Evidence for God from Science

Hosanna wrote:Jesus asked, "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?"

Why do you suppose the most famous carpenter in the history of mankind, from the dusty village of Nazareth, located in an insignificant corner of a mighty fine Earth, who most assuredly changed the course of history with His existence, would be so very concerned about a person's soul, including the soul of the atheist?

Justhuman wrote:Did Jesus say that?

Yes

Justhuman wrote:Who recorded that?

Eyewitnesses Matthew and Mark (Jesus' disciples)

Justhuman wrote:When was it written down?

When? About 40 years after the resurrection of Jesus. In others words, the Gospels were written right after 70 AD, the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple.

Justhuman wrote:Did Jesus change the course of our history? Or did God?

Yes, Jesus is God. He changed the course of history the day He conquered death in His resurrection.

Say, thank you for the dialogue. I'm heading out for evening worship, but Lord willing, I shall respond to your other posts as the Lord grants me time.

Hortator wrote:

Justhuman wrote: Tell me, Hortator, does God in his omnipotent omniscience know the future?
Did Jesus, as the son of God, 'know' his future?

Yep.

Then what is the point in doing something of which you know the outcome in advance? Why put your own son through such a painfull and agonizing ordeal, to know that humans will let him die at a cross, and knowing you will resurrect him 3 days later.
What sacrifice was it for Jesus to die at the cross when he knew he would be resurrected 3 days later?
What use was it for humans because all was predetermined. They had no option than the one God chose for them.
Thus God didn't sacrifice his son, because to sacrifice something you need to 'loose' something. And what is there to loose for an omnipotent omniscient God?

Justhuman wrote:

Hortator wrote:

Justhuman wrote: Tell me, Hortator, does God in his omnipotent omniscience know the future?
Did Jesus, as the son of God, 'know' his future?

Yep.

Then what is the point in doing something of which you know the outcome in advance? Why put your own son through such a painfull and agonizing ordeal, to know that humans will let him die at a cross, and knowing you will resurrect him 3 days later.
What sacrifice was it for Jesus to die at the cross when he knew he would be resurrected 3 days later?
What use was it for humans because all was predetermined. They had no option than the one God chose for them.
Thus God didn't sacrifice his son, because to sacrifice something you need to 'loose' something. And what is there to loose for an omnipotent omniscient God?

I believe this one passage in Philippians 2 answers your question re: Christianity.

• Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, 2 make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. 3 Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; 4 do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Justhuman wrote:... unresting from my case...

Kurieuo wrote:Do you have a say in any of your beliefs or actions, or are you merely experiencing sensations?

I think you want from me one single yes/no answer if in my material world I only 'experience' action/reaction sensations, but I cannot answer that. If I choose yes I'm not responsible for anything I do, I'm just a slave of the material universe, cannot realy control anything I do. But that would deny me any intelligence too, for that would also be just action/reaction processes.

So, for now I tend to think both. Seen individually there is only action/reaction between neurons and we do not have control over those individual neurons, but can that be extrapolated to the whole brain, to the whole human body, to the world we live in?
On the basic physical level I only experience sensations, but as a whole being I can choose my own actions and can choose what I believe.

Holding two contrary beliefs at one time, is alright to do until we have more information to make a better judgement one way or the other. Sometimes it is the best thing we can do. I hope you do at least recognise the difficulty here between Materialism and our own individual will, but I can accept you'll hold to both nonetheless at least for now.

Justhuman wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Justhuman wrote:There is no 'true evidence', for any humans point of view regarding our origin (existence?) (And many other things too). Only assumptions and opinions (and fuzzy feelings). What is deemed rational seems to depend on what one believes. Both can be rational whithin their own boundaries.
I didn't write that rational thought is an illusion, on the contrary. In a materialist universe there is no illusion, for everything is 'real'.

This is a prime example of what atheism is. It is a state of limbo a person remains in their whole life until they die,never knowing if they are right or wrong until they die.They don't want to know,don't ask questions as to how we got here,they apply dumb atheist philosophy to their world view and it causes a state of limbo.

It goes back to what I explained before atheists have no evidence athesm is true and they even explain to you why they are excluded and don't have to have any evidence to know they are right. So that they do not care if something is true or not,they go on what sounds good to them personally just like atheism. This prevents a person from getting to the truth about anything,it is a state of limbo they remain in. You cannot apply a world view you have no way of knowing is true and apply it to our world,theories,etc and get to the truth about it.It just causes you to be in a state of limbo never knowing you are right or not and accepting ideas that sound good to you.

