Christians come on in

[msanch24]

Convince me to believe in a god.

What's your indisputable, scientific, hard evidence? I don't mean "because the bible says so". Or "I knew a guy who died and God made him breathe again". Give me a tangible, logical reason to accept a faith.

I await enlightenment.

[ISAtlanta300]

You were born.

/ thread.

[msanch24]

You were born.

/ thread.

hardly what i was looking for. lets refrain from stuff like this, please.

[ahabion]

Faith is a part of life. Nothing scientific about it. You have faith in all the things that you do will lead you to something.

Faith in school. Faith in love, Faith in friendship and relationships. Faith in money. Scientifically, you can live without all of these things but we have faith that these things will lead us to a better job, better social life, better community, better financial circumstances. It always doesn't work out but that's why they call it faith. You believe in what you're doing will lead you to something better and so you continue to pursue it.

You won't see it until it actually happens or plays out. You do so with the purpose and intent that it all culminates to something better when it's revealed. It's just like what the Oracle told Neo. "...balls to bones."

[msanch24]

Faith is a part of life. Nothing scientific about it. You have faith in all the things that you do will lead you to something.

Faith in school. Faith in love, Faith in friendship and relationships. Faith in money. Scientifically, you can live without all of these things but we have faith that these things will lead us to a better job, better social life, better community, better financial circumstances. It always doesn't work out but that's why they call it faith. You believe in what you're doing will lead you to something better and so you continue to pursue it.

You won't see it until it actually happens or plays out. You do so with the purpose and intent that it all culminates to something better when it's revealed. It's just like what the Oracle told Neo. "...balls to bones."

Thank you for a thought out response. I understand that faith is not a scientific (tangible as i called it in the OP) thing. But what starts someone believing? what jumpstarts faith? I (speaking just from my own POV and experience), have no reason at all to call faith a part of my life. im a logic based person. I see things for what they are. To me, faith is a romanticized version of the world we live in. My social life, my relationships, and my love are all parts of my soul. An internal thing that was obtained through evolution. Not an external thing like a god, or an internal thing caused by a god.

My word choices in this post my offend some of you. I apologize, that is not my intent at all.

[antj101]

Thank you for a thought out response. I understand that faith is not a scientific (tangible as i called it in the OP) thing. But what starts someone believing? what jumpstarts faith? I (speaking just from my own POV and experience), have no reason at all to call faith a part of my life. im a logic based person. I see things for what they are. To me, faith is a romanticized version of the world we live in. My social life, my relationships, and my love are all parts of my soul. An internal thing that was obtained through evolution. Not an external thing like a god, or an internal thing caused by a god.

My word choices in this post my offend some of you. I apologize, that is not my intent at all.

Before I begin... this is the definition of the word "faith" copy/pasted from dictionary.com

faith   
[feyth] Show IPA
–noun
1.
confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2.
belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.
belief in god or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.
belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.
a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.
the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.
the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.
Christian Theology . the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.

Everyone believes in something... even if it is as simple as believing the sun will rise in the morning. You do have faith that the sun will do it's "job" and rise... correct?

Now... your "soul"... can you see such a thing? A soul is far from a tangible object of any kind in my mind. You say that you've obtained your soul through "evolution"... does that mean that early human's did not have a soul?

^^^ just a base argument.... not meaning to offend... Just questioning you're idea's and beliefs to make you think...

[msanch24]

Before I begin... this is the definition of the word "faith" copy/pasted from dictionary.com

faith   
[feyth] Show IPA
–noun
1.
confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2.
belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.
belief in god or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.
belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.
a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.
the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.
the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.
Christian Theology . the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.

Everyone believes in something... even if it is as simple as believing the sun will rise in the morning. You do have faith that the sun will do it's "job" and rise... correct?

Now... your "soul"... can you see such a thing? A soul is far from a tangible object of any kind in my mind. You say that you've obtained your soul through "evolution"... does that mean that early human's did not have a soul?

^^^ just a base argument.... not meaning to offend... Just questioning you're idea's and beliefs to make you think...

Souls can not be touched with fingers or the like, but souls can be felt. You feel others' and you feel your own. that is tangible to me. Yes, faith is tangible to some, and i respect that, but i cannot feel it.

Early humans had souls yes, ever since human beings became "superiorly intelligent", we have had souls. A "soul" in a sense that we have feelings and emotion.

