Evidence for God from Science

erzeon wrote:I also don't like how christianity has changed due to changes in society's values. So that's why I believe christianity is corrupted, I also think that there may be some truths to it.

This is perhaps more the nature of how traditions work than Christianity really changing. But I think Scripture allow for this flexibility, as long as the essential doctrines do not change (which have not). It seems Paul shows such flexibility in his writings which are often targeted towards working with a particular culture.

erzeon wrote:So does anyone know what the religion is called where you believe in a God but not necessarily the exact one contained in the bible? Just some greater being.

I find "religion" titles misleading, and in a way dislike designating anything a "religion", setup for some reason to designate those beliefs that touch on spiritual matters. What you have is a particular worldview, not necessary a religion.

If you believe God still interacts with the world today, then you advocate Theism. If you believe God may have created the world, but has no further interest in it, then Deism.

Kurieuo

erzeon wrote:Well I just said I believe the bible isn't very accurate. I'm getting a bible off a friend today and going to study that. I'll let you know when I find something that I don't believe happened.

I also don't like how christianity has changed due to changes in society's values. So that's why I believe christianity is corrupted, I also think that there may be some truths to it.

So does anyone know what the religion is called where you believe in a God but not necessarily the exact one contained in the bible? Just some greater being.

OK. I agree, erzeon, I don't like how chrstianity has changed, AT ALL, either. But I don't think that it has really changed, I think it has been the same since 6000 years ago. I think that God's plan to reconcile man, with his desire to to wickedness, back to himself has remained unchanged.

I agree that Man has changed the message watered things down, and that parts of chrsitianity are curropt, but that is not a reflection on God, that's a reflection on Man who has a long history of inability to do the right thing.

Jbuza wrote:
OK. I agree, erzeon, I don't like how chrstianity has changed, AT ALL, either. But I don't think that it has really changed, I think it has been the same since 6000 years ago. I think that God's plan to reconcile man, with his desire to to wickedness, back to himself has remained unchanged.

I agree that Man has changed the message watered things down, and that parts of chrsitianity are curropt, but that is not a reflection on God, that's a reflection on Man who has a long history of inability to do the right thing.

Christianity has not been around for that long?

as long as the religion changes, my belief will not reside in the religion. That's why I'm an agnostic theist now. Not sure if there's a christian god and I'm not saying there isn't, just saying that the religion is corrupted and because of this there should be a new religion that sticks with the old views about god and the world. Changing christianity over the years because of changes in society shows that the church just doesn't want to lose members and that they are more concerned about numbers rather than a true religion.

And also, some christians have such different opinions on some issue. For example, when I ask one christian why god doesn't just bring down hell, one guy says because god wants us to have a choice to go to hell or heaven, the other says that god will eventually destroy hell, another says that god isn't powerful enough. It makes me think that some christians don't really know about their religion and when they argue some atheist views, they aren't arguing it from the religion's standpoint but rather from what they can make up on the spot. Therefore christians can't really argue back atheist views most of the point because what they say isn't what they've learnt from church and you can tell they are defending the atheist's questions because they believe that if they think they don't, they're being disloyal to god and will be sent to hell.

I was also talking about this to a friend, how a person is born into christian and his parents are christian so therefore that person becomes christian. He is surrounded by christians and grows up around it and really just accepts the religion on faith. But if he were born into a buddhist family, that person would not go back to christianity. I reckon if you are a true christian, you would go back to christianity no matter what. But this is not the case, most of the people here will probably say that if they were born into a buddhist family they would still go back to christianity. But they haven't gone through living life as a buddhist. They will say that they will go back to christianity because they currently already have faith in christian and it's hard to imagine living life without all the previous influences they already have. If they don't go back to the same religion then they aren't true christians.

