Is there a GOD?

[bulldoza]

Thank you for your reply wysiwyg. I'm not sure I fully understand what you are trying to say but I get the jist of it.

btw, I didn't mention spiritual or any other form of life after death because I don't want to pre-empt or potentially influence any replies.

 

[Mr J]

Mr J - I don't know if there is intelligent extraterrestial life out there or not.

Do you see the inconsistency then? You don't know if there's intelligent life, but you're certain there is a god. Even if you feel far more strongly about God since you think the Bible is evidence, how can you be sure? Is your faith really based on certainty, rather than a choice to believe despite a lack of concrete evidence?

But to be honest, whether there is extraterrestial life out there or not is irrelevent to me personally because Genesis tells us that God created the universe and everything in it and so the existence or non-existence of extraterrestial life does not affect my belief in God.

Have you ever considered whether God is what we would call an extraterrestial? Perhaps God inhabits something larger than the universe and did create this universe and all that is within it. Perhaps we are just a petri dish? This may make him a far greater lifeform, but certainly not a god in the way we imagine them. Our situation might be comparable to a colony of ants in a lab worshipping a scientist.

Now hopefully, you will take a few minutes to answer the question I posed to the forum earlier:

"What do you believe will be life after death if life goes on at all?"

I don't know, but I think it's most likely that we will cease to be in every way. I have seen no evidence of life after death. The evidence against it is the lack of evidence for it. I could make outrageous claims that can't be proven wrong, but you'd be a fool to believe me simply because there's no evidence against it.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Our situation might be comparable to a colony of ants in a lab worshipping a scientist.

I considered the possibility of our visible universe being a universe within a bigger universe. Like a cell being part of a larger body.

 

[bulldoza]

Do you see the inconsistency then? You don't know if there's intelligent life, but you're certain there is a god. Even if you feel far more strongly about God since you think the Bible is evidence, how can you be sure? Is your faith really based on certainty, rather than a choice to believe despite a lack of concrete evidence?

No, I don't see any inconsistency at all.

The Bible (Book of Genesis) says God created the universe and everything in it, which IMO would include any extraterrestials if they exist.

Personally, it makes no difference to my beliefs if ET's exist or not since there existence or non-existence does not affect my belief in God. I have already commented twice on why I believe the Bible to be true.

 

[tunrida]

You mean spiritual life after death but did not state that. Spirit is observable during life but not observable after death. Belief in such is just that, belief, but why belief? Why not deal with the reality? The answer will be 'prove there is not spiritual life after death' . Case dismissed on grounds of no evidence.

there have been many court cases (I refer mainly USA) that have tried to establish religious beliefs - particularly creation. They failed to prove their case (ie lost) but then forced the nonsense on people by turning to the legislators with some success resulting in some schools either barring teaching evolution or enforcing teaching creationists.
In desperation some from the religious right has 'modernised' creation and call it 'intelligent design'
there is neither reason or logic in your statement "Spirit is observable during life" unless you mean normal and abnormal brain activity.

 

[tunrida]

No, I don't see any inconsistency at all.

The Bible (Book of Genesis) says God created the universe and everything in it, which IMO would include any extraterrestials if they exist.

Personally, it makes no difference to my beliefs if ET's exist or not since there existence or non-existence does not affect my belief in God. I have already commented twice on why I believe the Bible to be true.

a question for you bull: do you think there is anyone else at all anywhere who has the same identical god as yours, or do you suspect that theirs may be just a wee bit different to the one that is in your head?

 

[motorway]

One of the reasons I believe the Bible to be correct is the very close similarities between the predictions of the prophets in the Old Testament and the accounting of the actual events in the New Testament. The main examples of this I can give are the reasonably detailed descriptions of the birth of Jesus Christ, the miracles He worked during His life and his death and resurrection by the prophet Isaiah and the fairly similar accounts of those events in the 4 Gospels.

It was written that way ON PURPOSE
So the prophesies would be Fulfilled

And it opens up another question of ORIGINALITY.. ( Those Miracles ? )

The mind works backwards seeing pattern..
I knew that was going to happen etc
It always works BACKWARDS
SOMETHING CONSTELLATED AND CRYSTALLIZED
And of COURSE WE just KNEW etc


But if I predict that a friend of mine will wear a red hat next week.. And I put it down in an (OLD ? ) TESTAMENT and Then HE WEARS A RED HAT and SAYS he did it SO HAS TO FULFIL THE PROPHESIES and writes about it in a (NEW ? ) TESTAMENT

That is on another level again
But what does it mean ? ==> except the obvious ?
And maybe he did not wear the RED HAT at ALL
BUT JUST WROTE ABOUT IT ( for his OWN PURPOSE )..

So just because the NEW TESTAMENT lines up WITH the OLD
means NOTHING TO THE TOPIC

ALL such literature of that age , era and culture
would too.


IS not The BIBLE the SORT of PROOF of GOD
YOU use when YOU have NO REAL PROOF..
WHEN you don't KNOW , But want others to BELIEVE...