[antj101]

Souls can not be touched with fingers or the like, but souls can be felt. You feel others' and you feel your own. that is tangible to me. Yes, faith is tangible to some, and i respect that, but i cannot feel it.

Early humans had souls yes, ever since human beings became "superiorly intelligent", we have had souls. A "soul" in a sense that we have feelings and emotion.

It seems as though you are questioning faith more than Christianity.

I understand if you have a problem with faith. It is a hard "concept" to fully comprehend. Though a soul is quite as difficult. May I ask why you want a "tangible, logical reason to accept a faith? I just want to see where you're coming from.

[sport_122]

Thank you for a thought out response. I understand that faith is not a scientific (tangible as i called it in the OP) thing. But what starts someone believing? what jumpstarts faith? I (speaking just from my own POV and experience), have no reason at all to call faith a part of my life. im a logic based person. I see things for what they are. To me, faith is a romanticized version of the world we live in. My social life, my relationships, and my love are all parts of my soul. An internal thing that was obtained through evolution. Not an external thing like a god, or an internal thing caused by a god.

Logically how do you believe in your soul? Scientist will argue that there isn't one because it cannot be proven?
Just reading some of your posts I see some issues in your logic. I see where you actually mention things that you should not believe in if you are looking for hard evidence. How can we quantify the statement "your internal soul that was obtained through evolution"? This is where biology and spirituality collide at a brutal truth. The physical and the spiritual are real to all of us, whether we want to admit this or not, we ALL function off of our physical AND our spiritual being. Our physical being does not ache over loss until our spiritual being has given it the means by which we could experience those things. Love and hate and all that encompasses these things exist on the spiritual level and manifest themselves through our physical body. Very similar to how you would not doubt the existence of your soul, I would not doubt the existence of God.

For the Christian, God has demonstrated his existence and his power by showing that he has authority on both of those plans. Through Christ, we are given accounts of the physical by his healing, walking on water, resurrections, and the cross connection by seeing him command the spiritual while still being in his physical. Through the spirit we see the opposite relation and position of God. We see the spiritual commanding the physical. You asked what initiates belief? Belief NEVER starts with the physical. It can be influenced by the physical, but it doesn't start there. Belief is gained and it is a process over time. My belief in God and my faith in Christ as a redeemer rests on this process and those things that have proceeded my coming into faith in him.

I hope that makes sense. But I would apply it the same method by which you believe in your soul. I just also believe that these physical and the non begin with the non or even a third type of existence and culminate to what we are discovering or rediscovering as a creation of God.

[NJSC]

First thing I think that needs to be addressed is this idea of "indisputable, scientific, hard evidence." Can one give such evidence to anything? The answer is absolutely not. Everything can be disputed. Secondly the idea that you present that Christianity is the only faith through the title of the thread is a little odd. Why are you singling Christ followers out but then turn around and ask for a logical argument to believe in "a god" and "a faith?"
So before I just go and rattle off a standard argument from the library of apologia I'd like to know a little more about you. What do you believe, if anything? Do you think that good and evil in fact do exist? Are you in disbelief about any higher power or is it just the God presented to you through the modern day church? Have you read much on the subject or just shooting out questions? I also ask where is your hard evidence that God does not exist?

[msanch24]

First thing I think that needs to be addressed is this idea of "indisputable, scientific, hard evidence." Can one give such evidence to anything? The answer is absolutely not. Everything can be disputed. Secondly the idea that you present that Christianity is the only faith through the title of the thread is a little odd. Why are you singling Christ followers out but then turn around and ask for a logical argument to believe in "a god" and "a faith?"
So before I just go and rattle off a standard argument from the library of apologia I'd like to know a little more about you. What do you believe, if anything? Do you think that good and evil in fact do exist? Are you in disbelief about any higher power or is it just the God presented to you through the modern day church? Have you read much on the subject or just shooting out questions? I also ask where is your hard evidence that God does not exist?

Youre absolutely right. Allow me to explain:

I refer to the christian "God" as "a god" because by capitalizing his name and using his name as a proper noun, i am admitting to his existence, which i cannot do. Not to offend, just how i operate.