We also need faith to believe in god. Of course people need a different level of proof before believing in god. I'll call it proof levels (because I don't know what the correct term is). Proof levels are different for everyone. It changes when you are lied to and deceived a lot. If for example a child's father tells the child that his mother will not die even though she has cancer. Then the mother dies and the child feels deceived. He would think things through before accepting what someone says the next time. And as he is lied to and deceived to more, he starts doubting lots and lots more about what he hears. So I guess christianity doesn't treat everyone equally, even though it should.

And also, when defending your christian views, a christian shouldn't just say "because god has his ways", "go see a priest" and etc. It's a bad reflection on the individual himself, that he hasn't really studied his religion and that it seems like the only reason why he believes in god because it's safer to believe in god and go to heaven than to not believe in god and go to hell if he exists.

Obviously I will get arguments in response to these, but like I said. If I asked another christian will I get the same response?

bizzt wrote:

Jbuza wrote:
OK. I agree, erzeon, I don't like how chrstianity has changed, AT ALL, either. But I don't think that it has really changed, I think it has been the same since 6000 years ago. I think that God's plan to reconcile man, with his desire to to wickedness, back to himself has remained unchanged.

I agree that Man has changed the message watered things down, and that parts of chrsitianity are curropt, but that is not a reflection on God, that's a reflection on Man who has a long history of inability to do the right thing.

Christianity has not been around for that long?

I guess that is a matter of interpretation. And I did not mean a literal 6000 years could be +/- a bit. Didn't God tell Adam and Eve that Christ was coming, didn't he set Christianity in order immediatley after the fall?

But if you would like to define Christianity in perhaps a more literal sense of those who followed or came after Christ's public ministry, than I concede I was wrong. Or you could define it as after they were called Christians at Antioch

For me I see Christianity including the fall of man, and begining with God's promise in Eden.

erzeon wrote:as long as the religion changes, my belief will not reside in the religion. That's why I'm an agnostic theist now. Not sure if there's a christian god and I'm not saying there isn't, just saying that the religion is corrupted and because of this there should be a new religion that sticks with the old views about god and the world. Changing christianity over the years because of changes in society shows that the church just doesn't want to lose members and that they are more concerned about numbers rather than a true religion.

I agree that parts of christendom have done this, but I just want to say this is a reflection on Man. What do you expect from man, your one. You must know were not particularly swift sometimes. Christianity hasn't changed. If I describe a blue bus as green does it become green? It is the same just becasue a man describes Christianity a paticular way doesn't make Christianity that way. IT is as unchanging as the nature of God. IF I beleived that Christianity changed in response to the teachings of parts of christendom I would reject it all today.

erzeon wrote: And also, some christians have such different opinions on some issue. For example, when I ask one christian why god doesn't just bring down hell, one guy says because god wants us to have a choice to go to hell or heaven, the other says that god will eventually destroy hell, another says that god isn't powerful enough. It makes me think that some christians don't really know about their religion and when they argue some atheist views, they aren't arguing it from the religion's standpoint but rather from what they can make up on the spot. Therefore christians can't really argue back atheist views most of the point because what they say isn't what they've learnt from church and you can tell they are defending the atheist's questions because they believe that if they think they don't, they're being disloyal to god and will be sent to hell.

Your right. That's why we don't put our trust in men.

erzeon wrote: I was also talking about this to a friend, how a person is born into christian and his parents are christian so therefore that person becomes christian. He is surrounded by christians and grows up around it and really just accepts the religion on faith. But if he were born into a buddhist family, that person would not go back to christianity. I reckon if you are a true christian, you would go back to christianity no matter what. But this is not the case, most of the people here will probably say that if they were born into a buddhist family they would still go back to christianity. But they haven't gone through living life as a buddhist. They will say that they will go back to christianity because they currently already have faith in christian and it's hard to imagine living life without all the previous influences they already have. If they don't go back to the same religion then they aren't true christians.

