in Europe and the US in the mid 1800s and came to be known as "moral treatments" which has religious influences. Thus the cooperation between religious and psychologists ended with Sigmoud Freud and other psychologists with the concering of neurotic influences of religion. Early research have confirmed the clinical lore that religion impaired mental health. In recent years, with better methodolgies in the past two decades reveal quite the opposite, that religious involvement is associated with a greater well-being, less depression and anxiety, greater soial suppoer, and less substance abuse.

The body of research is not well known to many psychologists who were introduced to the harmfulness of religion during their psychiatric training and remain skeptical about the mental health benifits of religious practices. This skepticism has been fueled by concerns about the ill effects of religion on mental health. Many religions that survived overtime and developed a stable tradition that advocates a hopeful and optomistic world-view, encurage human traits like altruism, forgiveness, and kidness to promote the establisment and maintenance of social relation, in all which does contribute to better mental health.

Referances:
Koenig, Harold G.; Larson, David B.; International Review of Psychiatry, Vol 13(2), May 2001. Special issue: Religion and psychiatry. pp. 67-78.

 

[Masquerouge]

In reading, Religion and Mental Health: Evidence for an association by Harold G. Koenig and David Larson. They state that the healing professions of psychiatry and religion have had a historical relationship between them. Even the first mental hospitals were established and ran by religious orders during the Middle Ages. Though advances of mental illnesses were suppressed during that time. Fast forward to the Renaissance, the mentally ill, whom were thought to be possessed by deamons, were persecuted by misguided religious leaders.

Referances:
Koenig, Harold G.; Larson, David B.; International Review of Psychiatry, Vol 13(2), May 2001. Special issue: Religion and psychiatry. pp. 67-78.

I would also suggest reading this:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/06...f=pd_bbs_3/103-4357185-8119043?_encoding=UTF8
I think if you liked the Koenig book you will like this one

 

[CurtSibling]

Interesting stuff, guys.

I'll be taking note of these for my records.

 

[Quasar1011]

Prophesy is penned by men and is of no use when seeking the proof of a deity.

To state point blank that some shaky predictions by a shaman proves
the existence of a god is pushing the boat out to a massive degree.

I will not accept dogma in the place of intelligent debate.

Will you accept mathematics, then? The prophet Daniel wrote that from the time of the issuance of a decree (yet future to him) to rebuild Jerusalem, to the coming of the Messiah, would be 483 years. Such a decree was issued by Longimanus (Artaxerxes) of Persia in 444 B.C. A prophetic year in the Bible is 360 days. Exactly 173,880 days (483 x 360) after Artaxerxes issued his decree, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, and allowed Himself to be proclaimed the Messiah.

Daniel further wrote that the Messiah would be cut off after that, and of course, Jesus was killed not long after that first Palm Sunday. How could Daniel, a mere man, have predicted such things 483 years in advance? Daniel merely penned what God inspired him to write. No shaky prediction there!

 

[Birdjaguar]

Will you accept mathematics, then? The prophet Daniel wrote that from the time of the issuance of a decree (yet future to him) to rebuild Jerusalem, to the coming of the Messiah, would be 483 years. Such a decree was issued by Longimanus (Artaxerxes) of Persia in 444 B.C. A prophetic year in the Bible is 360 days. Exactly 173,880 days (483 x 360) after Artaxerxes issued his decree, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, and allowed Himself to be proclaimed the Messiah.

Daniel further wrote that the Messiah would be cut off after that, and of course, Jesus was killed not long after that first Palm Sunday. How could Daniel, a mere man, have predicted such things 483 years in advance? Daniel merely penned what God inspired him to write. No shaky prediction there!

If Daniel did predict the future, then that in and of itself would be a pretty significant event and present much food for thought among the science only crowd. Such an ability, though, does not necessarily provide proof of god. Just that one guy had a pretty special ability. The source or cause behind that ability would still be up for discussion. Good point though.

 

[Quasar1011]

If Daniel did predict the future, then that in and of itself would be a pretty significant event and present much food for thought among the science only crowd. Such an ability, though, does not necessarily provide proof of god. Just that one guy had a pretty special ability. The source or cause behind that ability would still be up for discussion. Good point though.

The next logical step, then, would be to see what Daniel said about the source of his abilities.

Daniel 1:17
To these four young men God gave knowledge and understanding of all kinds of literature and learning. And Daniel could understand visions and dreams of all kinds.

Daniel 2:26-28
The king asked Daniel (also called Belteshazzar), "Are you able to tell me what I saw in my dream and interpret it?"

Daniel replied, "No wise man, enchanter, magician or diviner can explain to the king the mystery he has asked about, but there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries. He has shown King Nebuchadnezzar what will happen in days to come..."

Also, Daniel and the other prophets often did not understand the very things they were prophesying! How could a man write gobbledygook, and still have it come to pass centuries later?

Daniel 12:8-10
I heard, but I did not understand. So I asked, "My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?"
He [the angel Gabriel] replied, "Go your way, Daniel, because the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end. Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand."

 

[Perfection]

Will you accept mathematics, then? The prophet Daniel wrote that from the time of the issuance of a decree (yet future to him) to rebuild Jerusalem, to the coming of the Messiah, would be 483 years. Such a decree was issued by Longimanus (Artaxerxes) of Persia in 444 B.C. A prophetic year in the Bible is 360 days. Exactly 173,880 days (483 x 360) after Artaxerxes issued his decree, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, and allowed Himself to be proclaimed the Messiah.