As for me personally, I have read the books, been to bible school, examined the bible word by word. I believe VERY little of it.
I have entertained believing, but i was lying to myself and everyone the whole time. At the end of the day when i lie awake in bed and think about it, It seems insane to me to believe in something, and idea presented to me by mortal men, with no hard evidence to speak of.
I do believe in good and evil (in people) but each are implemented by chemical reactions in the brain. I do not believe in an atmospheric battle between good and evil.

My hard evidence that a god does not exist is simply the lack of hard evidence that a god does exist.
Let me shoot out an example:

I tell you "Hey NJSC, listen up. There used to be huge purple elephants the size of the moon on Earth. There were three of them, and they lived for thousands of years, eating meteors. We sprouted out of their poop."

There is no evidence left from these elephants, and it sounds absurd, but to me, my origin story is just as believable. Again, not trying to offend.

thank you for taking an interest!

[NJSC]

Youre absolutely right. Allow me to explain:

I refer to the christian "God" as "a god" because by capitalizing his name and using his name as a proper noun, i am admitting to his existence, which i cannot do. Not to offend, just how i operate.

As for me personally, I have read the books, been to bible school, examined the bible word by word. I believe VERY little of it.
I have entertained believing, but i was lying to myself and everyone the whole time. At the end of the day when i lie awake in bed and think about it, It seems insane to me to believe in something, and idea presented to me by mortal men, with no hard evidence to speak of.
I do believe in good and evil (in people) but each are implemented by chemical reactions in the brain. I do not believe in an atmospheric battle between good and evil.

My hard evidence that a god does not exist is simply the lack of hard evidence that a god does exist.
Let me shoot out an example:

I tell you "Hey NJSC, listen up. There used to be huge purple elephants the size of the moon on Earth. There were three of them, and they lived for thousands of years, eating meteors. We sprouted out of their poop."

There is no evidence left from these elephants, and it sounds absurd, but to me, my origin story is just as believable. Again, not trying to offend.

thank you for taking an interest!

I take no offense in your stance and I applaud the maturity that you have been presenting in the conversation.
First thing to consider is you are willing to refute the idea of a supreme being based completely on you not seeing any evidence. But at the same time you ascribe to the belief in a soul which just appeared through evolution. Your support of this is us having feelings and emotion, but do not inferior animals also have this soul? Any dog lover will tell you that their dog has feelings. You shout at a dog, they are sad. You come home from a long day, and your dog obviously missed you and is excited that you are home. So based on your argument dogs then also have souls, but at what point during the evolutionary period did dogs receive that? You get the point. The evolutionary theory also is based on genetic mutations which are then able to make a specific individual stronger, faster, sexier, etc. So a "soul" would then have no evolutionary benefit and therefore based on it's own argument would not propel a species further along the evolutionary spectrum. So based on the evolutionary theory there would be no souls.

The idea that you do believe in good and evil in people but only by chemical reactions in the brain is in itself an oxymoron. The idea of good is that there is an outside standard which people hold themselves and others accountable for. If you simply attribute this to chemical reactions in the brain then one cannot judge another on what is good or what is evil. We are simply animals, again with no souls. That would then go to say if I wanted to come and hump your leg, punch your aunt Sally in the face, or (GASP IS HE ABOUT TO SAY IT?! YES HE IS!) steal your car that you cannot then say that it is wrong, because it is all just chemical reactions in my brain. Across nearly everyone in the world there is obviously evidence that this standard exists. Rape and cannibalism are two of the highest standards to social laws or objective standards on what is evil. This goes to show that there is obviously an external objective moral standard that exists, and I would argue that this standard is from God.
I'm going to touch on your argument for evidence again. Scenario: QD (I picked you because you are probably going to read this.) comes into my house and kills my wife no finger prints, no dna evidence, no weapon, no motive, nothing. Does that then mean that QD did not kill my wife? Of course not. Truth is truth whether evidence is there or not also whether you choose to believe it or not.
Another book to read is "More Than a Carpenter" by Josh McDowell Little bit of an easier read.

