It's called discernment. I heard that women are usually better at this than men are. As my personal experince I would agree with this since my wife was a lot better at discernment than I was. I was shocked at the times she was right about people.King Alexander said:
Prove God Exists - Act Three
- Thread starter Perfection
- Start date
- Status
King Alexander
Universe explorer
@Smidlee: how did you became a believer at first?
1) Something *strange* happened that made you change your stance(no need to describe it, if you don't want; just yes or no),
2) you were raised that way?
I'm curious to know, since most believers were raised hearing about religion.
EDIT: If you don't want to post here, PM me.
1) Something *strange* happened that made you change your stance(no need to describe it, if you don't want; just yes or no),
2) you were raised that way?
I'm curious to know, since most believers were raised hearing about religion.
EDIT: If you don't want to post here, PM me.
Quasar1011
King of Sylvania
Pointlessness said:
Jesus being the Son of God, is obviously misunderstood by you. Jesus is the Son of God. Jesus is alive!
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
Quasar1011 said:Jesus being the Son of God, is obviously misunderstood by you. Jesus is the Son of God. Jesus is alive!
This has little worth.
Please provide some proof beyond you personal opinion.
Even if JC existed (for which there is scant evidence) he is most certainly dead now.
The burden is upon you to support your claims with truth.
Religionists speak much of truth- So let us have some.
Or will you cop out and retreat to the 'faith defence'....?
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
Smidlee said:
It seems you apply mere coincidence and mythological misconception as real world dynamics...
Iggy
Deity
Actually I think I can help find your proof. I was driving past a churchy sort of place in Leeds this weekend and saw a sign to the effect of "Worship Meeting - Sunday 6.30pm. Come in and find Jesus".CurtSibling said:
Now I am not sure if it is every Sunday however it would appear that Jesus is alive and well in Leeds and seems to enjoy playing hide and seek.
FearlessLeader2
Fundamentalist Loon
In one sentence you demand truth, in the next you decry it. Shall I invent a pleasing lie?CurtSibling said:
Perfection
The Great Head.
Just prove god exists and be done with it!FearlessLeader2 said:
FearlessLeader2
Fundamentalist Loon
Given:
Proof denies faith. P >< F
God wants faith. G -> F
God does not, therefore, want proof of God. G -x P
There is no proof of God. P >< G
Faith is therefore possible. F can exist
This is as far as any proof for the Christian God can go.
Proof denies faith. P >< F
God wants faith. G -> F
God does not, therefore, want proof of God. G -x P
There is no proof of God. P >< G
Faith is therefore possible. F can exist
This is as far as any proof for the Christian God can go.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Well, since you've acdknowledged repeatedly that there is no proof, then why are you posting here?
Perfection
The Great Head.
Now there's some logic you could strain potatoes with!Xi 12 said:
Robert Plomp
Apolyton Admin
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2004
- Messages
- 59
Hello there. I was just browsing the OTF here while I saw this challenge....
I can't resist
God: supernatural being that's not a part of our 'dimension'
Creation: everything we can observe directly or indirectly. ie. it's the universe. Everything that is a part of our 'dimension'.
What can be said about the universe?
To say something about the universe in general, we need to find properties that apply to all parts of the universe. ie. if all parts of a bike are red, the bike will be red.
But before we take a look at the shared-properties of all parts of the universe, we must group everything that's a part of the universe into two groups. The group of physical (material) things and the group of non-physical (non-material) things. (ie. love, wind, heat)
About that 2nd group, this 2nd group is dependant on the 1st group. Without material there can't be inmaterial things. No gravity without mass. No love without an organism. No heat without a fire.
It's safe to say that while looking at the universe / creation, we only have to take a look at the physical group. If we would remove all the materials, no inmaterials would be left over.
- Everything in the universe has a limited size. There's nothing that has an infinite size.
- Everything in the universe has an origin / former shape. There's nothing that has ever popped out of plain nothing. A rock comes from a mountain, which comes from a planet. A human is born from the conception of the body fluid of two people.
- Everything in the universe has a point of beginning. There's nothing that has always been.
It's safe to say that if these 3 properties count for all parts of the universe, it must count for the universe itself. Since without the parts of the universe, there would be no universe.
Thus the universe has a limited size. It ends somewhere after the last planet/star/comet/unimaginable thing.
Thus the universe has a source. It can't have popped-up out of nothing. Not even the very first particle could have, without a cause, a reason.
Thus the universe must have begun at one particular moment. Or pherhaps our pre-universe must have, or our pre-pre-universe. But at one particular moment it must have become.
This means that there must be something outside our universe. Something beyond it's borders. Or do you expect a big wall with a sign "no passage behind this wall", and even if, what's behind that wall?
This means also that the universe must have an origin, a source, a cause.
And it means that there must have been something before the universe, or our pre-pre-pre universe came into existance.
Something that's outside our universe, which is the cause, the source, of our universe, that already was there before our universe existed........ that's something we need to look deeper into.
