Why should I believe in the God?

[ComplexCity]

As I said, it can reveal things that would perfectly align with the theistic belief while being pretty improbable on the atheistic side, therefore proving to be a good evidence for God's existence.

Is archaeology not a science? Yet there is no evidence (yet) of one the most prominent events in the bible. You have to realize as well that there are things that happen on the Atheist side that seem to happen through science (such as adaption which is part of evolution). Again, not saying that it discredits God but I'm gonna need tou to show me (not tell me) examples of what I'm asking for or the claims being made

 

[Marin]

Is archaeology not a science? Yet there is no evidence (yet) of one the most prominent events in the bible. You have to realize as well that there are things that happen on the Atheist side that seem to happen through science (such as adaption which is part of evolution). Again, not saying that it discredits God but I'm gonna need tou to show me (not tell me) examples of what I'm asking for or the claims being made

Here's where you make a mistake. What matters here is not the historicity of a certain biblibical account (or the whole thing for that matter) but the full scope of evidence for the case of God in it's mere most basic form, which is where the point of Deism vs Theism comes into play. Let's suppose the Bible, in it's entirety is false, let's say all polytheistic/monotheistic religions ever invented are wrong, let's remove any notion of theism out of the picture, there is again nothing that make it so that atheism logically follows from all that.

This does absolutely nothing to discredit the notion of God in deistic terms and many atheists (ironically) admit this! So even if all the scriptures are wrong in every possible way, the case for a creator and a designer as seen through philosophy of science and the teleological arguments would go completely unscratched. There is absolutely nothing an atheist can do to harm this concept for he lacks any and all possible grounds to attack it! No longer can one go to the scriptures and moan about fallacies, nor can they object to the moral nature and necessity of God for the deistic God is indeed bulletproof.

This is why, if worse comes to worse, Deism would win over Theism. Atheistic views are unsalvagable. (Note that the OP talks not about theistic God in specific, he simply chooses to ignore the deistic one and assumes Theism is all there is.) This is what I meant by the first post so the topic of the historicity of a certain biblibical account is totally off-topic.

 

[Sheinen]

Why should I believe in God? You have nothing to lose ^^

 

[Dannie]

Why should I believe in God? You have nothing to lose ^^

Why does everyone keep saying this? Who cares if I have nothing to lose. What does that even mean anyway? There are a lot of things that I can do and not lose anything, so this is not a very good argument in this situation. What's the point in believing in that shit anyway? What do I get out of it? What does it do for me? Is believing in him just to appease his ego?

 

[SZiaee]

This is enough for those who really think :
Our solar system is 4.57 billion years old. Earth started accreting concurrently with the sun and our neighbouring planets 4.57 bln years ago. However the universe is 13.7 ± 0.2 bln years old. This places the age of Earth at one third the age of the universe (4.57 bln/13.7 bln = 1/3). Moslems say that this is what Allah says. The Quran says that in God's Throne time Earth is 2 days old while the Heavens, Earth and everything in between are 6 days old (2/6 = 1/3):

[Quran 7.54] And your Lord, Allah, who created the Heavens and the Earth in six days and then settled on the Throne...

Those six days are on the Throne; so the frame of reference for creation is the Throne, not Earth.

[Quran 41.9] Say: "Is it that you deny Him [Allah] who created the Earth in two days? And you claim others to be equal to Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds."

[Quran 50.38] And we have created the Heavens and Earth and EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN in six days and We were not touched by fatigue.

All those days are on the Throne; the frame of reference for creation is still the Throne. When God says that He created the Heavens, Earth and EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN (including you and me) in six days this means that He is referring to the period of existence. Earth has been in existence for 2 days (out of 6).

 

[Your Creepy Stalker]

Why should I believe in God? You have nothing to lose ^^

I'd rather be right in this life than wrong in the only one we get.

 

[Phact]

Not enough to suck those extra chromosomes from your DNA.

You were correct, I did misinterpret what I read.

 

[lndra]

I question things such as religion when it comes to the day we die. Each of us are shaped by our surroundings.