[msanch24]

I take no offense in your stance and I applaud the maturity that you have been presenting in the conversation.
First thing to consider is you are willing to refute the idea of a supreme being based completely on you not seeing any evidence. But at the same time you ascribe to the belief in a soul which just appeared through evolution. Your support of this is us having feelings and emotion, but do not inferior animals also have this soul? Any dog lover will tell you that their dog has feelings. You shout at a dog, they are sad. You come home from a long day, and your dog obviously missed you and is excited that you are home. So based on your argument dogs then also have souls, but at what point during the evolutionary period did dogs receive that? You get the point. The evolutionary theory also is based on genetic mutations which are then able to make a specific individual stronger, faster, sexier, etc. So a "soul" would then have no evolutionary benefit and therefore based on it's own argument would not propel a species further along the evolutionary spectrum. So based on the evolutionary theory there would be no souls.

The idea that you do believe in good and evil in people but only by chemical reactions in the brain is in itself an oxymoron. The idea of good is that there is an outside standard which people hold themselves and others accountable for. If you simply attribute this to chemical reactions in the brain then one cannot judge another on what is good or what is evil. We are simply animals, again with no souls. That would then go to say if I wanted to come and hump your leg, punch your aunt Sally in the face, or (GASP IS HE ABOUT TO SAY IT?! YES HE IS!) steal your car that you cannot then say that it is wrong, because it is all just chemical reactions in my brain. Across nearly everyone in the world there is obviously evidence that this standard exists. Rape and cannibalism are two of the highest standards to social laws or objective standards on what is evil. This goes to show that there is obviously an external objective moral standard that exists, and I would argue that this standard is from God.
I'm going to touch on your argument for evidence again. Scenario: QD (I picked you because you are probably going to read this.) comes into my house and kills my wife no finger prints, no dna evidence, no weapon, no motive, nothing. Does that then mean that QD did not kill my wife? Of course not. Truth is truth whether evidence is there or not also whether you choose to believe it or not.
Another book to read is "More Than a Carpenter" by Josh McDowell Little bit of an easier read.

For me, souls are in all living things. Its the ability to reason, as well as the presence of emotions that separates us from other animals. A more intelligent animal will survive. Through evolution, the species gets more and more intelligent until it obtains the ability to reason. Pair that with emotion and bam, you've got yourself a human being.

Im not too clear on the point you're making in the second part, but ill take a stab at responding. Chemical makeup of a persons decision making sector of the brain decides how well they abide by the "social moral code of good and evil". This doesnt change that the code exists or whether or not they break it or abide by it. They simply do or dont. Some do, some do not. This, of course, largely influenced by environmental factors and the quality of parenting. But some apples are just rotten from the beginning.

As for the unfortunate story about QD, no, we do not know who killed your wife, but we know that she was killed. Her body is the evidence that it happened. In the context of the existence of a god, there is no such evidence. QD addresses this in very good wording up a little bit. let me go find it... ok, this right here:

"He's been around for all this time and there is no definitive evidence of His being? Speaks volumes, man."

this is pretty much what Im trying to say.

My apologies if this is all a little incoherent. I ramble sometimes and my meaning mightve gotten buried somewhere.

[sport_122]

For me, souls are in all living things. Its the ability to reason, as well as the presence of emotions that separates us from other animals. A more intelligent animal will survive. Through evolution, the species gets more and more intelligent until it obtains the ability to reason. Pair that with emotion and bam, you've got yourself a human being.

Not sure if you are a Bio major or not, but I was and I don't think we got evolution right.

Depending on the numerous schools of thought, most believe evolution is either a guided act of selection to pass and carry on traits through DNA.

My issue is that evolution has some very large gaps in its foundations. I remember Richard Dawkins (Biology professor at Oxford and Neo Atheist) discussing evolution with John Lennox (Mathmetician and Theologian at Oxford)

He presented a case for a guided evolution which was not random (in his mind). To him evolution is a guided process on which we went from simple cells to complex cells. We went for billions of years to become what we are today.

Well the problem comes in with DNA. In the same sense, some professors credit DNA as the computing factor that drives evolution and development. Under this idea, the process of evolution is guided by the most complex code known to man. So evolutionists have seriously faulted in my mind when they have chosen to discuss the cellular model, but they leave out the method by which the majority of evolutionary biologists claim the process is guided. Scientists cannot explain DNA at its origins through evolutionary theories. This is the foundation that the entire argument must be supported on.

