God is Imaginary
Replies
-
So you are more willing to accept an ancient game of telephone during a relatively literary era over the myriad of other texts?
You have to realize that they were skilled at communicationg history this way. It was far more sophisticated than that of what you'd think of as the telephone game.
I understand the oral tradition but there is nothing to show that Judea was a land rife with oral tradition. They had already moved on to text centuries past. Why, suddenly, would this group go back to the oral tradition?0 -
I haven't read either. But as they are both thousand-year-old religious texts that deal with magic, so to me they hold the same credibility.
Ahhhh. So, all of your thoughts, opinions, and decisions on this subject are not via any personal education.
I don't need to actually read them. We can dismiss Genesis based on what we know about life and the universe. We can dismiss the story of Noah and the flood, as it's not supported by geological evidence. As far as Moses goes, it's debatable that there were even any Jews in Egypt at that time, and as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) there are not the remains of an army at the bottom of the Red Sea.
If we can dismiss these stories, why not the story of Jesus?0 -
I don't need to actually read them. We can dismiss Genesis based on what we know about life and the universe. We can dismiss the story of Noah and the flood, as it's not supported by geological evidence. As far as Moses goes, it's debatable that there were even any Jews in Egypt at that time, and as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) there are not the remains of an army at the bottom of the Red Sea.
"Dismiss" the stories, or understand them for what they are? This is where education on this subject becomes important. The bible is full of parables, poetry, hyperbole. To understand it better, without blindly dismissing it, you'd need to study it. I can totally understand someone not believing in God, trusting in the bible, or wanting to be members of any organized religion without any real understanding of them. There are plenty of hypocritical Christians and Christians who don't even understand what they claim to believe to turn people away. I totally get that.0 -
I don't need to actually read them. We can dismiss Genesis based on what we know about life and the universe. We can dismiss the story of Noah and the flood, as it's not supported by geological evidence. As far as Moses goes, it's debatable that there were even any Jews in Egypt at that time, and as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) there are not the remains of an army at the bottom of the Red Sea.
"Dismiss" the stories, or understand them for what they are? This is where education on this subject becomes important. The bible is full of parables, poetry, hyperbole. To understand it better, without blindly dismissing it, you'd need to study it. I can totally understand someone not believing in God, trusting in the bible, or wanting to be members of any organized religion without any real understanding of them. There are plenty of hypocritical Christians and Christians who don't even understand what they claim to believe to turn people away. I totally get that.
So in your studies, you've accepted some stories as more factual than others? Isn't that just picking and choosing what you want? I'm really asking. I'm trying to understand.0 -
So in your studies, you've accepted some stories as more factual than others? Isn't that just picking and choosing what you want? I'm really asking. I'm trying to understand.
No, it's not like choosing what to believe and what not to believe. It's understanding which stories are meant to be teaching stories, which ones use hyperbole, which ones use poetry to create images. The Old Testament helps to understand the New Testament, and vice versa.
I'm not a genius by any stretch of the imagination. When I want to learn about science, I read books written by well-respected scholars. When I want to learn about math, I turn to great mathematicians. When I want to know about other religions, I read their "bibles" or I seek out someone who has studied them. Same for my own religion. I read, I question, I ask, I seek out theologians who have spent their lives devoted to studying Christianity. When I wanted to learn everything I could on atheism, I did tons of reading. I've spoken to leaders in the atheist movement and those well versed on what atheism is about. I don't just blindly accept anything. Never have. I've always sought after answers.0 -
So in your studies, you've accepted some stories as more factual than others? Isn't that just picking and choosing what you want? I'm really asking. I'm trying to understand.
No, it's not like choosing what to believe and what not to believe. It's understanding which stories are meant to be teaching stories, which ones use hyperbole, which ones use poetry to create images. The Old Testament helps to understand the New Testament, and vice versa.
I'm not a genius by any stretch of the imagination. When I want to learn about science, I read books written by well-respected scholars. When I want to learn about math, I turn to great mathematicians. When I want to know about other religions, I read their "bibles" or I seek out someone who has studied them. Same for my own religion. I read, I question, I ask, I seek out theologians who have spent their lives devoted to studying Christianity. When I wanted to learn everything I could on atheism, I did tons of reading. I've spoken to leaders in the atheist movement and those well versed on what atheism is about. I don't just blindly accept anything. Never have. I've always sought after answers.