If I'm born into a family which is follows a faith of any religion, I would most likely follow that religion. Most religions tell us that their faith is the one that sends us to Heaven (guaranteed that you didn't sin much and the types of sins/while following the faith in detail more or less). So does God judge us based on something we can't control (the families we are born in?), or is this something else?

 

[Itachi The L Giver]

Google the definition of faith.

 

[Avani]

Should such a problem be solved by a theophany?

Then he would end up in a lab with humans testing him to what makes him one and if they can clone that being.

Thing is different people have different ideas about concept of God and what's " proof". Is he alien or part of our wold, does he exist outside of creation or within; if he is within, who created him, if he is outside then can he still be considered omnipresent....What's his relation with living being...Can you really describe "him" using the same criteria as you use for the people or the world you can see and know? There is no end to these arguments.

This does absolutely nothing to discredit the notion of God in deistic terms and many atheists (ironically) admit this! So even if all the scriptures are wrong in every possible way, the case for a creator and a designer as seen through philosophy of science and the teleological arguments would go completely unscratched. There is absolutely nothing an atheist can do to harm this concept for he lacks any and all possible grounds to attack it! No longer can one go to the scriptures and moan about fallacies, nor can they object to the moral nature and necessity of God for the deistic God is indeed bulletproof.

This is why, if worse comes to worse, Deism would win over Theism. Atheistic views are unsalvagable. (Note that the OP talks not about theistic God in specific, he simply chooses to ignore the deistic one and assumes Theism is all there is.) This is what I meant by the first post so the topic of the historicity of a certain biblibical account is totally off-topic.

Thing is deism does not insist that not believing in existence of God makes one "unsalvagable". That's a concept that's not even common to all the religions. Eastern schools like Buddhism don't rely on belief in the God.

 

[Darth AniCetuS]

There is no god.

 

[Michelle]

the fact that youre "educated" and still believe in a broken religion makes it even worse. you dont have to teach me about science bro. and its not about opinions here. thats what you dont get and thats exactely what makes you ignorant and uneducated. its not about opinions but about pure facts.


you dont get it do you? every single person contributes to this VIRUS that is religion by supporting them and believing their crap. they have done way waaay more harm than any good during the past few millenia. who am i to tell them its wrong? who are they to claim those invented things as fact? who are they to commit war and crimes for their cause? who are they to ****ing force adam and eve story in biology classes?

The thread is about believing in God not about religion.

These are two quotes from the Qur'an:

"Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and earth, and the alternation of the night and the day, and the [great] ships which sail through the sea with that which benefits people, and what Allah has sent down from the heavens of rain, giving life thereby to the earth after its lifelessness and dispersing therein every [kind of] moving creature, and [His] directing of the winds and the clouds controlled between the heaven and the earth are signs for a people who use reason[Chapter 2, Verse 164]."

"Indeed, within the heavens and earth are signs for the believers[45:3]."

You must be registered for see images

If we saw a building like this on an empty planet, people will instantly believe that someone must have been there in a certain time in history, because such a building requires an architect.

In these two verses it explains that the Earth is a sign for a believer. This is because it is impossible for such a complicated structure to just come into existense on its own. So the Earth was made by an architect that we worship.

Arian said that we were hardwired to worship God. This also proves Allah's existence because Allah says in the Qur'an:
"I created the jinn and humankind only that they might worship Me[51:56]."

I can find in the Bible something similar. But not this is the reason of my belief.

Well, some people would argue that believing something to be true without proof is idiocy.

I can live with it U_U

God exists because man exists.

Such twisted reason. Doesn't it contradict your next post?

Google the definition of faith.

This is helpful, but is so much to read.

OT- believing makes you stronger. You have an anchor and a support. Holly books shouldn't be taken ad litteram and religion as form of oppresion and manipulation is also a thing to think at and choose your way to believe.

 

[Natsu Shazneel]

The thread is about believing in God not about religion.

I can find in the Bible something similar. But not this is the reason of my belief.

I can live with it U_U

Such twisted reason. Doesn't it contradict your next post?