Also, if you haven't seen Ben Steins documentary "Expelled:No Intelligence Allowed" you should watch it. I experienced some of these things as and undergrad and my brother in law is experiencing them now. The interesting dynamic is how people who ask for scientific reasoning oftentimes don't realize that the scientific community is EXACTLY like the religious community. There is a status quo that effects a high majority of the fundamental beliefs, and to step outside of the status quo means you will be labeled and cast out...Try asking your professor to bring in a person who can really articulate alternative scientific oppositions to evolution and see what there response is.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Academic...8AC93998A58A61

I mention all of this (seems a bit off topic) but it is mainly to make a statement that the battle between faith in God and Science is a myth. I think it is poison that is being taught to us as if it is the end all truth and there are tons of people out there propagating this crap.

[quickdodge®]

Convince me to believe in a god.

What's your indisputable, scientific, hard evidence?

There isn't any indisputable evidence in the existence of a God. Faith is most certainly not evidence. Faith is a belief. Not a tangible truth.

Can one give such evidence to anything? The answer is absolutely not. Everything can be disputed.

You sure you don't want to edit this out of your post?

I also ask where is your hard evidence that God does not exist?

Much, much easier to disprove God than to prove. There are no pictures. There are no videos. There are no recordings. No nothing to show that there is a God. There's nothing to prove that there is a God, so that's more proof that He doesn't exist.

I'm not saying I don't believe. I'm just being logical and thinking things through. To me, it just makes sense. Later, QD.

[ahabion]

There isn't any indisputable evidence in the existence of a God. Faith is most certainly not evidence. Faith is a belief. Not a tangible truth.

Reminds me of a recent movie I saw "The Rite" with Anthony Hopkins (guy in Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal)...

I went to this movie with a friend of mine (both of us Christians) but this guy was one of the elders of our church on a very special time. A week prior to us seeing the movie, we were talking about his experiences as an elder and the one thing he says that he cannot shake off was (to him) the true confirmation that this 'belief thing' is really real. I asked him what confirmed it for him and he stated that it was when he was asked to be part of an exorcism for one of the girls at our church that got possessed. He stated that it was entirely surreal or 'unbelievable' witnessing it. I asked him for more details because I enjoy these kinds of things... the Exorcists movies, Exorcism of Emily Rose... but I asked him if the things we see in movies is true. He had a resounding answer of Yes. He said that they had 5 grown men trying to hold her down (she's around 130 lbs) and the men probably from 160 - 250 lbs and yet they couldn't hold her down... he said very literally she was pushing (using her arms) them a good distance off while they attempted to hold her down. The voice changing completely and speaking in a totally different language. Now mind you, we're Asian... so we have our native tongue, English, and given who I know were at the exorcism, French, Laos, Thai, and Cambodian were all representative languages there. The girl was born in the States, knows our native language and English fluently and may know one of the common school languages (French, Spanish, etc...) but what he told me was that it was a completely different language altogether which scared the crap out of him. It wasn't until our Pastor started into the exorcism using God's name did the fighting-back subside.

I then asked him what happened next... he stated that the Pastor started to demand the names of the demons that possessed her... she was replying in English and no one of the older elders knew to write English besides my friend... so he had to write out all the names. He stated that the first night, he had over 50 names and it gradually became less and less each night (4 nights total). By that time the Pastor was completely exhausted, they asked for help from one of the sister branches (same denomination and ethnic language) to send their pastor to help with the 'boss' demon. Now that's the story he told me a week prior to seeing the movie.

Now during the movie, what he told me the week before was all confirmed (now, i know it's just a movie... so it's not real real) but it was a based on a true story (real life experience).

Long story short, all I'm saying is that everything he told me he experienced a week previously was played out almost to the T in this movie... very coincidentally. Take it however you want... but this stuff is real for me.

Good movie BTW for anyone who likes those demonic possession movies. PG13 so don't expect a lot of blood, violence, sex, or gore. I think they did a good job upon the basis of the movie than 'Hollywood-ing' it up.

[msanch24]

Reminds me of a recent movie I saw "The Rite" with Anthony Hopkins (guy in Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal)...