NEED them to BELIEVE


Motorway

 

[Mr J]

No, I don't see any inconsistency at all.

The Bible (Book of Genesis) says God created the universe and everything in it, which IMO would include any extraterrestials if they exist.

Personally, it makes no difference to my beliefs if ET's exist or not since there existence or non-existence does not affect my belief in God. I have already commented twice on why I believe the Bible to be true.

I intentionally mentioned existence outside of the universe.

You mention that if ETs existed it would be mentioned in the Bible, but that if they are shown to exist it wouldn't change your belief in God (and I assume the credibility of the bible). Why not? If your evidence for God is the Bible, and the Bible is shown to miss something you believe it couldn't have missed if it were true, then how can you not question your belief when the credibility of your primary evidence is destroyed? It sounds like your faith is based on something other than the Bible, and you're just using it as is convenient.

 

[bulldoza]

Thank you for your view motorway. It shows, what I commented on back in my first post, that there is no 'hard evidence' proving the existence or non-existence of God.

We as individuals, should make our own decision on whether we believe in God or not. I have seen and experienced enough to convince me that God exists.

Tunrida - yes I believe there are others in the world who believe in the God I do.

 

[bulldoza]

You mention that if ETs existed it would be mentioned in the Bible,....

Your statement is not true, I never said the existence of ET's would be specifically mentioned in the Bible. What I said was that Genesis tells us that God created the universe and everything in it. I went on to say that consequently whether God created ET's or not is irrelevent to my beliefs.

 

[explod]

I intentionally mentioned existence outside of the universe.

You mention that if ETs existed it would be mentioned in the Bible, but that if they are shown to exist it wouldn't change your belief in God (and I assume the credibility of the bible). Why not? If your evidence for God is the Bible, and the Bible is shown to miss something you believe it couldn't have missed if it were true, then how can you not question your belief when the credibility of your primary evidence is destroyed? It sounds like your faith is based on something other than the Bible, and you're just using it as is convenient.

Am back, cant help myself.

Good points, but yesterday I put up a post which clearly shows that Matthew"s story is at direct odds with Luke's story in the bible but our ole pal buldozer just kept rolling on.

People will only believe and see what they want to, we can only at the end of the day save ourselves and let the poor ole bulldozers push it all against the wind.

As in Cool Hand Luke, "some people yar'h just caa'nt reach"

 

[bulldoza]

Am back, cant help myself.

Good points, but yesterday I put up a post which clearly shows that Matthew"s story is at direct odds with Luke's story in the bible but our ole pal buldozer just kept rolling on.

If you feel your post conclusively proves Matthew's Gospel is sufficently at odds with Luke's Gospel to the point where it conclusively proves God does not exist, then why not take your post to the media and see if it will stand up to their scrutiny.

If it does, I am sure they will offer you mega $'s to publish your post.

IMO your post would not stand up to their scrutiny.

 

[explod]

If you feel your post conclusively proves Matthew's Gospel is sufficently at odds with Luke's Gospel to the point where it conclusively proves God does not exist, then why not take your post to the media and see if it will stand up to their scrutiny.

If it does, I am sure they will offer you mega $'s to publish your post.

IMO your post would not stand up to their scrutiny.

What I posted was a direct quote from Richard Dawkins and it has, and it does and after initial attacks at his cridibility, which also stood up, they the theologians have become quiet; if you are unable to prove your point, do not stir the hornets nest.

Another great thinker Michel Onfray (who teaches philosophy at the Peoples University of Caen, France) has a book published in 2006 "The Atheist Manifesto" which is well worth checking by those who may be undecided.

 

[bulldoza]

What I posted was a direct quote from Richard Dawkins and it has, and it does and after initial attacks at his cridibility, which also stood up, they the theologians have become quiet; if you are unable to prove your point, do not stir the hornets nest.

Richard Dawkins is entitled to his opinions just like anyone else. If Richard Dawkins had conclusive proof that God does not exist, I am sure at least the media would be all over it one way or the other.

I have to go out for a while. If I can I will pop back this evening if you would like to discuss further

 

[explod]

Richard Dawkins is entitled to his opinions just like anyone else. If Richard Dawkins had conclusive proof that God does not exist, I am sure at least the media would be all over it one way or the other.

I have to go out for a while. If I can I will pop back this evening if you would like to discuss further

Most media is controlled by religious interests, judaism and scientology in particluar. Media deliberately ignore if they can the rationale of thinkers like Dawkins.

And on God, the issue is not that he does not exist, because in truth we do not know, the real issue is proving that he does exist Just feeling or believing or reading it in the bible does not prove any sort of real existence. You say I know he exists, please tell me why you know he exists?

 

[roland]

Most media is controlled by religious interests, judaism and scientology in particluar. Media deliberately ignore if they can the rationale of thinkers like Dawkins.

And on God, the issue is not that he does not exist, because in truth we do not know, the real issue is proving that he does exist Just feeling or believing or reading it in the bible does not prove any sort of real existence. You say I know he exists, please tell me why you know he exists?

