By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Prove that God exists

makingmusic476 on 05 September 2011
Umos-Cmos said:
o_O.Q said:
Umos-Cmos said:
pezus said:
Reason 1: The tide comes in the tide goes out...never a miscommunication.

Reason 2: The Bible

Reason 3: He is watching us and tempting us into feeling he doesn't exist but he actually wants us to resist that temptation and embrace Him.

God does not temp us.  Satan does.

lol so therefore when i see some hot lady going down the street and i have feelings of lust for her or whatever its not me but satan right?

God's DNA is a part of us.  We were created in his image, therefore we have passions and desires.  We are here to learn to master those passions and desires.  Satan is the one putting the dirty thoughts into your mind of all the bad things you want to do with said hot lady.

Are you supposing that a perfect, omniscient, and omnipotent God has passions and desires?

(An example of one of the many tenets of Christianity that completely befuddles me.)



Around the Network
DélioPT on 05 September 2011

I think he probably meant to say that God, being love, wants to spread that love. Call it a pure desire.
What we have, based on that, is also that. Our love also creates (kids) that`s why we are created in His image: As He created us out of love, to love, so do we create our of love, to love.
To be honest, God`s love is the meaning of all life. With big bang being an impulse of Love!



Tetsuya on 05 September 2011
makingmusic476 said:
Umos-Cmos said:
o_O.Q said:
Umos-Cmos said:
pezus said:
Reason 1: The tide comes in the tide goes out...never a miscommunication.

Reason 2: The Bible

Reason 3: He is watching us and tempting us into feeling he doesn't exist but he actually wants us to resist that temptation and embrace Him.

God does not temp us.  Satan does.

lol so therefore when i see some hot lady going down the street and i have feelings of lust for her or whatever its not me but satan right?

God's DNA is a part of us.  We were created in his image, therefore we have passions and desires.  We are here to learn to master those passions and desires.  Satan is the one putting the dirty thoughts into your mind of all the bad things you want to do with said hot lady.

Are you supposing that a perfect, omniscient, and omnipotent God has passions and desires?

(An example of one of the many tenets of Christianity that completely befuddles me.)





makingmusic476 on 05 September 2011
DélioPT said:
I think he probably meant to say that God, being love, wants to spread that love. Call it a pure desire.
What we have, based on that, is also that. Our love also creates (kids) that`s why we are created in His image: As He created us out of love, to love, so do we create our of love, to love.
To be honest, God`s love is the meaning of all life. With big bang being an impulse of Love!


God's actions throughout the Old Testament imply otherwise.

I'm just thankful I was born now and not around the time of Noah!  Would've hate to have been washed away in a deluge of water just for being at the wrong place at the wrong time.



DélioPT on 05 September 2011
makingmusic476 said:
DélioPT said:
I think he probably meant to say that God, being love, wants to spread that love. Call it a pure desire.
What we have, based on that, is also that. Our love also creates (kids) that`s why we are created in His image: As He created us out of love, to love, so do we create our of love, to love.
To be honest, God`s love is the meaning of all life. With big bang being an impulse of Love!


God's actions throughout the Old Testament imply otherwise.

I'm just thankful I was born now and not around the time of Noah!  Would've hate to have been washed away in a deluge of water just for being at the wrong place at the wrong time.


When Jesus was asked about why Moses allowed divorce, Jesus said this: "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning."
Could a person at that time, who didn`t have enough of a heart to "understand" something as this, have a heart for something bigger?
Even if God punishes, why should that be a result of Him not loving us?
If God didn`t love why would Jesus open the path to God for us to save ourselves?



Around the Network
makingmusic476 on 05 September 2011
DélioPT said:
makingmusic476 said:
DélioPT said:
I think he probably meant to say that God, being love, wants to spread that love. Call it a pure desire.
What we have, based on that, is also that. Our love also creates (kids) that`s why we are created in His image: As He created us out of love, to love, so do we create our of love, to love.
To be honest, God`s love is the meaning of all life. With big bang being an impulse of Love!


God's actions throughout the Old Testament imply otherwise.

I'm just thankful I was born now and not around the time of Noah!  Would've hate to have been washed away in a deluge of water just for being at the wrong place at the wrong time.


When Jesus was asked about why Moses allowed divorce, Jesus said this: "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning."
1. Could a person at that time, who didn`t have enough of a heart to "understand" something as this, have a heart for something bigger?
Even if God punishes, why should that be a result of Him not loving us?
2. If God didn`t love why would Jesus open the path to God for us to save ourselves?

1. That obviously depends on the person.  Let's say a child was born mere hours before the flood.  Did that child deserve to die?  It's not unlikely that many newborns were caught in the flood, assuming it did indeed happen, and I doubt their hearts had been "hardened" at such a young age.

2. And thus you bring up another point.  The God presented in the Old Testament is entirely incongruous with the God of the New Testament.  A God that willfully destroys countless people for the actions of some (or hell, destroys anybody at all) does not fit with a God that tells us to be absolutely forgiving and merciful in all situations.   