Evidence, evidence... Neither one of us have the evidence.

There is a massive amount of evidence Christianity is true but you being an atheist not caring if it is true or not don't take evidence seriously and since you just accept things that sound good to you without evidence you are not an evidence type person and so it won't sway you,until you get serious about evidence.If you have no way of knowing atheism is true then how could you pass up free salvation Jesus offers?It does not take much faith at all to believe God can do miracles if he created the entire universe and everything in it,miracles would be nothing for him.He could be born into this world the same way we are easily.

There is a massive amount of evidence Christianity is true but you being an atheist not caring if it is true or not don't take evidence seriously and since you just accept things that sound good to you without evidence you are not an evidence type person and so it won't sway you,until you get serious about evidence.If you have no way of knowing atheism is true then how could you pass up free salvation Jesus offers?It does not take much faith at all to believe God can do miracles if he created the entire universe and everything in it,miracles would be nothing for him.He could be born into this world the same way we are easily.

Dear Abelcainsbrother. You keep coming back about evidence for Christianity, but it is no evidence. Unless you qualify belief as evidence.
Being an atheist doesn't make me uncaring about the truth. I wish you could differentiate between 'not believing' and 'not caring'. Maybe it is impossible for you to think of anything else but your believe, or maybe YOU don't care about the atheistic viewpoint? What makes us different then?

Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, 2 make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. 3 Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; 4 do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I fully agree with first half, being humanitarian values.
Still, for a God to reduce himself to the level of mortal human and experience the suffering, and later to return to the God-form... What can he gain with that? Maybe the knowledge of how the suffering realy feels? But he would already know that.
From the human viewpoint it seems very nice for a God to do lower himself to us mortals, but he still remains a God. He cannot truly die, for then he wouldn't be a God. The sacrifice is therefore meaningless.
Whether or not one is Christian seems irrelevant to me.
Well, maybe I'm wrong. It's tough thinking.

There is a certain theological context missing that helps to make sense of why Christ, being in the very nature God, would enter into our world to take upon himself (not reduce himself to) the form of man. I don't expect you to have such an understanding as a non Christian, but it is certainly not the goal of God to experience the what it is like to suffer or a range of other human experiences, but runs much deeper, in themes that extend all the way back to Genesis. He stands to gain nothing, except providing us with a way to Himself despite ourselves.

It'd be great if we were Vulcan and could mindmeld, to bring you up to speed with various themes, but that you show some interest in discussion here, you are at least free to look into such themes yourself, if not only to gain a better understanding of Christian theology.

There is a very good, easy to digest YouTube channel that could help bring you up to speed with the various themes that culminate with Christ's crucifixion. I'm sure, even if you reject Christianity you'd nonetheless find it interesting. So if I might recommend one source to help with important themes, particularly around the Messiah, who we believe is Jesus, it would be this:


https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLH0Sz ... dEh25pduQ8

That is really just an overall summary, which doesn't really get into the why Jesus needed to die. They also have other animated videos though, of the books found in the Bible starting with Genesis and going all the way through, which also touch upon other important Christian themes.

Just human: I really do not understand how you can state that God is and was eternal, besides the fact that it is the only option for you to have an omnipotent and omniscient God.

Let's stop for a second and put aside the question of God. Fact is, EVERYTHING comes from something else. Science asserts there was a beginning, an actual moment, to all physical things and space coming into existence. From where? A non-physical realm. From what or Whom? As nothing can created itself, and as all things are derivative or created by some other pre-existing thing or things, this means that the ultimate source of things had to be eternal. That is a fact. Something was eternal, and that something was not a physical thing or Being - as it resided in another, non-physical realm.

Just Human: For about every other option would make God less, and thus not a god.

Yes.

JustHuman: And so you write things like: "Such would imply that He created Himself" I'm sorry for the word, but that is utter bs. It's a circular reasoning, a dead end argumentation.

How so? What are the options for an Originator of all physical things? A) It popped into existence uncaused (an impossibility of only metaphysical belief); B) It created Itself (a logical impossibility); C) It was eternal. C is the only possibility! Something was non-physical and eternal.