But, when you researched Christianity, did you go into it unbiased, running the risk of changing your beliefs or world outlook, or did you go into looking for reasons why you already believed something?0 -
So in your studies, you've accepted some stories as more factual than others? Isn't that just picking and choosing what you want? I'm really asking. I'm trying to understand.
No, it's not like choosing what to believe and what not to believe. It's understanding which stories are meant to be teaching stories, which ones use hyperbole, which ones use poetry to create images. The Old Testament helps to understand the New Testament, and vice versa.
I'm not a genius by any stretch of the imagination. When I want to learn about science, I read books written by well-respected scholars. When I want to learn about math, I turn to great mathematicians. When I want to know about other religions, I read their "bibles" or I seek out someone who has studied them. Same for my own religion. I read, I question, I ask, I seek out theologians who have spent their lives devoted to studying Christianity. When I wanted to learn everything I could on atheism, I did tons of reading. I've spoken to leaders in the atheist movement and those well versed on what atheism is about. I don't just blindly accept anything. Never have. I've always sought after answers.
How do you know it wasn't meant to be taken literally?0 -
But, when you researched Christianity, did you go into it unbiased, running the risk of changing your beliefs or world outlook, or did you go into looking for reasons why you already believed something?
Unbiased. I didn't want to believe just because my parents did. I didn't want to teach something that I hadn't come to believe and love on my own. Because of the research I did, and continue to do, I am better able to teach my students on a very personal level of my faith.0 -
We actually don't know that anybody died for their beliefs. We have stories about people who died for their beliefs, that as you say, had been passed down from generation to generation before they were ever written down. Stories change over time. Why is the description of Jesus in the Christian bible more accurate than the description of Jesus in the Quran?
I want to be sure I address this correctly, so I'll add a little more to my thoughts on this.
We know that many early Christians died for their faith with as much or more certitude than we have for any other historical claim. Non-Christian writers wrote of the horrible persecutions of early Christians (Herodotus, Pliny, etc.). Only a hyper-critical skepticism would doubt the basic veracity of ancient accounts. Further, there is significant supporting archaeological data (e.g., Peter's death near the Vatican Hill and his tomb below St. Peter's Basilica).
The stories about Jesus in the New Testament were written in the first century by, in some cases, direct eyewitnesses. The Quran did not appear until the 7th century with Muhammad. If you look at the stories about Jesus in the Quran they show dependence on other existing sources.0 -
Regardless of all that you don't seem to understand the questions people are asking. Let's try it this way - convince me that there is a God. "I believe" isn't proof. It it were then there's a God, a Goddess, Zeus, aliens, unicorns, wizards, and Big Foot. Show me your proof. Not your opinions. Show me how your God is any more real than unicorns and wizards.
I never said "I believe" is proof. I'll offer you what I consider proof, knowing you'll still choose not to believe.
The life of Jesus is proof of the existence of God. Jesus came down from heaven in fulfillment of the scriptures. We have historical witnesses to his life, teachings, and miracles. You may not like that things weren't written down at the time, but that was not the culture then. They passed down historical data word of mouth, generation to generation. Look at the evidence of credibility of those eyewittness accounts. People died for their claims of Jesus rising from the dead and ascending into heaven. People don't let themselves be killed over something they know to be a hoax.
Let's look at the logic of the story of the resurrection. We know Jesus died on a cross. People witnessed this. We know Jesus' dead body was wrapped and placed in a tomb and closed off by a huge boulder. The outside of the tomb was guarded by Jesus' followers AND by those who didn't believe he was the son of God. "Something" happened, and his body was missing from the tomb. Let's see what makes more logical sense (even if our brains can't fully grasp it). Why would the Jews take Jesus' body? They could have ended Christianity right there by showing they had his body. Why would his disciples take his body and then die over a hoax? I could sit here and claim all day that I saw a ghost. If I hadn't really seen one, I certainly wouldn't repeat the claim if a gun was held to my head. It's amazing to me that these people didn't change their stories just to save their lives. That's how much they believed. Let's say Jesus wasn't really dead, but some drug was used to stop his heartbeat and make him appear dead. How'd he get out of the tomb with all those people standing guard? Can you offer any logical explanation for the resurrection? I've yet to find one, and I've looked.