I asked bulldoza pretty much the same question and all I got was:

Hi Roland - I'll quickly summarise what I have commented earlier.

The reasons I believe in God include my belief that the overall messages and teachings in the Bible are the Word of God and to be correct.

One of the reasons I believe the Bible to be correct is the very close similarities between the predictions of the prophets in the Old Testament and the accounting of the actual events in the New Testament. The main examples of this I can give are the reasonably detailed descriptions of the birth of Jesus Christ, the miracles He worked during His life and his death and resurrection by the prophet Isaiah and the fairly similar accounts of those events in the 4 Gospels.

It mystifies me how anyone can read a book of jumbled fables and cryptic narratives that have been handed down, translated, interpreted and re-translated through the ages and, without any solid proof, base your whole life on the text presented.

In my mind there is no doubting environmental conditioning when it comes to religion. If bulldozer had been born in India, he would be spruking Hinduism, Iran he would have been a devout Muslim. If born in China, bulldozer would probably would have been a Buddhist.

 

[derty]

I recently listened to an eBook that was a series of 24 lectures by Bart Ehrman covering the history of Christianity from the period of Jesus to Constantine.

Fascinating stuff. What I found most interesting was that:

• It was likely that Jesus was a Jewish apocalyptic prophet preaching that the King of the Jews would come and deliver them to the Kingdom of God. It was a common belief of the day. The king would be a mortal man and the Kingdom was a physical place on Earth.

• There were several different Christianities with markedly different views on worship, Jesus's birth and mortality and God. The main three were the Ebionites, the Marcionites and the Gnostics. These were dominant through the 2nd century AD with what is today's orthodox Christianity ultimately being a blend of the Ebionites and Marcionites not exerting itself until into the 3rd century AD. What we know as Christianity today was ultimately successful as it was the form of Christianity that was popular in Rome and the wealth and power from within Rome saw all other forms branded heretical.

• The four canonical gospels were written anonymously (i.e. not actually by the apostles themselves) and all differ significantly. With Mark considered the earliest with subsequent gospels built off Mark and another lost document scholars call Q. There are also many other gospels from around this time that were not included.

• Apostle Paul, who is historically considered as significant as Jesus for the development of Christianity, never knew Jesus and was initially a Jewish Pharisee who persecuted Christians. He did not preach the teachings of Jesus but essentially founded the religion that preaches the religion of Jesus and built up the significance of the death of Jesus and his resurrection being crucial to salvation of the sins of the world.

So what is Christianity today is nothing like what was preached by Jesus the Jew or the early Christ based forms of Christianity but a much later homogenised interpretation authorised and implemented by Rome based factions.

 

[bulldoza]

Most media is controlled by religious interests, judaism and scientology in particluar. Media deliberately ignore if they can the rationale of thinkers like Dawkins.

And on God, the issue is not that he does not exist, because in truth we do not know, the real issue is proving that he does exist Just feeling or believing or reading it in the bible does not prove any sort of real existence. You say I know he exists, please tell me why you know he exists?

Regarding the media, I am not convinced that most media are controlled by religious interests.

In the second paragraph I assume you are speaking on behalf of yourself and if that is the case then that is fine and I have no issue with your opinion.
Personally, I have read and experienced enough to say I know God exists but the evidence I am accepting as proof of God's existence would not be sufficient for you and I guess for many others, given your comments so far. I have no problem with that at all.

Regarding telling you why I know God exists, we are now starting to go round in circles because Julia effectively asked the same question to me yesterday and I posted my reply.

I'm starting to feel that some maybe feel that I am trying to shove my beliefs down their throats. Let me assure you I am not. I have consistently commented we should all decide individually whether we choose to believe in God or not based on whatever evidence or non-evidence is acceptable to each one of us.

 

[explod]

I have consistently commented we should all decide individually whether we choose to believe in God or not based on whatever evidence or non-evidence is acceptable to each one of us.

So you believe regardless of any evidence and by your statement would still believe when there is no evidence, ie ..."non-evidence"...

Do you teach your belief to others and your children?

 

[bulldoza]

So you believe regardless of any evidence and by your statement would still believe when there is no evidence, ie ..."non-evidence"...

What I said was:

"Personally, I have read and experienced enough to say I know God exists but the evidence I am accepting as proof of God's existence would not be sufficient for you and I guess for many others, given your comments so far. I have no problem with that at all."

Given I am not trying to change anyone's views, if you think my beliefs and the evidence I have to support my beliefs is a load of rubbish, then that is fine. You are entitled to your views just I and everyone else is entitled to ours.

Short of going into details of my personal life, which I won't in a public forum like this for obvious reasons, then I can't give you any more information regarding my personal experiences which contribute to my belief in God - and IMO that shouldn't matter to anyone else since I am not trying to change anyone's views.

You clearly do not believe in God or at best are unsure, from my interpretation of your comments and that is fine. You are entitled to your views and I am not trying to change it.

I'm going to watch the Olympics and so I'll try to pop in tomorrow.

Good night