New Testament = God sent Jesus to save us.  Forgive them, for they know not what they do.
Old Testament = God sent meteors and floods to wipe us out.  Destroy them, for they know not what they do?

It makes no sense.



Runa216 on 05 September 2011
GameOver22 said:
Runa216 said:
Raido said:
nightsurge said:
  1. If you wish to believe in the Big Bang Theory or other creation theories that don't rely on a devine being, explain to me where the very first object in the universe came from. They say the Big Bang started from a very small amount of elements that began moving extremely rapidly in a dense state. Well, what about where those elements came from? They had to come from somewhere, correct? Just a little philosophical conundrum.

I don't know how the universe came into being, nobody knows. I also don't have to believe anything, I just see it as something that we will never know (at least not in my life-time).

There is an infinite amount of possibilities, it's not only "Big Bang" or "God", but theories like the Big Bang are way more likely than the outdated and evidence-less theory of God.


I'm still waiting for someone to explain why the universe needs a creator, but God does not.  I mean, if we came from something, and it has to be some divine being that's pulling the strings, who's to say that God, the almighty puppetmaster himself doesn't need to have been created.  If the universe can't be infinite, why can god?  

The argument comes from the claim that there cannot be an infinite chain of causes, hence, there needs to be a necessary first cause that terminates the causal chain. As to why God does not need a creator in the same way as the universe, that is the whole idea of a necessary being. It is not contingent and does not rely on something else for its existence. It is meant to supply the ultimate foundation upon which everything else is based. This is why you see many religious debates center around the concept of a necessary being and whether it is a meaningful term. In many cases, the gulf between atheists and theists comes down to whether they find a necessary being to be a reasonable proposition.

But why does it have to be a divine creator, why can't t he necessary first be the big bang?  



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Runa216 on 05 September 2011
makingmusic476 said:
We live in a universe in which everything has to come from something. Matter cannot come from nothing. The universe had to begin at some point, and whatever force put this machine in motion is obviously not bound by the physical laws of our universe. It wouldn't be inappropriate to label this force/deity/whatever God, I think.

Now, the nature of said God still remains a mystery to me. I identified myself as Roman Catholic up until a month or so ago, but inconsistencies in the Bible and the nature of God Catholicism (and to a degree Christianity in general) present don't make much sense to me.


So where did god get the materials? 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

makingmusic476 on 05 September 2011
Runa216 said:
makingmusic476 said:
We live in a universe in which everything has to come from something. Matter cannot come from nothing. The universe had to begin at some point, and whatever force put this machine in motion is obviously not bound by the physical laws of our universe. It wouldn't be inappropriate to label this force/deity/whatever God, I think.

Now, the nature of said God still remains a mystery to me. I identified myself as Roman Catholic up until a month or so ago, but inconsistencies in the Bible and the nature of God Catholicism (and to a degree Christianity in general) present don't make much sense to me.


So where did god get the materials? 


The whole "he's not bound by our physical laws" is basically a catch all to say he can do anything.  Where'd he get the materials?  He made 'em out of thin air!

The only other possibility is that some entity bound by our physical laws somehow triggered the big bang, which doesn't seem possible, given the same question you just asked.  Where'd the materials come from?  What was the trigger?



GameOver22 on 05 September 2011
Runa216 said:
GameOver22 said:
Runa216 said:
Raido said:
nightsurge said:
  1. If you wish to believe in the Big Bang Theory or other creation theories that don't rely on a devine being, explain to me where the very first object in the universe came from. They say the Big Bang started from a very small amount of elements that began moving extremely rapidly in a dense state. Well, what about where those elements came from? They had to come from somewhere, correct? Just a little philosophical conundrum.

I don't know how the universe came into being, nobody knows. I also don't have to believe anything, I just see it as something that we will never know (at least not in my life-time).

There is an infinite amount of possibilities, it's not only "Big Bang" or "God", but theories like the Big Bang are way more likely than the outdated and evidence-less theory of God.


I'm still waiting for someone to explain why the universe needs a creator, but God does not.  I mean, if we came from something, and it has to be some divine being that's pulling the strings, who's to say that God, the almighty puppetmaster himself doesn't need to have been created.  If the universe can't be infinite, why can god?  

The argument comes from the claim that there cannot be an infinite chain of causes, hence, there needs to be a necessary first cause that terminates the causal chain. As to why God does not need a creator in the same way as the universe, that is the whole idea of a necessary being. It is not contingent and does not rely on something else for its existence. It is meant to supply the ultimate foundation upon which everything else is based. This is why you see many religious debates center around the concept of a necessary being and whether it is a meaningful term. In many cases, the gulf between atheists and theists comes down to whether they find a necessary being to be a reasonable proposition.

But why does it have to be a divine creator, why can't t he necessary first be the big bang?  

Because the big bang still depends on other things, namely matter. In order for the big bang to occur, there needs to be something rather than nothing. That something still needs a cause because all physical things are contingent things, and all contingent things depend on something else for their existence. That would be the argument anyway.