First, this "something" is not a part of the universe. We cannot apply the properties of the universe on something that's outside the universe. The fact that I have a red bike doens't mean I have a red car as well. Pherhaps I do have a red car, but that can't be proven by just looking at the bike.
And if you can only see my bike, you can't say anything about the color of my car. You can guess of course. So we can't know anything for sure about this "something"
This "something" might have an unlimited size, it might even be inmaterial, since it might be that 'outside our universe, our reality' inmaterial things can be independant to material things. Pherhaps material things are even dependant to inmaterial things over'there'.
This "something" doens't need to have a cause, an origin as well. Neither does it need to have a beginning. Those are all properties that do account to our universe, it doesn't have to count for it's reality as well.
Thus we have something outside our universe that became in existance before our universe and cause our universe, while it has no beginning itself neither does it have a size or a cause. And of course something that's not a part of our universe doesn't nessecarily have to obey to the natural laws of our universe. It can break those laws easily. We just plainly call such a "something" god.
God is just a word. You can name it "something" if you wish.
And this "something" apparantly created our universe. Pherhaps it only created the first particle. Pherhaps by holding to plates close to each other in a vacuum so that nothing could split into a positive and a negative particle.
Pherhaps these particles kept on splitting and growing, and finally blowed up in the first big-bang. And pherhaps this "something" is so different to us, and so superior, that it could form everything out of nothing. And created the universe as wel know it. As a giant cage for humans. A cage of almost-infinity.
I can't prove how the earth became what it is today, neither can I prove how we became what we are today. But we need something. Something to fill the gap of everything.
We, modern humans, think that since we found scientific explanations to simple things like lightning and earthquakes, we must find the explanation to everything within this "everything" (universe, reality)
That's a very optimistic thing. But we know from 'everything we know' that in the end there's always a need for an extern factor to be involved.
No painting without a painter.
In fact things should be all around.
There is a something, a god. Unless you can prove how the universe could have cause itself. Of course it's in the end nothing more but the first cause argument. And this argument will always be the only argument. And since you can't handle it, you should face it.
But I can comfort you, this "something" doesn't nessecarily have to be the christian god, the hundu god or the muslim god. Pherhaps it's not even a creative thinking "something". And pherhaps it is, but did it abandon us for billion years already.
But I wouldn't be too sure.
1948 has been prophecied 3000 years ago by people who claim they contacted this "something"
And so have many things that come into existance these days.
But that's another story.
Robert
Ps. did any newbie ever debut with such a large post?
I can't resist
God: supernatural being that's not a part of our 'dimension'
Creation: everything we can observe directly or indirectly. ie. it's the universe. Everything that is a part of our 'dimension'.
What can be said about the universe?
To say something about the universe in general, we need to find properties that apply to all parts of the universe. ie. if all parts of a bike are red, the bike will be red.
But before we take a look at the shared-properties of all parts of the universe, we must group everything that's a part of the universe into two groups. The group of physical (material) things and the group of non-physical (non-material) things. (ie. love, wind, heat)
About that 2nd group, this 2nd group is dependant on the 1st group. Without material there can't be inmaterial things. No gravity without mass. No love without an organism. No heat without a fire.
It's safe to say that while looking at the universe / creation, we only have to take a look at the physical group. If we would remove all the materials, no inmaterials would be left over.
- Everything in the universe has a limited size. There's nothing that has an infinite size.
- Everything in the universe has an origin / former shape. There's nothing that has ever popped out of plain nothing. A rock comes from a mountain, which comes from a planet. A human is born from the conception of the body fluid of two people.
- Everything in the universe has a point of beginning. There's nothing that has always been.
It's safe to say that if these 3 properties count for all parts of the universe, it must count for the universe itself. Since without the parts of the universe, there would be no universe.
Thus the universe has a limited size. It ends somewhere after the last planet/star/comet/unimaginable thing.
Thus the universe has a source. It can't have popped-up out of nothing. Not even the very first particle could have, without a cause, a reason.
Thus the universe must have begun at one particular moment. Or pherhaps our pre-universe must have, or our pre-pre-universe. But at one particular moment it must have become.
This means that there must be something outside our universe. Something beyond it's borders. Or do you expect a big wall with a sign "no passage behind this wall", and even if, what's behind that wall?
This means also that the universe must have an origin, a source, a cause.
And it means that there must have been something before the universe, or our pre-pre-pre universe came into existance.
Something that's outside our universe, which is the cause, the source, of our universe, that already was there before our universe existed........ that's something we need to look deeper into.
First, this "something" is not a part of the universe. We cannot apply the properties of the universe on something that's outside the universe. The fact that I have a red bike doens't mean I have a red car as well. Pherhaps I do have a red car, but that can't be proven by just looking at the bike.
And if you can only see my bike, you can't say anything about the color of my car. You can guess of course. So we can't know anything for sure about this "something"
This "something" might have an unlimited size, it might even be inmaterial, since it might be that 'outside our universe, our reality' inmaterial things can be independant to material things. Pherhaps material things are even dependant to inmaterial things over'there'.
