By Faith And Faith Alone - The Existence of God

[BornReady]

The main purpose of this post is to show that I agree that there is no actual proof that the God I believe in exists. The evidence given can only be attributed to God by faith.

Then it isn't evidence of God. Evidence supports a hypothesis when the hypothesis predicts the evidence. For example, it is the predictive power of Newton's Laws which cause scientists to accept them.

 

[Codrus]

Then it isn't evidence of Cod.

here i am...




now im here

...........................................................................look over here.





proof enough?...no?..the streets will flow with the blood of the non-believers...but deep down ..i lubs you all

 

[BornReady]

I believe in Cod! Thou great one have mercy on me.

 

[Codrus]

OH STOP GROVELING ....

 

[Diggin Deep]

I disagree with the OP as it still hasn't provided any proof but it's good to see someone religious argue their point kind of intelligently and without getting stupid and insulting. :thumbup

My point exactly...there is no proof


The arguments that I posted can be explained many different ways and attributed to many different things, not just God. It's up to the individual to determine if those arguments, life, the artwork of earth, personal experiences, etc. are substantial evidence for them to attribute it to science, chance, a creator, or God. At least two of those answers require faith. No matter how you look at those arguments or how you explain them, there is no proof one way or the other. You must have faith. To believe in a creator requires faith. To believe in a god requires faith. To believe in God requires faith. Is there conclusive proof that God exists - NO. No one can prove that the explanations of those arguments are absolute proof of a creator or God. Those arguments could either be evidence of something unknown, of a creator or of God.

I can't prove my belief to you. I can only tell you why I believe. What leads me to believe one thing, may lead someone else to believe something completely different. There's two sides to every story, there are things that can't be explained no matter how hard we try...we must faith.

The point I'm trying to make is that Christians can sometimes get caught up in the battle of trying to prove their beliefs, when ultimately there is no proof - only life experiences and evidence that supports their belief. However, those same life experiences, arguments, the beauty of the artwork on earth could have other explanations - most of them do. It's ok though...that's what makes us all so unique. I would never want someone to have faith in something or believe in something just because I said so or based on what I conclude to be substantial evidence. It's up to the individual to determine that for themself.

At the end of the day...all I can do is offer another side of the story to those who wish to listen.

 

[Diggin Deep]

I have not read the whole thread, but I have long said the only thing I can think of that would destroy my faith in God would be proof He existed. Faith is essential to Christianity (and all other faiths).

Mak...I read the last time you said that. I completely agree.

 

[Diggin Deep]

Then it isn't evidence of God. Evidence supports a hypothesis when the hypothesis predicts the evidence. For example, it is the predictive power of Newton's Laws which cause scientists to accept them.

I wrote this before...I don't know if this explains what I mean by evidence or not, but it's a shot...

I think there is sometimes confusion about the meaning of these terms: evidence, belief and so forth. What is the relationship between these terms? In short, evidence is anything that comes to your attention. It could be something that comes out of a laboratory experiment if you are a scientist, but it could also be just a personal experience. But the constitute is that the person experience is essentially what becomes the evidence for developing your beliefs. So you look at the evidence and then you build up some belief based on that evidence. But belief in itself is not faith. It is very clear from scripture that faith is when you actually act on your belief.

So this cycle continues with belief leading to faith and then once you have acted on that belief, you get some type of feed back as to whether that was reasonable or not reasonable actions to take. That now becomes part of your knowledge. So we can now somehow complete this cycle and realize that once you gain knowledge based upon acting upon that belief, you now have additional evidence that will support future actions, future tests.

 

[Minor Axis]

The existence of God cannot be proved or disproved. The Bible says that we must accept by faith the fact that God exists: “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him”

Replace "God" with any mythical creature of your choice and you may see the problem with statements like this. Just because these words were found in really old scripts how do you decide to assign validity to them?

(Hebrews 11:6). If God so desired, He could simply appear and prove to the whole world that He exists. But if He did that, there would be no need for faith. “Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed’” (John 20:29).