As with all historical data, we must look at the evidence of credibility. The highest order would be eye witnesses.
Are you implying that no other religion had people die for their faith? Including the multiple other messianic movements of that era. Including the Jews killed as heretics during the Spanish Inquisition? Why are their sacrifices less valid?
I want to ask this again since it appears to have been missed and speaks directly to your argument that Jesus as godhead is valid because people died for their belief of this.0 -
wineplease, you've clearly put a lot of thought into your faith, and I respect that (especially since you don't reject current science, that infuriates me). If it gives you comfort to believe, then that's great. You're also not pushy.
I just don't think it's necessary to invoke the supernatural, ever. I disagree with the idea that once we get to the end of our current understanding, theology takes over (like you said about before the big bang). Why should god hide behind our ignorance?0 -
wineplease, you've clearly put a lot of thought into your faith, and I respect that (especially since you don't reject current science, that infuriates me). If it gives you comfort to believe, then that's great. You're also not pushy.
I just don't think it's necessary to invoke the supernatural, ever. I disagree with the idea that once we get to the end of our current understanding, theology takes over (like you said about before the big bang). Why should god hide behind our ignorance?
Something I just wanted to take a second to point out.
Yes she does believe strongly in her faith. But she doesn't hide from reality. The woman isn't denying dinosaurs existed or trying to explain through junk science how Noah's Ark was real. She's not a radical. She's a woman of faith who uses it to guide her life and help her make the right choices.
I wish more believers were like her.
Nothing any of us say is going to make her lose her faith. We shouldn't be trying to. I only want people to THINK about what they claim to believe and she has put plenty of thought into it. She has studied up on and befriended people with different views, rather than demonizing them she is kind to them and learns from them.
She's a Catholic, she's going to believe in the doctrine of the Catholic church. I'm an atheist, I don't believe any religion is true. But I sure prefer an intelligent discussion with someone who thinks differently than sitting around with someone who agrees with my every word so we can pat each other on the back and say how smart we are.
It's debate group. If we can't respect each other for a difference of opinion there's no point in being here.0 -
I have great disdain to those who use religion and the beliefs of others to their own profit and purpose. Such as televangilists, etc. And when an Organization, such as the Catholic Church, Mormons, many Christian Faiths, etc. puts the good of that organization before the well-being of the individual, then I believe they are using their own organization as a tool or weapon against those that do not go along with their doctrines.
RoadDog- I meant to respond to this earlier. I certainly would not disagree with your dislike of any bad use of a religious organization for evil purposes. Manipulating others for financial gain is terrible whether it is done by people with a religious message or a financial institution (like ENRON or Stanford) or anything else. Greed is not limited to any one organization, of course. Because religious people tend to be trusting and, unfortunately, sometimes naïve, they are often easy targets for those who are motivated by greed and other self-serving motives. Further, I agree that the Church should focus on the good of the individuals it serves but I do think religious organizations have a right to offer defenses and explanations of their beliefs. This might sometimes be interpreted as “attacking” others so it is important to make sure to speak in ways that show respect, even when we disagree.0 -
She has studied up on and befriended people with different views, rather than demonizing them she is kind to them and learns from them.
I can't even imagine my life without some of these people I've befriended who believe differently than I.0 -
Are you implying that no other religion had people die for their faith? Including the multiple other messianic movements of that era. Including the Jews killed as heretics during the Spanish Inquisition? Why are their sacrifices less valid?
