Does Anyone In This 'forum' Believe In God?

[Guest TTK]

Is the Bible the Word of God?

Emmett F. Fields

In the Bible, the book of Numbers, chapter 31, verse 15 reads: "And Moses said unto them, "have you saved all the women alive?"

And verses 17 and 18 reads: "Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. (18) But all the women children, that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

I know the Bible is not the word of God because it tells us God is a murderer; that God killed, or caused to be killed, millions of innocent people. That God ordered, or approved of, the murder of civilians, of little children, of helpless old people, defenseless women, prisoners of war, and even livestock. It tells us that God approved the instructions to soldiers to keep the virgins for yourselves. I detest and deny such a book, and I reject and call blasphemous any book that says such is the nature of God. The Bible slanders God, and therefore the Bible cannot be the word of God.

If there is a God, the Bible is a blasphemy. If there is no God, the Bible is a myth. Either way, the Bible is not the word of God.

In Exodus 29:45-46, God is said to have said (45): "And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God. (46) and they shall know that I am the Lord their God, that brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell among them: I am the Lord their God."

The Bible says most clearly that the God of the Old Testament (Jehovah) is "THE LORD GOD OF THE HEBREWS," the God of "the children of Israel," the God of Abraham, of Isaac, of Jacob. The Old Testament is the story of a private tribal god, whose first and only concern is for his "chosen people." It is a god created by the priests of that tribe, to justify the atrocities that tribe committed. It is the story of a simple tribal god, and like all the other tribal gods in the world at that time, the god always reflected the people who created him. If the tribe was a warlike tribe, their god was a warlike god.

The Bible tells us the Hebrew tribes were an aggressive, hostile people, and so their God reflected their heartless ferocity. That God, and the books of the Old Testament, literally drip with innocent blood, with conquered people murdered, with raped virgins--mere children, with inhuman cruelties and unspeakable crimes--All approved by the Old Testament God! We do not need such a God in our modern world.

WE ARE INDEED LUCKY THAT THE BIBLE IS NOT THE WORD OF GOD!

The Bible tells us that God is small, that the Bible God is not the God of the endless Cosmos. He is not even the God of the entire Earth--small as that is; but is the God of some remote and primitive tribe, of some obscure area of our little Earth, during a limited period of time, long after the evolution of man. Such a concept of God is an insult, and is absolutely false! I might believe in a God that is incomprehensibly great, but I could never believe in a God that is disgustingly small.

It is certain that the true God of the endless Universe could not be small. The Bible describes a God too insignificant for intelligent belief.

When I was a Christian the very thought that there could be a lie in the Bible was repulsive to me, just as it would be to any believing Christian. I had been taught that the Bible was the word of God. I had been taught to believe--to believe blindly and to worship without question.

Being the word of God, I knew there could not be one single lie in the Bible, I knew deep within me that God did not lie. I still believe that! If there is a God that God would not lie. It never occurred to me that the Bible was not the word of God, that it might be a forgery, the product of human deception.

There came a time when I determined to read the Bible again, this time just as I would read the books of some strange and foreign religion, to see it with the eyes of a thinking infidel. Would the infidel see our Bible as reasonable, as moral, and as a force for human good? It was then that I found the lie, and looking further I found another lie, then other lies and still more. To me it was a revelation; it was as if a bandage had been taken from my eyes and I was seeing the truth for the first time. We all know that a book containing lies cannot be the word of God. We all know that, regardless of what concept we have of God.

The Bible is not the word of God because the Bible contains lies.

The Bible says in Exodus 10, verse 27, "But the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he would not let them go." Then in verse 29; we read "And it came to pass, that at midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of the Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle."

That is a lie!

The God of the endless Universe would not murder innocent children. It is a lie that God "hardened Pharaoh's heart" so God would have an excuse to murder little babies. That is a lie and a blasphemy!

In the Bible (Deut. 28, verse 16) God is made to say: "But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth."

That is a lie!