I went to this movie with a friend of mine (both of us Christians) but this guy was one of the elders of our church on a very special time. A week prior to us seeing the movie, we were talking about his experiences as an elder and the one thing he says that he cannot shake off was (to him) the true confirmation that this 'belief thing' is really real. I asked him what confirmed it for him and he stated that it was when he was asked to be part of an exorcism for one of the girls at our church that got possessed. He stated that it was entirely surreal or 'unbelievable' witnessing it. I asked him for more details because I enjoy these kinds of things... the Exorcists movies, Exorcism of Emily Rose... but I asked him if the things we see in movies is true. He had a resounding answer of Yes. He said that they had 5 grown men trying to hold her down (she's around 130 lbs) and the men probably from 160 - 250 lbs and yet they couldn't hold her down... he said very literally she was pushing (using her arms) them a good distance off while they attempted to hold her down. The voice changing completely and speaking in a totally different language. Now mind you, we're Asian... so we have our native tongue, English, and given who I know were at the exorcism, French, Laos, Thai, and Cambodian were all representative languages there. The girl was born in the States, knows our native language and English fluently and may know one of the common school languages (French, Spanish, etc...) but what he told me was that it was a completely different language altogether which scared the crap out of him. It wasn't until our Pastor started into the exorcism using God's name did the fighting-back subside.

I then asked him what happened next... he stated that the Pastor started to demand the names of the demons that possessed her... she was replying in English and no one of the older elders knew to write English besides my friend... so he had to write out all the names. He stated that the first night, he had over 50 names and it gradually became less and less each night (4 nights total). By that time the Pastor was completely exhausted, they asked for help from one of the sister branches (same denomination and ethnic language) to send their pastor to help with the 'boss' demon. Now that's the story he told me a week prior to seeing the movie.

Now during the movie, what he told me the week before was all confirmed (now, i know it's just a movie... so it's not real real) but it was a based on a true story (real life experience).

Long story short, all I'm saying is that everything he told me he experienced a week previously was played out almost to the T in this movie... very coincidentally. Take it however you want... but this stuff is real for me.

Good movie BTW for anyone who likes those demonic possession movies. PG13 so don't expect a lot of blood, violence, sex, or gore. I think they did a good job upon the basis of the movie than 'Hollywood-ing' it up.

aside from stories and "based on a true story" films, theyre no evidence for these happenings either. Not saying your friend isnt being truthful, but i just dont believe that it happened like that. And if it did, it wasnt caused by demons. I just cant believe that. my mind wont allow it. It seems way too...absurd.

[ahabion]

aside from stories and "based on a true story" films, theyre no evidence for these happenings either. Not saying your friend isnt being truthful, but i just dont believe that it happened like that. And if it did, it wasnt caused by demons. I just cant believe that. my mind wont allow it. It seems way too...absurd.

That's what the character in the movie believed too... he explained it away using science. That the possessed were really schizo and that the speaking of English (she was native Italian) and other languages were due to the person's age and demographic. If there is one thing that I've learned in corporate america, is that you can explain anything away, even hard facts and numbers.

I either case, convincing anyone to do or be something else when that person is already resolved to do the other is pretty fruitless. Resolved being the keyword there.

[Nerdsrock22]

I would consider reading Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis if you are actually interested in hearing some compelling and logical reasons for the belief of God. If you are determined to find concrete physical proof for faith, then I'm afraid you are barking up the wrong tree. Christianity, at least, starts with a spiritual understanding of God, and then (hopefully) manifests itself physically through the actions of it's followers.

[msanch24]

I would consider reading Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis if you are actually interested in hearing some compelling and logical reasons for the belief of God. If you are determined to find concrete physical proof for faith, then I'm afraid you are barking up the wrong tree. Christianity, at least, starts with a spiritual understanding of God, and then (hopefully) manifests itself physically through the actions of it's followers.

I'll definitely check it out! thank you.

I understand that christianity itself cannot exist in the absence of faith, but that is exactly where im at, so this will be an interesting discussion. I ask with an open mind.

[antj101]

I would consider reading Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis if you are actually interested in hearing some compelling and logical reasons for the belief of God. If you are determined to find concrete physical proof for faith, then I'm afraid you are barking up the wrong tree. Christianity, at least, starts with a spiritual understanding of God, and then (hopefully) manifests itself physically through the actions of it's followers.

This...

[msanch24]

This...

which part? the book or the philosophy on faith?

[antj101]

which part? the book or the philosophy on faith?

The book... as well as his idea of faith

[msanch24]

The book... as well as his idea of faith

ill check it out! thanks

[chaseamundo]

Subscribed

[msanch24]

Subscribed

thanks! what does a fellow cd have to say on the matter?