A good reason to thank God for growing up in a Christian family, which will not save you. In fact it is possible that it could produce many agnostics.

erzeon wrote: We also need faith to believe in god. Of course people need a different level of proof before believing in god. I'll call it proof levels (because I don't know what the correct term is). Proof levels are different for everyone. It changes when you are lied to and deceived a lot. If for example a child's father tells the child that his mother will not die even though she has cancer. Then the mother dies and the child feels deceived. He would think things through before accepting what someone says the next time. And as he is lied to and deceived to more, he starts doubting lots and lots more about what he hears. So I guess christianity doesn't treat everyone equally, even though it should.

Mark 10:15 - Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
There are numerous passages like this.

erzeon wrote: And also, when defending your christian views, a christian shouldn't just say "because god has his ways", "go see a priest" and etc. It's a bad reflection on the individual himself, that he hasn't really studied his religion and that it seems like the only reason why he believes in god because it's safer to believe in god and go to heaven than to not believe in god and go to hell if he exists.

Obviously I will get arguments in response to these, but like I said. If I asked another christian will I get the same response?

You are right. Once your faith grows it is easy to just accept it with seemingly no evidence, but past experiences drive future behavior. You will not liekly get the same response from two or three people on any issue ever.

Jbuza wrote:

bizzt wrote:

Jbuza wrote:
OK. I agree, erzeon, I don't like how chrstianity has changed, AT ALL, either. But I don't think that it has really changed, I think it has been the same since 6000 years ago. I think that God's plan to reconcile man, with his desire to to wickedness, back to himself has remained unchanged.

I agree that Man has changed the message watered things down, and that parts of chrsitianity are curropt, but that is not a reflection on God, that's a reflection on Man who has a long history of inability to do the right thing.

Christianity has not been around for that long?

I guess that is a matter of interpretation. And I did not mean a literal 6000 years could be +/- a bit. Didn't God tell Adam and Eve that Christ was coming, didn't he set Christianity in order immediatley after the fall?

But if you would like to define Christianity in perhaps a more literal sense of those who followed or came after Christ's public ministry, than I concede I was wrong. Or you could define it as after they were called Christians at Antioch

For me I see Christianity including the fall of man, and begining with God's promise in Eden.

For me it is when Christ came to Die for my Sins and later resurrected. The Old testament Saints did not know Jesus being their Saviour at that time. Like you said it is all based on the interpretation.

JesusFreak wrote:I have to ask, why are there even atheists? I understand that they take practically ONE religion, Christianity, and try to make every piece of it seem false.

Not all atheists are like this. Most are intelligent people, who while disagreeing with Christianity, don't constantly attack it.

Do atheists even read the Bible very thouroughly, take it piece by piece, break it down, analyze it, and so on? It doesn't seem so.

Do you? It doesn't seem so.

As far as I'm concerned they only like things from a scientific viewpoint which is a no brainer for atheists.

So, science is bad now?

If atheits are SOOOOOO SMART, why havn't they explainded why an eyeball works the way it does, I mean it can focus on distances clearly without readjusting but cameras have to adjust.

Does the Bible explain this? Ugh, it's so annoying when you people try to use the Bible as a science book.

I think what a lot of atheists claim to have is a bunch of B.S. We have a Bible that explains things in HUMAN terms NOT Godly terms, we are incapable of understanding that much.

Yeah, the Bible has some good stories about morals, but doesn't say anything about science.

If we could, we would be God. Anthony Flew renounced his atheism BECAUSE he found that there HAS TO BE INTELLEGENT DESIGN on this earth. He carefully studied evolution and intellegent design, put it side by side, and came to the conclusion the I.D. wins. All science is, is understanding more of HOW the world works that the Bible doesn't explain and doesn't need to. If you are an atheist reading this, explain to me HOW, WHAT, WHY, miracles happen to people for a reason. Sure, the body can do weird and wild things like hallucinations and what not, but WHY are people SUDDENLY like a snap healed of something that is incurable? WHAT cause it? Why?