The God of the endless cosmos never told savages to slaughter defenseless, defeated people, "to save alive nothing that breatheth." It is the lie of savages to justify their robbing and murdering their neighbors.

The Bible is not the word of God.

In the Bible (Josh. 10, verse 12-13) "Then spoke Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and said in the sight of Israel, sun, stand thou still upon Gideon; and thou, moon, in the valley of Ajalon. (13) and the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies."

That is a lie!

The God of our endless universe never stopped the sun (That is to say, stopped the turning of the Earth) so one bunch of savages could slaughter another bunch of savages.

It is a lie!

In the Bible (1 Samuel 6, verse 19) "And He smote the men of Bethsemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the Lord, even he smote of the people fifty thousand and threescore and ten men: and the people lamented, because the Lord had smitten many of the people with great slaughter."

That is a lie!

The God of the endless universe would not slaughter the men of one savage tribe because they peeped at the superstitious paraphernalia of another savage tribe.

We could go on and on quoting these primitive lies from the Bible, all of which prove but one thing: The Bible is not the word of God.

All I ask is that you read the Bible. Read it with an open mind, and you will be amazed that you ever, for one moment, believed the Bible was the word of God.

Even some believers have seen the bad that is in the Old Testament. I know they have sworn not to think about the Bible, not to judge--but only to believe. Yet they have moved, some of them, a little, ever so little, away from the Old Testament. They won't admit it but some Christian believers wish the Old Testament had not been written. They are ashamed of it; they are ashamed of the old God--and the slaughter.

There they were, on their knees, eyes closed tight, hands clasped, head bowed, brain off. But, with innocent blood rushing by, the screams of women being murdered, of little children being raped, something slipped. They thought, just a little, but they thought. Evolution and natural morality had built an over-ride switch into their brain and, in spite of themselves, in spite of their religion, they thought.

Somehow they knew there was something wrong about the Old Testament! They didn't know just what, but there seemed to be something that was not just right. And so they moved. In spite of themselves, they moved--they created a new God: Jesus!

A-Men, there is yet hope for mankind!

We now come to the New Testament, and although the New Testament has Jesus say, in Matthew 5, verse 17-18; "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. (18) For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." In spite of such claims, the New Testament is the religious philosopher's attempt to create a new God idea, and to escape the evil bloody God Tyrant of the Old Testament.

What kind of God is this new God? We know the oldest gospel in the New Testament was written after 78 A.D., and the other gospels are even more recent. So we know that the quotes of the new God, Jesus, were only legends for at least one generation, and in most cases for several generations.

Let us see 'what it is said' this new God said according to the New Testament.

Jesus is said to have said: (Luke 14:26) "If any man come to me and hate not his father, his mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."

That cannot be the words of God!

Jesus is said to have said: (Matthew 10:34-37) "Think not that I am come to send peace to earth: I come not to send peace, but a sword. (35) For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in- law against her mother-in-law. (36) And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. (37) He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me."

That cannot be the words of God!

How can we ever find peace with gods like that running around in people's minds? Jesus is said to have said: (Matthew 19:29 and Mark 10:29) "And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters; or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life."

These are not the words of God!

Jesus is said to have said: (Mark 9:43-48) "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: (44) Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (45) And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off; it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: (46) Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (47) And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the Kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: (48) Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."

Those are not the words of God: Those are words of insanity!

Jesus is said to have said: (Luke 12:5) "But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; I say unto you, fear him." Christianity is founded upon fear--and is perpetuated by fear. That would not be the way of the true God, the great God of this endless universe.

In the New Testament, as in the Old Testament, we could go on and on quoting cruel, foolish, un-Godlike sayings from the new God. Sayings that we know are the words of men--of cruel, mean, heartless, small minded men. Words of hate and vengeance! words to frighten and oppress! They are words to give power to the priest, the church and the religion. They are words to destroy reason and to make the human mind a slave.

We now know that the Jesus myth of the New Testament was taken from the story of the founder of the Essene cult. The founder of the Essenes was named Jesus, he was crucified in 88 B.C.E. and everything good that Jesus of Nazareth is said to have said was written almost a hundred years before Jesus of Nazareth is said to have lived.