Of course not. All I’m saying is that people do not die for what they know to be false. Certainly those you mentioned devoutly believed in what they died for. In the case of the early Christian martyrs, they died for their claim to have seen the risen Jesus after his crucifixion. I find it unreasonable to conclude that they didn’t really believe in Jesus’ resurrection if they chose to die for that claim. My conclusion is that they really believed they saw Jesus after his death. The tomb was empty on Easter Sunday (no one denied that). The most plausible explanation is that Jesus really rose from the dead.0 -
Back in the day there were plenty of witnesses who saw the Gods come down from Mt Olympus too. Any attorney or police officer will tell you that eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable evidence there is. If you walk into a restaurant and 2 hours later everyone in there is asked to describe you odds are no one will provide a complete description and it's even likely that some will get your sex wrong. Eyewitness testimony that was told in a 300 year long game of telephone is about as reliable as, well, a game of telephone. You believe that those things were actually seen. Again, it's just your belief. Previously you said there was a myriad of evidence (possibly different wording but the gist was the same). But you have yet to provide any of it.0
-
For the record, I believe in God. No one can prove God and other scientific beliefs. No one can prove all the scientific theories. That's why they're theories. Someone mentioned miracles. Look for people and doctors who claim to have had something, or diagnosed someone with a certain ailment. Then they're miraculously healed. Then people will say "the mind is a powerful thing." Life is like those choose your own adventure books. You want to believe, great. You don't, great! You get to choose. You have athiests who have never believed and all of a sudden, they're believers. Ever asked one why? Look em up. I am sure they will be happy to tell you. Does it really bother people that much that someone else beliefs, though not being forced upon you, are not in line with someone elses? In the end, we'll only know once we're worm food.
A scientific theory is not just a guess. It's not even remotely the same as "I have a theory that rain is when God cries." Gravity is a scientific theory. Does that mean that it's possible that the only reason things don't randomly float around is because God is holding them down? Not even a little bit.
There are some people who seem to be miraculously healed. That proves nothing. Frankly, if their being healed is the work of God then that only proves that God is an *kitten*. He CAN heal. He CAN end suffering. He just chooses not to.
I give as much credit to the opinions of atheists who are now religious as you would to previously religious people who are now atheists. And that's a MUCH larger group.0 -
Back in the day there were plenty of witnesses who saw the Gods come down from Mt Olympus too. Any attorney or police officer will tell you that eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable evidence there is. If you walk into a restaurant and 2 hours later everyone in there is asked to describe you odds are no one will provide a complete description and it's even likely that some will get your sex wrong. Eyewitness testimony that was told in a 300 year long game of telephone is about as reliable as, well, a game of telephone. You believe that those things were actually seen. Again, it's just your belief. Previously you said there was a myriad of evidence (possibly different wording but the gist was the same). But you have yet to provide any of it.
You're really going to compare a restaurant full of people giving a description of another customer to those who witnessed the death and resurrection of Jesus!!!????? I wouldn't exactly call that the same kind of eyewitness testimony.
Maybe you've missed the evidence of God I've mentioned, so I'll break it down for you again:
"Something" outside of the universe created it. That would be a creator. That creator, I call God. What would you call the "something" that created the universe? And if your answer is, "Another universe", what created that one?
God became man and came down from heaven so we could know him better. Jesus was real. He told us about God. He performed miracles (eyewitnesses to these events). Jesus was crucified, died, was buried, was resurrected, and ascended into heaven. ALL of this was witnessed. You may choose to dismiss this historical data, but I simply cannot. I cannot conclude that people died for something they knew to be false.
On a peronal note: I cannot look into the face of my child or at the world around me and not see a wonderful gift from God. I see God in all things.0 -
There are some people who seem to be miraculously healed. That proves nothing. Frankly, if their being healed is the work of God then that only proves that God is an *kitten*. He CAN heal. He CAN end suffering. He just chooses not to.
CAN you give your children all the junk food they want? CAN you never punish your children? CAN you make sure your children can do whatever they want without any consequences? Would you concede that creating a perfect world in the eyes of a child is not really in their best interest? Would you agree that children can't possibly understand why parents seemingly "make life hard" on them?
In addition, IF you believed in God and wanted Him to make this world perfect, what would the world look like to you? I'm really curious. I've replied to lots of questions here, so I'm turning some to you now.0 -
For the record, I believe in God. No one can prove God and other scientific beliefs. No one can prove all the scientific theories. That's why they're theories. Someone mentioned miracles. Look for people and doctors who claim to have had something, or diagnosed someone with a certain ailment. Then they're miraculously healed. Then people will say "the mind is a powerful thing." Life is like those choose your own adventure books. You want to believe, great. You don't, great! You get to choose. You have athiests who have never believed and all of a sudden, they're believers. Ever asked one why? Look em up. I am sure they will be happy to tell you. Does it really bother people that much that someone else beliefs, though not being forced upon you, are not in line with someone elses? In the end, we'll only know once we're worm food.
