Evidence for God from Science

I've seen the comparison between God and other so called gods made, I don't agree. But what similarities do you, the atheist who's reading this question, see between the true God of the universe and the mere supermen of paganism?

Bluejay4 wrote:I've seen the comparison between God and other so called gods made, I don't agree. But what similarities do you, the atheist who's reading this question, see between the true God of the universe and the mere supermen of paganism?

What kind of question is that?

You are asking atheists, those who believe God doesn't exist, to tell you similarities of something that doesn't exist.

Makes no sense.

If they believed that "the true God of the universe" existed, so they could describe Him, they wouldn't be atheists in the first place.

RickD wrote:

Bluejay4 wrote:I've seen the comparison between God and other so called gods made, I don't agree. But what similarities do you, the atheist who's reading this question, see between the true God of the universe and the mere supermen of paganism?

What kind of question is that?

You are asking atheists, those who believe God doesn't exist, to tell you similarities of something that doesn't exist.

Makes no sense.

If they believed that "the true God of the universe" existed, so they could describe Him, they wouldn't be atheists in the first place.

Worked for hitchens ..he always said 'there is no God and I hate him'

To be fair, I think what they're trying to say is that they see multiple accounts of God's nature that they see as equally plausible. But I also think they generally misunderstand the meaning of "God." @Kurieuo and @edwardmurphy were having a discussion about this -- the difference between "gods" and "God" with a capital G -- that I think illustrates well what they're not seeing. It was pretty interesting.

If you want to read it... http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 80#p181022

RickD wrote:

Bluejay4 wrote:I've seen the comparison between God and other so called gods made, I don't agree. But what similarities do you, the atheist who's reading this question, see between the true God of the universe and the mere supermen of paganism?

What kind of question is that?

You are asking atheists, those who believe God doesn't exist, to tell you similarities of something that doesn't exist.

Makes no sense.

For me that question is kind of like asking who would win in a fight between Star Wars and Star Trek. On the one hand, neither of those things is real so the question is silly. On the other hand, it's an interesting topic if you're into that kind of thing.

I don't believe in any of them, and I'm certainly not an expert on the subject, but I agree that the Christian version of Abraham's god is quite different from the handful of pagan gods that I know anything about. He didn't used to be - as far as I can tell the god of the OT fits right in with all of the other petty, wrathful, primitive gods of the ancient world. He seems to grow up a lot in the NT, though.

Why is being the god of the universe a big deal, anyway? Every religion I can think of has a creation myth. Personally, I prefer the one that says that the earth is the back of a giant turtle.

edwardmurphy wrote:Why is being the god of the universe a big deal, anyway? Every religion I can think of has a creation myth. Personally, I prefer the one that says that the earth is the back of a giant turtle.

The way I understand it, it's about the starting point -- what the idea of God even means. When you posit a god that governs just the sea, you're positing a force of limited scope, which not only requires additional explanations for forces beyond the sea, but also why its force is limited to the sea and so on. Positing "God" still answers questions of the origin of things, but without the extra baggage. At its most basic, God is simply the intelligent-first-cause explanation.

And granted, this argument doesn't give a free pass to all the specific claims made by the Bible (that's more the realm of historical validity of the accounts), but it does change the scope of what we're debating. For example, I've often heard atheists argue that "order from chaos" (to borrow the phrase) is a simpler explanation, since we don't have to worry about explaining what God's agenda is and so forth. To me sounds a lot like an appeal to randomness -- throwing up our hands and saying there's no explanation possible. I see little difference between that and simply regarding questions about the origin of the universe as uninteresting/unknowable. But I won't deny that "God" leaves a lot to be explained.

Bluejay4 wrote:I've seen the comparison between God and other so called gods made, I don't agree. But what similarities do you, the atheist who's reading this question, see between the true God of the universe and the mere supermen of paganism?

The similarities I see between the God you worship vs those worshipped by others are:

* I am unable to experience their existence, but believers claim its existence is obvious to all.
* Those who do believe divide themselves in various denominations and sects because there is no consensus when it comes to the details of what they believe.
* They all subscribe to an ancient (holy) text that is written in such a vague way that results in many different interpretations thus the various sects and denominations.
* I am often told that after death, or in the end everything will make sense; or someday I will see.