From the Essenian cult of the old Jewish religion, has evolved a new God, a new myth, a new religion and a New Testament.

But the good work of the religious philosophers who created the New Testament God has been corrupted by organized religion. The Jesus myth of the New Testament no longer resembles the kind and just leader of the Essenes who lived, suffered and died just a little over two thousand years ago.

In the New Testament we find a God that evolved during the first few hundred years of the Christian era. Christianity developed through religious hate. The weak were called heretics and their teachings were brutally suppressed, and so the Christianity that survived is the orthodoxy of the strong and the ruthless. Orthodoxy destroyed the meek and filled Christianity with hate, fire and fury.

The Christian layman and the unscholarly T.V. preachers, who have so much influence and emotional appeal today, are unaware of the deterioration that occurred in Christianity during its formation. The good in the original story was pushed aside and the bad took hold. The idea of eternal torment, as well as the idea of easy forgiveness of sins became established and soon fossilized into dogma and doctrine.

In the New Testament there evolved a God much worse than the Old Testament God. As much worse in fact, as endless torture is worse than endless sleep, as much worse as eternal burning is worse than simple annihilation.

Unlike the God of the Old Testament, the God of the New Testament was not happy when his victims lay dead and broken before him. The Son of God has not only carried on the family tradition, but has exceeded the wildest expectations of the father.

If we are heartless enough to believe the Bible, we must believe the God of the New Testament pursues the dead into death. This God, we are told, has found a way to torture even those who have paid "the final penalty."

The New Testament God has set up his torture chamber where there can be no escape, where death cannot be a welcome release. Everlasting torture, eternal burning; this terrible belief, this evil everlasting injustice, has become the heart and foundation of the Christian religion. People believe, NOT through reason, NOT through any desire to goodness or piety, NOT through any hope of making the world better, or mankind better, or themselves better, but through FEAR--simple, devastating, mind-numbing FEAR. They believe because they are afraid to think, afraid to question. They keep their minds as little children--afraid to be adult men and women. They believe simply because they are afraid not to believe!

Those who believe in hell can never know truth, for they are blinded by fear. The idea of hell was invented to establish a religious dictatorship and those who believe live under a tyranny far greater than any human tyrant could ever establish. They believe they are always under the eye of the tyrant! They believe their every word is recorded, their every action noted, even their innermost thoughts are known and judged by their cruel master of endless, unmerciful punishment. To such believers every act and thought is the result of fear. They are to be pitied.

That terrible dogma of hell has destroyed the very foundations of morality. The basic force of morality is "the power of sympathy"; feeling the hurt of others--and caring. The dogma of hell has destroyed that foundation. The mother, it is believed, could sit joyfully in heaven for all eternity and watch her wayward son or daughter burning and suffering in hell.

I detest a belief that can make people so heartless. I could never be a Christian! I could never be happy in a heaven knowing there are people suffering in a hell. I have great sympathy for people, their pain, their suffering, their feelings, their losses, and their hopes.

I deny that hell exists! I deny that a vengeful God exists! And I deny that any book that tells the lie that such a gross, everlasting injustice as hell exists could be the word of God!

About the turn of this century there were over a hundred studies made, and published, which questioned the historicalness of Jesus. Was Jesus a real historic person or was he a myth? One of the most famous books on the subject was Albert Schweitzer's "The Quest of the Historical Jesus." The book was first published in 1906. Schweitzer concluded that, "The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward as the Messiah, who preached the ethic of the Kingdom of God, who founded the Kingdom of Heaven upon earth, and died to give His work its final consecration, never had any existence." (p. 398).

History and scholarship tell us that Jesus was not a god but a myth; a Jesus of Nazareth did not live at the time that Jesus is said to have lived, and no one at that time did the things that Jesus is said to have done. We now know where the myth of Jesus came from and how it originated.