This "something" doens't need to have a cause, an origin as well. Neither does it need to have a beginning. Those are all properties that do account to our universe, it doesn't have to count for it's reality as well.
Thus we have something outside our universe that became in existance before our universe and cause our universe, while it has no beginning itself neither does it have a size or a cause. And of course something that's not a part of our universe doesn't nessecarily have to obey to the natural laws of our universe. It can break those laws easily. We just plainly call such a "something" god.
God is just a word. You can name it "something" if you wish.
And this "something" apparantly created our universe. Pherhaps it only created the first particle. Pherhaps by holding to plates close to each other in a vacuum so that nothing could split into a positive and a negative particle.
Pherhaps these particles kept on splitting and growing, and finally blowed up in the first big-bang. And pherhaps this "something" is so different to us, and so superior, that it could form everything out of nothing. And created the universe as wel know it. As a giant cage for humans. A cage of almost-infinity.
I can't prove how the earth became what it is today, neither can I prove how we became what we are today. But we need something. Something to fill the gap of everything.
We, modern humans, think that since we found scientific explanations to simple things like lightning and earthquakes, we must find the explanation to everything within this "everything" (universe, reality)
That's a very optimistic thing. But we know from 'everything we know' that in the end there's always a need for an extern factor to be involved.
No painting without a painter.
In fact things should be all around.
There is a something, a god. Unless you can prove how the universe could have cause itself. Of course it's in the end nothing more but the first cause argument. And this argument will always be the only argument. And since you can't handle it, you should face it.
But I can comfort you, this "something" doesn't nessecarily have to be the christian god, the hundu god or the muslim god. Pherhaps it's not even a creative thinking "something". And pherhaps it is, but did it abandon us for billion years already.
But I wouldn't be too sure.
1948 has been prophecied 3000 years ago by people who claim they contacted this "something"
And so have many things that come into existance these days.
But that's another story.
Robert
Ps. did any newbie ever debut with such a large post?
Ok so two nights ago I tried speaking to God through my mind. Before this I thought about what my idea of God is (that God does not exist and even if He does is very different from the general perception of Him) and thought of this exact sentence: "God, strike me now if I be wrong so that I may know the error of my (erm) wrong-ness." (I realise this sentence seems somewhat weird but I was trying to be spontaneous 
.) Anyway, since I haven't been struck by anything unusual since that moment till now, I conclude that at least one of the following must be true:
1. God cannot hear my thoughts and therefore is not omni-scient.
2. God refused to answer my request (even though answering it with a simple strike would make me much more convinced of His presence).
3. God has not the power to even strike me with something decent.
4. God doesn't care.
5. I wasn't sincere in my request (although I assure you I was).
6. God does not understand English
7. God does not perfectly understand human thoughts.
I'm still thinking what all this means...
EDIT: added 6. and 7.
.) Anyway, since I haven't been struck by anything unusual since that moment till now, I conclude that at least one of the following must be true:1. God cannot hear my thoughts and therefore is not omni-scient.
2. God refused to answer my request (even though answering it with a simple strike would make me much more convinced of His presence).
3. God has not the power to even strike me with something decent.
4. God doesn't care.
5. I wasn't sincere in my request (although I assure you I was).
6. God does not understand English
7. God does not perfectly understand human thoughts.
I'm still thinking what all this means...
EDIT: added 6. and 7.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
FearlessLeader2 said:
Faith is not truth - It is just one person's hope that a myth is real...
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
@CyberShy:
Welcome to CFC-OT and yes, that is mega-post to begin with!
Interesting viewpoints, and at least you take the time to outline your ideas.
Better than just shouting 'I believe - OK?' - That is what I see too much in these threads.
Welcome to CFC-OT and yes, that is mega-post to begin with!
Interesting viewpoints, and at least you take the time to outline your ideas.
Better than just shouting 'I believe - OK?' - That is what I see too much in these threads.
Robert Plomp
Apolyton Admin
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2004
- Messages
- 59
If God would strike you with lightning, or He would put "I exist" in neon-letters in the sky, pherhaps everybody would actually believe He does exist.
Though that's not what God wants to achieve. We, modern people, debate about the existance of God. And people think that the christian faith is about believing God exists.
But that's not the thing. It's about, do you believe, do you agree with the message He sent. And what I read in the bible is true, either if God exists or not.
The truth about life is not dependant on the existance of God.
God cares if we accept His message, not if we accept His existance.
Striking you with lightning would only pull you away from what really matters: the message. And the message is available, either you believe in the exitance of God or not.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
Lightning is created by conditions on our planet.
It has nothing to do with a mythical god.
It has nothing to do with a mythical god.
CyberShy said:
Realise of course that I said strike and did not make any reference to lightning
. Also, being as great as God is surely he must know that making His existence unquestionable would create a whole lot more believers from respect alone. I was sincerely seeking to reach Him, and got no reply. Sure I may not believe in Him totally but I don't know many people who would not find comfort in knowing there's someone out there who cares. EDIT: I forgot to add that what I did and experienced might also mean simply that God does not exist.
- Status