That’s all I can think of for now, maybe more later

K

Kenny wrote:

Bluejay4 wrote:I've seen the comparison between God and other so called gods made, I don't agree. But what similarities do you, the atheist who's reading this question, see between the true God of the universe and the mere supermen of paganism?

The similarities I see between the God you worship vs those worshipped by others are:

* I am unable to experience their existence, but believers claim its existence is obvious to all.
* Those who do believe divide themselves in various denominations and sects because there is no consensus when it comes to the details of what they believe.
* They all subscribe to an ancient (holy) text that is written in such a vague way that results in many different interpretations thus the various sects and denominations.
* I am often told that after death, or in the end everything will make sense; or someday I will see.

That’s all I can think of for now, maybe more later

K

Answers:

* I am unable to experience their existence, but believers claim its existence is obvious to all.

Who's existence? Well, Kenny, I sure cannot experience your personal existence can I? Yet, I see evidence that you do indeed exist. I can choose to ignore you or respond. Same goes for you with God. You can ingore the great outdoors and wonders of nature and rationalize a belief system that ignores God's overtures to you. Next, you said, claim its existence, what is the it in the question? Are you not then choosing to ignore based upon your belief system?

* Those who do believe divide themselves in various denominations and sects because there is no consensus when it comes to the details of what they believe.

Not true, when it comes to essentials of Christian faith there is no disagreement...

Next do all scientist, philosophers have the same consensus or do they mesh with groups of like minded persons (Global warming, no warming, etc and etc)?

* They all subscribe to an ancient (holy) text that is written in such a vague way that results in many different interpretations thus the various sects and denominations.

There have been and are claims science has made in the resent past and now that are error. Since these are new, because they are new, make their errors better?

I pointed out some very clear passages of fulfilled prophecy concerning Israel to you during your membership here, Kenny; however, you continue to choose to believe and have faith in whatsoever you will, nevertheless...

* I am often told that after death, or in the end everything will make sense; or someday I will see.

It will happen, one day, you will die and find out... why are you mocking your own death? Do you dislike yourself or something?
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Bluejay4 wrote:I've seen the comparison between God and other so called gods made, I don't agree. But what similarities do you, the atheist who's reading this question, see between the true God of the universe and the mere supermen of paganism?

The similarities I see between the God you worship vs those worshipped by others are:

* I am unable to experience their existence, but believers claim its existence is obvious to all.
* Those who do believe divide themselves in various denominations and sects because there is no consensus when it comes to the details of what they believe.
* They all subscribe to an ancient (holy) text that is written in such a vague way that results in many different interpretations thus the various sects and denominations.
* I am often told that after death, or in the end everything will make sense; or someday I will see.

That’s all I can think of for now, maybe more later

K

Answers:

* I am unable to experience their existence, but believers claim its existence is obvious to all.

Who's existence? Well, Kenny, I sure cannot experience your personal existence can I? Yet, I see evidence that you do indeed exist. I can choose to ignore you or respond. Same goes for you with God. You can ingore the great outdoors and wonders of nature and rationalize a belief system that ignores God's overtures to you. Next, you said, claim its existence, what is the it in the question? Are you not then choosing to ignore based upon your belief system?

* Those who do believe divide themselves in various denominations and sects because there is no consensus when it comes to the details of what they believe.

Not true, when it comes to essentials of Christian faith there is no disagreement...

Next do all scientist, philosophers have the same consensus or do they mesh with groups of like minded persons (Global warming, no warming, etc and etc)?

* They all subscribe to an ancient (holy) text that is written in such a vague way that results in many different interpretations thus the various sects and denominations.

There have been and are claims science has made in the resent past and now that are error. Since these are new, because they are new, make their errors better?

I pointed out some very clear passages of fulfilled prophecy concerning Israel to you during your membership here, Kenny; however, you continue to choose to believe and have faith in whatsoever you will, nevertheless...

* I am often told that after death, or in the end everything will make sense; or someday I will see.

It will happen, one day, you will die and find out... why are you mocking your own death? Do you dislike yourself or something?
-
-
-

BW
Who's existence?
Ken
The existence of the God worshipped.