The discovery of the truth about the New Testament is one of the greatest miracles of the modern world. It is as if there were a God and that God had said: "Enough of this myth that has caused so much hate and trouble, so much war and persecution, so much torture and suffering in the world! I will put a stop to it before it destroys the entire earth."

What were the "miracles" that revealed the truth about the origin of the myth of Jesus, of Christianity and of the New Testament?

In December, 1945, there was discovered in upper Egypt a group of 52 Gnostic scrolls that dated from about 148 A.D. These first scrolls tell about the conflicting doctrines and the uncertainty in early Christianity.

In 1947 there was another unbelievable discovery. In Qumran, on the shore of the Dead Sea about 15 miles from Jerusalem, another great number of ancient scrolls were discovered. These scrolls are known as "the Dead Sea Scrolls." The impression given the public was that there were only a few scrolls found, just those found in the first cave. But there have been discovered hundreds of scrolls, these scrolls are about a thousand years older than any previously known copy of the Bible, and they contain all of the books of the Old Testament except Esther. There are also other scrolls that date almost a hundred years before Jesus of Nazareth is said to have lived. They contain almost every myth in the New Testament; they contain "The sermon on the Mount," and other bits of goodness and wisdom attributed to Jesus. They do not contain the evil sayings of Jesus. Those have been added later.

These old scrolls simply destroy the credibility of the historical foundations of Christianity by proving the New Testament evolved from the uninspired, historical, writings of man.

These scrolls have not been honestly presented to the public. It is strange that what God seeks so forcefully to reveal, the men of God are so determined to conceal!

Religion is big business, and those who hold positions of profit and prestige in that business will not allow mere truth to become a threat to religion.

What kind of a God do you think there would be if there were a God? A God would be just, kind, good, helpful, intelligent and wise. In short, God would be all the things the Bible God is not.

A true God would be better than the best of us, not worse than the worst of us.

If there were a God there would not be war, there would not be evil, there would not be starvation, overpopulation, pollution, misery, religion, plague and disease; there would not be dogmas and doctrines and creeds. There would be no need to believe foolishness and there would be no fear of thinking. Why even science, philosophy and reason would be respectable--if there were a God.

Honestly now! Who could worship a God like the God of the Bible? Not a thinking person! Certainly not a kind and gentle person, not a just person nor a loving person. It would have to be a frightened person. A person so afraid that he doesn't think, he just falls down and grovels before a tyrant. Only a coward could blindly worship the murderous, bloody, vengeful tyrant that the Bible describes as "God."

I will NOT worship such a God!

I cannot and will not believe in such a God. It is a lie. It is a blasphemy and a slander against the very idea of God.

The Bible is not the word of God!

With a God like the God in the Bible we don't need a Devil. When we look at the Bible we must seriously question if we have not been misled into worshiping the evil elements of nature instead of the good. We must seriously question if belief is not the wrong end, and doubt the right end, of religion. After all, it has always been the kindest, the gentlest, the most moral and the most respectable people who have eaten deeply of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil--the very tree the Bible demands that we avoid.

Or, has the world advanced so far that what seemed good to those who wrote the Bible is seen as evil now? Let's think about that! If the Bible is not the word of God, and of course it is not, then let us consider who did write the Bible and why.

The Bible was written by primitive priests, but those primitive priests were the learned men of that day. They were the thinkers and the law-givers. They derived their authority by claiming to speak for God. Primitive people are easily fooled, and often the old priests fooled themselves--just as honest ministers fool themselves today.

The priests who wrote the Bible stood upon their tippy-toes and reaching just as high as they could reach, they drove their spike. That spike is the Bible. It represents their best knowledge, their best morals, their most advanced understanding and world view. It was as high as they could think! And they thought it was as high as anyone would ever be able to think. So they drove the spike of their knowledge just as high as they could reach and they called it "The word of God."

That spike, that was as high as those old priests could reach, is less than knee high to modern man. Humanity has advanced during the thousands of years since the Bible was written and our modern knowledge and higher moral understanding, tells us that the spike, the Bible, is not "the word of God."

