Evidence for the existence of God

[senseinobaka]

The_vagabond7 said:
senseinobaka, you are clearly a Jehovah's Witness, a religion I am very familiar with (I've study a great many religions in depth). If you're not, then you should look into it, you believe exactly as they do.

Your prophecy in Isaiah I am very well aware of, and is completely nonsensical and proves nothing, and provides no comfort. The fact of the matter is even if he is GOING to make animals suddenly live peacefully for no apparent reason other than because it sounds peachy keen in paradise, even contradictory to his original design for nature and would throw his ecosystem completely out of whack, it doesn't change the fact of what he made.

Clearly he doesn't feel the same way I do, because he created it, and said "it is good". Now you believe that Jehovah is incapable of wickedness, any wickedness that exists is brought on by man, and by Satan. All of the wars, disease, famine, pain suffering, ect is not because of him, he did not create that. Rather Man created that by sinning six thousand years ago in the garden of eden. This world of pain, fear, disease, starvation, a constant struggle for survival is not of his design, but rather something he hates.

So what is of his design? If you want to know, all you have to do is look at the earth seven thousand years ago, a thousand years before he made man. What was it like? It was a world of fear, pain, disease, starvation, a constant struggle for survival for every living thing. After he made all of his beautiful creations he wiped out most of them by means of rapid climate change, having them hunt each other to extinction, diseases, famines, and sometimes by creating creatures that just weren't capable of surviving (a serious lack of wisdom). He was capable of creating life however he wanted, and created it so that it was a gruesome, painful, terrifying ordeal, where every day was a struggle just to live. He did something completely contradictory to his supposed nature, he created things that are supposedly unthinkably awful to him. He created what Witnesses attribute solely to man and Satan.

He is a bloodthirsty god. If you are a witness you believe in Armageddon, in which after the great tribulation when god puts it into the heart of man to have it's governments attempt to destroy all of organized religion, Jehovah will step in to defend his true servants (Specifically Jehovah's witnesses, and no other religion, because they worship false gods). Now this god of infinite love and wisdom's brilliant loving solution to creating a peaceful world, is what? To kill 99.9% of the earth's population (witness's are about 6-7 million, in an earth of 6-7 billion). That is the end of the conflict. Kill everyone that disagrees with him, or doesn't know him (I know you claim that the door to door work you do gives everyone a chance to know him, but honestly how is passing out magazines and offering studies to people giving them a real chance to know him, compared to say him saying "Hey everybody, I'm Jehovah. Who wants to know me?") in a massacre of men women and children. Then there is a ressurection of righteous and unrighteous that were lucky enough to die before god killed them. Perfectly loving, just, and sensical!

The fact of the matter is, as Mark Twain put it, the bible is the most damning biography ever written. The God of Love is a bloodthirsty god that killed millions, and supposedly in the future plans on killing billions more. He gave birth to pain, fear, disease, famine, war (as jane goodall showed, primates wage war just as humans do. we're just better at it), and afterwards looked at the carnage and said "it is good". I'm sorry but the god you believe in is a fairy tale. His world and book contradict his very nature.

I don't believe in destroying god, but seeing as how this is an open debate I don't feel to bad about showing the illogical reasoning behind it.

 You have an idea of what I beleive as a Jehovah's Witness, but I wouldnt describe you as being very familiar. I say this because you touch on some buzz words and ideas, but explain them incorrectly.

First of all is Armegeddon. The events leading up to Armageddon according to Revelation is not as you described it. Many of the events have already passed, but the next one according to Revelation to be completed is "god putting it in the heart of governments to destroy false religion." You claim this a bloodthirsty act on God's part, when infact it really isnt. Modern governments, governments installed in the last 100 years, have already been doing this. Both Russia and China are governments that have chosen atheism and purged religion (Russia has stepped back and allowed some practice of religion, but continues an atheist agenda). Many other governments have also outlawed religion. World wide there is a huge downturn in religous belief. It has been a process that is far from bloodthirsty. [[side note]the reason for religions destruction is for the same reason many hate organized religion. Religion is bloodguilty do to wars and execution, they misled with false teachings of god (such as hellfire as I mentioned earlier), and are notoriuos hypocrites. In revelation god describes religion as a harlot[/side note]] . Next you mention the great tribulation. Revelation doesnt say the great tribulation is an act of god, infact it says it is an act of man. The great tribulation is described as being a time with extreme suffering and death. Infact, this man made tribulation is so great that there would be no survivors at all unless god take action. This act of god is what Revelation calls Armageddon. Many beleive Aramgeddon is an apocalypse, when in fact it the thing that saves us from extinction. Armegeddon is not a massacre of men, women and children.

You also claim that I beleive as a witness I think only witnesses would survive Armageddon. Again, you are mistaken. Gods action at Armageddon will be with the purpose to save men, not kill men. I've said this before, all men receive the benefits of Christ's ransom. (I'll make this side not; If god selectively kills someone at armegeddon it would be a person who will directly receive second death, or eternal destruction. But this applies to a very, very, VERY small few. The bible only records a couple instances were a person was deserving of that: Adam, Eve, Judas, and the Cities of Sodom and Gomorah. Thats how many were excluded from a resurrection hope in 4000 years of bible history. Armageddon wouldn't be much different, there may be some...but not alot. It's a case where god decides that the individual is not deserving of the ransom.)

Also our Door to door ministry is not with the purpose of ensuring someone salvation at armegeddon. It's a bible education work being done that way people can come to truly know about God and His Kingdom. It also teaches what his kingdom will accomplish. This is a necessary action because mainstream christianity doesnt do it. You seem like smeone who is very well read and educated, and it wouldnt suprise me if you had a better understanding of waht the bible teaches than most born and raised christians. The spirit of our ministry is found at John 17:3.  

And then there's post Armageddon. You acknowledge a resurrection of the righteous and unrighteous. You are correct. This is the point in history in which all men have the opportunity to live a life free of sin and satan. You claim that only those who died before armageddon will recieve this benefit. You are both right and wrong. The billions before Armageddon will be raised and the billions who survive armageddon will recieve the benefits of ransom (living without the shackles of sin). 

 

I feel like I'm writing a novel here, so I'll breifely discuss your objection to the prophecy in Isaiah. The prophecy applies to gods kingdom after armegeddon. It doesnt say anything about what life was like in the animal kingdom before the sin in eden. In fact that's not mentioned anywhere in the bible. But science has, and it shows that animals existed in an ecosystem much like the one today. But you seem to believe that a predatory animal is some how evil. I have to disagree with the premise. God designed a system that is adaptable and changing. It's not static, if it was then all animals would go extinct. I think this animal kingdom argument is actually kind of silly, it's almost as if you are grasping at straws to pin wickedness on god. "Oh look that Lion ate that zebra, how evil is God?" It doesnt make sense to me on any spiritual or scientific level.