Refute that the origination of things was in the realm of the non-physical (as nothing previously physically existed). A thing cannot create itself. So whatever that thing was that originated all physical things, it had to have been eternally existing. And from the characteristics, complexity, design of things that came immediately into existence, with such awesome power, the source had to have been eternal, unfathomably powerful, and beyond an intelligence we can understand. We know these because of what showed up, with such untold power, and how they immediately functioned with order and obeying laws. Even the chaos within had strict parameters bracketed by the governing laws. So, this "thing" that was the Originator most certainly had what can only be described as God-like powers and intelligence. But that doesn't necessarily prove it was the God of the Bible. But that is obviously an option. So, one must refute the characteristics of what the Originator had to possess - to say that what I've said so far is circular reasoning. From this understanding, one should search to see if there are any credible evidences for the identity of the Originator. But It's necessary characteristics shouldn't be a question.

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Justhuman wrote:There is no 'true evidence', for any humans point of view regarding our origin (existence?) (And many other things too). Only assumptions and opinions (and fuzzy feelings). What is deemed rational seems to depend on what one believes. Both can be rational whithin their own boundaries.

I didn't write that rational thought is an illusion, on the contrary. In a materialist universe there is no illusion, for everything is 'real'.

With the exception of the first act of creation...

Now, do you mean that "With the exception of the first act of creation..." the act of creation is (also) not real in the materialist universe? I.e. not happened?

Where did the material come from that made all the entire universe?

I don't know. How do you expect me to explain it? Do I expect you to explain where God got it from?

You do not know? Then how can you base all your truth on materialism, if you do not know?

Atheistic materialism falls apart here.

If any material substance existed then why not God be that material which all things came into being?

Are there different substances on earth? -- The answer is yes.

Is it possible for other dimensions to exist? Do you see other realms in the material universe, stars, planets, gases?

If other realms of various substances exist then based on the principle of mathematical logical deduction, then, the spiritual realm, i.e. another dimension, can also exist because the material is there proving that different substances do indeed exist.

Then why cannot God, who created the entire universe ex nihilo

After all nothing cannot create anything at all...
-
-
-

Justhuman wrote:

Hortator wrote:

Justhuman wrote: Tell me, Hortator, does God in his omnipotent omniscience know the future?
Did Jesus, as the son of God, 'know' his future?

Yep.

Then what is the point in doing something of which you know the outcome in advance? Why put your own son through such a painfully and agonizing ordeal, to know that humans will let him die at a cross, and knowing you will resurrect him 3 days later.

What sacrifice was it for Jesus to die at the cross when he knew he would be resurrected 3 days later?
What use was it for humans because all was predetermined. They had no option than the one God chose for them.
Thus God didn't sacrifice his son, because to sacrifice something you need to 'loose' something. And what is there to loose for an omnipotent omniscient God?

How else could it be revealed, the human condition, all is foibles, schemes, self justifications, hubristic pride, violence, putting folks and God on trial, condemnation, be known, and dealt with if not for the Cross: after all it has got your attention!

What was there for God to lose?

To answer that, God remains true in the absolute sense to all that he is, all his character traits, nature, words, promises, gifts, callings, etc without and shadow of turning. He keeps his word and promises...

Therefore, if he cannot keep his word, then how can he remain God? He gave humanity great promises and callings, and one of these is reason and thought in a free manner. No matter what decisions people make, God works all things to prove himself true and incapable of breaking his word, promises, etc. This manner proves himself just and fair as well as all powerfully able to work through all things, justly toward all.

That is why the cross: to restore folks to the original call God charged human beings with as well as to reconcile us back to himself so we again can govern in the image and likeness of God's character traits we were fashioned to originally shine.

However, these things you do not understand as you are still putting God on trial in your mind with the intent to kill him for the greater good of materialism. In that, even today shows the power of the cross in your own life, exposing what is keeping you from God who came to save you.

Only God himself can save, no one else. Why?

Because we are imperfect and have too many motives and agendas that get in the way. I see you do not understand who Jesus is and make a play on God nature of oneness to entrap the unwary. Let’s deal with is...then, next, move on...

I know you cannot conceive of the orthodox Christian doctrine of the Trinity. The essence of substance of God is unlike anything we humans can image, yet, illustrations abound in nature pointing to the tri-unity of being, say, even in fruit. One Orange is all 100 percent orange, yet, the peal, the fruit, and the Juice are also all 100 percent all orange. They all share the same essence of being all orange.