Today we desperately need a new God--a God that is NOT an insult to our intelligence--a God that is as great as the endless cosmos. We need a just God that does not have chosen galaxies and a preferred life form--a life form that is told to slaughter other life forms. We desperately need a God that commands that we think, instead of believe and worship. We need a God to civilize us, not one that makes us savages.

But we must not be as foolish as the old Bible priests. We must not drive another spike, create another Bible, and say "believe." How soon would future generations find our highest morality brutish, our best intellect childish, and our world view primitive? How soon would our children's children again be divided, with future orthodox preachers insisting that our book is "the word of God," and some future heretic saying; "it is the ravings of ignorance."

We must not hold back future generations at our level. Let us stand upon our tippy-toes and make our mark, but beside that mark write "Question and Grow." Our best knowledge today is NOT the word of God, and the best wisdom of people who lived and thought thousands of years ago is not "the word of God."

There is one fact which wise men and heretics have always known, which philosophers and scholars have known for generations, a fact that even theologians know today, a fact that frees the mind and drives away the awful fear. The time has come for the victims to know that fact also:

The Bible is not the word of God!

[subzero1]

BTW for the question of "prove God exists." Can you prove to me you exist and are not a figment of my imagination (and that every bit of proof you offer is also not a figment of my imagination)? Assuming you can't prove that, does it mean you are indeed a figment of my imagination? It is a stupid exercise, I know, but I think it makes a point.

It has been my experience that those who cannot provide evidence for their beliefs usually end up attacking the very concept of proof - as if saying "nothing can be proved" somehow validates their belief.

[Craytonic]

It has been my experience that those who cannot provide evidence for their beliefs usually end up attacking the very concept of proof - as if saying "nothing can be proved" somehow validates their belief.

I would say the same about attacking the person and not their argument.

[subzero1]

I would say the same about attacking the person and not their argument.

Yes, precisely correct. And my post was against your argument, not against you personally. And I notice you have avoided answering my initial request for compelling evidence for God's existence, not once, but twice. Maybe a 3rd time is a charm, please provide compelling evidence for God's existence.

[Pre V]

Yes! Thank GOD for Reps!!!!!

[Craytonic]

Yes, precisely correct. And my post was against your argument, not against you personally. And I notice you have avoided answering my initial request for compelling evidence for God's existence, not once, but twice. Maybe a 3rd time is a charm, please provide compelling evidence for God's existence.

You obviously missed the point I have made time and time again may different ways. You can't "prove" god exists or does not to a point to satisfy everyone, most academic athiests agree on this (as pugwash did earlier). This is you missing the ball wizz by every time I bang this home.

The "prove god exists" argument is one of the weakest. I can respond "prove God doesn't" or "prove you exist" and we could go on like that ad infinitum. It is the argument people make when they want to distill the issues down to little catchphrases like "bush lied people died" or things of that nature you see printed on t-shirts. It is fun to chant at a rally and probably makes the person saying it feel very self-righteous, whitty, and smart, but it does not lead _anywhere_.

It is like asking does absolute truth exists.

[subzero1]

You obviously missed the point I have made time and time again may different ways. You can't "prove" god exists or does not to a point to satisfy everyone, most academic athiests agree on this (as pugwash did earlier). This is you missing the ball wizz by every time I bang this home.

The "prove god exists" argument is one of the weakest. I can respond "prove God doesn't" or "prove you exist" and we could go on like that ad infinitum. It is the argument people make when they want to distill the issues down to little catchphrases like "bush lied people died" or things of that nature you see printed on t-shirts. It is fun to chant at a rally and probably makes the person saying it feel very self-righteous, whitty, and smart, but it does not lead _anywhere_.

It is like asking does absolute truth exists.

I disagree. Without first establishing that god exists, there is nothing else to talk about, the rest is just hubris.

More genearlly, how does one show that anything (not just god) exists? By providing evidence. If you cannot do this, then your position cannot be taken seriously.

I will grant that it's a simple argument, and a simple requirement, but that does not make it weak, merely simple.