BW
Well, Kenny, I sure cannot experience your personal existence can I? Yet, I see evidence that you do indeed exist. I can choose to ignore you or respond.
Ken
If I gave you my address, you could come to my house and not only have evidence of my existence, you could have proof.

BW
Same goes for you with God. You can ingore the great outdoors and wonders of nature and rationalize a belief system that ignores God's overtures to you.
Ken
If I believe in Santa Clause and I define Santa as a jolly old man who makes toys for children, the very existence of toys will be evidence of Santa to me, but it will not be for you. If you believe in God, and you define God as one who creates Nature and all that exists, the very existence of nature and all that exists will be evidence of God to you, but it will not be for me.

BW
Next, you said, claim its existence, what is the it in the question?
Ken
The Deities the OP was referring to.

BW
Are you not then choosing to ignore based upon your belief system?
Ken
My belief system has nothing to do with any of the Deities the OP was referring to.

BW
Not true, when it comes to essentials of Christian faith there is no disagreement...
Ken
I said the details; not essentials.

BW
Next do all scientist, philosophers have the same consensus or do they mesh with groups of like minded persons (Global warming, no warming, etc and etc)?
There have been and are claims science has made in the resent past and now that are error. Since these are new, because they are new, make their errors better?

Ken
What does science have to do with this conversation?

BW
I pointed out some very clear passages of fulfilled prophecy concerning Israel to you during your membership here, Kenny; however, you continue to choose to believe and have faith in whatsoever you will, nevertheless...
Ken
Fulfilled prophecies is only proof for those who already believe.
BW
It will happen, one day, you will die and find out... why are you mocking your own death? Do you dislike yourself or something?
Ken
I’m not mocking, I am only pointing out similarities the OP asked about.

Ken

BW
Who's existence?
Ken
The existence of the God worshipped.

B. W. responds - God is not an it

BW
Well, Kenny, I sure cannot experience your personal existence can I? Yet, I see evidence that you do indeed exist. I can choose to ignore you or respond.
Ken
If I gave you my address, you could come to my house and not only have evidence of my existence, you could have proof.

B. W. responds - I can ignore the invite and dig my heals in the sand and believe you do not exist despite the evidence. God gave you a road map to find, yet, you reject the directions back to God's house...

BW
Same goes for you with God. You can ingore the great outdoors and wonders of nature and rationalize a belief system that ignores God's overtures to you.
Ken
If I believe in Santa Clause and I define Santa as a jolly old man who makes toys for children, the very existence of toys will be evidence of Santa to me, but it will not be for you. If you believe in God, and you define God as one who creates Nature and all that exists, the very existence of nature and all that exists will be evidence of God to you, but it will not be for me.

B. W. responds - As Stated before: Kenny, I sure cannot experience your personal existence can I? Yet, I see evidence that you do indeed exist. I can choose to ignore you or respond.

In this God is just and absolutely fair in giving folks free moral agency, you can trust him or not. How is that not fair? He gave a way clearly marked out for you to find him and you are free to ignore the road map and his address. Unlike Islam, Christianity does not force your convert or die. God is real, it is you that refuse to find him or acknowledge him.

This denial maybe based upon your past life experience common with all human beings experiencing being betrayed, abandoned, neglected, rejected, put on trial, judged and executed in various way, wrongly accused, lied about, slandered, attempts to take things held dear in ones heart away from them, all from a need to feel wanted and validated and in control.

Well your disdain for God was put upon Jesus Christ during the 24 hours before the cross, thus revealing what sin's dysfunction, your not being perfect, really is by what it produces around you. You continue to put Christians and God on trial and mock and seek ruining other peoples lives by attempting to steal what is in his or her away and force people to become like you. God and Christians do not force you to accept the Lord. He reasons with all of us and let's a person come to one's own free conclusions. He will grant you a place you so desire, life void of him, if that is really what you want. However be sober minded about Humanity and what it really does and not naive.

We, all humanity placed their sin/dysfunction/our not being perfect, all the hate, disdain, disbelief, rejection, anger upon Jesus Christ as that is how we human beings treat what is good demonstrated also in how we treat others. While upon the cross Jesus bore God's wrath for all our unjust sin dysfunction,our not being perfect, all our hate, disdain, disbelief, rejection, anger... in our place.