A scientific theory is not just a guess. It's not even remotely the same as "I have a theory that rain is when God cries." Gravity is a scientific theory. Does that mean that it's possible that the only reason things don't randomly float around is because God is holding them down? Not even a little bit.
There are some people who seem to be miraculously healed. That proves nothing. Frankly, if their being healed is the work of God then that only proves that God is an *kitten*. He CAN heal. He CAN end suffering. He just chooses not to.
I give as much credit to the opinions of atheists who are now religious as you would to previously religious people who are now atheists. And that's a MUCH larger group.
Except I know that when "God cries", it doesn't mean it rains. That's just illogical there. Gravity has been proven to work. Go ahead an jump. I promise you, you will come back down. Unless you're in the vaccum of outter space. You know what, we can also shelter a homeless man, and give him your life savings so we can be even more decent human beings without a god in our lives to drive our morality. But that too would be illogical. But we do what we can.
As for miraculous healings, if it happens, and it makes you feel like God is an *kitten*, then so be it. But it seems like you would at least acknowledge the possibility of a god existing.
And yes!!! I will agree with you 1000000% if I could. The group of people leaving their faith for whatever else is astoundingly greater then the reverse. Everyone discovers their truth one way or the other. I don't judge or push it either way. I listen, talk and still treat em as if nothing ever happened. Who am I to unassociate myself with someone who doesn't think like me? Golden rule right?0 -
wineplease, you've clearly put a lot of thought into your faith, and I respect that (especially since you don't reject current science, that infuriates me). If it gives you comfort to believe, then that's great. You're also not pushy.
I just don't think it's necessary to invoke the supernatural, ever. I disagree with the idea that once we get to the end of our current understanding, theology takes over (like you said about before the big bang). Why should god hide behind our ignorance?
Something I just wanted to take a second to point out.
Yes she does believe strongly in her faith. But she doesn't hide from reality. The woman isn't denying dinosaurs existed or trying to explain through junk science how Noah's Ark was real. She's not a radical. She's a woman of faith who uses it to guide her life and help her make the right choices.
I wish more believers were like her.
Nothing any of us say is going to make her lose her faith. We shouldn't be trying to. I only want people to THINK about what they claim to believe and she has put plenty of thought into it. She has studied up on and befriended people with different views, rather than demonizing them she is kind to them and learns from them.
She's a Catholic, she's going to believe in the doctrine of the Catholic church. I'm an atheist, I don't believe any religion is true. But I sure prefer an intelligent discussion with someone who thinks differently than sitting around with someone who agrees with my every word so we can pat each other on the back and say how smart we are.
It's debate group. If we can't respect each other for a difference of opinion there's no point in being here.
I've been nothing but respectful. I know I won't change her mind, and I wasn't trying to. I'm trying to understand.0 -
Except I know that when "God cries", it doesn't mean it rains. That's just illogical there. Gravity has been proven to work. Go ahead an jump. I promise you, you will come back down. Unless you're in the vaccum of outter space. You know what, we can also shelter a homeless man, and give him your life savings so we can be even more decent human beings without a god in our lives to drive our morality. But that too would be illogical. But we do what we can.
You're a bit mistaken there. Being pulled back down when you jump doesn't prove gravity, it just shows that for some reason things spontaneously move toward the ground, among other things. The theory of gravity explains WHY objects move toward the ground. It involves masses, constants, and all sorts of other complicated physics that make my head hurt, and it's backed up by observations and hard data.
Saying something is "only a theory" makes no sense.0 -
Religious debates are fun. It is impossible to win. There is no proof to support either side of the debate.
