does god exist

[9-10ths_Penguin]

like i said bible in particular the gospels are considered as historical evidence. where evidence is defined as something which you can draw a conclusion from.

I have drawn many conclusions from the Bible. "God exists" is not among them.

historical evidence of jesus christ as the people who wrote the gospels are witnesses to his works.

That's exceedingly doubtful. From what I gather, the earliest Gospel copies are dated to several decades after the events they purport to describe, and it's not generally believed that the Apostles whose names are attached to the Gospels actually wrote them. In fact, the two-source hypothesis for the synoptic Gospels pretty much precludes the possibility that Matthew, Mark and Luke each sat down and independently wrote their own version of the events that they had personally witnessed.

|| i am a christian because ive experienced gods presence which i know wont mean much to you. take platonic love for example - you cant really see it but the connection is still there.

If you've experienced God's presence, why so much emphasis on the Bible as evidence for faith? I'd think that if you have first-hand knowledge of God, an nth-hand account like the Bible would be a minor factor in your decision to accept Christianity.

the bible doesnt prove god. we already establish that it is impossible to prove or disprove god. it is evidence. one to draw conclusion from. the conclusion doesnt necessarily have to be right but it is an indicator of what might be right. also with the link that you gave me: that does not prove that it is flawed and inaccurate. it just suggests contradiction, intoleracnce, injustince, cruelty etc. as to your argument about you being god - the gospels make two claims:
1. that god reserrected.
2. that he preformed miracles.

It makes a few more claims than that, but regardless, why not expand our scope a bit? Let's consider all scriptures of all religions. From that evidence, we can make a few conclusions:

1. There are an array of claims about God and the supernatural.
2. Some of these claims are mutually exclusive and therefore cannot all be true.
3. Generally, all of these claims are devoutly believed by the adherents of their respective religions.

Now, we can draw one big conclusion as a "summing up" of the ones above: a religious claim may be devoutly believed even if it's not true.

Given this, a new question arises: what makes Christianity special? In what way does it have a better claim to truthfulness than other religions, since we know that at least some of them are false?

the jews did not deny that the tomb was empty and did not deny that he had some sort of magical powers. noting that the jews hated jesus.

According to the New Testament. Assuming that your premise is true in order to prove that your premise is true is called begging the question, and it's a logical fallacy.

 

[Caladan]

noting that the jews hated jesus.

Seems to me that this remark smell of old fashioned ignorance and bigotry.
Noting that that before Christianity became dominate in Western civilization it was one of 2 forms of Judaism, practiced by Jews.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It makes a few more claims than that, but regardless, why not expand our scope a bit? Let's consider all scriptures of all religions. From that evidence, we can make a few conclusions:

1. There are an array of claims about God and the supernatural.
2. Some of these claims are mutually exclusive and therefore cannot all be true.
3. Generally, all of these claims are devoutly believed by the adherents of their respective religions.

Now, we can draw one big conclusion as a "summing up" of the ones above: a religious claim may be devoutly believed even if it's not true.

Very nicely done.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Noting that that before Christianity became dominate in Western civilization it was one of 2 forms of Judaism, practiced by Jews.

What a horrible distortion of history that was.

 

[Magic Man]

logic being that we cannot see it therefore it does not exist???

Well, I'd say it's pretty sound logic to say that if we can't sense something in any way, it doesn't exist.

 

[Magic Man]

i dont see why you have dismissed the gospels as historical evidence.

Well, let's see, maybe because it is only evidence for some of the places and people in the stories. It is not historical evidence that Jesus Christ was the son of God or that any of the miracles or wondrous things happened. You can use the Bible as a piece of evidence that Jesus existed (although it's still not proof). What you absolutely cannot do is use it as evidence that Jesus was something more than a regular human being.

and obviously it suggest that we christians arent christians for no reason.

Obviously, you're Christians for a reason. Unfortunately, it seems that your particular reason is based on nothing but indoctrination.

 

[Magic Man]

Definitely.

Well, it does more to build my faith in Athene, actually, but sure.

Yes.

Um, I don't know. I haven't read it.

Prove? No. Give strong evidence for the truthfulness of? You bet!

Are you saying that along with God, you also believe in Zeus, Anubis, Thor and all other gods in literature?

It's not fiction. At least not in the sense of the word used by people in literary genre studies. And if you're using a more etymological sense (like 'made [by man]'), then of course it's fiction. Every book is.

And what book isn't flawed, erroneous, and inaccurate? I've read a lot of books. I've yet to read one that's perfect. That doesn't mean I chuck 'em all out.

It's fiction in the sense that it tells stories about people that didn't actually happen. That's generally what fiction is. The problem is when people read the Bible looking for historical fact. It is a collection of myths not to be taken literally.

 

[BucephalusBB]

Are you saying that along with God, you also believe in Zeus, Anubis, Thor and all other gods in literature?

He's saying it's evidence. You don't have to believe evidence

 

[Magic Man]

He's saying it's evidence. You don't have to believe evidence

Ah, well I guess that's where we differ. I don't even think it's evidence that they exist. But thanks for the clarification. Now that you mention it, it does seem obvious that that's what he was saying.

 

[BucephalusBB]

Ah, well I guess that's where we differ.

Nah, I am with you on this one. I just spoke for him

 

[Magic Man]

Nah, I am with you on this one. I just spoke for him

I understand. I meant "we" as in "he and I".

 

[crystalonyx]

If there is doubt that some god exists, why is this god not powerful enough to asuage this doubt?

 

[camanintx]

there is more evidence to suggest that god exists than there is to suggest that god doesnt exist. therefore it is logical to assume that he does until other evidence suggest that there isnt.

Just curious, but do you believe that anything that exists had to come from something greater than itself?

 

[Storm]

If there is doubt that some god exists, why is this god not powerful enough to asuage this doubt?

Maybe because He doesn't care? Or, the more traditional answer, He wants faith. The latter always seemed rather nonsensical to me, but the faithful tend to disagree.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Despite there beinig no evidence, i think he/she does.

 

[Elessar]

If there is doubt that some god exists, why is this god not powerful enough to asuage this doubt?

He is, he chooses not to do so. He chooses to leave it in doubt so as to encourage faithfulness.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

He chooses to leave it in doubt so as to encourage faithfulness.

:biglaugh:

What a petty god you've created for yourslf ...

 

[Elessar]

G-d wants us to question. If we all must serve him, because there is undeniable proof of his existence, then that would end intellectual curiosity and destroy the ability to question. And the ability to question everything is extremely important. If we question his existence, but then come to the affirmative that he exists, how much greater is that than a thousand mindless automatons who worship G-d because they have to?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

G-d wants us to question.

<yawn> anthropopathic silliness </yawn>

 

[Storm]

G-d wants us to question. If we all must serve him, because there is undeniable proof of his existence, then that would end intellectual curiosity and destroy the ability to question. And the ability to question everything is extremely important. If we question his existence, but then come to the affirmative that he exists, how much greater is that than a thousand mindless automatons who worship G-d because they have to?

I disagree. Absolute knowledge of God would not negate free will, it would simply give us the ability to make an informed decision.

If I had proof that God is as the majority of Christians I've known believe He is, I would still refuse to worship Him.