This is helpful, but is so much to read.

OT- believing makes you stronger. You have an anchor and a support. Holly books shouldn't be taken ad litteram and religion as form of oppresion and manipulation is also a thing to think at and choose your way to believe.

No cause this is not a manga it is reality.

 

[Deadlift]

Then he would end up in a lab with humans testing him to what makes him one and if they can clone that being.

Thing is different people have different ideas about concept of God and what's " proof". Is he alien or part of our wold, does he exist outside of creation or within; if he is within, who created him, if he is outside then can he still be considered omnipresent....What's his relation with living being...Can you really describe "him" using the same criteria as you use for the people or the world you can see and know? There is no end to these arguments.

I can agree that people can have different concepts of the idea of God, it's normal afterall.
Well, a believer can find a "proof" of the existence of God, for example, by observing the fine tuning of the universe, a non believer would simply remark that it's likely due to physical laws we still don't know. There is not a certainly right or wrong answer. If there was, thread like these wouldn't have been posted

Every objection you made assumes that the creator shares the same nature of the creation. I would have problems believing that.
If He doesn't share the same nature of the creation (transcendence)He isn't affected by space-time, meaning He's always existed without the need of a cause (who created God). In the same way, the "outside" you're referring to has not to be considered as a physical location, but as a condition of transcendence, leaving His omnipresence intact.

 

[HashiraMadara]

I can agree that people can have different concepts of the idea of God, it's normal afterall.
Well, a believer can find a "proof" of the existence of God, for example, by observing the fine tuning of the universe, a non believer would simply remark that it's likely due to physical laws we still don't know. There is not a certainly right or wrong answer. If there was, thread like these wouldn't have been posted
.

So basically whatever not known act is a will or doing of God in your case I presume? The reason science points at something as a Law, it is because at whatever point/state or time frame it follows a pattern instead of doing weird things. Hence the words "non contact forces" <== No one knows what's magnetism is or what causes it but everyone uses it because it follows patterns that can be exploited. If this was someone's will you think it would be so constant? Even in Planck scale if you know Quantum Mechanics you will know everything seems random there but you can strike a prediction using "probability". Meaning If God had an influence on it then his will can be predicted HENCE ALBERT EINSTEIN'S BOGGLED MIND: "God doesn't play dice".

Every objection you made assumes that the creator shares the same nature of the creation. I would have problems believing that.
If He doesn't share the same nature of the creation (transcendence)He isn't affected by space-time, meaning He's always existed without the need of a cause (who created God). In the same way, the "outside" you're referring to has not to be considered as a physical location, but as a condition of transcendence, leaving His omnipresence intact

Then how does an off grid being manipulates or influence the grid? <=== Millions of times I have been asking this question. At which notion does non physical, "Transcendent" being's consciousness be of existence?

Here's where you make a mistake. What matters here is not the historicity of a certain biblibical account (or the whole thing for that matter) but the full scope of evidence for the case of God in it's mere most basic form, which is where the point of Deism vs Theism comes into play. Let's suppose the Bible, in it's entirety is false, let's say all polytheistic/monotheistic religions ever invented are wrong, let's remove any notion of theism out of the picture, there is again nothing that make it so that atheism logically follows from all that.

This does absolutely nothing to discredit the notion of God in deistic terms and many atheists (ironically) admit this! So even if all the scriptures are wrong in every possible way, the case for a creator and a designer as seen through philosophy of science and the teleological arguments would go completely unscratched. There is absolutely nothing an atheist can do to harm this concept for he lacks any and all possible grounds to attack it! No longer can one go to the scriptures and moan about fallacies, nor can they object to the moral nature and necessity of God for the deistic God is indeed bulletproof.

This is why, if worse comes to worse, Deism would win over Theism. Atheistic views are unsalvagable. (Note that the OP talks not about theistic God in specific, he simply chooses to ignore the deistic one and assumes Theism is all there is.) This is what I meant by the first post so the topic of the historicity of a certain biblibical account is totally off-topic.

