1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are you certain that God exists?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Cynic, Aug 2, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. matey

    matey Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2005
    Messages:
    76
    Ratings:
    +9
    I would argue that Columbus did discover America. He discovered America, as we call it now, in the eyes of Europe. America was not known to them and he sailed his ships across the Atlantic (in 1492, Columbus sailed the Ocean blue) and landed in the Bahamas.

    And there were already people here, as everybody should know. There were several distinct cultures throughout the America's: Incans, Mayans, Aztecs, Eskimos, and the many Plains Indians.
     
  2. Fascist Christ

    Fascist Christ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +39
    In a european perspective, that may work. Rather than "discover" I would say that he was the first Spainiard in recorded history to cross the Atlantic from Europe to the Americas. I cannot give credit of discovery to someone who thought he was in India, and their ignorance of the possibility of life on other lands. And withpeople already there, the possibility of a land-bridge from Alaska to Russia, and Viking artifacts found in the Americas, it is hard for me to say who was really "first" to "discover" the land. Columbus gets too much credit.
     
  3. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,672
    Ratings:
    +2,659
    http://muweb.millersville.edu/~columbus/papers/butch-1.html
    Jeffrey G. Butch
    History 392.01
    Dr. Tirado
    October 25, 1996


    Amerigo Vespucci



    Who was Amerigo Vespucci? This is a question I asked myself as I was researching the man credited with the discovery of the new world. Much information has been written about Christopher Columbus and very little about Amerigo Vespucci. To understand who Amerigo Vespucci was is to look at his life and times in that time period. This paper is an attempt to look at his history and try to get a better understanding of his life in the “Age of Discovery”. To have a understanding of Vespucci is to remember that to the day of his death, Columbus persisted in claiming he was in parts of Asia. This is part of the old world mentality and shows that Columbus never fully comprehended the achievements of his voyages. Two continents are named after Amerigo Vespucci. A great achievement for a man who many feel is a charlatan of geography. Did he discover America or was this honor bestowed on the wrong man?

    “In the middle ages, Europe knew less about the earth than did some of the ancients, for the commercial decline of Rome brought about the contraction of geographical knowledge.” [Pohl 6]. During this time period, men began to disregard authority and learned to rely directly on their own investigations. This is the seed that brought about men like Columbus and Vespucci. The period of the Renaissance is the fertile ground that brought about changes in the world of inquiry and scientific achievement in Europe. “This new spirit of inquiry received its chief impetus from the invention of the printing press whose importance outweighed even the greatest political event of the time.”[Pohl 9]. Printing led to the overthrow of authority and allowed the men of the period to come into immediate contact with each other and stimulated intellectual dialogue. It is by no accident that Florence produced a man like Amerigo Vespucci. The cultural environment of Florence and the availability of printed books with many opportunities led Amerigo Vespucci to the sea and to complete the voyages Columbus failed to complete in the discovery of the mainland now know as the America’s. :)
     
  4. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,672
    Ratings:
    +2,659
    Columbus was a Japhethite given credit for discovering land inhabited by Shemites.
     
  5. matey

    matey Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2005
    Messages:
    76
    Ratings:
    +9
    I know that Columbus did not know he discovered a "new" land. I know he set out to find a new route to the "riches of the East". I also know that Amerigo Vespucci is the namesake for America, given by a German geographer.

    But that makes absolutely no difference as to what Columbus discovered. He discovered the "lands of the Western Hemisphere", regardless of whether he knew it or not. He was the first to sail across the Atlantic. I doesn't matter if Amerigo was smarter or more "Rennaissance" than Columbus. Columbus was the First to go. If it was a race, Columbus won. This doesn't minimalize the contributions Amerigo gave to us all, it's just that he wasn't the first to cross to discover the new land.

    And all this affirms my certainty in the existence of God. How? I see how history gets distorted and how everybody has a different perception on what happened. And how new evidence comes forth all the time as to the peopling of the "Americas". The "peopling of the Americas" being completely a different page in History than the discovery of the lands of the Western Hemisphere by Christopher Columbus on October 12, 1492.

    So if everybody has a different perception, mine is the only perception that counts in my belief in God. There lies my certainty that God exists. Evidence is not needed in my belief in God. If I were to go about trying to come up with evidence for someone else that God exists, I would likely come up empty-handed, even though I believe that everything in this world is God (He created it so it
    all has to be Him, I think).

    I believe that God is not about evidence. He is about a way of thinking, i.e. believing. Belief, as I'm sure it has been already said on this thread, doesn't require evidence or that you be able to prove it. Evidence and proof is the domain of science. Science involves, I think, a completely different faculty of the brain. If I try to prove God by proof and evidence, I will come up empty-handed. But I will still give God credit for it.
     
  6. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,672
    Ratings:
    +2,659
    Good points, Matey. Keep in mind:
    1. God created the Earth and...
    2. ...turned it over to Adam and Eve, who...
    3. ...was tricked out of it by Satan, who...
    4. ...offered it to Jesus, Who...
    5. ...declined it, Who...
    6. ...is coming back for it, Who...
    7. ...is going to rebuild it, and...
    8. ...give it back to us.
     