Nobody ever claimed that science was complete. If science was completed, all scientists would be out of the job b/c they would no longer be needed for making discoveries. That's the thing about science, it is ever growing.

What is so wrong with FAITH?

Nothing. Only the hardcore, intolerant atheists hate people who have faith.

The Bible does not force us to have Christianity as a religion, it gives us the choice to not believe or believe.

No it doesn't. It says become a Christian or burn forever in the fires of hell. Yeah, that's a choice

Even if the Bible was a fake which I doubt, wouldn't it be better to live a fulfilling life rather than a bitter one?

There it is again, your atheist stereotype.

I mean, atheists can have tons of money and still want more, doesn't it seem like there just has to be more to life than this, I think so. As the Bible PROMISES, we will be rewarded for our earthy efforts if you are a Christian, and if you're not, you're ...!

Since when are all atheists rich and shallow? Also, a lot of atheists do have fullfilling, happy lives. It's what you make of life that determines your happiness. The philosopher Jean Paul Sartre explains how to live a very happy life, and he was an atheist. You make who you are, go out and enjoy life.

Ya know, Christians can lead empty, sad lives as well. Becoming Christian =/= happiness.

Sounds like you are DEFENDING atheists when you claimed this:

voicingmaster wrote:Hi, this is my first day on these forums. I am a Christian,...

SOURCE: CLICK HERE

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:I have to ask, why are there even atheists? I understand that they take practically ONE religion, Christianity, and try to make every piece of it seem false.

Not all atheists are like this. Most are intelligent people, who while disagreeing with Christianity, don't constantly attack it.

I agree.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:Do atheists even read the Bible very thouroughly, take it piece by piece, break it down, analyze it, and so on? It doesn't seem so.

Do you? It doesn't seem so.

How do you know? Do you know what my daily routine activities include? Don't assume things for which you have no evidence or proof for.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:As far as I'm concerned they only like things from a scientific viewpoint which is a no brainer for atheists.

So, science is bad now?

Did I say science was bad? It is bad if one mis-uses it to fit what think they know as fact when it isn't and publish it. What I was saying is that atheists look for nothing else but science as their ONLY worldview in life and take it as fact instead of exploring what an ancient biblical text says ALSO, which science can somewhat agree with. They also fail to be more logical in hot debates against a believing opponent.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:If atheits are SOOOOOO SMART, why havn't they explainded why an eyeball works the way it does, I mean it can focus on distances clearly without readjusting but cameras have to adjust.

Does the Bible explain this? Ugh, it's so annoying when you people try to use the Bible as a science book.

No, the Bible does not explain this, nor should it. In the bolded text, it kind of implies that you have deconverted from being a Christian.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:I think what a lot of atheists claim to have is a bunch of B.S. We have a Bible that explains things in HUMAN terms NOT Godly terms, we are incapable of understanding that much.

Yeah, the Bible has some good stories about morals, but doesn't say anything about science.

Really, there is not a HINT of science in the Bible? If so, I must have interpreted it the wrong way when scripture provided me with some scientific facts. Hmm, let me go back and make sure I wasn't imagining things.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:If we could, we would be God. Anthony Flew renounced his atheism BECAUSE he found that there HAS TO BE INTELLEGENT DESIGN on this earth. He carefully studied evolution and intellegent design, put it side by side, and came to the conclusion the I.D. wins. All science is, is understanding more of HOW the world works that the Bible doesn't explain and doesn't need to. If you are an atheist reading this, explain to me HOW, WHAT, WHY, miracles happen to people for a reason. Sure, the body can do weird and wild things like hallucinations and what not, but WHY are people SUDDENLY like a snap healed of something that is incurable? WHAT cause it? Why?

Nobody ever claimed that science was complete. If science was completed, all scientists would be out of the job b/c they would no longer be needed for making discoveries. That's the thing about science, it is ever growing.

I agree.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:What is so wrong with FAITH?