Excellent point you're making I must say.
My dear friend the excellent point you're making can easily be thrown at you. An atheist can tell you the same. "There is 100% no distinguishable manner at which 1 can prove or point an existence of deity". The problem with atheist is the hypocrisy of forming a philosophy/ideals/morality based on the very religions they call bull shit.

 

[Deadlift]

So basically whatever not known act is a will or doing of God in your case I presume? The reason science points at something as a Law, it is because at whatever point/state or time frame it follows a pattern instead of doing weird things. Hence the words "non contact forces" <== No one knows what's magnetism is or what causes it but everyone uses it because it follows patterns that can be exploited. If this was someone's will you think it would be so constant? Even in Planck scale if you know Quantum Mechanics you will know everything seems random there but you can strike a prediction using "probability". Meaning If God had an influence on it then his will can be predicted HENCE ALBERT EINSTEIN'S BOGGLED MIND: "God doesn't play dice".

Then how does an off grid being manipulates or influence the grid? <=== Millions of times I have been asking this question. At which notion does non physical, "Transcendent" being's consciousness be of existence?



Excellent point you're making I must say.
My dear friend the excellent point you're making can easily be thrown at you. An atheist can tell you the same. "There is 100% no distinguishable manner at which 1 can prove or point an existence of deity". The problem with atheist is the hypocrisy of forming a philosophy/ideals/morality based on the very religions they call bull shit.

No offense bro but sometimes I have the impression that you don't read the posts you quote

 

[Marin]

Thing is deism does not insist that not believing in existence of God makes one "unsalvagable". That's a concept that's not even common to all the religions. Eastern schools like Buddhism don't rely on belief in the God.

You're still here? Anyway, re-read my post, I didn't say Deism claims atheist can't be saved (as if such a diety would care about whether you believe in it or not).

Excellent point you're making I must say.
My dear friend the excellent point you're making can easily be thrown at you. An atheist can tell you the same. "There is 100% no distinguishable manner at which 1 can prove or point an existence of deity". The problem with atheist is the hypocrisy of forming a philosophy/ideals/morality based on the very religions they call bull shit.

Well, an atheist could say there is no evidence, but they'd be lying. There's a plethora of good arguments (raging from teleological to ontological in nature) and evidence that has yet to be convincingly explained away by the atheist camps with the light of modern science only making things better for the believer.

 

[Marin]

I question things such as religion when it comes to the day we die. Each of us are shaped by our surroundings.

If I'm born into a family which is follows a faith of any religion, I would most likely follow that religion. Most religions tell us that their faith is the one that sends us to Heaven (guaranteed that you didn't sin much and the types of sins/while following the faith in detail more or less). So does God judge us based on something we can't control (the families we are born in?), or is this something else?

Suppose we're talking about the Christian God then no, one won't be judged by things they can't control, their birth place being just one of those things. It is indeed probable that one would stick to the beliefs they've been raised in but it is also not unusual for one to abandon them in favor of something else (otherwise there'd be no irreligious people would there?).

Now, we could go through a wide range of theologies that deal with the state of those that don't belong to a certain religion, but instead I'll just say that I don't believe in a diety that judges one's lack of opportunity.

 

[HashiraMadara]

Well, an atheist could say there is no evidence, but they'd be lying. There's a plethora of good arguments (raging from teleological to ontological in nature) and evidence that has yet to be convincingly explained away by the atheist camps with the light of modern science only making things better for the believer.

I am so glad there are many. If you would lay me a few of them.
list me a few instances of proofs of deity's actual existence...

No offense bro but sometimes I have the impression that you don't read the posts you quote

Summary:
* First quote you're saying unknowns of the universe prove a higher being's existence "GOD" :|

* Second quote, you're justifying his inabilities to be disproven using mortal/earthly methods :sdo:

 

[Deadlift]

Summary:
* First quote you're saying unknowns of the universe prove a higher being's existence "GOD" :|

* Second quote, you're justifying his inabilities to be disproven using mortal/earthly methods :sd:

Exactly, it's not what I'm saying lol