One other thing I will point out is your request for proof God does not exist is fallacious. It is impossible to prove that "anything" does not exist. If we were talking about sasquatch and you told me that I could not prove that Big Foot does not exist, then you would be correct, I cannot, and neither can anyone else. But it's not really up to me to prove that Bigfoot does not exist, it is up to you to prove (or at least provide some evidence) that he does. Once specific evidence is presented, then debate can continue. But in the absence of evidence there is really nothing to talk about.

[Craytonic]

I disagree. Without first establishing that god exists, there is nothing else to talk about, the rest is just hubris.

More genearlly, how does one show that anything (not just god) exists? By providing evidence. If you cannot do this, then your position cannot be taken seriously.

I will grant that it's a simple argument, and a simple requirement, but that does not make it weak, merely simple.

One other thing I will point out is your request for proof God does not exist is fallacious. It is impossible to prove that "anything" does not exist. If we were talking about sasquatch and you told me that I could not prove that Big Foot does not exist, then you would be correct, I cannot, and neither can anyone else. But it's not really up to me to prove that Bigfoot does not exist, it is up to you to prove (or at least provide some evidence) that he does. Once specific evidence is presented, then debate can continue. But in the absence of evidence there is really nothing to talk about.

I think it would be best to just point you back to my post about proving your own existence to another.

Also, let me remind you that many people find proof of God in many places, each person's idea of "proof" to them will be different. I once took a class with an extremely distinguished math professor who saw proof of God in mathematics and science. It was proof for him, but it may not be proof for you. Another may find "proof" as well, but in something completely different. Each person is going to have a different level of proof they need, with some being slapped in the face not enough (for example, people that still think smoking will not affect your health). This is yet another reason why it is silly to argue in terms of "proof." It is useful in proving the equation 1 + 1 = 2 but is utterly useless in a metaphysical context.

BTW, who gets to determine who has to do the proving? I see no reason to think either side has more of a responsibility of shouldering it here. You take me having to prove it to you as a given, but I don't see any reason why I would have to carry that burden. As far as I am concerned, you have the burden of proving non-existence to me. The point once again being this is merely a "God exists" "No he doesn't" shouting match, nothing more.

[eddhead]

There is no evidence......and never will be......that's the crux of the matter......believers stumble along supported by the crutch of blind faith...... a faith that is not and cannot be supported by empirical evidence....!

Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom, atheism is human concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind cannot begin to understand.....and yet it is more than this.......atheism is not an old religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and never has been, a religion at all.........the definition of atheism is magnificent in its simplicity.......atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness.

BTW......All of my recent reading has been focussed on the Bible......here is the latest book I've just finished.......if you want to know the archaelogical truth about the Bible.....this book tells all.....!

thanks for the recommendation.. I am going to check it out.

[Pugwash]

BTW, who gets to determine who has to do the proving? I see no reason to think either side has more of a responsibility of shouldering it here.

If you're going down the proof route, the believers have to prove there's a god. There is no question here.

Two views, both with the same result:

1: Why? Well, the default state is nothingness and you're trying to tell us there's something we can't see. Prove it.

2: We're happy with no god and you're the one trying to convince us there's a god. You can't say "There's a god, you have to believe me, prove to me I'm wrong!" or else we're in the Flying Spaghetti Monster argument.

There's no Santa Claus, there's no Easter Bunny and there's no God. If you want to maintain that there is a God (which I don't actually believe you have tried to do, to be honest) because it makes you happy, like the Tooth Fairy, then sure, carry on, but one day, you'll grow up and realise they were lying to you because it was easier to deal with tooth-loss or buying chocolates or whatever.

"Then why," asked the Eskimo earnestly, "did you tell me?"

[Craytonic]

Pug, as for the proof bit, since we are on it, I'll throw the gauntlet back down and say prove that you exist and are not something I invented in my mind to keep me occupied.

Obviously, you exist, but I still think it is a valid point - a world of proof is not enough for some.