Of course you can reject this, freely too, but when will you bury your hatchet? As you treat us and God and others displays your existence is imperfect and incapable of burying the hatchet. Place you hatchet into Jesus and let him bury it for you, then you will discover God's existence as true...

Someone sent me a note that says: God's justice gives us what we deserve. God's grace gives us what we do not deserve. God's mercy withholds what we do deserve.

BW
Next, you said, claim its existence, what is the it in the question?
Ken
The Deities the OP was referring to.

B. W. responds - Again God - our creator is not an it. Neither are you.

BW
Are you not then choosing to ignore based upon your belief system?
Ken
My belief system has nothing to do with any of the Deities the OP was referring to.

B. W. responds - Yes it does - you singled out the Creator, and are putting him on your own personal trial and bribed the jury to find him guilty worthy of death. Some things simply do not change. Jesus took your hatchet blows so you can see that you are not as perfect as you claim to be. He offers forgiveness for this and all you have done to others (evidence here too) and heal the wound in the heart life gave you. In that, you will know God is real...

BW
Not true, when it comes to essentials of Christian faith there is no disagreement...
Ken
I said the details; not essentials.
BW
Next do all scientist, philosophers have the same consensus or do they mesh with groups of like minded persons (Global warming, no warming, etc and etc)?
There have been and are claims science has made in the resent past and now that are error. Since these are new, because they are new, make their errors better?
Ken
What does science have to do with this conversation?

B. W. responds - Scientist disagree on Details and even on Essentials. So do philosophers concerning ideas.

So from what I am hearing you say - this is the superior way while Christians all agree on the essential truth of Jesus Christ are wrong.

So I am hearing you say that two wrongs make things right?

People can disagree on details as such discussion help uncover truth and this has no effect on essential truth of Jesus Christ for a christian.

BW
I pointed out some very clear passages of fulfilled prophecy concerning Israel to you during your membership here, Kenny; however, you continue to choose to believe and have faith in whatsoever you will, nevertheless...
Ken
Fulfilled prophecies is only proof for those who already believe.

B. W. responds - Israel was regathered back to the same geographic location twice and in the manner described. There is no misunderstanding the plain text of the language.

Again you have a right to disbelieve and keep wielding your hatchet to give God another blow.

Why do you do this, Kenny?

BW
It will happen, one day, you will die and find out... why are you mocking your own death? Do you dislike yourself or something?
Ken
I’m not mocking, I am only pointing out similarities the OP asked about.

B. W. responds - Are you sure you are not mocking our own death? Do you believe that you cease to exist after you die?

Isn't that mocking as well as a blind attempt to get away with the hatchet you wield against others and God?

Again here is the note someone sent me: God's justice gives us what we deserve. God's grace gives us what we do not deserve. God's mercy withholds what we do deserve.
-
-
-

Skeptics tend to define God in a way that allows them to disprove his existence.

PaulSacramento wrote:Skeptics tend to define God in a way that allows them to disprove his existence.

Dont you have that exactly backwards?

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Skeptics tend to define God in a way that allows them to disprove his existence.

Dont you have that exactly backwards?

You mean:

.ecnetsixe sih evorpsid ot meht swolla taht yaw a ni doG enifed ot dnet scitpekS

Now Audie, that makes no sense!

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Skeptics tend to define God in a way that allows them to disprove his existence.

Dont you have that exactly backwards?

You mean:

.ecnetsixe sih evorpsid ot meht swolla taht yaw a ni doG enifed ot dnet scitpekS

Now Audie, that makes no sense!

True, it does not make sense, put that way.

Still, I'd think you'd find it unworthy to here go the creogument route,
which requires that all contrary arguments be misrepresented,
generally without even being first graced with " you mean".

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Skeptics tend to define God in a way that allows them to disprove his existence.

Dont you have that exactly backwards?

I don't think so, the reason I say that is because the majority of definitions of God I have seen from skeptics are not orthodox definitions to begin with and rather easy for them ( skeptics) to use to "prove" the non-existence of God ( or prove whatever it is they are trying to prove at the time.