God is unlike the orange, yet, he can send the fruit of himself to earth as a man to take care of the issues we human beings inflict upon each other as well as God. deal with it and reconcile us back to himself so we can again walk with God as originally designed and promised. In doing so, God can remain in Heaven holding all things together (peal) waiting to pour out his Spirit (the juice) into human beings to help them in this mortal life. This is the best illustration I can use to help you come to grips as to who Jesus is and why did He die.

He died to save your and mine's life.

He exposed what defiles us, as well as paid the full price for it, so we can come back to God and become what he originally planned for us to be and during this mortal life sealing and purifying us for the future task he promised and gave.

To refine gold, one must remove the dross. That is a material principle. This mortal life and the current universe follows that truth. God is in the process of removing the dross in the most absolutely-just manner imaginable. When complete the perfect comes. We like to argue that if were God, we would make it perfect to begin with, our manner to do this imposes the squelching of free moral will. God does not squelch this, he first refines it and removes the dross according to truth.

Yes, God is all knowing and despite being all knowing and thus knows the final results, he still lets folks make up their own minds freely. Since he already knows the final results of a person's heart toward him, then God can do with each person as he so wills without any violation whatsoever. Jesus came to forgive and heal our violations.

What would have made God unjust is if did not offer a call to humanity to present a choice to return or not. Jesus is known as the Word... The Holy Spirit known as the fire needed to burn away dross... Predestination is summed up in Romans 8:29...

The question is to you, Justhuman, why don't you accept God's call?

You can remain in doubts, and hubris seeking, like most atheist, the goals of atheism upon the entire world,

Please re-read John 3:14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21 and return to the Lord of Host who created the entire universe...
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:
With the exception of the first act of creation...

Now, do you mean that "With the exception of the first act of creation..." the act of creation is (also) not real in the materialist universe? I.e. not happened?

Where did the material come from that made all the entire universe?

I don't know. How do you expect me to explain it? Do I expect you to explain where God got it from?

You do not know? Then how can you base all your truth on materialism, if you do not know?

Atheistic materialism falls apart here.

If any material substance existed then why not God be that material which all things came into being?

Are there different substances on earth? -- The answer is yes.

Is it possible for other dimensions to exist? Do you see other realms in the material universe, stars, planets, gases?

If other realms of various substances exist then based on the principle of mathematical logical deduction, then, the spiritual realm, i.e. another dimension, can also exist because the material is there proving that different substances do indeed exist.

Then why cannot God, who created the entire universe ex nihilo

After all nothing cannot create anything at all...
-
-
-

Do you mean that "not knowing" automatically means it cannot be? As I do not know where all the material (energy?) came from with the Big Bang, you do not know where God got it from. It's the same, only different viewpoints.
Like:

If any material substance existed then why not God be that material which all things came into being?

...

Then why cannot God, who created the entire universe ex nihilo

Only the last line I cannot agree with:

After all nothing cannot create anything at all...

That's a statement you cannot know. It might be true, it might not be true.

As B.W. wrote:

To answer that, God remains true in the absolute sense to all that he is, all his character traits, nature, words, promises, gifts, callings, etc without and shadow of turning. He keeps his word and promises...

Therefore, if he cannot keep his word, then how can he remain God? He gave humanity great promises and callings, and one of these is reason and thought in a free manner. No matter what decisions people make, God works all things to prove himself true and incapable of breaking his word, promises, etc. This manner proves himself just and fair as well as all powerfully able to work through all things, justly toward all.

Come on! God 'incapable' of breaking his word? He is an omnipotent omniscient being. How can you know God wont do this or that or didn't lie (a little)? You may think so, but you cannot know. Or is there no alternative for you? Like "to admit he is capable of breaking His word, would break away the pillars of my belief"?

As for me I don't know I'm right in my atheistic view, but I think so. It's what I 'feel', or don't 'feel'.

Petty the written discussions cannot fully express/explained ones full reasonings. If you know what I mean.

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:

After all nothing cannot create anything at all...

That's a statement you cannot know. It might be true, it might not be true.

Of course we can and do know. Even the most ardent materialists will concede the something from nothing contradiction (unless of course, you are a brilliant theoretical physicist and decide the only way to make your erroneous metaphysical argument is by redefining nothing).