[NJSC]

I knew you would be reading
I don't want to edit that out of my post. Everything can be disputed. I'm not speaking to the logic or intelligence of the arguments which dispute everything. Case in point the philosophical postmodern movement that states there is no ultimate truth only what one believes to be true. Solipsism also stands on the premise that the physical world does not exist other than a projection of the of the mind. So you are the ruler of said reality and choose what exists and what does not. So that is what my statement that everything can be disputed speaks to.
I also don't think that it is easier to prove or disprove the existence of God. To prove something is to show the absolute validity or correctness of something. Whether that stance is in favor of the existence of God or not it has not happened. I think that the only proof is upon death. If you end up before the creator then the truth is there. Only probability can be discussed.

[quickdodge®]

I knew you would be reading
I don't want to edit that out of my post. Everything can be disputed.

I have a 1979 Honda Civic. I can prove that. It is non-disputable. I'm married. I have children. My favorite color is ........... These are all truths that can be proven without a doubt. Not everything can be disputed.

To prove something is to show the absolute validity or correctness of something.

Which you absolutely can NOT do when it comes to the existence of God. Which makes it easier to believe that He does NOT exist. He's been around for all this time and there is no definitive evidence of His being? Speaks volumes, man.

If you end up before the creator then the truth is there. Only probability can be discussed.

IF there is a creator. Later, QD.

[NJSC]

I have a 1979 Honda Civic. I can prove that. It is non-disputable. I'm married. I have children. My favorite color is ........... These are all truths that can be proven without a doubt. Not everything can be disputed.

But if I choose to dispute that I can. I can merely choose to believe that everything is merely a figment of my imagination. Then you don't exist. Your wife doesn't exist. You car doesn't exist, and neither do colors. Not saying that I ascribe to this mentality, but some do.

Which you absolutely can NOT do when it comes to the existence of God. Which makes it easier to believe that He does NOT exist. He's been around for all this time and there is no definitive evidence of His being? Speaks volumes, man.

Which you also absolutely can not do when it comes to the non-existence of God.

IF there is a creator. Later, QD.

We'll find out.

[quickdodge®]

But if I choose to dispute that I can. I can merely choose to believe that everything is merely a figment of my imagination. Then you don't exist. Your wife doesn't exist. You car doesn't exist, and neither do colors. Not saying that I ascribe to this mentality, but some do.

You're right. You can dispute. But when it's placed right in front of you, the dispute is instantly null and void.

Which you also absolutely can not do when it comes to the non-existence of God.

In a sense, you're right here as well. Again, though, the lack of evidence to prove God's existence becomes the proof of (a probable) non-existence. I don't have to prove that He doesn't exist because there is no evidence to disprove it.

We'll find out.

That we shall. Like I said before, I'm not a total non-believer. I'm one who just has lots of questions that will literally NEVER be answered by anyone on Earth. Later, QD.

[Echonova]

You're right. You can dispute. But when it's placed right in front of you, the dispute is instantly null and void.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IQlh...eature=related

[RL...]

Convince me to believe in a god.

What's your indisputable, scientific, hard evidence? I don't mean "because the bible says so". Or "I knew a guy who died and God made him breathe again". Give me a tangible, logical reason to accept a faith.

I await enlightenment.

No one can give you a tangible or logical reason to accept a faith because accepting a faith requires, well faith. And faith is the ability to believe in something in the absence of logic or tangible evidence which is why religions' validity can not be proved on paper, only in one's faith.

[msanch24]

No one can give you a tangible or logical reason to accept a faith because accepting a faith requires, well faith. And faith is the ability to believe in something in the absence of logic or tangible evidence which is why religions' validity can not be proved on paper, only in one's faith.

Yes, I suppose I'm starting to accept this. Unfortunately, I just don't have the faith. I can't believe in something I've never seen, felt, heard, etc.

[ahabion]

Yes, I suppose I'm starting to accept this. Unfortunately, I just don't have the faith. I can't believe in something I've never seen, felt, heard, etc.

That's why they call it faith.

That begs the question that even if you saw it, would you believe it?

Even in biblical terms (based on the Bible) this was true and yet there were those without faith. Where God was with the nation and yet man still refused to believe. So even if tangible evidence were there, would you believe what you saw to be true or would you also explain it away using some theoretical ideology?