Daniel further wrote that the Messiah would be cut off after that, and of course, Jesus was killed not long after that first Palm Sunday. How could Daniel, a mere man, have predicted such things 483 years in advance? Daniel merely penned what God inspired him to write. No shaky prediction there!

1 Where are you getting the 483?

2. Where does the bible say that a prophetic year is 360 days?

 

[storealex]

If it could be proved, it would no longer be a matter of faith, but knowledge, and therefore meaningless.

 

[Perfection]

If it could be proved, it would no longer be a matter of faith, but knowledge, and therefore meaningless.

Knowledge is meaningless?

 

[Stylesjl]

If it could be proved, it would no longer be a matter of faith, but knowledge, and therefore meaningless.

A cleverly concealed copout isn't it?

 

[storealex]

Knowledge is meaningless?

Christianity is all about belief. If God was a fact, there would be no need of faith. And faith is what we want from religion. Knowledge we get from books.

A cleverly concealed copout isn't it?

Don't be so cynic, it blinds you from the fact that others are not.

 

[Stylesjl]

Don't be so cynic, it blinds you from the fact that others are not.

Right and you haven't answered the real question: Why should people beleive in god? The flying spaghetti monster has as much validity, why don't you have faith in it? Why does the god you beleive in take precedence?

 

[storealex]

Right and you haven't answered the real question: Why should people beleive in god? The flying spaghetti monster has as much validity, why don't you have faith in it? Why does the god you beleive in take precedence?

I have already argued this to death with Curt in the past. Rather than waste my time going through such a discussion again, I suggest you search the forum and find it.

 

[CurtSibling]

Will you accept mathematics, then? The prophet Daniel wrote that from the time of the issuance of a decree (yet future to him) to rebuild Jerusalem, to the coming of the Messiah, would be 483 years. Such a decree was issued by Longimanus (Artaxerxes) of Persia in 444 B.C. A prophetic year in the Bible is 360 days. Exactly 173,880 days (483 x 360) after Artaxerxes issued his decree, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, and allowed Himself to be proclaimed the Messiah.

Daniel further wrote that the Messiah would be cut off after that, and of course, Jesus was killed not long after that first Palm Sunday. How could Daniel, a mere man, have predicted such things 483 years in advance? Daniel merely penned what God inspired him to write. No shaky prediction there!

As I said, your fervent belief in prophecy is not groundwork for proof.

I am ultra-sceptical about things like predictions, as I know mediums,
witches and tarot readers, and I know many charlatans exist in that
type of augurism. Prophecies can sometimes be on the target, but
they are still mere guesswork, and sometimes lucky.

The fact that people wrote about jesus' exploits, does not make
them 100% fact...There is such a thing as reverential treatment.

So...
Can you prove to me that god inspired Daniel to write his words?

That would be an acceptable proof of a god to me.

.

 

[CurtSibling]

I have already argued this to death with Curt in the past. Rather than waste my time going through such a discussion again, I suggest you search the forum and find it.

You never managed to provide any proof or any challenging viewpoint that I can recall.

It was people like FearlessLeader2 who provided good posting on the last thread.

.

 

[CurtSibling]

Christianity is all about belief. If God was a fact, there would be no need of faith. And faith is what we want from religion. Knowledge we get from books.

Many christians insist on their viewpoint, even to non-believers.

So we ask them to be polite and provide proof, so they can justify this.

Is that a lot to ask of 1.1 billion people?

Don't be so cynic, it blinds you from the fact that others are not.

Should we be blinkered idealists, then?
And take all we are given with a docile nod?

We are human and seek answers, you cannot block this desire.

PS
Cynics live longer.

.

 

[Stylesjl]

I have already argued this to death with Curt in the past. Rather than waste my time going through such a discussion again, I suggest you search the forum and find it.

Obviously it didn't work because Curt is nowhere to beleiving now.......

I asked you why your believes were anymore valid then others since you reject proof and simply ask for faith. Faith won't cut it, i could have faith that an asteroid will hit the Earth tommorrow will that make it happen? Maybe, but based on our understanding of science; most likely it won't.

 

[storealex]

You never managed to provide any proof or any challenging viewpoint that I can recall.

Dude.. of course I never provided any proof. As I have just said (And as I said back then) there is no reason for a beliver to seek for proof. Then it would no longer be a matter of faith, but of knowledge... dude...

What I told stylejs was that you and me have argued this to death, along time ago, and that I wont bother going through the same again, just with a new person. I have better things to do with my life, but if Stylesi is interested in my answer, he should be able to find it in one of your old discussions.

Should we be blinkered idealists, then?
And take all we are given with a docile nod?

Yeah... just take it to the other extreme Curt... that's your style isn't it?

Obviously it didn't work because Curt is nowhere to beleiving now.......

I never tried to convert Curt. Converting is not something I do. People should decide for themselves.

 

[King Flevance]

Well, I believe in God because matter cannot be created nor destroyed, at least on Earth. I cannot fathom the idea of everything just existing and then eventually evolving/transforming to what it is in its current form, and this goes for both biotic/abiotic matter. It seems to me there would have had to be some Creator, or God, to "create" all this. Ok, then "who created God?", well, call this copping out, but he is God, and thus cannot be applied to the scientific rules we have formulated here on earth. God exists outside of these rules.

I haven't read through all of this post but the first reply seems pretty good to me. I still fail to see how this was ever shot down.

 

[Ultima Dragoon]

I'm no expert in this, take my word for it.

But.

He gives no reasons that are provable by thought sequence. some statements are contradictory.

Sorry if I offended anyone, but this really isn't my speciality, but I wish I could at least argue confidently.