Why do ancient scholars believe that faith is an important aspect of understanding God? Is it because we are forced to use it to believe the premise? Anyone have an opinion why would God put such importance on faith instead of having a relatively honest and straightforward relationship with his children? Does it amuse him to keep us guessing?

Does faith build character and make you a better person?

 

[Diggin Deep]

Replace "God" with any mythical creature of your choice and you may see the problem with statements like this. Just because these words were found in really old scripts how do you decide to assign validity to them?

Why do ancient scholars believe that faith is an important aspect of understanding God? Is it because we are forced to use it to believe the premise? Anyone have an opinion why would God put such importance on faith instead of having a relatively honest and straightforward relationship with his children? Does it amuse him to keep us guessing?

Does faith build character and make you a better person?

You are correct...you could replace "God" with anything you want and it doesn't mean that whatever you fill in the blank with is true. I assign validity to "God", because I believe...not only believe, but I have faith in Him. What I have experienced in life, the beauty of things on earth and what I have learned over the years is why I assign validity to God. That's just me though.

I'm not sure if you have to have faith to understand God, but you do have to have faith in order to have a relationship with Him and follow Him. It's one thing to believe in a creator, but another to follow Him, that where faith becomes important and essential. I hate to use personal experiences because they don't add much to this type of discussion - so I won't, but I believe that I do have an honest and straightforward relationship with God...nor do I feel that I'm in the middle of a guessing game.

 

[alice in chains]

Proving God is stupid because if you did, there would be no reason to have faith. However, the case for God's 'existence' is strong in the truth factor, but low in the scientific field. Both sides are equal on their case.

The real question is whether we should worship God or not. Just because he's God we're supposed to worship him? Just because he created everything...? What credit does that automatically give him? Is it wrong to use our free wills and natural being to deny God? Why not right? It feels right and what feels right is natural.

 

[Panacea]

Proving God is stupid because if you did, there would be no reason to have faith.

I don't quite understand what you're implying by this...if there was proof of a god, it would be a bad thing because faith is better than fact? Is that it?

However, the case for God's 'existence' is strong in the truth factor

Can I ask you to elaborate on what this means?

 

[Joe the meek]

Just because he's God we're supposed to worship him? Just because he created everything...? What credit does that automatically give him?

As my father had told me on numerous occasions growing up, he (my dad) brought me into this world and he can take me out.

No one is promised tomorrow.

 

[sexysadie]

I disagree with the OP as it still hasn't provided any proof but it's good to see someone religious argue their point kind of intelligently and without getting stupid and insulting. :thumbup

I agree, now how about somebody non-religious doing the same...lmao

 

[sexysadie]

Sounds like you have more of a problem with alcohol than atheism, to be honest, lol. But I can kind of see your point. If someone dosen't hurt others with their religious beliefs or try to impose them on others, they are ok with me, the same as drinkers. :thumbup

I guess the same can be said for non-believers, I can endure them if they just keep their views to themselves..........

......the shoe fits differently when it's on the other foot doesn't it Peter?

 

[Panacea]

I agree, now how about somebody non-religious doing the same...lmao

Be the change you wish to see in the world

 

[sexysadie]

Be the change you wish to see in the world

I was just showing Peter the other side of the coin....it was nothing personal.

 

[The Doc]

I cant see your brain, but im sure it exists. As does God Almighty

 

[sexysadie]

I cant see your brain, but im sure it exists. As does God Almighty

Good one..lol:thumbup

 

[The Doc]

Good one..lol:thumbup

I never met George Washington either, but because hella people wrote about him i accept he was real. As with God, and the bible

 

[BornReady]

So this cycle continues with belief leading to faith and then once you have acted on that belief, you get some type of feed back as to whether that was reasonable or not reasonable actions to take. That now becomes part of your knowledge. So we can now somehow complete this cycle and realize that once you gain knowledge based upon acting upon that belief, you now have additional evidence that will support future actions, future tests.

What feedback? Personal feelings? If so, then the only evidence you are presenting is personal anecdotes that can't be verified. This may be enough for you to believe and that's fine. But it is unreasonable to expect anyone else to believe in your god based on this "evidence".