I like to use Hollywood because they do such a great job portraying life. Even though they are works of fiction or whatever genre thereof, it still is a story of humanity and human behavior. The stories, ideology, thoughts and theories are all visualized for the audience in a way to allow them to understand. You should watch the kid's movie "Horton Hears a Who". Exactly what you speak of.

[STRteg]

Religion was created to control the masses and thats it, it doesn't matter how many details you get into bottom line without religion there would be no form or structure of productive lifestyle for us to follow

Point blank - Religion = CROWD CONTROL because honestly, would mankind have made it to y2k without it?

[msanch24]

Religion was created to control the masses and thats it, it doesn't matter how many details you get into bottom line without religion there would be no form or structure of productive lifestyle for us to follow

Point blank - Religion = CROWD CONTROL because honestly, would mankind have made it to y2k without it?

This has always been my understanding.

[Nerdsrock22]

Religion was created to control the masses and thats it, it doesn't matter how many details you get into bottom line without religion there would be no form or structure of productive lifestyle for us to follow

Point blank - Religion = CROWD CONTROL because honestly, would mankind have made it to y2k without it?

So what do you do with counter-cultural religion Karl Marx?

[geoff]

First off, it's very nice to see this section come back to life. It has been some time since I have seen any life in here. I hope all is well with everyone and that this year has started out prosperous and good for everyone. Now that that is aside; I will try to answer the original question as well as give a response to something a few posts above.

Faith- The Bible defines faith as thus; " Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Hebrews 11:1. There is no scientific proof to validate someone's faith. Science can not be used to explain that which transcends all that we sense and perceive. God is above our minds and thoughts, He is outside of our "box" because He goes beyond what any single one of us or mankind in general can experience in one life time. We understand things based on time, some of us get 75 years and others a few months. To explain a God who is not bound by time but created it and not bound by physical laws because He wrote them; would be like trying to explain to an infant the human anatomy or physics. It can not be done with science or theories because those are based on our own limited knowledge and understanding of the world around us. Faith goes beyond all understanding and reason, it requires effort and a truly open mind. I learned long ago that there is no way to prove God nor ones faith, simply because you can choose to either believe or dismiss evidences in nature and even in our own bodies. Faith starts because the Holy Spirit calls us. We all have a yerning to search out the unknown and the reason we are here. The Holy Spirit calls to a man's soul and gives him conviction for sins. When we stand in the presence of the Holy God we are humbled and only then will faith begin. You can not expect to search for God already expecting to find nothing. You are only battling yourself there and your own deep mind for what you have already decided. If you are truly interested to learn more about Truth and the truth behind faith and God, give me a call 678-832-3871 jonathan. I would love for you to come to my church, listen to what is preached and feel the Spirit of God. I have given the offer before for anyone to come and see what I am talking about and prove me wrong. Good luck with your search and I pray that God would speak to your heart.

Second- The whole religion as a crowd control or the bible as such, it makes absolutely no sense. " No one but God could have authored the Bible, for good beings would not falsely claim divine inspiration, and evil beings would not teach such high morality." New Life study guide.

If anyone is interested in searching for the Lord, seeking Truth, or just wants to talk about faith. I reach out to anyone, my invitation is for all and my number is the same.

[bu villain]

Second- The whole religion as a crowd control or the bible as such, it makes absolutely no sense. " No one but God could have authored the Bible, for good beings would not falsely claim divine inspiration, and evil beings would not teach such high morality." New Life study guide.

Makes no sense?! Is it really inconceivable that people might lie because they thought it would be an effective way to convince people to behave better?

[geoff]

It is inconcievable only if you have taken time to study the Bible. As I said before, good men would not have claimed divine inspiration and evil men would not have written to maintain such high moral standards. The Bible was written over many centuries and penned by many different authors yet it flows as if it was done by one person in one lifetime ( Jesus is the author and it was done in His own timeline). If it were a tool used for crowed control then it would have been full of corruption, as we have seen time and time again that power WILL corrupt any man. Also, Christianity is the fulfillment of the Jewish beliefs. The Jews are a very strict people that live by a code, they wrote the first half of the bible and in fact even the New Testament. The New testament was written by the apostles who were in fact Jews themselves. My point being this, if it were simply for crowd control then the Jews would have never written the New testament because they would have held onto tradition and their laws. If you want to look at men who try to use scare tacticts and control a population then look at communism. If religion and the Bible were created for such a thing then why would communist nations fight the belief in Christianity?