  7. Fascist Christ

    Fascist Christ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +39
    I need to know. How do you get from "god exists" to something as mythological as this:

    Seriously now, can you arrive at such a conclusion without storybooks? How else can we explain how religion becomes an epic soap opera?

    The premise that god exists brings forth no such stories. In fact, the premise denies it. There is no practical purpose for god to have created a devil, or a paradise, or a special apple tree, or to have a son, or to have that son murdered, or to raise the dead, or promote racial favoritism... all these things are foolish fabrications that insult our creator's benign and universal nature.
     
  8. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,672
    Ratings:
    +2,659
    Ignoring your assessment about 'fabrications and fairy tales', here's your answer:
    1. God created the Earth - (Genesis 1:1)
    2. Turned it over to Adam and Eve - (Genesis 1:28-30)
    3. Who were tricked out of it by Satan - (Genesis 3)
    4. Who offered it to Jesus - (Matthew 4:8-9)
    5. Who declined it - (Matthew 4:10)
    6. Who is coming back for it - (Acts 1:11)
    7. Who is going to rebuild it - (Revelation 21:1)
    8. And give it back to us - (Revelation 21)
     
  9. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,672
    Ratings:
    +2,659
    He didn't

    Cute --- any Bible scholar will see through that in a heartbeat.

    Dream on.
     
  10. Fascist Christ

    Fascist Christ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +39
    Thank you for listing the passages of the storybooks and the verses of the poetry to back up my statement.
     
  11. Fascist Christ

    Fascist Christ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +39
    Did you have something to add to the conversation?
     
  12. Radar

    Radar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +30
    Are you saying that god did not create the devil? Then that would explain how he has no power over Satan. How did the Devil come about? God supposedly created the heavens and the earth and all there inhabitants. Is the Devil not a fallen angel? Were angels created by god? Was the serpent in the garden the devil? If so why couldn't god keep him out? And if the devil is a fallen angel then why didn't god just destroy him? That is the god of the Old Testament who did not send things to hell but just destroyed them. It seems to me that if this fairy tell is true then Satan (the devil) would be god's equal and this could be one of the other gods that is spoke of in the 10 commandments. Because God is a jealous god. This would also make hell a creation of god, sort of god's dungeon with the sentence of eternity no matter how big or little your sin was with no chance of parole. Seems a bit much to me.
     
  13. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,672
    Ratings:
    +2,659
    How 'bout you pare this down to one question, and depending on how you accept the answer, we go from there, okay? But if you think the Bible is a fairy tale, please say so clearly so I know whether to ignore you or not. I don't wish defend fairy tales.
     
  14. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,672
    Ratings:
    +2,659
    Correction: I don't wish to defend fairy tales.
     
  15. Radar

    Radar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +30
    So in other words you don't have answers for my questions. I believe there are only 7 questions.
    1.Are you saying that god did not create the devil? If not then.
    2.How did the Devil come about?
    3.Is the Devil not a fallen angel?
    4.Were angels created by god?
    5.Was the serpent in the garden the devil?
    6.If so why couldn't god keep him out?
    7.And if the devil is a fallen angel then why didn't god just destroy him?

    Start any where you like.
     
  16. Ahmadi

    Ahmadi Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +3
    That's a very silly statement. If reason and the 'entire' creation had been enough to learn from and know that God exists without even a shadow of doubt, then everybody in the world (or at least the entire Scientific community) would have a firm belief in the existence of God. Signs and miracles make certainty possible. Otherwise, very, very few people would have accepted prophets. Many accepted the existence of God because of the miracles and signs they saw.

    Based on the problems with the signs that he must have discussed, did he provide any standard, or criteria for a sign to be acceptable?

    You see, my understanding is that a sign or a miracle doesn't have to be supernatural or something that could not happen. A sign is a natural occurance which can be explained by Science. However, the time that a specific natural occurance happens and the predicted results that actually occur are miraculous.
     
  17. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    40,107
    Ratings:
    +14,169
    Religion:
    Judaism
    ... a bit like using entrails to foretell the future. Every delusion is replete with 'signs'.
     
  18. Ahmadi

    Ahmadi Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +3
    Again, conception without sex is rare but it has been scientifically proven to have occured. Sometimes, very rarely, a woman is known to have conceived a child without intercourse and that is because she had some sort of an ability or a system in her body that enabled her to conceive. The miracle is not in the conception because it is scientifically possible. The miracle is that God told her that she will conceive even without intercourse and it actually happpened. It is possible that the angel that she saw in a vision, who appeared in the form of a young man, must have triggered the system in her body when she just looked at him. The miracle is not in the conception itself but the timing of the conception and the fulfillement of a prophecy.

    A miracle or a sign is so because God Himself predicts it to occur. It is God's words that are being fulfilled.
     
  19. Ahmadi

    Ahmadi Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +3
    Well, even I can do that to predict that you will die before the year 3000 but that doesn't make it a sign. The accuracy and the correctness and the exact nature of the sign makes it a sign. Delusions don't have the kind of signs that a religion does.Knockout
     
  20. Ahmadi

    Ahmadi Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +3
    Well, my religion says that you can try it as much as you want and you will get the results that are told.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...