[Pugwash]

Pug, as for the proof bit, since we are on it, I'll throw the gauntlet back down and say prove that you exist and are not something I invented in my mind to keep me occupied.

I have done so sufficiently to myself. I think, therefore I am, and all that.

How can I not be a figment of your imagination? Simple: You're not that clever.

[KB]

I am so sorely tempted to pull the plug on this thread, it's one that should never have been started..........I'm sure we all know the bit about don't dicuss religion amongst friends.............It is also a dicussion with no logical end, theologists have been arguing God's exsistance for centuries and yet we have a handful of members here who believe they can wrap it all up within a matter of days.

Yet I will let it run for now but if it gets to personal and members frind themselves being abused please drop me a PM and i will turn off the lights.

Ken

[subzero1]

I think it would be best to just point you back to my post about proving your own existence to another.

Also, let me remind you that many people find proof of God in many places, each person's idea of "proof" to them will be different. I once took a class with an extremely distinguished math professor who saw proof of God in mathematics and science. It was proof for him, but it may not be proof for you. Another may find "proof" as well, but in something completely different. Each person is going to have a different level of proof they need, with some being slapped in the face not enough (for example, people that still think smoking will not affect your health). This is yet another reason why it is silly to argue in terms of "proof." It is useful in proving the equation 1 + 1 = 2 but is utterly useless in a metaphysical context.

BTW, who gets to determine who has to do the proving? I see no reason to think either side has more of a responsibility of shouldering it here. You take me having to prove it to you as a given, but I don't see any reason why I would have to carry that burden. As far as I am concerned, you have the burden of proving non-existence to me. The point once again being this is merely a "God exists" "No he doesn't" shouting match, nothing more.

[abstract summary]

You: God exists.

Me: Really? Show me.

You: Lots of people believe in god.

Me: Other people's belief is not evidence.

You: Well, you can't prove god doesn't exist.

[/abstract summary]

I've already stated that I can't prove that god does not exist. No one can. And not just god. I can't prove the tooth fairy doesn't exist. Or that elves don't exist. Etc. Why don't you believe me? It's impossible to disprove them, or put another way it is impossible to prove there non-existence.

But it is very possible to prove that the tooth fairy does exist, one simply has to produce a tooth fairy. It's the same for elves and for god. Once you put the idea forth, it's up to you to back it up. I'm still waiting for you to back your claims. Trying to shift burden of proof to me is merely a cop out.

BTW for the question of "prove God exists." Can you prove to me you exist and are not a figment of my imagination (and that every bit of proof you offer is also not a figment of my imagination)? Assuming you can't prove that, does it mean you are indeed a figment of my imagination? It is a stupid exercise, I know, but I think it makes a point.

Are you saying that you cannot tell the difference between reality and figments of your imagination? No wonder you believe in god. (sorry, it was a cheap shot, but just too easy to pass up).

More seriously, I can only present evidence for my existence and try to show why it is compelling. All I'm asking is for you to do the same.

[Craytonic]

It doesn't really matter what you prove to yourself. Assuming God exists, I am sure he could prove his existence to himself via similar means.

The real question is proving it to another, and a snide ad hominem attack won't cut it and is really beneath you - two posts in a row. I am a little disappointed in you and am about done with this thread as your side grows uncivil.

[subzero1]

It doesn't really matter what you prove to yourself. Assuming God exists, I am sure he could prove his existence to himself via similar means.

The real question is proving it to another, and a snide ad hominem attack won't cut it and is really beneath you - two posts in a row. I am a little disappointed in you and am about done with this thread as your side grows uncivil.

I am not sure how my post is an ad hominem. I'm merely trying to point out that the burden of proof is on you. I truly do not see how that is an ad hominem.

[Pugwash]

I am so sorely tempted to pull the plug on this thread, it's one that should never have been started...

It seems civilised enough for now.