If someone wants to believe in God or religion that is great. I only have an issue when someone tries to force their religious viewpoints on people that do not believe the same things.0 -
You're right lour, there isn't definitive proof that any deity exists or not, but you can explain away many of their myths. To me, that's enough.0
-
There were eyewitnesses to the Greek Gods coming down and to Cyclops and Medusa too. Are they fact now? Greek Mythology is nothing more than religion that no one believes anymore.Back in the day there were plenty of witnesses who saw the Gods come down from Mt Olympus too. Any attorney or police officer will tell you that eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable evidence there is. If you walk into a restaurant and 2 hours later everyone in there is asked to describe you odds are no one will provide a complete description and it's even likely that some will get your sex wrong. Eyewitness testimony that was told in a 300 year long game of telephone is about as reliable as, well, a game of telephone. You believe that those things were actually seen. Again, it's just your belief. Previously you said there was a myriad of evidence (possibly different wording but the gist was the same). But you have yet to provide any of it.
You're really going to compare a restaurant full of people giving a description of another customer to those who witnessed the death and resurrection of Jesus!!!????? I wouldn't exactly call that the same kind of eyewitness testimony.
Maybe you've missed the evidence of God I've mentioned, so I'll break it down for you again:
"Something" outside of the universe created it. That would be a creator. That creator, I call God. What would you call the "something" that created the universe? And if your answer is, "Another universe", what created that one?
God became man and came down from heaven so we could know him better. Jesus was real. He told us about God. He performed miracles (eyewitnesses to these events). Jesus was crucified, died, was buried, was resurrected, and ascended into heaven. ALL of this was witnessed. You may choose to dismiss this historical data, but I simply cannot. I cannot conclude that people died for something they knew to be false.
On a peronal note: I cannot look into the face of my child or at the world around me and not see a wonderful gift from God. I see God in all things.
Your "something created the universe" argument is also flawed. If something cannot come from nothing then where did God come from? If He has always existed then why can't the universe have always existed? Those aren't evidence of God. Those are nothing more than your beliefs.
"In the beginning, Chaos, an amorphous, gaping void encompassing the entire universe, and surrounded by an unending stream of water ruled by the god Oceanus, was the domain of a goddess named Eurynome, which means "far-ruling" or "wide-wandering".
She was the Goddess of All Things, and desired to make order out of the Chaos. By coupling with a huge and powerful snake, Ophion, or as some legends say, coupling with the North Wind, she gave birth to Eros, god of Love, also known as Protagonus, the "firstborn".
Eurynome separated the sky from the sea by dancing on the waves of Oceanus. In this manner, she created great lands upon which she might wander, a veritable universe, populating it with exotic creatures such as Nymphs, Furies, and Charites as well as with countless beasts and monsters.
Also born out of Chaos were Gaia, called Earth, or Mother Earth, and Uranus, the embodiment of the Sky and the Heavens, as well as Tartarus, god of the sunless and terrible region beneath Gaia, the Earth." -- Why couldn't that be the real story of how the Earth was created?0 -
There are some people who seem to be miraculously healed. That proves nothing. Frankly, if their being healed is the work of God then that only proves that God is an *kitten*. He CAN heal. He CAN end suffering. He just chooses not to.
CAN you give your children all the junk food they want? CAN you never punish your children? CAN you make sure your children can do whatever they want without any consequences? Would you concede that creating a perfect world in the eyes of a child is not really in their best interest? Would you agree that children can't possibly understand why parents seemingly "make life hard" on them?
In addition, IF you believed in God and wanted Him to make this world perfect, what would the world look like to you? I'm really curious. I've replied to lots of questions here, so I'm turning some to you now.
You were outraged that I compared witness claims of seeing Jesus nearly 2000 years ago to eye witness report accuracy of another customer in a restaurant then you turn around and compare giving a child all the junk food they want to ending the suffering of a child with cancer?? LOL I wouldn't exactly call your comparisons similar either.