Nothing. Only the hardcore, intolerant atheists hate people who have faith.

Then they need help.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:The Bible does not force us to have Christianity as a religion, it gives us the choice to not believe or believe.

No it doesn't. It says become a Christian or burn forever in the fires of hell. Yeah, that's a choice

Re-read what you just typed and compare it with what my quote was. It is a choice.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:Even if the Bible was a fake which I doubt, wouldn't it be better to live a fulfilling life rather than a bitter one?

There it is again, your atheist stereotype.

Atheists can have everything and still not be satisfied, then lose it all. Believers can always be satisfied, knowing what the deal behind the scenes is like. For instance, I live in a wonderful house in a wonderful location, yet my own bedroom is bare, nothing much in there, but I make the best of it. I have really no money, but I still deal with it as if I were rich and laugh at the face of atheists who could be rich yet never really and completely satisfied. And yes, I understand there can be poor atheists, but they still strive for something more for which they believe they can get by doing certain things, but still not good enough. I live like I am rich even though I myself am very poor.

voicingmaster wrote:

JesusFreak wrote:I mean, atheists can have tons of money and still want more, doesn't it seem like there just has to be more to life than this, I think so. As the Bible PROMISES, we will be rewarded for our earthy efforts if you are a Christian, and if you're not, you're ...!

Since when are all atheists rich and shallow? Also, a lot of atheists do have fullfilling, happy lives. It's what you make of life that determines your happiness. The philosopher Jean Paul Sartre explains how to live a very happy life, and he was an atheist. You make who you are, go out and enjoy life.

Not all are but there are some. I just find their worldview skewed.

voicingmaster wrote:Ya know, Christians can lead empty, sad lives as well. Becoming Christian =/= happiness.

I agree. It can go both ways. On has the assurance of hope while the other lacks it.

voicingmaster wrote: Does the Bible explain this? Ugh, it's so annoying when you people try to use the Bible as a science book.

Yeah, the Bible has some good stories about morals, but doesn't say anything about science.

I find it annoying that people try to use Origin of Species as a science book. There are far more unsubstantiated scientific claims in Origin of Species, with its adaptation to the point of speciation and all.

If you would like you can accept this underlying premise and use it to engage in scientific inquiry, but it is not different in the least part from my acceptance of underlying premises found in the Bible and using them to engage in scientific inquiry.

The Bible contains a considerable number of statements that explain observations.

Hey everyone, I'm new to the board. I thought I'd take a crack at answering this question.

The reason that there are atheists, quite simply, is because of sin. We all fall short of God's glory in some way or another, and where we fall short we sin. Many times because of this people will try and believe certain things just to justify their sin, in an attempt to flee from the inherent shame that goes along with it. We all do it.

joshutup wrote:Hey everyone, I'm new to the board. I thought I'd take a crack at answering this question.

The reason that there are atheists, quite simply, is because of sin. We all fall short of God's glory in some way or another, and where we fall short we sin. Many times because of this people will try and believe certain things just to justify their sin, in an attempt to flee from the inherent shame that goes along with it. We all do it.

Nope, that's wrong, atheists are just stubborn.

numeral2_5 wrote:Nope, that's wrong, atheists are just stubborn.

Well, that would be another way to put it

joshutup wrote:

numeral2_5 wrote:Nope, that's wrong, atheists are just stubborn.

Well, that would be another way to put it

Yeah

Atheist are the kind that let others think for them, they read a site on bible contradictions, and decide Gods fake, without even studying into it more and finding its just translation issues and mis-interpretation.

Because i have always found things that disprove God but i always take time to look into it even more and find out it doesnt disprove at all.

what do you guys think of agnostics? pretty much all my friends are agnostics and sometimes i can get them to talk about god, but they never really even think about the existence of god one way or the other. i would consider myself slightly agnostic because i do not know what type of god exists. i do not flatter myself to say i can describe god.