[subzero1]

Kenberg, I really hope the plug is not pulled, I think things have remained quite civil, and debate of this nature is very useful and interesting. We all have our beliefs and that's OK with me. What I find interesting is discovering "why" people believe what they do. Which is why I keep asking for evidence. I know these are smart, reasonable people, so I am infering that they have a strong reason for their beliefs, I'm trying to get at what those reasons are. As Craytonic already posted, people believe for all kinds of different reasons, and I"m interested in hearing about that. Once we establish that burden of proof is on the believer, then the next step is to seriously examine the evidence presented. We haven't gotten to that point yet, but I think we will soon.

[Pugwash]

Once we establish that burden of proof is on the believer, then the next step is to seriously examine the evidence presented. We haven't gotten to that point yet, but I think we will soon.

It's not going to happen. They've got this whole faith thing going on which basically says that if they search for proof it's because their belief isn't strong enough and therefore they need to give a bit more cash to their church (optional, but encouraged ) and get back to believing.

[Craytonic]

[abstract summary]

You: God exists.

Me: Really? Show me.

You: Lots of people believe in god.

Me: Other people's belief is not evidence.

You: Well, you can't prove god doesn't exist.

[/abstract summary]

I've already stated that I can't prove that god does not exist. No one can. And not just god. I can't prove the tooth fairy doesn't exist. Or that elves don't exist. Etc. Why don't you believe me? It's impossible to disprove them, or put another way it is impossible to prove there non-existence.

But it is very possible to prove that the tooth fairy does exist, one simply has to produce a tooth fairy. It's the same for elves and for god. Once you put the idea forth, it's up to you to back it up. I'm still waiting for you to back your claims. Trying to shift burden of proof to me is merely a cop out.

Are you saying that you cannot tell the difference between reality and figments of your imagination? No wonder you believe in god. (sorry, it was a cheap shot, but just too easy to pass up).

More seriously, I can only present evidence for my existence and try to show why it is compelling. All I'm asking is for you to do the same.

Please show me where I argued that God exists because people belive he exists. I NEVER advanced that particular argument. Don't put words in my mouth. You may wish I had used that argument, because the flaw is obvious, but I did not.

And obviously I can tell the difference between reality and imagination, as I said for the sake of argument.

Keep the cheap shots coming guys.

[KB]

@ Pug and Sub yes this thread has been amazingly civil and this is the reason I have left it alone I'm just saying make sure it stays that way.

Cheers

Ken

[Craytonic]

I am not sure how my post is an ad hominem. I'm merely trying to point out that the burden of proof is on you. I truly do not see how that is an ad hominem.

I was talking to pugwash.

[Craytonic]

The only "proof" many will find acceptable will be when we both die. At that point, the consequences of either of us being correct will come to be.

All you have advanced so far is the argument that "There is no proof God exists." This is very different than proving "God does not exist." Also, that first argument is subject to the counterargument that "just because there is no proof you find sufficient that God does not exist does not in fact mean God does not exist." I think we have gotten no where, typical for this type of discussion.

There are many ways of arguing proof existence - the ontological argument, the first cause argument, the argument from design, and the moral argument are just a few of many. Augustine presented five of his own that many find convincing (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm#3) in the Summa Teologica, as mentioned earler. Each has been discussed by people much smarter than any of us, so I don't really see the point? I don't really want to go through the motions of something that has been done so many times throughout history. No one ever agrees on these things.

[eddhead]

It's not going to happen. They've got this whole faith thing going on which basically says that if they search for proof it's because their belief isn't strong enough and therefore they need to give a bit more cash to their church (optional, but encouraged ) and get back to believing.

I would put it a different way.

The matter of providing proof of God's existance immaterial to the discussion. The fact is that lack of proof on the existance of God, is not in and of itself proof that God does not exist. Let's not place an onus of proof on either believers or non-believers. This is a matter of faith which by it's nature implies belief without full knowledge (if you are a believer). Otherwise, it is an unsolvable question.

[Pugwash]

The real question is proving it to another, and a snide ad hominem attack won't cut it and is really beneath you - two posts in a row. I am a little disappointed in you and am about done with this thread as your side grows uncivil.

What Ad Hominem attacks?