I CAN do all the things with my kids that you mentioned. But if my child were deathly sick and I did nothing for him or if he were in a burning building and I walked away I'd be negligent at best and a heartless ***** at worst. Your God does those things every minute of every day. If an imperfect person did those things you'd call for the most severe of punishments for them. But if a "perfect" God does them you make excuses. To me that's like blaming my other son for not saving his brother while saying that I must have had my reasons even if you don't understand them. I'm the adult. I'm the one responsible. Not the child, the parent. Isn't God supposed to be our Father? If He were a human CPS would have taken all of us away by now. If your child says "I hate you!" do you brush it off or do you banish them, their kids, and their kids from your home for all eternity unless they come groveling back begging your forgiveness?0 -
I CAN do all the things with my kids that you mentioned. But if my child were deathly sick and I did nothing for him or if he were in a burning building and I walked away I'd be negligent at best and a heartless ***** at worst. Your God does those things every minute of every day. If an imperfect person did those things you'd call for the most severe of punishments for them. But if a "perfect" God does them you make excuses. To me that's like blaming my other son for not saving his brother while saying that I must have had my reasons even if you don't understand them. I'm the adult. I'm the one responsible. Not the child, the parent. Isn't God supposed to be our Father? If He were a human CPS would have taken all of us away by now. If your child says "I hate you!" do you brush it off or do you banish them, their kids, and their kids from your home for all eternity unless they come groveling back begging your forgiveness?
I've already addressed all this within this thread.0 -
Please provide references to credible eyewitnesses of the descent of the Greek gods.There were eyewitnesses to the Greek Gods coming down and to Cyclops and Medusa too. Are they fact now? Greek Mythology is nothing more than religion that no one believes anymore.
I’ve already explained that God did not come from nothing. God is eternal and self-existent. Since God had no beginning, there is no issue of “coming from nothing.” The universe, on the other hand, prompts the question, “What is its cause?” That is because it exhibits the characteristics of change, expansion, entropy, temporality, etc. The features of the universe present the question, “What is its cause?” If you understand what we mean by “God” no such question arises.Your "something created the universe" argument is also flawed. If something cannot come from nothing then where did God come from? If He has always existed then why can't the universe have always existed? Those aren't evidence of God. Those are nothing more than your beliefs.
The genre of the story you cite is mythological. I suspect there are interesting and perhaps even true insights reflected in this myth but it is certainly not compelling as a scientific account and the theology and philosophy implied in it need to be developed and discussed before I can make a judgment on its truth-value."In the beginning, Chaos, an amorphous, gaping void encompassing the entire universe, and surrounded by an unending stream of water ruled by the god Oceanus, was the domain of a goddess named Eurynome, which means "far-ruling" or "wide-wandering". She was the Goddess of All Things, and desired to make order out of the Chaos. By coupling with a huge and powerful snake, Ophion, or as some legends say, coupling with the North Wind, she gave birth to Eros, god of Love, also known as Protagonus, the "firstborn". Eurynome separated the sky from the sea by dancing on the waves of Oceanus. In this manner, she created great lands upon which she might wander, a veritable universe, populating it with exotic creatures such as Nymphs, Furies, and Charites as well as with countless beasts and monsters.
Also born out of Chaos were Gaia, called Earth, or Mother Earth, and Uranus, the embodiment of the Sky and the Heavens, as well as Tartarus, god of the sunless and terrible region beneath Gaia, the Earth." -- Why couldn't that be the real story of how the Earth was created?0 -
The genre of the story you cite is mythological. I suspect there are interesting and perhaps even true insights reflected in this myth but it is certainly not compelling as a scientific account and the theology and philosophy implied in it need to be developed and discussed before I can make a judgment on its truth-value.
Nor is the bible compelling as a scientific account. Additionally, you haven't provided any references either, except the bible, which doesn't count as evidence that the bible is true.
You can make this about faith and what feels right to you, and I can't argue with that. But your beliefs don't have any scientific validity, so you shouldn't claim they do. As far as I know (from Wikipedia, I admit), there is no consensus among ancient historians about the accuracy of the new testament's story of Jesus, besides some points (he existed, he was crucified, etc.). Please provide us with the sources that convinced you.0 -
Nor is the bible compelling as a scientific account. Additionally, you haven't provided any references either, except the bible, which doesn't count as evidence that the bible is true.
You can make this about faith and what feels right to you, and I can't argue with that. But your beliefs don't have any scientific validity, so you shouldn't claim they do. As far as I know (from Wikipedia, I admit), there is no consensus among ancient historians about the accuracy of the new testament's story of Jesus, besides some points (he existed, he was crucified, etc.). Please provide us with the sources that convinced you.
I'm not sure what you're asking here. I've provided the eyewitnesses to the resurrection and ascension.
Please do not rely on Wikipedia as any serious research.0
